Tales from the Mets Dugout
Tales From the Mets Dugout, a new book by Baseball Think Factory regular Bruce Markusen, is exactly what the title promises: a collection of assorted media stories and reminiscences about the New York Mets, arranged chronologically. The lengths of the tales run from “very short” to “even shorter than that.” The writing style is light and breezy. Serious analysis of any kind is deliberately lacking; this is a feel-good book for Mets fans.
An example of length: The first tale of Chapter 6, “1986 and Beyond,” is the story of how Ray Knight, who had been injured in 1985, did NOT get traded to the Cubs in 1986. The tales includes a discussion of Knight’s roster situation, the proposed trade to the Cubs, speculation on what might have happened to the season if the Mets had succeeded in trading Knight, and a footnote involving Dave Lopes. This entire tale takes one page.
An example of feel-good aiming at an audience of Mets fans: The tale Fighting Words discusses the 16th inning of the last game of the NLCS against the Astros. This was, without doubt, an exciting game to watch, but Markusen opens the tale with “The 1986 National League Championship Series between the Mets and the Houston Astros may have been the most thrilling series since the adaptation of the playoffs in 1969.” Mets fans may well believe that. I doubt that anyone else does. The series was not particularly exciting except for that last game. And, for most people except Mets fans, the question of the NLCS was whether the Astros would finally get into their first World Series, which they did not.
Another example: The tale The Buckner Game begins, “Game 6 of the 1986 World Series ranks among the top five games in Fall Classic history.” Although amusing to watch at the end, this game did not even end its series; it simply kept the Red Sox from winning in six. I would imagine that most historians can find five Game 7s that would rank higher, not to mention other games that actually ended their series. The Buckner Game ranks with such games as Game 6 of the 1985 series, commonly known as The Don Denkinger Game. Neither one is among the top five World Series games of all time.
One strong point of the book is the high level of fact-checking and research. Markusen gets his details right with very few exceptions. He does have a tale involving Rickey Henderson titled “Hendu,” which if memory serves, was the nickname for Dave Henderson, not Rickey. That, however, was the worst I found in casual reading, and it is possible that, at least in New York, Rickey inherited the nickname after Dave retired.
One weak point is Markusen’s occasional moral tirades. The worst of these is the tale Blunders on the Base Paths, which uses Game 1 of the 2000 World Series as a launching pad for a rant on the subject of running hard on every single batted ball. The tirade is embarrassing, the game itself does not really support the thesis that bad baserunning cost the Mets the game, and this is possibly the single longest tale in the entire book.
On balance, though, the errors are very few and the warm fuzzies abundant. If you’re a Mets fan, this is a fun read that will take you back to happy times. If you’re not a Mets fan, someone has probably written a similar book about your favorite team. It might even be as good as this one.
Brock Hanke
Posted: April 18, 2005 at 05:46 PM |
12 comment(s)
Related News:
Reviews,
Books,
NY Mets,
Dugout
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but that is one of the dumbest things that has ever been written on BTF. The series was not particularly exciting???
Game 1: A taut 1-0 pitchers' duel between Gooden and Scott, won by the Astros.
Game 2: OK, an unexciting, routine 5-1 win for the Mets.
Game 3: A 6-5 Mets' victory, won on a 2-run, Lenny Dykstra walk-off home run in the bottom of the 9th. The Mets rallied from a 4-0 deficit after two innings, only to trail 5-4 going to the bottom of the 9th. A real yawner, that one.
Game 4: A great pitching performance by Scott in a 3-1 win, but not a particularly exciting game.
Game 5: A classic duel between Gooden and Nolan Ryan, eventually won by the Mets 2-1 in 12 innings, to put the Mets ahead 3-2 in the series. No, nothing worth watching in this one.
Game 6: One of the great post-season games of all time, in which the Mets rally from 3-0 down in the top of the 9th, both teams score in the 14th, and the Mets eventually win with 3 in the 16th (though not before the 'Stros answer with 2 of their own).
Four of the six games tremendous, hard-fought battles, including at least three classics. Maybe you think that's "not particularly exciting," but I have never heard or seen anyone who agrees with you.
And, by the way, as far as your reasoning for minimizing Game 6 of the World Series goes -- that it wasn't the "ultimate game" -- I wonder how you rate Game 5 of the 1956 World Series. That wasn't the deciding game, either. Guess it doesn't rate, either.
For example, if a book is about the value of OPS and is targeted for the baseball fan that knows little about OPS - then the questions should be "How well does this book cover OPS for the person who knows just about nothing about OPS?" If the answer is "Pretty good" then the book is a success.
To judge such a book in terms of "What would Bill James get out of this book?" or "What would the majority of BTF members get out of this book?" is somewhat unfair.
In other words, should a cook book be judged as being good or not based on how the average cook could benefit from it - or how Wolfgang Puck benefits from it? I think most would agree that it's the former.
Therefore, as it is clear that the target audience for Bruce's book is Mets fans, it sounds as if the book is a success.
I wasn't even going to watch that series, but I ended up riveted. Scott's game 1 was a gem, and I still remember Charlie Kerfeld, all 600 pounds of him (OK, he wasn't that fat then) losing game 5.
Granted, it was no 1989 Giants-Cubs NLCS ;) - but I can still feel the tension.
Yeah, I almost fell out of my chair when I read that. I don't know how you can have any recollection of that series and still claim it was not particularly exciting.
If the review is specifically targeted at the same market (e.g., it appeared at a Mets fan Web site), then what you say would apply. Here, Mr. Hanke is reviewing the book for everyone at this site, not just Mets fans. He has every reason to make the point that non-Mets fans may not find the book to their liking.
Yeah, kinda dumb to take issue with the exciting-ness of the 86 playoffs.
Forging Genius is not out yet; I'm not sure when it will be.
I must have been watching a different game. A baserunning blunder that costs a run in a game that later goes into extra innings seem pretty important to me.
Hey Brock - the greates World Series game of all time is 1985 Game 7.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main