Jan 4, 2014, 6:25 PM EDT
The Orioles and Mets tossed around trade ideas involving not just first baseman Ike Davis, but second baseman Daniel Murphy, and left fielder/first baseman Lucas Duda as well, reports Eduardo Encina of The Baltimore Sun. He writes that the two teams couldn’t reach an agreement because the Mets wanted Orioles top pitching prospect Eduardo Rodriguez in return.
The Mets are still expected to move at least one of Davis and Duda but a lot of teams have already satisfied their needs for first basemen already. Davis and Murphy are both entering their second year of arbitration eligibility while Duda is entering his first year. The Mets currently have just $45 million committed and would need to double that to reach last year’s Opening Day salary of nearly $94 million, but their focus on making a trade is more about optimal roster construction. Taking Duda out of left field, where he spent most of 2013, and moving him to first base full time in place of Davis gives the Mets a better outfield with Curtis Granderson in left, Juan Lagares in center, and Chris Young in right with Eric Young, Jr. as the fourth outfielder.
- John Hart to be named Braves President of Baseball Operations 2
- No, Ned Yost didn’t “out-manage” Bruce Bochy. His players played better 54
- At least Hunter Strickland entertained us last night 31
- Royals even up World Series with 7-2 Game 2 victory 37
- Craig Kimbrel wins Trevor Hoffman Award; Greg Holland gets Mariano Rivera Award 8
- World Series, Game 2: Giants vs. Royals lineups 10
- HBT Daily: Are the Royals doomed, doomed, doomed? 11
- Giants inhaling the air of superiority after Game 1 7
- So, if you’re not a fan of the Royals or Giants, who ya got? (129)
- Erroneous Narrative Alert: no, the Giants are not a “gritty,” anti-stats organization (122)
- Pedro Martinez has some opinions about who the new “face of baseball” is (112)
- PANTY RAID! Homeland Security agents confiscate unlicensed Kansas City Royals underwear (105)
- “The Kansas City Royals Are the Future of Baseball” — someone actually said that. (93)