For the entire off-season, we have been writing about the re-tooling of the New York Mets. After a disastrous slow-motion crash landing in 2025, the front office decided that the core was not sufficient to carry this franchise to a world championship, so they broke it apart and embarked on a new strategy anchored by the principle of run prevention.
After much difficulty getting over the lost of some fan favorite players, we have begun to get comfortable with the run prevention strategy and have even begun to build some excitement about the new core players and the cast that surrounds them.
But wait, the first pitch of the Mets' 2026 regular season has not yet been thrown and there seems to be a few leaks in the strategy. I don't think that the Mets' leadership has been true to the strategic vision they espoused. Here are four reasons why:
1) First Base. Pete Alonso was "not good enough" with his below average defensive metrics, so the Mets passively watched the bidding war and then bade him goodbye. In his place, Jorge Polanco was brought in. Polanco didn't have the power bat that Alonso possessed, but being a former middle infielder it was plausible that he could learn to be an above average defensive first baseman and could still deliver enough offense to keep the engine running. But the Mets did not show full commitment to this approach, as they kept Polanco in the back fields for half of the spring training season, and then played him minimal innings after that. A revolving door of players, some of whom did not make the team filled at first. In the end, it looked like Brett Baty was getting more reps than Polanco. Now the Mets begin the season with no one having enough innings of real competitive play to have learned to play this position, leaving one major hole in the defense and another in the strategy.
2) Utility gloves. Some of the slickest fielding players in the Mets organization have left the building. Each of them was considered a defensive plus in the various positions they played. It is not fair to include Luis Guillorme in this statement because he left before "run prevention" was ever uttered. But LuisAngel Acuna was traded, Jett Williams never hit the big league field, and Vidal Brujan was just DFA'ed. Jeff McNeil, although not a "slick fielder", was a jack of all trades that never hurt the team in any position he played. The utility role is now theoretically manned by Brett Baty, who has proven to be not much more than adequate at any of the positions he played previously (2nd, 3rd) and is very much unproven at the new positions he is trying(corner outfield and first base).
3) Bo Bichette. Bichette was knighted as the third baseman of this team, and it was made clear in the early going that he would NOT play short because the team wanted him to focus on learning to excel at third. Three months later, he has been named the backup shortstop to Francisco Lindor. Lindor, who has been an iron man for most of his career, has shown some physical fragility lately, and it may be only a matter of time before he hits the IL. When that happens, we will see an infield with Baty at third, Bichette at short, and an ill-prepared Polanco at first. Is that better than last year??
4) Pache versus Young. Jared Young made the team. Cristian Pache did not. Young is limited to corner outfield play, has average speed, and has a little pop in his bat when he connects. Pache can play all outfield positions, is a legitimate speedster, and sizzled at the plate during the spring training period. If Pache is on the Mets bench, they have a great late-inning defensive replacement at any outfield position and someone who can steal a run for the team. Instead, Young is on the bench, presumably as a late inning pinch hitter who might hit a long ball, but not a defensive replacement.
In my view, these are glaring inconsistencies with the stated strategy. Strategies are meant to remain fairly constant with only slow evolution to be effective. To me, if you can't follow a strategy, you don't have a strategy. I hope I am wrong about this because it is key to a successful season.
The key is Lindor: just 3 for 19 and a walk in spring ball. But he has hit lousy in spring training the last 3 years. And March/April has been one of his weakest “months”.
ReplyDeleteMy plan for him would be to give him early days off vs. lefties, since the hamate spot is more impactful to right hand hitting. In those early lefty games, I’d do Vientos at 3rd, Bichette at short.
But an easy assignment today: Paul Skenes. So I expect Lindor to go 4 for 4.
No dissenting comments? Looks like everyone agrees.
ReplyDeleteI did not agree at all with the Jared Young decision, especially because it meant that none of Melendez, Pache or Brujan could be on the roster, all of whom bring something to the team that Young does not. I would have chosen Brujan because replacing Lindor, as needed, with Bichette, makes the team defense potentially worse at 3 positions, whereas keeping Brujan keeps the team as defensively strong as they can be at two and maybe at all three. Brujan also brings speed similar to Pache. That was an inexcusably bad decision made unavoidably worse by the Mets having to keep Vientos who not only has no trade or defensive value, but is in fact the only true right handed power bat on the team. I view the Young decision as poor risk management. It's as if they were trying to find a replacement for Tauchman who would otherwise have been the 26th player, rather than taking a fresh look at that opening in the light of the team's overall needs. We now have two position players who help better the team positionally not at all, one of whom we have kept because we have a hole of our own digging and need a RH power bat and could not trade if we wanted to and another do to poor decision making approach to an opportunity. I find the Young decision very disappointing. See my post today on what I would have done and why.
ReplyDeleteI would have kept Baty at 3rd base and switch Bichette to 1B. I would say that this team has not improved at 1B. Honestly, I liked last years team better with the exception of the pitching. Excited about Benge but keep thinking about what Jett could have done as the 2B.
ReplyDelete