Given the fact that Mets starters, except for Johan Santana, can't seem to win a game, is it that far fetched and idea to re-sign Pedro Martinez?
There is a faction out there that suggests it is better to move on from the Pedro years. The Mets relied too much on Pedro and got little in return. But after almost two years since his surgery, how much of a gamble would it really be? Pedro's tenacity and desire to win would easily surpass that of Perez, Main, and Hernandez. And for those that felt Livan Hernandez was a smart alternative to Pedro, guess again. He got pounded today for seven runs.
It would cost the Mets about 5 million to sign him and considering the Mets have the highest payroll in the National League, it is unlikely they will pull the trigger. But the Mets have to do something. Pitchers two through five are not even pitching five innings on most nights. The improved bullpen will begin to resemble last year's soon if something is not done. In fact, maybe what contributed to last year's bullpen meltdown was a starting staff incapable of going deep in games.
Omar did a good job repairing the bullpen but his lack of intervention with the starting rotation and another bat is stifling the Mets, at least in the early going. The Mets are going to have to do something with the starting staff or this season will get out of hand in a hurry. It's still early and perhaps it is a gamble but signing Pedro seems less of a gamble than the current plan.
He who hesitates is lost. The Mets pitching woes are not unique. If the Mets do not go after Pedro, some one else, maybe the Angels, will.
A note in regards to today's loss: A team that does not hit in a game that pitchers do well and a team that hits well in a game where the pitching falters is a losing team.
