I don’t like calling people names, but man…how else can you respond to this (Insider may be required)? This is just poor analysis. Because Wright had one poor week this week (by the way, David hit .340 in September this year) and had a disappointing year with runners in scoring position (which could be contributed to luck; if you know about BABIP, you know that Wright’s .263 BABIP with runners in scoring position is quite low; last year, his BABIP was .331 with RISP), all of a sudden he’s not clutch? Despite everything from Wright’s past saying that his clutch lines are in line with his career numbers?
Do we forget that in 2007, David hit .310 with runners in scoring position, and OPS’d .976? Do we forget that last year, during the middle of the Mets’ epic collapse (and make no mistake; last year was a collapse, this year was not, more on that later this week) that David was spearheading the offense’s best month of the season with a .352 batting average and 1.034 OPS? So now because he had a year slightly worse than his 2007 season, he needs to see a sports psychologist? Really? There are so many ways I can dispute this, and destroy this argument, but if you’re a person with even an ounce of rational thought in your brain, you can see through how…wrong this blog item by Olney is.
David Wright will be fine in 2009, just like he was fine in 2008, 2007, and every other Mets season since they brought him up from the minors. To say that the team needs to “fix” him ignores the greater problems with this franchise, namely the lousy bullpen and the poor bench, but like I had said earlier, talking about how to solve bullpen and bench problems doesn’t grab headlines like fixing star players who played excellent baseball all season long.