AOL News has a new home! The Huffington Post.

Click here to visit the new home of AOL News!

Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

Mets Thought Jason Bay a Better Health Risk Than John Lackey

Mar 12, 2010 – 2:45 PM
Text Size
Josh Alper

Josh Alper %BloggerTitle%

Of the many reasons why the Mets have spent most of the last two years being mocked, teased and generally pitied by much of the baseball world, none may loom larger than their sketchy history when it comes to player health. They've misdiagnosed, mistreated and guessed wrong about almost every ache and pain that's come their way so it stands to reason that they'd be skittish about acquiring players of questionable fitness.

That's why some eyebrows were raised when they signed Jason Bay as a free agent this offseason. Bay came to New York with a stamp of disapproval about the state of his knees from the Red Sox. Given the investment the Mets made, people were wondering why they didn't chase John Lackey to bolster the rotation instead. The answer, according to Rob Bradford of WEEI, is that they thought Lackey was a bigger health risk.
Time to cue the guffawing and backslapping around Red Sox camp, right? In a word, no.

Would it seem odd if any other team in baseball had decided to sign a 31-year-old outfielder who'd missed 38 games in the last five seasons instead of a 31-year-old pitcher who missed time in each of the last two seasons with arm trouble? It wouldn't seem odd in the least, especially when that pitcher signed a five-year deal as opposed to the four-year contract (with a vesting option) that the outfielder received. Tossing aside need for a moment, that's a pretty reasonable decision if health is a major concern.

Look, there are reasons to question the Mets' decision to sign Bay. His defense leaves something to be desired, he strikes out an awful lot and they may have benefited more from bolstering their rotation, for example. Finding fault with their decision making on the injury front is awfully silly in this instance, though.

The Red Sox might be right about Bay's knees and they might be right that Lackey is a better fit for what they need in 2010 and beyond. Or they could look up on July 17th to find an offense that's peforming below expectations and a rotation that's missing one of its stalwarts. That's baseball and both teams made the same kinds of choices. Time will tell who was right and it may shock and dismay you to learn that the answer could be both of them.
Filed under: Sports

ON FACEBOOK