What’s the Plan?

[Gwreck]

Britton and Sammon are asking, and so am I:

 

[bLOCKQUOTE] What are the New York Mets doing?

After Edwin Díaz agreed to a three-year contract to become the closer for the Los Angeles Dodgers on Tuesday, that’s the refrain echoing through the hotels that host MLB’s Winter Meetings.

According to league sources, the Mets had offered the 31-year-old Díaz a three-year, $66 million deal with modest deferrals. New York expressed a willingness to go higher before Díaz decided to sign with Los Angeles.

One year after signing Juan Soto to a record contract and falling on their faces down the stretch of the season, the Mets have been curiously cautious in free agency. They have signaled at every turn an unwillingness to extend long-term offers — to the top of the starting pitching market, to the top of the outfield market, to their long-tenured All-Stars in Díaz and Pete Alonso.

Losing Díaz to the Dodgers is a bad result; losing him to such reasonable terms — three years and $69 million — invites skepticism of president of baseball operations David Stearns’ short-term plans and long-term vision.

Yes, it is early in the offseason, and a splashy acquisition (or two) between now and the start of spring training wouldn’t surprise anyone.[/bLOCKQUOTE]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6876026/2025/12/09/new-york-mets-edwin-diaz-plan/

Starting Pitching

Does we really just want to roll with Senga, Manaea, Peterson, and Holmes again, with McLean being the only major change? Does anyone really think that Sproat or Tong are actually ready and able to make 25-30 regular season starts plus a couple more in the playoffs — and be good while doing so?

Offense

Schwarber got 5/$150 to be a fulltime DH. That sure seems like a pretty good indicator of where the market would be for Pete. If the Mets aren’t going to pay up, then the plan is…Vientos?

And even if they do pay Pete, there’s still two outfield spots and a DH slot that are vacant. Again, Vientos is not the answer. Assuming that Benge and Williams can both immediately be impactful players at the major league level seems like folly.

Bullpen

Needs several quality arms and is now counting on a bounceback season in a huge way from (1) Williams AND (2) Minter, plus hoping that (3) Raley will be good over an entire season.

It feels like the Mets are 3 impact free agents away from being an 85 win team.

[Centerfield]

I think the plan for 2026, and generally going forward is to keep payroll fluid and avoid as many long term contracts as possible, especially those that will have multiple players aging at the same time. I think the goal will be 85-88 win teams that compete for the Wild Card yearly, and contend once in a while for a division when everything breaks right.

I think the goal is to have the farm system feed the team, and cycle out guys as they hit free agency, while making an exception here and there on a couple superstars. Take gambles on older players on short term deals, reclamation projects.

Boring, ever-evolving teams that get bounced first or second round every year. Like the Brewers.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Boring, ever-evolving teams that get bounced first or second round every year. Like the Brewers.

 

Well, if they contend every year we won't be bored. But it's certainly not the model I would prefer.

[Marshmallowmilkshake]

I think the plan for 2026, and generally going forward is to keep payroll fluid and avoid as many long term contracts as possible, especially those that will have multiple players aging at the same time. I think the goal will be 85-88 win teams that compete for the Wild Card yearly, and contend once in a while for a division when everything breaks right.

I think the goal is to have the farm system feed the team, and cycle out guys as they hit free agency, while making an exception here and there on a couple superstars. Take gambles on older players on short term deals, reclamation projects.

Boring, ever-evolving teams that get bounced first or second round every year. Like the Brewers.

 

Well, the Brewers weren't dropping $755 million on Juan Soto.

[ashie62]

I don't think they're going after Kyle Tucker or Alex Bregman or even Framber Valdez or any other bigger names

I do believe they may be in on the two Japanese 1B/3B guys

The splashier of the two is Munataka Murakami. He is 26 years old and the guy that crushed Sadahara Oh's record with 56 homers in 2022

He strikes out a lot. 28% in NPB is considered high for a league that chases less. He is considered a below average defender. He does have a big personality for what that's worth and does project big power

The less talked out player is Kazuma Okataka. He is thought to be a 1B only position player. He hit .337 last year. There are some scouts that believe his hit tool translates best to our game

Okataka is the player I would think to most appeal to Stearns. Analytically sound and not terribly expensive

Someone mentioned some signings similar to Michael Cuddyer back in the day

How about Trent Grisham or Harrison Bader for the OF. Josh Bell for DH power. Miguel Rojas of the Dodgers as our utility guy. Sorry guys, Jose Iglesias had his moment

Wouldn't Chris Bassitt fit in nicely now at a lower price for two years or so. He makes starts and stays available

You've got today in no particular order (I'm not counting Senga) as a basis for a rotation

Peterson

Maclean

Sproat

Tong

Manaea

Among a few others

There is nothing sexy about any of these proposed options. They do provide some found for the Carson Benges' and Jett Williams of the Metsworld to settle in

Just Thursday musings

[Frayed Knot]

I don't for a minute believe the team's goal is to win 85-88 games.

[kcmets]

I texted Ambler. He hasn't answered.

He's not terribly reliable.

[metsmarathon]

I’m still not convinced that stearns isn’t a very smart clever baseball man, who has a plan in mind to make the Mets a perennial top contender.

And maybe that plan has names like Imai, and okamoto, and Tyler rogers, and Kyle Tucker.

But he’s still a smart clever baseball man with a heart that’s three sizes too small.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I’m still not convinced that stearns isn’t a very smart clever baseball man, who has a plan in mind to make the Mets a perennial top contender.

And maybe that plan has names like Imai, and okamoto, and Tyler rogers, and Kyle Tucker.

But he’s still a smart clever baseball man with a heart that’s three sizes too small.

 

Yeah, I think that's a good take.

[metirish]

There better be a great plan, when Cohen chided Mets fans to show up last season we did

[ashie62]

There better be a great plan, when Cohen chided Mets fans to show up last season we did

 

I thought of that. It feels like Cohen gave Mets fans the big effyou with Pete

Cohen says I understand how upset the fans are, do you?

Even with this and the prospect the Mets are cutting their budget and may actually stink next year I'll be watching every game and posting here, it's what I do

[Benjamin Grimm]

http://ultimatemets.com/covers/2025/20251212_NYP_02.jpg

[metsmarathon]

What’s crazy is, and mind you this is all just preseason projections and all that ********, but right now, with our rotation and lineup feeling like they are in absolute shambles…

FanGraphs depth charts has us currently projected to have the 6th highest WAR in baseball, with 43.2 WAR.

A team with 43 WAR last year could expect to be an 89-90 win team

Mind you, last year the Mets actually had 46 WAR between their pitchers and batters (fielding included) which should’ve been a 92-win team based on such figuring.

So there’s definitely a pathway to find a successful analytic framework upon which to build optimism (or pessimism if ya wanna focus on the underperformance of our expectation!)

Can stearns win back the rational part of our brains by adding to this foundation? I sure hope so.

It won’t feel right next year without Pete, but maybe it’ll be ok if it just feels different if we win.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I think that if the Mets contend with a lot of production from their younger players it will feel like a new dawn.

And if that doesn't happen, and the Mets muddle around or below the .500 mark, it will be a dreary season.

This really can go a number of ways.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Tim Britton, in The Athletic, predicts what the Mets might do, based on his understanding of their planned approach and the rumors he's been hearing.

Sign Michael King (SP) Three-year deal projected (~$75M with opt-out). Adds high-ceiling arm to rotation.

Trade David Peterson → Padres for Ramón Laureano (OF) Peterson (SP, final arb year) swapped for Laureano (OF, one year of control). Laureano fills Nimmo’s outfield void.

Trade for a First Baseman Options discussed: Willson Contreras (Cardinals, salary dump fit), Yandy Díaz (Rays, underrated bat), Isaac Paredes or Tyler Soderstrom (younger, higher cost). Contreras is the focus in this blueprint.

Acquire Two Set-Up Relievers Names floated: Tyler Rogers, Luke Weaver, plus A.J. Minter and Brooks Raley already in-house. Devin Williams remains the closer.

Projected Roster

Lineup (9):

SS: Francisco Lindor

2B: Marcus Semien

LF: Juan Soto

1B: Willson Contreras (trade acquisition)

RF: Ramón Laureano (trade acquisition)

3B: Brett Baty

C: Francisco Álvarez

DH: Ronny Mauricio / Mark Vientos platoon

CF: Tyrone Taylor (with Carson Benge pushing later)

Rotation (5):

Michael King (FA signing)

Nolan McLean

Clay Holmes

Sean Manaea

Kodai Senga (Depth: Christian Scott, Brandon Sproat, Jonah Tong)

Bullpen (8):

Closer: Devin Williams

Set-up: Tyler Rogers, Luke Weaver, Brooks Raley, A.J. Minter

Middle/Depth: Huascar Brazobán, Brandon Waddell, Adbert Alzolay

 

In some ways, this exercise highlights the need for something big — something that goes against the grain of what the Mets have indicated so far this offseason. I’m not going out on a limb by guessing that this roster does not excite you. (Emphasis added.) The Mets would be counting on some internal offensive improvement, on rebounds in the rotation from multiple pieces and on the bullpen being more consistent than it was a season ago. It would be a better defensive team, if you value that.

[Centerfield]

I don't for a minute believe the team's goal is to win 85-88 games.

 

I feel like I should start by saying I am incredibly angry at the Mets. More so than in my entire life. And likely a lot of this is reactionary, so take what I say with a grain of salt. And of course, none of us have any idea what the Mets are going to actually do. But that being said.

What I speculated was:

 

I think the goal will be 85-88 win teams that compete for the Wild Card yearly, and contend once in a while for a division when everything breaks right.

 

And let me start with this. I'd be thrilled to be wrong. But the reason I think this is the case is:

1. The owner responded to Jon Heyman via text. And although I may be reading too much into this, he said something along the lines of "I understand the fans' frustration, but it's early, and there's still plenty of time to turn this into a playoff team" (emphasis added). Playoff team is a lot different than championship contender, or World Series team. And in the past, the owner has talked big along those lines. I feel like this shift in tone is material.

2. The team I described above is more or less what David Stearns churned out in Milwaukee. He was hired in 2015. After taking a year to get going, his teams won 86 games, 96 games, 89 games, 95 games, 86 games, 92 games (not counting 2020). Minimum 86-89 wins, three division titles when things broke right. I concede three division titles is more than "once in a while". But I also contend that the NL Central is not the NL East.

3. His stated preference and his demonstrated practice of avoiding long term contracts to pitchers, and to any players over 30. I think it's hard to consistently win 95 games without making yourself a little bit uncomfortable. The Dodgers have all sorts of long term deals. Including the Freeman deal that we didn't do with Alonso. The Phillies have bad contracts. Nola. Castellanos. They endured the back end of the Realmuto deal. They just gave a five year renewal to a 33 year old Schwarber. San Diego has Bogaerts, a million years left on Machado. Yu Darvish. The Yankees, with Stanton, LeMahieu, Cole. 8 years to Max Fried. You can look at these contracts and find fault with all of them, but these teams win year after year. If you're not willing to spend like this, than (a) you better hope you're in a central division, and ( be willing to finish with 86-89 wins in half your seasons.

Again. I'd be thrilled to be wrong.

[Centerfield]

And for the sake of argument, let's assume that Stearns' plan is to churn out a 95 team that will challenge the Phillies for the division. How can he get there?

The team won 83 games in 2025. That team reached that win total with the support of early season contributions from Megill and Canning, standout seasons from Alonso and Diaz, and solid contribution from Nimmo. None of these players are back in 2026.

So what is our starting point? 80-81 wins? Basically a .500 team. And I think that may be generous. Where is this team finding a minimum 15 wins?

Cody Bellinger? He's the same age as Alonso. And he's a better defender, but offensively, he has a lower ceiling, a lower floor, and none of the consistency. If we're afraid of how Alonso will age, aren't we also taking a risk with an aging Bellinger? Kyle Tucker is 29. So he's more of a Stearns type player. But do you see Stearns giving the long term deal it will take to get him?

You could make trades. But trading prospects doesn't follow the Stearns model for sustained success. I don't think Milwaukee has that protracted run if you're trading prospects for rentals and veterans.

Michael King. The Japanese sluggers. Framber Valdez. Are these guys the answer? Would Stearns even be interested in any of them?

Again. I'd love to be wrong. But I'm having trouble coming up with a realistic path to a team we can look at and say "Yeah, that team can challenge the Phillies and Dodgers".

[Gwreck]

Where is this team finding a minimum 15 wins?

 

Stearns seems to be banking an awful lot on existing talent improving. I think it’s possible but I see it as a huge, everything-must-go-right gamble.

-If we get Vientos’s 2024 production for a full year, that could be +3 or +4 wins over the negative contributions he had in 2025.

-McLean, if he can do what he did in 8 starts over a full year is probably +3 or 4 wins.

-Manaea and Senga, if healthy and pitching effectively: a couple wins from each.

-If Taylor’s offense is akin to 2024 and not 2025, that’s probably a win.

-Alvarez playing like he did post-demotion, if he can do it over a full year: a win+ of potential improvement. Maybe more if you account for not giving ABs to Senger.

-Mauricio, Benge, Williams: who knows? Presumably it’s possible any one of them or more could be an impact player and thus drive multiple wins of value.

Edited December 12, 2025 by Gwreck

[MFS62]

Of those veteran first base options Ben mentioned, I prefer Yandy Diaz - his numbers just strike me as a tad better, and he strikes out less than Contraras or Paredes. Any of them would be acceptable place holders for Clifford for a year or two.

Later

[Edgy MD]

I too, feel pretty strongly that the team's goal is not to win 85-88 games.

I may well disagree with almost everything about their approach, but I am most certain that their goals are more ambitious.

I am not angry. I am disappointed, but I tend to expect this sort of garbage, and I think it is simply part of a broken, broken system of arcane rules created to paste over a woefully unjust baseball economy, and an organization willing to go along to get along in that world. I do not have kids, and I imagine I might feel very different if I watched my kids (indeed, encouraged my kids) to grow up rooting for these players. It stinks to high Heaven.

[metsmarathon]

I think stearns is also banking on this having been a 90-win team that played down to 83 wins, instead of that reflecting their true talent level.

And he’s probably right about that.

Will we get the regression bounceback and snag a few free wins? I sure hope so… but I think that’s his starting point.

And if it is true that there was something insidious in the clubhouse that we do t know enough about, and if he’s now gone and fixed it, or will have fixed it by the end of the off season, then maybe yeah we get those wins back next year.

But those are still some pretty big ifs.

[metsmarathon]

I honestly didn’t think the Mets could possibly make me this mad. I’m a grown ass adult. I lived through the 90s, the madoff era. All of it.

I was wrong. :Sadface

[Centerfield]

I too, feel pretty strongly that the team's goal is not to win 85-88 games.

I may well disagree with almost everything about their approach, but I am most certain that their goals are more ambitious.

 

 

Wait. So both you and FK feel that the team is not trying to just make the playoffs? I mean obviously once they're in, they're hoping to win it all. But as far as win total, you think they're all in? It's hard to fathom that considering how they're acting.

"Let's try to win 85-88 games. If things break right, we win 90+ and win the division. But 87 wins should be enough to play in October. Then hopefully we go on a run."

"**** the wild card. Let's win the ****ing division. 95 wins and we make Philly our bitches"

I don't know. I feel like their thinking is a lot closer to the first quote than the second. I hope you guys are right.

[Edgy MD]

I do not conclude that two non-moves (the trade too) in the past few days are the sum total of how they are acting, have acted, or will act. I do not know if they will succeed or it will blow up, but no, I do not think their ambitions are 85 to 88 wins. I do not support these decisions, but I am sure they are part of a larger strategy I can try to glean, but I am certainly not privy to.

Beyond that, I do not know who you are quoting. Or characterizing. But obviously the story goes on, and there are plenty of chapters that have not been written.

[Benjamin Grimm]

We'll get a better idea once we see what kind of moves they make for the rest of the winter. I suppose it's possible that they'll aim for 87 wins (not that any team actually aims for a specific number) for 2026 and then go bigger for 2027 and beyond.

I saw Stearns saying that the Mets need more innings from their starting pitchers. (Um, yeah!) Maybe that will tempt them to extend beyond their comfort level for someone like Framber Valdez. Only five AL pitchers threw more innings than his 192. He averaged a little over 6 innings per start, which doesn't really seem all that impressive but I guess it is by today's standards.

[metsmarathon]

I think it’s too early to say they’re aiming for the wild card and good luck with the playoffs lottery.

I think they’re aiming to eventually build a “**** yeah let’s go” team, because one does not spend $300M to just only make the playoffs.

I just think they’re doing it a different way, that may prove to be smart, if heartless. I think their big brains have missed the mark on the fandom and its irrational whims that don’t necessarily abide by analytical purity. And while I like big brains and I cannot lie… my anaconda wanted Pete’s home runs, son.

[Centerfield]

I do not conclude that two non-moves (the trade too) in the past few days are the sum total of how they are acting, have acted, or will act. I do not know if they will succeed or it will blow up, but no, I do not think their ambitions are 85 to 88 wins. I do not support these decisions, but I am sure they are part of a larger strategy I can try to glean, but I am certainly not privy to.

Beyond that, I do not know who you are quoting. Or characterizing. But obviously the story goes on, and there are plenty of chapters that have not been written.

 

The quotes are two made-up quotes trying to depict two different mindsets that David Stearns might be having this winter. I'm guessing the real David Stearns has a mindset closer to the first guy rather than the second guy. But you're right. We don't know anything and we have to see.

The reason I'm pessimistic is that the two non-moves, and specifically, the mindset motivating the two non-moves, suggests an unwillingness to take the kind of risks a team has to make in order to construct a championship contender. I'm also looking at the players that remain available and having a hard time seeing a road map to a championship contender. But again, we don't have all the info, and we don't know who's available in trades. I also wouldn't be happy if we gut our farm system for short term help, but I see that as less of a risk with Stearns.

I'd be happy to be wrong. And like everyone else here, I hope we go into Opening Day with a team that is realistically expected to challenge for the division, or be a division favorite, rather than a team that projects to a Wild Card.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Of course, a wild card turned out to be a lot of fun in 2024 and was better than we had in 2025. (Or 2021 and 2023.) So I wouldn't necessarily scoff at a wild card. But I agree that a wild card should be a consolation prize and a division title should be the goal.

[ashie62]

In effect Cohen has said they will out a playoff quality team on the field

I have no clue if they are just happy to make the tournament and take their chances or shoot to get a post season bye or both

I believe we will be looking at a signature David Stearns in either event.

Just too soon to tell

[Centerfield]

Sure. Wild Card runs are fun. And as upset as I am about Pete, it would be silly for me not to acknowledge the success that Stearns had in Milwaukee. Making the playoffs 5 out of 6 years would be the best run in Mets history by far. I have no doubt he wants to bring that type of success here. But my concerns are:

1. Whether a "Stearns" team, can be successful in the NL East. Milwaukee does great in a weak NL Central. How would those teams fare against the NL East? If those Brewers teams played against Philly and Atlanta, they're not making the playoffs all those years.

2. Post Season Success. As good as the Brewers were in the regular season, they were garbage in the post-season. Stearns teams went 1-5 in playoff series. (.167) Stearns' analytic-driven Brewers remind me of the Moneyball A's. In fact, they have the exact same playoff win percentage: 2-10 (.167).

By contrast, the Mets don't make the playoffs a lot. But when they do, they've beaten some pretty good teams to get there, and tend to fare better. Mets in playoff series since 2000: 7-6 (.538).