Jan 19, 2010, 8:30 AM EDT
Peter Gammons has this habit — which I love by the way — of casually dropping bombs in such a way that is sounds like it’s not news at all. But as far as I can tell, this is news:
Everyone in the business understands that the Mets did not insure
Beltran, so that when team physician Dr. David Altcheck and trainer Ray
Ramirez signed off on Dr. Richard Steadman’s decision to perform
arthroscopic surgery in Vail, Colo., it was clear they were afraid that
their worst time-frame fears might be realized and that Beltran could
be out for — and paid for — much of the 2010 season.
I’ve not seen anyone say that the Mets didn’t insure Beltran’s contract. If that’s the case, wow. Sure, you may eat it if your fourth outfielder or lefty specialist goes down, but how do you not insure the centerpiece of your team?
That aside, everything I’ve read previously frames the Mets’ failure to sign off on Beltran’s surgery as the team simply dithering. But were they dithering because they’re simply incompetent when it comes to getting things done or, as Gammons suggests, were they hoping to block the surgery and get Beltran out on the field at some limited percentage rather than have to pay a player to sit on the DL? It’s great sport to make fun of the Mets’ decisions, but if it truly was the latter in this case we’ve gone from more or less benign bumbling to something much, much more troubling.
And for what it’s worth, Gammons reports that it’s almost certain that Jeff Wilpon knew about the surgery stuff all along, implying that he was the one holding off on giving his OK. In light of this it would not shock me in the least if Omar Minaya’s reluctance to be out in front of this the other day, and instead, have assistant GM John Ricco be the team’s spokesperson, was a function of Omar not wanting to be the fall guy for his boss’ incompetence. If that was the case, good for Omar. His imminent termination will probably come as a relief.