Go Get Juan Soto

[Edgy MD]

And I want him to go to Los Diablos Rojos.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Here's a dumb headline in my Google News feed, from something called Marca.com:

Do the Mets give up on Juan Soto after acquiring Jose Siri from the Rays?

And no, I'm not going to click on the article to see what the answer is.

[Edgy MD]

News You Can't Use.

[metirish]

Do we think this gets resolved before Thanksgiving?

[Benjamin Grimm]

Most predictions I've seen have said early December.

[Centerfield]

Per Klapisch the Yankees meeting went well.



https://www.thescore.com/mlb/news/3134171https://www.thescore.com/mlb/news/3134171



Apparently he talked to Steinbrenner about the areas where the Yankees need to improve. I think that's encouraging for the Yankees. You don't do that unless you're serious about going back.



Nothing leaked about anything like that for the Mets. I wonder if the Mets would have to push for someone like Burnes or Fried in order to show him their commitment to winning.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I read somewhere that Steve Cohen will not be outbid for Soto.... that he will offer $50M more than the next highest bidder for Soto. If this is accurate and it's mainly about money, that would make the Mets the favorites to land Soto, I would think.

[Centerfield]

It was Michael Kay, who said he heard from "somebody in baseball".



https://nypost.com/2024/11/19/sports/what-scares-michael-kay-in-yankees-pursuit-of-juan-soto/https://nypost.com/2024/11/19/sports/what-scares-michael-kay-in-yankees-pursuit-of-juan-soto/



I think that if that were true, yes, the advantage goes to the Mets.



And while that may be true, I have my doubts about this source. Cohen and Stearns have run a very tight ship. How likely is it that they let something like this leak, and if they did, how likely is it that it got to Michael Kay's friend and no one else in baseball.

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, even if that's true, it's not true.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Here's a dumb headline in my Google News feed, from something called Marca.com: Do the Mets give up on Juan Soto after acquiring Jose Siri from the Rays? And no, I'm not going to click on the article to see what the answer is.

I'm now gleaning that this doesn't mean that the Mets don't need Soto now that they have Siri. There's some buzz out there that Siri and Soto are enemies and Soto wouldn't want to come to a team where Siri is his teammate.



I find it hard to give much weight to this. I can imagine 700 million reasons Soto might want to let bygones be bygones.



And if Soto says, I won't sign with the Mets if Siri is on the team, that's not a great attitude for an incoming player, but the Mets could ditch Siri so fast his head would spin.

[Edgy MD]

=Centerfield post_id=178105 time=1730568436 user_id=65]So yes, of course you always want to your system to develop your own Soto. But to illustrate how hard that is, the Mets, in their 82 year history have never developed a player as good as Soto, and so the likelihood that they will in the near future is pretty low.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Strawberry and Wright, I assume?



Their best free agent signing has got to be Beltran.

[Edgy MD]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Strawberry and Wright, I assume? Their best free agent signing has got to be Beltran.

I was thinking Seaver and Gooden.



Agreed on Beltran as their most successful free agent signing, though that may or may not depend on whether you count Mike Piazza.



With apologies to Don Aase, of course.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I guess I thought we were talking about offensive players.

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, poor Don Aase. His next hit will be his first.

[Centerfield]

I don't know how you can realistically compare pitchers to Juan Soto. But sure. Count them if you want. The point remains that the Mets, in their 62 year history, have developed at worst, zero, at best two players, if you include pitchers, that could reasonably be compared to Juan Soto.



So sure. Go ahead and wait for Juan Soto to show up in your farm system. But understand how unlikely that is and how long you might be waiting.



Understand further that other teams don't wait for the megastar to show up in their system. They sign them. And win championships.



Understand further still that you can improve scouting and player development in hopes of developing the next Soto AND sign the actual Soto.



And the fact that the Mets have never signed a player as good as Soto illustrates how unique this opportunity is and is an excellent argument for why they should pull out the stops and do everything in their power to sign him.

[Edgy MD]

You wrote about players "as good as," so no, there's nothing unrealistic at all.



They certainly were as good, and the data supports that. Of course they were.

[Centerfield]

I mean, not really.



Juan Soto is averaging 5.2 in WAR over his first 7 seasons. If you remove the sixty game 2020 season, his average yearly WAR is 5.66. His last four seasons are 7.9, 5.5, 5.5 and 7.1.



Gooden started out strong, with WAR of 5.5, 12.2 and 4.5 over his first three seasons. Then he never hit 4.0 ever again in his career. In his four seasons leading up to his age 26 season he went 2.5, 1.5, 3.4, 3.7. He's really not close to Juan Soto.



But let's say for argument that Gooden is as good as Soto. That's 2 players in 62 years. So you can hope that your team will scout and recruit and do whatever they can, but it's inescapable that the likelihood of developing your own Juan Soto is extremely unlikely. And the likelihood that they'll develop one in time to help this core win is basically negligible. There isn't a single prospect on the farm who's realistic upside is anywhere near Juan Soto.



So again, you can temper your desire to get Juan Soto off anyone else's team for whatever reason you want. But it's absolutely wrong to suggest that it makes sense to do so because:



(a) these deals tend to do south (they don't)

( You can develop your own Juan Soto (sure, I guess, but highly, highly unlikely)

© We've never signed one as good? (I think that's your argument? There's only been a few as good as him. And it worked out great for the teams that did. And the big free agents we signed worked out terrific as well. Beltran and Piazza. Two of the best Mets ever. And they remained productive right up until the end of their deals)

[batmagadanleadoff]

Jim Bowden, writing for The Athletic, believes that the Mets are the favorites to land Soto. (long read)



Excerpt:

I predicted a 15-year, $622 million contract when I finalized my top free agent ranking in late October. I believed Soto would get $622 million because he is only 26, has one of the best hit tools the game has ever seen, and should age well. Fifteen years makes sense when you consider many superstar players have signed deals that run until they're at least 40, even though the backends of those contracts rarely work out well for the teams. Those are eye-popping numbers, but they're really not surprising given the player. [***] 1. New York Mets The Mets are my favorites to sign Soto because I believe if their owner, Steve Cohen, wants him, he will make the highest bid — offering the most dollars and years — and if he does that and no other team matches it, I think he's getting his man. Cohen was the highest bidder last offseason for Yoshinobu Yamamoto before the Dodgers matched the Mets' bid, and his offer two years ago to Brandon Nimmo (eight years, $162 million) far exceeded any other the outfielder had received.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5935858/2024/11/21/mlb-juan-soto-free-agency-teams-suitors/https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5935858/2024/11/21/mlb-juan-soto-free-agency-teams-suitors/

[metirish]

has one of the best hit tools the game has ever seen





Just say he's a great hitter and stop with the nonsense

[Edgy MD]

I'm rooting for the deal to happen, but plenty such deals go south.



Fifteen years is wowsers. Look at Jim Bowden go.



The notion that the Mets have signed long-term deals for high-end free agents have all worked out is fine, as long as we ignore the times it didn't work out, but it frequently hasn't.



I agree that he's certainly special even in the company of such guys, but still, clearly several superstar contracts have failed for the Mets.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I can think of two occasions when the Mets have signed the most coveted free agent. One worked out a lot better than the other: Bobby Bonilla and Carlos Beltran.

[metsmarathon]

=Centerfield post_id=179578 time=1732296038 user_id=65]
I mean, not really.



Juan Soto is averaging 5.2 in WAR over his first 7 seasons. If you remove the sixty game 2020 season, his average yearly WAR is 5.66. His last four seasons are 7.9, 5.5, 5.5 and 7.1.



Gooden started out strong, with WAR of 5.5, 12.2 and 4.5 over his first three seasons. Then he never hit 4.0 ever again in his career. In his four seasons leading up to his age 26 season he went 2.5, 1.5, 3.4, 3.7. He's really not close to Juan Soto.



But let's say for argument that Gooden is as good as Soto. That's 2 players in 62 years. So you can hope that your team will scout and recruit and do whatever they can, but it's inescapable that the likelihood of developing your own Juan Soto is extremely unlikely. And the likelihood that they'll develop one in time to help this core win is basically negligible. There isn't a single prospect on the farm who's realistic upside is anywhere near Juan Soto.



So again, you can temper your desire to get Juan Soto off anyone else's team for whatever reason you want. But it's absolutely wrong to suggest that it makes sense to do so because:



(a) these deals tend to do south (they don't)

( You can develop your own Juan Soto (sure, I guess, but highly, highly unlikely)

© We've never signed one as good? (I think that's your argument? There's only been a few as good as him. And it worked out great for the teams that did. And the big free agents we signed worked out terrific as well. Beltran and Piazza. Two of the best Mets ever. And they remained productive right up until the end of their deals)

[Edgy MD]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I can think of two occasions when the Mets have signed the most coveted free agent. One worked out a lot better than the other: Bobby Bonilla and Carlos Beltran.

And Mike Piazza if you count him. And Yoenis Céspedes if you count him.



I can't particularly quantify covetedness, of course, but they got the most primo packages in their offseasons of free agency.



But yeah, age-wise, Gooden is easily the best comp, and though I disagree that he didn't have an equal or (to my thinking) better career through those first seven seasons, he went into his eighth year with the trend lines working against him more pointedly than can be claimed about Juan Soto.



And certainly through history, pitchers are more likely to have their career production skew to the front half of their tenures.



No doubt that Soto has a package like none other. I also think everybody knows that, and so whoever lands him assumes tons of risk.



I hope it's the Mets, but I'll sleep easy if it doesn't go down that way. I'm also kind of happy to see the Mets push another team's offers up.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm rooting for the deal to happen, but plenty such deals go south. Fifteen years is wowsers. Look at Jim Bowden go. The notion that the Mets have signed long-term deals for high-end free agents have all worked out is fine, as long as we ignore the times it didn't work out, but it frequently hasn't. I agree that he's certainly special even in the company of such guys, but still, clearly several superstar contracts have failed for the Mets.

Your argument evolves every post you make.



Your first argument as to the monster free agent contracts was:

Edgy MD wrote: I can list just as many top contracts that ended up being an exercise in burning money.

But you didn't. We're several posts into this discussion and you still haven't. And I posted a list of the top twenty mega free agent contracts in MLB history and showed that they have an 80% success rate. So until and unless you come up with another 16 of 20 that ended up being an exercise in burning money, that statement is just patently false.



And then you shifted.

Edgy MD wrote: It's probably at least as open a question as to whether they've ever successfully signed one.

Which, honestly. I don't know why anyone we may or may not have signed in the past would affect our current ability to sign Juan Soto. But sure. My counter was that yes, we've successfully signed megastars to free agent deals. Beltran and Piazza. And it worked out great.

Edgy MD wrote: The notion that the Mets have signed long-term deals for high-end free agents have all worked out is fine, as long as we ignore the times it didn't work out, but it frequently hasn't. I agree that he's certainly special even in the company of such guys, but still, clearly several superstar contracts have failed for the Mets.

And now, you've shifted yet again. Saying that these long term deals for mega stars for the Mets don't work out. Or more accurately, they "frequently" don't work out. Again, if you're going to make blanket statements, it's helpful to come back with actual data.



By my count, the Mets have signed the Mega Star to a long term deal three times.



1. Bobby Bonilla (1992). At the time, the richest deal in MLB history. I'll count this one despite the fact that Bonilla was less a mega star, versus the best star available (this type of deal is often a trap). But let's include him. He was 13th in OPS (.883) going into his age 29 season. His first year was a disappointment for sure. His OPS dropped to .779. But then over the next three years, his OPS was .874, .878, and .984. He was traded in 1995 for top prospect Alex Ochoa. Overall, a success.



2. Mike Piazza (1998). Yes, this technically a trade and signing. Piazza is the first true Mega Star we got. He was #2 in OPS in 1997. Piazza had a career .915 OPS for the Mets, was a 6 time All-Star, and is possibly the greatest offensive Met.



3. Carlos Beltran (2005). The other mega start signed to a long term deal is Carlos Beltran. Career .869 OPS with the Mets. In his last season, he had a .904 OPS and was traded for Zach Wheeler. He'll make the Hall of Fame, and his plaque may have a Mets logo.



Who are the others?



Jason Bay was not a star, and wasn't even the biggest star available that year. Bay is a great example a Wilpon-Second-Tier special. Appier was another. Glavine was over the hill. Cespedes was a short term deal. I can't think of the Mets acquiring any other mega star to a long term deal.

Edited November 22, 2024 by Guest

[Centerfield]

Thought of one more.



4. Johan Santana. Perhaps the best example of a Long-Term Mega Star not working out is Johan Santana. Again, this was a trade and extension, but in 2008 he agreed to a 6 year, $137.5MM extension. Santana was great in 2008, very good in both 2009 and 2010, but battled injury the last three years of the deal, where the Mets got very little return on the back end other than the 2012 no hitter.



So if you're looking for deals that went south, this is the best example. And not surprisingly, it's a pitcher.

[Centerfield]

=metsmarathon post_id=179588 time=1732304458 user_id=83]
=Centerfield post_id=179578 time=1732296038 user_id=65]
I mean, not really.



Juan Soto is averaging 5.2 in WAR over his first 7 seasons. If you remove the sixty game 2020 season, his average yearly WAR is 5.66. His last four seasons are 7.9, 5.5, 5.5 and 7.1.



Gooden started out strong, with WAR of 5.5, 12.2 and 4.5 over his first three seasons. Then he never hit 4.0 ever again in his career. In his four seasons leading up to his age 26 season he went 2.5, 1.5, 3.4, 3.7. He's really not close to Juan Soto.



But let's say for argument that Gooden is as good as Soto. That's 2 players in 62 years. So you can hope that your team will scout and recruit and do whatever they can, but it's inescapable that the likelihood of developing your own Juan Soto is extremely unlikely. And the likelihood that they'll develop one in time to help this core win is basically negligible. There isn't a single prospect on the farm who's realistic upside is anywhere near Juan Soto.



So again, you can temper your desire to get Juan Soto off anyone else's team for whatever reason you want. But it's absolutely wrong to suggest that it makes sense to do so because:



(a) these deals tend to do south (they don't)

( You can develop your own Juan Soto (sure, I guess, but highly, highly unlikely)

© We've never signed one as good? (I think that's your argument? There's only been a few as good as him. And it worked out great for the teams that did. And the big free agents we signed worked out terrific as well. Beltran and Piazza. Two of the best Mets ever. And they remained productive right up until the end of their deals)

[Edgy MD]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm rooting for the deal to happen, but plenty such deals go south. Fifteen years is wowsers. Look at Jim Bowden go. The notion that the Mets have signed long-term deals for high-end free agents have all worked out is fine, as long as we ignore the times it didn't work out, but it frequently hasn't. I agree that he's certainly special even in the company of such guys, but still, clearly several superstar contracts have failed for the Mets. Your argument evolves every post you make.

Good.

Your first argument as to the monster free agent contracts was: Edgy MD wrote: I can list just as many top contracts that ended up being an exercise in burning money. But you didn't.

So what? I wrote that I could. If you'd like more information, please ask. That would be more evolution, of course.



But actually I have listed several. I'm happy to list many more.

We're several posts into this discussion and you still haven't.

I certainly have. OF MY OWN VOLITION!

[Edgy MD]

Edgy MD wrote: The notion that the Mets have signed long-term deals for high-end free agents have all worked out is fine, as long as we ignore the times it didn't work out, but it frequently hasn't. I agree that he's certainly special even in the company of such guys, but still, clearly several superstar contracts have failed for the Mets. And now, you've shifted yet again.

No, I havent.

Saying that these long term deals for mega stars for the Mets don't work out. Or more accurately, they "frequently" don't work out. Again, if you're going to make blanket statements, ...

I didn't make any blanket statements. I wouldn't make any blanket statements. You specifically quoted where my statement was qualified. Please give me some credit.

... it's helpful to come back with actual data.

Of course it is. If you'd like some, please ask.



I tend not to go overboard supporting a point unless it's challenged.

[Edgy MD]

Great analysis. Where can I find fWAR? I use Baseball Reference WAR (which I guess is bWAR?) because it's easily accessible on their player page.

He came to the same conclusion I did, to which you characterized me as somehow not realistic, condescendingly told me to "count them if you want," then when I did count them you responded "not really."



With him, it's "great analysis."



I'm really happy to support anything I write. Charts and tables and shit. 2-D and 3-D. All you need to do is ask.



Line graphs. Pie graphs. Ven diagrams. I can display it all. But the stakes grow so fucking high when you start talking down to me, I certainly am not motivated to post that on my own. So I just keep things short. "I disagree." "I can cite alternatives."



It's too damn personal all the time, but I can build an argument the size of a building if you'd like. I can cite logic and data and religion and biophysics and drama and poetry and philosophy. Regression analyses, cost-of-living adjustments. Standard deviations and ANOVA models.



But I tend to bore people, so I state my position, and if I think it's self-evident, and I don't want to be all tiresome, I leave all that out unless somebody writes something asking me to clarify or back up my position.



OE: The claim about ANOVA models is mostly a bluff, but I sure am keen to try.