Skip to content

Jason Bay is going to be a Met in 2013

Sep 25, 2012, 9:41 AM EDT

Jason Bay AP

Jason Bay has either been hurt, has stunk on ice or both since signing his $66 million deal before the 2010 season. And there is little if any chance, it seems, that he’s going to miraculously be a good player in its final year in 2013. But the Mets have decided that the roster spot he occupies is not worth as much as having him around next season. Mike Puma of the New York Post reports:

As Jason Bay considers the various “scenarios” regarding his baseball future, he can eliminate the possibility the Mets will swallow the $19 million he is owed and release him this offseason.

According to a team source, there is “zero” chance the beleaguered outfielder will be released this winter or asked to compete for a job in spring training.

Bay is owed $16 million next year and is guaranteed another $3 million for the buyout the Mets will certainly exercise as opposed to that 2014 option. On the season he is hitting .155/.231/.294 in 67 games. Since joining the Mets he is hitting .233/.317/.369 with 26 homers and a .686 OPS in 285 games.

  1. kiwicricket - Sep 25, 2012 at 9:47 AM

    Jason Bay is more likely to be a 4-letter word, than a 3-letter word.

  2. gammagammahey - Sep 25, 2012 at 9:54 AM

    Not that I think there’s any chance that any team will take him in a trade but who’s going to even consider it if the Mets say, “We’re releasing him at the start of spring training”?

  3. Joe - Sep 25, 2012 at 9:59 AM

    Red Sox fans were mad when they didn’t re-sign him.

    • mazblast - Sep 25, 2012 at 10:47 AM

      Some Red Sox fans were mad. Most realized that the Mets were offering too much money and too many years. While they were right, no one except perhaps the most pessimistic Mets fan could have anticipated just how little he’s been worth during the contract.

      • fathersworkandfamily - Sep 25, 2012 at 11:41 AM

        Sox offered 4 years $60M
        Mets offered 4 years $66M

        not a big difference, and the exact same number of years

      • 18thstreet - Sep 25, 2012 at 11:50 AM

        $6 million isn’t a big difference?

        Are you Mitt Romney?

    • hokiegajanisgod - Sep 25, 2012 at 3:32 PM

      Not all Red Sox fans…dude wanted too much $$$.

      Although if they did resign him they probably wouldn’t have signed John Lackey…and definitely not Carl Crawford.

      Wait, in retrospect I was mad the Sox didn’t sign Bay…until Ben the Great dumped Crawford on the Dodgers!

  4. hk62 - Sep 25, 2012 at 10:06 AM

    You’re seriously going to under estimate a player going into his walk year? He’ll be hurt again, but do enough to get something on top of that $3 mil buy out, just enough.

  5. dalucks - Sep 25, 2012 at 10:22 AM

    All the Mets can do is hope he can find his swing and play well enough to create some trade value. The Mets need help in the bullpen so if they can get two decent pitchers for him then consider it a win.

  6. thebadguyswon - Sep 25, 2012 at 10:25 AM

    Non story.

    • forsch31 - Sep 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

      Non comment.

  7. sdelmonte - Sep 25, 2012 at 10:57 AM

    ESPN’s NY site has a list of players with toxic contracts that the Mets could conceivably trade for, just for a change of scenery. So it’s not impossible they could move him.

    The problem is not that he’s awful. It’s that he’s awful and that the minors, despite having pretty good prospects at some positions, is bare of anyone in the outfield who would be much better.

  8. chc4 - Sep 25, 2012 at 11:04 AM

    Bay is just the latest in a long line of disastrous NYM signings.

  9. kevinbnyc - Sep 25, 2012 at 1:14 PM

    I knew his numbers were pretty bad, but its shocking to see them actually spelled out. Possibly worse than Mo Vaughn’s time in a Mets uniform.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

A's, Tigers big winners at trade deadline
Top 10 MLB Player Searches