In the wake of Marvin Miller’s death, the overwhelming sentiment among baseball writers on Twitter is that it is a shame that he was never inducted into the Hall of Fame. That the Hall disgraced itself in never voting Miller in and, now that he is dead and can never know the honor in life, it is doubly disgraceful. I agree with that sentiment 100%.
I wonder, however, if some of these same writers who believe that the Hall has disgraced itself will still take the position that voting in PED users like Bonds, Clemens and the rest will somehow sully the place.
Which isn’t to say that you can’t still vote against these guys if you want to. Of course you can. Just don’t claim that you are obligated to do so in order to “protect” the Hall of Fame from some new and unique stain. It’s been stained repeatedly throughout the years through any number of questionable and disgraceful inclusions and omissions. Compared to keeping Marvin Miller out and letting in people like Tom Yawkey in, allowing an additional PED user — for there are surely some in there already — is not gonna hurt the place.
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.”