Now, I realize I’m probably not the first to break this story. I’m probably not even the 157th. But some asshole Rangers fans wrote a story for some website basically putting down the Mets as being a loser organization, and what the hell…I have some free time after work to make this guy eat his words. Let’s give it a shot.
“Mets think Zito should join a winner”
Yeah, that’s awesome. How many World Series trophies have the Mets had in the past 20 years? One. Congrats. That was 20 freakin’ years ago. I’ve owned at least five cars since then. Maybe six, I don’t know.
First of all, it sounds like your real problem is that you keep buying shitty cars.
Now, onto your point, or as I call it, “point.” The Mets have one World Series championship in twenty years. That is correct. But can you remind me, Ranger fan, how many World Series titles your team has won in the last twenty years? Would that be…none? As in zero? Zip? Zilch? Heck, you guys haven’t even PLAYED in a World Series game, let alone won one. And here’s a fun fact: the Rangers didn’t qualify for the playoffs until MLB expanded the playoff structure from 4 teams to 8.
Here’s another pair of fun facts for Mr. Rangers fan: Since 1986, the Mets have won 1722 games, and the Rangers have won 1657 games, and the 97 games the Mets won last year would be a franchise high for the Rangers, had they ever actually, you know, won that many games. So continue talking about how much the Mets suck, because as a Rangers fan, you clearly have that right.
But they made it to the WS in 2000, doesn’t that count?
No, they lost. A loser is not a winner.
Compared to the Rangers, and their zero World Series appearances…yes, that counts. Again, if you were a Yankee fan or a Red Sox fan or an Angels fan, or even a Marlins fan…this all might sting a little bit. But the Rangers are the living embodiment of a mediocre baseball team, and they have been so pretty much since their inception. I kind of just laugh at you.
How many postseason appearances have the Mets had in the past 10 years? Three. How many have the Rangers had? Three.
But the Mets won the division last year, doesn’t th-
HUSHTHATFUSS! No. They lost in the first round of the playoffs. A loser is not a winner.
The last time the Rangers made the postseason, “Who Let The Dogs Out” was still a popular hit, and people were still worried that the Y2K bug was going to destroy the world as we knew it. We could also rephrase this question thusly: How many postseason appearances have the Mets made in the last six years? Two. How many have the Rangers had? Zero. Stop living in the past.
Also, just to clarify, the Mets lost in the NLCS, not in the first round. The Rangers, in case you were wondering, did not make the playoffs. Also, the Rangers have never won a postseason series in team history. They don’t even know what LCS baseball is in Dallas.
But the Rangers haven’t been in the playoffs since 1999.
Exactly. I’m not calling them winners either. I’m just saying that these people and/or teams clamoring for Barry Zito, claiming they are the best thing in sports since the invention of the jock strap need a reality check. And so do the people who think they need to reward an above average pitcher on the same level as a dominant ace.
If you want to rip on the Mets for not being winners, you might want to make sure your team is a winner first. It would be like Mets fans getting on the Yankees’ case for not winning a World Series since 2000 when the Mets haven’t made it that far since then. The Mets happened to be a very good team last year that fell just short of making the World Series. Ninety-seven wins in the regular season don’t lie. Plus, I don’t know if you’ve seen the numbers going around in this market, but the going rate for an above-average outfielder is about $17 million/season, or exactly what Zito will wind up making. The Mets haven’t even overspent on him yet and you’re ripping for it; the Rangers made the first offer here, and you’re offering the Mets a “reality check?” Thanks for that!
But it wasn’t over. See, this was written a week ago, and apparently a lot of other Mets fans reminded this guy of what a dope he is, including out friends over at MetsBlog.com. He wrote a response to Mets fans, and it basically amounted to, “If you haven’t won a championship, you’re not a winner.” That’s kind of silly. The Mets won 97 games last year, which was tied for the most in all of baseball. They ran into some bad luck in the playoffs and lost.
But even without a World Series trophy, if you were to ask me who the best team in baseball was, I’d say either the Mets or the Yankees. Why? Because they each won 97 games over a 162 game season, which would seem to mean more to me than winning eleven games over a sixteen game stretch like the Cardinals did. It just happened to be that winning games over that stretch determines where a certain gold trophy resides next year, and that’s fine. They’ll be back in the hunt again next year.
But seriously, you’re a published writer, man. Why do you have to resort to message board trolling and flame bait tactics. You even called Mr. Met gay, then didn’t even have the balls to leave it up. C’mon man, that’s just sad. Just because a bunch of Mets fans responded to your poorly written words, written as a reaction to Mets fans calling your team “losers,” (which, compared to the Mets, yes, the Rangers HAVE been losers – both in recent history and overall), and because you couldn’t handle the truth of the matter, doesn’t mean you have to resort to this. Either write an intelligent, well-worded response as to why the Rangers are a winning alternative to the Mets, or run another angle on this, but don’t be a jackass.