Dec 19, 2011, 11:19 AM EST
Today they finally announced the move, officially adding Francisco to the 40-man roster.
Andy Martino of the New York Daily News joked that perhaps Francisco’s physical exam took 14 days to administer. He does have a pretty lengthy injury history, but realistically the Mets probably just delayed things so a 40-man roster move wasn’t immediately forced upon them.
In years past the Yankees have delayed numerous signings, sometimes for so long it becomes laughable, but if MLB isn’t going to do anything about it the Mets are smart to take advantage. When it comes to marginal players and 40-man roster spots timing often plays as big a role as talent in deciding whether or not they’re snatched up by other teams.
Francisco, who’s expected to be the Mets’ closer, saved 17 games with a 3.55 ERA and 53/18 K/BB ratio in 51 innings for the Blue Jays this past season. He doesn’t fit the “proven closer” mold as much as some other free agents, but that mostly just served to keep his price tag in check and he was one of the best relievers on the market this offseason.
- Hector Olivera’s camp denies any damage to ulnar collateral ligament 3
- UPDATE: Hunter Pence out 6-8 weeks with fracture in left forearm 28
- MLBPA: leaks are from people “who want to see Josh Hamilton hurt personally and professionally” 32
- Suspending Josh Hamilton for a year would be obscene 146
- Report: MLB panel split on rehab for Josh Hamilton; one-year suspension is in play 45
- Joc Pederson goes 2-for-2 in Cactus League debut 6
- Braves scratch Mike Minor from start with more shoulder problems 6
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” 376
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” (376)
- Suspending Josh Hamilton for a year would be obscene (146)
- Curt Schilling lowers the boom on some men tweeting threats against his daughter (137)
- That facts of Josh Hamilton’s case should not be a matter of public record (94)
- Billy Bean responds to Daniel Murphy’s comments (90)