Baseball fans are passionate. Baseball fans love to argue. Who was the best, who was better? It’s a universal trait among fans.
And New York baseball fans have always been passionate and argumentative. Just listen to sports talk radio in New York — that’s kind of an oxymoron, because I have yet to hear callers to talk radio stations in New York talk. Scream? That’s more like it.
Diehard Mets fans can take heart — there is plenty to debate about when it comes to this team. What was their greatest game? Their greatest moment? Their all-time lineup?
The answers — or at least a jumping-off point to start the debate — can be found in Brian Wright’s new book about the Mets. In Mets ins 10s: Best and Worst of an Amazin’ History (History Press; paperback; $21.99; 288 pages), Wright offers some juicy tidbits of Mets history and gives the reader a wonderful history of a franchise that began as lovable losers but then shocked the sports world by winning the 1969 World Series.
Well-researched and written in a conversational style, Mets in 10s is certain to spark some (hopefully) friendly debate. As the title implies, Wright ranks certain categories of Mets history from one to 10. As you read this book for the first time, you will see the subject and wonder if your No. 1 pick is the same as Wright’s.
And New York baseball fans have always been passionate and argumentative. Just listen to sports talk radio in New York — that’s kind of an oxymoron, because I have yet to hear callers to talk radio stations in New York talk. Scream? That’s more like it.
Diehard Mets fans can take heart — there is plenty to debate about when it comes to this team. What was their greatest game? Their greatest moment? Their all-time lineup?
The answers — or at least a jumping-off point to start the debate — can be found in Brian Wright’s new book about the Mets. In Mets ins 10s: Best and Worst of an Amazin’ History (History Press; paperback; $21.99; 288 pages), Wright offers some juicy tidbits of Mets history and gives the reader a wonderful history of a franchise that began as lovable losers but then shocked the sports world by winning the 1969 World Series.
Well-researched and written in a conversational style, Mets in 10s is certain to spark some (hopefully) friendly debate. As the title implies, Wright ranks certain categories of Mets history from one to 10. As you read this book for the first time, you will see the subject and wonder if your No. 1 pick is the same as Wright’s.
It would have been easy, for example, to rank Johan Santana’s no-hitter against the Cardinals in 2012 as the best-pitched performance by a Met. After all, it was the first no-no in franchise history. But I was glad to see that Wright ranked Tom Seaver’s near perfect game against the Cubs on July 9, 1969, as the No. 1 pitching performance.
Now, I am not going to be a spoiler and disclose every winner. Wright breaks the book into eight parts, with several categories in each. “Beginnings” refers to the Mets’ early days as a woeful group of losers. “On the Mound” delves into pitching performances, and “At the Plate” explores hitting feats in single games and season efforts.
The fourth chapter, “Anguish,” explores the franchise’s tough losses and major disappointments. “The Clubhouse” references the best and worst trades in franchise history (Nolan Ryan for who??), while “Noteworthy Games” revisits key games in Mets’ history.
“Champions” is a top-10 look at regular-season games during years when the Mets reached the postseason. And the final chapter, “Best of the Best,” includes Wright’s all-time Mets’ starting lineup and their best postseason games.
Many readers will agree with Wright’s conclusions, while some certainly won’t. For example, I would have put the Mets’ World Series-clinching win higher than No. 5 among the postseason top 10, but certainly no higher than No. 3. Wright’s top two choices are right on the money.
That’s the beauty of this book. There is plenty of room for debate.
There are a few things that might have made the book better. Former Mets pitcher Jerry Koosman wrote the foreword, but an introduction by Wright would have been a good way to lead into the book. Also, there is no conclusion; the last top-10 item is given, and then the book ends. It seemed rather abrupt.
There could have been a few more categories, too. For example, best defensive plays would have been a good one, although we could say Ron Swoboda’s catch in Game 4 of the 1969 World Series is No. 1 and has no peer. Perhaps oddest plays would have been a good category, or best nicknames — who had the better nickname, George “The Stork” Theodore or “Marvelous” Marv Throneberry?
Those are just suggestions for future debate. Mets in 10s is a great trip down memory lane for Mets fans.
Now, I am not going to be a spoiler and disclose every winner. Wright breaks the book into eight parts, with several categories in each. “Beginnings” refers to the Mets’ early days as a woeful group of losers. “On the Mound” delves into pitching performances, and “At the Plate” explores hitting feats in single games and season efforts.
The fourth chapter, “Anguish,” explores the franchise’s tough losses and major disappointments. “The Clubhouse” references the best and worst trades in franchise history (Nolan Ryan for who??), while “Noteworthy Games” revisits key games in Mets’ history.
“Champions” is a top-10 look at regular-season games during years when the Mets reached the postseason. And the final chapter, “Best of the Best,” includes Wright’s all-time Mets’ starting lineup and their best postseason games.
Many readers will agree with Wright’s conclusions, while some certainly won’t. For example, I would have put the Mets’ World Series-clinching win higher than No. 5 among the postseason top 10, but certainly no higher than No. 3. Wright’s top two choices are right on the money.
That’s the beauty of this book. There is plenty of room for debate.
There are a few things that might have made the book better. Former Mets pitcher Jerry Koosman wrote the foreword, but an introduction by Wright would have been a good way to lead into the book. Also, there is no conclusion; the last top-10 item is given, and then the book ends. It seemed rather abrupt.
There could have been a few more categories, too. For example, best defensive plays would have been a good one, although we could say Ron Swoboda’s catch in Game 4 of the 1969 World Series is No. 1 and has no peer. Perhaps oddest plays would have been a good category, or best nicknames — who had the better nickname, George “The Stork” Theodore or “Marvelous” Marv Throneberry?
Those are just suggestions for future debate. Mets in 10s is a great trip down memory lane for Mets fans.
RSS Feed
