As I mentioned yesterday, I don’t think the Mets have the right to void K-Rod’s deal pursuant to the Collective Bargaining Agreement. I don’t even think they’ll try, honestly.
But there are growing calls today for the Mets to at least attempt to void his deal or do something else drastic. Lupica’s column is the first one I’ve read, but I’m sure there are others. I’ve talked to no small number of Mets fans in the past 12 hours who think the Mets should try. I totally understand the sentiment.
The sentiment certainly sits atop the moral and ethical high ground, with that ground being the notion that violence and aggression like that (allegedly!) shown by Rodriguez has no place in a major league clubhouse or on a major league payroll. It’s an admirable bit of high ground too. If I were running a baseball team I’d attempt to take such a stand in the event my players were involved in such things, even if the odds of success were low given the CBA and precedent.
But the Mets blew their chance to take such a position. They suspended him for two games, yes, but as soon as the suspension was over they pitched him. If they thought his act was so bad they could have done what the Cubs did with Carlos Zambrano or the Mariners did with Milton Bradley and placed him on the restricted list and told him to stay away from the team. Instead, they essentially said “we’re fine with whatever K-Rod did, as long as he can pitch.”
In light of that stance, I don’t see how — ethically speaking — the Mets can now voice the kind of disapproval the columnists and Mets fans are genuinely exhibiting. Any move against K-Rod now would be borne of disappointment that their closer can’t pitch, not disapproval of his untowards acts. It would be an act of opportunism, really.
Am I out to lunch here? Is punching a guy out less of a transgression if the guy doing the punching doesn’t get hurt? If so, sure, go ahead Mets. I just don’t think it’s so.
UPDATE: Rosenthal has some less philosophical thoughts about the mechanics of punishing K-Rod over all of this.
CSN Mid-Atlantic’s Rich Dubroff reports that the Orioles are “searching everywhere” for outfield help. The club recently acquired L.J. Hoes from the Astros in exchange for cash considerations, throwing him into a stable of six outfielders that could potentially crack the Opening Day Roster.
Adam Jones, of course, will open the season in center field. But in the corner outfield and on the bench, Dubroff lists Hoes along with Dariel Alvarez, Junior Lake, David Lough, Nolan Reimold and Henry Urrutia. Both Lough and Reimold are eligible for arbitration — Lough for the first time, and Reimold for his third and final year — so it remains to be seen if the Orioles will retain both of them.
The Orioles could target outfield help in the Rule-5 draft, and they could also target outfielders in free agency. Gerardo Parra, acquired by the O’s in a trade with the Brewers at the trade deadline, remains a possibility but the team is reluctant to offer him more than two years.
MLB.com’s Jordan Bastian reports that the Indians have signed catcher Anthony Recker to a minor league deal with an invitation to spring training.
Recker, 32, has spent the past three seasons with the Mets, compiling an aggregate .190/.256/.350 batting line with 15 home runs and 51 RBI in 432 plate appearances. He’ll serve as catching depth for the Indians.
Recker was selected by the Athletics in the 18th round of the 2005 draft. They then sent him to the Cubs in exchange for Blake Lalli in an August 2012 trade, and the Mets selected him off waivers from the Cubs in October 2012.
When last we posted about Yasiel Puig it was to pass along a rumor that the best player on his team wants him off of it. If that was true — and if this report is true — then expect that sentiment to remain unchanged:
Obviously this report is vague and there has not been, say, a police report or other details to fill it in. Perhaps we’ll learn more, perhaps Puig was misbehaving perhaps he wasn’t.
As we wait for details, however, it’s probably worth reminding ourselves that Puig is coming off of a lost season in which he couldn’t stay healthy, so trading him for any sort of decent return at the moment isn’t super likely. Which leads us to some often overlooked but undeniable baseball wisdom: you can be a distraction if you’re effective and you can be ineffective if you’re a good guy. You really can’t be an ineffective distraction, however, and expect to hang around very long.
We’ve written several times about how boring the Padres’ uniforms and color scheme is. And how that’s an even greater shame given how colorful they used to be. No, not all of their mustard and brown ensembles were great looking, but some were and at some point it’s better to miss boldly than to endure blandness.
Now comes a hint that the Padres may step a toe back into the world of bright colors. At least a little bit. A picture of a new Padres cap is making the rounds in which a new “sunshine yellow” color has been added to the blue and white:
This story from the Union-Tribune notes that the yellow also appears on the recently-unveiled 2016 All-Star Game logo, suggesting that the yellow in the cap could either be part of some special All-Star-related gear or a new color to the normal Padres livery.
I still strongly advocate for the Padres to bring back the brown — and there are a multitude of design ideas which could do that in tasteful fashion — but for now any addition of some color would be a good thing.