Over the last week, the Braves received the bad news that Kris Medlen damaged his UCL and Brandon Beachy was experiencing biceps tightness. They reacted quickly to create good news by signing free-agent starter Ervin Santana to a one-year, $14.1M contract.
The New York media asked Sandy Alderson if this signing affected what the Mets might do in regard to their shortstop situation. Alderson’s response:
“I’m not interpreting it in terms of ‘our situation. I don’t know that we have a situation here.”
From the standpoint of a GM speaking with the media, it was the right answer, of course. The Yankees and Red Sox might make competing moves with each other, but that’s because they’re in the same division and competing with each other for a playoff spot, while the Mets and Braves … oh, wait …
Seriously though, it wouldn’t make much sense for Alderson to publicly acknowledge that the Mets would be motivated to do something based on an opponent’s acquisition. And further, I don’t think it makes any sense for the Mets to step up their pace to improve the shortstop position just because the Braves signed a pitcher — it’s apples and oranges.
Or is it? The Braves getting weaker by potentially losing two starting pitchers would give the Mets a larger window of opportunity to advance further up the standings, wouldn’t it? So really, any response by the Mets would be more due to Medlen and Beachy being sidelined, than Santana joining Atlanta.
Even if you don’t look at it that way, I’m curious — do you agree that the Mets may not have a “situation” at shortstop? Do you think that a valid answer lies somewhere among Ruben Tejada, Wilmer Flores, Omar Quintanilla, and Wilfredo Tovar?
Again, it would be counterproductive for Alderson to say shortstop is a problem — but what’s YOUR view?
Answer in the comments.