Centerfield

Yeah. Five years to a 33 year old with no position is significantly more of a risk than 5 years to a 31 year old that can at least play 1B at a passable level. And to be clear, I’m not saying 5 years to Pete is a smart move either. I just think that if you’re going to take that chance on anyone, a franchise icon is where you do it. Also, I feel like Pete could have been locked up last year to a four year deal.

Mets are engaged in trade talks with the Padres, per multiple reports. Names being discussed are Nick Pivetta, Ramon Laureano, and Mason Miller. Padres are said to like the Mets young big leaguers and prospects, in particular Jonah Tong. My thoughts. Pivetta is a nice pitcher, but a regression candidate. We would be buying high. Similar thoughts about Laureano. Regression candidate. His ceiling is similar to Polanco, but could also just as easily post a .650 OPS. I don’t think we should give up top prospects for a reliever. Even one as good as Miller. The Padres deny it. But they have to be facing financial constraints. They have some of the worst contracts in the game. Darvish is in year 4 of his 6 year extension. He’s already toast. The Boegarts deal is a disaster. Machado is still productive and making $25M. But starting next year that salary jumps to $39M. He’ll be 34 and signed for seven more seasons! Even the Tatis contract is not good. He’s making $20M this year. Then jumps to $25M. Then when he turns 30, that number jumps to $36M. And maybe that’s worth it if he’s a .900+ OPS shortstop. But not really if he’s an .800ish corner OF, which is what he’s been since his PED suspension. They don’t need to move him now. But they have less than three seasons, and that’s assuming he keeps producing, and assuming no further suspensions. The Mets have leverage. How that translates into an actual deal, I have no clue. But if there’s a trade, it would be malpractice to lose it.

I have nothing against Contreras, depending on what we have to give up to get him. But at some point we have to get someone who can hit behind Juan Soto and he’s not it.

That’s where I am too. Offensively, it’s fine. So long as he’s batting 5th or lower. Defensively, hopefully this is our DH. Being a switch hitter, he kinda combines Winker and Marte. The defensive versatility allows Stearns to maybe move McNeil for a useful player, if he’s so inclined. He’s kinda like a better fielding Vientos. So I wonder if Mark is on the block. If he’s our everyday first baseman and batting third, then that’s no good.

So following the Polanco signing, it’s still up in the air which direction the Mets are going. Polanco is a nice bat when healthy, but not a star. I think the next offensive move will give insight on which way the Mets are going. If it’s another “perfectly fine” signing then I think it’s the Wild Card route. If they go middle of the order bat then we know they’re going for it.

Salary is 2/3 of what they offered Alonso. Contract term is also 2/3 what they were willing to give Alonso. He hit 26 HRs last year. Roughly 2/3 of Alonso’s 38.

$20M per year appears to be more than expected. MLB trade rumors had him at 3 years, $42M. Looks like Stearns went less years, more AAV.

If he’s healthy, the bat could be good enough to replace Nimmo. His defense doesn’t do much for the “run prevention” philosophy. Short term deal fits Stearns.

Just players. I get that Gil and Casey meant a lot to the organization. I don’t consider them icons and I don’t think their numbers should be retired.

Mets sign Jorge Polanco. 2 years. $40 million. Switch hitting utility IF/DH type. 32 years old.

Define it as you see fit. How many have we had? For me: Tom Seaver Darryl Strawberry Dwight Gooden David Wright Pete Alonso

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).

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.

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.

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".

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: 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.

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.

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.

And also, I've now given it a day to sink in. The answer is, I will never forgive Stearns.

This is what I believe Stearns and his crew don't understand. I made the point on Facebook. Think of David Wright. That contract went as bad as it could go. Do you know any Mets fan that regrets that deal? I'd make that deal 100 out of 100 times. That series in Washington, the World Series HR, and retiring as a Met. All worth it to me.

This lineup finishes fourth in the NL East. Below .500

I mean, you don't even bother if the answer if Paul Goldschmidt. If you're at that point, just trade Lindor and rebuild. It's crazy. The Mets right now: 1. Have nothing at 1B 2. Are locked into a .650 OPS at 2B making big money. 3. Have nothing at LF 4. Have nothing at CF 5. Have no DH 6. Have question marks at 3B and C Starting rotation is among the worst in baseball Bullpen has a question mark at closer, two oft-injured lefties, and nothing otherwise. Their payroll is at $261M.

Let's start with the obvious. There's no one player that can replace him. The Mets need: A. A first baseman. That should be easy enough. Defensively, he wasn't great. Whoever they get to replace him has a good chance to be better. B. A middle of the lineup hitter. Nearly impossible. Schwarber's gone. Only Kyle Tucker will give you similar production. And even then, he has much less power. Bellinger falls short, even coming off a good year. The Japanese guys are huge question marks, and it's unrealistic to expect them to replace Alonso's production. Even if they pull off a trade for Tatis Jr, his numbers are not as good as Alonso's. Basically. It's not going to happen. C. A right-handed presence. All of the guys mentioned above, except Okamoto, are left-handed. And if you figure the Japanese players typically see about a 100 point drop in OPS when coming stateside, this is not a great sign for him.

That's not remotely true for me. I'm still pissed about Strawberry. The Dykstra trade. deGrom leaving. Wheeler. Reyes. Murphy going on a tear for Washington. When the Mets beat the Phillies in the 2024 NLDS, it was fun. But it didn't stop me from cursing Jeff Wilpon when Zach pitched against us.

And the stupid Borough race. And the Queens crew. Whoever came up with the Helsley intro. And turning off the lights during a HR trot. Let me see our hero complete his victory lap.