Poll: On Edwin Diaz' next contract
They say a man will gladly pay $2 for a $1 item that he needs. You can certainly see the reason for that, in that filling a need immediately outweighs the dollar lost. But is that always the case? Would it be worthwhile to pay $10 for a $5 item or $100 for a $50 item? That probably depends on your financial status, along with how big the need is. As someone on a low budget (what did you say?) – there’s no way that last one would happen for me. And if we’re being honest, paying $10 for that $5 item wouldn’t happen, either.
Fortunately, billionaire Steve Cohen owns the Mets and, if he chooses to do so, he has the ability to spend $100 million on a $60 million player. There’s definitely a need for Edwin Diaz on the Mets. If they opt to let him leave the club, they will absolutely need to find a high-end replacement. We have an interesting test case with Diaz – and to a lesser extent, Pete Alonso. How much is Cohen willing to overpay to fill a need?
Of course, there’s a middleman here. How much sway will David Stearns have in re-signing Diaz? Stearns inherited Diaz’ contract. The largest contract to a pitcher that he’s handed out in his two years with the club was the 3/$75 deal he gave to Sean Manaea, figuring he would get somewhere in the neighborhood of 525 innings over the life of the deal. And that didn’t get off to a great start with Manaea in the first year of the contract.
Without Cohen pushing him to make the deal, would Stearns sign Diaz to a 5/$100 contract? While it’s a longer term than Manaea received, the expectation would be for Diaz to throw around 300 innings over the five seasons, about 200-plus fewer than Manaea despite the two extra years.
Diaz has been with the Mets for seven seasons, which seems a bit unreal. Part of the reason for that is that he missed a year with an injury and another season was the Covid year. So, he’s played roughly 5.37 seasons in New York. He was worth over $20 million in 2022 and was probably going to be close in 2020, assuming he was going to pitch as well over 162 games as he did in 60.
But FG Dollar Values has Diaz worth $16.5 million in 2021 and $16.1 million last year. And in 2019, Diaz’ performance was rated at $0.2 million. Not even considering the year he was out with an injury, Diaz has three seasons where he didn’t come particularly close to being worth $20 million.
We also have to consider that Diaz’ next contract, however long it is, will start with his age-32 season. We value a unit of fWAR at (roughly) $8 million, meaning that in order to deliver $20 million worth of value, you have to post a 2.5 fWAR. Since 2015, which is 10 full seasons due to the Covid year, there have been five seasons where a reliever at age-32 or older has posted a 2.5 or better fWAR. On average, one player does it every two years. What’s the likelihood that Diaz does it over all three, four or five seasons of his next deal?
There’s absolutely zero reason to believe that Diaz is going to be worth $20 million per season over a multi-year deal. Still, there are plenty of people around who believe that it’s worth paying a premium to retain Diaz, given his success in New York and no obvious replacement for him already on the roster. Is that logic or a rationalization, something to justify a signing that might otherwise be seen as unacceptable or irrational? Which brings up this great part from the movie, “The Big Chill.”
Michael:
I don’t know anyone who could get through the day without two or three juicy rationalizations. They’re more important than sex.
Sam Weber:
Ah, come on. Nothing’s more important than sex.
Michael:
Oh yeah? Ever gone a week without a rationalization?
I juggle too many rationalizations in my day-to-day life to wish to do that in my sports fandom, too. Perhaps those of you who can rationalize overpaying for Alonso and/or Diaz just have simpler/cleaner/healthier everyday lives than me. Maybe one day I’ll get to see how the other half lives.
I like Metsense’s plan better than my own. I wanted them to sign Fairbanks and either Suarez or Williams with the Diaz money because I’ve never trusted Diaz. He is reckless and only in his two walk years has he been what we all think he will be every year. Look it up: 2022 and his opt out season in 2025 he was lights out. Other than that, not really. Am I alone in noticing this? He walks people and lets them run rampant. I can see him blowing a big game by letting a cheap run. Plus, I’ve always said that he has a 10¢ brain.
As I wrote in my plan for 2026, I’d like to use matchups to close, like the Dodgers have done for years. If you have enough really quality arms, not meatballers like Helsley and guys that struggle with their consistency like Garrett, you are better off.
Diaz can be filthy, but only in his “walk seasons”. And don’t scoff at Emilio Pagan. He has been outstanding outside of The Great American Batting Cage. On the road, his numbers are great! And his only problem, the homeruns, can be helped by Citifield.
The Mets need at least three experienced relievers for their bullpen. Peter Fairbanks had 27 saves the MLBTR projects 2/$18m, Kyle Finnegan had 24 saves and MLBTR projects 2/$20m , Emilio Pagan had 32 saves and MLBTR projects 2/$16m and Ryan Helsley had 21 saves and MLBTR projects 2/$24m. All have Closer experience. All project at a reasonable price. If the Mets could sign three out of the four then their bullpen will be solidified and Diaz would not be needed. All of them are short-term contracts and gives the Mets more flexibility. Diaz wants four or five years. I voted no.