The general concept of sequencing relates to a connected series of events with the specifics being underpinned by the context to which it is being applied.
After he signed, we heard that the Mets had discussions with Bichette at the Winter Meetings. Did we hear the same thing with Tucker? Had the Mets been involved with Tucker earlier than their ultimately unsuccessful pursuit in mid-January? It certainly wouldn't surprise me if they had - it's just that I don't recall specifically hearing that.
Is it possible that the Tucker pursuit was a sort of Plan B instead of Plan A? It's not hard for me to imagine that the Mets expected Tucker to get a 5-7-year deal elsewhere so he wasn't on the radar. Then January rolls around and he's still available and the Mets switch gears.
Also, not sure I agree that the Robert deal doesn't happen if they sign Tucker. Stearns said that Benge was going to have a shot - not that he was guaranteed a starting role. It's possible the Mets were playing a game of chicken with the White Sox, trying to get Robert for as little as possible. And when they didn't get Tucker, they agreed to include Truman Pauley.
Ultimately, as outsiders none of us know who the preferred targets were and how early negotiations started with each player under consideration - unless the org specifically tells us. But I agree with a main part of your piece in that the Mets were working on many different things simultaneously. This is not like under previous administrations, where everything was linear and the team wasn't prepared for anything to go a different way.
You're right that we don't really have inside insight into timelines, etc., though I more or less based it off of piecing together bits dropped in various articles and podcasts over the last couple of months.
"The Mets had long let the Tucker camp know of their interest and Tucker came away impressed from agentless Zooms he did with his wife, Samantha, and Cohen, and that Samantha did with Cohen’s wife, Alex."
Similarly, in another Sherman article that I linked to in my previous piece he states that:
"The Mets had long talked with the White Sox about Luis Robert Jr. And once Bichette provided even a stronger floor of a strong positional group, they thought the upside play for Robert should be finalized."
At the end of the day it's speculation on my part based on previous reporting that may or may not be the exact picture on what happened if we're being honest about the quality of sports journalism.
But 100% agree it's great to have a front office that, while it won't necessarily make all the right moves, it seemingly has the forethought to have multiple plans to pivot to when things inevitably don't go as they initially hoped.
Stearns has proved he can definitely multitask. That is usually a good thing, although it could have been a contributing factor in losing out on Diaz for small change. Ultimately, wins and losses will determine how right or wrong he was…and a perhaps the main factors in determining the Ws and Ls will be injuries and performances of unproven youngsters…two things that are fare for a GM to control or even influence.
If you think about it, this offseason was tough. There were so many moving parts and there was a high risk, that big holes would be left on the roster.
I am happy with the moves. Out with the old, in with the new. If we ran back the same team, there would have been a sense of dread this spring. For better or worse, it will be an interesting season.
The early signing of Devin Williams was a very good move. When they lost out on Diaz they also pivoted to Luke Weaver. Another good move. Tucker apparently was the primary target for right field. Dodgers overpaid at 4/$240m. It was a good pivot to Bichette at 3/$120m even though it was also and overpay but it was a necessary more to make to Mets competitive. As for Baty, he should get the majority of his at bats at DH. Vientos should be the loser of at bats with the Bichette signing. Having obtained Semien and Robert improved the defense which needed improvements. The pitching was their downfall last year and the trade for Peralta ,along the the bullpen pieces, address the problem. I'm not endorsing the way the roster was constructed but I tip my hat to Stearns for adapting to make the Mets competitive.
After he signed, we heard that the Mets had discussions with Bichette at the Winter Meetings. Did we hear the same thing with Tucker? Had the Mets been involved with Tucker earlier than their ultimately unsuccessful pursuit in mid-January? It certainly wouldn't surprise me if they had - it's just that I don't recall specifically hearing that.
Is it possible that the Tucker pursuit was a sort of Plan B instead of Plan A? It's not hard for me to imagine that the Mets expected Tucker to get a 5-7-year deal elsewhere so he wasn't on the radar. Then January rolls around and he's still available and the Mets switch gears.
Also, not sure I agree that the Robert deal doesn't happen if they sign Tucker. Stearns said that Benge was going to have a shot - not that he was guaranteed a starting role. It's possible the Mets were playing a game of chicken with the White Sox, trying to get Robert for as little as possible. And when they didn't get Tucker, they agreed to include Truman Pauley.
Ultimately, as outsiders none of us know who the preferred targets were and how early negotiations started with each player under consideration - unless the org specifically tells us. But I agree with a main part of your piece in that the Mets were working on many different things simultaneously. This is not like under previous administrations, where everything was linear and the team wasn't prepared for anything to go a different way.
You're right that we don't really have inside insight into timelines, etc., though I more or less based it off of piecing together bits dropped in various articles and podcasts over the last couple of months.
For instance, Sherman states in this article https://nypost.com/2026/01/19/sports/the-mets-have-yet-to-figure-out-how-to-escape-the-dodgers-shadow/:
"The Mets had long let the Tucker camp know of their interest and Tucker came away impressed from agentless Zooms he did with his wife, Samantha, and Cohen, and that Samantha did with Cohen’s wife, Alex."
Similarly, in another Sherman article that I linked to in my previous piece he states that:
"The Mets had long talked with the White Sox about Luis Robert Jr. And once Bichette provided even a stronger floor of a strong positional group, they thought the upside play for Robert should be finalized."
At the end of the day it's speculation on my part based on previous reporting that may or may not be the exact picture on what happened if we're being honest about the quality of sports journalism.
But 100% agree it's great to have a front office that, while it won't necessarily make all the right moves, it seemingly has the forethought to have multiple plans to pivot to when things inevitably don't go as they initially hoped.
Stearns has proved he can definitely multitask. That is usually a good thing, although it could have been a contributing factor in losing out on Diaz for small change. Ultimately, wins and losses will determine how right or wrong he was…and a perhaps the main factors in determining the Ws and Ls will be injuries and performances of unproven youngsters…two things that are fare for a GM to control or even influence.
If you think about it, this offseason was tough. There were so many moving parts and there was a high risk, that big holes would be left on the roster.
I am happy with the moves. Out with the old, in with the new. If we ran back the same team, there would have been a sense of dread this spring. For better or worse, it will be an interesting season.
The early signing of Devin Williams was a very good move. When they lost out on Diaz they also pivoted to Luke Weaver. Another good move. Tucker apparently was the primary target for right field. Dodgers overpaid at 4/$240m. It was a good pivot to Bichette at 3/$120m even though it was also and overpay but it was a necessary more to make to Mets competitive. As for Baty, he should get the majority of his at bats at DH. Vientos should be the loser of at bats with the Bichette signing. Having obtained Semien and Robert improved the defense which needed improvements. The pitching was their downfall last year and the trade for Peralta ,along the the bullpen pieces, address the problem. I'm not endorsing the way the roster was constructed but I tip my hat to Stearns for adapting to make the Mets competitive.
Baty vs Vientos,May the bat man win