I can understand the Mets being patient and trying to manage expectations with regards to pitching prospect Matt Harvey, who appears to be making his first major league start later this week in Arizona. But geez, did they have to go Miguel Batista one more time? His ouster in Saturday’s debacle with Los Angeles was about the least surprising of the many bad things to have happened to the Mets since the All-Star break. That performance got Batista designated for assignment. Combined with Johan Santana’s deserved trip to the disabled list, it paves the way for Harvey’s ascendancy ready or not.
Recent trends notwithstanding, I can’t see the Mets continuing to climb the ladder for pitcher numbers and issue Harvey something in the 60s or 70s. I’d expect something like 36, although 33 and 22 are available as well.
In other news, Elvin Ramirez, wearing 62, is back again.
The Mets look like a team nearly wiped out from a lack of confidence that’s swept like a virus, infecting the bullpen first and now spreading throughout the lineup. I’m not putting it past the Mets to get healthy again but the offense in general requires more fixes than just that, and sadly, there’s few Matt Harveys waiting in Buffalo for their chance to hit their way onto this team.
What uni do you think Harvey shows up in?
Submitted by Howie R (not verified) on Mon, 07/23/2012 – 11:35am.
36 or 33 is my guess.
delete edit reply report to Mollom
How about really bucking the
Submitted by Ranjrz5 on Mon, 07/23/2012 – 2:00pm.
How about really bucking the trend and giving him #6… kidding.
Submitted by RogerB (not verified) on Mon, 07/23/2012 – 2:17pm.
Apparently he was wearing #70 in his bullpen session tonight. I guess we’ll know for sure tomorrow when he’s actually in the dugout.
Submitted by Matt B on Mon, 07/23/2012 – 3:05pm.
Seriously…..Harvey better get a respectable number, something like 22,33,36. It better not be his spring training number 70. It seems like new equipment manager Kevin Kierst has no clue that if lower numbers are available, they should be given out first instead of numbers in the 60s. This is how it has been for 51 years in Mets land, and in most MLB clubhouses.
Submitted by Ranjrz5 on Mon, 07/23/2012 – 3:06pm.
Anthony DiComo (via MetsBlog) says that Harvey will wear #33.
Like the Rolling Rock can says
Submitted by Jon Springer on Mon, 07/23/2012 – 3:08pm.
“33”
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 07/23/2012 – 3:54pm.
Espnnewyork says he will be wearing 33
Shades of John Maine 🙂
Submitted by PAKTYPE (not verified) on Fri, 07/27/2012 – 10:39am.
That the Mets have not retired #36 in honor of Jerry Koosman is one of the great crimes committed by this franchise. Kooz was a Met for 12 years, and while he wasn’t as great as Seaver, he was the perfect lefty complement to him. He won 140 games as a Met and had a career 3.09 ERA and 1800 strikeouts. He won at least ten games every year except 1971 (when he was hurt) and 1977 and 1978, when the Mets were awful and had no offense. Even during those two last years, his ERA was 3.49 and 3.75. He was 3-0 with a 2.57 ERA in three career World Series starts. Had the Mets been a better club during Kooz’ tenure, he might have been a Hall of Famer.
Submitted by Ranjrz5 on Fri, 07/27/2012 – 10:57am.
Question regarding Koosman: Baseball Reference has him wearing #47 in 1967 as well as #36. Could that hvae been a first-issued number that he exchanged for #36?
Submitted by Jon Springer on Wed, 08/01/2012 – 11:50am.
I will have to look this stuff up. I’m not strong on ’67 generally, but don;t recall hearing anything of Kooz in 47 till now.