(10-26-2016 03:49 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  Yup if you try to quantify it using that then yes, they are better than LA. However, they are not the best in baseball as you stated even using that as a metric.Jesus would you stop splitting hairs and enjoy some good baseball. BTW, i enjoyed lunch today on a delusional Mets fan at work that after one month thought the Mets offense would finish the year ranked higher than the Nats. Silly Silly Mets fan!

Discussing the game, especially the numbers aspect, is part of the fun for me!

I'm just trying to wrap my head around how else we're supposed to compare the staffs without using metrics like those. Can't I do that AND enjoy some good baseball?

If the Mets had stayed healthy they would have had a far more competitive offense, but no, even then they were never going to top the Nats. Harper got very little help the year before, and some bounceback out of the rest of the lineup was always going to happen. Then you add Murphy into the mix. Yeah, never was gonna happen for the Mets. We're built on our pitching, period. Hopefully we keep Ces around....