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.
- Royals’ World Series hopes in Yordano Ventura’s hands 0
- Giants stomp Royals 7-1 in World Series Game 1 rout 17
- World Series, Game 1: Giants vs. Royals lineups 0
- HBT Daily: In which I waffle on my World Series pick 13
- Must-click link: surviving spring training on $0 a day 78
- Your Official HardballTalk World Series Preview 28
- World Series Reset: Game 1 — finally! — is tonight 31
- HBT Daily: How the Royals and Giants were built 4
- So, if you’re not a fan of the Royals or Giants, who ya got? (120)
- Erroneous Narrative Alert: no, the Giants are not a “gritty,” anti-stats organization (115)
- Pedro Martinez has some opinions about who the new “face of baseball” is (111)
- “The Kansas City Royals Are the Future of Baseball” — someone actually said that. (93)
- Travis Ishikawa sends Giants to World Series on walk-off three-run homer (79)