Musings
Through the first seven years of his career, Manny Machado has accumulated has been a four time All-Star, and he has won two Gold Gloves. He has three top 10 MVP finishes includes two top five finishes. He has accumulated 33.8 bWAR in his career with 23.2 of that coming over the past four seasons. Since his debut in 2012, he ranks 15th overall in the majors in fWAR, and he ranks ninth since 2015.
This is all Machado has accomplished before his age 26 season, or put another way, this is what Machado has accomplished prior to hitting the prime years of his Major League career.
It should be noted Machado has accumulated a higher WAR than Giancarlo Stanton over the past four years. Stanton signed his deal when he was entering his age 25 season. At that point in his career, Stanton had 21.3 WAR, which is less than the 28.0 WAR Machado had accumulated up until that point of his career.
The Marlins rewarded him with a 13 year $325 million contract extension. As we now know teams were hesitant to give Machado a deal of similar length despite Machado being the better player playing a premium defensive position. But this isn’t just about Stanton and the deal the small market Marlins soon regretted and moved for pennies on the dollar.
For a moment, we should put aside comparisons to any one particular player’s contract. After all, there are plenty of examples available from Chris Davis to Albert Pujols to show how teams do not make good decisions on players. On the converse, there are plenty of contracts were players have signed at massive discounts to the level of production they provide. Instead, let’s look at Fangraphs‘ analysis of what the cost/WAR is for a player:
| fWAR | Cost/WAR | Value | |
| 2012 | 1.2 | $6.2 | $7.44 |
| 2013 | 5.0 | $7.2 | $36.00 |
| 2014 | 2.3 | $7.7 | $17.71 |
| 2015 | 6.6 | $9.6 | $63.36 |
| 2016 | 6.3 | $7.2 | $45.36 |
| 2017 | 2.6 | $10.5 | $27.30 |
| 2018 | 6.2 | $11.1* | $68.82 |
| Career | 30.2 | $265.99 |
* Estimated
Looking at it that way, through the first seven years of his Major League career, Machado has been worth $265.99 million to his team. This means, on average, he has been worth $38.0 million per season. If you were to assume Machado put up a similar level of production over the next 10 years, his contract should be worth 10 years $380 million.
Now, if you were to strip away his age 19 season where he played just 51 games and accumulated a 1.6 WAR, Machado has played six full seasons with a 29.0 WAR over that span. Looking at his six full seasons, on average, Machado has been worth $43.1 million per season. Using that valuation, Machado’s 10 year deal should have been worth a total of $431 million.
Keep in mind, that number may be light as well.
There are two factors to consider here. First, we are basing this off the production Machado has had prior to hitting his prime. Considering how teams are purportedly looking to pay players for what they will do and not for what they have done, you could argue Machado deserves more than $431 million based upon what he will do in his prime seasons.
Another factor is since 2012, the price per fWAR has risen. Recently, Major League Baseball has seen record revenues in each of the past 16 seasons. Year-in and year-out, baseball is making more money than the previous season, which in turn means, the owners have more money to allocate to payroll.
Looking at things from that perspective, Machado does not even need to maintain a certain level of production to be worth a perspective $40+ million a year salary. Looking at Fangraphs chart, the value of fWAR went from $5.4 million in 2007 to $10.5 in 2017. That’s almost double the amount.
Let’s say over the next 10 years, the cost per WAR only increases by 25 percent. That would mean the value per WAR would be $13.9 million. If that was the case, Machado would only need a 3.1 WAR player at his age 35 season to earn a $43.1 million salary. Of course, that is just for the value of that year and not the entire contract.
Really, breaking it down, Machado has signed a massively discounted deal with the San Diego Padres for the value he provides on the field. That’s based on factual and objective data. Remember that the next time Steve Phillips of MLB Network Radio says the system isn’t broken or Tom Verducci of Sports Illustrated and MLB Network says free agency is merely “recalibrated.”
Assuming the Mets carry five bench spots, which is the norm for a National League team, the race for the last spot on the bench became much more crowded and complicated with the team’s signing of Adeiny Hechavarria. That question becomes further complicated when you question just what exactly the Mets real intentions are with Peter Alonso.
Assuming Alonso begins the season in Triple-A, the Mets already have bench spots allocated to Travis d’Arnaud and Keon Broxton. One of Juan Lagares or Jeff McNeil is going to play everyday meaning the other is going to be on the bench. That is three bench spots spoken for with two remaining. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out.
Considering the Mets parted with a package headlined by Luis Santana in what has been an oft criticized trade, you could see the pressure to carry J.D. Davis. Aside from the pressure, whether it be real or imagined, Davis does have the ability to play both corner infield spots adequately, and despite his deficiencies out there, the does have outfield experience.
The real positive for Davis is the power he could provide off the bench, but in order for that to be realized, he is going to have to increase the launch angle in his swing and his corresponding high ground ball rates. There is also a real question whether Chili Davis is the hitting coach to get him to realize his full power potential.
If the Mets are looking for a versatile infielder who can play the outfield, there is forgotten man T.J. Rivera. Rivera missed last season due to Tommy John surgery, but reports this Spring have been overly positive. While we know Rivera is not a particularly good defender, the Mets also know Rivera can be trusted to start at any position over a long stretch. Between the 2017 season and the World Baseball Classic, we have also seen him able to raise his game in big games.
The issue both players have is neither plays shortstop. For that matter, neither does Jed Lowrie, which arguably led to the Mets signing Hechavarria to a minor league deal. The one thing we do know with Hechavarria is he can play shortstop and play it well. Over the last four seasons combined, he has amassed a 26 DRS. The problem with him is he can’t hit as evidenced by his career 72 wRC+.
Hitting was also an issue for Luis Guillorme. In his brief time with the Mets, he was only able to muster a 53 wRC+ in 35 games. That is partially because Guillorme received uneven playing time. It is also because he has never been considered to be a great hitter. Still, there are two factors in Guillorme’s favor. First, like Hechavarria, he is a good defender. Second, Guillorme did show himself to be an adept pinch hitter last year hitting .273/.467/.364 in 15 pinch hitting appearances.
Now, if the Mets are looking for a more offensive oriented middle infielder who could play shortstop, the team does have Gavin Cecchini. Heading into last season, Cecchini had worked on his swing, and it had paid dividends with him hitting .294/.342/.468 in 30 games for Las Vegas before fouling a ball off his leg effectively ending his season. If Cecchini shows he is able to hit the same way, he could make a case for a bench spot for himself.
Standing in Cecchini’s way is his not being on the 40 man roster and his shortstop defense having pushed him to second base. The same could also be true for Dilson Herrera. For his part, Herrera was never truly considered anything more than a second baseman and that was before his shoulder injury. That shoulder injury cost him some of his offensive output until he rediscovered his stroke last year hitting .297/.367/.465 for the Reds Triple-A affiliate.
One other overlooked name for the Opening Day bench is Dominic Smith. If Alonso were to start the year in Triple-A, the Mets would have to find playing time for Alonso, Gregor Blanco, Rajai Davis, Rymer Liriano, and Tim Tebow between first base, three infield spots, and DH. Even with how down the team may be on Smith, it is difficult to believe they would leave him in Syracuse to fight for playing time between those three spots.
Instead, the team could carry him on the Major League roster. Certainly, Smith reporting to camp with not just his keeping the weight off but also adding muscle, helps improve his chances. His being a good defensive first baseman capable of playing left field in a pinch should also help him.
Of course, Smith would have to compete with all of the aforementioned players as well as Danny Espinosa just to claim a bench spot. He would also have to count on the team not putting Alonso on the Opening Day roster, which judging from the improvements Alonso has made, is not a safe assumption.
Really, when breaking it down, the Mets have plenty of options to fill out their bench, and ultimately for this team to reach its full potential, they are going to have to find the right mix of players to complement their everyday players. Hopefully, everyone comes to play making this as difficult a decision as the Mets will have all year.
When you look at baseball right now, this is a sport in trouble. No, it is not in trouble because of any of the oft publicized and overblown issues like “pace of play.” Baseball is in trouble because years of labor peace are at risk, and players like Adam Wainwright and talking strike quite publicly because of how the owners have been treating free agency and other issues. Making matters even worse is Rob Manfred being Rob Manfred.
Addressing the media yesterday, he had the temerity to put the blame on the agents for current free agency hold-up saying, “Do I wish, if I had my way, that Scott Boras or Dan Lozano — whatever agent — would find a way to make a deal with some club sooner rather than later?”
As for making that deal, Boras would disingenuously say this is the result of the way teams now analyze and negotiate with players. He would even go so far as to tell the players to just reap what they sow saying, “I think it’s important to remember that the Major League Baseball Players Association has always wanted a market-based system, and markets change, particularly when the institution around those markets change.”
Looking at it, Manfred is right things have changed. They must have when not every team is on two 26 year old future Hall of Famers. However, it is more than that.
As detailed by Forbes, MLB has yet again had record revenues, which does not included the nearly $3 billion sale of BAM to Disney. What is incredible to contemplate is there is even more money on the horizon, and that’s even with the hand-wringing over the decline in attendance.
Now, consider for a moment, as ESPN reported MLB payrolls actually went down last year. Now, suspensions were part of it, but another part of it is the luxury tax has not been increased in proportion to league revenues. This is important because increasingly teams are using the luxury tax as a de facto cap.
Now, the entire reason there is a luxury tax as well as other similar spending and competitive balance measures is supposedly to create an even playing field. The concept is if you permit the Yankees to spend all they could spend, they would leave a team like the Rays in the dust. That’s a concept Rob Manfred now denies saying, “I reject the notion that payroll is a good measure for how much a team is trying or how successful that team is going to be.”
So, to get this right. MLB has insisted on a luxury tax to keep things even, and then their Commissioner says it is not a measure of how good a team will be. Justin Verlander jumped in with the obvious response:
Agreed… finally we’re on the same page! Awesome! Removal of the luxury tax it is. https://t.co/Omy0SaXZ1z
— Justin Verlander (@JustinVerlander) February 18, 2019
Overall, Manfred stood up and blamed the players and their agents while simultaneously citing one of the things the owners fought long and hard for have absolutely nothing to do with the success of teams on the field. Remember, he “rejects the notion.” Yet, we know someone the owners won’t take that off the table during the next CBA negotiation.
Through all of that, Manfred would then say, “I hate the negativity that surrounds the coverage of the sport right now.”
He hates it so much he points fingers. Oh and by they way, Manfred is pushing a pitch clock because he does not like the pace of the game right now. He thinks it needs to move faster to be more watchable. Somehow, he doesn’t think his repeated negative comments on the pace of play plays any part in promoting negativity surrounding the sport
With the Mets hiring an agent as opposed to a front office baseball executive, you knew Brodie Van Wagenen was going to have a learning curve. As such, he was going to make some bad moves, and certainly, you knew he was going to make some curious decisions. Some may inure to the Mets benefit while others may not. If these questionable decisions do work out for the Mets, then a World Series may very well be in the team’s future.
Why Isn’t Cano Playing First Base?
Robinson Cano was the big bat the Mets acquired this offseason, and the plan is for him to be a fixture in the Mets lineup. However, that is for as many games as he is able to play. To his credit, Brodie Van Wagenen has been quite vocal about the need to give Cano more days off than he is accustomed due to Cano being 36 years old.
If we harken back to 1999, Bobby Valentine did this with a 40 year old Rickey Henderson to get the last good season out of Henderson. That also led to the Mets claiming the Wild Card and going to the NLCS.
For Cano, it is not just his age, but it is also his position. Players who play up the middle play the more taxing defensive positions in baseball. That takes more of a toll on a 36 year old player. Given Jed Lowrie‘s presence on the team, you have to wonder why the team doesn’t make Lowrie the second baseman with Cano playing first.
Putting Cano at first would be putting him in a position where he would not be as subject to fatigue over the course of the season. It should also be noted with Cano already 36 years old and his signed for five more seasons, it is a position switch he will eventually have to make. If he is going to have to make the switch, why not do it now so the Mets could coax more at-bats and games from him over the course of the season?
Where Is Davis Getting His Opportunity?
With J.D. Davis‘ minor league stats, you could make the argument all he needs to succeed at the Major League level is an opportunity to play at the Major League level. Certainly, it’s a fair point to raise when someone hits .342/.406/.583 in 85 Triple-A games and .175/.248/.223 in 42 MLB games.
The problem is you’d be hard-pressed to where exactly he would get that opportunity.
He’s behind Todd Frazier and Jed Lowrie at the third base depth chart. He’s behind Peter Alonso and Frazier on the first base depth chart. He’s a right-handed compliment to right-handed hitters. He’s not suited to play outfield in the majors, and even if he was, he’s buried on the outfield depth chart as well. Combine that with Lowrie and Jeff McNeil being the versatile players on the roster, and you have to wonder where he gets hit at-bats.
After you are done contemplating that, you are left to wonder why the team would trade three good prospects in Luis Santana, Ross Adolph, and Scott Manea for him when they could’ve just as easily signed Mark Reynolds or Matt Davidson.
Was McNeil Playing LF the Original Plan?
One of the benefits of having McNeil on the roster is having a versatile player on the roster. Despite the team’s initial reluctance last year, he is someone who has received playing time at all four infield positions, and he has always trained in the outfield. To that extent, penciling him as the team’s starting left fielder, even against just right-handed pitching made a ton of sense.
That plan made even more sense when you consider Michael Conforto and Brandon Nimmo are both capable center fielders with Juan Lagares being the best defensive center fielder in the game. Really, breaking it down, moving McNeil to left field was probably the best way to handle the Mets resources.
However, the plan to move McNeil to left field does raise some interesting questions. For example, why didn’t the team send him to winter ball to play outfield. Also, why would the team expend resources to obtain Keon Broxton only to make him a fifth outfielder? Moreover, if McNeil is your outfielder, shouldn’t the team have a better insurance option against his inability to play left field than Broxton?
What’s the Plan for Backup Catcher?
When the Mets traded Kevin Plawecki to the Indians, they were effectively announcing Travis d’Arnaud was healthy enough to be the backup. That was called into question when Mickey Callaway said Devin Mesoraco signed with the Mets because of his relationship with Jacob deGrom.
It would seem if the Mets signed Mesoraco to catch deGrom the team now has one catcher too many. Does this mean the team is planning on moving him on the eve of Opening Day, or is Mesoraco willing to catch in the minors until the inevitable injury to d’Arnaud or Wilson Ramos. If that is the case, what impact does this have on Tomas Nido, and his future?
On the bright side, the Mets have good depth at the catcher position, but that only remains true to the extent they are keeping everyone. If they are the challenge is then to keep everyone happy and sharp, which is much easier said than done.
Where’s the Starting Pitching Depth?
With Jason Vargas struggling since the 2017 All-Star Break, you would have thought the Mets would have done more to address their pitching depth. That goes double when you consider the team traded Justin Dunn, their best starting pitching prospect, and with David Peterson and Anthony Kay being at least a couple of years away.
With the health issues facing Noah Syndergaard and Steven Matz, you would’ve thought the Mets would have been pressed more to add starting pitching depth. When you couple that with Van Wagenen knowing Jeff Barry councils his pitching clients to limit their innings, you would believe the Mets would have pressed to go more than four deep in the pitching rotation.
But the Mets haven’t. Not really. Their depth is essentially the same group who posted an ERA over 5.00 as MLB staters along with Hector Santiago, a pitcher now better suited to the bullpen.
When you look at this rotation the best health they had was in 2015, and that was a year the team needed 10 starting pitchers to get through the season. This team has nowhere near that type of depth.
As it turns out, more than anything, it may turn out to be the pitching depth which is the biggest key to the 2019 season. If the team is healthy, and deGrom and Syndergaard go against their agent’s advice, it is possible the team has enough pitching to get through the season. If the pitchers do impose pitching limits and there is more than one pitching injury, the team’s hopes of winning anything may be done, and that is even if the other questions are answered in the affirmative.
Yesterday, Jacob deGrom spoke to the media directly for the first time since reports of his frustration surfaced in the media. During his press conference deGrom offered some positive assurances for Mets fans telling us all he loves being a Met, and he wants to stay with the team. He also offered some reasons for concern including the fact he was frustrated and the Mets have yet to make him an offer.
Then, deGrom would drop a bit of a bombshell.
In response to a question about whether he would be willing to have a self imposed innings restriction next year, deGrom responded, “You play this game because you love it and then you have an opportunity to look out for your family and your future, so you have to see what’s right for you to do and I think that’s a discussion that’s going to have to be had with my agents.”
That’s not a yes, but it’s certainly not a no. What it was was a declaration that nothing if off the table in this negotiation, including deGrom consulting with his agents to come up with a plan to protect his arm so he can be as healthy as possible when he heads into free agency after the 2020 season.
When deGrom speaks on this matter there are three very important things to consider. First, deGrom has his own injury history. His career almost never got off the ground because he had Tommy John surgery. He would have to be shut down in a pennant race in 2016 to have ulnar transposition surgery. Just last season, he had a back issue in Spring Training, which cost him his Opening Day start, and he would hyper-extend his elbow on a swing.
Just as much as any other player, deGrom knows how the next injury can happen at any moment, and depending on the severity of the injury, it can have long lasting ramifications.
He saw those ramifications first-hand with Matt Harvey. During the 2015 season, deGrom watched on as Harvey was pressured to ignore his own agent’s advice on innings restrictions. He watched Harvey pitch against the advice of his agents, and he watched on as Harvey would be a shell of himself from 2016 until he was traded for Devin Mesoraco in May of last year.
On the topic of the agents, deGrom is represented by Jeff Barry. As has oft been cited over the past few days, Barry is the agent who has been encouraging pitchers to self impose innings restrictions in response to how owners have handled free agency. At the crux of his position is, if teams aren’t going to pay you for the wear and tear you put on your arm during your years under control, don’t allow the teams to abuse your arm for their own gain. Push back.
So, deGrom now has to process all of this and much more in deciding his next step in both negotiation and in terms of what he does should he not get an extension. At the same time, Noah Syndergaard will be making similar assessments.
Like deGrom, Syndergaard has had some scary injuries in his career including a torn oblique and last year’s hyper-extended finger. Also like deGrom, Syndergaard had a front row seat to the Harvey saga. Also, like deGrom, he is represented by Barry, who may very well be having the same discussions with Syndergaard and the team about restricting his innings in 2019.
This means how Brodie Van Wagenen handles these negotiations with deGrom could have a far-reaching impact. Not only could the Mets suddenly find themselves with deGrom limiting his innings, but they may also have to deal with Syndergaard heeding the advice of his agent and doing the same. That’s a very dicey situation for a Mets GM who has not built sufficient pitching depth to withstand his top two pitchers having innings restrictions.
Therefore, at the end of the day, the Metsask themselves if it is worth not giving deGrom what Van Wagenen, himself, told deGrom he was worth just a few short months ago when he was deGrom’s agent. Really, the Mets not stepping up to the plate here could have devastating consequences for their 2019 season.
With Jacob deGrom putting an Opening Day deadline for a potential contract extension, the team’s immediate focus is going to be locking him up to the point where he could be a Met for life. Of course, the immediacy of the talks are not just because deGrom set a deadline, it is also because deGrom will be a free agent after the 2020 season.
Looking at the rotation, deGrom is not the only pitcher who is fast approaching free agency. Zack Wheeler will be a free agent after the 2019 season. Noah Syndergaard and Steven Matz will be free agents after the 2021 season much like Aaron Nola who just signed a four year $45 million contract extension with the Phillies.
The Nola deal covers the rest of the years he is under team control with a team option for Nola’s first year of free agency. The 2023 team option is worth $16 million.
Looking at Nola, it is important to note he finished third in the Cy Young voting behind deGrom, who settled for $17 million in his third year of arbitration. This means if Nola continues pitching like he did last year, the Phillies will have Nola on a real discount in 2023 thereby freeing the team up to allocate their resources in other areas to improve their ballclub.
Seeing how the market has been relatively set by Nola’s extension coupled with the Mets need for some cost certainty, it would behoove the Mets to pursue extensions with their own starting pitchers. Another important consideration here is Syndergaard and Matz may be at their lowest value.
Syndergaard has been limited to 32 starts over the past two years due to an oblique and then a finger injury. Those injuries have stood in the way of him putting up another great season like he had in 2016. With health and an improved training regiment, which Syndergaard appears to be pursuing, we could see Syndergaard return to the pitcher he was in 2016. Perhaps, he will be even better.
Matz has landed on the disabled list in all four of his Major League seasons, but last year he still made a breakthrough in his career making 30 starts for the first time in his career. During his career, the Mets have seen glimpses from him including his having a 2.51 ERA, 1.021 WHIP, and a 10.9 K/9 in six September starts.
Certainly, the Mets could use the Nola extension as a framework for a possible Syndergaard and Matz extension. You could argue Syndergaard is better than Nola making him worth more money. Certainly, Matz has not had Nola’s success, and with that in mind, the Mets could possibly sign him for even less money.
In short order, the Mets could keep three-fifths of their incredible starting rotation together. This should insulate them from potentially losing Wheeler in free agency. Wheeler leaving could be abated by one of David Peterson or Anthony Kay stepping up this season. Of course, the Mets could sign Wheeler to his own extension.
Perhaps, the Mets and Wheeler could look to Nathan Eovaldi‘s four year $68 million contract as a starting point. After all, both pitchers were strong armed right-handed pitchers who have had injury issues and were roughly league average pitchers until the second half of last year. Wheeler would have the much better second half, but Eovaldi would have a great postseason.
Looking across baseball, increasingly more players are interested in contract extensions. So far this season, we have seen both Nola and Whit Merrifield sign extensions. We may see Paul Goldschmidt and Nolan Arenado do the same. It is now time for the Mets to do the same with as many pieces of their rotation as they can.
Last year, Brodie Van Wagenen, in his capacity as Jacob deGrom‘s agent, said if the Mets were not prepared to give his client a contract extension, they should entertain trading him. No, this was not a trade demand, but rather, it was a communication designed to facilitate the two sides agreeing to a contract extension.
Presumably, at that time and in the months that followed, Van Wagenen and deGrom has conversations regarding such an extension. These discussions likely included but were not limited to the type of contract deGrom would be willing to accept. It’s also probably a fair assumption this was a fluid conversation which factored into account how much deGrom’s Cy Young season should affect his negotiating position.
Put another way, when Van Wagenen took over as the Mets General Manager, he knew exactly what it would take to make deGrom a Met for life. By the same token, due to the intimate nature of the agent/player relationship, Van Wagenen May have known reasons why the Mets might not want to extend deGrom.
Because of this, it was no surprise the Mets decided Van Wagenen would not take part in any negotiations with respect to deGrom’s arbitration or extension. This was a reason why the Mets and Van Wagenen would have to settle any conflict of issue issues with the MLB and the MLBAPA. It’s also why at Van Wagenen’s introductory press conference, Mets COO Jeff Wilpon said his GM would not handle deGrom’s extension:
“We didn’t discuss specifics on any one player like that,’’ Wilpon said of deGrom’s future. “I think [deGrom] is to be determined and Brodie is going to have to recuse himself from some of those discussions. He will have to set an overall tone for the organization, which way he wants us to go, and then we’ll have to have some others be responsible for doing the actual contract.
**********
“The GM gives some guidance, but he’s not totally involved with every last detail,’’ Wilpon said. “[Van Wagenen] can give us direction. He just can’t be involved in the negotiation. Is it something we are worried about? No. We gave it a lot of thought and obviously I went through the process of making sure that everybody was OK with doing this kind of arrangement, of bringing an agent in to our side.’’
(New York Post) [Emphasis added].
That’s unambiguous. The Mets clearly said Van Wagenen would not be involved in negotiating deGrom’s extension.
That story changed today when deGrom gave the Mets an Opening Day deadline to get an extension done. Shortly after that was announced, Van Wagenen said he has been handling negotiations:
Here's Brodie Van Wagenen on Jacob deGrom's contract deadline. He says it's not a big deal, but a mutual understanding: pic.twitter.com/2KT0XnfENK
— Anthony DiComo (@AnthonyDiComo) February 12, 2019
Despite the Mets assurances Van Wagenen would not be involved in negotiating deGrom’s contract, Van Wagenen is involved in “discussions,” i.e. negotiations on deGrom’s extension.
While the obvious implication here is the Mets lied, it’s also possible both sides waived the conflict to permit Van Wagenen to be a part of discussions. Whatever the reason, Van Wagenen is now involved making it all the more baffling as to why a deal has not been done.
Remember, Van Wagenen knew or should have known what it would take to lock up deGrom long term. With a deal not getting done, and reports deGrom is getting frustrated, many questions need to be asked:
- Does Van Wagenen know something which would cause the Mets to not want to extend deGrom?
- Did deGrom’s new agent prod deGrom into believing he was worth more costing the Mets a chance to extend deGrom to more favorable terms?
- Did Van Wagenen rely too much on his relationship with deGrom to spend his budget to improve the 2019 roster now and look to extend deGrom later?
- Do the Mets have a pre-existing policy which would stand in the way of deGrom getting the contract he wanted?
- Did the Mets have plan to fill-out the 40 man roster first and then turn to deGrom to extend him (with that plan not being effectively communicated)?
There are several possibilities beyond these, but with each possibility that arises there is one overriding theme – the Mets have not handled this situation well.
That’s inarguable when the Mets have had a clear change in policy regarding Van Wagenen’s role in negotiations. That’s inarguable when the Mets best player is frustrated and now publicly setting deadlines for when an extension must be consummated.
In the end, none of this truly matters. What really matters is no matter the outcome of the extension discussions, the Mets do not permit this to become a distraction. Hopefully, when all is said and done, not only will this not serve as a distraction, but the Mets also find a way to keep deGrom a Met for his entire career.
During his interview with Mike Franceca on WFAN, he would speak about the team, and he would be challenged by Mike on a number of issues. As the General Manager, you can understand Van Wagenen trying to sell the fan base about the team. It is part and parcel of his job.
In some ways, he did effectively did that. He touted the combination of Peter Alonso and J.D. Davis as capably hitting 30 home runs combined from the first base position. He also reminded fans of this being a versatile team with Todd Frazier and Robinson Cano being able to play first base if necessary. This would also allow the team to play Jed Lowrie and have him bat second in the lineup every day.
Behind some of the bravado, some of Van Wagenen’s early bravado began to erode away, and you saw someone who is trying to sell an incomplete roster. We saw this through two telling exchanges. The first notable one regards Bryce Harper and Manny Machado:
On Harper/Machado
BVW: "It's not so easy to find spots for all of our good players already."
MF: "You're telling me you don't have room for them?
BVW: "Probably not the best fit for us."
MF: "Are you telling me you don't have room for them in the lineup?"— Matt Ehalt (@MattEhalt) February 11, 2019
Essentially, Brodie is going to have us believe the team has no room for Machado on the infield. Now, you could argue even with Amed Rosario being disappointing thus far, he is primed to break out next season. He can also point to there already being solid to very good veteran infielders. That’s fair. However, he loses us completely at Harper.
This is a team with just two starting outfielders in Michael Conforto and Brandon Nimmo. For all of their defensive prowess, neither Keon Broxton or Juan Lagares can’t hit. As for Jeff McNeil, the Mets apparently believed in him so much they aggressively pursued two other All-Star second baseman to play over him.
The Mets will tell you he’s now going to be an outfielder. That’s all well and good, and we all hope he can make the transition. However, no matter how good he is, he is no Bryce Harper.
That’s important due to the second pertinent exchange. When Mike asked if the Mets were better than the Vegas line of 84 wins, Van Wagenen was sure of himself saying, “I think 84 wins is light.” When pressed on whether this was a 90 win team, Van Wagenen was less assured, and he would not commit to the 90 win figure.
That’s very problematic.
Looking at the history of the Wild Card, the lowest win total for a National League Wild Card was 87 wins. That honor belongs to the 2016 Mets and Giants and the 2017 Rockies. No Mets fan wants to see a repeat of Madison Bumgarner and Conor Gillaspie in a winner-take-all game.
Really, if you are in the 84-89 wins range, you are in the postseason race, but you are towards the bottom of that race. That’s not where you want to be with the Nationals, Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals, Dodgers, and Rockies boasting good rosters of their own. And don’t forget the Phillies who are still in a position to pounce on a player or two in what is still a bizarrely loaded free agent class.
When you boil it down, Van Wagenen can be boastful all he wants, but he’s essentially admitted this is an incomplete team. Worse yet, he’s admitting after trading away Jarred Kelenic, Justin Dunn, Luis Santana, Ross Adolph, Gerson Bautista, Bobby Wahl, Felix Valerio, Adam Hill, and Scott Manea, his work is not nearly done.
Instead of saying, “Come get us!” to the National League, he should be telling ownership to “Please help us!” because this team is far from complete.
During his time in the minors, Jeff McNeil wore a couple of different numbers. Last year, he wore 12 with Las Vegas, and he wore 1 with Binghamton. Overall, he’d wear a variety of numbers including 3, 5, and 10. Naturally, when the Mets called him up to the majors, McNeil was assigned the number 68.
The significance of 68? Well, it was just next in line.
It was something the Mets seemed to start in 2016. That year, the Mets gave T.J. Rivera the number 54, and Ty Kelly was given 55. When Kelly Johnson returned, Kelly was given 56. Over the ensuing years, we’d see the number gradually climb up and up to the point Kelly would wear 66 last year, and eventually McNeil wearing 68.
Now, this is not a practice reserved for all prospects, and it has not been a practice always in place. For example, when Jose Reyes and David Wright were called up, they were given their now iconic 7 and 5 numbers. For that matter, when Eric Campbell was called up to the majors in 2014, he went from 24, a number somewhat unofficially retired by the Mets, to 29.
Put another way, back then the Mets appeared to give their players real numbers. That happened even in 2015 when Daniel Muno wore 16, and Darrell Ceciliani wore 1.
Now, McNeil is going to wear the number 6, a number which was available all of last season. For that matter, Rivera is going to wear 19, which was a number that Jay Bruce had before he was called up to the majors. It should also be noted the 3 he wore with Las Vegas was worn by Curtis Granderson.
Now, there are some restrictions with uniform numbers. For example, recent uniform history suggests Gary Carter‘s 8 and Keith Hernandez‘s 17 are unofficially retired. They may also want to try to preserve numbers for their top prospects like how Peter Alonso was assigned 20 this Spring Training.
Still, there is a wide chasm between not allowing a player to have a certain number and giving them a number in the 50s or 60s. These players have achieved something by making it all the way to the majors. They should be treated as such by giving them a real uniform number, especially as we saw in the case with Dilson Herrera and Juan Uribe, you are going to make the young player switch when a more established player wants the number.
As a side note, it’s more fan friendly as well because if you are someone immediately attached to a player like McNeil, when you go out and get the jersey, or even shirsey, you have the right number and aren’t out money when the player is finally deemed good enough to pick their own real baseball number.