The Pete Alonso Conundrum

[metsmarathon]

a few years back, Pete’s most similar player was shohei. That shohei appeared on Pete’s list wasnt really my point. Rather it was an entry into my next point.

Right now, if you look, shoheis most similar batter is ryan howard. Wait. Actually, his most similar overall is Pete. His most similar thru age 29 is Ryan Howard.

And some other big lumbering sluggers are all over the list.

In what way are shoei and Pete and Ryan Howard at all similar, other than that when you add up their homers and doubles and triples etc you get around the same numbers?

What examples do you have of success using sim scores to predict player performance, other than as a reminder that aging curves exist?

[roger_that]

a few years back, Pete’s most similar player was shohei. That shohei appeared on Pete’s list wasnt really my point. Rather it was an entry into my next point.

Right now, if you look, shoheis most similar batter is ryan howard. Wait. Actually, his most similar overall is Pete. His most similar thru age 29 is Ryan Howard.

And some other big lumbering sluggers are all over the list.

In what way are shoei and Pete and Ryan Howard at all similar, other than that when you add up their homers and doubles and triples etc you get around the same numbers?

What examples do you have of success using sim scores to predict player performance, other than as a reminder that aging curves exist?

 

Well, you need to use your brains as well as the advantages that sim scores give us. Using only one of them will result in certain misconceptions. In Shohei's case, I'd judge that the one time he appeared as Pete's best comparable, they were 26 years old, neither had a long body of work to begin with (which is when the sim scores will be most unreliable) and Shohei had done very few of the very distinctive things that would mark his MLB career. I wouldn't put that much stock in sim scores of players with three years of MLB experience.

Tell me, why (if sim scores are based strictly on adding certain stats together, as they are) do you suppose most sim score lists of veterans turn out to be players who play the same position, and often of players of a very similar body type? Adding stats wouldn't produce such results --it's because they're very similar players, and have often gone through most of the same things that formed who they were as players. This makes sim scores useful in predicting future results--with the judicious use of our brains, of course.

I hesitate to name the very best result I've gotten speculating with sim scores because that ended up getting me thrown off this website. Let me just say that it was a spectacularly successful speculation on my part, one that was deeply upsetting to the majority of CPFers at the time, and one that would probably upset some CPFers today.

If you want to hear a famous case that would have proved helpful to the Mets, I'd suggest Jason Bay. His comparables in his early thirties are all of players who had put up good to great numbers in their late 20s, like Bay, but who fell off a cliff once they'd hit 30. I think a careful perusal of Bay's most comparables might have given the Mets considerable pause in acquiring his services. Not all, and not all overwhelmingly, but enough of them faded very quickly to let the Mets wonder if they were doing the smart thing by banking on Bay to continue slugging as he aged.

[Edgy MD]

No it wasn't a success for you. You were an embarrassing disgrace.

And you are lying now, as you continually and shamelessly do.

And you cannot get "thrown off this website." As you have already been thrown off, after several patient suspensions, in defiance of the grace afforded you. Any disappearance that happens now is just me getting over my laziness and enforcing the ban you have already earned a thousand times over.

[Centerfield]

I feel like the using sim score to predict results can be fairly easily tested if you are able to go back and look up similar players retroactively.

I don't think it's any major feat if a sim score predicts decline. As we all agree, almost every player declines during that 32-34 window. Oftentimes precipitously. It's like I can come up with a fancy formula to predict that Frank from accounting couldn't hit Nolan McLean. It's not the formula, it's that most can't hit Nolan McLean. Does sim score predict the outlier?

Take a look at Moises Alou at age 30. Or David Ortiz. Or Jim Thome. Do their lists contain other players who performed into their late 30s? Or do their lists have players that declined under the normal aging curve.

If you look up Manny Ramirez at age 30, do you find Jason Bay? Or is it full of guys like Mike Schmidt or Moises Alou? If the latter, maybe there's something to it.

[smg58]

I don't know if you really need to get into a microscopic analysis of sim scores to know that the chances of Alonso's performance declining significantly over the next couple of years are high enough to advise caution. The questions that need to be asked are (a) how far are you willing to go to try to keep him, and ( what's plan B?

[metsmarathon]

Tell me, why (if sim scores are based strictly on adding certain stats together, as they are) do you suppose most sim score lists of veterans turn out to be players who play the same position, and often of players of a very similar body type? Adding stats wouldn't produce such results --it's because they're very similar players, and have often gone through most of the same things that formed who they were as players. This makes sim scores useful in predicting future results--with the judicious use of our brains, of course.

 

 

Judiciously using my brain I know that there’s a position adjustment In the score. Like, the difference between a shortstop and a firstbaseman is about 200 points. Between a DH and 1b is 14 points. So yeah, it’s amazing how often players who play the same position come up as similar to each other.

And with that, I know all that I need to know about the remainder of this conversation. It’s about as useful as looking to the sim scores to predict Pete’s future career based on Nate Colbert.

[Frayed Knot]

I don't know if you really need to get into a microscopic analysis of sim scores to know that the chances of Alonso's performance declining significantly over the next couple of years are high enough to advise caution. The questions that need to be asked are (a) how far are you willing to go to try to keep him, and ( what's plan B?

 

Right around this time last year I speculated (somewhere on this thread) that the Mets would hold off on anything north of four years for Pete and be willing to walk away if some other team went to five. Turns out it seemed like nobody even went to four. So now you can just take that same mindset only maybe holding the line at anything over three years given that he's a year older. That gets you his age 31, 32, and 33 seasons. Would they swallow hard and match a fourth year if some other suitor offered? Maybe.

OTOH, three years is a tricky length for camp Alonso/Boras to accept as it's not like going into age 34 season is an inviting time to be a FA for a 1B/DH

[rchurch314]

A BIG part of this is going to be Murakami-sama.

His contract is even more uncertain, but I think most teams would rather have Murakami. There's some machinations here for a shrewd POBO though, and probably for Boras too, as maybe they play Alonso off him. Blustering aside, I think Boras knows 7 years is unlikely, but maybe he can position Alonso as the 'safe' choice and land something bigger for teams that think they're not going to have a chance at Murakami and want to grab Alonso before other teams are looking for plan B.

More likely it goes the usual way where everyone goes after Murakami and Alonso waits and plays all the teams that missed out against each other., but there's certainly an argument to be made for the Mets just offering him something big enough to get him to sign early. They could still go after Murakami after that anyway, given their 3B and DH situations, though I doubt the Mets are going to spend $50/mill on two CI/DH guys this offseason, though they do seem allergic to paying pitchers..

[MFS62]

Since nobody knows what's going to happen, I'm going to start a poll for what folks think will happen.

Later

[whippoorwill]

Yeah this thread has gotten way off topic, and also is the boringest thread in the history of the internet. Really.

[Centerfield]

I don't know if you really need to get into a microscopic analysis of sim scores to know that the chances of Alonso's performance declining significantly over the next couple of years are high enough to advise caution. The questions that need to be asked are (a) how far are you willing to go to try to keep him, and ( what's plan B?

 

Three years certainly. Four years begrudgingly. Five years, I dunno. I guess it depends on who else is available by the time Pete signs.

Which is why I think it's important to get this done quicker than we did last year. Let Pete go find his market. Match it if it's 4 years or less. But pivot if he doesn't make up his mind quickly.

Plan B Options:

1. Murakami. Huge unknown. Younger, but he's never played in the bigs, has huge strikeout numbers, and was hurt last year.

2. Bellinger. Same age as Pete, more or less. Less consistent offensively, but is a better athlete and offers positional versatility. If he can actually play CF, he might be a good fit for the Mets regardless of Pete.

3. Josh Naylor. Not as good offensively, better defense. A few years younger.

4. Ryan Clifford. The in-house option.

Non-1B Options. You could always try moving Vientos/Baty/Nimmo/Soto to 1B and fill Pete's production in other ways.

1. Kyle Tucker. The big fish this offseason. I don't see this happening.

2. Kyle Schwarber. Masher. But will be 33 next year, and has never hit for any kind of average.

3. Alex Bregman. He's a big name, but I don't like his production at all. Power numbers have fallen off, which isn't great considering the ballparks he plays in. But he bats RH.

[Edgy MD]

Other coming firstbasemen in the system, both probably more than a year away, are Jacob Reimer and Chris Suero.

While neither is best suited at first, both are kind of gravitating that way, as are all of us.

Even McNeil could end up there in 2026, I guess. It will be the last guaranteed year of his contract, and a year over there might give a longer-tem option a chance to emerge.

[MFS62]

While Reimer may end up at first, he's a third baseman and not a butcher they would have to move there.

IMO Suero's talents would be wasted at first. He's a catcher who can run (over 20 SB without looking it up) and plays the outfield. I'm not sure Homie's near term position is at first.

But if one of them has to move to first at the end of a productive 15 year Mets career, so be it.

Ryan Clifford has the power and (lack of) speed that would make him the likeliest near term first baseman currently in the system.

Later

[rchurch314]

3. Josh Naylor. Not as good offensively, better defense. A few years younger.

 

 

I kinda want Naylor anyway, he seems like a fun player. But his defense isn't particularly great either, and while he's pretty good offensively, his ceiling is probably Alonso's average. Mets are leaking that they want more lefties though, can they move him to ..third? LF?

Alonso as the DH and Naylor as the 1B probably works, but I doubt you convince Alonso of that, though if you paid him the same maybe. Doubt the Mets do that though.

[Centerfield]

Joel Sherman says that Pete turned down a 7 year, $158M extension from the Mets in 2023. If he had accepted that deal, deducting the $20,500,000 he made this year, it would leave 6 years, $138M ($23M/year). A 6 year deal would take Alonso into his year 35 season. Pete was allegedly looking for an 8-10 year deal, which I guess would now be a 7-9 year deal.

Spotrac estimates his value at 6 years, $174 M ($29M/Year). I'm guessing this would be the upper limit of how high Stearns is willing to go, if it's even that high.

I dunno. I don't feel great about this one. I think he's likely gone.

 

Going back to the original extension offer from 2023. Pete has since made $20.5M in 2024, and $30M in 2025. There would be 5 years, $107.5M left on his contract. ($21.5M AAV). You'd think just by sheer pride he wouldn't want to take less than that.

Maybe 4 years $100M, plus a 5th year vesting option gets it done. Or a straight 4 year, $115M contract.

[Centerfield]

Another option at first is Kazuma Okamoto, expected to be posted by Yomiuri.

Power hitter, though not as prodigious as Murakami. But hits for average, walks and plays good defense. 29 years old.

Has been compared to Seiya Suzuki.

[Centerfield]

An article on Okamoto.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/slugging-japanese-infielder-expected-to-be-posted-by-yomiuri-giants/ar-AA1OoQQw?ocid=BingNewsSerp

[Centerfield]

One thing about Okamoto and Munetaka is that once they are posted, they only have 45 days to sign. I don’t think the Mets can afford to watch options come off the board without Alonso locked in.

I suspect the timelines of the alternatives, the two Japanese players, Bellinger, and Naylor if you’re so inclined, will speed up the Pete timetable this winter.

[duan]

Jim Bowden predicts that he will get 6 years $182 million.

I mean that strikes me as WAY too much. He has him as the third best free agent on the market, behind Tucker & Schwarber.

Having said that last year he predicted 7 years $189 million and we know how that played out.

I'm not sure I can imagine anyone else offering that length of contract at that rate.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I don't think so either. As we know, all it takes is one dumb owner, but sometimes there isn't that dumb owner. I think that the reasons that make the Mets hesitate would also apply to the other teams as well.

[Edgy MD]

One thing about Okamoto and Munetaka is that once they are posted, they only have 45 days to sign. I don’t think the Mets can afford to watch options come off the board without Alonso locked in.

I suspect the timelines of the alternatives, the two Japanese players, Bellinger, and Naylor if you’re so inclined, will speed up the Pete timetable this winter.

 

I think The Mets can afford to pursue two firstbasemen at once. If they somehow accidentally come to agreements with both, they have the DH slot open as well. So they can kind of land an Alonso replacement and keep negotiating with Alonso, if necessary.

[MFS62]

And I think I read that at least one of them also plays third - expanding the options.

Later

[Edgy MD]

While Reimer may end up at first, he's a third baseman and not a butcher they would have to move there.

IMO Suero's talents would be wasted at first. He's a catcher who can run (over 20 SB without looking it up) and plays the outfield. I'm not sure Homie's near term position is at first.

But if one of them has to move to first at the end of a productive 15 year Mets career, so be it.

 

 

I did not suggest that Reimer is a butcher. I did not suggest that Suero's near-term position is first. I specifically wrote that neither is best suited at first, but if that is where the vacancy is — and that is the thesis of this thread — they are two guys in the system who play first, and thus, they become relevant.

[Centerfield]

One thing about Okamoto and Munetaka is that once they are posted, they only have 45 days to sign. I don’t think the Mets can afford to watch options come off the board without Alonso locked in.

I suspect the timelines of the alternatives, the two Japanese players, Bellinger, and Naylor if you’re so inclined, will speed up the Pete timetable this winter.

 

I think The Mets can afford to pursue two firstbasemen at once. If they somehow accidentally come to agreements with both, they have the DH slot open as well. So they can kind of land an Alonso replacement and keep negotiating with Alonso, if necessary.

 

That’s a great point. The case can be made that Okamoto and Bellinger would be good fits for the Mets even with Pete in the fold.

Okamoto especially. He’s a RH bat that plays third, so can spell Baty, and McNeil with Baty shifting to second when that happens. Plays corner OF, so he can spell Nimmo. And plays 1B so he can fill in on days Alonso DHs. And can be the primary DH.

Good fit overall.

[Centerfield]

And Bellinger can play CF in the short term, while also giving our corner OF a day off, and play 1B.

[Centerfield]

Keith Hernandez was on Jon Heyman and Joel Sherman's podcast. According to Keith (very scientific), Pete is most similar to Harmon Killebrew.

Killebrew is a better hitter overall than Pete. So I'm not sure Keith's eye-test would pass any real level of scrutiny. But you can't argue against his longevity.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/k/killeha01.shtml

Stayed square in his prime through his age 34 season (.957 OPS, 41 HR). Was good through age 36. (.850 OPS, then .817 OPS). Fell off a cliff at age 37.

[Frayed Knot]

Killebrew was a great power hitter, he and Frank Howard were perennial AL HR leaders for a time. But let's just say he wasn't exactly a fitness nut. The Seattle Pilots (and probably a bunch of other teams that didn't have a player keeping a secret diary) referred to him as 'The Fat Kid'.

[Lefty Specialist]

I like Bellinger's flexibility. He's cut down on the strikeouts, too, in recent years. You can sign him and still go after Pete.

[Frayed Knot]

So a couple of things here.

These guys are all 1B-men who played at least a decent chunk of their careers in this century. All were also better overall hitters than Pete.

Shown are their OPS and OPS+ (pct above or below lg avg) figures for their age 27 to 30 seasons and then their 31 to 35 years

which is where Pete is heading if he lands a five year contract. The others lost an average of 35 OPS+ 'points' between the four year period

from age 27 thru age 30 and the five year stretch including their age 31 thru 35 seasons and only Thome and Votto, those two walk-tactic

freaks, didn't suffer a league average decline in their early 30s.

Albert Pujols: OPS/OPS+ Age 27-30 = 1054 / 177; Age 31 - 35 = 825 / 130

Miguel Cabrera: 1037 / 178; 889 / 141

Ron Howard: 912 / 134; 751 / 105

Mark Teixeira: 928 / 141; 808 / 118

Jim Thome: 982 / 149; 989 / 155

Joey Votto: 942 / 157; 929 / 145

Freddie Freeman: 954 / 147; 919 / 151

Pete Alonso: 838 / 134; ????

So, if we sign him, we're likely to see a decline; the only question is how much can we live with?

I said last year (on this thread) that I thought the Mets would dare someone to offer five years and were prepared to walk away if someone did.

So I guess my position now is that they should be prepared to cut ties, or at least think seriously about it, if someone offers him four.

[Edgy MD]

Ron Howard's OPS, to be fair, did not go down because his performance declined. He left TV to direct films, but he might well have stayed just as productive had he stuck to sitcom acting.