Centerfield

I think the idea is fun. I think the costumes are a miss. In the other parks, it’s all sausages or all Presidents. Here the mascots are too much of a jumble. There are so many things we could have done. Buildings. ESB vs Chrysler vs Freedom Tower vs Statue of Liberty. Mayors. Rudy. Bloomberg. Koch. La Guardia. Foods. Pizza. Bagel. Apple. Knish. Taco. We could even use offensive stereotypes for this one.

Hagenman has looked good this spring. 2.25 ERA with a 1.13 WHIP. Canning has been even better. 0.90 ERA with a 0.80 WHIP. It's not too late for someone to jump on the Max Kranick bandwagon. 9.1 IP, 0.96 WHIP, 1.93 ERA. Paul Blackburn on the other hand... Of course, it's just spring training. And spring training stats mean nothing.

Awful. Starting pitchers are losing half a season to injuries that didn’t exist a generation ago. Pitching is so fragile.

Big news from Yankee camp as a fly ball was hit to LF and Jasson Dominguez caught it.

Maybe we did have it. Here's Mike Piazza in his last game as a Met.

I remember him trying. Did it fly? Here's Pedro Martinez violating that rule.

The rule was one of the dumbest things in all of sports. It arose from a moral standard that is long outdated. It's insulting to grown professional men who are the greatest in their arena. It may have served as a detriment in free agency, now that the Yankees are not at a financial advantage over all other teams. It was likely illegal. Given that they benefit from the anti-trust exemption and have player control for 6+ years. But I liked that it made the Yankees look stupid and outdated.

Excited for this.

To recap: 1. MMM: Griffin Canning 2. irish: Justin Hagenman 3. BG: Jared Young 4. MFS62: Huascar Brazoban 5. Gwreck: Luke Ritter 6. doctee: Paul Blackburn 7. Fman: George Harrison 8. mm: Jonathan Frickin' Pintaro 9. JCL: Kevin "Night Train" Herget 10. KC: NONE A few notes. *smg: Tidwell/Hamel. Neither guy is on BP top 10. So both are eligible. Please pick one! *George Harrison. If he were alive, would have been the most likely to have a hit song. But he's dead. So seems like a long shot. *Brazoban, Canning and Blackburn. I'll allow these. But these are definitely on the lighter side of the Dark Horse eligibility pool. They might be Dusk Horse Mets. Like say, Jose Valentin.

Sure. But the honorable thing to do is to guess before you see them in action. Real men make decisions with as little data as possible.

yeah, that's a dark horse right there. let's go! This is what I'm talking about right here. That's a real Dark Horse. Luke Ritter. Jared Young. Hagenman. These are some dark horses. Griffin Canning? Paul Blackburn? GTFOH Reminds me of an article I saw recently. It was like "Breakout Candidates for 2025!" and had names like Corbin Carroll, Jackson Merrill.

Nunez and Butto already arrived in 2024. Put it this way. Every entry in this thread should make you say “who”? Think of how you felt about Jose Iglesias one year ago today.

Cast your predictions for Dark Horse Met of 2025 here!!! A reminder of the criteria for Dark Horse candidacy. 1. Not reasonably expected to contribute this year. No projected starters. No big name free agents coming off a down year. Has to be someone we expect to be a fringe guy. (IOW, no Montas/Holmes) 2. Can't be a premiere prospect (or at least, no longer one). No Drew Gilbert, Acuna, Clifford, etc. However, if Gavin Cecchini were to somehow resurface and make a contribution, he would qualify. 3. The type of player if he were hurt/released/traded prior to Opening Day you wouldn't care. Nick Madrigal fits that description. Dylan Covey too. Brett Baty does not. Of course, your prediction can be that there is no Dark Horse Met this year. Given that we have so many known quantities, that may end up being the case. And no, the Dark Horse Met need not have released any hit songs (though it's a bonus if he has). Good luck!

So if you’re predicting the opening day roster: Infielders: 1. Pete Alonso 2. Jeff McNeil 3. Francisco Lindor 4. Mark Vientos 5. Francisco Alvarez 6. Luis Torrens Outfielders 1. Juan Soto 2. Tyrone Taylor 3. Jose Siri 4. Brandon Nimmo 5. Starling Marte 6. Jesse Winker That leaves one spot for a backup infielder. Acuna, Baty, Mauricio, etc. Would be good if that infielder could play SS. Starting Pitchers: 1. Kodai Senga 2. Sean Manaea 3. David Peterson 4. Clay Holmes 5. Frankie Montas 6. Paul Blackburn Relievers: 1. Edwin Diaz 2. AJ Minter 3. Dedniel Nunez 4. Jose Butto 5. Griffin Canning 6. Tylor Megill 7. Reed Garrett Barring injury or trade, that’s your team folks.

I was thinking that too. With this short term deal, the conundrum continues. But I think next year will be much different. And I don't see much chance of him coming back. I think ultimately, if he has a good enough year to get a 4 year deal from someone else, he'll be gone. Stearns won't match it. But even if he's looking at 2-3 year deals again next winter, I think the chances are low. I think one of the Mets' young infielders will stick. Be it Mauricio, Baty, Jett, Acuna or someone else we're not thinking of. And I think Stearns, who values defense, won't want to keep Alonso and Vientos on the corners. I also think there's a chance that the team will want to move either Nimmo or Soto to 1B. We're probably years away for Soto. But Nimmo is older, has a bad foot, and opening up an OF spot gives you more options in next year's free agency than limiting yourself to 1B. But ultimately I think the biggest difference is that Pete will be ready to move on. I think this year he thought and hoped the team would eventually lock him down to a long term deal. When he realized that wasn't happening, I think he decided that the only place he'd play short-term is with the Mets. But I'm sure he's realized by now that he's likely not going to be a life-long Met. And that he's got one last chance to cash in. I'm sure Boras has told him that he shot himself in the foot by professing to everyone who would listen how much he wanted to come back to the Mets. How much that hurt his market. I wonder if we'll see Pete answer questions differently this year. To borrower a line from his teammate, "every team has the same chance".

The funny thing is, the structure of the contract almost assures Pete the record. If he hits less than 27 this year, he'll have had a **** year. Which means he likely opts in for 2026. The only thing that can derail him is if he's lights out for half the year proving he's not in decline, but has an injury that keeps him from getting to the record.

So if you're mathing. The offer was 7 years, $158M. Since then, he's earned $20.5M in 2024, and will earn $30M in 2025. That leaves 5 years, $107.5M left on that deal ($21.5AAV) Assuming Alonso opts out after 2025. He will hit the free agent market again at age 31, with no QO. Could he get a 5 year deal at that AAV? Maybe. Likely not. But assuming he puts up decent numbers (not worse than 2024), you have to figure he's offered at least a 3 year for something close to $21.5M AAV. With a good year, I can see 4 years, $25M per. So while it sucks for him that he won't have the security of a multi-year deal, if he doesn't decline further, I can see him ultimately making more money than the deal he rejected.

My speculation based on nothing but my imagination: *The Mets' offer was for 3 years, around $24M per year ($72M). Alonso/Boras were probably looking for 3 years, $30M per year, with opt outs each year, the Bellinger-type buyouts, and maybe even front-loaded. Without any other offers to compete with, the Mets didn't move, and hence the long standoff. *After the Cohen rant, I'm guessing Alonso/Boras dropped the buyouts and came back to the table. Then the sticking point was the AAV (24 vs. 30). Instead of meeting in the middle with AAV, Cohen/Stearns finally gave in and said we'll give you $30 AAV, but for one year, and removed one guaranteed year from their deal. They presented both options to Pete. 3 years, 72M, 2 years, $54M. Pete chose the two year deal since his intent all along was to opt out anyway. Things I have a stronger basis to believe: *All of the information given to Andy Martino and Jon Heyman come from Boras. They both broke the Soto signing at the same time, they both broke the Pete news at the same time. They both pumped the "Mets have pivoted away from Alonso" BS at the same time. Once Boras went silent, they were completely in the dark. As soon as the deal was done, Boras gave them the info and let them break the news simultaneously. *the Mets never pivoted away from Alonso. *Pete was never going to the Blue Jays. And all that 10 yard line crap was Boras propaganda.

It seems almost guaranteed to end up there next year, doesn't it? It seems like it. I’m glad he’s back. And I’m not sure it was on the table, but I would have preferred overpaying AAV and locking him up for 3 years. If 3/90 with no opt outs was possible, I would have preferred that. Again. I don’t have the discipline Stearns has.

And the Mets sign the damn guy.

I watched segments from Andy Martino (SNY) and Jon Heyman (Bleacher Report) today. It's funny. Neither of them have any idea what is going on. They're absolutely guessing. If the situation wasn't so exhausting, I think I'd better appreciate the comedy of two guys being shoved in front of a camera with nothing to say and air time to fill. So what that means is that Scott Boras has stopped leaking to the press. His last attempt at leverage was that ridiculous "10 yard line" garbage that he fed to Andy Martino the Thursday before Amazin' Day. But ever since Steve Cohen made his public statements, the only thing the Boras camp has leaked is their immediate response that their demands were industry standard. It's now been 10 days of nothing. When Boras was doing his propaganda, you could read the tea leaves and see what he was trying to do. But with this complete silence, it's anyone's guess. When Boras first went silent I wondered if maybe Pete took over negotiations. And if he did, I figured something would get done quickly. But if Pete did take over negotiations and we still don't have a deal, then maybe the two sides were further apart then we thought.

Maybe Boomer meant next Friday.

Oof. Point taken.

why would you think that? He's not a journalist, he's a guy paid to have takes. Right or wrong, doesn't matter. People are gonna tune in Monday, pay attention Monday (well, if our dictator hasn't turned off radio signals) and give him even more attention. Well, he’s not just a talk show host. He’s Boomer Esiason. He’s a Super Bowl QB and a bona fide celebrity before he ever started broadcasting. And no, he’s not going to lose his job for being wrong, but something like this erodes at his credibility. And as an athlete, a former QB, he’s egotistical enough that being right matters to him. He had plenty of chances to hedge in the clip I heard Friday. He was firm and confident, and said something about his information being 100% solid. So I’m just wondering what happened. The possibilities I guess are that he’s full of **** and did it for engagement, he was fed bad info, or the intel was good but something changed. I’m saying given who he his the first possibility seems unlikely. But what the hell do I know.

You would think he wouldn’t come out that confidently without good info. I really wonder what happened here.