The findings from Major League Baseball’s investigations of the Houston Astros’ 2017 cheating allegations have already resulted in two managers losing their jobs, and as fate has so drawn it up, a bomb has fallen in the Mets’ lap with their own skipper.
The fallout surrounding the infamous camera-trashcan relay system (we’ll call it that for now) began surely enough with the league suspending and Houston promptly firing both their manager AJ Hinch and general manager Jeff Luhnow. The saga then spilled over to Boston, where the reports revealed their own manager (and then-bench coach) Alex Cora to have designed and orchestrated the scheme, and by midnight Tuesday, the Red Sox had cut him loose.
The only remaining name cited in commissioner Rob Manfred’s nine-page statement is that of current Mets manager Carlos Beltran, who, as part of a larger, nameless group of teammates, “discussed that the team could improve on decoding opposing teams’ signs and communicating the signs to the batter” (2). Two months prior to the final ruling, an article from The Athletic (courtesy of Ken Rosenthal and Evan Drellich) had suggested that Beltran “played a key role in devising the sign-stealing system the team used that season.”
At the time of the reports, Beltran – who had been hired to manage the Mets just two weeks ago – denied any wrongdoing, texting Joel Sherman of the New York Post, “I’m not aware of that camera… we were studying the opposite team every day.” One day later, in the aforementioned publication from The Athletic, Beltran was quoted with a different tone: “if the catchers get lazy and the pitcher doesn’t cover the signs from second base, of course players are going to take advantage… I don’t call that cheating. I call that using the small details to take advantage.”
It may be worth noting that Beltran is only mentioned once in the entire document, and there are no other players or coaches named in the report itself. According to a separate article from Rosenthal and Drellich from Tuesday, league investigators promised immunity to all players that testified, but there is still no evidence of any kind that Beltran played any greater role, nor is there any potential explanation as to why he is the only then-active player to be reported. Some could speculate the inclusion has to do with Beltran no longer being represented by the players association (which exempts the league from a lawsuit), but in such a case, it would thereby be clear that there couldn’t have been anything more incriminating surrounding Beltran’s role.
Even so, Beltran’s job status remains up in the air to this point. ESPN‘s Buster Olney reported the front office to be “wavering” on whether or not to fire the newly-minted skipper. Mike Puma of the New York Post has added that the team’s concern for carrying itself with “integrity” may be the deciding factor in whether the fan-favorite remains in the chair for 2020.
That media coverage and organizational outlook have driven to this point implies Beltran may not have simply taken part in a group activity. And even at the minimum, a longtime fan favorite and future Hall of Famer has still cheated the system, and the Mets need to assess all sorts of resolutions and optics before they make their call in the coming days.
Thinking about this in the shorter term, ending the relationship with Beltran sooner rather than later would stop an already undesirable situation from potentially getting uglier. It’s already evident that Beltran had at least a mild interest in obtaining further info on opposing pitchers. Considering he also appeared to backtrack on his prior rejection of the camera while rationalizing cheating as an enterprise in “small details,” he may have adjusted his position in order to avoid further incriminating himself – because even if he may have been using advanced technology, he surely couldn’t have been using it maliciously (wink).
Removing Beltran from his post would also prevent the tension and uncertainty from affecting a young, motivated clubhouse. Playing beneath someone that several of the current players may have respected or even idolized from a young age is intimidating in itself. Doing so amidst ambiguity about the moral fiber of this same person could be quite daunting, even more so while subjected to continued scrutiny and persistent questions from the media.
Getting the controversy out the door would be a good first step, but it may also very well make for more of a reactionary demonstration of self-consciousness than an actual stroke of nobility. Although we can point to clues that Beltran may have had a greater role in the Astros’ sign-stealing escapades, we also know that Major League Baseball offered no evidence in the final statement, despite still having a finger on his name.
Succumbing to the fear of Beltran disgracing his standing as both a role model and representative of the Mets without even letting him speak his piece – two months after his last words on the matter – would be unfair to him, but even more so to the players hinging on his leadership. Between some of his one-time teammates (Dellin Betances, Jake Marisnick, Justin Wilson, Michael Wacha, and J.D. Davis) and fellow Latino ballplayers (Edwin Diaz, Amed Rosario, Yoenis Cespedes, Wilson Ramos, Robinson Cano, Jeurys Familia, Luis Guillorme, and Tomas Nido), he already has a clear connection to some of the team’s most important pieces. Taking Beltran him away from them before pitchers and catchers could even report may leave the clubhouse in a worse place than it was when he found it.
If the Mets were to fire Beltran, it would only make sense that their interim manager be appointed from within for this very reason. The most sensible alternative, in terms of accessibility, familiarity, and credibility would easily be Luis Rojas. However, Hensley Meulens and Tony DeFrancesco could also profile well as replacements. There’s never a way of truly knowing how much worse off a team is after it fires someone who has yet to even manage a game, but all three prospective candidates would make plenty of sense. In Rojas’ case especially, the Mets could legitimately improve by accident.
Of course, there is also a chance the Mets revert to old ways and try patching things up with current special assistant Terry Collins, whose old-school style of managing may or may not yield the same late-season success the team enjoyed under Mickey Callaway the last two seasons. What’s more, the idea of the organization digging around for a mulligan weeks before spring training would be a tough combination of embarrassing for the franchise and distracting for the players.
The counterargument, however, to the embarrassment of searching for a new long-term manager at the dawn of a win-now season, is the embarrassment of Beltran damaging the team’s aforementioned integrity.
Even as it stands, the Mets already have egg on their face for hiring a cheater, and they took another egg for hiding from the reality that they hired said cheater until they had no choice. Announcing the team’s decision to step away from Beltran as manager would be a sad and premature end to what looked like a promising chapter, but it also saves face. Even if he was neither a coach nor manager, he was a respected veteran who should have known far better than to (evidently) take part in something so patently dishonest, especially with a respectable 20-year career in the rearview.
But for any member of the Mets brass to pull out their copy of the Old Testament and turn on a game of integrity at the eleventh hour is, put frankly, is rather pathetic. Perhaps this is the most abstract and guttural explanation for the outcry that has largely surrounded the idea of the Mets firing Carlos Beltran. For an organization that has spent the last two decades dodging opportunities to show any integrity, this sure is a curious place to start playing the right way.
The Mets celebrated Pride Night last summer by unveiling their newly sponsored partnership with Chick-fil-A, a fast-food restaurant with a history of donating to notoriously homophobic groups and causes, two days before. They signed a disgraced former shortstop after he was cut in the wake of a domestic violence arrest and nominated him for a “Man of the Year” award after refusing to drop him from the roster for nearly three years.
They were sued by a former ticket saleswoman in early-2015 after she claimed the team’s COO regularly harassed and then fired her over her unmarried pregnancy. They have a 17-page long rap-sheet of callously and recklessly handled injuries featuring such players as (among several others – note three separate links here: one per word) Kazuo Matsui, Pedro Martinez, Billy Wagner, Ryan Church, Johan Santana, Jason Bay, and even Beltran himself at one point.
We all root for the team. We pay money to watch them in their beautiful stadium and buy their merchandise, even when they aren’t winning. But we don’t have to pretend the organization has been worth the trouble when it hasn’t always been. As if the numerous post-Cohen sale tales about the Mets’ current ownership group haven’t told enough of a story, be advised now and forevermore that integrity is not in this team’s vocabulary. If the Mets fire Carlos Beltran – which they’re perfectly entitled to do given the circumstances – this may be one honorable moment the team can hang on a mantel. They can have their moment. But in the scheme of things, that’s all it will be.
