He does what Joe Torre used to do when his veteran players slumped. He tells them he believes in them and will stick by them until they come out of it.

But in the case of these particular Mets, it doesn't work. These Mets get too comfortable. They can keep mailing it in at no threat to themselves or their lifestyle. You went 0-for-5 again, Carlos? No problem. You'll be back in there tomorrow, have no fear. We'll never embarrass you.

By now -- after the playoff flop of 2006, the historic meltdown of '07 and the sleepy start to '08 -- Randolph should understand this, and he should be doing something about it. He is not.

What all criticisms of Randolph have in common is that they’re all based in intangibles; the unprovable. There are no laundry lists of poor in-game decisions, or specific examples of handling his players poorly; only unspecific claims that cannot be backed up with factual evidence.

Managing a baseball team is a very unrewarding job, despite the cushy financial compensation. It’s the players’ doing when the team is winning, but the manager’s fault when the team is losing.

Where is the blame for Aaron Heilman, who allowed two runs in three straight appearances on April 6, 8, and 10? Why is no one blaming the Injury Gods because the Mets had a third-string catcher start 12 games this season due to both Ramon Castro and Brian Schneider being injured? Isn’t Carlos Delgado’s lack of patriotism responsible for his gradual loss of power since 2005?

If the journalists and Mets fans who have been calling for Randolph to be fired are really interested in having an honest and rational discussion, then they either need to present some tangible evidence of Randolph’s shortcomings, or they need to assign most of the blame to the players. Yes, those same players that the Mets’ front office is paying nearly $140 million this season.

And maybe if Carlos Beltran really can’t motivate himself to perform well because he has job security, then that’s his fault, not Randolph’s. There are plenty of other players in Major League Baseball with comparable job security and they aren’t apathetic. Or if the Mets really aren’t “fiery” enough because they don’t get verbally lashed, well, that’s the players’ fault. Just look at the Phillies – currently managed by the laid-back Charlie Manuel and formerly managed by the complete opposite Larry Bowa – for an example of why tongue-lashings aren’t always necessary.

The Mets haven’t been performing well because they’ve had a rash of injuries (and that does happen to other teams, even the Phillies who ripped the rug from under the Mets last season had more injuries to deal with). Oliver Perez is once again underperforming (Rick Peterson’s fault!), Jose Reyes has thus far been unable to find the power stroke he possessed in 2006, Carlos Delgado is on the downward trend of his career which explains some of his loss of power, and they’re relying on Nelson Figueroa to round out the back of the rotation.

Can’t it be that the Mets simply are not living up to expectations? They are not the NL powerhouse everyone thought they’d be; they do not have an All-Star at every position. Currently, with their +9 run differential, their real 17-15 record is exactly in line with their 17-15 Pythagorean record. Firing Randolph would be letting all of the underachievers on the team off the hook, and isn’t that what this is really all about – the Mets’ players underachieving? David Wright agrees:

There is another side to Randolph, I’ve seen him throw chairs. I’ve seen him flip tables. I’ve seen him kick people in the butt, The motivation is there, now it’s completely up to us as players to go out there and do our jobs and to get it done.

How can it be that this same manager was practically beloved in 2006? I’m not kidding, just read what Joel Sherman of the New York Post had to say about him circa September ’06:

Willie Randolph should not be penalized for having a runaway success. He should be honored for it. There were a lot of years around here where the Mets thought they had the formula to unseat the Braves and win the NL East. Randolph's team did it, not just by raising the payroll, but also because Randolph raised the expectation level. If adding famous names and hefty contracts were all that mattered, the Mets would have had a division title with Roberto Alomar and Mo Vaughn on the roster. They didn't then. They do now.

“What Willie is is a winner and he facilitates a winning attitude,” pitching coach Rick Peterson said.

This is the most important task for a manager, controlling temperament. In-game strategy is what keeps the talk radio dial spinning.

Randolph didn’t somehow unlearn good managerial tactics. The only difference between the 2006 and 2008 Mets is the players. Sherman even noted, back in Sept. ’06, that Willie was great at the stuff they are criticizing him right now for:

Randolph's team has played hard and focused, even with a big lead. It did not wallow in pity when Duaner Sanchez, Pedro Martinez and Tom Glavine were all lost in about the same period. Youngsters have grown, stars have flourished and castoffs have rejuvenated to fill in blanks under Randolph's rule.

[…]

Randolph delegates well to his coaches, communicates expertly with his players and has done what Torre did right away with the Yankees - stress to his players not to accept good, but to embrace the idea of winning a championship as the only acceptable goal. In that way, his most important act - his Manager of the Year platform - is that he has changed the culture from too much Club Met to one in which second best in New York and the NL East is no longer tolerable. Willie Randolph has always been a winner and he expects his team to be like him.

Unfortunately for Willie Randolph, the public isn’t interested in having honest, rational discussions about his team’s shortcomings. They simply need a scapegoat, and as it is in most cases, it’s the manager’s fault. Carlos Beltran is being paid too much money to take the fall for his own failures; he’s not expendable the way Randolph is.

Perhaps the most important question that needs to be answered in all of this is who will the Mets hire to replace Randolph? Phil Garner? Bobby Valentine: Round Two? Art Howe: Round Two? Frank Robinson? Are any of them really an improvement over Randolph?

As a Phillies fan, I know exactly the type of displeasure Mets fans are going through and I understand the disappointment in the manager, but it’s short-sighted and irrational, especially only 20% into the season. Give him some time.