The Mets cut Kyle Farnsworth, who was understandably angry after getting the news after last night's game >> Read more at MetsBlog.
In case you forgot, Farnsworth is the guy most Mets fans mocked when we was signed - twice - this past off season. He's also the guy who people feared might make the roster, let alone see become the closer. Yet, today, reaction to him being cut makes him seem like the second coming of Billy Wagner.
The Mets will essentially save $750,000 by cutting Farnsworth from the roster. Naturally, despite his performance and the crop of young pitchers capable of replacing him, the transaction is being described as 'cheap,' and 'not fair.'
I suspect that the people most pissed about this are probably the same fans who entered the day - and spent the last few years - already mad about Ownership's 'lack of spending,' as they say. The Farnsworth Situation plays plays right in to this narrative, despite it being less than $1 million. The other fact is, while move saves money, Farnsworth wasn't pitching well. I'm not sure he warranted a roster spot over, say, Josh Edgin, or Jeff Walters, even if he was free.
Again, spending money on the wrong players should always be considered wrong. And, while I guess not spending money on the wrong players could be called "cheap," it could also be called "smart." The difference probably depends mostly on how you view this front office, their rebuilding process and overall direction of the franchise.
In the end, had Farnsworth been throwing the ball well, I'm certain Alderson would have gladly continued paying him. But, he hasn't been pitching well. Frankly, Farnsworth's most recent save had more to do with Mark Teixeria's knees and Lucas Duda's glove than it had to do with his own arm.
This all is made to look worse considering they jerked Farnsworth around this past Spring. I realize it may not look good to other potential free agents. But, a quick survey by text message this morning indicates to me that players know the deal: Play well, get paid well, the end.