This is NOT a “Transitional” Year for Mets

I am already tired of people labeling 2012 a “transitional” year for the Mets. The Daily News used the term this past weekend, writing:

The Mets are in a transitional year…

The Wall Street Journal followed a few days later with:

…during what can politely be called a transitional era for the Mets.

The problem is that this should not be treated as a transitional year for the Mets. Last year certainly was; the bloated payroll made it virtually impossible for Sandy Alderson to make any moves to improve the club. He said he was waiting for payroll flexibility. Well, he certainly got the payroll flexibility this year with $50 million in bad salaries coming off the books, yet he was unwilling or unable to spend any of it.

Calling this a transitional year implies that Alderson and the crew should get a pass if things go wrong;  they are “transitioning,” after all. It’s similar to the two-year pass we all gave the Knicks after Donnie Walsh took over. He said he needed the two seasons to clear salary and make a run at the big free agents. Just like Alderson last season, we gave Walsh the pass. Then when he had the coveted payroll flexibility, he failed to land LeBron James. He did sign Amare Stoudemire and trade for Carmelo Anthony, but even if he didn’t, the free pass was over. His time had come.

I feel it’s the same way with Alderson. He had his one year pass and he got his payroll flexibility. It’s not our fault that he did not use it to improve the team.

I’m not saying the Mets have to make the playoffs or Alderson should be fired. I’m just saying that he deserves the scrutiny for the team’s play on the field this season.

His free pass is over.