The Mets have so many issues to deal with in what could be one of the most bizarre off-seasons the game has ever experienced.
On one hand, there’s a belief a frenzy in free agency is coming ahead of the collective bargaining agreement expiring on December 1, during which teams will rush to sign most of the available top free agents before that date and what is considered to be an inevitable and long lockout of the players by the owners in Major League Baseball. Such a phenomenon occurred after the 2021 season leading up to the expiration of that collective bargaining agreement, during which there was a period of time free agents were signing—for big money at that—at a rate never experienced in the sport, akin to a signing period similar to what transpires in both the NBA and the NFL.
On the other hand, there are those that believe the looming lockout and economic uncertainty in the sport—with so much conversation about the owners wanting a salary cap and the players not even willing to have such a conversation—that clubs will be hesitant to commit so heavily into free agency until the suspected lockout is over, whenever that might be.
Then there are those like me who expect something in between the two, but I only think that because this isn’t a strong class of free agents that’s about to hit the open market. It might be top-heavy, and it might contain some undervalued free agents as well, and those players could be the ones that get security before December 1.
And all of that uncertainty could put a hard freeze on the trade market as well, and it’s that market I truly believe the Mets specifically will need to delve into to solve a lot of their problems before their next regular season game, whenever that is.
And the date of that next regular season game will be determined by the perceived haves and have-nots and what I believe is a failed argument over what they believe is a flawed economic system which greatly benefits the product of the game at a harsh expense to the controlling party of the game.
Now, it’s not that I don’t think there’s a flawed economic system and rule set. It is deeply flawed and it does need to be fixed, whether you think there’s a need for a salary cap or not. But if this World Series is any indication, the argument that there are the haves and the have-nots and it’s those that have that always win has now proven to be absurd.
First off, every single one of these owners is a billionaire. Yes, some have more billions than others, but they’re all billionaires. They can all afford every single player that hits the free agent market. The smaller market clubs receive enough in revenue sharing to be able to offset any financial deficit created in signing any player in the game.
Until now, doing so has been a choice. Since there is no real salary cap, teams like the Mets, Yankees, and Red Sox seem to think that spending money on the major league roster and satisfying the overly simplistic false need of their fanbases that the more a team spends, the more likely they are to win championships. And since there is no real salary floor, teams like the Pirates and A’s simply cry poor, essentially say they cannot compete in this marketplace and more or less pocket their revenue sharing money for another day.
Then there are teams like the Dodgers, who have found a loophole in the economic system in an effort to lower the average annual value of new deals and lower their luxury tax obligation (they still pay a ton in tax every year, for what it’s worth), arguably mortgaged the entire decade of the 2030s (and maybe a part of this one) to satisfy their short-term desire to become a perennial powerhouse, but they’ve done so not just by making ludicrous and wild investments into their major league roster, but have also done so behind the scenes through organizational and cultural building.
A different kind of argument of an argument can be made for teams like the Rays, Guardians, and Brewers, the last three teams standing in 2026, all of whom are routinely in the bottom third in major league payroll. I think that argument is the most sound of all as they spend the minimum yet are able to extract maximum value out of their major league rosters with savvy external acquisitions and a strong investment in culture building. They always seem to be there in the end, maybe not to this extent, but they’re usually in the postseason thanks to savvy, clever roster and organizational building. Somehow, they’re always able to play with the varsity payrolls and, in most cases, beat them year after year, having truly found hidden value and an ability to extract a certain and collective overachievement from players on their roster thanks to a promoting, underlying culture.
Now, how this should all look in a new collective bargaining agreement, I don’t really know. I don’t have a law degree; I don’t have a degree in economics. I also am not a billionaire, so I don’t truly get the politics these people chew on all day and all night.
I tend to side with the politics of the players, though. That’s where I fell during the economic squabble in 2020, the last CBA and lockout in 2021–2022, and based on my scribble above, I think that’s where I am falling in 2026–2027. I also know that the house always wins here, as in the owners will get more of what they want than the players will when the dust settles.
I also believe that whatever rises from the rubble and the inevitable embarrassment both the owners and the players endure from the lockout, there won’t be immediate changes to the economic system, especially if there is to be a cap and a floor implemented into the policy (which I don’t really believe can just happen in this sport). It’s going to take at least a year, if not longer, for the new policies to take.
With that said, we have spent most of the last 3–4 weeks here discussing the problems the Mets must solve if they want to get good again. Now, believe it or not, the moves they made ahead of the trade deadline in early August might help solve some of those needs, help them hedge against some of their own potential free agents walking, and help create new opportunities in the trade market as well.
Over the last week, I’ve thought about five players specifically who would help get the Mets back on course. Some are pretty obvious, but some you might not have considered.