If Mets ownership did what people seem to think they want–say nothing–the media would be hounding them night and day. WHAT ARE YOU HIDING? WHY WON’T YOU ISSUE A STATEMENT? WHY AM I SHOUTING? People would presume their guilt, even more so than they do now, I think. Because the family’s reputation is being attacked. How on earth could they not respond to this in some way? Of all people, Olney–a former reporter on the Mets’ and Yankees’ beat–should know this.

As for the charge raised by Lennon and others that the Mets are timing announcements like Castillo’s release and the now-officially-official release of Oliver Perez strategically for PR purposes, to that I’d say: Who cares? There isn’t a business in the world that doesn’t hold off on releasing news or making decisions official for PR reasons. At least not ones that want to stay in business. Why should the Mets be any different?

– Matthew Callan, Amazin’ Avenue.

I have started and not finished about five different posts explaining, essentially, why I do not often and will not often weigh in on the Wilpons’ financial saga on this site. Callan gets at a lot of the reasons here: Essentially, the Wilpons have backed into a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t scenario, and it has become difficult to see through the posturing from both sides in the pending lawsuit (now lawsuits) to ween out reality.

I’ll add that I have no inclination or particular aptitude for business. If I did, I’d probably be a businessman and perhaps making a lot more money right now. I like baseball and writing, among other things. I have a pretty awesome job that involves writing about baseball. This stuff, though it involves baseball because it is inextricably linked to the Mets, is not baseball.

Also, I am not an expert in business or law or anything besides sandwiches, really. And it strikes me that every single person involved at the level where stuff is actually happening — the lawyers, the trustees, the Wilpons, etc. — is both better informed and better qualified than I am to process the various details of this case. Presumably there are career financial lawyers working around the clock on it.

I’m not sure I trust the media outlets covering the story to present the full breadth of information in any accessible way, at least partly because — as I’ve said before — what little I do understand about it suggests that most of the articles published on the subject, especially in sports sections, entirely fail to grasp or even attempt to portray the nuance involved. Hell, I dedicate a good deal of space on this site to doubting and criticizing sports columns in newspapers. I’m not about to put much faith in the same columnists when they take on a much more complicated subject.

I will continue to occasionally link off to takes I find interesting and to news when something meaningful actually happens. But if you’re looking for much more, I’d suggest checking out just about every other outlet covering the Mets.

With Oliver Perez, Boof Bonser, Ryota Igarashi and Taylor Tankersley now out of the bidding and mixed reports coming out today about Jason Isringhausen’s health, I am adjusting the odds I set for the Mets’ bullpen hopefuls last week.

Based on Rubin’s report linked above and just about everything else I’ve read, I’m going to now assume that Taylor Buchholz and Tim Byrdak, barring injury, join Francisco Rodriguez, Bobby Parnell and D.J. Carrasco as definites on the roster. That leaves, by my count, six dudes competing for two jobs. They are:

Pedro Beato (1:1): Beato was at 1:1 last time I did this and hasn’t done much to change his standing. His small-sample Grapefruit League performance hasn’t been dominant, but it hasn’t been atrocious either and he’s still 24 with a lively fastball and a ticket back to the Orioles if the Mets can’t find a spot for him on the 25-man roster.

Jason Isringhausen (1:1): Isringhausen slips to even-money due to the injury talk. By the Mets’ accounts he’s still in the mix, but hearing a pop in your elbow when you’re 38 and already a veteran of multiple arm surgeries is not a promising sign. If he’s healthy he’s probably still in, but it’s looking a lot less likely he’ll be healthy. And at some point the Mets will have to question — if they haven’t already — if they’ll want to lose Beato or risk Pat Misch and Manny Acosta on waivers to keep around a guy with so much mileage on his arm that could get hurt at any time.

Manny Acosta (2:1): Acosta has been pretty good, if a bit wild, in Grapefruit League action. Gun to my head (and based on very limited information), if I needed to pick one of them to pitch an important late inning in April, I’d probably take Acosta over Beato. Luckily no one’s holding a gun to my head and I don’t make those decisions, because Beato probably offers more long-term upside than Acosta.

Pat Misch (2:1): Pat Misch has been perfectly Pat Mischy in 16 2/3 Spring Training innings: Good control, not a lot of strikeouts, hit kind of hard but not terrible. He benefits by being left-handed and versatile. Also, his middle name is Theodore, which is my middle name too.

Mike O’Connor (5:1): O’Connor’s odds are long because he can be sent to the Minor Leagues without going through waivers. It’s hard to imagine a situation wherein the Mets are so eager to keep O’Connor around for April that they’re willing to give up one of the four guys above him on this list. His odds are better than Blaine Boyer’s because he is left-handed.

Blaine Boyer (9:1): Though Boyer has been good in limited Grapefruit League action, he is a hard-throwing right-hander like Beato and Acosta, and unlike Beato and Acosta he can be sent to Triple-A. I’d say his best chance for making the team now would be a rash of injuries. We’ll probably see Boyer in Queens at some point in the middle of the season.

The field (14:1): The field’s odds get a little better, mostly to make the math work out. But there has been some player movement lately, so this includes the off chance the Mets pick up someone from waivers or on a Minor League deal that they’re convinced is better than the in-house options.

According to just about everyone, the Mets have released Oliver Perez. So you can exhale.

I hate to say I told you so.

The decision brought about celebration in even the most contrarian corners of the fanbase. The universally reviled Perez, he of the 6.81 ERA in 112 innings since signing that lucrative three-year contract, is gone. We will suffer no more of his meltdowns. He has hurdled over the foul line into Mets’ history.

There’s really not much else to say. But I’ll add that though the Mets-fan part of me is warmed by the news — more proof that the new front-office is willing to cut bait on sunk costs and compile the best possible roster regardless of contractual nonsense — some other part of me sees it as at least a little bit sad. I got at this before, a couple weeks ago.

I know no one’s eager to pity a guy who is about to make $12 million this year for doing absolutely nothing. But Oliver Perez is 29. He has been playing baseball professionally since he was 17. He has lost his fastball. What must it be like to have the body that took you to such heights stop cooperating? What does Ollie do now?