Tylor Megill’s MLB start is reminiscent of the much more heralded Mets career start of:
They have that career start excellence in common.
But they also have something else in common:
Tylor Megill’s last 2 starts: 12 innings, 4 hits, no runs.
Matt Harvey’s last 2 starts: 12 innings, 4 hits, no runs.
Coincidence? Yes or no, they do have that in common.
Question:
Would it be more than a coincidence if GM Zach Scott trades for Matt Harvey? Or at least considers it?
The Mets go through pitchers like a burrito eater goes through toilet paper (I know, tacky - but it's a "Scott's thing").
So, a former President we all know just asked Zach Scott, “Try Harvey-cloroquine? What do you have to lose?”
Maybe Harvey figured out something recently that will make him not the Dark Knight of old, but a useful pitcher for a playoff-seeking team that, frankly, needs arms that function.
Or maybe his last two zero run games were a flash in the pan.
Worth looking under the hood, if you ask me. What do you have to lose?
4 comments:
He didn't leave here as a fan favorite. However, if the price is small and the results are big then all will be forgiven.
Reese, that is what I am thinking. Maybe Harvey just had two flash-in-the-pan games. The Mets clearly have raised the threshold of what they will accept as pitchers this year - but have had to resort to using marginal guys like Tropeano, Stock, and others because of the deluge of pitching injuries. Maybe Harvey figured some things out. If so, how cool would it be to have a competent, humbled, and contrite Harvey be part of a winning Mets mix.
But only if the last two games were not some sort of mirage - and he came cheap.
I think I will pass.
Ray, I think everyone will pass. I, however, am amazed at how he throws 12 four hit shutout innings. No one in the Mets upper minors is remotely close to being able to do that IN THE MINORS.
Post a Comment