So, things have been a little slow lately here at The Blog. Sorry 'bout that. Let's just say it's the dog days of winter (even if it has felt more like spring outside), and there isn't much going on in the baseball world except for the annual Hall of Fame election (congrats to Goose Gossage) and the Roger Clemens reality TV drama. Or is it a comedy?Anyway, other than avoiding arbitration with Jayson Werth and continuing to talk with their other arbitration-eligible players (Ryan Howard, Brad Lidge, Ryan Madson and Eric Bruntlett), the Phillies have been fairly quiet. That said, Carlos Delgado made some noise last week, alleging the Mets were the best team in the NL East last season. That's funny, I recall the Mets blowing a 7-1/2-game lead with 17 to play and being overtaken by the Phillies for the NL East crown on the season's last day. Doesn't really sound like something that would happen to the best team in the division, does it?
But Delgado's remarks raise an interesting question, one that's bound to be asked of players from the Mets and Phillies as the teams launch their respective winter caravans next week: Did the Phillies win the NL East last season, or did the Mets lose it? And which team is the favorite to win the division this year?
Go ahead. Have at it.
*
The Phillies' winter tour schedule is set. Once again, no events are slated for Delaware. No love for the First State, it seems. In a previous post, I listed the dates and attendees for the affiliate banquets in Allentown, Reading, Lakewood and Williamsport. But here's a full list of events.
6 comments:
The Phillies won the NL East, and There is simply no other defensible way to look at it.
Yes, the Mets collapsed at the end. But, the Philles got out to a very slow start. Each game counts the same as every other game, regardless of when that game occurred during the season.
Over a 162-game season, the Phillies won more games than any other team in the NL East. Therefore, the Phillies won the NL East. Period.
It doesn't matter that the Mets collapsed as the Phils surged. The key is that the Phils went 12-6 against the Mets who are now claiming to have been the better team... The numbers don't lie. I rest my case.
The Mets are sore losers.
From Wagner's comment about Burrell's "one-path swing," to (ex-Met) Lo Duca's they're-dancing-now nonsense, to this ... I've never seen or heard such a collection of whiny crybabies.
Here's what I like:
Last January, Rollins claimed the Phillies were the team to beat in 2007.
This January, Delgado claims the Mets were the team to beat...in 2007.
I hate when people phrase it like that. Yes, the Mets collapsed historically, but the Phillies had to match that move with their late-season surge. Also, if I recall correctly (note my sarcasm), the Phillies won the final 8 meetings between the two teams (and can pick up in '08 and continue the winning streak). To be honest, though, I like that Delgado is talking trash, because for years these teams have had the best rivalry that wasn't a rivalry. I like to see players on the opposing teams hate each other. It's nowhere close to Red Sox-Yankees, but in baseball there's no team I hate more than the Mets.
Who won more games in a 162-game season?
The Phillies did.
The best teams win.
What'd the Phillies do?
They won.
Who proved they were the best team in the NL East?
The Phillies did.
Simple as that.
Post a Comment