On the Mets’ trade deadline, rebuilding in New York and the Pete Alonso dilemma

Now that the trade deadline has passed, it seemed like a good time to check in with Chris Flanders on the state of the Mets. Below is our email correspondence on some issues facing the Mets both now and the near-future.

Brian: For many years, you’ve advocated for the Mets to do a full-scale rebuild but they’ve never done one. They had a chance with David Stearns coming aboard but he opted to go for a potential playoff spot, complete with a payroll that will likely come with a draft-pick penalty. And then this year, the Mets traded prospects – albeit not ones likely to be impact players – at the deadline.

I’m curious how you feel about where the Mets are and the decisions they’ve made since the end of last season. Also, what do you see happening over the next 12 months?

Chris: I have indeed argued for a proper rebuild, preferring that to “rebuilding for it,” which as we have seen has been a lousy pathway. The purpose for that feeling is not just to rebuild for the sake or process of it, but rather to reset the prime production years for a lot of the players. For example, I don’t think it makes sense to spend crazy for one or two free agents only to have a poor cast of characters otherwise.

So where does that take us for today? I’ve been ready to pull the plug on ‘24 for some time. My sense is that would still have been the right move, but after June’s torrid run, it simply would have been so bad of a move that it would have alienated a vast proportion of the fan base. Had they not waited so long, I don’t think it would have mattered that much. I understand why Stearns did not call for a sell off.

As far as I’m concerned, what the Mets ended up doing was as close to not making waves as could be structured. I don’t consider the traded people as any loss whatsoever, so it doesn’t feel like Stearns is breaking the promise of building a strong team from the bottom up, and the top down. The ‘24 Mets are in fend for themselves mode. That feels about right to me.

So, let me ask you, do you believe in the “you can’t rebuild in New York” thinking?

Brian: I don’t believe in that. It’s a media creation, right up there with “Player X” can’t play in New York. I’m an East Coast snob but those things are a bridge too far for me. My belief is that if you’re honest with fans, they’ll support any reasonable plan, especially rebuilding.

This season has been playing with house money for me. My expectations were an 80-82-win team heading into the year. Now, I’d revise that upward. I was fine with the moves Stearns made at the deadline, even if I would have preferred a SP upgrade, or a sell-high move with Luis Severino, or both.

Things change with the farm system in a very short amount of time. With the injuries to Jett Williams and Drew Gilbert, along with the poor Triple-A results of Blade Tidwell, there may not have been an untouchable prospect in the system, assuming for the right guy, at the deadline. Perhaps people would put Brandon Sproat in that category but his Double-A results were not better than Tidwell’s.

Would you have been in favor of trading prospects for a SP, say Blake Snell, to make a run at the pennant? With the injury-marred seasons of the Braves, Dodgers and Phillies – it seems like the NL is there for the taking. I don’t pretend to know what it would have taken to get Snell. But I hope Stearns didn’t dismiss it out of hand and found out what the cost was.

Chris: I’m really happy to hear that. I agree completely, if you are honest with the fan base and have a plan that you can develop, the fans will come. Maybe with the injuries there are less moveable prospect pieces, but I think Stearns nibbled on the edges to do a little something without egregiously going back on the not trading prospects. To me this year is treading water, and I’m ok with that even though the return for Severino, Garrett, Alonso, even Diaz would have really been something for returns.

As for Snell, there is a package of players I would have been amenable to trade for, but they all would have been 30 or deeper in the pipeline given San Francisco wanted to pawn off the whole contract. In that event, a couple way down prospects would have been fine with me, and having 1.5 years of Snell would have been nice. It would have also signaled watch out for ‘25 because the train is coming.

Let’s change tack a little. With the team playing with house money as you say, and a lot of payroll coming off the docket for next year, what kinds of moves do you see the team making in the offseason, and do you see the moves aimed at a serious move for the post season?

Brian: The way I see it, next year’s team is tied to the results from this year’s squad. My take has been that the Mets were going to try next season to get under the tax penalty that causes the draft pick to drop 10 spots. If, somehow, they were to make the playoffs this year – especially if they win a series or two – how do you justify having a belt-tightening offseason?

With Jeff McNeil’s resurgence, they’re set at 2B, SS, C, LF and wherever Mark Vientos plays, whether that’s 1B or 3B. That leaves four spots that have a question mark. Do you figure Brett Baty and Ronny Mauricio fill one of them? Does Starling Marte fill another? Is Stearns happy with Tyrone Taylor as the team’s starting CF? Do you want a full-time DH or do you want to rotate a bunch of players thru the spot, giving the “half a day off,” as it were?

Do you try to go with a 6-man rotation from the jump? If so, that means two SP, assuming Sean Manaea opts out of his contract and it’s impossible to figure that he won’t. Is it possible that they won’t have to do any major expenditure on the bullpen?

For me, it’s too soon to contemplate the offseason in any detailed way.

One last question for you: As one of Pete Alonso’s biggest backers throughout the years, is there enough season left for him to salvage his chance to cash in with a big contract in free agency? My limit on him right now would be a three-year deal, with the AAV seemingly shrinking by the day. It almost seems like he’s destined to sign a one-year deal to rebuild his value. Is there any other way it might play out for Alonso?

Chris: Interesting you see that the offseason is a close connection with the outcome of this season. I really have been viewing this year’s team as somewhat independent of future plans, including ‘25. Agreed it is too early to go overboard on predictions, but I get the feeling there will be considerable spending going on.

As for Alonso, every day gets more and more worrisome about a J.D. Martinez type future. I definitely believed Pete would snap out of things and rescue about an average season, but each game gets me more concerned. He has the skills and capacity to deliver, but the harder he tries the worse he gets. You can see that in every K as he walks back to the dugout shaking his head. I think it’s all between his ears and a desire to be The Guy that he’s trying to hit a 6-run homer every at bat. As it seems less and less likely a team will come up with 5, 6, or 7 years, I do wonder if a pillow contract is in the mix, but that comes with a lot of unknowns for him at a time when there is now documented decline. There is time to change that narrative for this season, but he better get things figured out really fast. I would be at a contract of 3/$26M, for a $78M total. He might get a bit more for AAV but if Alonso’s camp uses Freddie Freeman as a comp, it would be hard to justify.