Thanks to everyone who asked questions for today’s off-day mailbag! I especially appreciate the slightly unhinged ones.
Speaking of which, since I do not have an answer to the question of why God hates the Mets (though after a few months here, I must admit I can’t dispute the premise), I figured I would focus on some slightly less existential ones for now. Here’s what I’ve got…
“As Gary and Keith discussed, why not bring up [A.J.] Ewing and [Nick Morabito]? At least that gives me a look at a possible future. What good are retreads Slater and Ibanez?” – @FAN5577
I think the main concern with bringing up either of those guys is rushing them: Morabito has only been in Triple-A since Opening Day, and Ewing only has 12 games there (though he is hitting .326 with an .827 OPS, so he seems to have adjusted quickly). Their numbers are good, yes. But as we saw with Carson Benge early in the year, the jump from Triple-A pitching to major league pitching is substantial and requires time for adjustment.
The risk in calling up Ewing and/or Morabito would be that they are called upon to help a struggling team, find themselves unable to do so, and need to be sent back down with less confidence as the big-league team continues to flounder. Now, of course, they could also adjust quickly. They could thrive. But having watched the Nationals and Orioles thrust young players into key roles out of need over the last few years – or even watched the way the Red Sox have struggled counting on young guys to make leaps for them this year -- I can say that relying on young players to fix things is a risk to the franchise in the present and the future.
Still, to your point, calling up one or both of those guys at least ensures that more at-bats on this struggling Mets team will go to players who are likely to be part of good Mets teams to come. Austin Slater, Andy Ibañez, Vidal Brujan and whoever else they funnel into these spots are not the answer now or in the future. They are Band-Aids. And I think one can argue they should be ripped off in favor of more substantial roster interventions.
But more substantial roster intervention would require a shift in posture from David Stearns and his front office, who, to this point, have preached patience with a historically expensive roster. If they suddenly decide that the Mets’ slow start means they should prioritize the future over success this year, then yes, calling those players up makes sense. But it does not seem the front office is there yet. And if it gets to the point of surrender, calling up young players will be the least significant move it will probably make between now and the trade deadline.
“Is there anything to point to in spring training or otherwise that might help explain why the team is so impacted by significant injuries so early this year? Or is it just bad luck?” – Fir Douglass on BlueSky
I think the Mets are so impacted by injuries because they built their roster around a few players who have a history of injury. Period. End of story. Stearns took a risk this winter: As part of his roster remodel, he bet that the Mets could keep Jorge Polanco and Luis Robert Jr. healthier than any of their previous teams ever had. Even with careful handling in spring training and beyond, they couldn’t. Robert’s back has not yet allowed him to do baseball activities. Polanco’s bursitis lingers, flaring up seemingly whenever he threatens to make progress, and is not the kind of injury that will simply go away.
Juan Soto, I think, is pure bad luck. He has so little history of injury and returned so quickly that his calf issue seems to be a blip. As for Francisco Lindor, I think the Mets might have to confront a new reality there: Between the back issue at the end of last season, his elbow cleanup in October, the hamate bone break in spring training, and now the calf injury, the 32-year-old is no longer as invincible as the guy who has played at least 158 games in six of his 12 seasons (and all 60 during the Covid campaign).
Ronny Mauricio, Mike Tauchman,and Jared Young seem to fall more in the bad luck category. But if it weren’t for the injuries to the players they were needed to replace, their injuries would not be substantial enough to derail the Mets like the others.
No one can predict injuries. Every player expects to be healthy. But I think it is the job of the front office to make sure their team is not counting on players to be healthier than they have ever been, and the Mets look like victims of their own optimism so far.
“How can Cohen justify leaving Stearns in his role? He created this mess of a roster. He can’t be trusted to fix it, can he?” -- @Big_John1906
Everything I have heard about Steve Cohen’s stance during the last few weeks is that it is largely one of patience. Stearns would not have told MLB.com he is not firing Carlos Mendoza had Cohen not ok’ed the message. And Cohen does not have a history of dramatic reactivity.
That being said, Cohen knew what he was doing when he told reporters in spring training that he is annoyed that his team has not won regularly during his tenure. He was not bloviating when he said the Mets “have to make the playoffs.” With a roster as expensive as his, that standard seems more than fair.
All of which is to say, I think Cohen gives Stearns a chance to fix this between now and the end of the season. If they miss the playoffs, I do not think he will get more chances beyond that.
“If you were Stearns, what would you do in this situation?” – Brian Bardin on BlueSky
I have thought about this a lot, and I am aware there are always things we don’t know about why some moves have been made and not others. For example, while I have heard the Mets are in contact with teams about potentially moving a pitcher for help, I do not know exactly what offers they have had or considered, so exactly what kind of roster shakeup is available to them is not entirely clear to me.
Still, the first thing I would do is go to Cohen and say, do you want me to try to save this season at any cost, or do you want me to operate with an eye toward the future. If he says the former, I would take advantage of my financial flexibility and pursue a major trade for a big contract that might bring in a new veteran presence and might also bring in some kind of bullpen help or starting depth if I shouldered enough of the money.
There are several veterans around the sport who look uncomfortable with their current teams. Rafael Devers looks hapless with the frustrated San Francisco Giants. Trevor Story is struggling, even as he is vocally frustrated with Red Sox management: Could the Mets pair a deal for him and his contract while grabbing an outfielder from Boston’s longstanding logjam? The Orioles could use some infield depth, and while the Mets might not have it to offer, perhaps some kind of mutual shakeup is possible there. If that sounds like throwing good money after bad, it might be. But if the whole season is going to be bad money anyway, might as well see if a fresh start for a player with a strong track record can help revive him and the Mets at once.
Mostly, I would hunt for a first baseman who can hit for power. There are plenty of them around and securing one would not eliminate Polanco’s usefulness when and if he is healthy. Polanco, famously, has never been a full-time first baseman anyway. Bumping him into more of a utility role deepens the team immediately.
Absent options there, I would make clear that a $400 million-dollar roster is not a place to experiment, but rather a place where every spot is earned.
For example: Sean Manaea is neither starter nor effective short reliever. The Mets do not need a long reliever, since they have Tobias Myers. Keeping Manaea on the roster means working around him when the only thing the Mets should be worried about is winning games.
Besides, it does not seem fair to Manaea, who simply does not look right. When he is right, his velocity is better and his stuff is sharper. Whatever he and the team insist about his health, he has been off since spring training, throwing in the high 80s. I would see if the loose bodies he decided not to get surgically removed are still affecting that elbow, and I would suggest he remove them. He is not helpful in the bullpen as is, and the Mets need as many effective relievers as they can get. And his best chance at an effective future is likely a total physical reset.
I would also be decisive about Kodai Senga’s future. The veteran right-hander threw a bullpen this week, which means he is starting to build his way back from the lumbar spine inflammation that landed him on the injured list after several bad outings. But rosters paid nearly $400 million should not be proving grounds, and Senga has not proven he is an asset. Perhaps he could use a fresh start elsewhere. Perhaps he and the Mets have both needed one for quite some time.
Speaking of which, I would also stop patching holes with veterans trying to reestablish themselves. Tommy Pham,Slater, and the rest have been solid players throughout their careers. But they are not hitting well now, and the Mets do not have enough at-bats to give them to allow them to figure things out while playing in games the Mets must win to save their season. I would call up whichever prospects (Morabito, Ewing, Ryan Clifford) I think are most ready and let them prove they cannot handle it until injured veterans come back. The playing time they need is available in the big leagues now. I think I would let them take it.
And finally, I would tell the entire lineup, top to bottom, to take more pitches. I know the Mets are built around aggressive hitters. But that aggressiveness has not yielded good results. They are not stringing enough hits together to create consistent offense, so they need to find ways to get men on base. No more first-pitch outs from the bottom of the order down a run. If the Mets are built around hitters who cannot work the count and succeed offensively, they need to be built around different hitters. Seeing pitches does not have to come at the expense of making contact, and seeing pitches is the most proven recipe for success this sport has ever had.
Kurt Helin
