With all of the attention paid to the Mets’ pitching woes, precious little in the rumor mill has concerned their needs on the offensive side of the game. They have lost Brandon Nimmo and Pete Alonso and thus far added Marcus Semien and Jorge Polanco. Somehow the totals WAR of the new faces does not equal what the departing forces provided.
Right now going into 2026 the Mets have Jeff McNeil to play left field, Tyrone Taylor to play center and Juan Soto to play right. Aside from the offensive side of Soto, that’s not an awe inspiring set of outfielders yet the rumor mills are fairly quiet about who the Mets might try to add to supplement the starting lineup.
As much as we all like the stories about home grown players who make their way up through the minors to debut in the majors, none of the outfield options the Mets have available seem ready to assume that kind of ascension. Carson Benge is the top of that list with Jett Williams not far behind, but the numbers they’ve shown in the minors suggest they both might need a little more seasoning.
In the case of Benge, he’s demonstrated he has good defensive skills though not exceptional while delivering solid numbers at the plate an on the base paths after transitioning from pitching. In AAA he combined between Brooklyn, Binghamton and Syracuse to hit .281 with 15 HRs, 73 RBIs and 22 SBs. Many consider him a corner outfielder but the Mets have vacancies both in left and in center so it’s still unclear where the left handed hitter would start when he makes his Citifield debut.
Given his brief introduction to the minor league level with just 24 games and 90 ABs in AAA it might be a little premature to pencil him into the the starting lineup. Everyone is hoping he will continue his evolution as a multi tool offensive threat but for now it’s probably premature to pencil him into coming north with the big club.
Jett Williams is even more of a question. He's primarily been a middle infielder in the minors but has also logged time in center field. He hits for a decent average with high on base percentage and excellent stolen base numbers but in AAA he has not yet profiled as a star in the making. In 2025 split between two minor league teams he hit .261 with 34 SBs. Those are appealing numbers for sure but not the kind that suggest he's ready to face major league pitching.
Yes, we have all heard the rumblings about players like free agents Cody Bellinger and Kyle Tucker but unless the Mets are suddenly willing to offer up to them what they wouldn’t suggest to Pete Alonso it is unlikely either will wind up wearing orange and blue. Trade options exist but no one is sure if a Luis Robert, Jr. or others we’ve heard about are really stopgaps or real solutions.
What fans and media would like to see is the plan David Stearns has to improve offense and defense on a team right now that is lacking in both areas. Assuming that Semien is solid at 2B and Brett Baty continues at 3B, they still haven’t solved the 1B vacancy with Jorge Polanco’s one game appearance there in his whole career. Furthermore he’s know far more for his bat than his glove so it’s more likely he’s a DH in waiting than an on the field option.
For now the folks who follow the Mets are fraught with quite a bit of uncertainty regarding who will take the field for them in this Alonso-less, Nimmo-less and totally vacant center field-less lineup. The internal options in the infield are blocked and there are no real outfield nor first base solutions unless you are a true believer in the 2024 version of Mark Vientos. When will solutions appear?
8 comments:
I am not upset - I realize Stearns is in the middle of a work-in-progress here. The team could be better by opening day than it was at opening day last year, and possibly much better by the second half of 2026 than the 2nd half of 2025.
I join everyone, most likely, in wishing it was all done already.
@Tom: On the other hand, were all the work done by now what would be talk about for the next few months of winter? What fantasies could we express? What horrors would we be left to imagine? Both comfort and certainty have their drawbacks. A dose of anxiety and uncertainty have their roles as well. That's my story and I'm sticking with it.
Has anyone seen Vientos play first base? I recall one play: a wide throw up the first base line that he kept a toe on the base and stretched out full extension horizontally to catch the ball and get the out. It was a real nice play. I can’t recall that I’ve seen other action regarding him.
I like Miguel Andujar to platoon with Benge in LF. Andujar has terrorized lefties these past two years and they need that. Pretty sure an outfield spot will be solved via a trade and McNeil is getting traded.
I think that by the end of the 2026 season, there will be enough blue chip prospects that the Mets will either have to commit to bringing them up and allowing them to mature together or start trading them for established players.
Personally I am dreaming of a rotation that includes McLean, Tong, Sproat and a couple of those nice LH pitchers in the minors.
Great things are worth waiting for and the Mets have a great future in the minor leagues.
More on this in my next post this morning. We are in the “watching paint dry” phase of the offseason.
I like the expression, 'watching paint dry' as a characterization of this part of the offseason, but there is something actually going on that is interesting to try to understand, and that is the interaction between the free agent and trade markets (as markets). Right now we are at that stage of a temporary equilibrium between that is a kind of 'stasis.' The top FA all want long term deals -- whether pitchers or other position players; There are better trades to be had in terms of salary, length of contract, and in some cases, expected performance. The problem is that the current demands in terms of returns remains at their highest. So until further information is revealed by trades or free agent signings, there is uncertainty about movement on either front. It is a kind of Nash equilibrium in which no actor has an incentive to act unilaterally as long as others don't. The easy moves have come off the table, and the period of wild enthusiasm has also come to a halt -- marked by overpayment. Now the serious work begins. Someone has to be an initial mover. In these circumstances that is normally a person who has an appetite for risk taking: think of someone like Peller in San Diego. But even he is somewhat constrained by uncertainty in the ownership's willingness to spend. So I expect little movement -- in part because of the holiday season -- and because very few deals have offer sheets on the table that are clearly rational for all sides independent of what will occur in the FA and trade markets. There isn't enough clarity yet. Some call it patience, but it is better to think in terms of there being too little information that the relevant markets are currently providing. And one value of markets is their ability to provide information -- about valuation and price especially. Right now, not so much, so just like us fans, decision makers play over lots of alternatives in their minds between FA acquisitions and potential trades: length of contract v. prospects and other players, etc, without reaching a firm decision about which direction makes the most sense.
two quick thoughts. First, this will change, maybe not immediately after one move is made, like falling dominoes suggest. But it will change once there is some more clarity as to valuation and price in both markets. Second, there is a well known distinction of psychological and economic importance between 'willingness to pay' and 'willingness to sell' in the following sense. You can measure how much I value X, by asking how much am I willing to pay for it, and you get an answer. But you can also ask, now that you have X, you can ask how much you value it by asking how much you are willing to sell it for. For many objects the answers will vary greatly. The answers converge only when the objects in question are basically commodities, and diverge greatest, say when they are luxury goods. Blue chip prospects are most often thought of by fans and management alike, like 'luxury items' something you are loathe to trade away once you have them. And most management teams want to think about free agents more like replaceable entities while FA agents and their agents like to think of them as near monopolies, one of a kind pieces. Competitive markets help to find the price that fits somewhere between those two 'visions' of the asset/player. But competitive markets require that actors play in them and make offers, etc. But in a state of stasis in both trade and FA markets, because of the uncertainty and lack of clarity, we don't get the action we need to help set reasonable prices. So you can think of it as a chicken/egg problem. And that's why we need a first mover (and a couple of them in fact). The good news is that we almost always get them. Just not at this moment.
One more: It is easy to see why there is often a lot of movement early, then a lull. The early movement often leads to thinking that it will continue, but it doesn't. Because the early movement is based often on non-market factors -- overwhelming need, thought that you are getting a bargain, a player's need for security that displays a risk aversion, and so on. But that typically doesn't trigger more measured market exchanges. It clears the brush for the markets to work, and they will, but right now the actors are trying to figure out where the value lies and at what price in two different but interacting markets: trade and free agency. Just trying to help make sense of where we are and why it is often a bit harsh and unrealistic to lambast GMs and other decision makers. Just take a look at how long it is taking for offers to come to the Japanese and Korean players that have been posted. Trying to evaluate sensibly is not easy and funny enough, we always rely on offers others make as providing evidence of value, when in fact we have no independent reason for doing so. It's as if we think they know something we don't , but that is often not the case. So we like lots of offers or bids to feel more confident in our own, but what is the rational basis for that inference? It's more likely. psychological fact about us than anything else -- but really interesting nonetheless. So maybe psychology more than talent evaluation drives prices in some markets? Maybe baseball is one of them?
Post a Comment