I'm a mere 26 years old, born just 8 months before the Mets won it all. I have a question for the older posters on this board, who have been watching baseball longer than I have:

Have you ever seen a team that went so quickly from feel-good underdog shocking the baseball world to complete, unmitigated, underperforming disaster as these 2012 Mets??

By the numbers we are talking 44-37, and after tonight's game 10-23.

Inquiring minds would like to know!

Last year's Mets team was 55-51 and ended up going 22-34 the rest of the season. Someone correct me if I'm wrong about that. There are teams who are pretenders who inevitably come back to earth. And it usually happens at the same time it has for the Mets this year and in recent times. The Padres were in first place a few years ago, and then started plummetting sometime in August. I liken it to one of those couple day stretches in the winter when the temperatures are unseasonably warm. And then the strong north winds come and the temperatures plummet. You can only fool mother nature for so long. And the same thing applies in baseball. When all is said and done, one has to look at the talent level of the team and agree they were playing over their heads until around July 4th. They are their record. As far as I'm concerned, that's the sad reality.

well, the early years were miserable, but expected...

the mid-70's were horrible after '69 and '73, and Seaver gone...

since the ASG, they seem more like '63 than anything else

Last years Pirates did this as well.

I really do think that shows that this team is a year or two away. They were able to compete for almost 90 games. LEarning to finish the job and play those other 70 games at a high level is what makes a winner.

Actually the 2005 Orioles had a similar season that the Mets are looking to have this year. Orioles were not expected to compete in 2005 but started 47-40, then finished with only 75 wins.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Baltimore_Orioles_season

The 2005 Orioles were 42-28, then went 32-60 to finish 74-88.

The Orioles have had a few of those type debacles in the late part of the season. In 2008, they were 61-63, then went 7-30 to finish 68-93.

In 2002, they were 63-63, then went 4-32 to finish 67-95.

Playing in the AL East will do that to an undermanned team.

That 4-32 end season record for the 2002 O's is the single worst stretch of 36 games in baseball history.

Something to shoot for ??

2011 Mets..

been suffering with this team daily since about 1977. and that was the beginning of some DARK, DARK days.

we're there again. especially under THIS Ownership.

players had more GRIT in years past... way past. but this year's crew could tell/was made aware that NO REINFORCEMENTS were coming after our terrific albeit LUCKY start.

no deals were being made.
no benching of Bay.
no accountability for mistakes.
no commitment from the F.O.

hence, it's easier to pack it in quicker. so 10-23 will become 15-38 REAL FAST.

real sad.

2011 Braves and Red Sox! Historic collapses!

Oh sorry, they were notmfeel-good underdogs. my bad.

Not so much the numbers, but I still say the 1993 Mets were worse. They were embarassing. Just a bunch of horrible people, lousy contracts, and no love for the game. Just a paycheck and treated the fans like dirt.

Most disappointing was either '87 or '88. Totally underachieved, so much more than any team in recent history.

I mentioned the Orioles collapses in another post. From the Mets perspective, they have had their share of collapses.

1972 - Started 30-11, then went 53-62, finished 83-73 (Strike shortened regular season).

1980 - Started 56-57, then went 11-38, finished 67-95.

1991 - Started 53-38, then went 24-46, finished 77-84.

2007 - Started 35-19, then went 3-13 to go to 38-32. They were 83-62, then went 5-12, finished 88-74,

2008 - Started 86-67, then went 3-6, finished 89-73.

On the other side:

1985 - Started 38-35, went 60-29, finished 98-64.

1973 - Started 53-66, went 29-13, finished 82-79 (lost World Series)

1969 - Started 9-14, went 91-48, finished 100-62 (won World Series)

Going from fun to watch to completely unwatchable is a Mets special trade which they have develop over time.

Another is that they can never ever seen to commit to one plan. It is always, we will draft and develop our own players but then they take promising arms like Mejia and make him a reliever. Now you are hearing rumors they want to try this with Familia.

It is the same thing over and over. If they have money to spend, they spend it on useless players. If they have a so called smart GM, then they have no money to spend.

This is actually worse than the original Mets of the 60s that I remember as a kid. It only took 7 years for them to go from lovable losers to winning a world championship.

All of your answers and statistics for perspective are appreciated.

I just can't believe how quickly this season went from so good to so bad.

Viper99 sums it up perfectly: "Going from fun to watch to completely unwatchable"

Right, except the Pirates were playing guys with major league talent expected to be around a few years.

This years team won;t learn any lessons that are going to pay dividends next year, few of them will hopefully be here. So, this implosion..like last year's...isn;t going to serve "a purpose".

They are just a hideously warped and embarrassing organization.

"This is actually worse than the original Mets of the 60s that I remember as a kid. It only took 7 years for them to go from lovable losers to winning a world championship."

I was just thinking about this the other day. "Lovable losers" is a term you're not likely to hear in baseball ever again, primarily due to FA, inflated salaries/contracts, and more knowledgeable fans who understand the behind the scenes business aspect of the game.

I've been watching baseball since around 1955. There's nothing unusual about what happened to the Mets this year. It happens all the time...to everybody, not just us. The reason is that while a ot of teams can put a decent team on the field at the start of the season, only the good ones have depth and can relace players who get injured. Injuries are unavoidable. Our bench was lousy, when the injuries came...we went.

Another reason is having a lot of young players. They can, and often do start off looking great...but then they get scouted, veteran players figure them out, and their performance drops off. We had quite a few guys like that. Rarely does a prospect have a good complete year. Be happy if one does, but don't expect it. You'll be disapointed often

I have watched baseball since 1944 and you were spot on with your analysis. The word gets around on a young player's weakness and with Duda and Nieuwenheis it was proven to be true.They looked great in April and May but both wound up in Buffalo.

And the injuries took a fearsome toll because there was just no depth,a 46-39 team has now gone 8-21 and I just cannot see any turnaround.If the Mets can play .500 ball for the rest of the season to finish with 78 wins,1 more than last season,I think I would be happy.

In a way we were just lucky earlier in the year - many 2 out hits with risp that stopped happening. ANd in addition to lots of prospects which can start Ok and fizzle, the FO relied on guys from the other end of the spectrum: old post-surgery players like Young and Santana - 2/5 of our rotation looking real old right now.