New Astros owner Jim Crane unveiled some fan-friendly initiatives earlier today, including lower ticket prices, partial rebates for season ticket holders, lower concession prices and relaxed policies on outside food and beverage. While those are all well and good, they were overshadowed by some interesting comments about the team’s future as they prepare for a move to the American League next season.
According to the Associated Press, Crane indicated that they are currently mulling over changes to the uniforms and most interestingly, whether to change the team’s name.
“We’re going to study the information both from the fans and from all sorts of marketing people,” Crane said. “I’m not saying we’re going to change. We haven’t made the decision yet whether we’re going to change.”
The Astros were originally known as the Colt .45s when they were introduced to the National League as an expansion team along with the Mets in 1962. The team’s name was changed to the Astros when they moved to the Astrodome in 1965. There’s a lot of tradition there, but with the Astrodome in the rear-view mirror and the team about to switch leagues, the possibility of a new identity hasn’t been dismissed.
“We had the Colt .45s and everybody liked that one,” Crane said. “So you can imagine how upset they were when we switched that. What you get when you look at the fan base is the older we get and I’m old, you don’t like to change. But the younger fans are very receptive to change and the older ones aren’t, so that’s what we saw with the American League.”
I almost feel like this is out of bounds for me to discuss since I’m not an Astros fan, but switching back to the Colt .45s could have some appeal. While I haven’t heard much clamoring for a name change, this could be a way to find some middle ground between traditionalists and those hungry for something new. Edit:
I’m aware that this will probably never happen for a wide variety of reasons. Thanks to those of you who filled me in on the copyright infringement situation
, for example. The franchise was also named after a firearm and had this logo
. The world is a very different place now than it was in 1962, so I agree with many of you who say it would just be too controversial. The name is unlikely to change at all. Still, it’s a fun possibility to think about on this cold January night.
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.”