As someone who grew up watching the A's and Yankees win multiple World Series in the 1970s while constantly fighting one another, it's my opinion that talent trumps everything and while it may be easier if everyone gets along, it's far from necessary.
As for the length of the deals, it's my belief that having multiple players coming off the books at the same time - regardless if it's a 1-year, 3-year or 5-year deal - is what's important. I would have preferred to see this assembled not by length of deal but rather expiration of deal.
So, who's leaving, or potentially leaving, after this season?
Alonso has an opt-out
Diaz has an opt-out
Marte's contract is up
Montas has an opt out but the injury makes it seem much less likely
Minter has an opt-out
Winker's contract is up
Stanek's contract is up
Canning's contract is up
Blackburn's contract is up
If all of the players with options decide to return, the Mets have $41.05 million coming off the books. Once you give raises to arb-eligible and pre-arb players, it's not a lot to plow back into free agency, even considering Alonso's lower salary in 2026. If Alonso opts to stay - does that rule out a run at Vlad Jr.?
If everyone's fear comes true and the SP isn't up to snuff -- is there enough money to bring in an SP1 or SP2 and also replace the DH and fortify the bullpen?
And how does it work with everyone clamoring for the Mets to copy the Braves and look to lock up Alvarez and Vientos to team-friendly, long-term deals? Instead of a sub-$1 million salary, these players will carry salaries at least 5X that much - further cutting off money to improve elsewhere.
Everyone is very cavalier with Steve Cohen's fortune. But it's clear from both what he's said and what he's done that there's some ceiling on what he's willing to spend. How does he get the team to compete for championships while also lowering his payroll?
It's important to remember that Cohen has said on multiple occasions that his spending in free agency is the short term solution to fielding a competitive team, and that long term he'd like to develop players. I think the part that's easy to forget is that we have all these promising prospects coming up, and that going out to buy players in free agency isn't the goal, but to have the roster flexibility to make room for the developing players. Pitching especially, with Sproat, Tong, Scott, maybe Vasil or Hamel...there are a plethora of promising arms that can step in to the rotation in the next few years. Ideally the money they spend in the next few years is simply locking in Vientos, Alvarez, Alonso, and Peterson.
Cohen signed up for this, and he wants a perennial contender and to bring a championship team. Cohen himself said Dodgers East, not the fan base. So he’s set the bar that fans now expect. No one is crying for Cohen or his fortune. If this team does turn into Brewers East, well he deserves the shit coming his way. I have no tears for his choices.
I wouldn’t extend Vientos or Alvarez any time soon. But team friendly deals do lower the budget so it’s worth seeing them through when appropriate, even if it means laying out cash now.
Im with you on the stack of expiring contracts adding to about nothing. For what it’s worth lowering payroll as a grand strategy sounds weak-kneed. Ask the Dodgers or Yankees about lowering payroll. Or better yet, ask the Red Sox, who have been so successful after lowering payroll.
Im surprised to hear you of all people going back to the glory days in reference to team chemistry. Sure the in-fighting teams of the As and Yankees was something else, but lets move to this millennium where team chemistry has been essential whether it was the Red Sox, Cards, Giants, or, yes the Dodgers. It does matter in this new world of baseball in the current configuration.
Absolutely no one should cry for Cohen over money. The point is that if he decides - far from a sure thing - that he no longer wants to have the 2nd-highest payroll that none of us should be surprised. Or hurt.
Team-friendly deals raise the budget in the short term. And if Cohen decides - again, far from a sure thing - that he wants to lower payroll in the short term, they don't make sense. It has to mean something that he didn't try that with Alvarez the past two years or with Vientos this offseason.
MLB this century is far-less combative than it was last century. But while things appear on the surface to be all honky dory, the plain fact is we don't know how it really is. For years, we were told how much of a player's manager that Terry Collins was. It was only when Marc Carig published his story on his way out the door - when he no longer needed to curry favor with anyone - that we found out the truth. My opinion is that's not an isolated incident, covering up the truth to maintain access. There's just no way that all 26 players get along, either with themselves and the manager, the vast majority of the time. Winning still covers up a lot of sins.
When I think long term, I think about Bobby Bonilla, who actually will be paid in full before Soto's contract expires. I am not aware of any other deferred salary that will be payable by the Mets after anyone's contract is completed - does anyone else know or have info on deferred payments?
Stearns has better start thinking of this band aid pitching staff he has stitched together. Montas on the IL and now Manaea to the IL with an oblique strain. Its not even March 1st. Who's next, Senga?
Pitching has been suspect in both of Stearns years at the helm. Apart from overpaying for one of the front line guys from this free agency, I'm not sure he could have done much else to improve it. Hopefully the young guys can step up sooner rather than later.
As the writer of this article, I’d like your opinion on how roster construction can be handled when it comes to making room for the top prospects in the organization.
It isn’t fair to attach Nimmo to Stearns’ record. Nimmo is hardly a star on any team, and his eight year deal has gone badly already, IMO. Would you give him a six year deal now, because that’s what he has in a sense. Nimmo’s numbers are usually better than average but he hasn’t ever been an all star.
In fairness, none of the long term guys can be attached to stearns apart from Soto. He inherited the rest. But he has constructed the roster around what he was given, and to that end I think he's done a balanced job of roster construction. They've talked extensively recently about why they aren't bringing Iglesias back, primarily because of opportunities for young guys to step in. To Brian's comment earlier, expiring contracts are also how to make room for prospects, and that's why one year deals are so prevalent too. Prospects are hard because sometimes you think a guy will advance and they fail (Dom Hamel and Mike Vasil are recent examples). So you have to be able to fill the roster when your young guys don't make the team.
And to your point about Nimmo, I agree he hasn't played to his contract yet, but in terms of leadership and also in fans loving him, he is still a core piece of the team. I see a lot of Nimmo jerseys in the stands, and it goes to show that people really love him as a player.
According to Cot's, since signing his new contract, Nimmo has been paid $40.5 million, assuming he's already been paid the signing bonus. And in that time, he's produced $55.3 million worth of value according to FanGraphs.
Now, he may not be worth his contract when all is said and done. But he's provided a ton of excess value in the first two years of his deal.
It's interesting to hear this data from FanGraphs. From my perspective, when we signed Nimmo the storyline was, "we have our center fielder for the foreseeable future" - and then he only played one full season in CF and got moved to LF because he wasn't that great defensively. On the offensive side, he was the staple at the top of the order and was great at drawing walks to start the game. But then he was never ever a threat to steal, and eventually lost his spot in the order to Lindor, and then has kind of floated around the order looking for a place to fit. Is he a power guy now? Is he a contact guy? Work the pitch count? He can do all of those things, and when he turns on the power it's a beautiful thing to watch. He's also struggled with injuries his whole career, and while he played through it last year and was generally healthy the year before, the threat of his health looms large. I think his demotion from leadoff and CF gives the perception that he isn't what we signed him to be, and that's why it feels like he hasn't lived up to the contract. I guess FanGraphs sees it from a strictly value added standpoint and not necessarily in the context of the signing.
I also should add that for me personally, Nimmo is one of my favorite players. I'll be getting the new road jersey with his name on it. I also tried unsuccessfully to buy my son a Nimmo jersey (they didnt have him in youth sizes - so he ended up with Lindor). So my critique comes from a place of love and not disdain.
What you're describing is all narrative and when you make value assumptions based on narrative, you run the risk of being far from the right answer.
FWIW, Statcast defensive numbers had Nimmo being a league-average defensive CF in 2023. Stearns wanted to improve the defense and brought in a stronger defensive CF in Bader. But Bader's bat was so lacking that he was on the bench at the end of the year.
In a 9-inning game, you're going to get at least three chances to make an impact at the plate. You might get that many in the field. Or you might not get a single chance. We look at the choices that Stearns made last year to emphasize defense and they didn't turn out great. Nido was released, as were Short and Wendle. Baty was sent to the minors and Bader to the bench.
Was it the right call to move Nimmo out of CF? I dunno - maybe? But I think they could have gotten more production - combining offense and defense - with Nimmo in CF and Player X in LF, than they did with Bader in CF and Nimmo in LF.
Really enjoyed this article Ryan and sorry for the delay in commenting. When you lay out the expiring contracts and opt outs, Stearns' plan comes into better focus. It seems the model will allow for the promotion of the kids and hopefully some long term stability of the franchise so that payroll will come down over the next few years and free agent acquisitions will fill gaps but not be solely responsible for the team's success.
I would extend Vientos and Alvarez, taking a page out of the Brave's playbook and lock them up on team friendly 5-7 year deals. Yes, I know they are not even eligible to leave the organization for a number of years, but if they had taken the Braves approach, they could have singed Nimmo for less dollars and locked up Alonso at a cheaper rate when he was a few years younger. Its a crap shoot but with the way dollars are out of whack, sometimes waiting becomes very costly.
And back to Bobby Bonilla. His agent was a genius but so many still do not grasp that his deferral allowed the Mets to get Mike Hampton and get to the 2000 World Series where we got spanked by the Yankees. Then when Hampton left, the compensation the Mets got for Hampton was David Wright. Perhaps its time to put Bobby Bonilla Day in its proper perspective and move on. There are so many older and newer players with deferred salaries that makes Bonilla money look essentially like nothing.
And now back to the Mets lack of sufficient starting pitching. Anyone want to up the offer for Castillo? This pitching mess falls directly on Stearns.
It makes too much sense to extend Alvy and Vientos (and Peterson), but it takes two to tango and I often wonder if the players prefer to test free agency and push their price. Heck, Juan Soto turned down over $400 million extension in Washington so he could test the market. If Vientos and Alvy play to their potential, maybe they'll be of the same mindset.
The problem with signing/trading for a starter at this juncture is the tax hit. But you're right, why build an offensive juggernaut if your pitching staff is so porous that it takes a Herculean offense to squeak out wins.
As someone who grew up watching the A's and Yankees win multiple World Series in the 1970s while constantly fighting one another, it's my opinion that talent trumps everything and while it may be easier if everyone gets along, it's far from necessary.
As for the length of the deals, it's my belief that having multiple players coming off the books at the same time - regardless if it's a 1-year, 3-year or 5-year deal - is what's important. I would have preferred to see this assembled not by length of deal but rather expiration of deal.
So, who's leaving, or potentially leaving, after this season?
Alonso has an opt-out
Diaz has an opt-out
Marte's contract is up
Montas has an opt out but the injury makes it seem much less likely
Minter has an opt-out
Winker's contract is up
Stanek's contract is up
Canning's contract is up
Blackburn's contract is up
If all of the players with options decide to return, the Mets have $41.05 million coming off the books. Once you give raises to arb-eligible and pre-arb players, it's not a lot to plow back into free agency, even considering Alonso's lower salary in 2026. If Alonso opts to stay - does that rule out a run at Vlad Jr.?
If everyone's fear comes true and the SP isn't up to snuff -- is there enough money to bring in an SP1 or SP2 and also replace the DH and fortify the bullpen?
And how does it work with everyone clamoring for the Mets to copy the Braves and look to lock up Alvarez and Vientos to team-friendly, long-term deals? Instead of a sub-$1 million salary, these players will carry salaries at least 5X that much - further cutting off money to improve elsewhere.
Everyone is very cavalier with Steve Cohen's fortune. But it's clear from both what he's said and what he's done that there's some ceiling on what he's willing to spend. How does he get the team to compete for championships while also lowering his payroll?
It's important to remember that Cohen has said on multiple occasions that his spending in free agency is the short term solution to fielding a competitive team, and that long term he'd like to develop players. I think the part that's easy to forget is that we have all these promising prospects coming up, and that going out to buy players in free agency isn't the goal, but to have the roster flexibility to make room for the developing players. Pitching especially, with Sproat, Tong, Scott, maybe Vasil or Hamel...there are a plethora of promising arms that can step in to the rotation in the next few years. Ideally the money they spend in the next few years is simply locking in Vientos, Alvarez, Alonso, and Peterson.
Cohen signed up for this, and he wants a perennial contender and to bring a championship team. Cohen himself said Dodgers East, not the fan base. So he’s set the bar that fans now expect. No one is crying for Cohen or his fortune. If this team does turn into Brewers East, well he deserves the shit coming his way. I have no tears for his choices.
I wouldn’t extend Vientos or Alvarez any time soon. But team friendly deals do lower the budget so it’s worth seeing them through when appropriate, even if it means laying out cash now.
Im with you on the stack of expiring contracts adding to about nothing. For what it’s worth lowering payroll as a grand strategy sounds weak-kneed. Ask the Dodgers or Yankees about lowering payroll. Or better yet, ask the Red Sox, who have been so successful after lowering payroll.
Im surprised to hear you of all people going back to the glory days in reference to team chemistry. Sure the in-fighting teams of the As and Yankees was something else, but lets move to this millennium where team chemistry has been essential whether it was the Red Sox, Cards, Giants, or, yes the Dodgers. It does matter in this new world of baseball in the current configuration.
Absolutely no one should cry for Cohen over money. The point is that if he decides - far from a sure thing - that he no longer wants to have the 2nd-highest payroll that none of us should be surprised. Or hurt.
Team-friendly deals raise the budget in the short term. And if Cohen decides - again, far from a sure thing - that he wants to lower payroll in the short term, they don't make sense. It has to mean something that he didn't try that with Alvarez the past two years or with Vientos this offseason.
MLB this century is far-less combative than it was last century. But while things appear on the surface to be all honky dory, the plain fact is we don't know how it really is. For years, we were told how much of a player's manager that Terry Collins was. It was only when Marc Carig published his story on his way out the door - when he no longer needed to curry favor with anyone - that we found out the truth. My opinion is that's not an isolated incident, covering up the truth to maintain access. There's just no way that all 26 players get along, either with themselves and the manager, the vast majority of the time. Winning still covers up a lot of sins.
When I think long term, I think about Bobby Bonilla, who actually will be paid in full before Soto's contract expires. I am not aware of any other deferred salary that will be payable by the Mets after anyone's contract is completed - does anyone else know or have info on deferred payments?
Bill, Nimmo, Diaz, Manaea, and I believe Lindor have deferrals.
Stearns has better start thinking of this band aid pitching staff he has stitched together. Montas on the IL and now Manaea to the IL with an oblique strain. Its not even March 1st. Who's next, Senga?
Pitching has been suspect in both of Stearns years at the helm. Apart from overpaying for one of the front line guys from this free agency, I'm not sure he could have done much else to improve it. Hopefully the young guys can step up sooner rather than later.
As the writer of this article, I’d like your opinion on how roster construction can be handled when it comes to making room for the top prospects in the organization.
It isn’t fair to attach Nimmo to Stearns’ record. Nimmo is hardly a star on any team, and his eight year deal has gone badly already, IMO. Would you give him a six year deal now, because that’s what he has in a sense. Nimmo’s numbers are usually better than average but he hasn’t ever been an all star.
In fairness, none of the long term guys can be attached to stearns apart from Soto. He inherited the rest. But he has constructed the roster around what he was given, and to that end I think he's done a balanced job of roster construction. They've talked extensively recently about why they aren't bringing Iglesias back, primarily because of opportunities for young guys to step in. To Brian's comment earlier, expiring contracts are also how to make room for prospects, and that's why one year deals are so prevalent too. Prospects are hard because sometimes you think a guy will advance and they fail (Dom Hamel and Mike Vasil are recent examples). So you have to be able to fill the roster when your young guys don't make the team.
And to your point about Nimmo, I agree he hasn't played to his contract yet, but in terms of leadership and also in fans loving him, he is still a core piece of the team. I see a lot of Nimmo jerseys in the stands, and it goes to show that people really love him as a player.
This is demonstrably false.
According to Cot's, since signing his new contract, Nimmo has been paid $40.5 million, assuming he's already been paid the signing bonus. And in that time, he's produced $55.3 million worth of value according to FanGraphs.
Now, he may not be worth his contract when all is said and done. But he's provided a ton of excess value in the first two years of his deal.
It's interesting to hear this data from FanGraphs. From my perspective, when we signed Nimmo the storyline was, "we have our center fielder for the foreseeable future" - and then he only played one full season in CF and got moved to LF because he wasn't that great defensively. On the offensive side, he was the staple at the top of the order and was great at drawing walks to start the game. But then he was never ever a threat to steal, and eventually lost his spot in the order to Lindor, and then has kind of floated around the order looking for a place to fit. Is he a power guy now? Is he a contact guy? Work the pitch count? He can do all of those things, and when he turns on the power it's a beautiful thing to watch. He's also struggled with injuries his whole career, and while he played through it last year and was generally healthy the year before, the threat of his health looms large. I think his demotion from leadoff and CF gives the perception that he isn't what we signed him to be, and that's why it feels like he hasn't lived up to the contract. I guess FanGraphs sees it from a strictly value added standpoint and not necessarily in the context of the signing.
I also should add that for me personally, Nimmo is one of my favorite players. I'll be getting the new road jersey with his name on it. I also tried unsuccessfully to buy my son a Nimmo jersey (they didnt have him in youth sizes - so he ended up with Lindor). So my critique comes from a place of love and not disdain.
What you're describing is all narrative and when you make value assumptions based on narrative, you run the risk of being far from the right answer.
FWIW, Statcast defensive numbers had Nimmo being a league-average defensive CF in 2023. Stearns wanted to improve the defense and brought in a stronger defensive CF in Bader. But Bader's bat was so lacking that he was on the bench at the end of the year.
In a 9-inning game, you're going to get at least three chances to make an impact at the plate. You might get that many in the field. Or you might not get a single chance. We look at the choices that Stearns made last year to emphasize defense and they didn't turn out great. Nido was released, as were Short and Wendle. Baty was sent to the minors and Bader to the bench.
Was it the right call to move Nimmo out of CF? I dunno - maybe? But I think they could have gotten more production - combining offense and defense - with Nimmo in CF and Player X in LF, than they did with Bader in CF and Nimmo in LF.
Really enjoyed this article Ryan and sorry for the delay in commenting. When you lay out the expiring contracts and opt outs, Stearns' plan comes into better focus. It seems the model will allow for the promotion of the kids and hopefully some long term stability of the franchise so that payroll will come down over the next few years and free agent acquisitions will fill gaps but not be solely responsible for the team's success.
I would extend Vientos and Alvarez, taking a page out of the Brave's playbook and lock them up on team friendly 5-7 year deals. Yes, I know they are not even eligible to leave the organization for a number of years, but if they had taken the Braves approach, they could have singed Nimmo for less dollars and locked up Alonso at a cheaper rate when he was a few years younger. Its a crap shoot but with the way dollars are out of whack, sometimes waiting becomes very costly.
And back to Bobby Bonilla. His agent was a genius but so many still do not grasp that his deferral allowed the Mets to get Mike Hampton and get to the 2000 World Series where we got spanked by the Yankees. Then when Hampton left, the compensation the Mets got for Hampton was David Wright. Perhaps its time to put Bobby Bonilla Day in its proper perspective and move on. There are so many older and newer players with deferred salaries that makes Bonilla money look essentially like nothing.
And now back to the Mets lack of sufficient starting pitching. Anyone want to up the offer for Castillo? This pitching mess falls directly on Stearns.
It makes too much sense to extend Alvy and Vientos (and Peterson), but it takes two to tango and I often wonder if the players prefer to test free agency and push their price. Heck, Juan Soto turned down over $400 million extension in Washington so he could test the market. If Vientos and Alvy play to their potential, maybe they'll be of the same mindset.
The problem with signing/trading for a starter at this juncture is the tax hit. But you're right, why build an offensive juggernaut if your pitching staff is so porous that it takes a Herculean offense to squeak out wins.