EXPECTATIONS FOR 18: Mickey Callaway

[Edgy MD]

Hi, I'm Mickey F. Callaway. I'm a pitching coach-turned-manager. I've never held the big chair outside of a Division III college program. I'm either a breath of fresh fucking air or in way over my head, depending on where you are in your med cycle.

I'm promising a pro-active approach to caring for pitchers, accountability, and lots of love. You've never seen love like this. (This obviously doesn't apply to sharks.)

How's it all gonna shake out? I don't want the record, necessarily, because only so much is within the scope of a manager's control, but how are my efforts going to be manifest for better or for worse in 2018?

[fimg=365:3ihtlm7m]http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.3788739.1517350310!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/correction-mets-manager.jpg[/fimg:3ihtlm7m] [fimg=335:3ihtlm7m]http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.3631287.1510641926!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/new-york-mets-introduce-new-manager-mickey-callaway.jpg[/fimg:3ihtlm7m]
[fimg=321:3ihtlm7m]http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.3833884.1519244018!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/ackertwheeler22s-b5c-web.jpg[/fimg:3ihtlm7m] [fimg=379:3ihtlm7m]http://mediadownloads.mlb.com/mlbam/2018/02/24/images/mlbf_1876446183_th_43.jpg[/fimg:3ihtlm7m]

I'm the 21st manager in New York Mets history, but only the third who came from the pitching side. You can salute the Mets for being unconventional, but that ends when the rubber hits the road. Let's get rolling.

[youtube:3ihtlm7m]rtuCTM0x4qw[/youtube:3ihtlm7m]

[TransMonk]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm either a breath of fresh fucking air or in way over my head, depending on where you are in your med cycle.

This pretty accurately defines my feelings about the guy thus far.

I think that if the team stays healthy, it has the talent to bouy any time it may take for him to get his feet wet. If they are hurt and are out of it as early as last season, he could get second guessed early and often. I wonder how much rope he’ll get (if needed) from the fanbase/media.

[Fman99]

Hell if I know.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

His beard is already the most interesting development in managerial-chair facial hair since Bobby Vee.

He strikes me as alright so far and also a kind of a Bizarro World Willie Randolph in that both guys represent New Ways of Doing Things Around Here, only very different approaches to that.

[metirish]

Certainly says all the right things, but most managers do ...remember when Willie couldn't win a game , he'll be hoping for a better start

[Ceetar]

I expect a little more progressive thinking though I think the roster generally dictates those things more than we realize sometimes.

Like I expect him to hold to the quick hooks for third time through the order penalities for the non-Thor non-deGrom guys, but if the middle relievers suck he's not going to be able to do that.


but predictions? 2 ejections. 2 statements that get misinterpreted and he has to backtrack/clarify later. Still the manager in 2019.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'm expecting to like him, but it's not unimaginable that I'll change my mind, depending on how things develop.

I love what he's saying about bullpen use. As I've said in other threads, this is the kind of thing I've been waiting 20 years to hear a manager say.

What will be interesting to see is how Mickey reacts when he uses Familia to successfully get out of a jam in the 7th inning, but then Ramos blows the save and gets a loss in the 9th. Will he stick with the plan, knowing that even good plans don't work 100 per cent of the time, or will he cave in to the outrage and revert to the norm?

The answer to that question will strongly influence my opinion of Mickey.

[Ceetar]

I don't expect him to closer by committee much and I actually doubt we'll see much of Familia in the 7th. You need multiple good pitchers and there's a reasonable shot if you're facing the big guns in the 7th they loom in the 9th as well. So use Ramos then if he's the second best guy. I think you'll see that more, the second best guy coming in earlier than the 8th. Or Familia coming in in the 8th if that's when Harper is up, kind of thing, and then finishing it out, or if he taxes himself in the 9th someone else getting the 9th.

or Blevins starting the 9th if it's a lefty heavy thing. Or

[Edgy MD]

I'm not particularly comfortable with investing too much in third-time-through-the-order thinking.

Have your bullpen ready when a guy reaches the third time? Sure. Shorten that leash.

Have a class of starting pitchers who automatically come out after 18 batters? Bleh.

[fimg=400:215vjuju]http://78.media.tumblr.com/7f682850bb806ac75f15e2cee31a8c6b/tumblr_mr8d3unlKw1razffxo1_1280.jpg[/fimg:215vjuju]

[Benjamin Grimm]

I agree about pitchers automatically coming out after 18 batters. I hope that it doesn't actually play out that way. It would result in too many four-inning starts and more overuse of the bullpen.

[Ceetar]

Also probably more wins.

[Lefty Specialist]

He'll be a favorite of the beaters, for sure. How he ends up will depend on the health of his team.

[ashie62]

I have a headache thinking about multiple pitching changes. Gah

[Frayed Knot]

I think he'll be so fine that he'll blow my mind.

[Guest 41Forever]

Already protecting people wading in the Florida surf from killer sharks. Already reminding Dom Smith that being on time is important. Seems like a good fit. Predict he'll try some new things but gradually shift toward more traditional ways in some aspects. Will have a good year!

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I agree about pitchers automatically coming out after 18 batters. I hope that it doesn't actually play out that way. It would result in too many four-inning starts and more overuse of the bullpen.

Or "many fourth -inning starts and heavy use of the bullpen."

May I posit that perhaps you guys are uncomfortable with this because you're not yet comfortable with this?

I'm going to go with one ejection/ minimal shine off the rose (owing largely to solid handling of his beat relationships).

[Ceetar]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: I agree about pitchers automatically coming out after 18 batters. I hope that it doesn't actually play out that way. It would result in too many four-inning starts and more overuse of the bullpen. Or "many fourth -inning starts and heavy use of the bullpen." May I posit that perhaps you guys are uncomfortable with this because you're not yet comfortable with this?

I'd say that many aren't comfortable with the amount of bullpen already. for decades.

but yeah, it's only "over" use if it's not planned use. this would be planned heavier use and a design of having guys that throw innings 5-6-7 or 5-6.

[Edgy MD]

I'm not sure I understand the distinction between "four-inning starts and more overuse of the bullpen" and "fourth -inning starts and heavy use of the bullpen."

But I'm not comfortable because I think the proliferation of relief pitching only leads to the proliferation of relief pitching. And people tear their hair out, thinking the poison pill on their team is the ninth-best pitcher on their staff.

If only they can get the ninth-best pitcher in a groove, things would be alright. Jerry Manuel and his "eighth-inning guy." Terry Collins and the "second lefty." Always they are trying to figure out how to win by getting one more struggling pitcher pitching well. Never are they asking themselves why they are so keen to keep pulling the pitchers who aren't struggling.

Now we're to believe the key to the season is going to be getting good relief in the fifth inning? My God, it's new wax on the same old car!

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm not sure I understand the distinction between "four-inning starts and more overuse of the bullpen" and "fourth -inning starts and heavy use of the bullpen."

"Fourth" should have just been "four;" my change was merely to omit the "too." (Autocorrect. Feh.) My point was that perception and preconceived notions may be the primary issue here. What's wrong with a four inning start from Vargas if we've got Lugo warning like a starter for a 3-5 inning stint behind him. It's only "overuse" if pitching changes are more frequent than they really need to be.We'll see how often that is. Or we won't.

I get your concern. And I don't know if this will work for us. But one way to maximize our chances for success is to assemble a bunch of guys in the pen who could start and do so reasonably well, and then trust the process (if we're doing the damn thing). We may have a few of those. We'll see over the next few weeks, then months, if we have enough. Or, y'know, we won't.

[Edgy MD]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: What's wrong with a four inning start from Vargas if we've got Lugo warning like a starter for a 3-5 inning stint behind him.

We're asking two guys to perform well, where previously we asked for one. And you go from asking it, to needing it. And then it's three and four and five. And needing more guys to perform on a given night is a more unsustainable a trick to pull off than needing fewer.

And then there's tomorrow night.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I agree that pulling the starter in the fourth inning (before he has a chance to implode) will turn a few losses into wins. But if it happens frequently, unless there's a 17-man pitching staff it will end up moving the implosion later in the game.

I guess there's a tipping point somewhere, where additional shorter starts would be beneficial, but too many of those shorter starts will lead to a bullpen that's dead on its feet.

Mickey seems like a smart guy. If he can get this figured out and make it work, then good for him!

It would be easier if the Mets had three or four guys who could be trusted to go through the batting order a third time. But as far as I know, they currently only have two. (Does Vargas make three? I don't know.) But Harvey, Wheeler, Matz? They seem to have a way to go in order to get there.

[Ceetar]

The 5th and 6th are some of the highest scoring innings, period. The heart of the lineup lines up with the third time through penalty. Games are won and lost, and Mickey's saying "hey, maybe let's address that".

It's really just common sense and not sticking to a starting pitcher just because tradition suggests he should get more innings.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I wouldn't stick with the starter out of "tradition", but to avoid asking the bullpen for five innings several times a week.

[Ceetar]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I wouldn't stick with the starter out of "tradition", but to avoid asking the bullpen for five innings several times a week.

I think 7-8 (with plenty of swapping up and down from Vegas) can handle say 25 innings a week if need be.

[Edgy MD]

Ceetar wrote: The 5th and 6th are some of the highest scoring innings, period. The heart of the lineup lines up with the third time through penalty. Games are won and lost, and Mickey's saying "hey, maybe let's address that". It's really just common sense and not sticking to a starting pitcher just because tradition suggests he should get more innings.

It's actually not common, and I actually wrote nothing about tradition.

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: Ceetar wrote: The 5th and 6th are some of the highest scoring innings, period. The heart of the lineup lines up with the third time through penalty. Games are won and lost, and Mickey's saying "hey, maybe let's address that". It's really just common sense and not sticking to a starting pitcher just because tradition suggests he should get more innings. It's actually not common, and I actually wrote nothing about tradition.

the tradition is hard baked into the rules as per the useless Win statistic.

would you prefer logically sense? statistical sense? Run scoring is up, fresh relievers perform better than third time through starters, especially non-aces. Aim the pitchers best suited to getting outs at the best run scoring opportunities.

[Edgy MD]

Ceetar wrote: the tradition is hard baked into the rules as per the useless Win statistic.

It wasn't baked into my argument. Neither is the win statistic, which I've long considered grossly misleading.

Ceetar wrote: would you prefer logically sense? statistical sense? Run scoring is up, fresh relievers perform better than third time through starters, especially non-aces. Aim the pitchers best suited to getting outs at the best run scoring opportunities.

I'd prefer what the facts demonstrably support. The term "logically sense" doesn't even make grammatical sense.

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: the tradition is hard baked into the rules as per the useless Win statistic. It's wasn't baked into my argument. Neither is the win statistic, which I've long considered grossly misleading.

so it's not tradition or the win statistic that makes you want to single out one pitcher to pitch way more innings. What is it then?

Edgy MD wrote: would you prefer logically sense?statistical sense? Run scoring is up, fresh relievers perform better than third time through starters, especially non-aces. Aim the pitchers best suited to getting outs at the best run scoring opportunities. I'd prefer whatever the facts demonstrably support. The term "logically sense" doesn't even make grammatical sense.

so pretend I said statistical sense then.

[Edgy MD]

Ceetar wrote: so it's not tradition or the win statistic that makes you want to single out one pitcher to pitch way more innings. What is it then?

Please feel free to respond to what I've written and pretty please stop trying to press upon me what I haven't written. I really don't want to have to type twice.

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: Ceetar wrote: so it's not tradition or the win statistic that makes you want to single out one pitcher to pitch way more innings. What is it then? Please feel free to respond to what I've written and pretty please stop trying to press upon me what I haven't written. I really don't want to have to type twice.

You said it's not common and that you said nothing about tradition. As if that refutes my point somehow, which you have yet to actually refute and I can't even tell if you're trying to refute it. Nothing I wrote was even addressing you specifically until you commented so I'm not really sure what I'm pressing upon you.