Are The Braves Better?

By Joe Janish
Posted Friday, August 10, 2007

This past series with the Braves was not a “make or break” one by any means for the New York Mets. After all, they lost two out of three but still held a three-and-a-half game lead over Atlanta by the end of the week.

However, anyone who watched the games likely came out of it wondering, “are the Braves better than the Mets?”

The standings and the win-loss record say “no,” obviously. But those numbers are a mere cumulation of games going way back to April, when both were different teams. Each team has evolved into something somewhat different since then. So the question is, at the present time, in mid-August, apart from the total wins and losses, are the Mets a better team than the Braves?

If you’re thinking rationally, you’d be hard-pressed to say yes with confidence.

Of course, the media will point directly to the deadline deals that brought Octavio Dotel, Mark Teixeira, and Ron Mahay to the club as the difference-makers for the Braves. While those additions absolutely improved Atlanta’s chances, they were more the “icing on the cake” than the cake itself.

This past series with the Mets was a microcosm of the “magic” of Bobby Cox. Actually, it’s not “magic” at all – it’s simple fundamentals. Think back to game one, when some journeyman named Buddy Carlyle beat Oliver Perez. Was Carlyle the better pitcher, even on that night? Not necessarily. All Carlyle did was throw low strikes, and the Atlanta defense did the rest. The Braves offense wasn’t exactly spectacular, either, but somehow they scored seven runs. Atlanta rapped out 15 hits – but only three of them were hard line drives or long fly balls. If you watched the game you didn’t see the Braves pilfering the ball; rather, you saw a bunch of bleeders, bloopers, and balls that barely went beyond the reach of Mets infielders. What the Braves offense did – and what they do on a consistent basis – was put the ball in play.

If you didn’t believe what you saw in game one, Atlanta offered a reprise in game three. Another seven runs, yet watching the contest inning by inning, it’s still difficult to figure out where they all came from. Oh, yeah, there was a four-run fifth, highlighted by two homeruns – but it wasn’t the blasts by Teixeira and Larry Jones that hurt the Mets as much as the bloop single by Tim Hudson, the walk to Willie Harris, and the fielder’s choice by Kelly Johnson that set up the inning. And though the Jones and Teixeira bombs were played in the ESPN highlights, and part of the next day’s headlines, that four-run fifth was not nearly as important as Teixeira’s diving stop of a Luis Castillo grounder and two spectacular catches by Harris in leftfield.

As they did for 14 years prior, the Braves grind out victories in a boring, old-fashioned way:

1. Pitchers throwing strikes, and contributing to all facets of the game

2. Defense making all the routine, plus the occasionally outstanding plays

3. Outfielders hitting the cutoff man

4. Batters making the pitcher work, putting the ball in play

5. Executing bunts and hit-and-runs

6. Runners taking the extra base at every opportunity

All boring stuff, eh? But the Braves have used this recipe since Bobby Cox came on board in the early 1990s, and it’s proved successful. Yes, they do hit home runs on occasion, and those are gravy when added to above.

In comparison, Willie Randolph tells us that his team is “a bunch of grinders,” who rely on fundamental baseball to win ballgames. That’s more wishful thinking than actuality, unfortunately. Willie, after all, was that kind of player in his heyday – a heady hustler who could handle the bat, make the plays in the field, and do all the little things that win ballgames. So he preaches those things to his players, and would like to believe that’s how his team wins. And, occasionally, they do. More often, they simply overpower weaker teams with offense. But it’s not Willie’s fault, because you can’t expect Carlos Delgado, Ramon Castro, or Paul LoDuca to go from first to third on a single. You can’t count on Delgado and Shawn Green to make great plays in the field. You can’t ask too many Mets position players to drop a bunt, or expect them to execute a suicide squeeze. The personnel isn’t there; this is a team built for power, run production, and offensively outlasting the opponent.

Which makes this argument all the more frightening. Because the Atlanta lineup is more impressive than the Mets’ right now – with or without Carlos Beltran. For example, can the Mets bat an all-around athlete and strong hitter with Brian McCann’s talent in the seven hole? Can they place a .300 hitter with Kelly Johnson’s pop in the eight spot? Can they lose their starting shortstop – who also is one of their best hitters – and not even notice? Can they afford to have their top MVP candidate from 2006 suffer a season-long slump, and win in spite of him? Can they say that every single member of the starting lineup (one through eight) is capable of taking an extra base and scoring from second on a base hit? The answer to all of those questions is a resounding “no”.

Since the Mets cannot match up with the Braves defensively, offensively, nor fundamentally, their only hope is to beat them with pitching. And there we have a problem as well. Everyone can agree that the Mets' bullpen is in a shambles, outside of Billy Wagner. Meantime, the Braves picked up TWO solid arms -- Dotel and Mahay -- to add to Rafael Soriano, Bob Wickman, and Peter Moylan, among others. Say what you want about Wickman, but the guy finds a way to save games, even if he resembles Inspector Clouseau solving a crime. The Mets' starting rotation has been very good, and boasts four solid starters. However, would you take any two of them over Tim Hudson and John Smoltz? Maybe El Duque, but certainly not the others -- particularly the way Perez and John Maine have been pitching lately.

All this doom and gloom may seem like overreaction – after all, the Mets are still in first place ! Let’s just hope they can figure out a way to stay there over the next seven weeks, because the team right behind them might be better.