The blog for Mets fans
who like to read

ABOUT US

Greg Prince and Jason Fry
Faith and Fear in Flushing made its debut on Feb. 16, 2005, the brainchild of two longtime friends and lifelong Met fans.

Greg Prince discovered the Mets when he was 6, during the magical summer of 1969. He is a Long Island-based writer, editor and communications consultant. Contact him here.

Jason Fry is a Brooklyn writer whose first memories include his mom leaping up and down cheering for Rusty Staub. Check out his other writing here.

Got something to say? Leave a comment, or email us at faithandfear@gmail.com. (Sorry, but we have no interest in ads, sponsored content or guest posts.)

Need our RSS feed? It's here.

Visit our Facebook page, or drop by the personal pages for Greg and Jason.

Or follow us on Twitter: Here's Greg, and here's Jason.

Gettin' Dickey Wit It

I know, I know…the Mets are yet again revealing themselves an unserious and possibly inept organization for not (or not yet) signing an impact free agent while instead laying in a supply of R.A. Dickeys for the hard winter ahead. It’s an easy enough charge to level.

Still, can I say something in some combination of the Mets’ and Dickey’s defense?

There’s nothing wrong with signing R.A. Dickey.

Oh, eventually there might be. There might come a time when he knuckles under rather than hunkers down as his most unusual pitch flutters past one of our many backup catchers — or, worse yet, over one of the league’s many outfield fences — but we don’t know that. I don’t know a damn thing about R.A. Dickey other than what I’ve been reading regarding his lack of elbow ligament…which, I admit, doesn’t inspire oodles of confidence…and his inglorious track record. I kind of recall his excelling against the Mets one June night not long ago when Oliver Perez was decidedly doing no such thing against the Mariners. I recall it being considered aberrational (the Dickey part, not the Perez part).

But so what? He’s a minor league signee who will either descend into the land of forgotten relievers or surprise us with his effectiveness. The problem is not R.A. Dickey or Ryota Igarashi or Henry Blanco or Chris Coste. If those are the guys on the cover of the media guide, yes, that’s bad news. But they’re spare parts at the moment, and who honestly cares if we pick up our spare parts before we finalize our engine shopping?

You never know when a spare part will become essential in the short or long term. Rick Reed, Brian Bohanon, Darren Oliver and Omir Santos, to name four, all raised yawns in their time of acquisition. Then they each gave us some big innings and great swings down the road. I don’t know that the unexciting signings of late 2009 will remotely approach the contributions those guys made…but maybe they will. If not, they won’t be here or relied upon forever and a day.

R.A. Dickey isn’t why the Mets didn’t go harder for Jason Marquis or somehow get involved for Javier Vazquez or get around to landing Jason Bay. He’s just R.A. Dickey. He’ll report to St. Lucie before too long, he’ll be the subject of a few “look, it’s a knuckleballer!” stories and we’ll either be glad we got him or practically forget him as soon as we can. It’s not like we traded Bubba Trammell for Donne Wall or, for that matter, Jason Bay for Steve Reed here. It’s a minor league contract. It’s low-risk. It’s simply one of those things.

The Mets need to do more of the bigger things, but until then, get out the oversized mitt and make R.A. Dickey feel at home. What the hell? Consider it in the spirit of the holiday season.

SNY Presents Stuffed Cabbage in Jars

When Mad Men‘s brilliant third season ended in November, I thought I had seen every compelling thing I could possibly see on 2009 television regarding life as it was lived in 1963 Manhattan. And then last week came Mets Yearbook: 1963, and all I could say was, “Eat your hat, Don Draper.”

It’s not a competition per se, but Mad Men has to take a late back seat as my favorite show of the past year now that SNY’s Mets Yearbook has grabbed the wheel. Five episodes in and it brings new meaning to the phrase Mets classics. It is everything a Mets fan could want out of TV and maybe life. It is, to paraphrase John Adams from 1776, a masterful expression of the Metropolitan mind.

A standing O for SNY is in order — and this from someone who has sat on his hands for a good long while.

Since debuting in March 2006, the channel we reasonably considered “our” channel too often swung weakly and missed consistently, clogging its valuable airwaves with poker shows, boating shows, the most grating of shout shows, news shows plagued by smarmy attitudes and smug anchors, and a glut of mindlessly scheduled filler. The Met Quotient was never as high or as strong as any of us would have calculated had any of us been consulted. True, SNY produced all non-national Met broadcasts, employed the finest announcers imaginable, aired a weekly magazine show, a kids show, an offseason news show, a sprinkling of old games and recent ceremonies, a handful of interview specials, a couple of documentaries as well as breaking coverage of news both bad and good…and yet I can honestly say, without irony, that it was never enough. It never felt like anybody there at the highest precincts of decisionmaking truly lived and died with the ideal of the Mets. The network talked up “all things NY sports,” but came off as tone deaf to its true hardcore audience of Mets fans.

Not the case anymore, not with Mets Yearbook. Watch or rewatch any and all of the five episodes that have run to date and you will conclude there hasn’t been a more extensive and extraordinary representation of New York Met genius since Gary Cohen dined alone.

Just a few highlights from the highlight films of yore:

Mets Yearbook: 1971 — The Winning Way

• The wonders of the Florida Instructional League

• The oncoming curse of Jim Fregosi

• Bud Harrelson, chatting in a not at all stilted manner

• Tom Seaver, setting records

• Banner Day!

Mets Yearbook: 1984 — Don’t Stop Us Now!

• The sweetness of Strawberry Sunday

• The oncoming blessing of Gary Carter

• Baby Doc’s unlimited future

• Shea Stadium, overcome by The Wave

• Banner Day!

Mets Yearbook: 1975 — Meet The Mets

• Dave Kingman, friendliest Met ever

• Mike Vail, budding star

• Joe Frazier, asked if he’s gonna bring more Vails with him

• Dairylea Day

• Banner Day!

Mets Yearbook: 1968 — Year Of The Met Pitcher

• Jerry Koosman’s internal monologue

• Tom Seaver conducting a pitching clinic while wearing No. 38

• Ron Swoboda’s media onslaught

• Bud Harrelson invoking God at a Little League dinner

• Banner Day!

Mets Yearbook: 1963 — Let’s Go, Mets!

• The lady who says all her children are “a Mets fan”

• The gent who adds the Mets have nowhere to go but up

• The Mr. Met bobbleheads sold in the Polo Grounds stands

• Ed Kranepool, world-weary 18-year-old, and Casey Stengel, unstoppable at 73

• Banner Day!

Yes, Banner Day was quite the constant in these things, making one wonder why, for the umpteenth time, why the Mets abandoned what Dick Young (who, before turning evil, was quite a nifty conflict-of-interest script writer) called their “soul promotion” — and we’re not accepting “because there are no more scheduled doubleheaders” as an excuse. I can’t get enough of those placards. I can’t get enough of Old Timers Days and Helmet Days. I can’t get enough of Lindsey Nelson narrating. I can’t get enough of the incidental footage, like how the people filling the box seats looked so different from ’63 to ’68 and again from ’68 to ’71. I can’t get enough of the ballpark advertising, especially the outfield wall of the Polo Grounds where Hebrew National was, in 1963, introducing Delicious STUFFED CABBAGE IN JARS. I can’t get enough of watching the Mets at home in the Polo Grounds and marveling at Shea Stadium being built. I can’t get enough of the innocence and implicit honesty of these films, particularly 1963 when they made losing 111 games somehow sound like brand equity. None of the years above resulted in more than a second-place finish, yet I felt like a champ just for being a Mets fan listening to the Mets tell me how much I meant to them.

The stream of Met consciousness is unbelievable. Doesn’t matter if they’re focusing on Seaver and Stengel or Staiger and Stearns or Singleton and Schiraldi. It’s the Mets video family album. It’s about why we became Mets fans, whenever we became Mets fans, certainly if we hopped on board between 1962 and 1988, the years that Mets Yearbook will eventually cover in twenty-seven Amazin’ chapters.

To whom do we owe this simple pleasure of unearthed treasures and recovered memories? Let’s credit Gary Morgenstern, vice president of programming for SNY. He green-lit the concept and guided its creation, though the better word might be its resuscitation. The content of Mets Yearbook has existed for literally decades. It was Gary, however, who got it on the air. For that I wanted to thank him and pester him for information. He was kind enough to spend about twenty minutes on the phone with me last week to indulge my curiosity.

“These films have been in the Mets’ archives for some years,” Gary began. “It was unclear to us exactly what they had, where they existed and in what format.” The goldmine was struck in the process of moving from Shea to Citi Field. That’s when the film library revealed itself and “we confirmed what they had.”

You mean it took the destruction of Shea Stadium to give us these peeks into the life and times of Shea Stadium? Gary wouldn’t go quite that far, but did acknowledge that the transition “might have sped up the process and moved it forward”. He says a project like this had long been on the SNY radar, “conceptually” speaking: “We were aware there was stuff in the library, that there was a library full of content. We just didn’t know what they had. We imagined it was really compelling.”

That much has been proven. What wasn’t clear to SNY viewers starved for such content is why the network waited one more second than it had to to debut this stuff. Gary explains they had to answer their own questions, including, “How do we get our hands on them? What format are they in? Are they good for TV? It’s taken a little while.”

Of the five that have aired thus far — purposely nonchronological to offer us tastes of different Met eras — SNY had to work with different formats and running times. “They were not created for TV,” Gary notes; indeed, Lindsey, Ralph and Bob used to regularly remind us we could write to the Mets about having one of them shown if we were a civic organization or church group. “Some were 28 minutes long, some were 24 minutes long, some were 33 minutes long.” They needed to be properly formatted for 2009 cable television, edited for commercial breaks and generally spiffed up for broadcast.

The cynic in me wondered if the Mets gave a damn. After all, these are the people who needed a year of haranguing before painting their staircases orange and announcing a Hall of Fame. “The people in the broadcast department were fantastic,” Gary assured me. “They pushed it on us. They were aware of the content in their library and very supportive. They waded through boxes and boxes of tapes. They love seeing this stuff as much as we do.”

The Mets highlight films had taken on a mystical quality during their interminable absence. No fan much over thirty won’t immediately spurt “rain delays” when the subject arises. These were what you watched when the tarp was pulled over the field. Since that ad hoc tradition dried up, sightings were rare. SportsChannel aired the entire oeuvre to commemorate the Mets’ 25th anniversary in 1986, and some memorable clips emerged in An Amazin’ Era, the franchise’s celebratory VHS. The Mets transferred the 1969 production, “Look Who’s No. 1” to tape and handed it out at Shea one Sunday in 1999 (best…giveaway…ever). MSG ran the films from the playoff years to welcome the Mets to their frequency in 2002. Mets Weekly has spliced segments into its program periodically. But mostly…nothing.

Gary admits he had not seen them before Mets Yearbook began coming together, though “there were a couple of films I was aware of” and a general awareness they existed, thanks to their use on Mets Weekly. I have to confess it never occurred to me that anybody connected to airing Mets games wouldn’t have known about the sacred rain delay cache, and it frightened me a bit, but that’s now water under one of the many bridges that connect the Five Boroughs…especially since — hold onto your blue caps — Gary promises we will see Mets Yearbook during rain delays in 2010, even if they are not modern, even if they in no way explicitly promote Citi Field and even though they’re not Beer Money.

“Charming is the right word,” Gary agreed when I threw it at him. “They are so innocent and charming in their own way.” What fascinates him as a television executive is each film goes its own way despite the prevailing logic of today. When he thinks of a highlight film, Gary says, “I think of a game-by-game recap of the season. Our inclination would be to sort of follow a chronological progression of Game One through Game 162.”

Instead, he continues, “you get little bits and pieces and nice little stories, or highlights of a particular player. There is no recapping of the season, but you do get a flavor of that season. It’s really interesting and not necessarily something we would think of doing.”

But how about doing it that way? I asked. How about, given what we all know about 2009’s shortcomings, taking the 1963/1968 tone of  “We didn’t win that many games, but baseball sure is fun!” Gary allowed that might work on some level. “As you know,” he says, “there were positives. Maybe by focusing on them and telling those stories, that would be the right approach for a 2009 season in review and even beyond. It’s not the traditional approach these days.”

I bit my tongue and didn’t ask what positives there were, but if I try, I can see a 2009 highlight film that straddles the line between innocence and whitewashing. Give me a few segments: one on Pedro Feliciano breaking his own appearances record; one on the tasty Taqueria; one on Josh Thole’s Gee Whiz! September; one on the ’69 reunion; and one on Omir Santos’s home run off Jonathan Papelbon in Boston — and don’t try to convince me the Mets were merely a couple of MRIs away from legitimate contention. Don’t overwhelm me with phony salutes to sightlines. Make me feel 1971 warm and fuzzy with the material you have at hand without attempting to pull the wool over my eyes regarding 92 losses and poor fundamentals. Use catchy music and don’t cheap out.

And, no disrespect to the admirable Kevin Burkhardt, see if you can resurrect Lindsey Nelson.

OK, tough to imagine a Let’s Go, Mets! treatment translating to today but it might be fun trying. It’s already fun watching the years we’ve seen. It will be more fun when SNY airs its next five Mets Yearbooks, which will be — in an order yet to be determined — 1966, 1972, 1976, 1980 and 1988. Each resulted in a record better than the year before it, though only one, ’88, yielded as much as a division title. Still, I’ll bet there’ll be a golden glow around each of those seasons in those films. Gary says he’s yet to watch the raw material in full, but that we can look forward to “the same array of great unseen before content.”

He couldn’t say when the next five will air, though they will likely be keyed to Spring Training and the beginning of the season. More will be spread out across 2010 and 2011, which means we shouldn’t go hungry for long and we’ll be able to make this treat-laden Met smorgasbord last. At some point, we might see a Mets Yearbook marathon, though none has been scheduled (and no discussions with the Mets or Major League Baseball have occurred regarding a DVD release…though that would surely rock).

Since 1988, the Mets have made exactly four five annual highlight films: 1989*, 1990, 1999, 2000 and 2006. Gary says they’re MLB productions, thus out of SNY’s immediate grasp. Everything between ’62 and ’88 was “work for hire,” meaning the Mets are free to do with them what they want, even if local Knights of Columbus lodges are no longer clamoring to run them during their winter smokers. I mentioned it was a shame the Mets stopped doing these every year. After all, the NFL mandates a highlight film every year from every one of its franchises, even the Detroit Lions. Gary seemed sympathetic, but that’s not his charge.

SNY is, so I did ask about one other topic: Mets Classics. With the recent enshrinement of the “Omir-acle” at Fenway, we have seen, by my count, 43 different old games on SNY. The Mets are an impressive 42-1, with Game One of the 1969 World Series constituting the only loss in rerun history. Not that I’m not grateful for repeated chances to watch Endy Chavez to lay down a squeeze bunt against Colorado in April 2007, but, uh, Gary, what else ya got?

“We’re targeting for this year the ’86 NLCS versus Houston,” he reports, specifically the four Met wins. It occurs to me they were all shown in 2006 when SNY went heavy on 1986 (including the excellent Simply Amazin’ documentary). “Those are truly classic games and we’ll see full versions of those.”

More, I asked. When are we going to see more?

The answer was two-part. Stuff after ’86, such as the thus far buried 2000 NLDS and NLCS triumphs, is coming…eventually. As for old stuff, like say the ’73 postseason, probably not. Not a single full game from either series, versus Cincy or Oakland, exists in the Met library. Generally, Gary informs me, the MLB archives are light on full games from before 1980. Me, I’d settle for a stringing together of videotaped highlights, and Gary says a 1973 documentary is a possibility, though he’d sure like to find a full game telecast.

“We want to get more games into that pool” of Mets Classics, Gary says. “In the first year, we showed the same nine games over and over. Now we’re up above thirty.”

I left the vice president of programming with one final programming suggestion — and it’s not particularly original in that several Mets fans have suggested it to me over the years. How about just showing a Random Mets Game? Just pull one from whenever. It doesn’t have to be “classic” or fraught with historical significance — and it doesn’t have to be a walkoff win. It just has to be a Mets game from quite a while ago. Just put it on without giving away the ending (we’ll take it on faith that it engenders a happy recap).

“We will get to that point,” Gary forecasts. “Every year conjures up a certain era in Met history. If it’s not a ‘classic,’ then it’s a classic in memory.” He says SNY will get its hands on some Mets games whose main appeal is that they are Mets games — 1992, 1995, whenever — and “go more in that direction”.

Do enough of that and it will be a banner day for all of us.

*An incredibly reliable source informs me a 1989 highlight film was produced, correcting my mistaken assumption that the Mets weren’t anxious to publicize the Juan Samuel Era.

You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

From David Waldstein in the New York Times:

In 2002, three years after Valentine urged them to do so, the Mets brought in Satoru Komiyama, a control pitcher they called the Greg Maddux of Japan. Again, their timing was off. By the time the Mets got Komiyama, he was more like the Mike Maddux of Japan.

Based on a statistics sheet from Japan, Steve Phillips, the Mets’ general manager at the time, thought Komiyama was an experienced reliever. But Phillips misread the category Games Finished to mean saves, when it actually referred to complete games. Komiyama went 0-3 with a 5.61 earned run average (and no saves) for the Mets and went home after one year.

Good luck, Ryota Igarashi. All the same, we’d suggest you rent rather than buy.

Miracles Never Cease

Apologies in advance if a technical matter temporarily disappears this post. We’re still in the process of switching blog platforms, and I was going to wait on any further posting ’til it’s done, but I wanted to continue to get the word out about the following project…plus snow is falling on Long Island like pop flies on Luis Castillo’s head, and I need to stop staring out the window.

Back when Bob Costas was an up and coming broadcaster whose every other utterance was cheekily charming (as opposed to now, when he comes off as curmudgeonly condescending), he made a characteristically cute remark about wanting to follow the Gideons into hotel rooms so he could place the Elias Baseball Analyst alongside their Bibles in every hotel room in America.

That’s how I feel about The Miracle Has Landed. If I could, I would put this Good Book that details like no other the mitzvahs committed by the 1969 World Champion New York Mets in the hands of every single Mets fan. I can’t, but I can urge every citizen of Metsopotamia to bless himself or herself — as well as a loved one — with a copy. The Miracle Has Landed is undoubtedly the definitive Word on the definitive moment in the Genesis of the modern Mets.

This book is a near-religious experience. I preach its Gospel to the village elders who remember first-hand the Old Testament of Casey Stengel, and I preach its Glory to the Met-aphorical child Who Does Not Know How To Ask. For the wise and mature Mets fan, The Miracle Has Landed offers depth that outdistances even the 410 feet between home plate and deepest center field at the late, lamented Shea Stadium. For the youngster among us who wonders why such a fuss continues to be fomented over a team from forty years ago, The Miracle Has Landed provides an answer that could have been brewed straight from the Maxwell House Haggadah:

It is because of what the almighty Gil Hodges did for us when we left ninth place.

I could continue to get spiritual with you about this book, but better you should know what’s actually in it so you’ll be suitably convinced to secure it.

It has everything.

It has everything you could possibly want to know about the 1969 Mets. It is a most friendly encyclopedia on what stands, still, as the most improbable championship baseball has ever known. It is a library of biography, a repository of history, a stream of curiosities and a stage for eternal drama. It is a parade of perspectives. It is an endless sense of wonder.

It is 1969 come to life and come to stay. Invite it in to your home and to your heart.

Me, I invited Matt Silverman to tell me a little more about it.

The Miracle Has Landed offers not one voice but dozens of full-throated articulations of what made 1969 the incandescent year it remains. The Society for American Baseball Research, under whose auspices the book was produced, had the good sense to seek out an expert conductor to turn the choir into a vocal symphony rather than a cacophony. That would be Matt, an experienced sports author and editor, particularly where the Mets are concerned. SABR asked Matt to put this project together in 2007, and he would spend the next two years of his life devoted to its cause and deadlines. It took a lot of work, but Matt saw a bright side, particularly in the past year. See, while the rest of us were mired in the misery of the disabled and the diminished, Matt got to take frequent side trips to a happier, more miraculous place.

Matt tells me he’d be watching a game last summer, would see the Mets fall behind some random opponent 4-1, feel the deficit widening and adjourn to his office to work on captions or one of the many sidebars he personally contributed. “What a wonderful escape from 2009,” he says.

Any year is a good year to journey back to 1969. “It’s the touchstone,” Matt believes. “It’s the Met moment. It’s when they really became a franchise.” It’s also when The Franchise earned the only World Series ring he’d ever wear. “They really made Tom Seaver’s career,” Matt says. “They made everybody’s career.” After living with them for more than two years, the editor takes a step back and marvels at his subject matter.

“Whenever I look at the ’69 Mets,” Matt says of their statistics, “I still ask, ‘how did this team win?’ Even if pitching is 90% of the game, the Mets didn’t even have enough hitting for the other 10%.”

Seaver would go on to approximate his 1969 performance several times. Nolan Ryan would famously exceed what he accomplished, while Jerry Koosman would later win 20 games twice and Tug McGraw would become one of the game’s top closers. But, to Matt’s point, that’s basically it. “Most of those guys would never have another year like 1969,” Matt notes. Most of them never had a year like it before 1969. For instance, “Art Shamsky had had one great week with the Reds,” recalling his four home runs in four consecutive at-bats in 1966. “Otherwise, he was just good.” Yet Art (a .538 hitter in the inaugural NLCS) and his 1969 Met teammates, together, became immortal.

Matt draws one overarching conclusion for why it all merged so miraculously: “Gil Hodges made all these pieces work. Even when he got Donn Clendenon, he still platooned him with Ed Kranepool, who at that point wasn’t the most reliable player the Mets had except that you knew he’d be on the roster every year.”

They’re all champions now, just as they were all champions then, and you’ll read about each of them in The Miracle Has Landed. You’ll read about everybody who had something to do with 1969, from Seaver the Cy Young and Clendenon the World Series MVP to the bit Mets who exist less in memory than agate type. All 35 men who were 1969 Mets are profiled. That includes Amos Otis, then a young man who failed a couple of tryouts (before being shipped off to stardom in Kansas City in exchange for the doomed Joe Foy); Al Jackson, a 1962 refugee who redeparted as the miracle was finding its footing; Kevin Collins, an ultimately lost component of the pre-’69 Youth of America; and Jessie Hudson, who threw exactly two innings for the Mets in his only major league appearance on September 19, 1969. The bio of Clendenon is spectacularly epic. The bio of Hudson is relatively brief. But all of the biographies are lovingly and carefully crafted.

Silverman’s all-volunteer army of writers came from diverse baseball backgrounds. Some (like yours truly, who contributed two original pieces) were high-voltage Mets fans. Others were baseball historians who recognized a good story when they saw it. A couple came at it from the perspective of not being happy the miracle in question was pulled off. Everybody took the assignment at hand to heart. “The guys hit it pretty well,” Matt agrees, happily adding the writeups “didn’t have that cookie cutter feel.”

In addition to the player bios, there are profiles of Hodges, his coaches, the owner and front office poobahs (even M. Donald Dastardly) and articles/sidebars galore on every aspect of ’69. For example, did you realize that in the midst of widening their September lead over the Cubs and, four days from clinching the first-ever National League East crown, that the Mets were no-hit in the last no-hitter ever thrown at Shea? That the Mets were inundated by rain early in the schedule when they were yet to gel and had to play a boatload of doubleheaders later, when they were perfectly coalesced? That a roll of film from a Seaver start at Wrigley Field — the week after Jimmy Qualls made himself infamous — lay undeveloped for forty years, until it was developed for this book?

You’ll see the pictures. You’ll read the stories. You’ll step out of the path of the black cat so he can go haunt the visitors from Chicago. You’ll find yourself lost in a year like no other. “It’s your team,” Matt says to every Mets fan who harbors any doubts about what made 1969 so incredibly Amazin’. “There will never be another team like it.”

And there may never be another book quite like this.

The Miracle Has Landed is available from Barnes & Noble, Amazon, other online booksellers and New York-area retailers.

Mets Yearbook: 1963

Thursday night (12/17) at 7:30 marks the fifth and oldest to date installment of Mets Yearbook on SNY. It’s 1963 and, based on my previous viewing of this particular highlight film, it promises to be a gem among gems. That’s sayin’ something considering the channel has batted 4-for-4 with a quartet home runs thus far. I hope you saw 1968, which was as trippy as any acid dropped at the Chicago Democratic Convention that August. I hope you’ve seen them all. These are the best half-hours you’ll enjoy all offseason, save perhaps for the impending Ryota Igarashi introductory press conference.

Nah, these are better.

Image courtesy of kcmets.com.

Just Another Panic Monday

It’s hard enough being a Mets fan these days without inventing apoplexies. Thus, when I read John Harper in the Daily News go tabloid-dramatic and declare December 14 was Black Monday, I rolled my eyes and shrugged at the insipidness of it all.

Tuesday, when Harper’s piece ran, was a worse day for sports journalism than Monday was for the Mets.

Too bad the Phillies have Roy Halladay (though not so bad that they’re stripped of Cliff Lee). And newly Red Socked John Lackey no doubt could have poured us a nice, tall glass of Johan-Aid, which is a drink our notoriously short rotation is thirsting for. But under no realistic scenario were we going to get Roy Halladay, while overextending ourselves for John Lackey would have been a long-term folly. The transactions that landed them in Philadelphia and Boston, respectively, were discrete events. They had nothing to do with the Mets. It was not a Met failing that neither is a Met. Not everybody is potentially a Met.

I suppose it’s progress that our expectations have been raised so high in the last few years that we consider ourselves automatic players for almost every big name, many of whom have successfully draped Mets jerseys over designer suits in front of blue and orange logo walls. There was a time not so long ago when an aggressive Met offseason consisted of lowballing Vladimir Guerrero and scooping up in his stead Karim Garcia and Shane Spencer, a.k.a. the Glimmer Twins.

Not trading for Halladay and not signing Lackey wasn’t that. It just wasn’t. Halladay would have taken a load of prospects (Phillies had to give up a few) as well as a truckful of cash. It didn’t hurt that his new team could come at him from a position of strength. The word on ol’ Roy was he wanted to be near his Suncoast home for Spring Training and not so far from a World Series. The Mets happened to be on the other side of Florida and the wrong end of the recent competitive divide. Geography, standings and finances notwithstanding, who exactly were we going to trade to gain another Cy Young winner? The Phillies could part with Lee and not feel it. We did our prospects ‘n’ paychecks deal two years ago with Johan. It would have been fantastic to have lured another ace since, but I don’t see it as an organizational sin that Halladay didn’t happen for us. It’s Met-opic to believe it was.

Lackey? A real solid No. 2 framed as a No. 1 because he’s the cream of a feeble crop. Did you see what he got from Boston? The $85 million is insane enough, but the five years may be crazier. How many long-term contracts have the Mets given out in which somebody didn’t miss time or noticeably decline? The rationale has been that the Mets needed the help immediately, thus the front-loaded upside was worth the unwanted years at the end. Lackey is 31, not old. Fourth year, fifth year, we’re talking way more mileage and limited tradability based on what he’d be owed.

Perhaps it wouldn’t matter if Lackey was setting the world on fire in the first year or three, but a five-year commitment? At $17 million a year? That’s $17 million every year for five years, an albatross waiting to happen every winter when we’re drooling after other, better, more desirable saviors to fill needs that will loom as equally urgent if not more so.

So Omar didn’t make a Red Sox-sized pitch for Lackey. Y’know what? Good for him. At best he would have driven up Lackey’s asking price and wound up paying it.

It wasn’t Black Monday. It was just another Monday, no matter the perceptions fed by hacks like Harper who toss every dry twig they can gather into the Mets R Dopes narrative machine. Read his article and note the cheap shot he takes toward the end regarding the Mets possibly inviting Kelvim Escobar to Spring Training. Harper the Hack packages this non-development with not getting Halladay and Lackey to form a neat Bad Things Happen To The Dumb Mets In Threes package.

We’re not shy about criticizing the Mets here, either, you may have noticed, but not every good thing that doesn’t happen for them equals a bad thing that they caused. It’s rare that I say this regarding Minaya, Wilpon and the rest of management, but get off their backs.

The Mets are still in need of pitching and a lot of everything else. I thought somebody was talking out the side of a mouth when Jason Bay’s name came up as a Met target last week, but maybe this is a self-fulfilling prophecy coming to fruition. The Red Sox have kissed him goodbye, other suitors are falling by the wayside and the Mets…well, they have to sign somebody. They could do worse than Bay. I suppose they could do better, but in this free agent market, not much. Judging by the offer the Cardinals have reportedly made Matt Holliday — eight years, $128 million — Bay is the most reasonable big bat available. He ain’t perfect, but he’s an upgrade over the incumbent leftfielder who, at present, is nobody.

The Mets’ offer is four years, $65 million. It’ll probably have to be hiked up to five years, which I don’t like either, but I’d rather see five years go to a hitter of Bay’s caliber than a pitcher of Lackey’s. That’s not a knock on Lackey. It’s a knock on pitcher durability. Jason Marquis for three, no more than four years strikes me as a safer investment. Hell, he actually wants to pitch here. I try not to fall for the New Yorker Wants To Come Home storyline, but we could really use his bat.

We’re also still after Bengie Molina. I would give him one year and ask him to change his last name, but I understand it will take at least two and that he’ll still be related to Yadier. Shiver.

The Mets aren’t close to complete for 2010, not anywhere near close. Thankfully, the next Monday that counts is Monday, April 5 — and that’s still sixteen Mondays away.

The Hopefully Not Very Big Move

If all goes as planned, sometime next week we will be reborn on the WordPress platform.

This should mean very little is different. Those finding us through faithandfearinflushing.com should continue to do so. Ditto for those using our blogharbor address. All our posts are being moved over. At least at first, the design will look very familiar.

The one thing you’ll notice is that existing comments* will no longer be tagged with names — they’ll all be anonymous. This is unfortunate, and in fact stopped us from moving for a long time, but we’re told there’s no way to fix it. I also suspect RSS feeds may need to be tweaked — information when I get it. On the plus side, we will debut with better commenting tools, including the long-requested ability to edit comments. As well as better tools for sharing posts, printing them and more.

Oh, and Matt Holliday promised us if we moved to WordPress he’d sign a below-market deal, including a clause requiring the Mets stop splitting hairs over “obstructed views” vs. “sightlines” vs. “bad seats that shouldn’t have existed in the first place.”

Sorry, just kidding on that last part.

Anyway, within a couple of days the move will be under way, and we’ll close up comments on any new posts, as they won’t migrate over once the move begins. And then we’ll cut the ribbon on the new, familiar place.

Thank you to all of you for reading and commenting, and for putting up with our construction dust.

*To clarify, NEW comments WILL have names; in fact, we plan on doing away with anonymity altogether under the new platform. It’s the ones from the old posts, from before the switchover, that will, because of software restrictions, be unfortunately listed as anonymous.

27 Minutes Outside Citi Field

Ebbets Field was always in reach. There were obstacles — money, the policeman’s shoe, a leap, the greasy garageman — but a boy could contend with them and triumph, if he had wit and persistence and a touch of courage. It was easy and absolutely irrational to relate getting to see a Dodger game with getting to be a Dodger. Which, in the fine irrationality of boyhood, is what generations of Brooklyn children did.
—Roger Kahn, The Boys Of Summer

Why is Mets security being wasted on the Mets? Why isn’t it being dedicated toward the national interest?

Take that pesky couple that crashed the state dinner a few weeks ago. They got by the United States Secret Service. They got by the staff of the White House Social Secretary. But Tareqe and Michaele Salahi would have been stopped stone cold outside Citi Field. Or at least they would have been effectively delayed.

My proof? The last time I visited Citi Field, November 14, for a social event at least on par with that which President Obama threw for Indian Prime Minister Singh — the Bar Mitzvah of budding Mets superfan Ryder Chasin. As previously noted, it was a lovely affair…once it got going. That is to say the celebration was slated to begin at 1:30. Most people would be arriving via chartered bus from Connecticut where the actual synagogue service was held in the morning. Stephanie and I, however, were only able to attend the afternoon portion of the de facto doubleheader. We came, as we always do, via train, from Long Island, arriving unfashionably early, a little after one. It was a raw, gray Saturday, so we looked forward to going inside and warming up.

The invitation (which looked like a big ticket to a Mets game) said we should enter through the Jackie Robinson Rotunda. I wasn’t sure if this was just a charming affectation or actual instructions. It’s not that I doubted the Chasins. I doubted the Mets. Is it possible they’d actually a) have someone on duty in the middle of November in front of their own ballpark? b) have someone duty in the middle of November in front of their own ballpark who was sentient of an event about to take place therein?

Yes and yes, it turned out. So much for doubting the Mets. There was a young man in a red windbreaker stationed by the Rotunda. Hi, we said, we’re here for the Bar Mitzvah. I waited for the blank stare, but it didn’t come. He knew what we were talking about. He also knew the starting time was 1:30 and it, somebody must have told him, was inviolate.

“You can come in at 1:30,” he said, looking at his mobile device. “It’s…1:03 right now. You have 27 minutes.”

So much for not doubting the Mets.

***

There was a pause as we digested the notion that we were not allowed inside to an affair to which we were invited guests because we were early. We were not allowed inside on a blustery day when it had been raining. We were not allowed inside even though we were, on this particular occasion, a well-dressed couple about as not on the make as two people can be. We were not the Salahis before the world discovered the Salahis. We were not bucking for a reality show scam while conceivably putting the federal government at risk.

We were there a little early for a thing — not a 7:10 First Pitch with a 4:40 Gates Open, mind you, but a private party — and we were kept out.

“Is there a restroom we could use?” I asked, as if to appeal to the man’s sense of common decency (and because we could both use a trip to the restroom).

“Only the Porta Potties,” we were told, as if we had been excessively tailgating.

You’ve got a whole building of them right behind you, I was tempted to say, but held off, as we held it in.

It was clear as the sky was murky that this was the Mets way in all seasons. Policy rules all. Orders must be followed. Flexibility is on permanent hiatus. Not, “Let me use this walkie-talkie and check with my supervisor” or “Everything isn’t technically ready yet, but I don’t see why not” or “Sure, go ahead.”

The Mets, in the person of this guy in the red jacket, adhered to their clipboard. The clipboard said 1:30. Damned if they were gonna let anybody scam them out of what it said on that clipboard.

This is an organization wedded to its clipboard logic.

***

I grant you ours was not a situation that will affect millions of Mets fans when baseball is played again at Citi Field. It was just us at that moment. Just two people who had a reason to be there and got there less than half an hour before the proceedings commenced. They could have pointed us to another entrance; or noted the Acela Club won’t officially be open for this party for another 27 minutes so you can use the bathroom there but you can’t eat or drink yet; or said you can wait in the Rotunda considering it’s rather chilly out here, just don’t break anything.

Instead the Met way was to tell us to cool our heels and buzz off ’til the exact appointed moment of entry. Our choices were to huddle in the doorway in proximity to this guy and whichever of his red-jacketed compatriots were on the beat, or wander around the perimeter of Citi Field for 27 minutes before we could walk in like people.

So we wandered, which, weather and bladder issues aside, was not an altogether displeasing alternative to getting out of the cold and using a restroom. It would give me a chance to commune, one final time in 2009, with the place that had become, stretching back to April 3, my recurring bane, my destination of choice and the focus of the most puzzling question of my current baseball life:

Why can’t I bring myself to out and out like this place?

***

A Fonzie’s dozen of the many thoughts that floated across my mind during Citi Field’s first year:

1) If the Mets really want to be inspired by the lessons of Jackie Robinson, they’d learn to slide directly into home plate.

2) Daniel Murphy should not have been permitted to play left field in such close proximity to the Endy Chavez silhouette intended to define LEFT FIELD.

3) The ads behind the scoreboard look terrible, but they blend in quite nicely with the VINA AUT GLASS motif from across the way.

4) Visiting my brick and routinely recognizing the bricks that surround it reminds me of going to see my mother at Pinelawn and becoming familiar with the final resting places of others who just happened to be entombed in the same courtyard.

5) The seats had the leg room that was promised, but most of them outside the special Swells sections were noticeably hard on the butt. And to think the one item they emphasized at the Citi Field Preview Center was how great the seats themselves would be.

6) Overhearing former Shea planholders rue their resettlement into outer reaches of the Promenade was like something from an immigrant drama. “In the Old Country, I was in Row A!”

7) I wondered why there was a plethora of attendants overseeing the Fixin’s bars. Then I attempted to pump the ketchup or the mustard and realized it was not a one-person job.

8) Caesars Club smells like a high-end shoe store.

9) Before I realized ’47 was a brand name, I didn’t understand why the ’47 store wasn’t called the ’62 store — or why the Mets would allow any retail that even fleetingly evoked T#m Gl@v!ne.

10) Whatever happened to taunting the opposing pitcher? “Shush! Ian Snell is trying to pitch and he needs absolute silence!” And sustaining a respectable “Let’s Go Mets!” was like pulling teeth. Or pulling pork.

11) The acoustics are weird. I wind up listening in on individual conversations I want no part of, yet I detect no buzz whatsoever.

12) If you’re not a stickler for watching baseball, Citi Field’s a dandy destination.

13) All ballparks lose their charm when the Mets suck in them.

***

The Bar Mitzvah, besides the fun and joy it held in store once we were let in, provided me a unique opportunity. This was my 40th trip to Citi Field in 2009. There were 36 regulation games, one exhibition game, one open workout and one corporate-sponsored event connected to my work. Now a Bar Mitzvah. It wasn’t like Citi Field wasn’t giving me plenty of chances to get to know it. Yet I still feel like we’re strangers.

You might say I prepared specially for this 40th meeting. Four days earlier was Stephanie’s and my 18th wedding anniversary. Because she’s somebody I’d marry at every possible turn, she found my suggestion of how we could spend part of that day not just acceptable, but embraceable. We accepted a gracious invitation from the premier New York City historian Peter Laskowich to take one of his handcrafted tours. A month earlier we had joined him for the weekly walk and talk he gives in and around Grand Central Terminal; in June I was up and uncharacteristically at ’em on a Saturday morning as he led a group uptown, from Madison Square Park to Coogan’s Bluff. The latter was the one that ended overlooking the site of the Polo Grounds, which is my idea of a happy ending.

Our November 10 terrain was different. It wasn’t Manhattan. It was Brooklyn. Its underpinning wasn’t Giant black and orange. It was Dodger blue and white.

It was the other side of my heritage.

***

When I was a kid, my parents liked to joke they were a mixed marriage. Sure they were both Jewish, but one was a Litvak and the other was a Galitzianer. They each laughed. I never got it. Only recently did I bother to look into it. Litvak refers to Jews with roots in Lithuania, Russia and northern Poland. Galitzianer indicates Jews from southern Poland and the old Austrian-Hungarian Empire. The distinctions — theological, temperamental, culinary — are lost in the America of the 21st century, but apparently they were big a deal in Europe.

The Litvaks. The Galitzianers. Sooner or later, the rivalry melts and you’re part of an assimilated team playing together on common ground.

And then there’s us, the Metropolitan-Americans of today, more than a half-century removed from our roots. We are not Giants. We are not Dodgers. We are Mets. We are the repository of a melding of two great spiritual traditions. On April 11, 1962, as Richie Ashburn waited on the first pitch a Met would ever see, it was clear cut which of our bloodlines stemmed from where. It hadn’t been five years since there were New York Giants and Brooklyn Dodgers. The New Breed knew precisely from whom they were birthed. They were the product of a very mixed marriage that we who postdate 1957 couldn’t possibly fully appreciate as we approach 2010.

I’ve always tried to appreciate it though. I’ve always veered toward the black and orange myself. The New York Giants are the lost tribe in whom I’ve found my baseball background. I’ve been reading about them since I was nine years old, when the last active member of the tribe, Willie Mays, was becoming a New York Met. I’ve been hooked on the myths, the legends and the realities of what was New York (N.L.) before the current iteration took hold. I’m a New York Mets fan in my heart, a New York Giants fan in my soul is the shorthand I use.

So I’m not a retroactive Brooklyn Dodgers fan, exactly, but they have to be in there somewhere.

They have to be, even if they were the sworn enemy of the New York Giants. Litvaks and Galitzianers didn’t like each other as a rule, either, yet the progeny of Litvaks and Galitzianers married and, after a while, the labels amounted to little more than nostalgic wink.

They have to be, even if they aren’t a lost tribe. They never got lost. The less you heard about the old Giants, the more you kept hearing about the old Dodgers, who didn’t win as many pennants but long ago clinched first place in the romance column.

They have to be, even if the practiced exclusion of the Giants from the Mets’ backstory, culminating in the building of a Mets stadium that serves as homage to the Dodgers’ old ballpark without the slightest explicit nod to the Giant’s old ballpark — which happened, oh by the way, to be the Mets’ first home — is one of the things I held most vehemently against Citi Field in its first year, almost as much as red-jacketed security men who were in love with their clipboards and their inflexibility.

The Dodgers are in there somewhere with me. They have to be. They’re the D in the Met DNA. They’re from Brooklyn, just like me (though I was from there for about ten minutes before settling in my Long Island homeland). They’re the blue. It’s not a matter of black and orange versus blue and white anymore. It’s all about the blue and orange. I’ve read my share on the blue. Now it was time, under the guidance of Peter Laskowich, to experience it as best as I could up close.

On November 10, four days before my return to Citi Field, I was going to bone up with a trip to where Ebbets Field used to be. I wanted to sense what Ebbets Field was so maybe I could appreciate a little better what Citi Field is.

***

One thing you need to know about a Peter Laskowich tour: it’s never limited to what you think it will be. Grand Central was everything from geometry to psychology. Baseball in Manhattan was economy, demography, topography and destiny. Baseball in Brooklyn? It was America. It was an education and it was a little improv street theater, too, when Peter, outside the old Dodger offices on Montague, eased up on his erudition for a moment to tell a buttinski Yankees fan passerby (the kind who points at his cap as if that settles all arguments) where to get off when he started insisting, uninvited, that Yogi Berra tagged Jackie Robinson on Jackie’s steal of home in the ’55 Series.

Peter carries the pictures to prove otherwise.

Plenty of baseball, of course. This is not intellectual mumbo-jumbo smothering the reason you came, don’t worry. Peter gets to the baseball. He surrounds it with context, he leads you down one relevant path after another, he tells you to get out your Metrocard and, next thing you know, you’re where it happened.

You’re at Ebbets Field. Well, where Ebbets Field was. As with my two visits to the Polo Grounds, you just as soon use the present tense and forget that what you came to see isn’t really there anymore.

Approaching Ebbets was a third of the fun. We exited the 2 at Sterling Street and walked a block in what Peter ascertained was the wrong direction. An older man passed our hardy little band.

“Where’s Ebbets Field?” Peter asked him.

“Over there,” the man pointed.

That’s experience at work, I thought. The old guy knew Ebbets Field was there, even if it wasn’t.

It was a bit of a hike from the Sterling stop, even after we got reoriented. That was intentional, Peter explained. The Giants had ingratiated themselves with the city’s powers that be by the early 20th century, so much so that they could influence the placement of public transportation close to or far away from ballparks. It was no accident that the Polo Grounds was easily accessible (it had its own express line) and that Ebbets Field was a schlep from anywhere but the neighborhood. The Giants were New York. The Dodgers were Brooklyn, and Brooklyn was only reluctantly a part of New York.

What mattered, though, was the neighborhood. The neighborhood may have been a whole lot different from Charlie Ebbets’ time. It may have been a whole lot different from the time Walter O’Malley kissed it goodbye. But it was still the neighborhood and Ebbets Field was in the middle of it. I’d always read that, I’d always ascertained that, but until Peter led us to the corner of Sullivan Place and Bedford Avenue, I never quite got the depth of it.

I get it now.

Peter mentioned a statistic about a very large percentage of the Dodger trade coming to Ebbets Field on foot. Most of the fans lived within a half-hour’s walk of the park. The Dodgers were the neighborhood’s team. Ebbets Field was theirs. It was tiny. It fit right in. I could see it.

I could also see why everybody who was ever a part of it gets so choked up about a ballpark disappearing into the mists of a housing project that carries the name if not the spirit of the former structure. They did that uptown once the Mets left. The Polo Grounds became the Polo Grounds Houses. By then, Ebbets Field was already morphing into the Ebbets Fields Apartments (or “Ebbett’s,” as a sign offering rental information called it).

You couldn’t fool me, though. I could see what had been. Peter was a big help, pointing to where the visitors clubhouse was and how the visitors weren’t treated royally, particularly when they were visiting from Harlem. He showed as well the way home Gil Hodges and Duke Snider — when they were young, before they had wives — took after games. They, like the fans, walked home. The kids would follow along. Nobody bothered them too badly, Peter said. If you did, you feared Gil and Duke and the rest of the guys wouldn’t be such good sports about letting you tag behind them. Yes, Peter was a big help offering context and history.

But I could see it without his guidance. A baseball fan knows. Bedford meeting Sullivan, Sullivan meeting McKeever, McKeever meeting Montgomery, Montgomery coming back around to Bedford. An infinitesimal urban footprint. The boundaries of a major league ballpark for 45 summers. The home of the Brooklyn Dodgers. Where you walked to. Where you walked home from. From where O’Malley walked away. The heart of a neighborhood.

I could see Ebbets Field there. I really could. Four days later, I tried to see it in Flushing.

I really couldn’t.

***

I thought visiting the site of Ebbets Field and studying pictures of Ebbets Field would give me a greater appreciation of Citi Field’s exterior aspirations. Instead, it left me vaguely embarrassed by them. As aesthetically impressive as all those bricks and arches are, it’s not the heart of any neighborhood, not literally, not figuratively. After treading the actual sacred ground in Brooklyn, Citi Field’s Ebbets impulse felt a little creepy. Less an homage than a stalker’s obsession with recreating something that can never be duplicated. A 2009 state-of-the-art facility at the end of a parking lot masquerading as a 1913 bandbox off Bedford two solid weeks after Halloween ended.

Ultimately it made me think of Ned Flanders insisting his new brown-haired girlfriend put on a red wig to make her look more like his late wife Maude.

***

It took me most of the season to adjust my field of vision from the 7 after 111th Street, to quit lingering over the parking lot and to focus on the current ballpark in residence. I was quite heartened that on November 14, my instinct was to look for Citi Field, not Shea. I was also proud of my progress when we landed in Mets Plaza and I announced to Stephanie, “We’re home.”

The security guy knocked that sentiment right out of me. Peering hard at Citi and trying to find Ebbets didn’t help either. The rest of our perimeter walk just kept saddening me. I thought a ballpark in November would be the cure for the offseason blues. Many was the time my mood was brightened en route to LaGuardia in January just by passing Shea on the Whitestone Expressway.

Maybe that was the problem. I never got out and walked around Shea in November (I tried to drive up to it once or twice but couldn’t negotiate the locked gates). I got up close and personal to Citi Field during those 27 minutes, yet the closer I got, the more impersonal it felt. It felt abandoned somehow. Somewhere off the first base VIP entrance we even found a sizable patch of weeds or some such discouraging landscape overgrowth, as if this was the ballpark somebody had ditched for the West Coast.

Forty-one days had passed since the last game at Citi Field. Maybe it was going to feel deserted, but I didn’t imagine it would be so desolate. The chop shops were busy this Saturday, though they don’t constitute a neighborhood. The Mets want to raze them and create a Ballpark Village or something more pleasing and profitable. Would a few bars give Citi Field a neighborhood feel? Maybe. Wouldn’t be the same as a neighborhood.

Shea Stadium didn’t have those problems. Shea Stadium never engendered neighborhood pretensions. As a result, its concrete fit into its cement surroundings much better than our version of The Ballpark in Arlington. That, to me, is the real model for Citi Field: the Texas Rangers’ place, whatever it’s called this week. The Rangers built on a spot surrounded by nothing in particular and revved up the sepia-toned baseball theme to cover up its nothingness. For Arlington, Texas, it’s not bad. For Queens, the concept’s a little off.

The one area where you have a shot at Citi Field feeling like it’s in the middle of somewhere is the Bullpen Plaza entrance. It’s where you can stand outside and see a little something. But that’s all you see: a little. You see the Plaza, but not much field. You see some Promenade seats. You don’t get a great sense of the possibilities of a baseball game from 126th Street. I didn’t in November, anyway.

The rest of our perimeter tour wrought little delight. The back of Citi Field didn’t feel any friendlier. The Mets pictures you see on the Northern Boulevard side are still a nice touch, just as the mélange of ads is ugly as sin. As we made our way through the rear parking and reached the third base side — faux McKeever — Stephanie asked me if I wanted to round the bases. It took me a couple of seconds to realize she meant Shea.

Markers signifying home, first, second, third and the pitcher’s plate, when folks are stopping by and posing for pictures, make for a nice, understated tribute. When it’s November and nobody’s strolling by, they’re a collective downer. This is it? This is 45 seasons? Four lousy bases and the rubber? No sign, no plaque, no statuary, no foul lines, no sense of place? Yup, that’s right.

But who can pass up the Shea bases? We rounded them, and then we headed back to the Rotunda. My watch said it was almost 1:30. It took nearly 27 minutes to kill 27 minutes, but we had just about slain them. I could see a photographer and videographer were waiting out front. They had every good reason to be let in for the Bar Mitzvah, but the security guy made them wait, too.

Maybe there’s nothing wrong with Citi Field that an entire organizational and ownership facelift wouldn’t cure. Whether it’s the season or the offseason, I can never escape the notion that somebody has drilled it into the Met workforce that loving, liking or tolerating the Mets should be made as needlessly difficult as possible.

Gads, what an operation.

***

Magnanimous as hell, the guard said now we could go in. Go up that escalator there and take the first elevator to Excelsior. Before we did, we took advantage (until another red jacket told us to move along) of a private moment with the Jackie Robinson Rotunda. We took pictures of each other at the 42, which still makes me think of Butch Huskey before it makes me think of Jackie Robinson.

Had I been asked for input on creating the First Thing You See inside the Mets’ new ballpark, a lavish Jackie Robinson tribute would not have occurred to me. Nor would it have occurred to too many Mets fans. That whole Mets ballpark thing would have sent us in another direction…say toward the Mets. Still, as the Metsiness of Citi Field is filled in as promised (assuming the Mets keep their promises), I think I’ll come to like the JRR more. I already like it as an exit, as backhanded as that sounds. As an entrance, it’s just one more place you’re rushed through by men in red jackets. You’re whisked up an escalator and you practically run into a brick wall if you’re not careful. When it’s an exit, you come out of the dark and into something light, airy and pretty grand. On the way in, the intention, I think, is to have you respect it. On the way out, I can feel myself mentally lingering. It’s a great transition from baseball back into the real world: Rotunda, archways, plaza, stairs to the 7, train… home.

I respect the Rotunda’s cause and I like aspects of it. I downright love the picture of Robinson and Branch Rickey in particular (taken at those Dodger offices on Montague Street). I love that the two of them together are teaming to throw off the institutional racism that choked off baseball’s claim to being the National Pastime. Rickey’s showing some courage. Robinson’s showing loads more.

The rest of it…it’s not so much that it’s not about the Mets that bothers me. It’s that it’s not all that exciting, which seems antithetical to a ballplayer considered perhaps the most exciting to ever suit up. Again, respectable; important. It’s all about convincing us what a great human being this uncommon person and ballplayer was.

Am I shallow for not really focusing on all that on the way into a Mets game?

I read a description of the Rotunda recently, by Michael Kimmelman in the New York Review of Books, that I think explained to me why it doesn’t really hit its visceral mark:

Vague words like “teamwork,” “determination,” “persistence,” and “courage” are now emblazoned around the Citi Field rotunda like slogans from some corporate retreat. These platitudes dovetail with the sense of business people, however well-meaning, who are disconnected from the game and its true followers.

A big sign that says JACKIE ROBINSON, WHO PLAYED NEARBY, BROKE THE COLOR BARRIER IN BASEBALL AGAINST FORCES OF HATRED AND IGNORANCE MOST OF US COULDN’T IMAGINE AND BY DOING SO PAVED THE ROAD TO A BETTER AMERICA might get the point across without pussyfooting around.

I’d rather see a banner commemorating the Grand Slam Single when I walk into the Mets ballpark, like we used to see at Shea, but I get the idea of the Rotunda, and it is indeed respectable. When it was dedicated in April, I noticed how Rachel Robinson marveled at the permanence of the displays, how Fred Wilpon obviously meant for Jackie Robinson’s image to hover this year, next year and all years. It seemed to mean a lot to her (and him). It seems to mean a lot to enough people who do stop and dwell over those Nine Values and everything else. I’d still take the Grand Slam Single, et al, but I get the Jackie Robinson Rotunda. Like Robin Ventura’s blast, it’s not a home run, but it doesn’t hurt anybody to score it generously.

***

Following security’s instructions, we found our elevator in the dark. Citi Field was incredibly dark on this November day. Darker than you’d imagine. Everything was still where it was on October 4, which was a little surprising. You’d figure a ballpark would stay busy, have something to do when you’re not around, but if it’s not multipurpose, it doesn’t. It has, essentially, a summer job.

The same sense pervaded us when we got off our elevator on Excelsior. It was dark enough that I was briefly lost. I knew where Acela was, but I took us in a wayward direction. We wandered through a dark Caesars Club and toward first base before I realized we were off course.

It all sort of felt like home, but home in that sense of having been away for months and noticing nobody bothered to vacuum while you were gone. Still, everything was more or less where you left it, and you could take comfort from that. It wasn’t cheery — at least not until we reached the Bar Mitzvah celebration itself — but it was still Citi Field.

Just as I remembered it.

So Young, Yet So Overgrown

Citi Field in the offseason…not exactly the happiest place on Earth, at least from this corner.

And There Happens To Be a Housing Project Right Here

Mets fan in my heart, Giants fan in my soul, but the Dodgers are rattling around in there somewhere. With the help of the intrepid Peter Laskowich, I lit out in November to try to understand Citi Field a little better by interfacing with the spirit of its architectural progenitor. I don’t know if I do, but you can’t stand outside the former site of Ebbets Field and not feel something.