Dec 16, 2011, 8:40 AM EST
This is fun. Howard Megdal has a book coming out about the Wilpons and the Mets, and it contains a pretty juicy claim. The claim: that Fred Wilpon asked Bud Selig to put the kibosh on the deal he made to sell a stake of the Mets to David Einhorn because he was afraid of losing the team.
The report, passed along in the New York Post, is that after the deal was reached in principle, Wilpon got cold feet, realizing that Einhorn’s option to purchase a controlling interest in the Mets was way too obtainable. Wilpon, not wanting to lose the team, asked Bud Selig to intervene and strike portions of the deal in which Major League Baseball would assist Einhorn in taking over if the provision was triggered. As the Post puts it, “to play bad cop” as it were. This angered Einhorn and the deal quickly died. Major League Baseball sharply disputes Megdal’s reporting, calling him a self-promoter. Megdal stands by it.
This strikes me as one of those things we’ll never know 100% for certain because that kind of business — called in favors from friends, etc. — isn’t exactly documented in official reports. Megdal has a source or two telling him this. Baseball denies it. It’s just … business.
Juicy business, though.
- Merry Christmas from HBT! 74
- THE YEAR IN REVIEW: HBT’s most commented-upon stories of the year 86
- The Yankees are treating Alex Rodriguez differently than they treated Derek Jeter. So what? 40
- Braves sign setup man Jason Grilli to two-year contract 15
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot 120
- Phil Hughes signs a three-year extension with the Twins 27
- The Padres have talked to the Phillies about Cole Hamels 23
- Why is John Smoltz a shoo-in for the Hall of Fame? 63
- Curt Schilling goes after Obama, says Ronald Reagan would watch “The Interview” (225)
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot (120)
- Today’s specious anti-Mike Piazza-for-the-Hall-Fame argument (96)
- THE YEAR IN REVIEW: HBT’s most commented-upon stories of the year (86)
- Phillies GM told Ryan Howard they’d be better off “not with him but without him” (85)