New York Isn’t Place For Retread Managers

Seeing the reactions to the Mets hiring of Luis Rojas, you think people have confused the lyrics of Frank Sinatra’s anthem to be, “If you can’t make it there, you can make it anywhere.”

From Keith Hernandez to other media members, Rojas was met with skepticism because he’s never managed at the Major League level. We see responses this job required a veteran manager, as we saw with many, like ESPN‘s Chris Carlin, “This isn’t supposed to be the place where you learn.”

Even with Carlin taking a beating from Mets players like Pete Alonso and Marcus Stroman for his criticisms of Rojas, it’s fair to say Carlin wasn’t alone in that position. Overall, there is a prevailing notion New York is not a place where you can hire a new manager or coach and expect him to succeed.

This is complete and utter nonsense, and there are plenty of examples which prove it.

In 1984, the Mets hired Davey Johnson to be their manager. He had a similar managerial background to Rojas, and he would also usher in the greatest stretch in Mets history.

In 1995, after Pat Riley resigned from the Knicks, the team moved quickly to hire Don Nelson, who was about as poor a fit as you could have for the Knicks roster. He was replaced by Jeff Van Gundy, who proved to be one of the best head coaches in Knicks history.

The New York Giants had success and went to a Super Bowl under Jim Fassel, who had no previous head coaching experience, and the team flopped under Pat Shurmur, who had previous head coaching experience with the Cleveland Browns.

Obviously, there are examples in the reverse.

Bobby Valentine was a terrific manager for the Mets. Tom Coughlin won two Super Bowls with the Giants. John Tortorella brought the New York Rangers back to prominence.

Joe Torre was the manager for the last Yankees dynasty, but by the same token Aaron Boone, who had absolutely no previous managerial experience, has led the Yankees to consecutive 100 win seasons.

Therein lies the point.

New York isn’t just a tough place to play or manage. It is a place which demands the best. Somehow along the way, people have misinterpreted that to say you need people who have failed elsewhere.

For the Mets, that means people believe Rojas was not the right guy for this job, and the team instead should have hired Dusty Baker or Buck Showalter.

Both Baker and Showalter are justifiably respected baseball men. They’ve developed players and in many instances outperformed expectations in each and every stop. If you hire either one of them, you’re in very good hands, and you’re lucky to have them.

One thing with both of them is they’ve yet to win a World Series. You don’t hear that now, but it’s something you’ll hear if the Mets are fortunate enough to be in the postseason.

The point there is narratives shift and emerge as fit. If Dusty or Buck came to the Mets and won, they’d be a great story about finally winning. If they didn’t win, we’d hear how neither can win the big one, and the Mets need to move on from a manager who lifted Russ Ortiz too soon or one who didn’t use Zack Britton.

Even the best of managers available have their flaws. Ultimately, that’s why they’re available. The best any team can do, be it a New York team or a team anywhere else, is look at the candidates and make the best decision possible.

That can be someone like Buck or Dusty, and it can be someone like Rojas. For the Mets, they rightfully opted on the manager who knows this team inside and out, has their respect, and has shown he can get the most out of their talent. This is very similar to when the Mets hired Davey Johnson, who was not a retread, but rather, a first time Major League manager.

Ultimately, with Johnson, Parcells, Coughlin, and Van Gundy, and everyone else who has passed through this city, we’ve learned the only qualifications which matter for a manager or head coach is who is the most talented and who is the best fit for the roster.

Any other consideration is just noise, and oft times results in a mistake.

66 thoughts on “New York Isn’t Place For Retread Managers”

  1. Oldbackstop says:

    1. A manager was perhaps 10 percent of a teams success back in the day…now it is maybe 5 percent, with analytics and much larger staffs.

    2. So…5 or 10 percent is the difference on the playoffs, most years, but success is much more about the quality of the players and their performance than it is the manager

    3. What you are missing is the risk factor. Buck or Dusty are highly unlikely to come here a fail spectactularly….lose the respect of the team, say something really dumb under pressure in a press conference, not deal with play conflicts, whatever. An untested manager has a much larger risk of doing something like that.

    5. Most of the managers you cite above were players who understand a clubhouse and have the respect among players of having played the game. You repeatedly embraced this with Beltran. If you don’t think there is a huge difference in clubhouse respect between Rojas and Beltran you are wildly mistaken.

    4. You make much of the comments of the players on the announcement. Find me a player anywhere who ever flamed the new boss and I’ll be convinced these aren’t just asskissers scoring points, or guys relieved that it is a weak guy that is a known quantity.

    Could Buck Showalter have imploded? Sure. Could Rojas succeed? Sure. But the odds are wildly different.

    1. metsdaddy says:

      You hire the best manager for your personnel. You have to start making up things to explain how a manager who has gotten the most from these players, is well aware of the specific dynamics of this team, and is well respected throughout the game is not the best possible fit for this job.

      1. Oldbackstop says:

        Oh, well respected like Buck Showalter wouldn’t be? You have to cite soft stats like “the specific dynamics” of whatever, and getting the “best results” as a manager (64-75, 5th place, last season managing)

        You can argue for Beltran because he was a better player than any of these guys so they should listen.You can argue for a Showalter because he has a long managing record. To argue for someone with neither you have to use soft stuff like “specific dynamics” which could apply to anyone, and the validity of which you yourself have no idea, aside from the shills and sycophants and brown nosers greeting him.

        1. metsdaddy says:

          What you’re doing is readily apparent

  2. Oldbackstop says:

    I initially quoted Hernandez as saying ” “I was floored by this hire. He seems too young and no MLB experience.”

    My first quote — Does it sound like I would quote that if I was for Rojas? Really? That confused you?

    1. metsdaddy says:

      Again, as I’ll note you moved from hiring him would be a disaster when I recommended it, to softening it to maybe he could be good when BVW hired him to calling him a beta male when you’re hypocrisy was shown.

  3. LongTimeFan1 says:

    I think Rojas’s extensive family pedigree as well-known baseball lifers, fuels the massive support he has among beat writers, and even fans.

    Otherwise, Rojas would be a no-name, very young manager the players love, but everyone, including most vocal fans mock as Luis “who?”and that he’s manager because Wilpons are cheap and Jeff and Brodie want to control in every way.

    Instead, he’s universally supported.

    And that’s fine with me. He seems to have the skills, intellect, respect, communication abilities, minor league managerial background, player support and leadership to succeed.

  4. oldbackstop says:

    I wonder if anyone can find a rookie manager under 40 who did not play in the majors and did not manage above AA.

    Not if they can find a successful one. If they can find one.

    1. metsdaddy says:

      Have fun searching

    2. Oldbackstop says:

      Exactly. So each of those is a risk factor. Age. Experience. Lack of playing background. Lack of time in the majors. Failure to manage above AA.

      Why take on ALL those risks in a win now season?

      Not ready, which was the universal comment in October. Why now?

      1. metsdaddy says:

        Of course, this purposefully omits his lineage, his having helped developing the players on this roster, his having been a QC coach last year, and reports of his running ST prep.

      2. Blair M. Schirmer says:

        @Obs – very solid points. These Mets have a two season window, after which either payroll goes to $240m or they do a significant rebuild, settle for a couple of 70-75 win seasons in 2022 and 2023, then seek to contend again with their players currently in the low minors and rookie ball making up a large part of the team.

        I’m always reminded it took Nimmo 8 seasons in pro ball to become the player he is. Even an org better able to develop players would have taken 6 if not 7.

        “Why take on ALL those risks in a win now season?”

        —-Stellar point.

    3. Oldbackstop says:

      More MD sucking up to BVW…

    4. Live Arm says:

      “I wonder if anyone can find a rookie manager under 40 who did not play in the majors and did not manage above AA.

      Not if they can find a successful one. If they can find one.”

      Hmm, how about Buck Showalter… the same guy people are now saying would be the smart safe choice.

      He was 36 when hired by the Yankees in 1992 having managed just ONE season above A ball (Double A in 1991).

      As a player he wasn’t bringing any credibility either, having had exactly 100 AB’s in AAA where he hit .220. So basically Showalter was a mid-level minor league player and a successful manager in the harsh glare of the spotlight in places like Oneonta and Ft. Lauderdale… and yet his first big league job as a skipper was in New York, which is supposedly “not the place where you learn”.

  5. Oldbackstop says:

    Another quote from Hernandez (who ought be watching his mouth as a SNY guy, but apparently feels strongl):

    “I’m actually stunned by the decision,” Mets TV broadcaster Keith Hernandez said on SNY. “My concern is I believe the manager has to be the leader of the game and you’re getting a very young manager with no major league experience. My choice going into the winter was hands-down Joe Girardi.”

    Girardi was hired by the Phillies after not managing for two seasons following his departure from the Yankees. “I was just informed a half hour ago and I was floored.This is not a team that’s rebuilding. They think they can win and they want to win now. So we’ll see how it goes.


    So, basically, exactly how I feel. If this Rojas gets a quick trigger this spring, BVW has to go with him.

    1. metsdaddy says:

      But I thought you didn’t feel the same as Keith, but now, you do.

      Seriously, pick a lane

      1. Oldbackstop says:

        Pick a lane? Pick a brain. Every issue that is raised you take the moron stance. Like 10 for the last ten@ , from hiring Beltran to downplaying the scandal to saying it wouldn’t be a story to bemoaning his termination to applauding the Golden Child as bizarre weak choice. Happy 2020!

        1. metsdaddy says:

          You need to stop getting 3rd graders to help you troll.

          1. Oldbackstop says:

            The 3rd graders are managing the Mets! Bwahahahaha….

  6. LongTimeFan1 says:

    Just to respond to the tiff between Old Backstop and MetsDaddy, Buck Showalter at 35, was promoted by the Yankees to manage the big league team. He had no big league experience.

    1. metsdaddy says:

      And there you have it

      1. LongTimeFan1 says:

        Just to clarify, Showalter never managed above AA, but was a Yankees coach for 2 years prior to becoming manager. Like Rojas, never played in the majors.

        He was also 3 years younger than Rojas, when first managing,in majors, played longer in the minors, had less coaching/managing experience in minors, but a year more coaching in majors, but didn’t come from a well known baseball family.

    2. Blair M. Schirmer says:

      Worth noting, too, that the Yankees were coming off 5th, 7th, and 5th place finishes out of 7 teams. There was, sensibly, an opening for Showalter, a young guy who had come up through the NYY system, managing extremely well and getting excellent results, with records of .705, .766, .616, .515, and .657 in low A, A ball, and AA.

      The MLB Yankees had not make the postseason in a *decade* at that point. Handing over the reins to a veritable kid and trying something very different for the 1992 season where little was expected of the team–that was a smart move. If there was ever a time to make that kind of move, the 1992 season in Queens was precisely that time.

      I think it’s a very different situation with a team like the Mets who are watching the window close, rather than open, and are expected or at least are trying to win now.

      1. metsdaddy says:

        If you’re trying to win now, isn’t the manager who has proven he can manage this group effectively the exact right guy for the job?

        1. Blair M. Schirmer says:

          Effectively? Well, if that’s your criterion, it must be pointed out that Rojas, in eight years of managing in the Mets system, from 2011 through 2018 has finished:

          8th, 6, 4, 2, 7, 5, 2, and 9th.

          1. metsdaddy says:

            I’m not sure how the minor league records and finishes are a reflection on his ability to manage players, especially the players on the Mets roster.

          2. Blair M. Schirmer says:

            @metsdaddy – If you have a better criterion than finishes I’m all ears, but you did say “effective,” after all, and these 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th place finishes are not on their face examples of effectiveness (on the contrary), particularly in the context of these teams having had at least enough talent to usefully feed the 2015, 2016, and 2019 major league Mets teams.

            What example more concrete than the above is on offer that presumes to demonstrate Rojas’ effectiveness as a manager?

          3. metsdaddy says:

            Look at the development of his players.

            Minor league team records are nothing more than noise

  7. Oldbackstop says:

    Close,but Buck was an ATHLETE, seven years in the Yankee minors playing with a lot of the guys he would manage. He was a bad ass who got his name from walking around the clubhouse buck naked. And he had tw years as a big league coach….a real dugout coach, not quality assurance.

    1. metsdaddy says:

      So, Rojas isn’t on the level of Buck because he didn’t like to strut around naked?

    2. Blair M. Schirmer says:

      @Oldbackstop – AND Buck was a very successful minor league manager. The value of that to a floundering Yankee team that hadn’t seen the postseason in 10 years cannot be overestimated. He was picked as Baseball America’s Minor League Manager of the Year in 1989 after his season as the AA manager in Albany, which helped prompt his promotion to the MLB team for the 1990 season.

      Fwiw the circumstances of Showalter being brought on board to manage the Yankees in 1992 made eminent good sense. There was zero expectation that team would contend, so it was effectively a free year that would conceal the new manager’s growing pains, if any, and if he was a disaster, somehow, he could be fired easily and without sacrificing a season. It’s just not the same with Rojas. Might he do well? Sure. But why roll the dice unnecessarily?

      1. metsdaddy says:

        Hiring a manager who has the respect of an entire organization, understands the front office’s expectations better than anyone, and can get the most from the players on the roster is not rolling the dice.

        1. Blair M. Schirmer says:

          Compared to hiring a present-day Joe Girardi or Buck Showalter? Of course it is. That’s inarguable.

          As for each of your three claims, we know very little beyond what is invariably said for public relations purposes. Wrt your third claim, it is belied by Rojas’s thoroughly unimpressive record as a minor league manager. Is that his players’ fault? Perhaps. Perhaps when finishing 8th his team actually won 5 games more than we would expect (I say that without sarcasm), and I leave it to a more interested party to dig through each season and figure out Rojas’ record compared to the Pythagorean record. (An interesting subject for an article, fwiw.)

          But on the identifiable record, he hasn’t shown much. His finishes seems more like those of a minor league lifer occasionally kicked up the chain because he shows up and doesn’t cause problems–not the record of a shining star who will steer the Mets to outperform their pyth numbers on the way to 90 wins.

          Also, why the sideways move to ‘quality control coach’? Is there a precedent for that sort of move as part of the progression to MLB manager? There may be, but I’d be surprised to learn of it.

          1. metsdaddy says:

            Minor league records carry zero meaning. What matters is development, and Rojas developed his players.

            Overall, this is a person as prepared to be a manager as there is.

          2. Blair M. Schirmer says:

            @metsdaddy – “Minor league records carry zero meaning.”

            Really? None at all? So… Buck Showalter was promoted to coach for the major league Yankees team in 1990 and then to manager of the MLB squad two years later without any reference at all to the results that accrued while he managed low A, A, and AA ball–and he would have gotten the job just as fast and just as readily had his teams racked up the obverse of his results, finishing in those five seasons at .295, .234, .384, 485, and .343?

            Since team results are the aggregate of individual performances, your claim is no different than a claim that “it doesn’t matter if pitchers get outs, or hitters get hits; what matter is whether players develop,” whatever development could possibly mean if it doesn’t involve hits and outs at the most fundamental level.

            Is your idea also that we could look at the guys who managed in the minors who were given MLB managing gigs and we’d find that their team’s results had zero influence on whether they got those MLB gigs, and had no influence at all on their MLB success?

            Color me skeptical.

            “Overall, this is a person as prepared to be a manager as there is. ”

            —-So… major league managing is an irrelevant resume line. Actually having previously done the thing you’re being hired to do is meaningless when it comes to being hired to managed at the major league level?

            Color me infinitely skeptical.

          3. metsdaddy says:

            Buck Showalter’s record in the minors was not the reason he was made manager. It was his ability to develop players.

            And really, minor league records are irrelevant. Take the 2019 Syracuse Mets as an example. They had a good record not so much because DeFrancesco was a good manager, but rather, because it was a Four-A lineup in a Triple-A league.

    3. LongTimeFan1 says:

      I really don’t get your point about who is or isn’t the better athlete at the time each took over in their 30’s.

      Any manager in their 30’s and 40’s, or even 50’s should be in fine shape and able to partake in drills and throw batting practice effectively.

      For your FYI, just yesterday Syndergaard said Rojas is ripped and sets great example. Ripped.

      We don’t know why he only played a few seasons in the minors.and Dominican combined. And that included missing 2002 after playing in 2001, and then 2003 and 2004, retiring from playing after 22 season. I doubt it had anything to do with lack of athleticism at 6’0″ 180.

  8. Blair M. Schirmer says:

    Because I’m not an optimist by nature:

    The Mets won 86 and added Michael Wacha, Rick Porcello, Jake Marisnick, and Dellin Betances.

    The Braves? They won 97 and added Will Smith, Cole Hamels, Travis D’Arnaud, Will Harris, Chris Martin, Adeiny Hechavarria, Darren O’Day,* Nick Markakis, and Marcell Ozuna.

    *career ERA+: 168, 2nd all-time if he had enough ip.

    1. LongtimeFan1 says:

      If I’m not mistaken, Mets had the best second half in the NL East and showed unrelenting heart and resiliency after a disappointing first half.

      This Mets team is very good and I think deeper now than when season ended.

      Both the Braves and Nats lost key offensive players – top third basemen – Donaldson and Rendon.

      We have a hungry, strong core who came close to the playoffs and are determined to get there.

      1. metsdaddy says:

        I think this Mets team is not as good as the one which ended the 2019 season, but I still think it could compete even if I think they’re the fourth best team in the division.

        1. LongTimeFan1 says:

          The only consequential subtraction was Wheeler, but I think the depth and hunger in Porcello (born and bred as Mets fan) and Wacha, plus upgrades from Betances, Marisnick, and hopefully healthy return of two proven players in Cespedes and Lowrie, essentially replacing Frazier, make us stronger.

          Then replacing Callaway with Beltran/Rojas, Riggleman with Meulens, adding the very, very smart Hefner while retaining Regan in the organization as he has for years and will be there in Spring Training, – these are all meaningful steps forward.

          1. metsdaddy says:

            Going from Wheeler to Porcello is a huge downgrade, and Wacha isn’t all that good.

            I like Betances if he’s healthy, and Marisnick is just another Lagares, except now, he’s not getting the signs.

            I think the only place this team is better is manager and bench coach. Let’s hope that’s enough.

      2. Blair M. Schirmer says:

        @LongTimeFan1 – I’d like to agree, since I’d much rather root for a 92 win Mets team than an 84 win team, but that’s the very definition of cherry picking. To make that argument successfully, you have to be able to say why the second half was more credible and representative of the talent on hand than the first half, and why we should project the 2020 Mets based on the 2nd half of the 2019 season rather than the 1st half–particularly in the face of the unfortunate truth that basing a team’s projection on its *entire* season is historically what returns the most accurate results.

        But there’s no basis beyond preference for going by the 2nd half rather than the 1st half, or to go by the 2nd half rather than the entire season. This wasn’t a young team that figured out how to play in MLB and took off in July, or a team missing good, injured players who came back after the all-star break. It was a team a little older than the average who got about as lucky in the 2nd half as it got unlucky in the 1st half.

        Look at the performance, overall. Player by player this was a team that did a little better than they projected to do, got a little luckier than we could have expected, and even then they only won 86 and were never a strong bet to make the postseason.

        If there’s credible information showing veteran teams that stepped it up without any major additions in the second half then carried their 2nd half performance into the following season, I’d like to hear it, since as I said that’s the Mets team I’d like to root for in 2020–but as far as I know that information doesn’t exist because that’s not what happens. Veteran teams are projectable based on entire seasons, not half seasons.

  9. LongTimeFan1 says:

    I’ve been diehard Mets fan for 50 years and have no problem with the promotion of Rojas as manager.

    His background, history, intellect, passion, communicative abilities, old school/new school combo, plus broad support from the players, front office an other inside and outside the Mets, givesme confidence he’ll do the job well. I don’t think a retread such as Buck or Baker is necessary.

    Furthermore, Rojas has massive endorsement from Bruce Bochy who knows him since he was a kid. And Bochy’s right hand man with Giants,, Hensley Meulens, will be alongside Rojas collaborating.. I was skeptical about Rojas until I did further research to learn more about him and what those who know him say.

    1. metsdaddy says:

      As I said elsewhere, just look at who is saying what about Rojas.

      Baseball people LOVE this hire

      1. LongTimeFan1 says:

        A lot of them indeed do. He’s no ordinary 38 year old minor league manager. His pedigree since he was a kid, is off the charts. Felipe, Jesus, Matty, Moises.

        I’ve seen all of them play the game really well. Rojas was born into this family and learned from them since he was a child.

        He then incorporated those lessons into his coaching and managing while also becoming highly adept at sabermetrics.

        He has history with most, if not all our homegrowns. He’s nurtured them as players and people and then re-united with them last year in the majors.

        Furthermore, he’s now the Mets new manager and we all ought to rally behind him, welcome him into the helm and support him as he works his butt off to help bring home a championship.

  10. LongTimeFan1 says:

    I have lots of confidence in both Wacha and Porcello. Both still young, both having had some fine seasons which includes Cy Young, all star games and postseason.

    Marisnick is better defensive player than Lagares, is faster, healthier, is still in his 20’s, was a Top 100 prospect. Still has upside.

    Did he sign steal on offense, or benefit? I don’t know, but even assuming so with improved power in 2017, none of that helped his biggest problem – high K’s. That’s where he needs to improve. If Mets help him do so, he’ll be on base more with his fine abilty to steal bases with the same foot speed as Rosario per Statcast.

    1. metsdaddy says:

      Personally, I think Porcello has a nice bounceback year, but I don’t see him as good as Wheeler.

      I have less than zero expectations for Wacha, but I hope you’re right about him.

  11. Oldbackstop says:

    Blair put it best above….the attributes being cited to support Rojas are PR platitudes. All the same ethereal qualities were slathered on Beltran…a leader of men, unbelievable communicator, unprecedented baseball mind, was made for the job. Only Beltran had the resume of success at the major league level, and would demand respect in a jock atmosphere.

    Rojas? His minor league record was mediocre, his last team finished fifth. If his special skill is developing players, then leave him in the minors, a major league manager does not and should not have the time to “develop players.”

    What happens the first time Cano or Cespedes doesn’t run out a ball. Does Rojas get in his face the way Beltran or Showalter would?

    I am not saying Rojas won’t succeed, and as a Mets fan I’ll be pulling for him. But hiring a young rookie manager for a win now team is a risk that BVW didn’t need to take. If it doesn’t work out he should be canned.

    1. metsdaddy says:

      I’ll just note everyone in baseball thinks this was a great hire. From the players to people like Keith Law and Dan Szymborski, they speak to how this is exactly the guy the Mets should’ve hired in the first place.

      The only people questioning or denouncing it are you, Chris Carlin, and Michael Kay.

  12. Oldbackstop says:

    **I’ll just note everyone in baseball thinks this was a great hire.**

    I’ll just note you can barely get a sentence out without face planting. Employees and players have no upside to criticizing the hiring of Rojas or anyone else. Do you expect Dom Smith or Micael Wacha or Thomas Nido to go “WTF? Are we trying to win???”

    I suspect the people “in baseball” in Atlanta, Philadelphia, Washington and Miami especially thought this was a great hire.

    Citing what the majority thinks should not sway a thoughtful adult. Someone making the statement that “everyone in baseball” thinks something is great is just parading his proclivities at being an ignorant ass. The vast majority of people in baseball had the same reaction” who is he?”

    What not a single person in baseball THOUGHT was ” Wow, the Mets just made themselves a stronger team in 2020.”

    You have to realize that in any case like this the re e is a circle of people impacted: players, coaches, team employees, who are directly impacted by this in a career sense. To speak against it…or Beltran, or BVW, would be career suicide. To speak for it would be being “a team player.”

    It is painfully clear MD, that you don’t unders tree and business. What this Mets team needed was a leader to stand up to the chaos of the Wilpons. Here is a good article on it by Jerry Beach at Sportsmoney at Forbes Magazine:–jeff-wilpon-do/

    1. metsdaddy says:

      I didn’t cite the majority. I cited baseball people and smart ones at that.

      1. Oldbackstop says:

        No, you didn’t vote the majority, you said “*I’ll just note everyone in baseball thinks this was a great hire.*

        Which is, given that Internet Debating 101 says don’t make all inclusive negative assertions, an idiotic rookie mistake. I think that cartoon in you header is you batting.

        1. metsdaddy says:

          You’re like the kid with the broken leg on gym class. You can’t keep up, and you’re angry at the world.

  13. Oldbackstop says:

    A good balanced article by Harper that sums it up. Rojas was a vote for continuity, not an effort to restore credibility. His ability to discipline or confront veterans on the team is concerning. With a meddling front office a strong baseball leader like Girardi or Showalter was called for, but not surprisingly, the ownership enjoys playing fantasy baseball, and Rojas won’t knock their game board over:

    1. metsdaddy says:

      Saying Harper had a good balanced article is nonsense because he’s been pushing a narrative for a while now, and he’s been highly critical of Rojas.

      In fact, Harper is exactly the sort of ill informed person criticizing the hire I previously referenced.

      1. Oldbackstop says:

        “Pushing a narrative”….lol….such a snowflake term. It should be the name of your blog

        1. metsdaddy says:

          Your entire trolling is just that Steve Buschemi gif where he says “Hey, fellow kids”

          1. Oldbackstop says:

            I don’t understand your weird snowflake jargon. Maybe you are a sports columnist “pushing a narrative”….rofl. What a damning accusation!

          2. metsdaddy says:


  14. LongTimeFan1 says:

    According to Mets press release, Rojas played minor league ball from 1999-2005 for Orioles, Expos and Marlins. Baseball-Reference lists 2001-2004.

    According to what I read in the NY Post,, he retired early as a player at 23, due to injuries.

    Rojas was also quoted as saying he grew up loving the managerial side and wanting to be part of that more than playing.

    For those who don’t know, Luis Rojas managed in winter ball and according to Felipe Alou, is tough job and he always won.

    The Rays apparently viewed him as rising star and wanted to hire him last offseason for major league coach so Mets promoted him to the majors as both outfield and Quality Control coach.. If I’m not mistaken, wasn’t the very well-regarded Chaim Bloom the Rays GM at the time?

    1. metsdaddy says:

      He was.

  15. Oldbackstop says:

    Once again, pushing your trolling narrative. Sad!!!

    1. metsdaddy says:

      You need better material

  16. LongTimeFan1 says:

    According to Mets press release, Rojas played minor league ball from 1999-2005 for Orioles, Expos and Marlins. Baseball-Reference lists 2001-2004.

    According to what I read in the NY Post,, he retired early as a player at 23, due to injuries.

    Rojas was also quoted as saying he grew up loving the managerial side and wanting to be part of that more than playing.

    For those who don’t know, Luis Rojas managed in winter ball and according to Felipe Alou, is tough job and he always won.

    The Rays apparently viewed him as rising star and wanted to hire him last offseason for major league coach so Mets promoted him to the majors as both outfield and Quality Control coach.. If I’m not mistaken, wasn’t the very well-regarded Chaim Bloom the Rays GM at that time?

    1. LongTimeFan1 says:

      To Blair M. Schirmer,

      In response your 1/23/20 post at 11:22 pm.

      Of course second halves matter. Finishing strong carries into the next season, and the in-season break between the halves is a form of renewal. The 2019 team showed incredible resiliency when some teams would have folded after a rather disappointing first half. There’s indeed a reason why statistical splits include first and second half performance for both player and team and is referenced many times by fans, players, teams, media, statistical analysts, player agents.

      The Mets still relatively young core of position players discovered how good they can be together and that a poor first half is no reason to fold up the tent. Players grew and matured together. Conforto grew as a quite leader and Alonso cemented himself as the go-to guy, looking like future Mets captain should he be bestowed that honor down the road.

      As for concrete second half events, Mets essentially replaced the blah Vargas with the energetic, dynamic, big competitor, locally born Stroman who finished strong after initial struggle as Met.

      Robinson Cano had a bounce back second half after an outlier first half.

      Brandon Nimmo returned healthy and was his old self.

      We obtained Brad Brach who was solid pen addition and bleeds orange and blue growing up Mets fan.

      Zach Wheeler pulled off his second consecutive strong second half netting a huge contract. He’s obviously not returning to us, but I’m happy with the 2-pitcher depth we’ve added in Porcello and Wacha for rotation options.

      Porcello also bleeds orange and biue having grown up Mets fan.

      Degrom’s second half propelled him to his second consecutive Cy Young and he’s hungry for a third and a ring.

      Amed Rosario had an eye opening second half, definitive progress in his development on both sides of ball.

      JD Davis proved he’s a quality, bona fide big league hitter even when teams adjusted to him.

      I don’t view 86 wins as “just” 86 wins. That’s 10 games over .500 after two consecutive losing seasons and in first season of the Brodie regime. They fell several games short of wild card but now these players return excited to get things going and play both halves well. They recognize that just a few games at any point in the season can be difference between playoffs and going home. Now they take these important lessons into spring training, and the 2020 season.

      Moreover, they now have a 3-time World Series champion bench coach, a new manager they love who helped shape them as players and men in the minors, a very bright young pitching coach with new age teaching, and a full spring training with the respected Phil Regan.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *