Time will serve as the answer for the direction of the Mets

The Mets uncertain short and long term futures have been set in motion by their actions over the last couple of weeks

What’s up with the Mets? 🍎

• The Mets are talking about most of their top prospects in trade scenarios, but so far rival executives aren’t sure how aggressive the Mets are willing to be (Athletic)

• The Mets made a “reasonable try” to sign RHP Tyler Rogers before he bolted for the Jays (New York Post)

• The Mets could aim higher at first base than a trade for Willson Contreras (Athletic)

• Edwin Díaz penned his farewell to Met fans on Friday, before being introduced by the Dodgers in Los Angeles (Instagram)

---

Rumor Mill 💨

• The Red Sox are interested in trading for 1B Willson Contreras (MassLive)

---

---

No matter what, this is going to take time to get right ✍️

I know a lot of folks are still losing their minds over what can only be described as a nightmarish week for the Mets. I get it, I sympathize, I can relate. It has been a gut-wrenching, confusing, panic-ridden week after the Mets let both Pete Alonso and Edwin Díaz walk away from them and their legacies in New York, which followed the Mets trading away another beloved icon in Brandon Nimmo to Texas for Marcus Semien.

For me, right now anyway, I am over the emotional part of all of this. I, like many of you, watched the press conferences to introduce Alonso and Díaz to their new clubs on Friday, and yeah, it was hard to watch and still a little hard to believe. But it’s done, it’s over, and it’s onto a new frontier, whether I like it or not or whether you like it or not.

The question, of course, is what is that new frontier? These are going to be the “new Mets,” again, but are they going to be the new Mets in 2026, or are we talking about a long game here?

I keep saying this here and in social media because it’s simply the truth - the Mets have a really long way to go just to field a team and complete a nine-inning game in 2026. We all know about the holes they had before all of this, the areas of improvements they needed to address before all of this, and then there are the holes they’ve created after all of this.

But it’s not just “the Mets need a first baseman,” and “the Mets need a closer” and “the Mets need two starters,” or whatever. Sure, those are individual needs for the roster. But the Mets right now are searching for an identity. They’re searching for who and what they want to be and feel they need to be.

It was reported on Friday by The Athletic that the Mets are playing the trade market conservatively as they search for improvements in the aftermath of losing Alonso and Díaz. That approach appears to be frustrating their potential trade partners, with one rival executive telling the Athletic— perhaps hyperbolically— that they don’t really know how willing the Mets are to trade any of their top prospects.

That strategy seems to be falling in line with their approach to free agency so far this winter, as I jokingly said during the winter meetings that the Mets are looking to make the three-year club among free agents, as they are seemingly reluctant to go beyond three years for even the best, albeit second-generation, players who are available. They were not willing to give Robert Suárez a three-year deal that Atlanta gave him to be their setup man; they reportedly tried to sign Tyler Rogers, but he got a hefty three-year, $37 million deal with the Blue Jays to go setup there. There was no reason to expect the Mets to sign Rogers to that kind of deal after balking at Suárez and his three-year deal, after coming in second with a three-year, $66 million offer for Díaz.

New York Post

I am not saying the Mets are right or wrong, although while I think what Rogers got in particular from the Jays is hefty, three years and $10-15 million seems to be the going rate for setup relievers, a bar that might’ve been set by the Mets themselves when they signed RHP Devin Williams to a three-year, $45 million contract earlier in the off-season.

If the Mets really wanted Díaz, or Rogers, or Suárez, or all of them, they would all be Mets right now.

What I am saying is that a conservative approach in any pursuit— whether it’s a free agent or a trade— doesn’t signal to me, as someone who has watched this club with its current owner (and several GMs at this point), that the Mets are all-in for 2026.

To be fair, David Stearns did tip everyone off after he traded Nimmo when he said they could not possibly run the same group out there again. I think most people might’ve either missed that or didn’t wrap their heads around that entirely. I know I didn’t really think that meant he was willing to implode the roster from the middle out.

That doesn’t mean the Mets are going to camp as-built right now. There’s no way that’s happening. Like I said, they can’t even field a team right now. There will be moves. There will be more changes. There will be new faces here. And some folks are saying the Mets do plan to be aggressive the rest of the off-season, which still has around 60 days left to it before pitchers and catchers report to Port St. Lucie.

Now, keep in mind, the Mets being perceived as “conservative” in their approaches this winter can be interpreted another way. Maybe that’s how rival executives are viewing the Mets’ apparent unwillingness to deal top prospects or shell out overpays the way they have in their most recent past. But that could also be, at least on the trade market anyway, a result of the prices being so outrageous that the Mets aren’t willing to go nuts, and/or teams may think they have the Mets bent over a barrel, and the Mets aren’t relenting.

But I think this goes back to what the Mets want to be in 2026. As Joel Sherman of the New York Post said this week in light of what happened, Mets Owner Steve Cohen stops at nothing in pursuing the assets he wants, whether it’s a ballplayer or a piece of art. If he wants the painting, he outbids everyone for that painting. If he wants the player, he outbids everyone for that player (see Juan Soto and Alonso last winter). But that didn’t happen this time with Alonso, it didn’t happen with Díaz either.

So, what gives?

I don’t know if losing Díaz in particular threw them for such a loop that they are rethinking their short and long-term plan or not. People inside the organization reportedly seemed stunned and shocked Díaz left, although I don’t know why considering the Mets’ approach to his free agency and who was there for him on the other side of all of this, ie the World Champion Los Angeles Dodgers and a new house in 75-degree weather every day of the year.

New York Post

Maybe Mr. Cohen has backed off and put the fate of the roster in Stearns’ hands entirely, which functionally is the correct thing to do even if the results aren’t the same or to the fans’ liking? Maybe Mr. Cohen has in fact given his front office carte blanche to do whatever they feel is necessary to improve the roster, which would include blowing it up and starting over?

I do find it strange that the Mets went from wanting Díaz and Williams leading the bullpen, or at least sending such signals which would suggest they were looking to aggressively correct their problems from 2025, to where we are today where we are suddenly hearing the words “conservative,” and “disciplined” and all of the words which tell me the Mets may have pivoted and are looking at the longer game entirely now.

There are also a lot of people now out there saying, “okay, now they can trade for Skubal, get Tatís, sign King, sign Bellinger, trade for Contreras, and sign the three relievers they need.”

Folks - they’re probably not doing all of that. That’s not how Major League teams operate. Not even the Dodgers. Sure, the Mets might do some of that. But that strategy is reckless and lacks any sort of practicality or even an ounce of realism.

Just think and take the emotions out of it for a moment - with the roster the way it is right now, should the Mets really even be thinking about a trade for Tarik Skubal right now to begin with? To me, he’s the last piece of a championship equation for the Mets, and right now, the Mets are about five or six layers below that. Unless they know they can sign him (and remember, his agent is Scott Boras), I don’t think that’s the right move for them today.

MLive.com

There are also a lot of people downplaying the losses of Alonso and Díaz right now, which I don’t get. Maybe that’s a coping mechanism or not - I don’t know.

For me, like I said, this is no longer emotional. Rather, this is now about how they replace the value they brought to this organization in the short and long term? There’s the production loss, but there’s also the intangible loss. Cake that onto the productive needs the Mets already had with their offense, pitching staff, and their defense, and it seems almost impossible to see how the Mets can get it all right now and be successful now, especially since they’ve failed to do that already in their patchwork attempt over the recent years, regardless of the owner, GM, manager, dugout staff, or the rosters they’ve built.

Seriously - what organization with the gaps the Mets have to this degree has ever been able to patch it all together and be immediately successful? That’s just pragmatism.

There’s no short game approach in the ultimate long game.

I am not going to be a wishful thinker, hope blindly, and abandon everything I know about the game and how rosters are built just to make myself feel better about the Mets. It’s too easy to do that, and that leads to all of the disappointment I have and you have encountered with this franchise over the years.

Now, if I can draw any kind of conclusion right now, I do believe the future of the Mets will be centered around swing-and-miss pitching, defense, and contact. Perhaps not as much power as before, but they’re going to be less swing-and-miss, less station-to-station, and more athletic. If that’s true, that’s a good thing.

But realistically, that transition isn’t taking 60 days entirely. Some of it will, but you’re just pulling the wool over your eyes if you think that will be complete for the start of the 2026 season.

The good news is, the Mets have a lot of that in the pipeline. Some don’t fit that mold, such as Ryan Clifford, who is a very swing-and-miss prospect, but they have the big arms, they have become more athletic with guys like AJ Ewing and Jett Williams, and they’re deep with options. Not all of them will pan out, some of them won’t be here over time as they’ll get traded away, but we are seeing the ingredients I mentioned above come together there, so there’s no reason to think that’s not the vision for the Mets at the Major League level.

I also believe we will know where the Mets are heading in 2026 and perhaps 2027, 2028, and 2029 in their next couple of moves.

No matter what, this is going to take time to get right. Time will serve as the answer for where the Mets are headed now, and both Stearns and Mr. Cohen will be judged by the decision they make today over time. Sure, I believe the front office can put together an entertaining roster for 2026, and sure, I think that roster can be capable of getting to the playoffs in a 12-team field. But that roster will be far from Stearns’s ultimate vision for this organization.

---

Around the League 🚩

• The Marlins are signing Christopher Morel to a one-year contract (MLB.com)

• The Blue Jays agreed to sign former Met RHP Tyler Rogers to a three-year, $37 million contract with a $12 million option for a fourth year (Athletic)

• The Rangers signed C Danny Jansen to a two-year, $14.5 million contract, RHP Alexis Díaz to a one-year contract, and also sign LHP Tyler Alexander to a one-year contract (FanSided | ESPN | ESPN)

• RHP Josiah Gray avoided arbitration and signed a $1.35 million contract with the Nationals (NY Post)