Skip to main content

Pop Goes the Season?

Certainly it would be a brash to say that after two games this season the Mets are screwed because of Pedro's Hammy Pop but it's not a reach to say that this makes their post season chances significantly more questionable. As of now we do not know the full extent of Pedro's injury nor the given amount of time he will be sidelined, but for these here purposes let's assume near the worst and use Phil Hughes as a guideline. Hughes last season left his no hit bid with a hamstring strain and then went on to miss 3 months.

So if Pedro is gone for 3 months of the season, just where will the Mets go? Will the Mets be worse than last season? The simple answer is no, not really. They didn't have Pedro at all last season and this year they have Johan Santana. They're still a better team. So if Pedro, whom I named the Mets Key Player, is out for 3 months whom will be the new key Mets? I believe the pressure will now fall firmly on Mike Pelfrey's shoulders. Last season he wasn't ready and was eventually sent down. This season he won the 5th spot mostly because El Duque started the season on the DL. Now Pelfrey could potentially be in the rotation for a long time. At the very worst Pelfrey must transfrom himself into a .500 pitcher. Without their #2 starter the Mets need Pelfrey to better than average #5 starter to make up for the wins Peetey will be leaving on the DL.

With all that being said and even without Pedro, I still think the Mets have the best team in the NL East, and will still win the division even if he does miss 3 months.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Pedro being sidelined for a month, with a non-arm injury, would probably benefit the mets down the stretch b/c lets face it he only has so many bullets left in that arm so limiting his innings isn't the worst thing. Plus even with Pedro out the mets probably still have the best rotation in the NL East

Popular posts from this blog

M E T S = Mercifully End The Season

Do it before David Wright gets Hurt!

Numbers On Steroids: Mickey Mantle

Numbers on Steroids is a look at baseball players during the 90s to see if anything screams out at you. This week it's throwing a curve ball and looking at All Time Great Yankees. Players that we know did not take steroids to see if this gives a defense to any of the players 'convicted' by Numbers on Steroids. Time to look at my dad's favorite athlete of all time, Mickey Mantle. Averages Say: What's with the mysterious dip at 27 and then the uptick? At Bats Per Home Run Says: That's a mighty jump from 22 to 24 Explaining As If It Was the 90s If you take a look at the numbers there are two time frames which in the 1990s would be questioned. First would be the incredible leap he took from his first year in the big leagues to his first MVP season in 1956. His batting average jumped 50 points. His slugging percentage jumped 90 points and he hit 15 more homers than his previous high. This wouldn't merrit a conviction nowadays though because the young age he...

Guest Post: Thoughts on Sabathia Signing

I asked Grutt what his thoughts were on the Sabathia signing and I thought his response pretty much nailed it. So here it is. I don’t know. Every year I get a little more disenchanted with baseball. Yea, it’s great we signed the top pitching free agent. But we were supposed to. No team was even in the ballpark of the Yankees offer yet they still needed to jump from the already ridiculous price of $140 million to $160 million to close the deal. Now I hear we are going to sign more pitchers who will also get large contracts and the position player gaps are still glaring. Each new, large contract just adds to the feeling that the Yanks are supposed to win it all. “I think we have a good chance this year.” That is a lost feeling. If they don’t win I’ll wonder why, like there has to be some other reason besides that it’s a sport you can never predict how things will work out and some years just aren’t yours to be won. If they win I will be pleasantly smug. It gets a little more...