Mets should have seen this Matt Harvey disinterest coming
LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. — The Mets’ best opportunity to sell low on Matt Harvey came on Dec. 1, when they could have washed their hands of him and bid him farewell for the low, low cost of zero dollars.
They passed, tendering him a contract and thereby committing more than $5 million from their incredibly shrinking payroll.
So now that they’ve re-upped with The Artist formerly known as The Dark Knight, they might as well stick with him, right? In for a penny, in for a pound?
What’s the point of selling low, after all, when you could have sold even lower and saved yourself some effort?
The Mets have engaged several clubs on Harvey, The Post’s Mike Puma reported, though they expect the right-hander to be a 2018 Met. There’s no harm in listening, naturally; a well-run team stays open-minded, just as the Yankees entered this offseason with no intention of touching their offense and wound up adding Giancarlo Stanton.
Yet let’s say the Mets trade Harvey to the Orioles for Brad Brach, a reliever with one year left before free agency (just like Harvey) who is due to make a touch less than Harvey in arbitration; the website MLB Trade Rumors projects Harvey to make $5.9 million and Brach $5.2 million. Wouldn’t the Mets have been better off just pocketing the $6-ish million they’re set to pay Harvey and using that to go after a higher class of free-agent reliever than the one they’re currently pursuing?
Then there exists the risk that Harvey, whose last two seasons have been positively dreadful and riddled with injuries, actually rights himself in time for free agency. How would the Mets feel watching that happen somewhere else, especially if they went through the trouble of retaining him?
I’m skeptical that can happen. Harvey put a lot of miles on his arm in a short amount of time; he has endured both Tommy John surgery and thoracic outlet syndrome; and his well-documented nightlife ensures he isn’t the best-preserved 28-year-old among our species. However, if there’s any agent on whom I would bet to pull off this long-shot reconstruction project, it’s Scott Boras. The same control-freak qualities that caused that memorable 2015 clash with the Mets make Boras the ideal guy to solve such an enigma. Back in October, Boras told The Post’s Joel Sherman of his offseason plan for his client Harvey. The plan included a throwing program to fix both his command and his release point.
Furthermore, Harvey does have a role model to emulate. Alex Cobb, like Harvey, suffered through both TOS and Tommy John surgery, albeit in the reverse order that Harvey experienced. And now Cobb is a free agent set to score, although it won’t be the nine figures Harvey and Boras envisioned not long ago.
Baltimore and Texas are among the teams that have discussed Harvey with the Mets, and the talks have been at a “basic” level, according to one industry source. Nothing close has emerged.
Only a potential contender would have interest in Harvey, due to his pending free agency, and the return on him naturally will be underwhelming. That Texas won’t give up Jurickson Profar, the one-time potential stud who hasn’t panned out yet still has three years of control before he hits the market, for Harvey shows how far the Mets’ first-round draft pick of 2010 has fallen.
You tender a player a contract because you feel he provides some sort of value, be it to your team or on the trade market. Harvey’s value on the trade market is predictably low, no matter how badly some clubs need starting pitching.
On an episode of “Cheers,” Carla recalls how her sleazebag ex-husband Nick proposed to her: “Hey, Carla, I knocked you up and you know where I live, so I guess I have to.” Similarly, this Mets-Harvey marriage finds itself at a rather uninspiring juncture. Now that they’ve renewed their vows, though, they might as well ride it out for one more year. Given the commitment already made, it seems better than the alternative.