LAS VEGAS — If you didn’t like the Mets’ re-signing of Edwin Diaz, it is about the money, right?
Guaranteeing $102 million over five years for someone who will work roughly 65 innings if fully healthy is not easy to indulge. And fully healthy is an issue for every player, but even more so for power relievers who are used multiple times a week and are always at max effort. It is why performance is more inconsistent in this role than any other.
So in a perfect world you would stay away from $20.4 million annual commitments that take a reliever beyond his 33rd birthday.
But the Mets are not in a perfect world. The mandate is to win next year, and the Mets began this offseason with Max Scherzer as the only sure thing on the entire pitching staff — and that sure thing will turn 39 in July and had two IL stints in 2022. The mandate, by the way, comes from Steve Cohen, who last year exemplified he is willing to spend a lot until his organization is mature enough to regularly provide answers internally. They are not close on the pitching end to doing that.
So what do you think a fair price would be for Diaz? Aroldis Chapman, at the same age and with a similar accomplishment record, signed for five years at $86 million six years ago. Let’s say inflation and all the added money in the game even made the “fair” price just five years at $90 million. Do you think Cohen is going to sweat the differential ($12 million) spread over five years when the alternative is he might have to spend more in the aggregate replacing Diaz without any clue if his next closer(s) can handle New York? Again, Cohen has to operate in the real world, not the perfect world.
In that world, his team has much to do and removing something vital from the board has value, too. Diaz can be removed while the Mets probably know the next two most significant internal free agents, Jacob deGrom and Brandon Nimmo, are likely to drag to next month’s winter meetings, perhaps beyond. There are age/injury concerns on that duo, especially considering where the Mets anticipate the term (not just dollars, but years) going to where even Cohen will have limits.
Thus, the Mets must work on parallel tracks to consider alternatives. Let’s take the case of Nimmo. He is a leadoff-hitting center fielder who has improved on defense, plays with passion and is a good teammate. The Mets don’t want to lose him. But if his market climbs to six years or toward $25 million annually, will they feel compelled to pivot away from a player who will play at 30 next year and stayed his healthiest in his walk year?
Brandon Nimmo is now a free agent. Getty Images If so, there are two questions that matter a lot: 1. Can Starling Marte play center for, say, 120 games? 2. Is Francisco Alvarez ready to catch regularly in 2023? If Marte can play center, the Mets could prioritize an easier-to-find corner bat (the center-field market is difficult) and add a center field defensive caddy such as Kevin Kiermaier or non-tender candidates such as Cody Bellinger or Victor Robles. If the Mets think Alvarez can handle a full catching workload and provide, say, an .800 OPS bat, then they could leave Marte in right and go defense-first in center. I believe the hedge is to obtain a defense-first center fielder plus a superior bat to Darin Ruf/Daniel Vogelbach to serve primarily as a DH with the ability to get in the field.
For the sake of this exercise, let’s eliminate the pie-in-the-sky of free agent Aaron Judge to play center and through trade Shohei Ohtani to DH and start behind Scherzer (though isn’t that attractive, but likely at the cost of Alvarez plus). Here are three that entice me:
1. Jose Abreu. His power dropped (15 homers) in his age-35 season. But he remained a terrific hitter (.324 average, 40 doubles). And there is this: There were 100 players who had at least 50 plate appearances against pitchers in the top 25 OPS against (minimum 100 innings) and Abreu’s .359 batting average was the best (Jeff McNeil was second) and his .904 OPS was sixth (Marte was second). He will hit good pitching.
Jose Abreu has a reputation as a terrific clubhouse presence. APPlus, he has the reputation as a terrific clubhouse presence. I believe like Chili Davis and Nelson Cruz (also elder statesmen) that Abreu’s bat will stay productive into his late-30s, so a two- or three-year deal works. And he probably remains a better first baseman than Pete Alonso so can go into the field when necessary.
2. Michael Brantley. This is about the physical. Period. He had shoulder surgery in August that cost Brantley the rest of the season/postseason. If the medicals come back clean, Brantley is super attractive because he can probably be had on a one-year deal coming off his age-35 season.
He is a lefty DJ LeMahieu — just a professional at-bat. He is postseason tested. His rep as a leader also proceeds him. He can play left field when necessary. If Nimmo departs and the Mets opened their lineup with Marte leading off followed by Brantley, they would be fine.
Michael Brantley is proven in the playoffs. Getty Images
Joc PedersonGetty Images3. Joc Pederson. Will he leave the West Coast? If so, he will have a large market for all the reasons that the Mets should be interested in him. In the postseason, you better have players who can hit fastballs. Pederson can hit heat — and he has 12 homers and an .819 OPS in 218 postseason plate appearances. He hit 23 homers last year and tied Rafael Devers for 10th in slugging percentage (.521) among those with 400-plus plate appearances. You would want to limit it, but Pederson could play the corner outfield. My guess is the Mets think Vogelbach provides overall similar results to Pederson — I think Vogelbach is a depth piece.
The Giants could put the $19.65 million qualifying offer on Pederson. If so, he might accept. But if he is unfettered, Pederson should have a good multiyear market. The Mets should be interested.
