Centerfield

A guy who deserves to have his vote rescinded.

From my viewpoint, there are three scenarios. Scenario A The Mets pulled the walkaway move. They pulled their offer to Pete. But, the reporting is different, and couches a reunion as "less likely", without mentioning that the offer was pulled. If this happened, I think the reporting would be "Mets out on Alonso". Scenario B The Mets did not pull the walkaway move. But they wanted to create some heat, so Stearns calls Sherman, Heyman and Martino and says "Hey, I want you to report that we are discouraged with negotiations and that we are pivoting to plan B". At the same time, they leave the offer on the table. Could this be what happened? Possibly. But how much credibility do the Mets have if these negative reports are out there, while the offer sits waiting to be accepted? Scenario C The Mets have had their three year $70M offer on the table for some time. Pete and Boras were to bring back any competitor's offer but have been unable to secure any. Without a need to bid against himself, Stearns stands pat. Boras leaks to the press that Pete is willing to accept a short term deal, but only with the Mets. Because Pete loves the Mets. Boras leaks to the press that the Mets and Pete remain far apart on AAV, even after the concession by Pete to take three years. Suggests "Steve Cohen may have to get involved" Boras leaks to the press that the Mets have imposed a deadline. Boras leaks the terms of the Mets offer to the press. 3 years, $70M. An offer that is $20M less than the $90M rumor floated around previously. Boras leaks that the Mets have pivoted away from Pete. And that a deal is now less likely. During that time, David Stearns stands pat with his offer. For my money. I think it's C. And I think Stearns is confident that eventually all this bluster will blow over, and eventually Pete will have to sign the offer that's on the table. Unless, as I mentioned before, Toronto does something nutty and offers Pete terms similar to Santander. And if they do that, I guess Pete might be gone.

Exactly this. Walking away is an effective tactic. But it only needs to be communicated to the adverse party. There's very little advantage, if any, to going public with the move. And if the Mets wanted to walk away, they need to actually walk away. That means pull the offer and pivot. If the offer remains on the table, no one believes anyone has pivoted. Regardless of whatever has been disclosed. So let's start there. Did the Mets pull the walk away move? No. Not if you believe the reports from last week. Andy Martino: Joel Sherman: Jon Heyman: These reporters came out with nearly identical takes, all at the same time. None of them mention that the Mets pulled their offer. Only that they are discouraged, or have started their pivot. If anything, all of them imply that the Mets offer remains on the table. So, what do we think happened? Did the Mets leave their offer on the table and publicly disclose that they are pivoting? What's the sense in that. You have no credibility so long as the offer remains. The only thing that makes sense is that the Mets have done nothing but leave that offer on the table, and that Boras is feeding this narrative to the press. And when you look at the info that's come out, in the order it's come out, and who has reported it, it's very clear who's leaking this info.

I mean logically. Why would the Mets publicly state they are pivoting to other options. That's the dumbest thing they can do. The effects are: 1. Other teams are encouraged to bid on Alonso, thinking that maybe the Mets are out and won't match it. 2. Public outcry from angry Mets fans 3. Negatively impacts the Mets leverage with plan B options None of these things may end up making a difference. But ultimately, only Boras/Pete would want this kind of buzz out there.

I didn't say there was a fuss over it. I said the information was leaked. Yes, parties can divulge information. If they do it publicly, it's a disclosure. If they do it anonymously it's a leak. I'm of the belief that parties leak information with intent. Which side is more inclined to leak this "info" to Martino. Stearns? Not a chance. The Mets front office doesn't leak info. Also, they have nothing to gain by publicly stating that they are moving on from Alonso. If they wanted to move on, they'd simply tell Boras and pull their offer. They don't need the public to know. They certainly don't want their plan B options thinking that they now have the upper hand. It makes no sense for the Mets to release this info. Boras on the other hand, is hoping to create a public frenzy. The calls into WFAN like you describe. Outrage on twitter. He's hoping that it will spur Steve Cohen to get involved (hence the Jim Duquette line "Steve Cohen may have to get involved"). Would David Stearns leak that to the press? "Hey Jim, go on SNY and say 'Steve Cohen may have to get involved'." We all know what's happening. We all know where Duquette is getting his info. And no, I said before that I don't think it will work. I think Cohen hired Stearns to stop himself from paying more than market value. And I don't see any of this having an effect on Stearns. But I think Boras is pulling out all the stops to get as much money from the Mets as he can. In the end, I think (or maybe I just want to believe) that Alonso told Boras he wants to go back to the Mets, and that Boras job was to get as much money as possible. I think Boras is doing whatever he can in a tough situation. I agree with all of this. Which is why ultimately I think he will come back. My only real concern is Toronto. I think they can be a wild card in this. They're so desperate to get players and spend money I can see them beating the Mets offer. If they do, the Mets would have to match or else Pete is gone. I agree too. But let's say, for argument's sake, that the Blue Jays offer Alonso a contract similar to what they offered Santander. 5 years. $90-$100M. Does Stearns match? I don't think he does. And then if you're Pete, do you take a 3 year deal for $70M, or a five year deal for $95M? I don't know.

What leaks? "Pete Alonso is willing to compromise with a three year deal! And despite lots of interest, it's only open to the Mets! What a guy!" "Can you believe it? Even after Pete came to the Mets with a three year deal structure, they still refuse to compromise on money. Steve Cohen is gonna have to get involved." "Did you guys hear that the Mets are forcing a deadline on Pete's negotiations?" "WTF. Check out this low-ball offer the Mets made. After everything Pete has done." "The Mets have moved on from Alonso. Their plan B is Brett Baty. Get ready for life without Pete Mets fans."

Boras is starting to lose his cool. Yesterday at the Corbin Burnes conference, he complained openly that MLB teams are making money but not spending. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/scott-boras-shames-mlb-teams-for-sitting-out-free-agency-theyre-making-more-but-theyre-not-spending/ He's clearly frustrated at the Bregman and Alonso situations and the inability to create a market. Meanwhile, his mouthpiece Jon Heyman has an article that the slow moving free agency market is frustrating players: https://nypost.com/2025/01/16/sports/slow-moving-mlb-free-agency-frustrating-players-insane/ This peak into Boras' mindset starts to give you the context for the leaks they've issued this past week.

It's been bad for me as well.

I think it's helpful to consider why we are getting these leaks. First, Pete's market. There are no other offers that are close. If there were, they would have been leveraged against the Mets offer. There's been nothing. We can reasonably conclude there is nothing currently. So in the absence of actual competitors, Boras is reverting to the only option he has next. Public pressure. He leaked to Duquette last week that Pete was willing to come back on a three year deal, but intentionally did not mention the AAV demand. This riled up the Mets fanbase that a deal was close. The overwhelming sentiment was that for a short term deal, the Mets should "just get it done". Then came the news that they were still far apart in AAV. Duquette, in exchange for the news he was given, was asked to implore Cohen to get involved. Boras knows that Stearns won't budge unless he's made to budge. Since then, Boras has leaked additional info to try to create more public pressure. The Mets have given Alonso a deadline. The Mets made a low-ball offer. And now, he's leaking that the Mets have moved on. Boras is trying to demonstrate to the Mets that losing Alonso will create outrage, panic, and will be terrible for the Mets. I don't think it will work. I picture Stearns just sitting there. Unphased, just sitting on his offer. I think Stearns believes that even if another team comes into the picture and offers more, that the Mets will get the right to match before Pete leaves. And so he sits and waits, knowing he's the highest bidder. And for that reason, I still remain optimistic that the two sides will reach a deal. I don't really think anything has changed simply because Boras decided to make the discussions public. If anything, I think it suggests he's running out of options. I will say this though. Stearns had better be right. Because if Pete gets a higher offer, and out of spite, doesn't come back and ask the Mets to match. Or, if Pete does, and Stearns declines to match, I don't see how Stearns can realistically make up for the loss of Pete with the options that remain. I've said before that I would have blinked long before this. Let's see if he's right.

I take all of this with a grain of salt. The Mets front office doesn't leak. So figure everything you're hearing is coming from Boras, especially since Heyman is one of the guys reporting this. Stearns/Mets don't benefit in any way from news that they are pivoting to plan B. Boras does. The news comes out. Mets fans get outraged. Boras tries to use that to ramp up the pressure on the Mets. When the Soto saga was going on, the numbers were leaked constantly. Because it benefited Boras/Soto to have the numbers floated around so teams would increase their bids. With Pete's side, it's been a week and there's been no release of Pete's demands. This suggests that Boras doesn't want those numbers to be known. I think this is all a negotiation ploy, and that eventually the two sides will agree upon a deal.

Jim Duquette did an interview on something called "Foul Territory". Basically says that Pete and Stearns are in a stare down. Pete wants them to come up to his number and Stearns doesn't feel the need to bid against himself. Duquette suggested that Cohen may need to step in. No numbers from either side were mentioned.

Still not a peep on the Alonso demand. I'm guessing the demand must have been stupid high from Boras/Pete.

I think the 93.3 number is speculation from writers for the Athletic. I haven’t seen that it’s his actual demand yet.

Two days later and there are no reports of the numbers being asked. Curious.

I saw a Heyman clip posted by NY Post sports. Summary: ---There's a "good chance" of a reunion ---Spent some time advertising Pete's accomplishments (6 years, more HRs than anyone other than Judge). ----"Not a certainly, there are other teams involved" ---"They haven't met the price yet, there's some more compromising to do" ---It's only Jan. 10. Half the free agents haven't signed, Bryce Harper signed in February, so did Prince Fielder. They got big deals. ---A lot of teams are looking at shorter term deals with opt outs for Pete ---More than a month to go before Spring Training Basically, he ran through all the points Scott Boras would want him to cover. If I'm reading between the lines, it kinda sounds like Boras is pushing back on this leak, or at the very least, didn't want this information out there, and sent Heyman to try to pry back some leverage.

I have no idea if Jim Duquette has any credibility on stuff like this. I don't remember him having any inside knowledge, but I also don't remember him being wrong about stuff like this. If it's true, I'm guessing it's just a matter of time until a deal is hammered out.

Which was exacerbated by Pete publicly stating how much he'd love to be back. Basically he told other teams they'd be used as negotiating pawns. He's so goofy and loveable. Part of why I want him back.

I hope this is the case. The key will be whether another team enters the mix. If no team ever shows interest, then Pete has one and only option. If another team comes in with a 3 year offer, then I think BG's contract is more likely. I would think there would be some team interested in a 40+ HR bat on a 3 year deal, but what do I know.

I'm here too. I think this is the most likely result. I think it's possible that someone may enter the picture on a short term deal, but I think only the Mets would extend to that fourth year (and option years) and that will ultimately be the difference. Also, I think Pete would prefer to come back if everything else was equal.

I would argue (and I think Stearns would agree) that deals given to other players in the past have nothing to do with the type of deal Alonso should get. No matter what Boras may say. The only thing dictating Alonso’s deal is his market. And specifically, what any other team is willing to give him. And that’s why Stearns won’t budge unless another suitor comes along.

Of the other landing spots mentioned: 1. Giants: Alonso makes no sense for the Giants. They have 1B prospect Bryce Eldridge. He's their top prospect (#35 overall) and has the potential to be a masher. ETA is 2026. If the Giants are interested at all, I can't imagine they want anything other than a short term deal. 2. Angels: The Angels also have a top prospect at 1B. Nolan Schanuel is not as highly rated as Bryce Eldridge (#95, MLB Pipeline), but he's already made his debut. An article recently suggested that the Angels might consider a position change for Schanuel if they signed Alonso, but there's no one suggesting that this might be a possibility other than that one article's author. The author: Jon Heyman. 3. Mariners: Seattle certainly has a need for offense, and has a hole at 1B. But Seattle just doesn't really play in this end of the free agent market and are said to be looking to shed salary. I guess in theory these guys are a possibility, but the likelihood of Jerry DiPoto suddenly deciding to give an over 30 declining 1B a long term deal doesn't seem all that high. I was thinking that another factor working against Alonso might be the idea that other clubs believe that whatever they offer, the Mets will match anyway. So why even bother.

By the way, Carlos Baerga is now speculating that the Mets have interest in Anthony Santander. I wasn't really interested in Santander as a Soto alternative, but might be at least a conceptual fit as an Alonso alternative. In many ways, he's the same type of hitter as Pete. Low average, big power hitter. He gets on base less than Pete, but he's a switch hitter, and hit 44 last year. He's the same age as Pete (both entering their age 30 seasons). Like Pete, he's not great defensively, but has played some 1B in the past. How effectively, I have no idea. Newsday says the Mets made an offer to Teoscar Hernandez on a 2 year deal, so it looks like Stearns is not shy about bringing in another corner OF and mixing and matching at DH. Signing Santander could mean the Mets move Vientos to 1B, then try to mix in some of the younger players at 2B/3B. Alternatively, Santander could try playing 1B. I'm skeptical that this is anything more than a backup plan in the event Pete walks, or perhaps it's just leverage to bring down his price.

It's funny how much that HR in Milwaukee changes the perspective. If he doesn't hit that HR, I wonder if there would be this overwhelming support to bring him back. I like Pete. And I'd even be willing to overpay a bit to bring him back. I know that isn't necessarily the best baseball move, but as a fan, the people who wear the uniform mean something to me. And Pete is a loveable player and a terrific person. And I think there is value to a home grown guy who spends his whole career as a Met. 30/90 is fine. So is 4/100. Opt out after 1 in each of them. I wouldn't be upset if Stearns took it to 5/125. I just don't think he will.

Does anything typically happen during this week between Christmas and New Year's? I'm guessing baseball execs are sitting on a beach or next to a fire or something. The interesting thing about this lack of market is that I originally thought this next contract was an opportunity to lock up Pete for the rest of his career. It's becoming increasingly clear that this won't be the case, and that Pete is looking at going back to the market again, whether he takes an opt-out or not. I guess for him the best case scenario is for him to stay productive so he can get a Christian Walker type deal in a few years. If I were Stearns, I think I'd be inclined to offer Pete 4 years guaranteed. 4 years, $100M, opt-out after year 1. Those four years take him to his year 33 season, and even among big bodied RH hitters, 33 can still be a productive year. So maybe the best bet is to offer 3 years/90, or 4 years/100 and see which one Pete takes. Opt out after 1 in each of those deals.

I don’t think I have what it takes to be a GM. I would have blinked by now.