We learned earlier today, in a report from Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com, that some disagreement has arisen between the Mets and agent Scott Boras regarding the handling of 26-year-old righty Matt Harvey. Boras claims that the club is risking an injury to Harvey, who underwent Tommy John surgery in October of 2013, by not adhering to a 180-inning limit this season. (Harvey has already thrown 166 1/3 frames on the year, and has never before exceeded 178 1/3 innings in his career.) In turn, Mets GM Sandy Alderson countered that the team does not believe a hard innings cap should apply.
There’s been plenty more back and forth in the hours since that report emerged. Here’s the latest:
- Mets assistant GM John Ricco addressed the media, saying that the team will not shut down Harvey — who is obviously a key piece of the club’s rotation — down the stretch, as ESPNNewYork.com’s Adam Rubin was among those to report. (Rubin also reported earlier that the team would abide by this approach.) Harvey will have at least one start skipped, with the team moving to a six-man rotation, and is expected to end up with between 190 and 195 regular season innings.
- Ricco also said that Harvey will throw a “reasonable” number of innings in the postseason, with the team monitoring how he feels as things proceed. He added that the Mets believe they have only received recommendations from doctors regarding innings totals, as opposed to firm mandates. There is a chance, per Ricco, that Harvey “could end up being shut down” in the course of the playoffs, though he said that same possibility applies to some extent “with all our pitchers.” (That last quote came courtesy of Matt Ehalt of The Record; Twitter links.)
- Boras has made several comments to additional media outlets, including MLB Network Radio on Sirius XM (audio links) and The Michael Kay Show on ESPN Radio New York 98.7 FM (audio link). While many of his comments reflect what Heyman already reported, those sources are worth a listen for those who are particularly interested in the topic.
- According to Harvey’s representative, determining when to shut down a player under these circumstances “always should be a doctor’s decision.” Going into the year, per Boras, there was agreement on all sides that there should be limits, which “had to be defined by doctors as the season unfolded.” When the subject was addressed in August, says Boras, even the club’s own physician expressed that the advice of the surgeon — in this case, the esteemed Dr. James Andrews — should be followed.
- The parallels to the Nationals’ shutdown of Stephen Strasburg back in 2012 are hard to ignore, of course. Boras told ESPN Radio that the Nationals never allowed the decision to reach the player, instead deciding to follow the “expert medical opinion” in that case to shut down their staff ace when he reached his specified load (and also to pitch him on regular rest over the course of the season). For the Mets to extend Harvey beyond the medical advice, says the super-agent, is an unprecedented decision that puts the righty in “unfound territory” moving forward — in part because doctors are not sure that he’ll be able to continue his usual level of performance the rest of the way.
- There are no immediate transactional implications for this decision, aside from the fact that Harvey will have an opportunity to increase his 2016 arbitration salary, but the long-term ramifications are potentially broad. Harvey can be controlled via arbitration through 2018. With Boras as his agent, he may be unlikely to reach an extension regardless of whether this matter affects his relationship with the club in any way. (It is worth noting that, according to Boras, Harvey authorized him to discuss the matter with the media.) Any long-term health issues, of course, would potentially impact both Harvey and the club, though it is impossible to weigh that possibility at present.
It’s not Boras’ job to advise the Mets on how to handle their player. It’s up to the team, doctors, and the player. Screw Boras
I mean, it *is* part of his job to look out for Matt Harvey’s interests.
The Mets aren’t about to make the same mistake with Harvey that the Nats made with Stras. They need to go as far as they can, and they need Harvey to do that
I like and admire Scott Boras. But he continually puts his players above the players team in a pennant race. (Or the time he tried to outdo the WS by declaring that A-Rod was a free agent.) This situation has to have been known far before August. Pulling the rug out from under a team with a statement on September 4 is a little ridiculous. I’m sorry for all people employed by the Mets, as well as their fans that have waited so long for a contending team.
Although he represents some very good players, I think more and more FO’s are going to be shying away from signing his clients (many have done so for years). The Dodgers / Kevin Brown contract set that franchise back years and was a major reason GM Kevin Malone was drummed out of baseball. The Tigers / Fielder contract hamstrung the team, and DD had to dig them out. The Rangers / A-Rod contract brought the Rangers and their knees, subsequently the owner had to sell – though that was primarily due to his cable business. The Yankee / Teixeira contract hasn’t been worth a fraction of the amount paid. The Indians / Borne contract put a ceiling on how good they could get the past 2 years. The Rangers / Choo contract is absurd. There are a dozen other examples.
Only large market teams with resources to pay for 5-6 years of star production to get back one, maybe 2 years of decent production, and 3 years of struggling for multiple reasons, can afford to deal with him anymore. I wrote a few weeks ago – if I’m the Nationals, I trade Harper after the season for 3 top prospects, with one being a catcher. The Scherzer contract is going to cost that team just as much as those mentioned above. If they sign one like that with Boras for Harper, it will ruin the franchise.
Scott Boras job is to represent his players interest, not any teams. Why would he care what is good for the Mets? The Mets have dozens of very highly paid advisers and lawyers who represent their interest. Teams are going to keep signing big free agents, dont matter who their agent is. Some owners such as Washington seem to like him.
Harper is not going to be a free agent until 2019. That whole idea is absurd. He would get back more then three top prospects but what team could afford that and be willing to pay it? Boston has a really nice outfield and is not going to give up its farm. The twins arn’t going to go all in on one player. The Dodgers would have to give up both Seeger and Urais. What young catchers are there that would highlight such a deal. The whole thing is crazy.
It’s nice to represent the players interest. But Boras is selling his clients services to a team that want to use them to win. If this is the product he’s selling, FO people whose jobs are based on winning and not providing jobs to players, would be best to look elsewhere.
As for moving Harper now – this is the perfect time, as his trade value is as high as it will ever be – a low salary at this point (Boras said Trout’s extension will have no bearing on Harper……meaning he’ll want far more). As for getting a young catcher, it may surprise you, but there are some out there, as crazy as that seems to you. A third team can be pulled into a trade of that magnitude. And a young catcher is what the Nationals need going forward with their other young players – they can buy a bat in free agency in a few years for a lot less money and aggravation then Boras will be giving them (which is my main point).
It’s pretty clear that if Harper stays healthy, he’ll ultimately be playing for the Yankees or Dodgers (maybe Red Sox) once he hits free agency. Nationals haven’t won anything with him up until now. And based on this years performance, the Nationals will be taking a step back. Three starters are leaving in free agency, and Jason Worth is about done.
It’s nice that he represents the players interests? That’s his job!!!! Boras isn’t selling his clients as products, he’s not sending out coupons to each mlb team for 30% off their next michael Bourne contract or buy one Tex contract get a second player free. He is representing clients in personal service contracts, which any first year law student can tell you is very different than contracts involving the sale of goods or products. These are two very different things.
I wish I could post links because I think the Insult scene from the movie Billy Madison would be perfect for this guy.
You didn’t clarify anything at all. I don’t even understand what you are trying to say in the first paragraph. It sounds like non sense.
Harper has 4 years under team control and is a top five player. How are you going to get enough value to make it worth trading him?? You said there are catchers. OK, who? Name them. Also it would have to be a catcher on a team that has other prospects to trade. Harper would we require a massive haul. Your talking 5-6 prospects. Probably like three in the top 50 and there would need to be two elite prospects. Thats just a guess, as its almost impossible to in vision a scenario in which he could be moved. Pretty much zero teams are going to trade a guy like Harper ( I cant think of any times a player would or has been traded for this reason) because they don’t like his agent.
I hope, for your sake, that whatever it is your smoking, is legal in your state or province.
Mets are Gambling with house money , God Forbid something happens to Harvey it will set the Team back a Decade with handling Injured Pitchers between Players , Agents and Medical Advice ( i.e Doctors who know Best !) It’s not worth it , “UNLESS” they Don’t really Care !, Then Say it An’t so Joe .
May I ask you something?
Whats the point of Major League Baseball?
Its to win the World Series. Taking Harvey out of your rotation significantly reduces your chance of that.
Who has proof that throwing a 200 IP season after having TJ will injure you again?
For every Chad Billingsly there is a John Lackey.
Actually the point is to make money. Baseball is a business and the Mets see Harvey as a business asset. Thus they’re going to treat him like a long term investment.
But he is not a long term investment. They do not have him signed to an extension and there is no guarantee that he will sign one with them. The Mets have him for the short term and if they make a deep playoff run with him, perhaps they sell more tickets and can sign him to a lucrative long term deal. If they don’t make a playoff run or if he breaks down, then they can sign someone else. It’s not like Harvey or anyone else is irreplaceable. THAT is the long term investment.
Nobody has proof that it will injure you again, but that’s not the question, either. There are loads of other scenarios — later-occurring injury, susceptibility to other injuries, early degradation of productivity, decreased stamina, etc,etc– that could also be considered.
Problem here is that people want to see an immediate, obvious result to “prove” something — as if what happens to one pitcher (whether it is Strasburg or Harvey or someone else) proves anything.
Say Harvey pitches 220 innings (w postseason) and blows out his elbow in the WS. Does that prove anything? Maybe, maybe not! Does it prove anything that the Nationals’ bullpen collapsed in Game 5 of the 2012 NLDS and that Strasburg has more recently had struggles? Meh, not so much for me. Yet everyone manages to cite that in their analysis.
It’s all about the narrative in this arena. There’s very little focus on the realistic considerations that do/should go into the decisionmaking at the time its made.
For me, were I privy to the actual info — which we aren’t, b/c Andrews isn’t allowed to talk about his patients without their authorization — I’d be pretty strongly inclined to take his recommendation, which presumably would be based upon science, statistics, experience,and intuition.
Sure, teams have other considerations to weigh, too, and that’s fine. And there are reasonable risks to be taken — esp when you utilize an appropriate weighing of probabilities and uncertainties.
But saying that the balance of factors favors more innings now, after such an assessment, is much different from the haughty (and generally baseless) dismissal of actual medical opinion that I see bandied about in many places. (I’m not saying the Mets have done this — that’s unclear — but some of the media responses, etc.)
There’s no “proof” that having Harvey in the rotation will win the Mets the World Series, is there? But does it make it more likely? Probably, yeah. If a doctor says the same about an innings limit, I’m inclined to trust their assessment in assigning risks. If people would at least accept that premise — unless they have actual medical/statistical information to challenge the prevailing medical view — then we could at least discuss the tradeoffs honestly.
I think the fascinating part of the argument is the point that while MOST of the time a team’s interests and a player’s interests align, there are times when they don’t. Currently, the discretion lies entirely with the teams — but should it?
As you say, there are no absolutes. Harvey’s arm isn’t going to explode the second he hits 180.1 innings. But ultimately the Mets’ decision is whether or not to gamble on a increased chance of a career-threatening injury (in a doctor’s medical opinion) in exchange for an increased chance of short-term team success, and their input is the only voice that matters.
We don’t know what Harvey wants. The kid seems like a competitor; he may well be willing to take that same risk. I’m not sure it sits well with me that it doesn’t really matter what he, his doctor or his representation thinks, though I also don’t know how you change things in a way that makes sense for everybody.
True enough, but certainly doctors can disagree (a lot!) on the best approach to a medical question. So what it really comes down to in the end is who the players work for, and that’s for the team, not themselves, and certainly not for their agents. Teams who want to win are bound to take risks with their players, and they are entitled to take those risks. What a boring (or should I say, Boras) game baseball would be if teams became so risk-averse that protecting player health became their top priority. If the players don’t like the risk, they can take up a safer profession — one that doesn’t pay them a tiny fraction as much as playing baseball.
Jeff – I made a point above and will remake it……
It’s September 4. If Harvey’s innings pitched was a concern, Boras could have gone public 4-8 weeks ago and the Mets could have worked with him to shave some of those innings down. This is a team that has not made the playoffs in years. Now that they are on the cusp of doing it, Boras is saying that Harvey should only throw 14 more innings this year.
Sorry, but this strikes me as a lousy way to handle the situation, and one that reeks of Boras showboating to attract more clients.
This begs the real question: should Boras “going public” have any bearing on how a team decides to use a player? The answer in my book is, emphatically, no.
Does anyone else remember Harvey trying to return to pitch in games last year, and the Mets telling him to slow his roll, considering they weren’t playing for anything by the time he would be coming back? It’s not like they aren’t looking out for him – including moving to a 6-man rotation. Even if Harvey throws in the playoffs, he isn’t going to end up all that far past his career highs. Boras just needs to get into the spotlight, and what better way than throwing shade at a team that is performing better than anyone expected….
frankly, if I were the Mets I’d tell him to shut up and mind his own business. Then if i won the WS I’d trade Harvey to a crap team and never do business with Boras again.
Boras is just setting the stage for what will be a record salary for first time arbitration. Harvey is either the hero or has a publicly disclosed reason for any drop off in performance, for which Harvey gets compensated for putting the team above himself.
If you’re talking about Harvey, arbitrators don’t just look at the latest season to evaluate the player’s demand vs the team’s offer. Harvey having missed 2014 completely is going to hurt that “record salary” for the first time through arbitration.
It’s not going to be a “record salary” but it’s going to be mighty fine given Harvey was pretty good from the day he was called up.
This is why I cant go nuts for Harvey. First off I wanted Harper or sale or grandal over him in the draft. He wasn’t a bad pick though, but he’s only pitched almost 2 years. He calls himself the dark knight. He has a huge ego and little humility. And now he wants to bark about an innings limit during a pennant race? Are you freaking kidding me? I say screw boras involvement in mets operations. If he’s worried about his clients future then he should sign a long term deal tomorrow. The Mets should just pitch him unless injured. And if injured place him on 60 day Dl causing him lost service time. I do understand Harvey and boras concern but I don’t agree with it. You play to win. And the mets went all in this year and gave Harvey and his pitching staff some hitting to win games and now he wants to bow out. Shame on him
Adam wainwright another example, out for 2011 season tommy john comes back 2012 throws 198 regular season and 15 postseason innings…except for that freak injury this year he’s been the national leagues top teams ace the past 8 year years
Wow. It’s been funny reading this. I hope some folks clicked the recent link to get to this article. I am not a Scott Bora’s fan but he cares about money. If the player was going to stay healthy Boras would have wanted him to play. He would have made more money that way. If James Andrews (arguably the best sports surgeon of all time) advises against using a player… what kind of idiot would use that player? Dr. Andrews is the man that installed the artificial ligament in Harvey’s elbow!!! How on earth did anyone in the Mets organization think they knew more about Harvey’s artifial elbow ligament than the doctor that installed it? No surprise Harvey’s career fell apart along with the fact he has lost a lot of velocity off his fastball. Now Harvey has been released by both the Mets and the Angels. The Mets ruined his arm and career on this idiotic decision. It’s very sad too. Matt Harvey had unlimited potential and was already starting to reach it. This is typical Wilpon stuff. I guess they passed the blame onto the GM at the time and fired him. The dumb thing is they replaced him with BVW who quickly traded the farm and payroll to acquire a bunch of overpaid has beens that tanked the Mets to 2nd to last place in all of the National League in very short order. Also… The Mets were never going to win it in 2015. Great idea destroy your best pitcher for a season you won’t end up as champions anyway. Maybe they would be better now if they hadn’t destroyed Harvey’s arm. The Wilpons are idiots. More money than sense. I bet that’s be cause they probably didn’t earn the money themselves.