Remember how Jon Paul Morosi of FOXSports.com wondered out loud why the Tigers would push back Rick Porcello’s start with Triple-A Toledo, suggesting it could be trade-related? Yeah, according to Jason Beck of MLB.com, Tigers manager Jim Leyland didn’t take too kindly to that.
“There’s a rumor going around, I don’t know if anybody’s read it, about
Rick Porcello being traded,” Leyland said. “I want to make this
perfectly clear: That is a blatant lie. I don’t even know where it came
from. That’s a blatant lie and it’s irresponsible journalism. There’s not
a chance that Rick Porcello is going to be traded. That’s a lie. That’s
not even speculation. That’s a total lie. …
Ouch. You’re still okay in our book, Morosi.
Perhaps most importantly, Leyland also said that Porcello will return to the big leagues for next weekend’s series against the Indians. I don’t want Leyland to get mad at me by speculating, but the fact that the Tigers requested Porcello’s next start be pushed back by a day may have something to do with that.
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.”