LGM!

Blue is excited about the Mets season. Blue also appears to have a "wait-and-see" attitude. That's good. 

Blue is a dog of a vocal member of Mets Twitter. Mets Twitter is a mix though many people complain a lot. 

The first game had some of that, including dubious no calls at first (blocking/pick-off) and second (take-out slide? Mets have memories there). They also lost 3-1, the run on a solo homer, which was also their only hit. 

Not the way to win. The Q. had a rough first. Nonetheless, wariness about sending the runner helped him to avoid giving up anything. The Mets hit that homer. Nonetheless, they helped the pitcher with that pick-off (after a walk).  

The Brewers (with their ace on the mound) then tied it with another homer. Mr. Q. again had a lot of baserunners in the fifth. A medium-range fly ball gave the Brewers a sacrifice (the wind blew it away from center, their strongest outfielder). Mr. Q went 4.2.  Drew Smith closed up the six innings (the goal for a starter these days) cleanly enough.

The Brewers beat the Mets 6/7 last season. This game probably favored the Brewers given the starting pitching match-ups. But, winning with a single hit is hard. The team, especially with this mid-range pitching, needs to hit. 

If they hit, the first six innings involving two runs and another by the pen (going to happen) should provide them a reasonable chance for a win. Sometimes, you have no margin of error. The Tigers won 1-0 with both starters doing well, but one a bit better. Still, that wasn't a one-hitter. 

The Yankees came back from an early four-run deficit on Opening Day (Mets waited a day because of rain). That received some praise on television. But, like this game, it is only a single game. The Mets didn't hit that much in Spring Training as well. Let's see if they get in the groove.

As of now, the starter struggled some (he is after all a #3 starter type), the pen was overall good (one run in 4.1), fielding was reasonable, and the hitting was bad. 0-1. 

ETA: Severino gave up twelve hits and six runs. One was via a balk, symbolic of multiple defensive miscues or near misses vs. the Brewers holding things down.

The bullpen was good again. A reliever was tossed for allegedly throwing at someone who had a hard slide at second in Game 1 plus a lot of time on base today. Plus making "crybaby" faces in the dugout. Darling wanted them to do a brushback early in the game. Severino had enough problems.  

More hits too. Three homers. Still lost 7-6, not able to make up for earlier defensive slips and inability to exchange opportunities for runs. Messy game. Get into the groove, guys.

0/3: Shortly before the third game, we found out that the manager was suspended for one game (can't challenge) and the pitcher was suspended for three (challenged & pitched three innings today) for the alleged thrown-at incident.

I don't know how the manager can be blamed (this isn't a case of a manager getting in the mix during a fight) for this. Multiple articles are no more helpful. The pitcher was ejected right after the pitch. The manager was not. 

Is there an implication he was behind it? It annoys me that multiple articles do not discuss the matter. It's an obvious question. What does the manager being suspended "as a result" of the pitcher's actions even mean? 

The game was not much more appealing. Megill was out after four (shoulder soreness). If he is hurt, the next in line is about as good. He caught someone stealing in the first but catcher's inference helped lead to a run. The Mets only scored a run. They lost 4-1. 

The pitching was okay. Megill gave up two runs (one earned) and without soreness should have been able to go at least five. A long guy giving up two is acceptable if not ideal. Two runs and some homers in one game is not enough offense. 

Meanwhile, the Yanks swept the Astros, who are now 0-4. Oh well. BTW, the loss is on the manager's ledger, even though he wasn't there. Seems a tad unfair. Tigers (3-0) next.