Mets brass mix-up because Beltran's knee uninsured?

Written by Mike Mariano | 19 January 2010

The hits just keep on coming.  I haven't written about the Phillies in a week because this Mets stuff allows for me to bash them seemingly everyday.  Craig Calcaterra (the Shyster) writes for Circling the Bases today about the situation and a new wrinkle from Peter Gammons.  Namely, that the Mets never insured Carlos Beltran's contract.  Therefore, in things go awry and he misses the season, the Mets pay his exorbitant salary for him to rehab and rest.  The Shyster wonders whether the Mets mistake was due to incompetence and/or reluctancy to spend.  Did they botch the insurance, not realizing the need to insure an aging star, or did they try to sneak by without paying the premiums?  Either way, despite the rain cloud that's been flooding Flushing for the past year, the heavy stuff isn't coming down for a while.

Added by Benny B

From Metsblog:

I e-mailed Maury Brown, from the Biz of Baseball, as well as Will Carroll ofBaseball Prospectus, both of whom I trust and respect when it comes to medical and contract news in MLB, and they said:

Carroll: It’s impossible to insure a pitcher beyond three years.  I’d assume that it’s the same for position players.  I’d guess maybe 10 percent of contracts are insured.  Maybe.

Brown: My understanding is long-term contracts are becoming exceptionally hard due to risk.

I know you take joy in jumping on Mets management, but do some research first.  Is Halliday's contract insured?