The Rays want out of St. Petersburg

14 Comments

Rays’ owner Stuart Sternberg said yesterday what everyone has known for a long time: the Rays simply aren’t viable in St. Petersburg.  Certainly not in Tropicana Field and probably not even if those cool stadium plans the Rays came up with a couple of years ago — but which the city rejected — ever came to fruition.

Which they now never will, because Sternberg says that, to be viable, the Rays likely have to be across the bridge in Tampa. Hard to say if even that would make the Rays viable. Tampa is turning into a Yankees town, I hear.

I think the most interesting aspect of this — which is kind of buried in the story — is that Sternberg is basically asking the whole region to woo him as if he were the owner of a team in another city looking to move into the area:

“If we weren’t here, how would people treat us?” Sternberg said
wistfully. “I think that’s how I’d like to see this community react. If
we weren’t here, I think it would take a regional effort to get us
here.”

But you are there, Stuart, and you have a lease to an ugly old dome that no one forced you to sign (or, rather, assume when you bought the team), so you can’t expect to sit back and wait for everyone to cater to your leverage-free butt as if you were gifting them something.

Not that I don’t sympathize — the Rays are in a lousy spot — but in case Sternberg hasn’t noticed, the unemployment rate in the Tampa-St. Pete area is close to 12% and property values are in the dumper. To expect the area to pony up a minimum of a quarter of a billion dollars to build you a ballpark in this environment is not realistic.

Personally I think this is step one — the pledge of local loyalty — to Sternberg moving the team out of the Tampa Bay area entirely. If and when the region doesn’t woo him like he wants to be wooed, he’ll move on, saying that he gave them all a chance.

Where to move? I dunno, but Sternberg himself says there are “at least five” better cities in the U.S. that don’t currently have baseball teams and, I’m assuming anyway, could have baseball teams without running afoul of baseball’s established territories. Let’s see, Vegas (which I don’t think is viable for reasons I’ve said before) . . . Portland (which won’t even bother to keep its AAA team) . . . Charlotte . . . OK, I give up, Stuart, which five do you mean?

Report: Mets have discussed a Matt Harvey trade with at least two teams

Al Bello/Getty Images
1 Comment

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.”