Billy Wagner Possibly Out For The Season

With the ragged performances of the Mets bullpen in Billy Wagner's absence, I don't expect to hear the "experts" in the media----specifically on WFAN where Wagner is reviled

because he's not Mariano Rivera----saying much of anything now that it's quickly being learned what life is like without any closer at all. Now that the pain in Wagner's forearm has moved to his elbow, where there's swelling and a question as to whether he's going to be able to return at all this year, the Mets have to do something. They have several options, none of which are very appetizing. Here they are:

• Hope that Brian Fuentes gets to them when the Rockies put him on waivers and make a deal:
  

Fuentes isn't great, but he's adequate and experienced; as the season winds down, the

Rockies fall out of contention and see that they're better off getting a more advanced prospect or two rather than the compensation draft picks they'll get when Fuentes leaves as a free agent, GM Dan O'Dowd will deal him. Number one, Omar Minaya isn't going to panic and give up a top tier prospect for a closer who may not be that much better than what the Mets have in their bullpen now; number two, it's hard to believe that any of the teams that will have to let Fuentes pass them by on waivers will risk allowing him to get to the Mets. The go-for-broke Phillies would claim Fuentes and give up far more than the Mets will be willing to, so it's unlikely that the Mets are even going to get the chance.

• Explore other options and outside the box acquisitions:

The Orioles have no reason to trade George Sherrill unless someone knocks them over with an offer, plus Sherrill hasn't been that great lately anyway. People are convinced that

there's something wrong with Huston Street and A's baseball czar Billy Beane doesn't deal players when their value is low unless he has no choice like with the oft-injured Rich Harden. The Mets supposedly inquired with the Mariners about J.J. Putz at the trading deadline and it was said that the Mariners were asking for the stars, sun and moon. If they're unwilling to trade Jarrod Washburn for Boof Bonser with Washburn's

contract, then forget about getting Putz.
Outside the box options could include Rafael Betancourt (who's been awful lately); or Trevor Hoffman, who'd probably be unwilling to end his career away from San Diego without some cajoling, and hasn't been very good either, but might be reinvigorated by a move to a new team in the big city with a shot at a ring; at least he's experienced and would probably get through to the Mets on waivers. New York fans would go into a frenzy at the tolling of the bell in the beginning of AC/DC's Hell's Bells signaling Hoffman's arrival.

• Use someone on their current roster:

There was a caller on the soon-to-be-renamed Mike and the Mad Dog radio show on WFAN

in which the caller suggested to host Mike Francesa that John Maine be moved into the role. Maine hasn't been able to get too far past five innings all season long, shoulder pain or not, so it's not all that bad an idea. Had Maine not been recently disabled with shoulder pain, the Mets might think about this more seriously and it would be worth a try, but that transition isn't easy to make for a healthy pitcher late in the season and there's no reason to risk Maine's longterm future out of desperation in a move that would be a tossup.
As for their other starters, Oliver Perez can't be trusted to throw strikes; and Mike Pelfrey

has been too good in the rotation. Here's an interesting thought: could Pedro Martinez do it? He wouldn't be bothered by the pressure; the adrenaline would light up his fastball; and he might get a kick out of it. Would he be healthy to do it three times in a week? They could ask him and it's not something to dismiss out of hand.
They could continue down the road they're on with the mixing and matching of using Aaron Heilman, Pedro Feliciano, et, al. Duaner Sanchez would've been the logical choice at mid-season, but he's not 100% (or even 90%) either. The Mets don't have to worry about the division getting too far away from them because the Phillies haven't been playing well and as I've stated a couple of times, there's something wrong with that team; and the Marlins are going to fade down the stretch.
None of these options are particularly enticing or realistic, but the Mets are in this situation and they have to figure something out because it doesn't look like they're going to have their closer, the former talk show target and prime example of observers not appreciating what they have until it's gone, Billy Wagner.

Tony Bernazard---The Epitome Of Evil Among Baseball Executives

• Tony Bernazard, Tony Bernazard, Tony Bernazard and, lest we forget, Tony Bernazard:

I hadn't realized that Tony Bernazard was such a powerful and evil force among the Mets hierarchy that he's the behind the scenes puppetmaster who's orchestrated every move the

Mets have made over the past four years and that he and he alone is the mastermind behind Willie Randolph's demise.
I have no way of knowing what's true and what isn't in regards to Bernazard, but it does seem that he's becoming the fall guy for whatever went wrong between Randolph and the Mets; that being said, for all those that have been relentlessly ripping the Mets for the way

they fired Randolph, it's in the same ballpark when these anonymous quotes are popping up from people whispering in the ears of dubious messengers saying that Bernazard is a "bad" guy. When there are guys like Chris "The Biggest Idiot In The World" Russo going off on tangents saying that the Mets should "get Bernazard outta here" without knowing exactly what Bernazard did or didn't do, it's more of a search for a fall guy in the Randolph firing other than Randolph himself.
You can say whatever you want about Mets GM Omar Minaya and owners Fred and Jeff Wilpon, but one thing you cannot say is that they're stupid. Minaya may be taking advice from Bernazard, but if Bernazard had so much power in the organization and hated Randolph that much, then Randolph might have been gone after the 2006 NLCS. Now we hear that because of Bernazard's former top tier position with the players union, the Mets would never

bring in a player who'd crossed the picket line thirteen years ago, which leaves Kevin Millar (pretty much exactly the type of player the Mets could use) as a non-option. I would hope that Minaya isn't so easily manipulated that he's going to let such a forgotten thing as that to prevent him from bringing in a player the Mets need. It was so long ago and just about every team has forgiven and forgotten the players who crossed the line that it's absurd to think that a guy like Millar would be excluded out of hand based on the say-so of the assistant GM.
It's easy to play the game of telephone and repeat rumors about Bernazard's supposed

power in the organization, but Minaya isn't going to let his assistant tell him what to do when it's his job and reputation on the line. The easiest thing in the world for a reporter to do is to say, "I heard " from an anonymous source and not be required to back it up with facts because they have their own agendas like a latter day Deep Throat without benefit of verifiable truths.
This reminds me of when the New York Giants had hired a new veteran defensive coach named Rod Rust and Rust used a system called "read and react" which some reporters decided they didn't like. All of a sudden there were numerous phone calls to sports talk radio ripping the "read and react" system which the vast majority of them couldn't distinguish from any other system that defensive coaches use; but Rust became the villain in the Giants fall and was eventually replaced.
Rumors are rumors and word of mouth is word of mouth, but there doesn't seem to be any concrete facts with Bernazard either having the power to do what he's said to have done or that he and he alone is responsible for Willie Randolph's failures. Randolph was notoriously thin-skinned as a player, coach and manager and it may be that he was overly sensitive to a perceived interloper in his clubhouse and if that's the case, he should have taken a stronger stand against Bernazard hanging around and making him feel uncomfortable. Even if Bernazard did everything he's alleged to have done, it's partly Randolph's fault for not taking care of it so it wouldn't be an issue.

• J.P. Ricciardi----the gift that keeps on giving:

J.P Ricciardi apologized for his radio show roasting of Reds outfielder Adam Dunn----ESPN Story----but this appears to be a longstanding modus operandi of Ricciardi. He rips a player reacting in uncontrolled and unfiltered anger, contritely apologizes and goes back to business until he does it again. Buster Olney said on Baseball Tonight that Ricciardi

called Reds GM Walt Jocketty, apologized, and was trying to get in touch with Dunn to do the same.
Whether Dunn accepts that apology is up to him, but another interesting thing that Olney brought up is that there's a similar feeling around the Blue Jays as there was around the Mets in Willie Randolph's last days and that Blue Jays manager John Gibbons is close to being fired. Just so I understand, Ricciardi, whose term as Blue Jays GM has been mediocre at best, is going to be allowed to fire his third manager during his tenure? I have to openly wonder: How is Ricciardi still there? Does he have an unlimited amount of time to continually bring in another manager; then another manager; then another manager? Eduardo Perez (who is very good on the show by

the way) said that he thinks Cito Gaston will replace Gibbons if he's fired. Gaston has been unfairly deprived of another chance to manage after winning two World Series with the Blue Jays, but unless he's a miracle worker and gets the team to the playoffs, how likely is it that he's going to keep the job after the season if Ricciardi is finally let go?
The Blue Jays problems are not the fault of the manager. Gibbons is a fiery, solid X and O guy who should receive another chance to manage in a more stable situation. Does Ricciardi deserve another chance to change managers and deflect blame from himself? He's had almost seven years on the job and the team has never had more than 87 wins or been closer than nine games from a playoff spot at season's end. He's bluntly honest in his unguarded moments and extremely impressed with himself; perhaps Ricciardi would be better served to choose between his twin vocations of radio talk show host and GM and pick the one he's better at. It doesn't take a genius to figure out which of the two that is.

Conspiracy Theories And The Rapid Rash Of Firings

• Randolph's conspiracy theories (relayed through other parties):

The New York Post is implying, through quotations of anonymous Willie Randolph "friends" (take that for what it's worth) that the former Mets manager feels betrayed by new manager

Jerry Manuel and thinks that he may have been stabbed in the back by an ambitious subordinate----NY Post Story. If this is accurate, then Randolph is grasping at straws to find some reason why he was let go other than the reality of a team that was underperforming for him and hadn't played well and with life since early last season.
Any bench coach or "manager in waiting" is in a no-win situation while the entire episode is unfolding. Few and far between are the bench coaches who have little or no interest in becoming managers, so the current manager has to know that his trusted assistant would probably like nothing better than to have his job if the situation calls for it. Yesterday, I mentioned two recent situations where the bench coach may have undermined his manager to get the top spot; with Manuel, I didn't suspect similar machinations and I still don't. What was Manuel supposed to do? Was he supposed to ignore the front office personnel that wanted to talk to him because he didn't want to upset Randolph? Technically, since the front office personnel were above Randolph, they too were Manuel's bosses, so he had no choice but to respond to them when appropriate.
Randolph knew that there were front office personnel that wanted him out and had become paranoid (with good reason apparently), but to all of a sudden have "friends" implying that Randolph now feels betrayed by a bench coach with whom he'd become close and had counseled him during the turmoil strikes me as the Post either making things up or Randolph trying to find ways to deflect the blame away from himself for his dismissal.
It doesn't matter who the manager is and how close he is to a present of former employee

who's been mentioned as a possible successor, there has to be tension once the criticism becomes more pronounced, a firing is imminent and the replacement is seen to be skulking around and waiting for the job. Joe Torre was about as successful as a manager could be with the Yankees and had Joe Girardi as his bench coach before Girardi left to manage the Marlins, but Torre had to know when Girardi turned down several opportunities after the Marlins fired him and instead chose to work for the YES network, that his former catcher and coach had an eye on his job. Torre's bench coach from last season, Don Mattingly, doesn't have an undermining bone in his body, but Girardi seemed to be waiting for the opportunity that he eventually received. Friendship doesn't matter; loyalty doesn't matter and what actually happened doesn't matter; it's the perception that counts and if Randolph wants to see Manuel as a power hungry usurper who took his job through scheming, there's no way to dissuade him even if it's just a conspiracy theory to protect himself from the truth----he deserved to get fired.

• Mariners fire John McLaren:

This was somewhat inevitable once Bill Bavasi was fired even if it's just for cosmetic effect. McLaren may get another shot somewhere eventually (although he waited a really long time for this chance and may not have the stomach for another long delay), but it's hard to blame

him for this disaster. That being said, the Mariners have been unlucky and terrible in just about every phase of the game and that generally is a reflection on the manager.
Rob Neyer wonders if McLaren "could have fought harder for the young players he managed, particularly Adam Jones and Jeff Clement", but I don't think that McLaren would've been given such a strong voice in the construction of the team in his first full season on the job. Given Les Miserables Erik Bedard's injury-history and misanthropic behavior throughout his career, it was silly to think he was going to show up and suddenly become a legitimate number two starter and expected savior. The centerpiece of the deal for the Orioles, Adam Jones, hasn't been exactly lighting the world on fire in his chance to play, so it's hard to rip the deal as a total nightmare yet. With the fire both McLaren and Bavasi were under early in the season, they really couldn't afford to wait out Clement's struggles and try to win simultaneously.
McLaren may go down as a better coach than manager and, even though this wasn't exactly a fair chance for him, the results are what they are. The players didn't seem to be listening to him and installing Jim Riggleman makes sense to give the appearance of doing

something even if it's too late to do much of anything useful but clear out the house of some veterans and retool the organization.
One thing about Riggleman that needs to be watched is that he tends to batter his pitchers. While Dusty Baker has the Kerry Wood/injury problems laid at his feet, it was Riggleman who overused Wood as a rookie with some ridiculously high pitch counts----Wood 1998 Gamelogs. The argument that the Cubs were in a pennant race and were trying to win as many games as possible is the same argument that Baker can give for his usage of Wood and Mark Prior in 2003. The 1998 Cubs made the playoffs, but Wood missed the entire 1999 season with Tommy John surgery. Felix Hernandez is a valuable commodity who needs to be kept on a reasonable pitch count under Riggleman and if they're going to trade Bedard, they'd better keep him healthy and on the mound. They're out of the race, so going crazy with their pitchers makes no sense.

• J.P. Ricciardi's flapping mouth:

There are guys who should be baseball executives; there are guys who should have their

own radio shows; there are rarely guys who can effectively combine both. Say this for Blue Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi----he's entertaining. Now he's gotten into a war of words with Cincinnati Reds left fielder Adam Dunn. After receiving calls on his radio show from fans

advocating the Blue Jays acquisition of the power hitting left fielder, Ricciardi unloaded on the player----Story----with some unkind comments. As much as I hate to say it, Ricciardi might be well-suited to taking some lessons from Brian Cashman on saying a load of stuff while saying nothing at all. As annoying as it is, it seems to keep Cashman out of the same trouble that Ricciardi's free mouth uses to get himself into such verbal scrapes.
Never mind the inappropriate nature of a current GM unloading on a player in such a way, Ricciardi makes it worse by unloading on a player who isn't even on his team! It never ends in Toronto; Ricciardi's players fight with his manager (Ted Lilly and Shea Hillenbrand with John Gibbons); he accuses players of malingering and milking injuries (A.J. Burnett); he gets into

verbal confrontations with players and releases them in fits of anger knowing their penchant for getting off to slow starts and because they have contract options----that Ricciardi negotiated----which kick in with a certain number of at bats are reached (Frank Thomas); and his team has never, ever been a legitimate contender despite his brazen proclamations upon getting the job in 2001.
Again, amid high expectations, the Blue Jays are floundering at 35-39 and Ricciardi's job has to be in jeopardy with all the bluster, controversies and failures on and off the field. One thing about him though, he's not going to go out gracefully and if anyone's going to leave in a blaze of glory, it's Ricciardi.

An Objective Look At Willie Randolph's Tenure

• Randolph's Mets managerial epitaph:

When Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones fired coach Jimmy Johnson after winning two consecutive Super Bowls in 1993 and 1994, it was following a blowup between the two at an NFL function

after which Jones had a few drinks and asserted that any number of coaches could have won with the Cowboys' talent and that Johnson's contribution was just that----a contribution amongst a large number of people. There had been tension between Johnson and Jones for years as they rebuilt the Cowboys, much of it centering on who would receive the bulk of the credit; these things happen with two big personalities with even bigger egos, but the idea was that Jones was diminishing Johnson's accomplishment by saying that his part in the resurrection of the franchise wasn't as important as others thought it was. Jones may have been overstating the situation by saying that 500 coaches could have won with that Cowboys team, but the overall idea that many different coaches or managers can achieve similar successes with the same teams is not unreasonable; it's something to truly consider carefully. This begs the question: how much credit should Willie Randolph receive for the rise of the Mets from when he arrived and was his contribution any greater (or less) than it would've been under a different manager?
When GM Omar Minaya was hired late in the 2004 season, the Mets were an utter disaster and laughingstock around the major leagues. They played listlessly; there was infighting and no one seemed to know who was in charge. In New York, they were borderline irrelevant as fans became numb to the constant turmoil. Manager Art Howe was fired as

Minaya rightfully wanted to turn the page completely from the previous regime(s) and start fresh with a manager of his choosing. That manager was Willie Randolph. What was strange though, was how Minaya was able to convince the ownership, Fred and Jeff Wilpon, to open the Mets vault to spend some money on free agents while dispatching the aging and overly influential veterans Al Leiter and John Franco. I've always been curious as to Howe's private reaction to the news that the Mets had spent so lavishly to

sign Pedro Martinez and Carlos Beltran while he was forced to play Jason Phillips at first base and usher in the youngsters Jose Reyes and David Wright as they learned to play in the big leagues.
Randolph was walking into a pretty good situation. A honeymoon for a lifelong winner; a popular New Yorker who, despite his Yankees roots, grew up as a Mets fan in Brooklyn. There were few expectations even with the high-priced free agents and anything the team did positively after the previous few years was going to make the manager a hero. The Mets and Randolph endured their growing pains in 2005 because of the new manager's inexperience and the lack of overall talent on the team, but ended a respectable 83-79 and were once again a force on and off the field because Pedro gave them an identity and it was now known that they were willing to spend money to try and win. But was that 83-79 really that great an accomplishment?
The last team under Howe in 2004 went 71-91; are you going to seriously tell me that the Mets roster in 2005 in comparison to that in 2004 wasn't worth an extra 12 wins? Would

Howe not have benefited from the maturing Reyes and Wright and the presence of Martinez and Beltran? Along with the dispatching of the interfering busybodies in Leiter and Franco? This is not to imply that Minaya shouldn't have brought in the manager that he wanted or that the discipline and seriousness that Randolph instilled didn't contribute to the Mets improvement, but based on talent alone, Howe likely would have replicated Randolph's 2005 success.
In 2006, the Mets ran away with the NL East and lost in the NLCS to the Cardinals. That roster was power packed with the newly acquired and still slugging Carlos Delgado; along with a near MVP year from Beltran and the emerging stars Wright and Reyes, the Mets were the consensus pick to go the World Series. With all of the talent on that roster, shouldn't they have been expected to make it as far as they did and possibly further than they did? Wasn't part of the reason that the Cardinals beat the Mets that year due to the strategic wizardry of Cardinals manager Tony La Russa?
In 2007, as Delgado began to lose bat speed; injuries robbed the Mets of Pedro and the overuse of the bullpen wore them down late in the season, one has to wonder whether another manager who was more prudent in the use of his relievers and able to adjust his message on

the fly while deflecting the negative aspects of managing in New York would've been able to steer the team through the struggles and prevent the collapse. In 2008 until Randolph was let go, there was an aura of resignation around the team. With the veterans continuing their downslide, the organization still in denial about what happened in 2007; and the cloud of malaise around the players; along with the repeated questions about the manager's job status, the result was probably never in doubt. A move had to be made and while it probably wasn't done quickly or cleanly enough for the tastes of the fainthearted, it was necessary.
There have been teams that have won with lesser talent because of their manager or coach. Billy Martin was a master at maximizing his players abilities in the short-term; in

hockey, Mike Keenan will turn a team around quickly simply because of the system he implements and his discipline; in football, Bill Parcells will pretty much guarantee a competitive team within three years of his arrival. La Russa is so brilliant that he can squeeze at least ten more wins out of his teams than would be realistically expected; but how many managers and coaches can say that? How many simply achieve what the talents of their players can achieve and occasionally less? It works the opposite way as well; the Diamondbacks under Bob Brenly could just as easily have reached the same heights with a scarecrow strategically placed in the corner of the dugout. The talent usually dictates what the team will accomplish unless they have a Hall of Famer running things. The people mentioned above are Hall of Famers; Art Howe isn't a Hall of Famer as a manager, but then neither is Willie Randolph.

• J.D. Drew is playing like an MVP:

Stunningly, the player to pick up the slack for the Red Sox after the loss of David Ortiz hasn't been Manny Ramirez, but has been J.D. Drew. Drew, at the unlikely age of 32, is staying healthy and killing the ball to the point that he's a legitimate MVP threat. Of course, there's always the possibility (or likelihood) of the oft-injured Drew winding up on the disabled

list at any given moment for some shocking injury to a bone or muscle that even most doctors didn't know the human body had, but for right now he's been playing great. He's getting on base; hitting homers and playing great defense. Most of all he's stayed healthy and made the loss of Ortiz seem like nothing more than a small bump for the team, and he's expected back sooner rather than later.
Drew's had spurts like this before and then something has invariably happened to halt his progress, but he's earning his money and doing his job. After last year's sub par year and amid all the smirking "I told you so's" doled out to Theo Epstein and Larry Lucchino, they're getting far more than what they paid for in Drew this year. I'd hesitate to think he's going to keep it up, but if he does nothing more than get them from before Ortiz got hurt until after Ortiz returns and still have the team in first place, that, coupled with his grand slam in the ALCS last year, will give the Red Sox hierarchy cause to say that Drew was worth the money and the ridicule no matter what happens from now on.

• Barry Zito rumored to contact Rick Peterson:

There's a story circulating that soon after Rick Peterson was fired by the Mets, Barry Zito contacted his mentor to help him rediscover whatever he's lost on the way to a 2-11 record this year and a contract that is looking more and more like money flushed down the toilet. Giants pitching coach Dave Righetti was said to be unhappy with the idea that Zito go to another pitching coach, but he needs to see the big picture; the Giants have so much money invested in Zito that if Righetti can't straighten him out, then they're going to find someone who can and that someone may be Peterson. Instead of getting angry and becoming territorial, Righetti should probably accept that Zito may need to talk to someone else; someone he knows and is comfortable with if for no other reason than to keep his job and not be replaced by Peterson completely.