G-Fafif

OHernandez 3 Beltran 1.5 Chavez 1 Newhan 1

Deja box all over again: http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=270606121

Trying to forget Endy's troubles, I came up with two managerial groupings that don't quite match the skipper-studded '69 affair thanks to Casey's first-ball participation but come close: May 9, 1965 featured Stengel (manager), Westrum (coach), Berra (coach/catcher), McMillan (shortstop) and Torre (Brave catcher). It was Yogi's last game as a player. Buddy Harrelson would come up in September, though Stengel would be retired from managing by then. Westrum would manage Harrelson and McMillan in September, so several games versus Milwaukee (Berra coaching, Torre catching for the opposition) would continue to feature five Mets managers in uniform. (Harrelson and McMillan were not on the roster together in '66.) On May 14, 1975, Wes Westrum managed the Giants against his old club, which was helmed by Yogi Berra. Roy McMillan coached. Bud Harrelson played short, the only game the oft-injured Buddy got into against the Giants that year. Joe Torre played third for the Mets on May 12, but not the 14th. We'll assume both Torre and Harrelson were in uniform both games. That's five Mets managers for you. But I can't think of any others that might equal the six in Game Four of the 1969 World Series.

In watching SNY's rebroadcast of Game Four of the '69 World Series, I realized I was watching something not just historic but probably historically trivial: The Mets manager was Gil Hodges. The Mets first base coach was Yogi Berra. The Mets shortstop was Bud Harrelson. The Orioles pitching coach was George Bamberger. The Orioles second baseman was Davey Johnson. The first ball was thrown out by Casey Stengel. Six Mets managers, past, present and future, playing a role in the same event, five in uniform. Can anybody think of a circumstance that would have equaled or topped this accumulation of orange and blue leadership? For all the paths crossed by other longtime baseball men who have held the same job, I can't.

One point awarded for Newhan's 0-for-1 last night because he wound up on second on the fly ball that Rowand didn't handle with two out in the ninth. It was positively Grote-esque (if you saw Game Four of the '69 Series on SNY or, for that matter, 38 years ago). Newhan has been mostly worthless as a pinch-hitter but he does hustle like few of his contemporaries. I've begun to root like hell for him even if I'd rather not see him all that much.

If m.e.t.b.o.t. can process apologies, please process apology for boxy comment. Hollow box characterization intended to reflect lack of good news in box score.

Glavine 2.5 Lo Duca 1.5 Newhan 1 Schoeneweis 0.5 Wagner 0.5 Mota 0.5 Wright 0.5

I assume the seats will be in extreme right field.

Forgot about that. Pitching calamity, then.

Scarce had a discernible career with the Phillies from '72 to '74 , which is part of what made the Tug McGraw trade not seem all that insane (John Stearns aside) when it was made. He resurfaced with the Twins in 1978. Murray for Rusch is never mentioned in the pantheon of great Mets trades, but it certainly ranks among the very good ones. The Mets' one-gamers whose only game was that one Mets game (woodchuck could chuck wood) were Hudson, Estrada, Rose, Liddell, Morgan and Hietpas (pending unforeseen catching calamities). Gibson, Hernandez and Hinchliffe (Met ERA from his one aptly named emergency start: 36.00) all had previous ML experience but never pitched again after their Met cameos, something Vargas is hoping he won't have to say (and probably won't; Park, too, presumably). Greer is the only Mets one-gamer on the list whose ML debut was with the Mets who went on to experience a little more big-time meal money (eight games with the Giants in 1995). One wonders if Kenny Greer is the only major leaguer to have made his debut in a 17th inning.

Roach and Clontz were in two games, actually. I was at Roach's only Shea start several weeks after he had his first, in Anaheim.

Perez 2 Gomez 1 Reyes 0.5 Chavez 0.5 Wright 0.5

Hollow Box: http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=270603121

Sosa 3 Gotay 3 Delgado 2 Smith 0.5 Feliciano 0.5 Reyes 0.5 Newhan 0.5

Oh yeah, him. Talk about the nose on the face of a question!

Discussion broke out the other night among me and three gamegoers over who has/had a World Series ring from the Mets and MFYs. We know for sure one is Casey Stengel: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2007/06/01/2007-06-01_look_it_up_caseys_stuff_in_auction-1.html The article's a bit misleading in that Casey wasn't just given one for the heck of it, but because he was a VP for many years after managing the Mets. In addition to Stengel I've got: --Gooden --Strawberry --Arthur Richman (traveling secretary for us; fixer for Steinbrenner) --Tim McCarver (our broadcaster in '86, theirs in '99-'00, though one of my friends thought this was bogus) --Fran Healy (our broadcaster in '86, theirs in '78, and still catching in '77) --Berra (coach in '69) --Stottlemyre (coach in '86) --Mazzilli Anybody else who anybody else can think of? Any scouts or wayward front-office types or minor league managers?

Maine 3 Reyes 1 Franco 0.5

Box o' Snake Woe: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=270601121

OHernandez 3.5 Chavez 1.5 Reyes 1 Wright 1 Easley 1 Wagner 1 Smith 0.5 Johnson 0.5

Lo Duca 2 Mota 2 Glavine 1.5

Edgy DC wrote: I fear (and what a fine fear to have) the Mets may go toward the post-season without being tested in fire. La-la-la! (Hands over ears.) I can't hear you talking about the post-season in May! But seriously, I think there's plenty of fire to go around on this club, especially with the memory of the last NLCS likely smoldering in many of them. But I have to admit this is way down my list of concerns right now. As class of the National League as we appear to be and probably are, our respective leads for the division title and a failsafe Wild Card are formidable (five and four games, respectfully) but not impenetrable.

Delgado 5 Reyes 1.5 Perez 1.5 Heilman 0.5 Feliciano 0.5 Wagner 0.5 Beltran 0.5

If the News is going to throw it right down the middle, it's hard not to swing on three-and-oh.

If anyone feared a 2007 letdown following the success of 2006 (and who didn't?), it hasn't happened. I suppose you could just look at the standings and figure that out for yourself, but out of curiosity, I did some checking to determine how historic the Mets' fine start is coming as it has on the heels of a very good season. It's pretty historic. Here is how 2006 + 49 games of 2007 ranks in terms of winning percentage among the best Full Mets Season + 49-Game samples. Note: There's nothing magical about the 49-game mark, it just happens to be where we are after a delightful weekend and it's close enough to one-third of a season to form impressions considering there's no game today. 1) 1986-87: 133-78 (.630) 2) 1985-86: 132-79 (.626) 3) 2006-07: 129-82 (.611) 4) 1988-89: 125-84 (.598) 5) 1987-88: 126-85 (.597) 6) 1969-70: 125-86 (.592) 7) 1999-2000: 124-88 (.585) 8) 1984-85: 120-91 (.569) 9) 1990-91: 118-93 (.559) 10) 1997-98: 117-94 (.555) What, if anything, does this portend for the rest of 2007? I'm not sure, of course, but '07 is one of only four successor years listed above that, after 49 games, has resulted in a winning percentage at least 50 points (.050) better than its predecessor's already excellent full season. In other words, we're running at a .653 winning percentage right now, a nifty .054 better than where we finished 2006. History indicates that if the Mets win at least 90 games one year and have a winning percentage 50 points better than they achieved at the end of that first year after 49 games the next year, it's a pretty good sign in terms of things to come. The newly discovered 90/50/49 Rule in action: 1987 Full Season W%: .568 1988 49 Games W%: .694 Improvement: +.126 1988 Full Season W%: .625 1988 Differential 49G to End '88: -.069 1985 Full Season W%: .604 1986 49 Games W%: .694 Improvement: +.090 1986 Full Season W%: .667 1986 Differential 49G to End '86: -.027 1984 Full Season W%: .556 1985 49 Games W%: .612 Improvement: +.056 1985 Full Season W%: .604 1985 Differential 49G to End '85: -.008 2006 Full Season W%: .599 2007: 49 Games W%: .653 Improvement: +.054 2007: Full Season W%: TK 2007: Differential 49G to End: TK If precedent presents any kind of clue, we see that an already very good team that improves upon its winning percentage for 49 games -- approximately the first third of the next season -- by at least 50 points (+.050) is likely on its way to a significantly better overall record than its predecessor. Full Year 1988: +10 wins versus 1987 Full Year 1986: +10 wins versus 1985 Full Year 1985: +8 wins versus 1984 The '88 and '86 Mets did not maintain their respective .694 winning percentages (they both would have wound up with about 112 wins if they had), but they each put down a pretty effective marker in those first 49 games to launch them toward division titles. 1985 stayed pretty consistent throughout and its 98 wins would be golden in the Wild Card era. I wouldn't swear to it based on my statistical noodling, but if the Mets can simply not screw up a whole lot over the next 113 games, I think we're in pretty good shape. 65-48 from here on out would get us to where we got last year: 97-65. The track record provided by 1988, 1986 and 1985 (each season building on an already very good record the year before) indicates a dropoff from the 49-game blistering pace of improvement is to be expected, but it shouldn't be so severe that it hampers us in the long run. If we suffered the worst of the three dropoffs, with our winning percentage declining by 1988's .069 over the last 113 games, we'd go 66-47 (.584) the rest of the way and wind up with 98 wins. 98 wins would be just dandy. Also, for what it's worth, we seem to be in the midst of one of the finest two-year runs in Mets history. So enjoy that if you can stand to.

Sosa 2 Easley 1.5 Wright 1.5 Franco 1 Delgado 1 Beltran 1 Smith 1 Reyes 0.5