“Will Ike Stir Mets Like Straw?”, asks Ian O’Connor.

Darryl Strawberry and Ike Davis- two lefties who were called up by the Mets to spark the hopes of a sagging franchise. Different decades, but similar circumstances. A valid comparison? Perhaps, but it ends there. O’Connor may be a well-known columnist, and his piece isn’t exactly a bad one, but it’s all too reminiscent of the cliche-driven sportswriter who seeks out a story that aims to inspire us all.

In the article, Strawberry talks about his first game in the Bigs and provides some insight into how Davis must feel. Fine. He also says the kid has potential- that he will probably struggle, but can be as good as he wants to be…blah, blah, blah. That’s all well and good, but what’s the big deal?

Are we that sappy of a sports society? New hope for the Mets! It’s possible, but so are a lot of other things. How about an opinion piece on how Ike Davis will probably fail as a Major Leaguer because the odds say so? Rather than being hopeful, Mets fans should continue to expect the worst, because that’s how it goes for the snake-bitten franchise. That would be a lot more realistic than any kind of comparison between a guy who has had four MLB at-bats and an eight-time All-Star who played seventeen seasons.

While O’Connor isn’t at all saying that Davis is destined to follow in Strawberry’s footsteps, he is still tying the two together. It doesn’t matter how or why. What matters is that there are two names to focus on in his article: Ike Davis and Darryl Strawberry. Why must everyone in the media try to make stories and comparisons out of things that are simply trivial? It’s not always a bad thing, but it’s become way too predictable.

“Davis Stirs Straw”…not a bad title for your piece, O’Connor. Here’s another suggestion for your work: “Grasping at Straws”.