Matthew Carruth at FanGraphs wants you to vote on it. His candidates: Barry Zito, Alfonso Soriano, Vernon Wells, or the write-in candidate of your choice. I think I’ll write in FOX’s broadcast contract with Major League Baseball, though in that case neither of the parties to the deal are its biggest victims.
If we limit it to ballplayers I don’t think I can top Matthew’s triumvirate. Soriano’s is probably the worst. Yeah, Zito’s is bad, but he’s at least he’ll take the ball every fifth day and give you average production. Wells may be just as bad as Soriano’s I suppose, but at least he’s a couple of years younger. I dunno, they’re all dogs.
Most of all, I’m having a hard time getting my head around the fact that teams used to give out contracts like that to players no one ever believed to be the best at their position at any given time.
Kristie Ackert of the New York Daily News reports that the Mets have discussed a trade involving starter Matt Harvey with at least two teams. Apparently, the Mets were even willing to move Harvey for a reliever.
The Mets tendered Harvey a contract on December 1. He’s entering his third and final year of arbitration eligibility and will likely see a slight bump from last season’s salary of $5.125 million. As a result, there was some thought going into late November that the Mets would non-tender Harvey.
Harvey, 28, made 18 starts and one relief appearance last year and had horrendous results. He put up a 6.70 ERA with a 67/47 K/BB ratio in 92 2/3 innings. Between his performance, his impending free agency, and his injury history, the Mets aren’t likely to get much back in return for Harvey. Even expecting a reliever in return may be too lofty.
Along with bullpen help, the Mets also need help at second base, first base, and the outfield. They don’t have many resources with which to address those needs. Ackert described the Mets’ resources as “a very limited stash of prospects” and “limited payroll space.”