Jun 8, 2013, 1:45 PM EST
We heard yesterday that the Mets were aiming for top prospect right-hander Zack Wheeler to make his major league debut next Friday against the Cubs at Citi Field, but it turns out that we’ll have to wait a bit longer.
John Harper of the New York Daily News reports that Wheeler is now expected to make another start with Triple-A Las Vegas before coming up to the major leagues. This means that he’ll likely make his major league debut when the Mets play five games against the Braves in Atlanta from June 17-20.
Wheeler gave up four runs on eight hits and a walk over 4 2/3 innings last night, but Andy Martino of the New York Daily News hears that nothing shifted due to the shaky performance and the Mets had Atlanta in mind all along. As Harper was told by one person, the Mets are already so close to the expected Super Two cut-off date that it’s better to play things safe with his timeline.
While Wheeler won’t have to deal with the pressure of making his major league debut at Citi Field, it’s worth noting that he’s from Smyrna, Georgia. He figures to have a rather large contingent of family and friends in attendance for the occasion.
- Suspending Josh Hamilton for a year would be obscene 40
- Report: MLB panel split on rehab for Josh Hamilton; one-year suspension is in play 19
- Joc Pederson goes 2-for-2 in Cactus League debut 4
- Braves scratch Mike Minor from start with more shoulder problems 2
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” 359
- Blue Jays sign Dayan Viciedo to a minor league deal 8
- Chris Sale will be sidelined for three weeks with foot fracture 11
- Aramis Ramirez says 2015 will be his last year 33
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” (359)
- If addiction is an illness — and it is — Josh Hamilton shouldn’t be suspended (307)
- Curt Schilling lowers the boom on some men tweeting threats against his daughter (137)
- John Baker, Jeremy Brown, coal mines and class (80)
- Billy Bean responds to Daniel Murphy’s comments (76)