The Mets have two unique stretches this year where they’ve won at least 10 games and been over .500 in the span. They are:
3/30-4/21: 14-7
5/17-6/1: 10-4
After last night’s 11-10 win, the Mets have won eight of their last 12 games and could add their third streak this season to this list. It doesn’t necessarily mean anything – they are 32-15 in these three stretches and 12-35 otherwise – except perhaps to enjoy any stretch where the wins outnumber the losses.
It feels like some people are actively rooting for losses in July, hoping that it forces the front office to become sellers and to acquire prospects to help in the future. If that’s the way that it works out, so be it. However, having witnessed my share of bad teams, it doesn’t feel right to root to add another one to the pile.
Is the 2023 team bad? Six games under .500 after 94 games certainly isn’t good.
Perhaps someone envisioned this team being comfortably under .500 after the All-Star break but my guess is that 99.9% of us felt the opposite on Opening Day. Were we – and my expectation was a team to challenge for 95 or more wins – just incredibly wrong in our ST optimism? Or have events just conspired against the club in the first two-thirds of the season?
Some people enjoy it when the club makes a bunch of transactions. A ton of losses the rest of the month and they can satisfy that thirst with deals of everyone from Tommy Pham to Pete Alonso and Brooks Raley to Max Scherzer. However you want to enjoy the game is fine with me. That is as long as you don’t believe that’s the best and only way to enjoy the game.
Advocates for tanking will tell you that’s the best (and perhaps only) way to build a World Series winner. They can point to the 2016 Cubs and the 2017 Astros as proof. Shoot, they might even try to claim the 2019 Nationals, too. But other clubs from the Mets360 era – The Cardinals, Giants, Red Sox and Dodgers – didn’t fly a flag earned by tanking.
And while you can definitely point to the three teams mentioned above who spent time losing a whole lot only to turn things around – you also have to acknowledge the clubs that linger in the wilderness.
The Tigers are on pace for their seventh straight losing season. As are the Royals.
The Angels are at .500 now but have finished below that mark the previous seven years. And unlike the Tigers and Royals, the Angels spend.
The Marlins entered this year having finished under .500 in 12 of the past 13 years, with the only exception coming in the 60-game season of 2020.
The Pirates went 20 years where they finished below .500 every season and are currently working on a five-year stretch.
It’s very easy to accomplish the losing part of tanking. It’s not necessarily a given that winning teams will follow.
Two offseasons ago, my NFL team – the Vikings – fired their coach and GM. Plenty of their fans wanted them to tank to get a high draft pick and the chance to draft a franchise QB. Shoot, plenty of their fans still want them to do that. However, ownership wants them to be like the Steelers – regularly in the playoffs with a few years where they make the Super Bowl. So, they eschewed the tank and embarked on what the new GM called “a competitive rebuild.” In the first year with the new coach and GM, they improved from 8-9 to 13-4.
It should be stated that after a few years with very bad luck in one-score games, the Vikings went 11-0 when the margin of victory was eight points or fewer in 2022. Some expect that luck to run out this season and for the team to revert to a sub-.500 record.
Regardless, the same year that the Vikings cleaned house and opted for the competitive rebuild, the Bears – division mates – also changed their coach and GM. But they opted to go the route of tanking. After going 12-4 in 2018, Chicago went 8-8 for two years before going 6-11 and prompting the change. Last year, the Bears went 3-14. The losing part of tanking was a smashing success.
So, we have a case in the NFL where one team is embracing tanking while the other isn’t, with both teams starting their journey at the exact same time in the exact same division. No one expects the Bears to do anything in 2023. But will they return to prominence in 2024? Meanwhile, the Vikings have cleared a ton of bad contracts the past two years and should be in better shape in 2024 than they were in 2021. But can they follow up with another team that wins double-digit games here in 2023?
Obviously, it’s apples and oranges comparing the NFL to MLB. But if the choice is losing the vast majority of your games for three-to-five years in the hopes that it will lead to a team like the Astros rather than the Pirates or trying to win and build your organization the same time, like the Dodgers (and Vikings) – my pick is the latter.
The Mets finished under .500 seven times in seven years from 1962-1968 and 1977-1983. They also finished with losing records six straight times from 1991-1996 and again from 2009-2014. The first two led to a World Series winner while the other two resulted in a pennant. Given that, it’s easy to understand why Mets fans embrace the tank. They’ve seen first hand how all of the losing paid off with trips to the World Series.
It’s just that a bunch of teams have a history different from the Mets.
There are two 35 year olds I want on the Mets next year. Both are trade candidates.
I realize that the clock is ticking on them and they are over the age of peak productivity, but I believe that Tommy Pham and Brooks Raley have discovered what works for them to be very good players.
Pham seemingly has found the solution to his vision problems. His OPS+ is 132, he hits the ball hard, and he can steal a base. His fielding is OK. He’s my regular LF next year.
Raley has an ERA+ of 195. His stats vs. LH hitters are OK, and great vs. RH hitters.
I’m not sure how much we’d get back for them. Unless it’s phenomenal, I would keep them.
I think the issue with the Mets selling off assets as a viable strategy is that due to their high payroll commitments, they aren’t going to get corresponding high draft picks. They will be penalized, right? Also, I think that selling off high value free agents who we’ve signed might deter future possible free agents from signing contracts to play for them.
I never, ever worry about trades deterring future free agents from signing here. The overwhelming majority of time, players look to maximize their earnings in free agency. Sure, you hear times where a player expresses a preference to play on one coast or the other. Allegedly Trea Turner wanted to be on the East Coast, while Ohtani supposedly only wants to be on the West Coast. But if the Dodgers offered more money than the Phillies, perhaps Turner would have become a West Coast fan. Money talks.
Fans are saying hitting is the problem. Getting a DH with some power to bat fifth should be a priority.
Seems a change in hitting coach would be in order unless they are following the same instruction as last year but under a different person. If that is the case then it is all on poor performance of the players- where the blame really lies. Hate to think of being sellers at the deadline but we will lose a certain number of players when their contracts expire at year end and why not get some value if 11 games from now we have not cut the wildcard deficit down to 4 games from the current 8. Tall order yes, but if we go 8-3 over the next 11 we would be 2 under .500 and there could be hope. So while I am firmly in the sell corner, I have no issue with eating my words, getting close and picking up a bullpen arm and an impact bat for the lineup. That bat could be Mauricio if they would stop wasting time and bring him up even if it is to DH and back up around the field. I’d bring up Vientos as well and send Vogelbach out. So fingers crossed starting with the hope that the good Verlander shows up tonight. Have my Lindor shirt ready and already have my ticket! First game I’ve been able to attend this season. LGM
I don’t think we have to worry about them tanking. They are doing a good job of that without our wishes.
To make the playoffs this year, they have an extreme uphill battle and a lot of teams they have to pass to even get a wild card slot. I personally think they should sell. I truly believe that Pham will wake up next spring and will be Pham the guy who will perform what the back of his baseball card said he will do. So I think he should be sold. What could garner a good prospect is a package, maybe with Robertson.
Our rooks Mauricio and Vientos need steady at bats in the bigs to see what we may have in them for next year. It would be really helpful to k ow what we have in them now this year, because it could really change the dynamic of what we do in the offseason.
Scherzer and Verlander, do we want to rely on them next as they are a year older? I’ll take my chances and sell them both, that’s $ 86 million, well less because whoever they get traded to will want a pay down on their salaries, for Ohtani. Sign Yamamoto and you have Ohtani, Senga and Yamamoto as the top three.
In the trades now, maybe we add a decent young reliever and some role players that build depth for next year. Or, just maybe with a Padres fire sale, we manage to get Hader. Next year we would have Diaz and Hader the two headed monster to anchor the bullpen.
So, I fully believe the Mets should be planning for 2024 right now. Worst thing would be if Eppler makes some bone headed trades because he thinks we can win now, and get another chump like Gott.
Think about it, my reasoning makes a lot of sense.
Ohtani?
Please, no Ohtani. Don’t even consider it or wish it. He’ll make Verlander & Scherzer’s salaries seem like chump change. I’d rather get youth and depth for my money.
When Uncle Steve signed Max and Verlander to $43 mil AAV deals, he essentially married them. It would stun me if either was dealt, unless the Mets ate a ton of money, and the prospect return would be minimal. The simple exercise is to wear the hat of an opposing GM…what would you give up for either of those guys and the massive money due them next year? So, my guess is that 99% chance both return in 2024… unless Scherzer’s family really hates NY and he opts out. Mets need to find a way to bring in a #2 to pair with Senga at the top of the rotation, get what they can out of the two elders, and solve the lineup problems to compete for the wild card in 2024.
With Cohen’s money and five year plan the Mets will never tank…. nor should they.
This trading deadline the Mets should be a strategic seller. By trading veterans, who have no contract next year, and turning them over to obtain minor leaguers to bolster their minor league depth. The Mets Robertson,Pham,Canha Vogelbach and Carrasco are free agents. The Mets could lose them and get nothing. Eppler should get the best deal that he can, even if it is a similar deal like Escobar. The Mets have money but they don’t have minor league depth. They can offer them , like Robertson, a contract for next year in the off season.
Eppler should offer Scherzer, Verlander, Carrasco and Quintana for the best minor leaguers that he can obtain. This offseason there are seven top free agent starting pitchers younger than 31 years old that are available. Invest the “saved money” in them. The Mets will have a better minor league system and a top notch younger rotation for the Major League team in 2024. It would be a win-win situation.
I certainly agree that they should be strategic sellers, marketing everyone not controllable beyond 2023 as well as Scherzer and Verlander. For the non-controllable guys, I would take what I can get but I would not give away Robertson unless the got a top 10ish prospect. I’d also listen on Alonso just to gauge interest/value, even if it is for an offseason plan.
With regards to Scherzer and Verlander, I would listen on anything. However, the net payroll cost should not exceed the replacement cost for 2024 rotation unless they get back some legit prospect capital. If they are paying something like $25 million of either guy’s 2024 salary and not getting back a top 8 prospect that is close, and preferably a pitcher, no deal. They don’t have starting pitching internally and would likely have to buy starters at a much higher price than $18 million per.
A lot of Triple A relievers with options is what Pham,Canha,Quintana.Vogelbach and Carrasco will bring back.
How about a rotation of Senga, Yamamoto, Quintana, and, yes, Scherzer and Verlander next year?
I think it would be a good one.
But bolster the bullpen!
I agree with your marriage take. I’d be very surprised if either Scherzer or Verlander were traded.
Ohtani has 35 home runs 76 RBI and is 7-5 on the mound. I’ll take him. Power bat that we need, starting pitcher that we need.
If one assumes that 90 wins is what it will take to get the last WC, the Mets are halfway there, with 45W today. Given that there are 66 games left, they will need to finish at a Death Valley hot .681 between now and the end of the season. That’s essentially 7 out of every 10 games from now through Sept.
It’s not impossible but highly implausible.
There’s no need to tank the season. But they should be looking to trade all players with contracts expiring and anyone not named Alonso, Lindor, Alvarez, Baty, Senga, or Diaz. If there’s no market for Vogey, then cut him.
I am much more interested in seeing the AAA squad cut their teeth in the MLB than I am seeing the likes of Stewart, Pham, Canha, Guillorme, et al in the lineup everyday, pursuing what is nearly a hopeless cause.
No one knows the appetite that Cohen has to eat contracts to move players but he could spruce up some transactions that could bring some nice prospects our way. I think a lot of teams would love Max or Verlander starting every fifth game down the stretch if the price is right.
It is a damn shame that Pham went down. He could have been one of the more valuable trade chips but his value just dropped. I think Marte’s value was minimal already but now is virtually zero.
Eating huge contracts is admitting to a massive blunder from any MLB precedent. But we have unprecedented wealth in the owner’s box and if Cohen wants to pay for an expensive mulligan, I sure don’t mind. It’s not my money. I just want to see and engaged and exciting team playing meaningful games with a realistic shot at the WS.
I don’t know why you would assume it would take 90 wins to get a Wild Card.
Last year the Phillies made it with 87 Wins. If we carried the current 6-team format to previous years, here’s the win total for the third WC team in the NL going backwards:
2021 – 83 wins
2019 – 86 wins
2018 – 88 wins
Not that it’s going to be easy for the Mets to get 87 wins…
Hmm. I don’t know what data I was looking at, but I was wrong and 90 wins is probably more than is needed. That reduces the required winning percentage but I am still in the camp that this season is over. It’s time to offload anyone who won’t contribute in 2024 and beyond and give the prospects some ABs. From my perspective, every AB that Vog, Pham, Canha, Luis G, et al get from here on out is a wasted opportunity.
Also, for the record, getting to the WC round through sacrificing prospect development is not worth it. I’d rather see the kids all play 60 games and come 4th in the division versus these vets.
Now, if they roll off 18 wins in the next 20 I will change my tune but it will take something that dramatic.