In Part 1 of this series, we argued that the Mets do not have an ambition problem. They have an execution problem.
In Part 2, we examined how slow starts create a pressure-amplification cycle that makes every season feel harder than it needs to be.
That naturally raises the next question:
How do successful organizations avoid allowing pressure to consume them?
No franchise provides a better case study than the Yankees.
Because while the Yankees have won 27 World Series championships, they have also spent the last sixteen-plus years failing to win one.
And yet they remain one of the most stable organizations in professional sports.
That isn't an accident.
It's an advantage.
The Yankees' Greatest Advantage Isn't Their Payroll
When people talk about the Yankees, they usually start with money.
That's understandable.
The Yankees have spent aggressively for decades.
But money alone doesn't explain what separates them from most organizations.
The Mets spend aggressively.
The Phillies spend aggressively.
The Padres spend aggressively.
Several organizations now operate with payrolls that rival the Yankees.
Yet none possess what may be the Yankees' most valuable asset: Trust.
Not fan trust.
Organizational trust.
The belief that even when things go wrong, the organization knows where it's going.
That belief has been built over generations.
And it changes everything.
The Yankees Haven't Won Nearly As Much As People Think
This may sound strange to Mets fans, but the modern Yankees are not a dynasty.
They haven't won a World Series since 2009.
Since then, they've experienced:
painful playoff losses
disappointing seasons
failed free-agent signings
aging roster cycles
prospect misses
managerial controversies
front-office criticism
Yet through all of it, one thing has remained remarkably constant:
Nobody seriously questions whether the Yankees are a legitimate baseball organization.
Nobody questions whether ownership is committed.
Nobody questions whether they expect to contend.
Nobody questions whether elite players want to play there.
The pressure is real.
The doubt is limited.
That's an important distinction.
Stability Is The Real Advantage
The Yankees have spent the last quarter-century building something every organization wants and very few achieve:
Stability.
Since the late 1990s, the Yankees have remained remarkably consistent in who they are.
Different players.
Different managers.
Different executives.
Different competitive cycles.
The organization itself remains recognizable.
The standards remain recognizable.
The expectations remain recognizable.
The identity remains recognizable.
That consistency creates confidence.
Confidence creates trust.
Trust creates stability.
And stability helps organizations survive difficult periods without losing their direction.
Compare That To The Mets
One of the defining characteristics of the Mets over the last forty years has been: Change.
Different ownership groups.
Different front offices.
Different baseball philosophies.
Different rebuilding plans.
Different timelines.
Different promises.
Different visions.
When disappointment arrives, the organization often responds with another reset.
The Yankees typically respond with adjustments.
That distinction matters.
One approach reinforces stability.
The other reinforces uncertainty.
The Yankees And Mets Don't Experience The Same New York
This is perhaps the most misunderstood dynamic in baseball.
The Yankees and Mets share a city.
They do not share the same environment.
When the Yankees struggle, the conversation usually becomes:
"How do they fix this?"
When the Mets struggle, the conversation often becomes:
"Are we doing this again?"
One assumes competence.
The other questions it.
That's what decades of accumulated trust buy you.
The Yankees begin every season with the benefit of the doubt.
The Mets are still trying to earn it.
The Cohen Era Changed The Landscape
When Steve Cohen purchased the Mets, many people assumed New York baseball would fundamentally change.
For the first time, the Mets had an owner capable of matching or exceeding the Yankees financially.
Many expected the Yankees' advantage to erode.
Instead, something interesting happened.
The Yankees largely remained the Yankees.
They continued competing.
They continued reaching the postseason.
They reached the World Series in 2024.
They continued operating with the same confidence and stability that had defined them for decades.
Why?
Because their advantage was never just money.
Money was only one layer.
Underneath sat trust.
Continuity.
Identity.
Expectations.
Organizational confidence.
Those advantages cannot be purchased.
They must be earned.
What The Mets Should Learn
The lesson here is not that the Mets should try to become the Yankees.
They can't.
No organization can replicate a century of history.
But they can learn from what the Yankees built.
The Yankees did not eliminate pressure.
Pressure is permanent in New York.
Pressure is permanent when expectations are high.
Pressure is permanent when championships are the goal.
What the Yankees learned was how to carry it.
How to absorb criticism without abandoning the plan.
How to endure disappointment without questioning their identity.
How to remain stable when the environment becomes unstable.
That's the real advantage.
And it may be one of the most important gaps the Mets still need to close.
Because before an organization can become a consistent winner, it must first become consistently itself.
Part 3 Thesis
The Yankees did not eliminate pressure.
They learned how to carry it.
Decades of trust, stability, and organizational consistency allow them to absorb adversity without questioning who they are every time something goes wrong.
What We've Learned So Far
Part 1: The Mets do not have an ambition problem. They have an execution problem.
Part 2: The Mets' slow-start problem is not a standings problem. It is a pressure-amplification problem.
Part 3: The Yankees did not eliminate pressure. They learned how to carry it.
Next: Part 4 – The Braves Built a Baseball Machine
If the Yankees show how organizations survive pressure, the Braves show how organizations survive something equally dangerous: randomness. Injuries, free agency, prospect failures, and roster turnover are unavoidable. The Braves keep winning because they've built a system capable of replacing what they lose faster than most organizations can.
Outstanding work RVH! I particularly liked the line, "absorb criticism without abandoning the plan". Very difficult to do, but possible with enough confidence in your vision.
ReplyDeletePaul, it is instructive to step back & think about why the Mets perform so differently from the Yankees - virtually all the time. Even when the Mets play well, it is the exception - not the rule.
DeleteSteve Cohen might have been better to have just tore everything down & announce a total organizational rebuild when he acquired them (vs declare a quick turn-around) & built them the right way - but he didn’t have his permanent leadership team & the core was still young enough to potentially augment while the next generation infrastructure was put in place. Plus, everyone was so fatigued from the Wilpons, it was virtually impossible to tear everything down.
Not a simple or straight forward path forward for a NYC team.
The upshot, look at the Knocks - after so much losing & incompetence, they are now the talk of the town.
The Mets need to could success consistently to earn trust.
Unfortunately, they have taken a big step backwards this year.
Great analysis. They also do my mantra: “ drift, power arms, draft power bats”. Most draftees will fail. But by drafting power hitters, they ended up with Judge and Rice. Two incredible cornerstones, or at least one so far, and another one that looks like he may become the second cornerstone of power.
ReplyDeleteThe Mets buy their cornerstones (Soto, Lindor) the Yankees develop (judge, rice)
DeleteExcellent analysis. And parts of it generalizable. For example, the Giants/Jets; the Knicks/Nets. One organization typically understands who they are, what their goals are, how they carry themselves, etc. The other can appear adolescent by comparison, grasping at straws, uncertain, transitory. The Knicks lost the plot for a while as have the Rangers. What they share in common is Dolan.
ReplyDeleteI am hopeful about the Nets, but not exactly sure why. Last year's 5 first round picks were hardly used optimally -- which is an understatement.
What I'd like the Mets to do is at the end of the season declare that that the start of the offseason is the first day in the new era of the Mets, and to lay out and share a self-conception, an identity, a set of goals, an explanation of the plan moving forward, a commitment to it, an argument for it. And a little bit of self awareness about how they have not responded to teh opportunity that new ownership had given them to start from scratch, to develop and build an organization capable of staying the course. They tried to change on the fly and ended up wasted resources, rather than building a foundation. Chasing outcomes, rather than developiing processes. Losing fans' good will rather than gaining or earning trust. And that all ends now. No timelines, no Elon Musk like promises designed to increase valuation or expectations. Just a commitment to the fans, the city and to one another. There is a path. There will be bumps. But we will not be deterred, by others, or, more importantly, by our own self-inflicted mistakes, whether born of overenthusiasm, ignorance or self-deception. Clear minded, and clearly committed.
Would be great for them to make this move after the season. Really have to see what is still standing amidst the ashes of this season at the mlb & minor league levels.
Delete