An industry official told me this morning that Pedro Feliciano cleared waivers in August, which surprised me. Feliciano is making $2.9 million this season - high for a LOOGY, I grant you - but given that teams often exhibit less financial discipline and/or common sense when they're in the heat of a pennant race, I didn't think some $970,000 for two months of potentially very good work was an outrageous fortune.

Because no one claimed Feliciano, the Mets had freedom in deciding what to do with him. They could have traded him to any of the other 29 teams. Or, more realistically, to any of the contending clubs. They could've shedded salary or picked up, say, a second-tier prospect by helping pay some or all of the freight.

So why didn't the Mets trade Feliciano? With the considerable help of Mets beat writer David Lennon, we ferreted out the club's thinking:

1. There wasn't a great deal of interest in Feliciano, according to a person in the loop. That has to speak as much to the contending clubs' needs as any reflection upon Feliciano. Unless a name is slipping my mind, I don't believe a single lefty reliever was traded in August. And again, Feliciano is one of the best at what he does.

2. The Mets still have an interest in finishing out the season in unembarrassing fashion. As we've discussed here , the trades of Rod Barajas and Jeff Francoeur might have made the remaining Mets players feel like the front office was giving up, but those two players had become on-field liabilities. Feliciano isn't. He's putting up a very representative season for him, and that season has value. So with no major suitors, the Mets didn't aggressively shop Feliciano.

3. Feliciano will probably be a Type B free agent this fall, which means that, if the Mets offered Feliciano arbitration and he signed elsewhere, the Mets would get a sandwich-round draft pick as compensation. If Feliciano accepted the Mets' offer...he'd be an overpaid LOOGY. But the Mets' problem in recent years hasn't been overpaying for competence. It has been employing awfulness, at any price.

There's also a chance that Feliciano could wind up as Type A, with a good final month, and if the Mets offered him arbitration in that instance, Feliciano would have to consider accepting, because teams have historically exhibited an unwillingness to give up two draft picks for a non-closer.

--I missed this when it first broke - vacation excuse - but the Yankees recently had high-ranking decision-makers Billy Eppler and Damon Oppenheimer in Japan to watch Yu Darvish pitch. It obviously carries meaning that the Yankees sent two such important people abroad, but I don't think we should leap to conclusions that the Yankees will go aggressively after Darvish, who appears likely to be posted this winter by the Hokkaido Nippon Ham Fighters.

--As expected, Javier Vazquez will replace Dustin Moseley in the Yankees' starting rotation and pitch on Saturday. It makes sense. There's a chance that Vazquez can be a productive postseason starter for the Yankees. Moseley? No.

--Interesting piece here by Frankie Piliere of AOL FanHouse, about Derek Jeter's swing and approach.

advertisement | advertise on newsday

--Cliff Lee left the Rangers, who were in Kansas City, to have his back treated in Texas. No big deal, the Rangers say, but this obviously will have to be monitored.

--Good piece by Joe Posnanski about the value of closers. I'm with Posnanski. I think closers can be quite overrated by some baseball folks, and yet at the same time, I do think a team can be torn apart by a string of late-game losses.

I found this piece on Twitter, which I highly recommend.

--The Nationals fired broadcaster Rob Dibble, for really dumb comments he made about Stephen Strasburg while working on Sirius XM Radio. It's one thing to be critical of the team that employs you. It's another altogether to be critical and uninformed.

--Have a great night.

@NewsdaySports