Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jimmy P's avatar

Again, I start with trying to understand what the Mets & Stearns are doing. And to my mind, he is executing a plan. Grabbing a high number of interesting arms on the cheap in the hope that 2-3 rise up and succeed. It's not crazy. They've decided against overpaying for uncertainty, so have gone a different direction. When they had $12 million to spend, they grabbed 3 guys rather than one "good" guy. It's a strategy that may or may not work. No one knows.

I think it's also a belief that teams need to develop their own young relievers. To get the really good guys, maybe the best strategy is to develop them instead of wildly overpaying for relievers who are famously up and down.

In terms of optionality, I see the hand-wringing but think it's largely unnecessary. The "optional" guys the Mets prized in 2023 were of inferior quality. Pretty much none of them had ever experienced success or projected as possibly having high-grade stuff. This year, Stearns has gone after guys who are a cut above that. Most of them have shown flashes, experienced some degree of success.

And now we have Spring Training. The staff will work with these guys for 7 weeks. Some will get hurt, some will impress. We'll get a lot of data, see who is coachable and who is banged up. Best case, the pen is too crowded at the end of Spring Training.

There will be options: 1) Trade the guy; 2) Release the guy.

Now often when clubs release a guy -- say Reid-Foley, for example -- the Mets will say, "Hey, we love your arm and your attitude, it's a numbers thing. Go out and by all means sign a ML deal if you can get one. But if not, you are welcome here -- you know our staff, you know the facilities, and you know how it works. You will get a shot. All you have to do is pitch well. Good luck."

A high percentage of these guys get released and resign with the organization. Some go find better deals. But if that's the case, you can usually trade that guy for something/anything.

I don't think it's a problem.

I think they are doing something different from last season and people don't understand what's happening yet.

Of course, it might not work. But I respect the thinking behind it and admire the way he's executed the strategy. There are no guarantees.

Fans just want to whine and complain and spent like crazy. Well, that's not happening. The Mets are trying to think beyond 2024.

And also -- I've said this before -- Stearns has no idea who he's got. He wants to see these players, Baty & Viento & Butto, etc -- and he wants *his guys* that he trusts to evaluate them, too.

It will be an interesting team in a transitional year. 82 wins might be 86 or it might be 76. Oh well. They are following a plan. This is Year One. I'm going to enjoy it.

Expand full comment
Wendy's avatar

What happened to optionality? a.k.a. Stearns was not impressed with Billy Eppler's ideas about constructing a roster.

Brandon Nimmo is a very good Met. Many players are so concerned about talking about "myself" so Brandon's team first attitude is refreshing.

Expand full comment
11 more comments...

No posts