"There is a difference between being bad and being gifted at losing, and this distinction holds the key to understanding the true magic of the New York Mets."
@enrico_grimazo@GoodFundies@Cecconi140 No one is willing to admit that this org needs to rebuild. He’s trying to do it on the fly while still competing, but that is a high variance proposition as we can see from ‘24 (good variance) and ‘26 (bad variance)
@enrico_grimazo@GoodFundies@Cecconi140 Stearns was handed a very mediocre core that had made one (1) playoff run (barely) and was past their peaks, and one of the worst farm systems in baseball. He should have torn it down to the studs. But then we made a run in ‘24 which nixed that and fucked everyone’s expectations
@enrico_grimazo@GoodFundies@Cecconi140 Eh. Sure they lost value at 1B this year, but not anywhere near enough to make any difference in our season. The Os were already shopping the contract at the deadline. Very glad that’s not us
@GoodFundies@Cecconi140 Pete is the largest actual diff this year… but in general it’s just not that hard to find 2-3 aggregate wins at 1B without taking on that level of downside risk. If Mendoza had just IL’d Polanco and platooned Vientos/JY, it would be a much smaller diff even this year
@GoodFundies@Cecconi140 This is also a false comparison. These players play different positions. Nimmo would be taking innings away from Ewing or Benge. Semien is taking innings from Baty (the horror), is signed for 2 more years not 4, and is probably easier to just cut if we do find someone better
@GoodFundies@Cecconi140 we’re talking about maybe 5 wins when all is said and done this year… a year in which the Mets are 20 games out of a playoff spot… a year which in theory is a “good” surplus value year for Nimmo/Pete that you’re gonna pay for on the backend…
are you seeing the problem?
@GoodFundies@Cecconi140 my guy… per your own screenshot it’s 5.5 wins so far this year, and that’s before you factor in the actual replacements (Nimmo for Ewing, Pete for JY, and Baty for Bichette), which makes it even less. idk how you gonna spin that to 10-15
@GoodFundies ...right. and a 5yr deal for a 31yo unathletic 1B who's already losing bat speed is not a very good bet to be worth it, based on all the available evidence about how that profile typically ages (i.e. limited upside and it can go REALLY bad really fast)
@GoodFundies sure looks like a guy who had marginal bat speed to begin with and it’s now dropped past the point where he can do consistent damage. bb% also a red flag
(should really look at raw speeds not percentiles for analyzing decline… not to mention ev90, swing decisions, and zcon)
@jimallen926@GiraffeNeckMarc this is partially true, and the trade doesn't look great in retrospect
but also sproad and williams are no longer top 100 guys (we traded the right guys at the right time) and peralta had the worst half season of his career (kinda unlucky) and it's a half season later
@A1Layne@mike_petriello 2008-present: out of hand; very precise
pre-2008: varies wildly; very imprecise
pre 2008 tech in theory measures closer to the plate, which is slower. however, the old tech was incredibly imprecise, so there's no way to scale it with any precision (no, nolan did not throw 108)
@GoodFundies at least 90% of this is that we have a history of signing players with very high "about to become dogshit" odds to way too much term (i.e. 30something good-but-not elite players)
@Jolly_Olive if his median outcome was "4 win player for the next 5 years" the mets would obviously keep him and if they didn't it would be a very easy contract to move
unfortunately, that is simply not how aging works
@James_Schiano yes LOLmets for not keeping Pete and Nimmo, if they had, then they'd be only 13 games under .500 (and stuck with 2 terrible contracts for 4 more years)... IDIOTS