It seems insane that I’m even asking this but the truth is that I’m writing a column for tomorrow saying that – assuming he continues to hit well and the Mets make the playoffs – the Mets first baseman deserves the honor.

Yes, back in May I wrote a piece about Delgado and Giambi in advance of the Subway Series in which I discussed both players being on the decline; at the time, both seemed like albatrosses on their respective teams, two guys who made a lot of money and didn’t offer a whole lot of production.

Giambi has also improved dramatically since then, but Delgado’s production is out of control: He has 24 homers and 69 RBI in the 68 games since June 27, and there is no doubt that he has been the most important player on the Mets for the past few months. As bad as he was early on, his dominance now has made up for it and, when weighing the MVP award, “valuable” will forever be a relative term.

Are there guys who have been more consistent? Yes. More productive? Yes. More valuable? I’m not so sure. And if Delgado keeps this up and the Mets erase the demons from last September on their way to the postseason, seems to me like Delgado should be one of the most unlikely MVPs in history.
Carp says:

I agree with you, Sam. He would be among the most unlikely ever, and he deserves to be.

Imagine this. In 2008, Delgado, who was hitting like a utility infielder in the first half, could win the NL MVP for a marvelous half a season; C.C. Sabathia could win the NL Cy Young, after spending the first half in the American League; and Jerry Manuel—while a longshot—could win the NL Manager of the Year after spending half a season as a bench coach.

But Delgado has been unbelievable, not only his numbers, but in hitting in the clutch (hear that A-Rod?) and almost all of his homers have been breathtakingly long ones. Just incredible power shots.

Let’s also remember that, back in July, everybody was banging the drum for Giambi and his moustache to be added to the AL All-Star team, and ditto for David Wright. Nobody was even mentioning Delgado. Most people assumed the Mets would dump him before the season was over, or at the very least, the minute the season ended. Now he’s in line to have the option picked up, and it might be a bargain.

Before we get ahead of ourselves, though, the Mets have 17 games left. And we all remember the significance of that number, don’t we?

My favorite personal football thought is this: The most important position in the NFL today is starting quarterback. The second most important position is backup quarterback.

So we will see if the Patriots were truly genius by installing Matt Cassel, who hasn’t started a game at QB since high school, as Tom Brady’s backup. We will also see whether—again, they have to keep on proving it—the sum of the parts is greater than the parts with the Pats. It says here that they will not collapse. Indeed, I expect them to still win the division. I really do. Unless Cassel stinks. And I doubt he will.

On the flip side, you have the Jets. With all their Belichick-like micromanaging and CIA-like secretiveness, you’d think somebody would have at some point said, “Gee, what would we do if our kicker got hurt?” I mean, how hard is it for a coach, during camp, to go around and ask guys if they could kick in a pinch. I guarantee there’d be 40 guys who said they could do it, at least for an extra point or a short field goal. It’s not that hard. I used to do it. You practice it a little bit, you tell yourself to keep your head down, and the ball goes pretty straight most of the time.

I think it’s unforgivable to not have that contingency in place, and could you even imagine how the Jets would have been ripped if they’d lost that game in Miami because they couldn’t kick an extra point?

One more thing. I keep reading and hearing that the bookies believe in the Jets this week, because the spread against the Patriots has changed so much since the Brady injury. Bookies don’t move lines. Betters move lines. Bookies—as I understand it—want equal money bet on both sides of a wager. So they start a line where they think they can accomplish that, and if money starts to pour in on one side, they adjust the line. It had nothing to do with what the bookies believe about a team. It has to do with what bookies believe, and what they see, about bettors.

Thursday, 9:47 a.m., Sam says:

A few things:

1. The Patriots will not win the division. Either the Jets or (yes) the Bills will. If the Patriots are able to hang on and make the playoffs, I think that would be a fantastic year. To me, you don’t lose the best player in the league in Week 1 and remain as dominant as you were when you had him. It just doesn’t happen. Will they be good? Yes. Could they still make the playoffs? Yes. But I wouldn’t bet on it.  And …

2. Speaking of betting, Carp, as someone who has done his share of sports betting in the past, let me say that both you and the general public are correct. Bookies moving lines does not necessarily reflect what they think about the game or a team, but rather what number they believe will generate equal action on both sides of the line.

Thus, by moving the Pats-Jets line so dramatically after Brady’s injury was confirmed, bookies and handicappers showed us that they believe the PERCEPTION of the Jets-Pats game is that the Jets are now much more likely to compete (and win) now. It isn’t only a reaction to bets (there hadn’t been enough time for people to make a lot of bets when the line moved, so it couldn’t only be based on that) but it also isn’t just the line-setters suddenly loving the Jets. Betting lines are based in perception (or at least a guess at what public perception is); right now, that perception is in favor of the Jets.

Now that it’s official that Billy Wagner is down and out for the remainder of the season (and perhaps for his career), do the Mets have the arms in the bullpen to survive?

I know, I know, they’ve gone 22-11 without their closer, using closer-by-committee. And I know that Luis Ayala had been solid lately (tell you what … if this guy does become an effective closer the rest of the way, major props to Omar Minaya for finding him).

But we also know that a lot of games have been adventures in the late innings, and some of those disasters.

Normally, teams without closers don’t go far in the playoffs. It is probably what held Atlanta to a single World Series win in all those years in the postseason, and what made the Yankees great when they were great.

On the other hand, you can sometimes win if the timing is good … if your starters give you length, as the Mets’ starters have done for a while now. Or if your offense can come up with big production nights in those games when the starter can’t go long. Or both.

The glass is never full, and rarely half full, for the Jets and their long-sufferers.

So I want to pose the obvious Week 1 question to Green Nation: Are you happy with the opener? Does a hang-on-for-dear-life win over the woeful Dolphins qualify as a good win? Is any win a good win? Is a win on Opening Day a good win no matter how or against whom?

Or are you, the long-sufferer, conditioned to see the black cloud behind the silver lining? Do you recall the game nearly slipping away at the end, with—egads—Chad Pennington nearly moving the Fish for a winning touchdown? Do you say, “Same Old Jets” and reach for the Tums?

Are you preparing for the worst in the coming weeks as a result of what you saw at the end of Game 1?

Or are you just too busy dancing in the streets over the news of Mr. Gisele Brady’s knee injury up the road in Foxborough?

Do the Mets need to make the postseason for Jerry Manuel to have the “interim” removed from his title? Do they need to go deep into the postseason?

Or is Manuel the Mets manager next year no matter what happens the rest of the way, based on how the team has rebounded in the post-Willie Randolph era?

I personally think this turnaround was imminent, and that it would have happened with Randolph. But you do have to wonder how much Manuel has had to do with the marvelous bounce-back from Carlos Delgado, the renewed spring in the step of Jose Reyes, and the emergence of Mike Pelfrey as a top starter.

That the Mets have kept it together even with that dreadful bullpen is very impressive, too.

What do you think? Is Jerry back for Opening Day at Citi Field?

11:47 a.m., Sam says:

The short answer to the question is, “yes,” he’ll be there on Opening Day next year. And that’s because he’ll take the Mets into the postseason, probably even to the NLCS.

Would Randolph have done that, too? I think he would have. But it doesn’t matter whether he could or couldn’t have turned the Mets around on his own because the perception was that he couldn’t. So he was fired.

If the Mets happen to collapse again over the next few weeks, then I think we’ll be looking at a manager search in October. But I don’t see it happening. The Mets will be in Milwaukee for the division series and Manuel will be on the bench then, as well as at Citi Field next April.

Week 1:
(HOME team in CAPS).

Love:
EAGLES (-7 1/2) over Rams.
Vikings (+2 1/2) over PACKERS.
CHARGERS (-9 1/2) over Panthers.
PATRIOTS (-16 1/2) over Chiefs.
BILLS (-1) over Seahawks.
STEELERS (-6 1/2) over Texans.

Like:
Redskins (+4) over GIANTS.
DOLPHINS (+3) over Jets.
FALCONS (+3) over Lions.
RAVENS (+1 1/2) over Bengals.
Bucs (+3 1/2) over SAINTS.
Jaguars (-3) over TITANS.
COWBOYS (-5 1/2) over Browns.
49ERS (+2 1/2) over Cardinals.
Bears (+9 1/2) over COLTS.
Broncos (-3) over RAIDERS.

What do you think? Who you pickin’?

6:30 p.m., Sam says:

In an Ali-like return to the ring, I will surely do better than Carp in Week 1 and, for that matter, over the duration of the season. If we’re not picking hockey, he’s got no chance. Here’s the picks you can take to the bank (and I don’t do “love” or “like”—- it’s either right or wrong, and most of mine will be right):

(HOME team in CAPS).

Love:
EAGLES (-7 1/2) over Rams.
PACKERS (-2 1/2) over Vikings.
CHARGERS (-9 1/2) over Panthers.
PATRIOTS (-16 1/2) over Chiefs.
Seahawks (+1) over BILLS.
Texans (+6 1/2) over STEELERS.
GIANTS (-4) over Redskins.

Jets (-3) over DOLPHINS.
FALCONS (+3) over Lions.
RAVENS (+1 1/2) over Bengals.
SAINTS (+3 1/2) over Bucs.
Jaguars (-3) over TITANS.
COWBOYS (-5 1/2) over Browns.
49ERS (+2 1/2) over Cardinals.
COLTS (-9 1/2) over Bears.
Broncos (-3) over RAIDERS.

First things first. Who will get to the playoffs?

And without fanfare, here are my NFL regular-season predictions:

NFC East: Cowboys, Giants, Eagles, Redskins.
NFC North: Packers, Vikings, Bears, Lions.
NFC South: Panthers, Bucs, Saints, Falcons.
NFC West: Seahawks, 49ers, Cardinals, Rams.

AFC East: Patriots, Jets, Dolphins, Bills.
AFC North: Steelers, Browns, Ravens, Bengals.
AFC South:  Jaguars, Colts, Titans, Texans.
AFC West: Chargers, Broncos, Chiefs, Raiders.

Wild Cards: NFC—Giants, Vikings, AFC—Colts, Jets.

What do you think?
(Tomorrow: Week 1 picks).

This past week we have seen it all from the Mets, haven’t we? Dramatic comebacks, cataclysmic meltdowns, a bullpen that was as putrid as could be one night, and near perfect the next.

So do you think they can hang on in the weak NL East? Can they reach the finish line that slipped out of their hands like a greasy rope last season?

Also, can  you imagine what kind of season Johan Santana would be having if he had Mariano Rivera in his bullpen?

I hate to do unrelated matters in this blog, but this is unrelated. I think later this week I will begin doing a weekly pro football picks thing. I’m going to ask Sam to do the same, and invite you all to send in your picks when we do ours. OK?

Hope you enjoyed the holiday.