The point about Heilman brings me to my next point. On Tuesday, lefthander Mike Bacsik, who couldn't strike a man out if he didn't have a bat in his hand, was scheduled to start in the stead of 34-year-old Pedro Astacio, who is out for the year with shoulder surgery on the horizon (a topic I don't care to discuss). Fine, Aaron Heilman, who is 6-3 with a ___ ERA in Norfolk, had pitched just days before, thus rendering him unavailable for a start with the Mets on Tuesday.
Luckily for the Mets, Bacsik's start, which would have seen a pitcher with a 27.00 ERA this season take the hill at Shea, was rained out. Heilman had not started since his start the weekend before, and was available to start Sunday, the day Astacio was originally slated to pitch. Instead of slotting Heilman, a polished pitcher who was ranked within the top 40 prospects by Baseball America, the Mets decided to give Bacsik the start on Sunday.
Now this is what gets at me. The Mets are obviously in the midst of a much-needed rebuilding phase; why wouldn't they gain experience for one of their top prospects, who has already stayed in the minors long enough this year to avoid arbitration eligibility for another year? Not to mention increase their chances for a win?
It's obvious this organization needs a change. But like I said, I'm not going to go into that. It's just too repetitive. Let their transactions speak for themselves.