Mike Nichols

Links: Willie, Turnaround, Rock, Trust, Convinced
By Mike Nichols - Jul 18, 2008 3:39 pm

Toasty Joe states he is fairly confident if Willie Randolph was still in charge the Mets would not have come from behind to defeat the Reds last night.

Over at Mets Merized Online, Joe D. provides six reasons why the Mets have turned their season around.

Kingman from Loge 13 celebrates the last rock concert ever at Shea Stadium.

Anthony De Rosa of Hot Foot asks, ‘can the Mets trust Billy Wagner in a big spot?’

After 10 straight wins, Metstradamus is finally convinced this season is not a complete waste of time.

30 Responses to “Links: Willie, Turnaround, Rock, Trust, Convinced”

  1. patrick says:

    lets not count our Harrelson’s before they Bud shall we?

    Enjoy this, enjoying it, but remember dogs sniff each other’s kiester to say hello.

  2. over at majorleaguesarcasm.com they talk about how manny earns respect and how there was a receipt found under the tv of david ortiz… ahahahah

  3. grotesmask says:

    Yes, Anthony, I have faith in Billy the Kid. Not like he won’t screw up again, but I trust him as much as Franco, not as much as Orosco.

  4. DSulls says:

    theonion.com/content/news/appealed_strike_call_taken_all_the?utm_source=onion_rss_daily

  5. ToastyJoe says:

    MetsBlog linkage makes the baby Jesus smile. Thanks, Mike!

  6. mikepelfreyismyguy says:

    billy wagner is a great closer. he had one bad week, and besides that one week, he was dominant

  7. Andrew says:

    I gotta say, I am LOVING the positivity these days.

  8. Ceetar says:

    I don’t think Manuel has had any positive effect. Right place at right time. I’m fairly confident that the Mets would in fact have won last night, and there there were games in the first three months that the Mets won that they wouldn’t have had Jerry been manager.

    • Andrew says:

      I’m inclined to disagree; the Mets looked absolutely lifeless whenever they fell behind under Randolph, except for Wright, who always would look like he was trying to hit a six-run homer to make up for everyone else doing nothing.

      Since Manuel has come on board, they have

      • Andrew says:

        Stupid touchpad made me accidentally click “add comment.”

        – Since Manuel has come on board, they have showed that spunk that they used to have in ‘06 — even in the losses they’ve had.

        • patrick says:

          look there is no way to quantify the reality of the effect being real or coincidence in the near term

          example if the Mets now went on to lose 10 straight would we suddenly say that it was Manuel, or blame it on the players just being terrible?

          Even if the Mets finish out strong win the East and fair well in the playoffs, there is no way to tell whether it will be good or bad going into next year assuming they keep Manuel.

          Frankly they could win the World Series, make all the right off season moves and then fart it up next year.

          What is is, and is is now the Mets winning, I think a lot of what people are drawn to be and about Manuel at the moment is generally superficial and will become areas of pain if the Mets do not win games consistently while he is here, the only real tell tale sign of any manager.

        • Andrew says:

          Listen, I’m all about sabermetrics and proper statistical analysis, but it does happen that teams just don’t believe in themselves sometimes, and when they fall behind they just pack it in for the rest of the game. That’s how the Mets were playing under Randolph; there was a lack of hustle, a lack of focus, and a lack of determination. These things aren’t quantifiable, you’re right, but they’re certainly there now.

    • Gina says:

      I disagree but I don’t think it has anything to do with Manuel. I just think Willie’s presence and the constant media frenzy around him and whether he’d be fired or not had a negative affect on the team.

      • I agree that the presistant questions about Willies job status on a day in day out basis had a very negative impact on the team, and is a big reason why the team is playing better. However I do believe that you have to give Manuel some credit, a 3 game winning streak can be seen as a conincidence maybe even a 5 game winning streak. However 10 game winning streaks are not something that just happens. The mangerial change has most definatly helped this team turn it around, and he should be given some credit maybe not all of the credit but he should be given a good deal of it.

  9. grotesmask says:

    Man, that’s dumb commentary!

    How has JMAN changed things for the better?

    1. New types of practices and new coaches

    2. Confronts players who lag, don’t show up, etc.

    3. Makes appropriate changes for position players and pitchers with better smarts than WR.

    4. Knows how to listen to and handle players better than Randolph

    THis is the essence of good managing. Whether or not, the Mets do well in the final half, Manuel is proving himself a better more player-respected manager than Randolph.

    Nothing personal toward any of you or Randolph, but the comments are dumb, and Randolph has not shown himself to be quality managerial MLB timbre.

  10. dobo2519 says:

    Nichols….another stellar post buddy.

    Tell me what you think, not opinions from other blogs….i can set up an RSS feed too!!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.