Mike's Mets - It All Begins Monday, but It Might End for Brodie

 

By Mike Steffanos November 6, 2020

I've been a bit distracted by the election this week, but I was still quite happy to read in the Post yesterday that the expectations are that the Steve Cohen's control of the Mets is expected to begin Monday. Even though it's basically been a done deal since last Friday, it still will be with a sense of relief and excitement that I await that climactic change over. Honestly, it feels like it's been forever since I've been looking forward to this moment, going back to the original negotiations between Steve Cohen and the Mets last winter. Even my concerns expressed yesterday over labor-management uncertainty won't dampen this anticipation. So, while Monday is generally not my favorite day of the week, this upcoming Monday will be a big exception to the rule if, indeed, the changeover happens.

An interesting question in Mike Puma's piece linked above on the upcoming closing of the sale is the fate of current GM Brodie Van Wagenen. While the man had some ups and downs over his two seasons in charge, I think the broad consensus of opinion was that he was in over his head as a Major League General Manager, and that's my opinion, too. He had some good moments, notably using his skills and connections from being an agent to sign all of the players in the Mets aggressive amateur drafts the past two seasons. On the other hand, the Cano trade and his difficulties with managing the roster this season were big black marks against Van Wagenen.

I remember back when Brodie was hired after Sandy Alderson stepped aside. I didn't think it was going to work then. This was not because I had any real feel for what the successful agent might bring to the job, but because I knew the Mets under the Wilpons was not the sort of organization where an outside of the box selection like Van Wagenen would flourish. He would have needed a lot of support from both above and below, from an ownership that was willing to roll the dice and innovate and a front office full of solid baseball advisors who could help his manage the hurdles that his lack of any previous front office experience would have created.

The Wilpons didn't hire Van Wagenen because they were prepared to take the team into a dramatic new direction, but because he got along well with Jeff Wilpon. The consensus about Jeff from the people who were familiar with him is that he had an overinflated sense of his own baseball acumen and an inability to listen to advise from those who knew better. As for the team that surrounded Van Wagenen in the front office, I don't think they were completely incompetent. There were good people left over from the Alderson years, particularly in scouting and development. For the most part, however, they were there because they got along with Jeff Wilpon, too. The proof of their failure to help Van Wagenen succeed was the Cano deal, trading for Marcus Stroman while not even attempting to retain Zack Wheeler and bleeding so many young players out of the organization this season through clumsy roster moves.

Brodie Van Wagenen beefed up the Analytics team a bit, but it was still woefully small compared to what the top organizations were doing. He really rubbed me the wrong way early on with that "come get us" nonsense after his first offseason, which predictably blew up in his face. While I can appreciate bravado when it has something behind it, I didn't look at the Mets going into that season as the favorites even before their lack of depth predictably sabotaged yet another Mets season. When Davey Johnson was calling the Mets the team to beat back in the day it was because they really were. He was stating his belief, not just whistling in the dark.

So yeah, a hiring like Van Wagenen's could have conceivably paid off in a much different organization, but it's not surprising that it didn't work here. I really don't blame him as much as they folks who hired him. The Wilpons were always the weakest link in the chain. If they weren't forced to sell the club, it wouldn't have mattered much if they kept the current GM on or replaced him. The incompetence, stinginess, failure to innovate and overall mismanagement wasn't going anywhere.

As for the question of what happens to Van Wagenen on Monday, Puma points out in his piece that Sandy Alderson isn't known as an executive who defaults to handing out pink slips. Puma notes that Alderson kept GM Kevin Towers on in San Diego when he took over as the Padre's president back in 2005. On the other hand, Puma mentions something I hadn't heard before, that when Alderson stepped down as Mets GM for health reasons back in 2018, it was also under some pressure from Jeff Wilpon, who wanted to hire Brodie Van Wagenen.

I really am not very concerned on which way the Mets will go with Van Wagenen. He has two years left on his contract, and it might turn out that he is allowed to stay on if he chooses to. I would bet if he does stay on it would not be with complete autonomy in decision making, nor should it. His skills in negotiating with amateur free agents would continue to be useful. I certainly wouldn't expect to see a repeat of the Cano deal if Brodie did stay on. I'm not worried for the guy personally if he gets canned, either. He'll go back to being a successful sports agent and continue to make a ton of money. We should all share that fate when we fail at something.

Update: After I posted this, Deesha Thosar reported in the Daily News that Steve Cohen's purchase of the club could happen as soon as Friday. Hey, the sooner the better. Fridays are great, anyway, but the purchase finalizing would make this one truly epic.

Continue reading by clicking here..