Mets Game 88: Loss to Braves

Braves 5 Mets 3

Oliver Perez got off to a strong second half start, but unfortunately it wasn’t enough to do the same for the Mets.

In a matchup pitting the two top free agent pitchers coveted by the Mets last winter, Perez pitched his most effective game of the year. Of course, when your ERA was nearly in double digits a week ago, that’s not saying much. But still, we have to be happy to see baby steps from the enigmatic lefthander — perhaps by Year Three of his contract, the 36-Million-Dollar Man will begin earning his dough.

Perez walked four, struck out six, and allowed three runs on five hits in six innings. Two of those five hits, however, were solo homers blasted in the second inning that gave the Braves a quick 2-zip lead. The Mets mounted a comeback in the fourth, scoring three runs off a shaky Derek Lowe, but that was all they could muster in the contest. After Dan Murphy’s double scored Gary Sheffield, the Mets offense produced just two singles through the remainder of the game.


Ironic, isn’t it, that the starting pitchers spun similar performances, yet for Lowe, it was a mediocre outing, but for Perez, it was a good outing?

Garrett Anderson was 3-for-4 with a homerun for the Braves. Ryan Church pinch-ran for him in the 8th and eventually scored the insurance run.

Jeff Francoeur was 0-for-4 with an RBI. The Mets are 2-1 with him in the lineup.

Luis Castillo was the only Met with more than one hit.

Pedro Feliciano was victimized by Bobby Parnell’s inability to strand runners. Parnell faced two batters and allowed two hits, with one of them scoring the go-ahead run, which was charged to Feliciano. In turn, Feliciano was also charged with his third loss of the season.

The Mets are now 42-46 overall, 7.5 games behind the first-place Phillies.

Next Mets Game

The Mets and Braves do it again at 7:30 PM on Friday night in Atlanta. Mike Pelfrey faces Jair Jurrjens.

Joe Janish began MetsToday in 2005 to provide the unique perspective of a high-level player and coach -- he earned NCAA D-1 All-American honors as a catcher and coached several players who went on to play pro ball. As a result his posts often include mechanical evaluations, scout-like analysis, and opinions that go beyond the numbers. Follow Joe's baseball tips on Twitter at @onbaseball and at the On Baseball Google Plus page.
  1. David W. July 16, 2009 at 10:34 pm
    The three runs we scored were a gift from Martin Prado. Funny how when we play crappy defense and give away runs, I think we suck; and when the other team plays crappy defense and gives us runs, I think we suck and got lucky.

    Parnell got the double-play ball but Cora made the bad decision to cover 2nd. Parnell’s pitch to Chipper was a meatball.

    We are so bad I don’t even get angry when Chipper beats us again. I’m numb.

  2. joejanish July 16, 2009 at 11:26 pm
    LOL! so bottom line is, we suck.

    Cora covering 2B on that steal wasn’t really a “bad” decision — it made sense in that a) you expect Prado to be late on Parnell’s 95+ MPH heat and b) you expect a Bobby Cox #2 hitter to be trying to go the other way in that situation. In a way, it was more a fluke that Prado did what he did.

    But, it seems that most of the time Parnell gets into a game, people get big hits — fluke or not. Even the outs are hit pretty hard. Everyone is sitting on the kid’s fastball — which isn’t much different from Brian Stokes’ (hard but fairly straight).

  3. isuzudude July 17, 2009 at 8:33 am
    But we can still get Adam Dunn for Parnell!

    Um, yeah, I don’t think so…

    David says it all. The Mets suck. There’s no two ways around it. Just gaining a 3-2 lead in this game seemed like enough of an uphill battle, so it certainly was too much to ask for the offense to add on, or for the pitching to hold it. And whatever momentum people thought the Mets had gained by winning 2 games against the lowly Reds prior to the break has now been dashed. So much for all the hype about the Mets playing the 2nd easiest strength-of-schedule in baseball over the second half. I guess that doesn’t mean a whole lot when the Mets are considered an easy strength-of-schedule opponent on other team’s schedules as well.

  4. Stephen Greene July 17, 2009 at 2:11 pm
    The Wilpon family, who owns the Mets, have had recent financial headaches recently because of the Madoff scandal and is not on top of the league’s expansion list at the present time. The Wilpons reportedly lost $700 million in the Ponzi scheme.
    So not only are the Yankees the better team they
    have better owners as well!!
  5. Kenny July 17, 2009 at 5:31 pm
    don’t blame the wilpons for losing their money to madoff. it wasn’t their fault. when have the wilpons taken the blame for anything? you can blame omar, tom glavine, art howe, willie, rick petersen or dallas green. but not the wilpons.


    and besides, the wilpons didn’t lose $700 million. so you’re a liar. you’re probably a clubhouse cancer too. do you even PLAY baseball? probably a yankee fan.

    and besides, if the wilpons DID lose $700 million (see above), it wouldn’t affect the team’s payroll. jeff said so. so there, you liar.

    and even if it DID affect the team’s payroll (see above), jeff let omar sign a closer. and then jeff let omar trade for another closer.

    and besides, the fan base said we wanted a closer. and we got TWO closers. so we should be doubly thankful. (see below)

    thanks wilpons!