The blog for Mets fans
who like to read


Greg Prince and Jason Fry
Faith and Fear in Flushing made its debut on Feb. 16, 2005, the brainchild of two longtime friends and lifelong Met fans.

Greg Prince discovered the Mets when he was 6, during the magical summer of 1969. He is a Long Island-based writer, editor and communications consultant. Contact him here.

Jason Fry is a Brooklyn writer whose first memories include his mom leaping up and down cheering for Rusty Staub. Check out his other writing here.

Got something to say? Leave a comment, or email us at (Sorry, but we have no interest in ads, sponsored content or guest posts.)

Need our RSS feed? It's here.

Visit our Facebook page, or drop by the personal pages for Greg and Jason.

Or follow us on Twitter: Here's Greg, and here's Jason.

Animals Strike Curious Poses

Perhaps it’s not a fortuitous weekend for the Mets to be playing the Tigers from my perspective given the condition of my eldest cat Hozzie. In a nutshell, the tabby who prefers to keep his own counsel when not expressing a desire to be fed and fed some more wasn’t doing great before the Mets arrived in Detroit and he got worse on Friday night, sort of like Met hitters against Justin Verlander. Sufficiently alarmed, Stephanie and I gathered our boy and shuttled him to an emergency vet. Bottom line: our indefatigable fourteen-year-old feline is still with us — destined to outlast Alex Rodriguez’s playing career, we trust — but almost wasn’t. The Original Hosmer’s condition continues to bear watching.

So, I suppose, does that of the often unwatchable Mets. They are two games above .500, which suggests chronic mediocrity, but only two games out of the second Wild Card, which means we can’t wholly dismiss their viability as a playoff contender. Nevertheless, extended exposure to games like Saturday night’s at Comerica Park would convince you to ask a kindly professional to please do the humane thing and send them on their way.

Then again, sending a Met on his way sealed last night’s doom as Tim Teufel waved Jay Bruce toward a home plate his foot never touched, ending a 6-5 defeat that would have fit snugly inside almost any unfulfilling Met season. I’ve seen this loss in years when a handful of reversed outcomes would have led to October appointments. I’ve seen this loss in years when the inability to execute led to the dismissal of managers, coaches and higher-ups. I’ve seen this loss in books that attempt to explain how nobody here could play this game.

This was the Ty Kelly of losses. You could plug it anywhere and it would look like it belonged.

Remember when Jay Bruce making a last out was a harbinger of celebration? The same man who fanned against Jeurys Familia in Cincinnati last September 26 rumbled toward tying the game this August 6, even though he’s more than a touch torpid on the basepaths. Rumble he did, nonetheless, surprising the viewer who was thinking Travis d’Arnaud’s single to right wasn’t that deep and that Bruce, who had been on second with two out, wasn’t that fast. J.D. Martinez threw, Jarrod Saltalamacchia planted and Bruce slid into tagged oblivion.

Unlike 1962 to fairly recently, you can pitch an official fit about how the catcher blocks or doesn’t block the plate if you maintain a video replay challenge (or if you flutter your eyelashes at an umpire; I’m not clear on all the rule’s nuances). Terry Collins, who grew up a Tigers fan in Michigan — so maybe at least his inner child enjoyed himself last night — still had a challenge at his disposal in the ninth inning. He could have sent two officials to their headsets, or a pay phone, or whatever contraption was handy to get the potential good word. Saltalamacchia’s block looked legal to me, but that never stopped the occupants of the bunker in Chelsea before. Terry could have thrown a Hail Salty and seen what modern technology gave him for his troubles. Like Casey Stengel in legend, however, he stayed asleep on the bench.

Bruce being too slow and/or not having enough access to the dish did not lose the Mets the game by its own self. It was just the final straw in a box full of them. Jay from Cincinnati was one of the reasons the Mets had been in the game, having launched a fourth-inning leadoff homer to tie the score at one, thus unleashing weekend fill-in Gary Apple’s signature home run call of “I am about to speak louder to signify something of consequence has occurred.” Apple is a studio host by trade, so it’s tough to blame him for his Detroit play-by-play coming up a few lengths shy of what might have been delivered by the late Ernie Harwell…or, for that matter, Comerica Park’s Ernie Harwell statue.

Bruce solo-homered in the fourth. Curtis Granderson solo-homered in the fifth. Logan Verrett imploded in between, his grasp on adequacy no longer sufficient to keep his team completive when he pitches. When Verrett bailed in the bottom of the fourth, the Tigers led by three with two on. Jon Niese entered and decided the concept of inheritance was somehow anathema to the core tenets of fairness and equality, which is to say he allowed singles to Tyler Collins and Miguel Cabrera, allowing both inherited runners to score.

So the Tigers led, 6-1, yet the Mets scratched and clawed (a skill set Hozzie possesses in spades) in their fashion. Grandy had made it 6-2. As the fifth continued, Kelly got himself an infield single, found himself on second after Matt Boyd walked Neil Walker, took third on Bruce’s succeeding fielder’s choice grounder, and came home when Wilmer Flores served a soft single into right. It was station-to-station baseball with stops in between, but son of a gun, the Mets built a run and trailed by only three, with two on for d’Arnaud.

D’Arnaud struck out, but still. The Mets, despite playing like the August 2016 Mets, were kind of in this game. I had a hunch they would be, mainly because Apple had previously announced the Tigers had “blown the game open,” which seemed premature, if understandable, since they featured Miguel Cabrera while we had Ty Kelly in left and René Rivera at designated hitter. The DH is a revolting position on principle, but if they’re gonna let ya have one, you maybe shouldn’t use your defensive-specialist backup catcher there.

Met lineups of late have reminded me of most every pack of baseball cards I’ve ever opened: a random assortment of vaguely familiar players from teams I don’t care about and, if I’m lucky, maybe one or two guys I immediately recognize as Mets. Saturday’s lineup veered to the surreal. Rivera as DH? Loney on the bench? Conforto and Nimmo sitting (lefty, schmefty), with Kelly in the outfield? One game in 162 and all that, but it was weird. Yet usually when a lineup makes little sense to the naked eye, you’re forced to look more closely. Rivera walked his first time up. Kelly, who runs his ass off so hard that first base coach Tom Goodwin is forced to collect it whether Ty is safe or out, was on base three times. The Mets were doing just enough to avert being blown away.

Despite Kelly’s walk, Walker’s single and a Tiger error in the first all going to waste. Despite leaving Rivera to rot on base in the second. Despite Matt Boyd imitating vintage Matt Harvey (remember him?) in the third. Despite Logan’s implosion in the fourth. Despite Niese visibly formulating a quote in his head regarding the difficulty of coming in with runners on in what’s essentially an unfamiliar role to him and he’s not used to the wind currents at Comerica and he had the same problem with the air conditioning in his hotel room as Keith Hernandez had in his, so he couldn’t get the proper amount of sleep…despite all that, the Mets were down by a conceivably surmountable three runs smack in the middle of the fifth.

Long man Niese kept the bases empty in the bottom of that inning, his first full inning of proprietary work. Boyd departed in favor of Alex Wilson to start the sixth. Third baseman Kelly Johnson singled. Michael Conforto, pinch-hitting for Rivera (some cool DH strategy here), also singled. Alas, shortstop Matt Reynolds grounded into the Metropolitan Special, a.k.a. a 6-4-3 double play, and Granderson grounded out, too.

Jonathon retired the first two batters in the home sixth before allowing a double to Ian Kinsler and a walk to Tyler Collins, bringing up Cabrera, at which point I was Googling “bookies” and “sure things,” yet to my shock and surprise, Miggy’s deep fly to right flew into Bruce’s glove. Niese had survived the Tiger attack. We, à la Hozzie, were somehow still alive.

Detroit brought out another Wilson, Justin Wilson, for the seventh. Now the fun started, as our ad agency declared it would in 1983. Kelly singles. Walker singles. Bruce grounds into what appears to be a 3-6-3 double play, already in progress, except Cabrera the first baseman conks Neil in the head as he approaches second and the ball bounces away. With fingers crossed that nobody was concussed, Walker makes it to third and Kelly hustles home. It’s 6-4. The Mets go for another double play when Flores grounds to third, yet somehow that ball clanks off a Tiger glove and Walker scores. The Mets have hit into two surefire double plays, registered two runs and have been debited no outs. It’s 6-5. The Mets are making this happen!

But wait. They’re the Mets. They know there’s a double play in there somewhere and ask the waiter if they can make a substitution on the Metropolitan Special. They are assured it’s all right. In that case, d’Arnaud says, I’ll have that, but please make mine a 4-6-3. It is so arranged; two out. Then Johnson grounds to second just in case. Third out. Met batters basically produced two hits and three DPs, yet had cut their deficit to one run. You were tempted to love this game a little.

The Temptations, though, don’t necessarily hold sway in Detroit these days. Hansel Robles nonethless tamed his share of Tigers in the bottom of the seventh. The Tigers called on yet another reliever for the eighth, Shane Greene. With one out, Loney pinch-hit for Reynolds and singled. Granderson then lined to Cabrera, who didn’t proceed to throw at anybody’s helmet. Instead, he put together an unassisted double play, something completely off the menu, but the Comerica kitchen can be very accommodating.

Three double plays in three consecutive innings, yet the Mets were still in it. Robles stayed on the mound for the bottom of the eighth and he soothed the savage beasts in order. Finally, the ninth, and the Ghost of K-Rod Past. Francisco Rodriguez extinguished Kelly, then Walker, but then Bruce confounded a shift to single through the vacated shortstop hole. Alejandro De Aza, exactly the kind of hitter who would homer off Rodriguez when Frankie was a Met, also singled. That set up the resolution that lurked in the shadows all night, even after the three DPs, even after the 1-for-11 with RISP as d’Arnaud stepped in to hit with two on and two out. The Mets could tie this game off their old closer, maybe win it. It’s what a team going somewhere does.

Do these Mets look like they’re going anywhere?

I’m going to Hoboken’s Little City Books Monday night at 7 PM to discuss my book, Amazin’ Again, and remember the good times of 2015. Here’s hoping your pets are doing well enough so that you can join me.

48 comments to Animals Strike Curious Poses

  • Kevin from Flushing

    Here’s hoping Hozzie’s surpassed a 2014 close call and is on his way to 2015 glory! Wait…

  • Matt in Richmond

    As unbelievably maddening, annoying, frustrating as losing the game was, after further review i feel there were some positive signs. 14 hits is a big number, particularly for such a makeshift lineup. At least 2 of the runs were just plain lucky. When Niese came in he got Kelly to squib one to short that just happened to go in the perfect place to not be able to get an out. That allowed Cabrera to knock in 2. Bummer that Bruce couldn’t execute a better slide, but Teuffel, who I’ve chastised for making some horrendous decisions this year, was right to send him.

  • Cabrera's Patella Tendon

    Like my pal Cespedes’ Hamstring, I’m baffled by the support for the current man on the bench. I’m curious to hear what his defenders think of not pinch running Nimmo for Bruce and the mananager’s subsequent failure to challenge despite nothing to lose (except the challenge).

    The fact he “didn’t think about it” is abysmal. The fact he was checking with the replay coordinator before deciding not to think about it makes even less sense.

    Oh well, I guess just chalk up another loss to depleted manpower and lack of situational hitting, both of which are factors. But apparently a manager who is in over his head isn’t allowed to take blame for any of this disaster.

    • Rob E.

      Nimmo has six steals in 92 games this year (LY and NY), Bruce has four steals in 102. If we use just steals as a measuring point for speed, YES, Nimmo has more speed, but it’s not like he left Jose Reyes sitting on the bench while Duda ran the bases. And if you are consider “game experience,” you would certainly have to give the edge to Bruce.

      It’s a fair question, and yes, it could have made a difference considering the play that developed (though the throw beat him by a lot…THAT part of the play wasn’t close at all). But to be fair, Bruce is not particularly slow, and Nimmo is not particularly fast…if you are using this as an example of Collins being terrible, you’re splitting hairs. And I wouldn’t call it egregious…the announcers didn’t even mention it. The other side of the coin is that he didn’t want to take Bruce out of a lineup that was already depleted.

      Again, you can certainly make a case for bringing in Nimmo there, but I’m not hanging this on Collins (if you insist on a scapegoat, how about Verrett, who was awful). d’Arnaud came through, the Tigers made a good play and the catcher blocked the plate perfectly.

    • Dennis

      I’m baffled by the constant criticism of the man on the bench for every situation that goes wrong, while also receiving no credit from the peanut gallery for his successful decisions.

    • Jacobs27

      The “I didn’t think of it” is definitely fair game.

      First of all, you’re the manager, it’s your job to think of these things on any close play, really. The booth thought of it immediately. They blew a chance to overturn a call at second the previous night. This should’ve been on their minds. In this case, it would probably have done no good, but that’s not the point.

      Second, if it’s true that you didn’t think of it, there’s really no need to just toss that information out there as if it’s just occurring to you. Bad optics, as Sandy would say.

      At least they successfully challenged that safe call on Iglesias’ steal. Hey, d’Arnaud threw someone out, yay!

  • Ken K. in NJ

    I don’t have anything to add except wonderful, just wonderful. The best thing about Met losses is this blog. Especially loved your take on Niese’s mind set.

    Hang in there Hozzie.

  • Dave

    Hang in there, Hozzie. Your staff – the two whose opposable thumbs enable them to gather and serve you your food – remain committed to that task, I’m sure.

    Just saw today’s starting lineup. So we’re not going with our 12th string leftfielder today then?

  • S. Brand

    Hope Hozzie is ok. The Mets aren’t, but we will keep watching. I know I Know: the definition of insanity.

  • Bob

    Greg-Tell Hozzie that 16-year old Joe–German Shepherd/Akita–Met dog in LA is on his
    side.(don’t tell any other German Shepherds)
    Perhaps Hozzie has agiata from watching this version of the 1965 Mets…
    Met Fan since Polo Grounds–1963

  • Matt in Richmond

    Cabrera, first; this isn’t even remotely a disaster. Second Rob pretty much nailed it. Pinch running to buy a marginal upgrade in speed for the TYING run would be a highly questionable move. Say he does score and the game is tied. Now your biggest bat is out of the lineup. And taking a manager to task for not challenging a call that was clearly correct is one of the strangest things I’ve ever heard of.

  • Cabrera's Patella Tendon

    Rob E., Dennis and Matt in Richmond,

    TC did a fine job handling the staff after Verrett stunk. He used pinch hitters well and gave the team a chance to rally. Not sure why it’s incumbent upon me to praise him for standard managerial moves but there you have what you requested.

    Rob, who knows exactly how much faster Nimmo is but he’s faster and the play was pretty close so to not pinch run is certainly fair game to question as you yourself pointed out.

    Dennis, I’m pretty sure FAFIF has been clear on not allowing name-calling or making personal attacks. The peanut gallery wishes to be called Those Who Want A New Manager (TWWANM)

    Matt in Richmond, isn’t tying the game but being without your biggest bat better than losing the game but having your biggest bat finish out the game? How can you possibly argue that?

    And Collins admitted he should’ve challenged. After watching the play live he couldn’t possibly be sure Bruce was clearly out. And who knows how the crew in Chelsea might rule on blocking the plate? That takes slomo replays etc. and he had nothing to lose. And saying he didn’t think about it…indefensible.

    P.S. Nowhere did I blame the entire game on the manager. He isn’t the reason they don’t hit with RISP or the starter sometimes spits the bit. But surely he has to be accountable for his decisions or indecisions. Not sure why that’s not acceptable to you and other Defenders of Collins (DoC)

    • Dennis

      All due respect, I wasn’t making any personal attacks, name calling or calling out anyone specific. Just making a generalization on those who post negatively on Collins constantly without giving him any credit at all. Plain and simple.

    • Rob E.

      He IS accountable for his decisions. The point we’re trying to make is that there are situations in baseball where you can make a case BOTH ways. Every time Terry Collins does something that the TWWANM disagrees with, you portray it as a decision that is universally accepted as the ONLY reasonable strategy by everyone except Terry Collins, and that’s not true. I understand your position and it’s a fair point, but the other position is reasonable also. Just because the outcome didn’t work out doesn’t mean the thinking behind it was flawed. And that applies to about 98% of the criticism of Collins.

      I don’t know how much faster Nimmo is then Bruce (if he even is). I just passed along information that what published by Baseball America and Ron Shandler’s Baseball Forecaster…two of the biggest baseball analytics books. You can look it up yourself. Secondly, that was not a “bang bang” play…the throw was there in plenty of time. It wouldn’t have made a difference unless you are putting in a guy who is clearly a significant speed upgrade.

      Thirdly, considering the negligible increase in speed and the depleted lineup, I can understand a manager not taking out one of the only threats in the lineup. Fourthly, the only way this is a discussion was if the exact play that happened happened. I understand that the one negative outcome out of many possibilities DID happen, but no one can cover every single possibility every single time.

      Finally, I don’t understand the complaint about not challenging. He was CLEARLY out….there was no question. What would be the point of reviewing?!?!? If they overturned the call, they would have been completely wrong. You are criticizing the manager for not challenging a call that was totally correct…is that really what you want to build your argument around? That the manager didn’t throw a Hail Mary in the hopes of a correct call being overturned or a rule being misinterpreted? I can understand it if there WAS a question, but the play was perfectly executed. I don’t want to win THAT way. If you do, you’re rooting for the wrong NY team.

  • Duda's Back

    I’m going to first guess here and say I’d rather deGrom have faced Collins than Blevins face Kinsler. Not going to kill the manager here and hope it works out but not my choice. Kinsler is hitting .320 vs lefties and Collins batting .250 overall

    • Jacobs27

      Kinsler’s also looked damn good in this series. I was pretty nervous at that moment, but credit Blevins for making a pitch. The Tigers just got incredibly lucky.

      Kind of compensating for all those get-out-DP-free cards they handed out last night, right? And then their bizarre base-running confusion in the following inning.

  • Wright's Neck

    Well those were two extremely unlucky hits by the Tigers. Damn!

  • Greg Mitchell

    As I’ve noted previously: Blevins is one of the weaker “lefty specialists” in the league–with the hit given up today (yeah, I know, they are all “lucky”) they are hitting .230 off him, which is unacceptable for these “one batter” hurlers. Guess what, righties are hitting more than one hundred points WORSE against him. Yet Terry keeps lifting deGrom in favor of him. Sandy left the team with no shutdown lefty. Getting rid of Bastardo was okay but Niese is no lefty specialist….needless to say….

  • Bob

    Only got the Tigers broadcasts this weekend–My pal in San Diego gets SNY & wants to know who is doing play-by-play for Gary Cohen–and yes, I know–Who is on 1st!


  • Paul Schwartz

    That would be Gary Apple SNY post game host.
    Keep battling Hozzie!
    Trying to get there tomorrow night Greg!

  • ljcmets

    Not really a cat person but know how precious pets are and thinking of Hozzie.

  • Jacobs27

    I like Hozzie’s chances better than the Metsies’. Let’s go them both, though!

  • eric1973

    Good Luck to Hozzie. I had cats for 30 years, and they are more loyal than family, as they know no better.

    And speaking of those who know no better, that Saturday night TC lineup was a real pip, with your worst hitter / better catcher as your DH, and your worse catcher catching. Now THAT’S managing outside the box, for sure.

    Oh, and great decision by TC, bringing in JF to close today’s game. Just wanted to make sure I gave him credit.

  • Matt in Richmond

    Blevins has stranded 33 out of 36 inherited baserunners which I believe is tops in the league. Stating that he’s one of the weaker lefty specialists is just utterly inaccurate.

    Regarding TC. I think we have some clearly established positions here. There’s a handful of commenters that look for any and all opportunities to second guess him, and sometimes outright mock him, and there are those of us that feel he has done an exemplary job evidenced by, amongst other details, how much the team has overachieved and how much the players enjoy playing for him.

    I think it’s safe to say that none of us are likely to change our minds in the near future. I for one am growing weary of the topic and am going to try to comment more on the players, opponents and the exciting race I hope we are in store for.

  • Lagares' Thumb

    “There are those of us that feel he has done an exemplary job evidenced by, amongst other details, how much the team has overachieved and how much the players enjoy playing for him.”

    Exemplary (beyond hilarious)
    Overachieved (the only time that could even remotely be considered possible is last August thru October, and a team rolling 3 Aces and Cespedes anchoring a full lineup making it to the World Series doesn’t seem to qualify as OVERachievers, but definitely achievers)
    Enjoy (yes, if the players play poorly but they enjoy the manager never calling them out then put this in the positive column)

    I bow down to the Cult of Collins!

    • Dennis

      Not that he needs me to defend him, but I don’t think it’s necessary to mock Matt’s insightful opinion, which was non judgemental or harsh toward anyone.

      I agree…’s getting to be tiring and boring anymore in defending Collins’ (not the best manager….certainly not the worst as some like to think) against some of the usual posters who seem to do it only to get some attention. If we raise objective points on how well we think he manages this team against ridiculous comments by some, we get our hands slapped and get called out by being too personal. I don’t think a manager or player is beyond criticism when it comes to saying dumb things or what is perceived to be a lack of effort, but I think they are when it comes to what they do on the field when playing/managing baseball at the highest level possible. I give them the benefit of doubt since I’ve never done it……but that’s just me.

      I think he’s done a pretty good job here managing here….others don’t. Agree to disagree. In the end ……Lets Go Mets!

  • Matt in Richmond

    This kind of poisonous attitude I find perplexing to say the least. This team has given us genuine Mets fans such joy the last 2 years, I just fail to see what could engender such low emotions.

    This team has CLEARLY overachieved by any conceivable metric. Nobody had them sniffing the WS last year BEFORE the nearly unprecedented spate of injuries often left them with a AAA+ lineup. As for this year, you’re free to argue with me, but I would submit even being in WC contention when you factor in the list of things that have gone horribly wrong (please tell me I don’t need to enumerate them) is a monumental achievement.

    Cult? Hardly. I’m not that invested in managers one way or another. I find their import to be mostly negligible. I just tire of Monday Morning Quarterbacks that seem to follow the games solely to second guess everything the manager does the following day. In baseball, as in most arenas of life there are very few 100% right or wrong decisions. It’s a curious mix of gut feeling, probabilities, ephemera, and details we the fans aren’t privy to that go into making them.

  • sturock

    Terry is no genius– and it may certainly be time for a change– but, really, look at what he has to work with.

  • Jacobs27

    Matt makes a particularly important point that we can easily lose sight of in these discussions: namely, the relative unimportance of the manager in the grand scheme of things. Unless your manager is Matt-Williams-ing it up and all hell is breaking loose on the team, his decisions are just highly visible, not highly impactful. When managers screw up, it’s very frustrating because it’s not a failure to physically perform, but errors in judgment. And the manager’s decisions–good and bad–often come in high tension moments. Bad decisions in those situations seem both more avoidable and easier to criticize from a fan’s perspective than the player’s performance.

    Of course, the manager is supposed to put the players in the best position to perform. His success is not the player’s actual success or failure but whether he put them in the best position.

    Terry Collins’ Baffling Insistence aside, he’s certainly competent enough not to be the key factor in most Mets wins and losses. Or so I figure.

  • Left Coast Jerry

    The good news is we don’t have to listen to Gary Apple screw up the count and misidentify players for the rest of the season. Watching the last 3 games was brutal regardless of what was happening on the field.

    A note to the commenter or commenters who think it’s cute to identify yourself by players’ injuries. When do you graduate from middle school?

    Greg and Jason, if you think my last statement is offensive, I’m sorry. But up until recently I could come to this site without having to read sophomoric comments.

  • Matt in Richmond

    I think you just said what a lot of us were thinking Jerry.

  • eric1973

    For my part, I only do ‘first guesses’ here, not based upon results, which then would be considered ‘secong guessing.’

    If Blevins threw 9 strikes in a row, or Rivera hit 3 home runs, or Ces got 3 holes-in-one, I would still question the decisions.

    IMO, managerial decisions impact the games a lot, and can cause a difference in the standings.

    BTW, listening to Gary Apple was like watching a AAA broadcast from Sheboygen.

  • […] Animals Strike Curious Poses »    […]

  • Jack in PSL

    That’s one fine looking feline. I suspect Hozzie’s current malady may be linked to his keeper’s habit of watching all things Mets – in that regard, I know the feeling.
    Best to all.

  • Jacobs27

    Eric1973, yes, I think it’s important to distinguish as you do questioning decisions vs. results.

    On a side note, that’s how I think replay should work. Not, oh let’s wait for our replay coordinator to look at the replay and decide if we should challenge, but did I, watching the play, think that call may have been blown. First guess. Go.

    About manager’s impact, I should clarify, I think managers do have an impact in the sense that their job matters, but most managers above a certain level of competency are somewhat interchangeable in terms of results. They don’t make bad teams good or good teams bad.

    In other words, if you had an imaginary stat, mWAR, manager Wins Above Replacement level, I’d expect it to be between 0 and 1.0 for a lot of managers. You can’t just hire any Gary Apple (no offense) off the street to do it, but among big league managers who more less follow the book, their tangible comparative difference-making is relatively slim. Or so I think.

    Now maybe managers are quintessentially intangible in their value. Or maybe I’m just wrong and managers do matter as much as they seem to when they do perplexing, frustrating stuff at key moments.

    Broadcasters do matter, though. Seriously, you’re right, other Gary is like a AAA call-up spot starter forced to pitch a complete game. Actually, three in a row. Of course, even Ronnie struggled in the role. It’s not easy, and major league Gary has big shoes. We’re lucky most of the time.