Yeah, baby, believe it! Johan Santana pitches a no-hitter for the Mets!

Finally! I am happy for Squawker Jon and his fellow Mets fans that their franchise finally has a no-hitter. And I'm especially glad it was Johan Santana, one of the game's great pitchers. I even got a little teary-eyed watching it, and I have no heart! 

However, this means that much like I helpfully reminded Red Sox friends about 1918 before the 2004 ALCS, I now have one less thing to mock Jon about. You see, every single time an MLB pitcher has taken a no-hitter into the eighth or ninth, I always am sure to tell Squawker Jon that the Mets never had a no-hitter. You know, in case he forgot! 

Like when Justin Verlander nearly had his third no-hitter a few weeks ago. I informed Jon about how those no-hitters were more than his franchise ever had. I also have helpfully teased him over the years about how many ex-Mets have hurled no-hitters, making sure to remind him about how Dwight Gooden and David Cone did it as Yankees!

But last night was a little different. I watched the last three innings of Johan Santana's no-hitter instead of the Yankee game, as soon as Jon called me in the sixth to tell me what was what. Jon feared that Terry Collins may pull Santana even if he were pitching a no-hitter, due to the high pitch count. I told him flat-out that there was no way that Santana was going to allow that to happen. After all, this wasn't some rookie on the mound. It was Johan Santana! I just couldn't see any way that Santana was going to willingly leave the game. There would have been blood on the mound!

All teasing and trash talk aside, I really wanted Santana and the Mets to finally get that no-hitter, even if it means less ammunition when it comes to mocking my Met fan blogging partner. Until last night, the most historic thing to happen at CitiField was when Mariano Rivera got his 500th save on Mets' turf, a game Jon and I were at, and an event I love to remind Jon about, especially when K-Rod walked Mariano!

Now the Mets have their own no-hitter, on their own field. Good for them. Now I will have to find something else to mock Squawker Jon about!

What do you think? Tell us about it!

I've waited my whole life for a Met no-hitter

When I was growing up, I was obsessive about not missing a Met game, not just because I was a big fan, but because I didn't want to miss the first no-hitter. I had been fortunate enough to attend Tom Seaver's "imperfect game" that was broken up by Jimmy Qualls, and while I was too young to fully appreciate what nearly happened, it helped make me look forward to when the Mets would produce a no-hitter.

In the mid-70s, when the Mets were good, but not great, a no-hitter was something to look forward to. And why not? The Mets of course had Seaver, who would take two other no-hitters into the ninth, but they also had strong pitchers such as Jon Matlack and Jerry Koosman. They played in a pitcher's park.

Instead, it turned into the Mets' version of 1918 or 1940, only unlike the Red Sox or Rangers, there was no "not since..." to mark - it had never happened. In recent years - the Mets haven't even come that close - no no-hitters entering the ninth since Seaver in 1975. It looked so hopeless that if you had asked me before the game what the Mets would do first - pitch a no-hitter or win a World Series, I would have gone with the latter, and it's not as if I expect a title anytime soon.

As for who might be most likely to pitch one on the current team, a few years ago, I might have said Oliver Perez, who did have flashes of brilliance at one time. But that goes to show just how cursed the Mets had been in this area.

I would not have guessed Johan Santana. I was just glad he was back pitching at all.

Whenever I hear a no-hitter is going on, I call Squawker Lisa, but never before the ninth. Tonight, however, I called her after the sixth. I just had a feeling. Maybe it was because Carlos Beltran's ball that hit the third-base line chalk was called foul. Santana seemed in control. His biggest hurdle seemed to be the pitch count.

When Mike Baxter crashed into the wall in the seventh, it looked like another omen. In the eighth and ninth, it seemed that no out was routine. Maybe they were bloops, but fielders had to run to catch them, and avoid running into overeager fill-in shortstop Omar Quintanilla.

By the ninth, I thought Johan was going to do it. But I'm glad he got David Freese out and did not have to face Yadier Molina one more time.

And I'm glad that Beltran's ball down the line was called foul, not just because I'm glad Santana got the no-hitter, but because I didn't want Beltran to be the one who broke it up. I thought Beltran was very underrated as a Met and I didn't want Met fans to have something else to criticize him for. I'm glad he got a good reception tonight.

Squawker Lisa likes to tease me about Dwight Gooden and David Cone going on to pitch no-hitters for the Yankees. I was irritated about Gooden at the time, though after Johan became the first pitcher to have a no-hitter after missing the previous season, I have more appreciation for what Gooden accomplished. I was happy for Cone. As with Johan, Cone had come back from serious injury. Lisa reminded me how Cone was pulled after seven no-hit innings in his first game back in 1996 after his aneurysm.

By the way,  Lisa, do you remember who started for the Expos against Cone when he pitched the perfect game? A young pitcher named Javier Vazquez.

As I rooted for Johan to complete the elusive no-hitter, I fully appreciated the grim look on Terry Collins' face. This franchise has not had much luck with injuries in recent years and they pushed their luck with Johan tonight.

But as the magnitude of what Johan did sinks in, I have no doubt that Collins made the right decision. I hope I still feel that way in a few days when we find out how Johan is recovering from his 134-pitch outing. Right now, though, I am still having a little trouble believing that, after 8,020 games, the Mets finally have a no-hitter!

***

Just added my keywords for the blog entry. "Mets" and "Johan Santana" were of course already in the label list. This entry marks the first use of the keyword "no-hitter."

***

On Saturday afternoon, I will be participating in a "Progressive Game Blog" run by the United Cardinal Bloggers. Mets and Cardinals blogs will take turns writing about the game and about their teams in general. I will be covering the first inning along with the Cardinals blog Pitchers Hit Eighth.

Opening Day: The more things change...

It was great to see Johan Santana's successful return from a serious injury, combining with the revamped bullpen to shut out the Braves on Opening Day. But the Mets can't get through a day without several reminders of their numerous problems.

With two on and two out in the fifth inning, the Mets had their first scoring opportunity. It was time to pinch hit for Santana, who was going to come out anyway. So the Mets sent up...

Mike Baxter.
 
The Mets' unwillingness to spend the little it takes to have a major-league bench might be the most frustrating thing about their financial issues. If you don't have productive stars, you can't win. If you don't have depth, you can't compete.

Do the Mets expect to not have any injuries? That idea went out the window in the seventh, when Andres Torres pulled up lame while chasing Tyler Pastornicky's triple.  Now I have to learn how to spell Nieuwenhuis.

This franchise desperately needs to restore its credibility. But it doesn't help to trumpet sellling out Citi Field on Opening Day with the largest crowd in the ballpark's history, not when every story about the game mentions the patches of empty seats, which were clearly visible on TV.

Even the much-maligned Mets medical staff offered its own bit of self-promotion, touting Santana's successful surgery and recovery.  Yes, it's great to see Santana back out there, even if he may never be the Santana of old. But Santana had reduced velocity and barely made it through the fifth inning. It may not yet be time to start celebrating.

At least, however, the Mets are over .500, tied for first and have a better record than the Yankees. So I'm going to enjoy it while I can.  

Joel Sherman has Mets' marketing critique backwards

The Post's Joel Sherman lays out the Mets' likely offseason strategy to sell 2011 tickets as follows:

1) Hire a new general manager and manager...

2) Systematically leak how great Johan Santana, Jason Bay, Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes are doing physically over the winter...

3) Oversell the one positive from the 2010 season: the rookie class/breakout components...

Sherman's piece mostly focuses on a critique of the third item, arguing that popular new players such as Ike Davis should not be untouchable for marketing purposes if trading them will help the team. But if the Mets really want to avoid alienating their fans for a change, they should change their thinking regarding item #2 - and stop encouraging unrealistic expectations when it comes to injuries.

In January, Met fans were surprised and disappointed to learn that Carlos Beltran was undergoing knee surgery. Even worse, he might not be ready for the start of the season. Throughout the preseason and the first part of the regular season, reports kept changing as to when Beltran would return - late April, mid-May, maybe even the All-Star break.

As time went on, the story evolved to when Beltran would be able to resume "baseball activities." Media and fans became frustrated with Beltran's lack of progress. Those fans who believe that Beltran is less likely to play through injuries had new ammunition.

When Beltran finally returned after the All-Star break, manager Jerry Manuel raised expectations by putting Beltran back in centerfield and batting him cleanup despite the fact that Beltran was clearly not ready for either.

The Mets were 48-40 when Beltran returned to the lineup. Since then, they have gone 22-33. The Mets' collapse is far from all Beltran's fault. But it would have been better for both the team and Beltran if the Mets had said from the start that he probably wouldn't be back before the All-Star break, and once he returned, he was not going to be 100%.

Met fans have been burned so many times waiting for players to return from injury that the biggest marketing mistake the Mets can make is to try to burn them again by touting a quick return of Johan Santana.

Already we are hearing conflicting reports about when Santana will start "throwing" and when he will start "pitching" and when he will finally return. The truth is that nobody knows, and the main thing that nobody knows is how effective Santana will be when he returns.

The Mets' position should be that they hope to have Santana back by the All-Star break. From what has been reported, that is probably optimistic, especially having Santana back at full strength. But such a position tells fans and media right up front that the Mets are planning to play a significant portion of 2011 without Santana.

Rather than raise the fans expectations only to disappoint them yet again, the Mets will be obliged to come up with a plan B - competing without their ace.

No one is more of a competitor on the Mets than Santana, but if the Mets start fudging his return date, they run the risk of making Santana look like yet another Met who can't quite make it back on the field.

Of course, the new GM will have to do a better job than Omar Minaya of coming up with a plan B. Minaya's initial replacement for Beltran in the outfield rotation was Gary Matthews Jr. When Daniel Murphy, then the starting first baseman, got hurt in spring training, Minaya and Jerry Manuel's initial plan B was Mike Jacobs.

As for trading the young players, I agree with Sherman that nobody should be untouchable. But it's one thing for the Mets to realize that Davis is no Jason Heyward - there's still no point in trading him unless the other team still buys into the hype. Otherwise, you end up with a deal along the lines of once-hyped Lastings Milledge for Ryan Church and Brian Schneider.

Says Sherman about Davis:

What do you think will be his best year, something like .275 with 30 homers? That is good. But it probably never makes him one of the 10 best first basemen in the game.

Yes, but .275 and 30 homers would make him the cleanup hitter on the Mets. And most of the players that Sherman suggests as stopgap alternatives for Davis have no shot at 30 homers. Lyle Overbay has hit more than 20 homers just once - and his career high is 22. Adam LaRoche hit more than 30 homers once, back in 2006. And both Overbay and LaRoche have generally played in ballparks far more homer-friendly than Citi Field.

Hubie Brooks was once a popular young player, but it made sense to trade him when the Mets had a chance to get Gary Carter before the 1985 season. But unless the Mets get an offer they really can't refuse, I would hold on to the young players. Better to oversell the young players than the seriously injured veterans.