Curve Compression: How David Stearns Is Synchronizing the Mets’ Present, Future, and Payroll Cycles
In a prior piece, we outlined the emerging Mets organizational blueprint under David Stearns: prioritize run prevention, accelerate internal development, and avoid long-tail decline risk that sabotages future windows. This offseason is where that blueprint begins to show up not just philosophically, but operationally — in roster construction, contract structure, and payroll management.
What Stearns is doing isn’t a rebuild, and it isn’t a reckless win-now push. It’s more disciplined than either. He is compressing the Mets’ aging curve, youth maturation curve, and payroll curve into the same competitive window, so that veterans, prospects, and spending all peak together instead of working against one another. The bulk of this transition occurs during the 26-27 seasons.
Once you see that, nearly every move this winter makes sense.
The Semien–Nimmo Trade Was About Timing Control
The Marcus Semien–Brandon Nimmo trade has often been mislabeled as a baffling move. This deal was about accelerating aging risk forward in order to eliminate it later.
By trading Nimmo and paying cash to shorten contract exposure, Stearns removed three years of late-30s decline risk tied to a corner outfielder whose value depends heavily on athleticism and durability. In exchange, he absorbed Semien — older today, but with a shorter remaining term, elite durability, and defensive value at a position where decline is slower and more manageable.
Stearns chose to age earlier, not longer while improving run prevention at the same time: this was a two-for-one maneuver.
Semien offers immediate run prevention, leadership, and the possibility of offensive rebound. Even if the bat is merely average, the move works because it stabilizes the roster during the years that matter most. This isn’t avoiding aging. It’s controlling when and where aging happens.
Eliminating Future Decline Traps
This logic extends across the roster.
Pete Alonso walks rather than anchoring the team to a five- or six-year deal that would push heavy payroll into his mid-to-late 30s at first base. Nimmo is traded before decline becomes unavoidable. Long-term contracts for players already past 30 are largely avoided.
There are two exceptions — and only two.
Juan Soto exists outside normal rules as a generational bat. Francisco Lindor, now 32, is already embedded as a franchise cornerstone. His contract is a known quantity, and his defensive value and leadership justify managing the back end rather than replacing it.
The principle isn’t “no older players.” The principle is no new long-tail decline risk.
Aligning Aging With Youth Maturation
Here’s where the strategy becomes genuinely sophisticated.
By accelerating aging risk into the next three seasons, Stearns is pairing it directly with the maturation curve of the Mets’ next core.
The prospects arriving now are not theoretical. Carson Benge is nearing everyday outfield readiness. Jett Williams profiles as a multi-position, up-the-middle weapon. Ryan Clifford and Jacob Reimer are power bats poised for Triple-A rotation and positional experimentation. Nolan McLean is a rotation lock. Brandon Sproat and Jonah Tong are expected to deliver meaningful innings this season.
These players are entering their competence phase — not five years away, but now.
If Stearns had deferred aging by keeping Nimmo and signing another long-term veteran bat, those prospects would arrive into a roster weighed down by declining defenders and immovable contracts. That’s the classic timing failure. Instead, veteran leadership, youth development, and competitive ambition are aligned into the same 2026–2029 window.
Run Prevention as the Structural Backbone
Curve compression only works if the environment supports young players.
The middle of the field is now strong. Lindor and Semien form an elite infield core. Tyrone Taylor provides reliable center-field defense, with Benge capable of sharing duties and eventually sliding into a corner. This allows the Mets to manage Juan Soto’s defense intentionally rather than pretending it isn’t an issue.
On the pitching side, Devin Williams anchors the bullpen, reducing leverage pressure on young starters. The Mets still need one or two additional high-leverage right-handed relievers, but the framework is clear: shorten games, protect innings, and let youth perform without chaos.
Payroll Discipline Is Part of the Strategy
This blueprint only works if the payroll curve cooperates — and Stearns is clearly managing that, too.
In an optimal world, the Mets stay within the less punitive competitive balance tax tiers, while still paying for elite anchors like Lindor and Soto and leaving room to extend emerging talent. That’s difficult in the short term, but the medium-term picture is intentional.
The 2026–27 seasons are tight, but they’re also transitional. Major contracts come off the books: Manaea, Senga, McNeil, Montas, Minter, Holmes, and eventually Semien. Rather than replacing those deals with new long-term commitments, Stearns is pairing short-term, mid-priced veterans (via FA) with controllable youth (via trades).
That approach creates two advantages at once:
-
It preserves competitiveness now.
-
It opens significant salary room just as the next core becomes extension-eligible.
This is payroll curve compression to match roster curve compression.
First Base as a Feature, Not a Hole
With Alonso gone, first base remains unresolved — and that’s intentional.
Clifford and Reimer will rotate through first base, DH, and secondary positions in Triple-A. This right-left power pairing creates internal competition while preserving trade flexibility. The likely external addition is a short-term bridge, not a franchise commitment.
That restraint is the point.
What Comes Next
If this framework holds, the rest of the offseason should look deliberate rather than dramatic. Expect Stearns to trade prospect depth for controllable young major leaguers, particularly where timelines align with the next three seasons.
You should also expect contractual rebalancing trades — swapping one form of declining or inefficient money for another to open positional lanes or reset timelines. Deals that look neutral in isolation may make sense once roster access and payroll flexibility are considered.
Free agency should be dominated by one-to three-year contracts: bullpen leverage adds, positional bridges, and mid-priced veterans who fill gaps without blocking the next core.
The Bottom Line
David Stearns isn’t rebuilding the Mets. He’s synchronizing them.
He has pulled aging risk forward, aligned it with leadership and defense, paired it with a wave of ready talent, and managed the payroll so future flexibility isn’t sacrificed. If executed correctly, this approach gives the Mets multiple seasons of legitimate contention without mortgaging the next decade.
It’s not loud. It’s not sentimental.
But it’s the most structurally sound plan the Mets have had in years.
35 comments:
Sounds good, but, he’s trading for Skubal.. why do that? And, would you then sign him to a ten year deal? You have to if you want him.
I agree with most of your writing. My disagreement is that Stearns won’t sign anyone for more than three years - Imai will probably get six as a 27 year old - and that he is looking for younger players to trade for. Maybe, but Contreras can fit the plan as a 34 year old. Personally, I would leave Vientos at first base.
And then comes the kicker: are you selling tickets to pissed off Mets fans? Cohen’s presence makes them entitled and right now even positive Ernest Dove put a rip piece up.
RV, well thought out post. I have been championing this way of thinking for a while now.
The only issue (not mine) the majority of Met fans would have with this is that, under this plan there will be no glamorous signings this year. There will be no Tucker, Bellinger, Valdez etc.
Do the Met fans have the stones for this? I doubt it. I personally could handle it. I also feel that the way the team is currently constituted, with a relief pitcher or 2, the Mets can replicate the same outcome as this year.
You have to figure Manaea, Senga, Vientos, Peterson (2nd half) have to have a little better year than last. Hopefully, continued growth from Baty and Alverez will help. The return of Minter to help the bullpen.
Trades like you mentioned for Contrares would be great if you don't have to give up essential future assets. I also have to admit I was wrong on Contrares's fielding. It seems he's not as bad as I thought.
I guess we will see shortly if this is Stearn's plan moving forward. For if he makes 1 crazy signing this plan goes out the window.
Boy, will we be clearer on all this in March! But removing age decline seems to have been a real goal here.
The Hot Stove may have a gas leak in this explosive off season.
To take this one step further, don't be surprised if Lindor gets traded.
Crazy, I don't think so. This would fit into your aging out system. Why do I say this, because I keep reading more and more that there is a problem between Soto and Lindor. The chatter is not coming just from bloggers looking for hits. Have seen articles in the Post and SI among others.
JUST SAYING
I agree with all of you, but there isn’t a single positive article on the internet about Stearns or about Cohen, who charges big dollars to attend games and “has a casino”… “what’s his problem?”
I’m afraid the Mets will give in to the pressure to sell tickets.
Let them learn to be adults. Lindor isn’t like Nimmo or Alonso, defensively defective player that relies on offense. I wouldn’t trade Lindor. You need to anchor your team to successful veterans to teach the kids. Can’t get rid of all of them. I’m on the verge of stopping to read the newspapers and SNY. Can’t blame Stearns for avoiding them.
I totally agree with this article and I love the way you explain it .I was trying to do the same but with less skill .Accelerating age risk is the perfect statement to use. I though it was brilliant move because you gain on defense too. Sterns best skill is to develop and find talent ,our farm is shaping up well let's use it we have potential 8 players in the next two years worthy of a shot at the show this is Sterns strength .I actually love the the stones and discipline he has he earn my respect .
I agree with TexasGus. No trading Lindor. His leadership on the field is glue for what will be a younger team. His defense is still elite even though he always gets passed on Gold Gloves by flashier shortstops. His offense is still needed because even with improved defense we will not be winning a lot of 1-0 games.
RVH this was another masterpiece. I enjoyed the strategic look at how to explain the recent moves (and non-moves). The only part that I really struggle with is the pitching. Williams does not relieve the pressure on starters to go deeper. If Diaz stuck around and Williams was pitching the eighth it gets a little better, but losing Rogers still makes the middle innings weaker.
I do think they will trade / sign for several “meaningful” players to bridge the next two seasons. Players like Contraras, even bellinger for five years at a higher AAV could work because he addresses versatility AND offense/defense. He is a more complete player. One established starter with a couple years of contract left as well plus the usual relievers on one-two year contracts. Those types of moves keep them “playoff-competitive”. If Skubal is available AND open to contract they go for it; otherwise they wait for FA & pay big bucks then.
Realistically, under this plan, they have room for one really big long-term contract.
I don’t see them spending less than $300M again this year with the dead money.
It seems that they may be contemplating at an upgrade in CF (Roberts?!) & putting Benge in a corner spot.
Regardless, everything will come down to the quality of the starting pitching: this means rebounds & the young pitching developing & contributing in real-time as they reach the majors.
Rogers was a tough loss but he is 35 & signed for three years plus a fourth vesting so they may be paying him from 35-39 or even 40 depending on birthday. I’m sure that last year sealed the deal & would violate the Mets master plan. Can’t do that for a middle reliever. Could possibly do that for Bellinger.
Great piece. I’ve been saying the same thing (though not as well articulated) all offseason. But I also think that while Stearns would like to be competitive this year, he is less concerned with ‘26 results, and sees our real competitive window as starting in ‘27 or even ‘28 as the wave of young, cheap pitching and select position prospects establishes itself. Baty and Alvarez will be in their early prime, with Soto still under 30. Obviously the hope is that the player development program continues to supply talent to keep that window as close to perpetually open as possible.
But all of that really does argue for trading Lindor, who will be entering his decline with 4-5 years left on his deal just as the rest of the timeline comes together. Factor in the possibility that he and Soto really don’t mix well, and the fact that Lindor will lose significant trade value with ever season going forward, and this argues for getting all the younger talent you can for him now. The fan base is already having its moment of anger and grief, may as well rip the bandaid all the way off and fully align the org’s trajectory.
Interestingly, multiple ‘26 WS hopefuls, including the all-in Dodgers and Blue Jays, plus the Padres (who are run by a crazy person) could use serious upgrades at SS.
Trading Lindor is not currently an option. Last thing we need is to further alienate the fan base.
I have been saying all along that the Mets needed to find out what they have in-house and then bring in the missing pieces.
I don't disagree with what Stearns has done so far because the Mets were a very incomplete team. It needed to open up positions for up and coming prospects with high upside.
2026 should be about can Vientos play 1B or is he just a DH candidate?. Is Baty the 3B going forward?. What do the Mets have in Tong, Sproat, Scott, Benge and others.
It would not surprise me if the Mets move Semien if he is doing well in 2026 and teams come calling.
For all those lamenting Diaz, ask yourselves, if the money was equal and you had a choice between the not ready for prime time Mets and the twice defending champions, who would you pick?.
Alonso? the Mets would not give 5 years to and he finds a team willing to do so, that's were you sign. Obvious choices when you think about them.
2027 is where the future Mets team starts but don't be surprised if the energy from the kids make the 2026 team an enjoyable one.
One veteran that should be back is Marte.
They just announced a deal with Jorge Polanco. RH utility If 34 years old. Terms not yet announced. Likely means Jeff & Acuna are gone unless they do trade Semien. Utility IF, RHDH. Another veteran placeholder.
Agree with your comments. Marte is too one dimensional & canny play defense anymore. Need the roster spot for youth or versatility.
From Jeff Passan (mlb trade rumors) “Polanco primarily as a first baseman and DH. Polanco could also potentially chip in at third base, though it looks as it the Mets view Polanco a piece of the puzzle in replacing Alonso at first base.”
2 years, $40M
That's a head scratcher. Brought him in to be a PT DH/1B???
Never played 1B before. Yikes him and Vientos at 1B.
The 1 good thing about is it didn't cost any prospects. Contrares would have cost us assets. Same offensive production.
On possibility of Lindor trade now. Here's how to think about it rationslly from only the perspective of paying for declining years. If you believe there is compelling reason to suppose he will decline significantly with 4/5 years left his contract, then so does every potential trading partner; therefore the value you would get back now would reflect that fact. So stop fantasizing the likes of Tatis. They are buying say 4 years of A/A- play from you and increasing risk of accelerating decline. So the question is why would you trade that given that you right now have a claim on those 4 years of high quality performance. And then you are free to manage the risk when you get to that stage. He may become a piece in a trade or he can be packaged with payoff of % of his salary paid in return for prospects if the farm needs replenishing. The point is you can do this with truly exceptional players on long term contracts but not with most. And as I pointed out earlier in another post today, you can do offer (and I believe maybe should) a longer than you want otherwise contract to Bellinger because his versatility should be understood as a form of insurance for the risk you are taking in the early stages of the bets you are making on your prospects as major leaguers. Remember, and a point not fully appreciated even if often mentioned, most highly regarded prospects don't perform above the major league average throughout their careers. The distribution is surprisingly broad along the continuum from failure to allstar performer.
I had a comment before about the possibility of Lindor getting traded. But the comment disappeared.
Can that happen??? I think it was right before the Adam Smith comments.
Anyone know how that can happen?
I might have preferred Contrares to Polanco, but the difference is basically marginal. It does, however, suggest that the addition in the outfield needs to be something of a power bat. And that is why I imagine the Mets are drawn to having Benge as a corner OF and Robert as the CF. We shall see. Robert is A defense and speed, poor bat to ball skills, potential power. Benge is potential 15-20 HR. Robert would be gone after two years though and the other in house potential CF candidates are not sources of power, with ironically the exception of Williams. But then again, Polanco is gone in 2 years as well and there are in house potential power bats for FB. Do these basic moves and you haven't really touched any of the prospects you truly believe in. So while I prefer Bellinger as part of the solution because of the insurance he provides, I understand these moves
Robert actually make a lot of sense (at the right cost) right now. Let Benge take a corner OD spot. Take a bet on Roberts playing better & being elite CF defense - if he fails, trade him at deadline or let option expire; if he excels have him for two years at $20M or buydown piece. Creates a lot of flexibility. Raises the floor with potential for higher ceiling. They are betting on youth anyway this year so fits with overall strategy. Reasonable option for sure.
Front offices don’t move elite anchors because of personality rumors. They move them when performance, preparation, and development all degrade at once. There’s no evidence that’s happening here — and every move Stearns has made suggests Lindor remains central to the plan. I think Lindor trade is a long shot for sure, but not totally out of question. Mets would need to be blown away by an offer.
The Robert approach over the Bellinger approach has the following implications. Polanco and Robert leave open the possibility of a trade for Skubal if that's what they want to explore this year. The bullpen is separate from that and will be dealt with by 2 right hand high leverage pitchers. My guess is that one of them will be Weaver. The other may be Megill, but I he has to be traded for
Megill & Peralta potentially. Milwaukee also has surplus of young, controllable OF talent.
Look at how solid Milwaukee is sitting now - 2 years after Stearns left. If they could spend, they would be a consistent powerhouse
Sorry Jules, but a Skubal trade right now with this makeshift team is ridiculous. Why would you give up a boat load of prospects on a transitional team.
Baseball reference has him as a switch Hitter
Only makes sense if it is a trade & sign. Lock him up for the period when our young talent matures & keeps team playoff competitive during the transition. It’s an unlikely scenario but plausible & this move creates increased optionality to be able to participate if Skubal is moved. At a minimum, it would substantially raise the cost to acquire Skubal if the Mets are seriously engaged so worst case it costs an acquiring team more & let’s the Mets demonstrate how serious that would be in a free agency scenario next year.
@JoeP. I was not advocating for Skubal trade. As I see it, they have several options in front of them if we focus only on need for a moment. The needs are SP, RP and outfielder. RE: outfielder. They can accomplish this in several ways. FA, trade for one, expanded trade; FA-- Bellinger is best choice; Trade for one: Robert: expanded trade: Ryan, Buxton. All of these make good sense to me
SP: FA-- King; trade for one -- Peratta, Pivetta; expanded trade, Ryan Buxton, Peralta, Megill. All make good sense depending on price;
RP: FA, trade for one, expanded trade. FA -- most options: preferences: Weaver, Fairbanks, others; Trade for 1-- Megill,
expanded trade: Peralta, Megill.
What these have in common across the board is how short the terms of the deals are but for Bellinger (I am assuming King is 3yr with an option) and how few prospects and/or draft choices they have to give up: none if they go FA route (though lose draft choices i believe in Bellinger and King. Roberts -- WS want some prospects, but have no leverage to insure high level prospects. Mets can give them a Vientos who is a ML or Mauricio and a lower level high potential ceiling player; Ryan and Buxton requires you give up more as you get two A- players who are under control for two years; and two years is perfect bridge time for Mets leadership to secure synching up time frames; for Peralta and Megill or Megill alone, no one from the top tier is involved.
Lets see what a plausible starting roster would look like for Mets based on making a version of the moves I mention above:
1B- Polanco
2B- Semien
SS-- Lindor
3B -- Baty
LF- Soto
CF- Robert/Buxton/Benge
RF- Bellinger/Benge
C- Alvarez
DH - Undetermined but suppose Vientos from right side, McNeil others from left
SP- Mclean, Holmes, Senga, Ryan/Peralta/King, Manaea, Peterson
RP -- Williams, Weaver/Megill/?, Minter, Raley, .....
This is well balanced, 50% improved defensively and plenty of bullets in the minors and some baby Mets in the majors as well for the optimal mix of potential trades and open lanes to the majors and no new long term bad contracts. Is it the best team in BB; of course not; but is there a core with lots of flexibility to be the best team or two for a 5-6 year period: absolutely
Gotcha Jules. I hope you don't think I was calling you ridiculous. I meant a trade for him and not locking him up long term would be.
Not a problem Joe.
Post a Comment