What will it take to forgive Stearns?

[Edgy MD]

I would not only make that deal 100 times out of 100, but I would cherish the years at the back end, as the player perhaps finished his career as a bench player.

But the system is wrongly built to penalize such contracts several times over.

[Edgy MD]

I think the boring and/or ever-evolving team I see the Mets being transformed into is The Yankees.

[metsmarathon]

I would not only make that deal 100 times out of 100, but I would cherish the years at the back end, as the player perhaps finished his career as a bench player.

But the system is wrongly built to penalize such contracts several times over.

 

Yup

You do that for Pete. You do it for Edwin. And when Jeff McNeil comes up for his next contract you push him out the door fast enough that it doesn’t slam on his back, as a courtesy.

[MFS62]

So allow me to make the opposite and less sentimental analysis here.

Let's imagine here that they didn't trade Nimmo and also signed Pete for the same deal he's apparently getting from Baltimore.

And now let's fast forward to Opening Day 2028, at which point:

- Pete is starting his age 33 season and is signed thru the end of the 2030 season when he'll be on the cusp of turning 36

- Brandon will be 35 and will also under contract for three more seasons thru 2030

- Lindor will be 34 and signed thru 2031

- and Soto will still be (hopefully) in the solid part of his prime at age 29 and NYM property thru the 2040 season when he'll be 40 y/o

And, of course, what's wrong with that picture is that the first three will not just be into their declining years but also still have 3, 3, and 4 years to go by OD '28.

So what Stearns is trying to do, or so it seems, is to both deal away and not sign players who will wind up getting old at the same time while the superstar with

(Gulp!) 13 years still to go on his deal will, at least theoretically, be right in the midst of his peak seasons.

 

A well thought out analysis.

Now we're waiting for the sugar to make that medicine go down.

Later

[Frayed Knot]

Well, the 'sugar' is going to be whoever mgmt gets to replace these recently lost pieces. Whether or not you/me/we LIKE their choices is still TBD.

We already know at least the main replacement for Diaz as they signed him ahead of time.

[Centerfield]

Given the unpredictability of modern day post-season baseball, it's tough to classify failure to win a WS (particularly within a certain short period of time) as a failure.

What we should want and, not coincidentally what the Mets have rarely had, is a sustained period of high-level competitiveness. That should be the goal.

So allow me to make the opposite and less sentimental analysis here.

Let's imagine here that they didn't trade Nimmo and also signed Pete for the same deal he's apparently getting from Baltimore.

And now let's fast forward to Opening Day 2028, at which point:

- Pete is starting his age 33 season and is signed thru the end of the 2030 season when he'll be on the cusp of turning 36

- Brandon will be 35 and will also under contract for three more seasons thru 2030

- Lindor will be 34 and signed thru 2031

- and Soto will still be (hopefully) in the solid part of his prime at age 29 and NYM property thru the 2040 season when he'll be 40 y/o

And, of course, what's wrong with that picture is that the first three will not just be into their declining years but also still have 3, 3, and 4 years to go by OD '28.

So what Stearns is trying to do, or so it seems, is to both deal away and not sign players who will wind up getting old at the same time while the superstar with

(Gulp!) 13 years still to go on his deal will, at least theoretically, be right in the midst of his peak seasons.

Now how he moves forward 'fixing' this whole mess, both in the short and longer term, is where he's going to make or break his reputation around here.

I mean, yeah, we're pissed right off, but I want to see how this is going to wind up before declaring Stearns an enemy of the people.

 

Yes. Going into the offseason, I felt like the Lindor contract and Nimmo contract made it difficult to re-sign Pete long term (or Bellinger/Framber/Schwarber or any other older FA) since it would mean many core players would be declining at the same time, and that same time coincides with the peak Soto years. Having a third of your lineup and $80M AAV tied up in mid 30's players is less than ideal. But that story changed once you unloaded Nimmo's deal. That's why that deal, while painful, made some sense. You trade Nimmo, take the short term hit on Semien, and now you have some wiggle room.

After the Nimmo trade, your 2028 Opening Day Aging Core is down to:

1. Lindor. 34 YO, and signed through 2031

2. Pete. 33 YO, and signed through 2030.

You can take that hit. And there's a chance 33 YO Pete is still a slugger (look at 33 YO Schwarber and Judge). I felt like re-signing Pete gives you a three year window to get something out of the remainder of Lindor's prime.

So what do the Mets do now? You have maybe 3 years left of prime Lindor. You're squarely in the Soto prime. A prime that you paid dearly to get. But you have a terrible pitching staff, and half a lineup to build. I honestly don't see any realistic way the Mets can get back to being a championship contender in 2026.

Which is why I think they'll go half measure. Aim for 85-88 win teams from here on out. Call up the kids. Fill in around the edges. Hope you get hot at the right time.

[Lefty Specialist]

That's a Jeff Wilpon plan. I've already seen that movie and know how it ends.

[Frayed Knot]

The team/Cohen Can take the financial hit on an aging Alonso if things don't go well in the latter years of the deal but that doesn't mean they want to or think they should.

Look, it's clear that they made the decision not to go five years on Pete so it wasn't a case where clearing Nimmo's future obligations dictated whether Pete would re-up here or not. I think Pete's likelihood of remaining disappeared out the window once the Phils went a full five on Schwarber* just one year after no one was willing to even go three years on Alonso. Clearly the market had changed (Boston was also in on Pete for what sounded like four years at a slightly lower AAV rate than he ultimately got) but that doesn't mean the Mets had any intention of following. We have a 30-page thread here approaching its 3rd birthday discussing what to do with future Pete so I don't think we need to rehash it here, but I, and others, were skeptical of five years last winter so this is hardly a new concept.

 

Which is why I think they'll go half measure. Aim for 85-88 win teams from here on out

 

As in, Ad infinitum? Really?!?!?

So the moneybags owner who came in with a WS-within-five mindset has now resigned himself to never even trying to win a division title unless your past winter's moves all turn out to be the baseball equivalent of drawing an inside straight (Steve is a poker player after all)? I'm not buying it and I think you are vastly overreacting to two non-moves two months before ST gets going and before you know what other moves will be made between then and now.

* And isn't Pete's deal topping Schwarber's by $1mil/per [5/$150 becomes 5/$155] the most Boras-ian thing ever?

[bmfc1]

As soon as they win a WS title I forgive all of it. Until then he can **** right off

I still feel this same way.

[metsmarathon]

I’m mostly pissed, re Pete, that they let It get to the point where he was able to get the 5x155 from the o’s without it seeming like the Mets gave him much of an alternative…

Like if they went 4x125 as soon as he opted out (or before) would he have taken it?