Will Jim Crane have trouble with Major League Baseball over old discrimination complaints?

9 Comments

Richard Sandomir of the New York Times has a story this morning about the owner-in-waiting of the Houston Astros, Jim Crane, and a history of discrimination complaints with the EEOC against Crane’s company, Eagle Global Logistics:

Eagle, run by a former college pitcher named Jim Crane, had failed to promote blacks, Hispanics and women into managerial positions, the agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found. Eagle had also demoted women from managerial positions, maintained a hostile workplace, paid blacks, Hispanics and women less than male and white counterparts, and shredded important documents, the agency said.

There was a large fine — $8.5 million — leveled by the EEOC after Eagle agreed to a consent decree, but the fine was subsequently walked back in major fashion when it was found that only about 10% of the specific claims were worthy of compensation. Which doesn’t mean that discrimination didn’t occur, mind you, though it could mean that. The key here is that these aren’t findings in litigation. They’re administrative in nature and the burden of proof is much lower than in a lawsuit.  These things can be messy.

Sandomir presents all of this by way of wondering if the discrimination complaints may cause bumps in the road to Crane’s ownership approval by Major League Baseball.

It seems like a major stretch to think it would.  Crane has been known to Major League Baseball for some time — he tried to buy the Astros once before and was close to getting the Rangers last year — so if MLB found him odious for some reason, they would have said something already.  Sandomir claims that someone did say something off the record about it all at one point, but that was denied by MLB’s Rob Manfred.

I have no idea about the merits of the actual discrimination claims, but I think this is much ado about nothing as far as Crane’s approval in the ownership group goes.  Drayton McLane is a good buddy of Bud Selig’s. If Selig felt like there was going to be any kind of a problem here, he would have let McLane know about it a long time ago so as not to put him in a tough spot.

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.”