Offseason grades for the Mets plus an alternate reality

Former Reds GM Jim Bowden has reinvented himself as a media – hmm, what’s the right word here? He’s been on TV and he’s a prominent columnist for The Athletic. Let’s call him a media personality. Truth be told, he’s not my favorite in any of the roles in which he’s performed. At The Athletic, his bread-and-butter column is making lists. His articles always get a ton of comments. Sure, most of them are ridiculing his lists one way or another. But they say there’s no such thing as bad publicity.

Regardless, in his latest column, Bowden had an MLB Power Ranking, in which he placed the Mets sixth. His first sentence on the Mets started out like this: “The Mets had a sensational offseason…” Perhaps when you sign Juan Soto that makes everything great. To be fair, there were other good moves the club made, even if my opinion on the good moves differs from yours.

So, here’s my take on the big moves made by the Mets this offseason. And for this purpose, we’ll count any “big move” as one that carries at least a $4 million contract. Here are my grades for those moves, taking in account what the player has done recently and how much he’s being paid, along with my expectations in 2025:

Dec. 4 – signed Frankie Montas. Grade C-
Dec. 9 – signed Clay Holmes. Grade B
Dec. 11 – signed Soto. Grade A+
Dec. 19 – signed Griffin Canning. Grade D
Dec. 27 – signed Sean Manaea. Grade A-
Jan. 9 – signed Paul Blackburn. Grade D+
Jan. 17 – signed Jesse Winker. Grade C
Jan. 23 – signed A.J. Minter. Grade B
Jam. 30 – signed Ryne Stanek. Grade B-
Feb. 12 – signed Pete Alonso. Grade C-

What if we kept all of the moves with a grade above in either the “A” or “B” range but used the money spent on the others elsewhere – what kind of team could we have gotten? Before we look at an alternate universe, we need to acknowledge that this is purely a theoretical exercise. We have no way of knowing if the free agents would have been willing to sign with the Mets for the dollar figure that they signed elsewhere. Additionally, just because Player A signed a certain contract, that doesn’t mean he was willing to sign that in early Dec. If the Mets offered Alonso the 2/$54 contract they did on the day they signed Montas, there’s probably zero chance he would have signed that.

Still, we can acknowledge the limitations of the exercise without completely invalidating it.

So, how much money did the Mets spend on the “C” and below players from my list above? Focusing just on what they’re being paid in 2025, it’s $62.8 million, broken down as follows: Alonso $30, Montas $17, Winker $7.5, Canning $4.25 and Blackburn $4.05. The challenge is to come down with a group of players that essentially cover the same positions at a similar salary and who would perform better than the group that Stearns signed.

This group is a 1B, a part-time DH and three starters. My group will be a 1B, a part-time DH, two SP and a RP. And the reason it has a relief pitcher is my belief that Jose Butto should be used as a starter. There was a report recently where the headline indicated that Butto was happy to be a reliever. But that was misleading, as he was happy that there was clarity on what his role was going to be, that he didn’t want to bounce back and forth between starting and relieving. With me running the show, he still has certainty. It’s just that in my alternate universe, he’s in the rotation.

Here are the players signed in my alternate universe:

Walker Buehler - $21.05
Aroldis Chapman - $10.75
Kyle Hendricks - $1.25
Paul Goldschmidt - $12.5
Joc Pederson - $18.5

My group is a shade more expensive than Stearns’ – checking in at $65.3 million or $2.5 million above Stearns’ collection. But that’s close enough. Now, what would the 2025 expectation for our two groups be? For simplicity’s sake, let’s use the ZiPS forecasts and compare the fWAR totals among our 10 players:

3.1 – Alonso
1.1 – Montas
1.2 – Winker
0.5 – Canning
0.7 – Blackburn
6.6 – Total

2.0 – Buehler
0.7 – Chapman
0.3 – Hendricks
2.2 – Goldschmidt
2.1 – Pederson
7.3 – Total

There’s nothing sacred about these ZiPS numbers. And even though they were my choice to use here, it’s my belief they are off in their estimation of both Alonso’s and Pederson’s numbers in 2025. Alonso had a 2.1 fWAR in 2024, while Pederson had a 3.0 mark. Yet ZiPS thinks they are going to trade marks in 2025.

Regardless, ZiPS sees my group being 0.7 better than Stearns’ group. That’s not a ton. But my opinion is that when push comes to shove, my group will be more than a full win more productive at the end of the year. If Alonso and Pederson both finish the season with a 2.5 fWAR – which would be an increase over 2024 for Alonso and a decrease for Pederson – my group would have a 1.7 advantage.

And that’s not even counting the utter replaceability of Hendricks. He was chosen because he was a starter that signed a very cheap deal, not because he was a valued asset. With a cheaper salary, it would be easier to move on from Hendricks if he imitates Adrian Houser. The Mets moved on from Jorge Lopez, Yohan Ramirez and Michael Tonkin – who all made $2 million or less - by the end of May. But they kept Houser ($5 million) until July 24, Jake Diekman ($4 million) until July 28 and Adam Ottavino ($4.5 million) all year.

Of course, we could use different players. We could swap out Pederson and Hendricks and use Josh Bell and Jack Flaherty and get 3.2 fWAR from those spots, rather than the 2.4 of my original picks. But those two would also cost more money. Or we could have signed a reliever cheaper than Chapman, although him being a lefty with extensive closing experience might be worth the premium.

Ultimately, it comes down to me not valuing Alonso as near a 4-win player, along with being skittish about Montas. And also viewing Blackburn and Canning as a waste of $8 million-plus. I’d just as soon give that sixth starter’s spot to Tylor Megill. But if you do that then the SP depth takes a serious hit. Could you sign two pitchers to go to Syracuse for that money? Perhaps. Shoot, if the Mets didn’t sign them, it’s entirely possible that Blackburn and Canning would be on NRIs.

My take is that while being underwhelmed by some of these signings, that Stearns gets a pass for his previous body of work. And if he hits on Holmes, Manaea and Minter, it won’t matter too much if Blackburn, Canning and Montas don’t meet his expectations.

And there’s always Soto.