What Do Michael Wacha and Tom Seaver Have In Common?

On Tuesday night, Michael Wacha of the St. Louis Cardinals was one out away from baseball immortality.  He had retired twenty-six Washington Nationals without allowing a hit.  All he had to do was find a way to get Ryan Zimmerman out and he would have completed his first no-hitter in just his ninth major league start.

But Zimmerman had other ideas.  The Nats' third baseman chopped a ball that grazed off the top of Wacha's glove and rolled in the direction of shortstop Pete Kozma.  Kozma's throw pulled first baseman Matt Adams off the bag, who could not apply the tag to a hustling Zimmerman.

The no-hitter was not to be for Wacha, as he fell one out short of immortality on September 24.  That date should bring back memories of a similar circumstance that happened to Tom Seaver in 1975.

Thirty-eight years ago, also on September 24, Tom Seaver took the mound against the Chicago Cubs.  Seaver had already taken two no-hitters into the ninth inning in his career.  But both of those gems were broken up with one out in the ninth.

On July 9, 1969, Chicago's Jimmy Qualls looped a clean single to left after Seaver had retired the first twenty-five Cubs to face him.  Seaver retired the next two batters, then stood on the mound with his hands at his waist wondering what might have been in the Mets' 4-0 victory.

Three years later, Seaver was once again two outs away from pitching the Mets' first no-hitter (although this one was not a perfect game, as Seaver walked four hitters) when he faced the San Diego Padres on July 4, 1972.  But Leron Lee channeled his inner Jimmy Qualls and lined a single to center to break up the no-no.  Seaver then induced the next batter, Nate Colbert, to ground into a game-ending 6-4-3 double play, giving the Mets a 2-0 win over the Padres.

After two near-misses in 1969 and 1972, Seaver took another no-hitter into the ninth inning on September 24, 1975 when he matched up against the Chicago Cubs.  But this time he was able to retire the batter he faced with one out in the ninth, striking out the Cubs' Rick Monday.  Needing one out to pitch nine hitless innings, Seaver allowed a two-out single to rightfielder Joe Wallis to break up the no-hitter.  However, even if Seaver had retired Wallis, he would not have been able to celebrate a no-hitter at that moment because the game would not have ended there.  Neither team had scored through the first eight innings and the scoreless duel continued into extra innings.  The Mets eventally lost the game, 1-0, when closer Skip Lockwood walked Bill Madlock to force in a run in the 11th inning.

Since 1975, when Seaver lost his no-hitter with two outs in the ninth, no Met had even taken a no-hitter into the ninth until Johan Santana did so on June 1, 2012.  But Santana finished what Seaver couldn't, striking out David Freese of the St. Louis Cardinals to complete the first no-hitter in franchise history.

Michael Wacha, now Freese's teammate in St. Louis, came within one out of throwing his first career no-hitter on September 24, 2013.  Tom Seaver, on September 24, 1975, also missed his first career no-hitter by one out, becoming the only Met to have a hitless game broken up with two outs in the ninth inning.

What do Michael Wacha and Tom Seaver have in common?  They both share a September 24 heartbreak.  Wacha hopes that's not the only thing he can share with Seaver before his career is over.
 

We Don't Need No Stinkin' Walk-Offs

Photo by Greg Fiume/Getty Images North America

After playing their best game of the season in the first game of Friday's day-night doubleheader, whitewashing the Nationals, 11-0, the Mets dropped the second contest to Washington, 2-1, losing the game when Ryan Zimmerman took a LaTroy Hawkins offering over the wall in right field.

The heartbreaking defeat was the Mets' ninth walk-off loss of the year in their 100th game.  That's only three shy of the dozen walk-off losses the Mets suffered in 2010, a year in which the Mets seemingly lost every game on the road in walk-off fashion.

With the loss, the Mets dropped to 46-54.  That means one-sixth of their losses have come with their opponents celebrating in front of their home crowd by throwing their hands up in the air and waving them around like they just don't care.  To make matters worse, the Mets actually have a winning record on the road (25-24) despite all the walk-off losses.

Just imagine where the Mets would be if they had just won five of those nine games they lost via the walk-off.  For one thing, they'd be 30-19 away from home, which would be the best road record in the majors (St. Louis currently has the best record on the road at 30-21).  Winning those five games would also have given the Mets an overall record of 51-49.  The team would be in second place in the NL East and would be within sniffing distance of the division-leading Braves.

And what about losses at Citi Field in which the opponent scored the decisive run in their final turn at bat, which don't count as walk-off losses but are just as painful and avoidable?  Just this past Monday, the Mets blew a 1-0 ninth-inning lead to Atlanta when Bobby Parnell allowed two runs before he could get the final three outs.  The team has also lost four extra-inning games at home, including a 20-inning defeat to the Marlins on June 8 and a 15-inning loss to the Diamondbacks on the Fourth of July.  In the latter contest, the Mets rallied to tie the game in the 13th and 14th innings, only to see the bullpen allow an extra-inning run for the third consecutive frame in the 15th.  New York did not have a third overtime rally in them that day.

Other games at Citi Field that saw the Mets give up the decisive run in their opponent's final turn at bat include a 3-2 loss to the Dodgers on April 25 (Los Angeles scored two runs in the ninth), a 7-4 defeat to the Reds on May 22 (Cincinnati scored three times in the ninth), and a 6-4 heartbreaker to the Nationals on June 28 (Washington scored twice in the ninth).  The most recent home loss in which the Mets allowed the winning run to score in their opponents' final at-bat came this past Monday, as mentioned above, when Atlanta scored two runs in the ninth inning to turn an uplifting 1-0 victory in to an ugly 2-1 defeat.

In all, the Mets have lost 17 games in which their opponent scored the winning run in their final turn at bat (nine walk-offs, four extra-inning home losses, four home losses in which the decisive run was scored in the ninth inning).  That's almost one-third of their loss total for the season.  Had the Mets just won nine of those 17 games - which is barely more than half - they'd have a 55-45 record.  And if two of those nine wins had come against the Braves (in addition to last Monday's ninth-inning debacle to Atlanta, the Mets also let a 1-0 ninth-inning lead slip away in Atlanta on June 17, which became one of their nine walk-off losses), Atlanta's record would not have been 58-45.  Rather, it would have been 56-47, meaning the Mets would be in first place right now.  And all they had to do was win roughly one-half of the games they lost in their opponent's final at-bat.

The Braves have four walk-off losses in 2013.  The Nationals have five.  The Phillies have six.  The Mets have nine.  And don't forget those eight additional losses at home in which the Mets allowed the decisive run to score in the ninth inning or later.

We don't need no stinkin' walk-offs like last night's loss at Nationals Park.  We also don't need no stinkin' losses at home when the games are there for the taking in the late innings.  Should those types of losses continue, the Mets are going to miss out on what could have been an unexpected successful season.  And that would be the biggest stink of them all. 

Is You Is or Is You Ain't My Davey?

The David Wright contract extension.  That's what on the minds of all Mets fans today, especially with conflicting reports that Wright has been offered a long-term extension.

Over at ESPNNewYork, Adam Rubin's sources claim that the Mets have offered Wright a seven-year extension that would allow him to remain a Met until 2020.  But MLBTR is reporting that no such deal has been offered.  In fact, Wright himself was quoted on the site, saying:

"I have said from Day 1 that I want to play my entire career with the New York Mets.  I remain hopeful that goal can be achieved.  However, I am disappointed by the reports that I have read today which are inaccurate."

Wright's "now you see the extension, now you don't" news comes a day after the Tampa Bay Rays gave homegrown third baseman Evan Longoria a six-year extension worth $100 million.  Earlier this year, the Nationals signed the man in their hot corner to a similar deal, keeping Ryan Zimmerman in Washington through 2019, with a team option for 2020.

Both six-year, $100 million extensions were signed after each player was coming off an injury.  Zimmerman's deal this spring came after he played only 101 games in 2011 and posted the worst power numbers of his career (12 HR, 49 RBI).  Similarly, Evan Longoria signed his extension after missing 88 games for Tampa Bay in 2012.  Both Zimmerman and Longoria were 27 years old at the time their new contracts were signed.

David Wright will turn 30 in three weeks.  He was not injured in 2012 and posted fine numbers (.306, 41 doubles, 21 HR, 93 RBI).  However, his production fell off during the second half, as it has over the past few seasons in which he was fully healthy.

Zimmerman and Longoria are just entering their prime.  Wright will soon be leaving his.  If the Mets do offer Wright a seven-year extension, which would not begin until the 2014 campaign, that would keep him in New York through 2020, his age 37 season.  Will he be worth the amount of money the Mets would be paying him that year?

Carlos Beltran was given a seven-year deal by the Mets at age 27.  He played well until he was 31, then started to miss large chunks of time with injuries.  Before Beltran, there was Mike Piazza, who also signed a seven-year deal to remain a Met after the 1998 season.  Piazza had his last .300 season in 2001 at age 32 (the third year of his seven-year deal) and his final 30-homer season at age 33 (his fourth year).

If the Mets are truly going to give Wright a seven-year deal, they have to make sure they don't backload it with a high salary that will make it difficult to bring in other players once Wright starts to slow down, whether it be through injuries (like Beltran) or age and a demanding position (like Piazza).

Is Wright going to remain a Met for life?  Conflicting reports are confusing the issue.  But one thing the Mets should not be confused about is letting Zimmerman and Longoria's deals affect what they're going to do with Wright.  Both players are younger than Wright and should get more money because of it.  But Wright's best season may already be behind him.  It's up to the Mets to notice that before they talk dollars and cents with their third baseman.

No Gold Glove For Wright; Guess He Didn't Hit Well Enough

The National League Gold Glove winners were announced on Wednesday but no Mets received the Midas Touch. There was no bling presented to Carlos Beltran or David Wright this year. Beltran's was expected since he missed half of the season. But what about Wright? Didn't he hit well enough?

Before you think I've forgotten that the Gold Glove is for defensive excellence and is not supposed to have anything to do with a player's hitting prowess, let me explain what I mean about Wright not hitting well enough to win the Gold Glove.

A few years ago, Derek Jeter was voted the worst shortstop in the American League. Although I don't think he's the worst, I also don't think he's the best. However, he won the Gold Glove this year despite what all the "experts" say about his defensive ability. Let's look at the stat sheet to see what Jeter did offensively this year.

He hit .334, which was his highest average since 2006 (he won the Gold Glove in 2006). He hit 18 HR, which was his greatest home run output since 2005 (he won the Gold Glove in 2005). He scored 107 runs, which was also his highest total since the Gold Glove season of 2005. He stole 30 bases, which was more than he had stolen in his two previous seasons combined. He did not win the Gold Glove in 2007 and 2008.

As 70s comedic icon Arte Johnson would say, that bit of news is "very interesting". In the two years that he did not win the Gold Glove, Jeter never surpassed 15 HR or 15 SB. He also did not hit for as high a batting average or score as many runs. But what do you know? He upped his batting average to .334, had an 18/30 split in the HR and SB department and voila! His glove automatically becomes golden!

This isn't as bad as 1999, when Rafael Palmeiro played primarily as a DH (only playing 28 games at first base) and was still awarded with the American League Gold Glove at first base. However, he did hit .324 with 47 HR and 148 RBI for the Texas Rangers that year, all of which were career highs and all of which were done while he was not doing steroids...period.

So that brings us to David Wright. This year, Ryan Zimmerman replaced Wright as the National League Gold Glove winner at third base. Wright had been bestowed the prestigious award each of the last two seasons. In both seasons, he was in the 30 HR, 100 RBI club.

Zimmerman has always been very good defensively, perhaps even better than Wright, but he averaged 19 HR and 71 RBI during the two seasons Wright won the Gold Glove.

In 2009, Zimmerman established career highs with a .292 average and 33 HR. He also added 106 RBI. On the other hand, Wright had the worst power season of his career, finishing with only 10 HR and 72 RBI. Of course, Zimmerman won the Gold Glove this season.

For the Mets to compete in 2010, they will need a bounceback season from David Wright, especially in the power department. Not only will a power surge help the Mets score more runs, but it might be enough to wrest the Gold Glove away from Ryan Zimmerman. After all, pitching wins championships but sluggers win Gold Gloves, right?