Jan 23, 2014, 3:15 PM EDT
Ken Rosenthal hears this:
— Ken Rosenthal (@Ken_Rosenthal) January 23, 2014
The first impulse is to say “haha, Balfour wanted to play for a winner and the Mets don’t win and hahaha” and all of that. But this is not all that interesting for those purposes. I mean, if the money is at least close, a closer is going to want to to a winning team because that leads to more saves. And all ballplayers want to play for a winner.
No, it’s more interesting inasmuch as it suggests that the Mets aren’t anywhere near as confident in Bobby Parnell as their closer as they have suggested. Or, alternatively, that the Mets are getting into the “flip-a-closer” business that the A’s used to do from time to time. Letting a guy rack up some saves and then trading him to teams which are desperate for relief help in midseason. Which, frankly, could be kind of smart.
But smart or not, it’s not the sort of thing Balfour wanted, obviously. And unless the money was substantially different, I assume most of us would make the same choice too.
- Bryce Harper is 15th player in MLB history to reach 50 career homers before age-22 season 25
- The Dodgers took the shift to the extreme last night 44
- VIDEO: Jorge Soler hits two long home runs in third major league game 20
- Settling the Score: Friday’s results 17
- Mariners end Jesus Montero’s season 37
- Troy Tulowitzki says he’ll retire before he switches positions 32
- Mike Trout is the best MVP choice, but . . . 49
- Baseball is dying, you guys, because no one would recognize Mike Trout in a bar 73
- Could women play major league baseball? Sure. Right now, though, the deck is stacked against them. (220)
- Forgiveness for Pete Rose? Not in this lifetime (146)
- Albert Pujols plays the “you never played the game!” card (104)
- Great Moments in Drug Testing and Punishment: The NFL Edition (101)
- And That Happened: Thursday’s scores and highlights (75)