Yeah, it's early, but here's the problem ...

... The Four Horseman of Queens when the Mets have the worst starting ERA in all of MLB. Now they just look like four bloated idiots who need to put down the forks and pick up an electric razor:

"The Mets currently are without their best hitter, their best starting pitcher, and now their closer, and I’m just wondering what other team in baseball has encountered anything like that this season."

I don't want to use injuries as an excuse.


"So the Mets came into Saturday two games under .500."

And left Sunday four games under .500 ... ha cha cha.


"The Cubs, champions of the world, destiny’s darlings, with pretty much all of their main guys?

They were one game over .500."

Yes, the Cubs are disappointing as, errr ... "destiny's darlings" ... so the Mets are therefore playing well? Because the Cubs are also playing poorly?

Also, the Cubs are the World Champs. The current World Champs. Mission: Accomplished.

So I don't see the point.

Most disappointing teams so far are the Giants, Blue Jays, Cubs, Mets ... maybe the Mariners and Pirates, too?

The season isn't over. Is that the point?

Or are the Mets supposed to keep their chins up by comparing themselves to the under-performing Cubs?

Or are you just a sad cheerleader for the Mets?
 



"Matt Harvey is now a lifetime .500 pitcher, 31-31, at the age of 28.

Ron Darling never had Harvey’s talent, at least the talent Harvey once showed at Citi Field.

He certainly didn’t have Harvey’s fastball.

But by the time Darling was 28, his record in the big leagues was 73-41.


And Darling won 14 more games, more than Harvey’s ever won in a single season, the year he turned 29."

Yes, Matt Harvey is mostly hype, though still kind of young, so maybe he'll turn it around.

Can you think of any NY Daily News columnist who has largely fed the Harvey hype?

Not to mention Josh Satin hype.

In fact, I beg Mike Lupica to never say anything positive about the 2017 Yankees. Don't jinx it.