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.
I agree with most of this as well, especially the point about developing our own relief core. It is going to be fascinating to see how the plan works. Also, people may have forgotten what actual hustle looks like. Bring in a bunch of guys fighting for playing time and generally there is a high level of competition. So glad it's almost here.
Yes, as the 23-24 offseason has been a disaster so far. It's defined by what Stearns hasn't done not by what he has. Maybe the 24-25 off season will be more interesting but as of this moment I have no confidence in Stearns or in what he is doing. It really seems like he is working hard for a 74-88 season. Prove me wrong Mr Stearns!
I think you are right about the numbers and completely wrong about it being a disaster.
You are crying for the old Wilpon kick-the-can down the road approach and they are attempting to do something different with more of a long-range plan. They are building a foundation, trying to get the financial house in order, avoiding bad contracts, while assessing and evaluated current assets.
One more sidenote: It's 2024 and the Mets are coming off a 75-win season, 29 games back of the Braves.
When you look at 3B, it is easy to see that they could have done more. Baty probably sucks. Vientos probably sucks. Wendle probably sucks.
It may be that they work to patch that hole at a later date. Teams make deals at the end of Spring Training due to the numbers crunch.
I am saying that if the Mets were Championship Contenders, they'd address it. But they aren't. They are merely the 2nd WC contenders -- with many questions left to answer, and payroll to get in line, and this isn't the year to be "all in."
And signing a 39-year-old DH in Justin Turner would have helped in 2024, while doing nothing for 2025 and beyond, and while probably being a negative in 2024 in terms of ABs for a number of players.
This team is not chasing the 2024 season.
It just isn't.
They aren't kicking the can down the road as a strategy anymore.
If you only view this as a 2024 exercise in team building,, I think you are mistaking what's actually happening. This isn't the Joe Fan Plan. They have pivoted. They are thinking down the road. They are adding staff at every level. More coaches per team. So many areas are being addressed and examined. But if 2024 is your lens, well, you have a right to be as unhappy as you'd like to be. With the right moves, and an additional, $100 million, this group could have shot for the First Wild Card!
The problem with the Eppler approach was not the plan itself, but the fact that he was unable to find capable relievers on the scrap heap. Blame Eppler, or the pitching coaches or the analytics staff or bad luck-I don’t know. The pen would have looked better if a couple of optionables or waiver claims had worked out.
I think plan is that mid season some of our young AAA pitchers will be ready to contribute, and voila now you have optionables at the point of the season when you most need them.
Brasier is a very interesting case in point when you look at the Mets bullpen. Guy was a 36-year-old mediocrity. Cut by the Red Sox in May. The Dodgers grabbed him, tweaked his stuff, taught him a cutter, and he was lights out. Now signed for 2/$9 million.
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.
Agree with most of this!
I agree with most of this as well, especially the point about developing our own relief core. It is going to be fascinating to see how the plan works. Also, people may have forgotten what actual hustle looks like. Bring in a bunch of guys fighting for playing time and generally there is a high level of competition. So glad it's almost here.
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.
If they’re good enough, you don’t need to option them. Good is more valuable than optionable.
>> A well-structured extension allows everyone to win. <<
Well, um, the team is incurring an enormous amount of risk.
Yes, as the 23-24 offseason has been a disaster so far. It's defined by what Stearns hasn't done not by what he has. Maybe the 24-25 off season will be more interesting but as of this moment I have no confidence in Stearns or in what he is doing. It really seems like he is working hard for a 74-88 season. Prove me wrong Mr Stearns!
I think you are right about the numbers and completely wrong about it being a disaster.
You are crying for the old Wilpon kick-the-can down the road approach and they are attempting to do something different with more of a long-range plan. They are building a foundation, trying to get the financial house in order, avoiding bad contracts, while assessing and evaluated current assets.
I don't get the daily relentless whining.
I think he will prove you wrong. 75-87 =)
100000% correct
One more sidenote: It's 2024 and the Mets are coming off a 75-win season, 29 games back of the Braves.
When you look at 3B, it is easy to see that they could have done more. Baty probably sucks. Vientos probably sucks. Wendle probably sucks.
It may be that they work to patch that hole at a later date. Teams make deals at the end of Spring Training due to the numbers crunch.
I am saying that if the Mets were Championship Contenders, they'd address it. But they aren't. They are merely the 2nd WC contenders -- with many questions left to answer, and payroll to get in line, and this isn't the year to be "all in."
And signing a 39-year-old DH in Justin Turner would have helped in 2024, while doing nothing for 2025 and beyond, and while probably being a negative in 2024 in terms of ABs for a number of players.
This team is not chasing the 2024 season.
It just isn't.
They aren't kicking the can down the road as a strategy anymore.
If you only view this as a 2024 exercise in team building,, I think you are mistaking what's actually happening. This isn't the Joe Fan Plan. They have pivoted. They are thinking down the road. They are adding staff at every level. More coaches per team. So many areas are being addressed and examined. But if 2024 is your lens, well, you have a right to be as unhappy as you'd like to be. With the right moves, and an additional, $100 million, this group could have shot for the First Wild Card!
The problem with the Eppler approach was not the plan itself, but the fact that he was unable to find capable relievers on the scrap heap. Blame Eppler, or the pitching coaches or the analytics staff or bad luck-I don’t know. The pen would have looked better if a couple of optionables or waiver claims had worked out.
I think plan is that mid season some of our young AAA pitchers will be ready to contribute, and voila now you have optionables at the point of the season when you most need them.
Brasier is a very interesting case in point when you look at the Mets bullpen. Guy was a 36-year-old mediocrity. Cut by the Red Sox in May. The Dodgers grabbed him, tweaked his stuff, taught him a cutter, and he was lights out. Now signed for 2/$9 million.