Giants got cold feet I guess. He's a pro ballplayer at 28 - what could the issue be that would keep you from doing deal?

I really feel like this (total payroll, not Correa's contract) is too much.

Well, at least Cano’s contract will be coming off the books. :-|

I don’t mean to look a gift horse in the mouth, but this team is very mercenary. Takes a while to bond with a team full of imports. ‘99-‘00 team was like that though, and most of us recall that group fondly.

Where does he play? Assuming Lindor at SS, the positions that make the most sense are 2B, where the Mets have NL batting champ returning, and 3B, where I thought the Mets were going to give Baty a chance. I know McNeil has played a lot of different spots over the years. I guess there is the DH position.

I agree with 4 that this team is very mercenary.

*pinches bridge of nose* I see a trade in the Mets near future. Or maybe it's a migraine coming.

Russlan - According to the snippet above he's going to play 3rd.

McNeil will be both the starting second baseman and defacto 4th outfielder. The DH will be vogey but heavy usage by the outfield. That opens 2nd up a lot for one of the Mets utility infielders.

Batty starts in minors and if anyone faulters you can bring him up and make someone a permanent dh.

Escobar gets traded for a reliever

The Mets are now "the Yankees", meaning that if they can't win the World Series with this ####### roster, the narrative will be that their season was a failure. Doesn't matter if they win 130 games in the regular season, they've got to be the last team standing or else.

That said, I admire and respect what they're doing. Can't blame a team for going all out to win.

The Mets still have the same problem they had last year, an old and brittle rotation. The lineup should be bonkers though.

This sucks.

Yeah, it's getting a little ridiculous.

/bitter Braves fan

#10 no way to address that problem when your two best starting pitchers are your oldest. I would have brought back Bassitt but hard to complain going into the season with this roster.

. The Mets still have the same problem they had last year, an old and brittle rotation.

Stating the obvious, they won 101 games last year.

Weird signing. Another SP would have been a much better idea.

Correa has only played SS in MLB, and will move to 3B in New York. I guess this is his ARod moment?

Sort of makes me wonder if the Mets could have gotten anywhere forgoing Nimmo and Correa and offering Judge half a billion dollars.

The Mets are now "the Yankees", meaning that if they can't win the World Series with this ####### roster, the narrative will be that their season was a failure. Doesn't matter if they win 130 games in the regular season, they've got to be the last team standing or else.

I think I disagree. I think the average fan has gotten a drop smarter in terms of the playoffs being a crap shoot. The above average fan definitely realizes the extra round of playoffs makes it extra crapshoot-y. Most importantly, the dodgers hold that narrative of "win or bust" and it will take awhile for that to wear off.

Additionally, the Mets did all this without giving up any of the kids.

If the Mets lose in 23 Mets fans will be fine. So long as Uncle Steve keeps signing guys. If they don't win in the next three years then yes there will be issues

The Mets are now "the Yankees", meaning that if they can't win the World Series with this ####### roster, the narrative will be that their season was a failure. Doesn't matter if they win 130 games in the regular season, they've got to be the last team standing or else.

It doesn't have to be--we can make our own! Of course, there will be the same folks who claim the Mets choked down the stretch last year and that their 101 win season was a failure of some sort. But we don't have to listen to those people. If the Mets win 100+ games this year, they're a great team in my eyes--whether they lose a couple in the vaunted postseason or not.

I don’t mean to look a gift horse in the mouth, but this team is very mercenary. Takes a while to bond with a team full of imports. ‘99-‘00 team was like that though, and most of us recall that group fondly.

On first blush, this sounds ridiculous. However, I remember this feeling too, when the Red Sox went from being a big spender that came in well below the Yankees to being on the same level. It feels weird and it takes an adjustment to get used to it.

Weird signing. Another SP would have been a much better idea.

Target of opportunity.

Bit pricey for a 3B with 22 HR and 64 rbi.

On first blush, this sounds ridiculous. However, I remember this feeling too, when the Red Sox went from being a big spender that came in well below the Yankees to being on the same level. It feels weird and it takes an adjustment to get used to it.

At the end of the day, hard not to like ManRam and Ortiz.

#21 - That was my thought as well. At SS, Correa's yearly stat line ranks right up there with the best shortstops in MLB: Bogaerts, Lindor, Turner, Seager, etc. At 3B though, his numbers are a clear step or two behind the Machado, Arenado, Devers, Jose Ramirez, Austin Riley types.

Ortiz was a cheap acquisition.

At the end of the day, hard not to like ManRam and Ortiz.

As another Red Sox fan I probably wouldn't have cared if the 2004 team was made up of 25 former Yankees, but having seen a few of these things now, yeah ideally you have some fun homegrown guys thrown in with the star acquisitions.

Or just Pedro and Manny and Ortiz, those guys help, too.

I think I disagree. I think the average fan has gotten a drop smarter in terms of the playoffs being a crap shoot.

Of course, the fans are a bit wiser today but Manfred has made it pretty obvious that he only cares about converting the postseason into the NCAA tournament.

How could I forget the mercenary Pedro. Duh. Yeah, the Red Sox were good at getting easy-to-root-for imports.

Target of opportunity.

Hard to view paying $315M to a guy who just failed a physical, and need to switch positions an "opportunity".

If they had gotten Correa at a significant discount, that would make tons of sense. Spending $300M on a player should really always be part of a well thought out plan.

I think the average fan has gotten a drop smarter in terms of the playoffs being a crap shoot.

If you believe that, why do you even want your team to have a $350M payroll? Your odds are just as good at $250M.

At least Correa lasted with the Giants longer than Aaron Judge did.

#21 - That was my thought as well. At SS, Correa's yearly stat line ranks right up there with the best shortstops in MLB: Bogaerts, Lindor, Turner, Seager, etc. At 3B though, his numbers are a clear step or two behind the Machado, Arenado, Devers, Jose Ramirez, Austin Riley types

Dude has almost 13 bWAR over the last two seasons. We'll see how that translates to third, but it's right in the thick of that 3B group--except for Devers, who is way back of the pack. The positional adjustment between third and short is typically about half a win.

The only cap for Steve Cohen is the 40-man roster.

If you believe that, why do you even want your team to have a $350M payroll? Your odds are just as good at $250M.

Disagree. Thanks to MLB devaluating the regular season, either a club aims for 88-92 wins and thinks "crapshoot" or goes balls to the wall to reduce the likelihood of being poisoned by the small sample curse.

Stevie chose the latter.

#31 - I know; I was talking about his traditional numbers relative to his position (which will affect his WAR). His hitting stats will be less impressive at 3B than they were at short.

So all these taxes go into playing player benefits right ? Funding pension, medical etc. there can't be that much needed. I wonder what they do when all those obligations are basically fully funded? I guess this is just a massive revenue sharing exercise. The cheap teams now don't need to pay "fringe" costs anymore - just pure payroll. So it just massively lower their breakeven.

#35 in addition to benefits, money also goes to the "Industry Growth Fund."

I think the average fan has gotten a drop smarter in terms of the playoffs being a crap shoot.

If you believe that, why do you even want your team to have a $350M payroll? Your odds are just as good at $250M.

Because you want your team to have a good regular season, which can still matter to you.

The Mets are now "the Yankees", meaning that if they can't win the World Series with this ####### roster, the narrative will be that their season was a failure. Doesn't matter if they win 130 games in the regular season, they've got to be the last team standing or else.

I think I disagree. I think the average fan has gotten a drop smarter in terms of the playoffs being a crap shoot. The above average fan definitely realizes the extra round of playoffs makes it extra crapshoot-y. Most importantly, the dodgers hold that narrative of "win or bust" and it will take awhile for that to wear off.

Well, it's entirely possible for multiple teams to be trapped under the same narrative of mathematically impossible expectations. At this point the Dodgers, the Mets and the Yankees are all in the same boat.

Additionally, the Mets did all this without giving up any of the kids.

That speaks to their wisdom, but it won't lower the expectations.

If the Mets lose in 23 Mets fans will be fine. So long as Uncle Steve keeps signing guys. If they don't win in the next three years then yes there will be issues.

What we've seen with the Yankees is a wash / rinse / repeat pattern of inflated offseason expectations being fueled by the latest free agent signing(s), followed by a very good / great regular season, but then followed by some other team grabbing the final trophy. At that point the "failure" narrative sets in, but gets forgotten when the next Big Time free agent gets brought into the fold. The cycle then begins once again. We've seen this with the Yankees for a long time, we've seen it recently with the Dodgers, and if the Mets don't win the World Series, don't be surprised if the Mets join the club.

I'm not saying that anyone has to agree with the "failure" narrative, or that it's rational.** But trust me, the narrative will be there.

** If three teams have the same ultimate expectation when only one team out of twelve (or thirty) can win, then obviously rationality and expectations have little common ground.

#31 - I know; I was talking about his traditional numbers relative to his position (which will affect his WAR). His hitting stats will be less impressive at 3B than they were at short.

As 31 points out, it's only a half a win adjustment. Additionally, the reason there's a half win adjustment is because shortstop is harder to play. Moving to 3B should allow him to claw at least some of that half win back with his defense.

I think the WAR hit going from SS to 3B will be quite substantial. The positional average OPS difference seems to be around 50 points, then we have to consider defense. Even if he’s exactly effective at third as he is at short, he’s going to lose value in the adjustment (FG has SS at +7.5, 3B at +2.5). I’d think that would add up to one WAR or more lost, even performing at the same rate.

Edit: I don’t think there’s any reason to assume that a good/great defense shortstop will improve at third. He could as easily be worse. Short may be harder to play, but third is a different skillset. I don’t know Correa well enough to say with any authority how he profiles there though.

Mets are certainly paying a premium, but I think you can at least say now that they look improved for next season. This is going to be interesting in a few years though, then I guess we’ll really see how unlimited a payroll Cohen’s willing to have when he’s paying the backend of Lindor, Correa, Nimmo, etc…

Edit: I don’t think there’s any reason to assume that a good/great defense shortstop will improve at third. He could as easily be worse. Short may be harder to play, but third is a different skillset. I don’t know Correa well enough to say with any authority how he profiles there though.

It seems intuitive to assume that, very broadly, a good SS will be at least as good or better 3B. There are exceptions, of course, and it's going to take time to learn the ins and outs. It's not like he's moving to catcher or the outfield, where he's going to be taking on a different set of responsibilities. He's still going to mostly be fielding grounders and throwing to 1B.

There's a rumor out there that the hang up was who would pay for the physical. Surely that can't be the reason.

The Mets could solve their two SS problem by giving one of them to the Giants (who don't have one).

This is going to be interesting in a few years though, then I guess we’ll really see how unlimited a payroll Cohen’s willing to have when he’s paying the backend of Lindor, Correa, Nimmo, etc…

There is no etc. Those are the long-term deals.

There's a rumor out there that the hang up was who would pay for the physical. Surely that can't be the reason.

You'd think the Giants would spring for the 10k bucks or whatever rather than let a $350MM shortstop walk, but I guess you never know. Also seems like something that would be covered in a CBA, but I have no idea.

This is exciting, but I don't really get it. There is this idea that Correa is a premium bat, but he is just not at that level (as others have noted). As much as the Mets have spent this offseason, prior to this signing, I thought they had done it in a fairly responsible and targeted manner. This is just brute force. Maybe it doesn't matter anymore, but it's hard to get used to as a Mets fan. I don't love it, but it's way better than where we came from.

I think the WAR hit going from SS to 3B will be quite substantial. The positional average OPS difference seems to be around 50 points, then we have to consider defense. Even if he’s exactly effective at third as he is at short, he’s going to lose value in the adjustment (FG has SS at +7.5, 3B at +2.5). I’d think that would add up to one WAR or more lost, even performing at the same rate.

You're doublecounting here. The offensive baseline is the same for all positions ("average"); everything you're talking about is supposed to be captured in the positional adjustment.

41, I agree with the “as good” part. It’s the “better” which would allow him to “claw… back” some of his lost value that I’m not sure is reasonable to expect.

Lots of unknown in this, including the new shift ban. I’ve wondered in general what impact that may have on defensive value metrics and doubly so for someone like Correa who is changing positions now.

I feel like I’m maybe coming off too negatively. Moving Correa obviously doesn’t maximize his value, but dude has a 129 career OPS+ which will play anywhere, and should be a plus defensively. Maybe he won’t be in the top three at his position, but I would think top six. It is a lot of money to pay for that and in a vacuum, it’s not a great deal. But the Mets are obviously in a different position than most other teams now, as hard as that still is for me to believe.

44, “etc” is for future contracts, like Alonso for an obvious one.

47, okay, I guess I thought that the 7.5 to 2.5 was just a defensive adjustment. Because you can be a better hitter for your position relative to another and a defensive position can be inherently more valuable than another due to chances. I guess that’s all baked into that number but intuitively, I would think it would be higher because of the OPS difference between third and short being quite a bit higher than I thought (granted, I was unable to find a clear number, I based that on articles from like 2013 and 2021 where the position difference was both about 50 points, despite big differences in the raw OPS).

@40: This. A-Rod is a recent and obvious example. He was a better SS than he was a 3B (though age and injuries surely account for some of that). Not that he was consistently great at either position (though he had some excellent defensive seasons).

Arod put up 9.4 bdWAR in Texas, and if I use the most optimistic end points in New York of 2004-2011, he put up 4.0 bdWAR. If I use end points before his missed season, 2004-2013, he put up 2.9 bdWAR.

Range at shortstop is quite a different beast than playing 3B.

At 3B though, his numbers are a clear step or two behind the Machado, Arenado, Devers, Jose Ramirez, Austin Riley types.

He has a higher career OPS+ than every one of those guys except for Ramirez, with whom he is tied. He didn't hit well with RISP last season, and Twins leadoff hitters had a .325 OBP, which is why his RBI total was low. That hasn't been an issue throughout his career and he's moving to a team that finished #2 in the league in OBP and got a .379 out of the leadoff spot.

The biggest question with Correa, at least for the near term, is whether he can stay healthy. He should get plenty of chances to drive in runs as long as he can stay on the field.

44, “etc” is for future contracts, like Alonso for an obvious one.

Of course there will always be future contracts. I thought the comment was about the probably unproductive end of the Mets' long-term deals, of which there are 3. The theory is by that time there will be a better pipeline of young players who produce for much less money. It'll either work or it won't.

I don’t mean to look a gift horse in the mouth, but this team is very mercenary.

Yeah. It's hard to be excited about all this. It's like there's no upside. If the team does win a title, it's just expected for turning into the Yankees. If we don't, then we're a laughingstock failure as usual.

44, “etc” is for future contracts, like Alonso for an obvious one.

I don't think the back end of a hypothetical
future Alonso contract is something to worry about now.

Well, my thinking is that these contracts and their unproductive end will overlap. Not hard to see how Alonso’s will match up with the end of the current batch, as well as maybe an Ohtani or resigning Senga… it’s just crazy for me to think about how they could really end up with 200 million a year for marginal players. Maybe the system will produce the prospects or Cohen’s spending will have no limit. It’s just very strange for me to think about, if you’d told me a few years ago this is what the Mets would be looking at… well, I’d probably be just as shocked as I am now!

I’m totally with 53. I’m very uncomfortable with these developments. I’m sure I’ll enjoy it with little difference if the Mets win it all, but these expectations aren’t very fun and a very different mental space from what I’ve been used to basically my entire sports life. And what’s weird for me personally, as also being a Buffalo Bills fan, is that my football team is in a similar boat, being Super Bowl favorites since the season began. Obviously there’s a difference in football with a salary cap and the inherent randomness, but I find it incredible that both of my teams are expected to win now after a near lifetime of the opposite.

At least I have the Sabres?

There's a rumor out there that the hang up was who would pay for the physical. Surely that can't be the reason.

Hundreds of players get team medical exams without that issue coming up, so that is probably someone’s idea of a joke. Players see the team doctor at the club’s expense.

No definitive leak yet on what the medical issue was, although I saw some speculation that it might be a back issue since Correa apparently missed some time for that. Not sure if the Mets already had access to the Giants medical info or are just going with what Boras relayed until they do their own examination. I’m sure the Mets doctors will give it a careful look. What could go wrong?

The Mets could solve their two SS problem by giving one of them to the Giants (who don't have one).

This seems like a good solution. Luis Guillorme for Kyle Harrison coming right up. ;)

@40: This. A-Rod is a recent and obvious example. He was a better SS than he was a 3B (though age and injuries surely account for some of that). Not that he was consistently great at either position (though he had some excellent defensive seasons).
   
50. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: December 21, 2022 at 11:48 AM (#6110356)
Arod put up 9.4 bdWAR in Texas, and if I use the most optimistic end points in New York of 2004-2011, he put up 4.0 bdWAR. If I use end points before his missed season, 2004-2013, he put up 2.9 bdWAR.

Range at shortstop is quite a different beast than playing 3B.

I don't know, maybe being 35 in 2011 had an impact? In 2003 in Texas, he was +8 at SS, in 2004 in NY he was +14. From 2001-2003, he was 0 at SS, from 2004-2006, he was +1 at 3B, despite being older. From the numbers alone, he looks like he was at least as good at 3B as he was at SS.

Edit: Still funny to see ARod winning two gold gloves, getting moved off SS for Jeter, then Jeter winning the next three.

Generally on the move to 3B, I don't see him having a problem matching up with the top 3B. Given his relative youth, he's just as good a hitter as the top 3 mentioned (Machado, Arenado and Ramirez) by OPS+ since his career began (so 2015-2022). He trails them on an Rbat basis, but that's do only to fewer PA's. If you look at his Rbat on a rate basis, he's hit better than all three of them (Rbat/PA). Yes, subtract 5 runs per season on positional adjustment and he falls behind them on WAR, but the guy has been 70 runs above average as a SS. He has the range and arm to be well above average at 3B. Yes, there will be different plays at 3B he'll have to make that he wouldn't at SS, but I don't see that taking him down so much that he's somehow not able to stack up to those guys. My 2 cents anyway.

Among the four major US sports, only baseball can have a Steve Cohen situation happen. For the first time, there is a team owner who genuinely doesn't care what the financial penalties are for spending limitless money. I mean, Cohen will now be paying a $100 million "tax" beyond the actual payroll, bringing the amount he'll spend on big league players in 2023 to over $450m.

This literally cannot happen in any other of the Big Four sports. Jerry Jones or Bob Kraft can spend all the money they want on a stadium, or on coaches, or training facilities, etc. - but they cannot do the equivalent of what Cohen just did with Correa.

When I saw Cohen's quotes today about the signing, and the ~$500 million he is laying out next year, it struck me that (short of an actual salary cap), the most effective way to put some restraint on Cohen or future owners like him is...expanded playoffs.

Look, Cohen's Mets won 101 games last year, then did not even make the World Series. Cohen clearly was unphased by this: Either he thinks the answer is to spend even more money to improve the team, or he simply isn't directly connecting his willingness to spend unprecedented money on the Mets with whether or not they win a title.

As others in this thread have noted, the more you expand the playoffs, the less likely it is a specific team is going to win the World Series in a given year. You can win all the regular-season games you want, and the marginal difference it will make in your likelihood of winning the World Series in that specific year declines beyond a certain point (I'm not sure what that point exactly is, but that curve clearly does bend towards zero additional marginal benefit).

If you've followed Cohen's career, he doesn't seem like somebody who is inclined to show restraint - but if you have enough years of teams winning 87-95 games winning the World Series, relative to teams winning 96+ games, then you've got to believe almost anybody will eventually say, "What's the point of the extra 10 wins a year? Just make the tournament."

But maybe Cohen is a unique case. He reported made $1.7 billion in 2020 alone; he is one of the 35 richest people in America. He has gotten in hot water before legally, come out of it, and just keeps on going with a very public profile. He does not seem phased by much...including an extra $100 million "tax" in 2023. You realize how little money that is for him. It may well be the case that nothing short of a hard cap will do anything.

47, okay, I guess I thought that the 7.5 to 2.5 was just a defensive adjustment. Because you can be a better hitter for your position relative to another and a defensive position can be inherently more valuable than another due to chances. I guess that’s all baked into that number but intuitively, I would think it would be higher because of the OPS difference between third and short being quite a bit higher than I thought (granted, I was unable to find a clear number, I based that on articles from like 2013 and 2021 where the position difference was both about 50 points, despite big differences in the raw OPS).

The difference between SS and 3B is a positional adjustment for WAR's estimate of positional scarcity. Batting runs are based on league average of all positions, it's not calculated by position. Correa has been 145 batting runs better than the average position player in his league since he started his career. Makes sense to use overall average since not everyone plays only one position. You can hover over the column headers at B-R and it will give you a brief explanation of what the categories are and how they are calculated.

What we've seen with the Yankees is a wash / rinse / repeat pattern of inflated offseason expectations being fueled by the latest free agent signing(s), followed by a very good / great regular season, but then followed by some other team grabbing the final trophy. At that point the "failure" narrative sets in, but gets forgotten when the next Big Time free agent gets brought into the fold. The cycle then begins once again. We've seen this with the Yankees for a long time, we've seen it recently with the Dodgers, and if the Mets don't win the World Series, don't be surprised if the Mets join the club.

It would be very difficult to overstate the chasm between Mets history and Yankees history.

In the Mets' first 60 years, they missed the playoffs 51 times (granted, under varying postseason formats). yay, now they are 10 for 61.

playoffs in consecutive years? sure, 1999-2000 and 2015-16.

playoffs in 3 straight years? NEVER.

the Yankees are working on a mere 30 consecutive winning seasons. the Mets "record" in that category is 6 (1985-90, and the last of those was 82-80).

Cohen cash + expanded format means now Mets fans - for the first time franchise history - can expect to play postseason games every October.

if they go 1-1 in the World Series in the next decade with 6 or 7 other postseason appearances, most Mets fans I know will be quite pleased (especially the ones under 40 who have never experienced a Mets parade at the Canyon of Heroes).

It seems like a very risky contract in the long term. Correa's def numbers have gone down this year. And he's lost a lot of speed since 2019 (0.6 ft/sec). Also whatever showed up on the physical, his weird back massage injury, and the shift ban.

DRS has him slightly above avg; OAA slightly below. It's the sudden drop that would make me worry. I guess he has the arm to play 3b given he still gets a lot of baserunner kills. Still if its not my money I would love him on my team.

It seems like a very risky contract in the long term. Correa's def numbers have gone down this year. And he's lost a lot of speed since 2019 (0.6 ft/sec). Also whatever showed up on the physical, his weird back massage injury, and the shift ban.

The biggest issue for me is that even if you give Correa credit for 150 Gs in the COVID year (which you shouldn't do) he's averaged 122.5 games per season from age 20 to 27. That's a huge red flag.

It would be very difficult to overstate the chasm between Mets history and Yankees history.

You're absolutely right about history, but I'm talking about going forward, not looking backward. The Mets' plunge into Instant Success this month has at least matched anything the Yankees have done in any previous single offseason.** Teams don't splurge like that just to raise expectations about gaining a few regular season games on the Braves.

** The closest they came was in 2009, when they added Sabathia, Burnett and Teixeira, and promptly won the World Series. Other than that year, though, their Big Time free agents mostly came along at the rate of one a year.

He does not seem phased by much

It's "fazed", unless you're saying Cohen also owns the USS Enterprise (which would not surprise me in the least).

Among the four major US sports, only baseball can have a Steve Cohen situation happen. For the first time, there is a team owner who genuinely doesn't care what the financial penalties are for spending limitless money. I mean, Cohen will now be paying a $100 million "tax" beyond the actual payroll, bringing the amount he'll spend on big league players in 2023 to over $450m.

This literally cannot happen in any other of the Big Four sports.

This kind of does happen in the NBA, actually. Last season the Warriors payroll was 176m, and they were paying 170m in Tax on top of that (the next-highest team was paying 98m in tax). This season they're paying 189m in payroll and 170m in tax on top - two other teams have joined them in the 100m tax payment club, the Clippers are paying 145 and the Nets are paying 108.

Cohen is definitely doing this to improve the Mets’ chances at a championship, even marginally, but he’s also doing it because he is a die hard Mets fan who is richer than god and it’s more fun when your team is good. He owns the game 6 ball that “gets by Buckner!” for crying out loud.

Cohen is definitely doing this to improve the Mets’ chances at a championship, even marginally, but he’s also doing it because he is a die hard Mets fan who is richer than god and it’s more fun when your team is good. He owns the game 6 ball that “gets by Buckner!” for crying out loud.

Let's not go overboard hyping the latter. The Wilpons were big fans too, remember? And ask any Deadskins fan about Danny Boy?

Positional adjustments in bWAR ... Where Correa "loses" due to the change is in oWAR which is just offense and the positional adjustment. With the same offense then his offensive production, now relative to the average 3B, will drop by about half a win. So he needs to improve by about 5 runs in defense relative to the average 3B vs how well he performed relative to the average SS.

ARod to 3B: You can't tell from the HR totals or ISO and his SBs went up but the impression was that ARod took advantage of the move to third to bulk up a bit (who knows how??), costing him a bit of range.

These things are tough to tell because most SS will be kept at SS until the defense falls off due to age or injury ... which is to say until they are 30 or so. They may or may not do better at 3B (in a relative sense) but any increase in Rfield might be short-lived due to age decline. Guys who are still capable, much less good, SS who switch to 3B are few and far between -- nothing springs to my mind but ARod. John Valentin maybe; Petrocelli maybbe. Even Valentin was already 31 (and I'm not sure his SS Rfield numbers are really believable). Still, by the numbers we have, neither Valentin or Petrocelli made up for the positional hit.

If they had gotten Correa at a significant discount, that would make tons of sense. Spending $300M on a player should really always be part of a well thought out plan.

But no reason to think this wasn't part of the plan. As the excerpt says "Cohen stepped in to do the deal he thought had gotten away from him." That sounds like the Mets had decided that Correa at something like 12/$315 was a good idea but the Giants went higher than the Mets were willing to go. Surely the Mets have been considering whether Correa would be a good addition since ... well, since April 2022 I'd think. I just bought a new amp ... had my eye on it for a few years now but the price was always too high. In November I noticed a place had it on sale at 25% off ... now that was a price I liked. (Probably means a new model is coming but obviously I wouldn't be paying the new price anyway.)

To the extent this wasn't part of the plan, it was probably more in that the original plan might have been "if we can't get Correa at the right price then let's resign Nimmo" (or similar) and now he's decided "Oh WTF I want both" ... which is also kinda how I ended up with the new amp. In my case, Lindor is the one who's moving to the downstairs guest bedroom system or I might just sell him on the used market.

Short may be harder to play, but third is a different skillset

Not really. 3B is SS with less range required. (2B is SS with less arm required.) The reaction time of the average 3B is probably higher than the average SS but you can't be a good SS without an excellent first step and quick hands. And Howard Johnson aside, you never see teams try Pedro Guerrero or Keith Moreland at SS. Of course there are sometimes ideal fits between player and position (Brooks, Schmidt, Arenado, Ozzie, Belanger) and Correa's probably not that guy at 3B (he wasn't at SS). But if we could measure these things, I'd be surprised if his raw tools weren't those of an above-average 3B so give him spring and half a season to learn the position. (If the back injury rumor above is true then all bets are off.)

I was going more off of last year than career hitting numbers (which might have been a mistake), but there's a clear drop in the power numbers (HR, RBI, SLG) from the top shortstops vs the top third basemen.

Top shortstops:

CARLOS CORREA - .291/.366/.467, 22 HR, 64 RBI, 140 OPS+

TREA TURNER - .298/.343/.466, 21 HR, 100 RBI, 121 OPS+

XANDER BOGAERTS - .307/.377/.456, 15 HR, 73 RBI, 131 OPS+

FRANCISCO LINDOR - .270/.339/.449, 26 HR, 107 RBI, 125 OPS+

Top third basemen:

MANNY MACHADO - .298/.366/.531, 32 HR, 102 RBI, 159 OPS+

NOLAN ARENADO - .293/.358/.533, 30 HR, 103 RBI, 154 OPS+

AUSTIN RILEY - .273/.349/.528, 38 HR, 93 RBI, 142 OPS+

RAFAEL DEVERS - .295/.358/.521, 27 HR, 88 RBI, 141 OPS+

JOSE RAMIREZ - .280/.355/.514, 29 HR, 126 RBI, 148 OPS+

Whereas Correa has the highest OPS+ amongst the shortstop group, he'd be last amongst the 3B. My reasoning was that assuming good health (always iffy, of course), Correa's a perennial contender for the Silver Slugger at SS, and I don't think he would be at 3B. Throw in that he's a Gold Glove caliber defender at short and he might not be while learning a new position at third, and I could theoretically see a significant drop in value.

Others have brought up some good points since my initial post though, so maybe that was over simplifying things. Guess we'll see...

Maybe I’m overestimating the importance of better reaction times at third. But again, I tend to think it’s reasonable that Correa will be as good a third baseman as shortstop, just not likely a better one, even less so to make up the positional difference.

As for 60, I think the expanded playoffs have already mitigated what an owner like Cohen can buy. Phillies almost won the World Series as a distant third place team and I doubt this will be an exception. The three and five game rounds have really taken the crapshoot aspect of the postseason to a whole other level.

I have no doubts though that if the Mets win the World Series this year that there will be massive complaining. And only mockery if injuries or ineffectiveness cause them to miss the playoffs entirely.

You could probably argue that having one owner going this far over the threshold could improve competitive balance. Not that it will because the “poor” teams aren’t likely to spend more, but I also don’t think that the Mets signings have inflated the market at all. Someone was going to pay these players roughly the same amounts, apparently more in the case of Correa. All that Cohen has done is marginally increase the chances that one team makes the postseason. The system isn’t really any more broken today than it has been for a long time. And yes, I know people can disagree about the merits of a salary cap but I still tend to favor one if only because as a Mets fan, all of this just feels sort of icky. I mentioned it’s odd for me that the Mets and Bills are expected to win a championship now, but if the Bills don’t, it will be nowhere near the level of toxic conversation that would occur if the Mets don’t. I’d just like to feel that everyone is more or less on the same footing, and it’s up to your intelligence and skill to win big. There’s nothing savvy about this Correa move.

And ask any Deadskins fan about Danny Boy?

Danny Boy is an undercover agent from Dallas whose sole purpose is to destroy the once proud franchise and leave the NFC East for the other three teams to battle over. His fanboy schtick is an obvious pose. Any past or present Redskins / Deadskins / WFT / Commanders fan will tell you the same thing.

I mentioned it’s odd for me that the Mets and Bills are expected to win a championship now, but if the Bills don’t, it will be nowhere near the level of toxic conversation that would occur if the Mets don’t.

That's not really that odd, as stockpiling all-pro talent in the NFL isn't nearly as easy as it is in MLB.

And maybe the Bills were expected to win the Super Bowl prior to the start of the season, but at this point they're just one of four or five teams** with a roughly equal chance of going all the way.

** along with the Eagles, Chiefs, Bengals, and maybe the 49ers. None of those teams really stands out above the others.

the shift ban.

I think in general we over-state this. The shift ban makes the SS's job _easier_. The shift ban makes the 3B's job _easier_. The whole point of the shift is that the SS and 3B weren't doing much against LHB. So the SS had to learn how to play on the other side of 2B or in short RF while still having pretty much the same responsibilities against RHB. The 3B was nearly wasted against most LHB but now had to learn to play a bit of SS and sometimes take the force/DP play at 2B. Now 3B can go back to taking a nap during most LHBs. What I'd like to see (but I think the rule bans) is that the SS switches sides for LHB.

Maybe there were more extreme shifts against RHB than I realized.

The biggest issue for me is that even if you give Correa credit for 150 Gs in the COVID year (which you shouldn't do) he's averaged 122.5 games per season from age 20 to 27. That's a huge red flag.

You are also counting his age 20 rookie season, when he didn't debut until early June as if it was a season in which he missed 63 games. He played 152 games total that year -- that itself increases the average by about 7 games. A "simple but fair" solution in his case is to treat his age 20 (which was a full season by any standard) and 2020 (which was a full season by 2020 standards) as one season and just divide his game total by 7 rather than 8. That puts his "average" at 127 games, not a big differece obviously.

Anyway, yes, from ages 22-24 he missed a lot of games. For ages 25-27 he's missed a pretty typical number of games, maybe a bit light. I point this out all the time -- 131 players reached 502 PA, <4.5 per team. 59 made it to 600. Obviously you'd like Correa to be one of those 60 -- in 2021 he had 640 and last year he had 590. As saber-nerds we like to refer to 650 PA as a "full" season -- 28 players had a full season last year.

These things have been trending down over time but it's not like it's a whole new universe compared with the past. In 1982 (26 teams don't forget) there were 142 qualified players, 80 with 600+ PA, 44 with 650+.

I'm not saying his durability isn't a concern ... although I will say I don't know that we have any good studies on this. For most stats, we use the last 3 seasons to project going forward and over the last 3 years, his durability has been just fine ... but of course one of those is 2020. But for durability it may well be that years 4-6 are also important. Or maybe a combination of PA, dWAR and Rbase/SB/triples (or sprint speed now that we have it) can produce a useful prediction of future durability. But to my knowledge, we don't have useful projections of future playing time.

For what it's worth, ZiPS (not a playing time projection system!!) pegs him for about 580 PA for the next 4-5 years then a gradual (I assume standard) decline from there. It projects 42 WAR over 12 years. Who cares how often he sits if he produces anything close to 42 WAR for $315 M. 500 PA of Correa goes a long way.

Takes a while to bond with a team full of imports. ‘99-‘00 team was like that though, and most of us recall that group fondly.

Not quite as much. I had to look these up.

Edgardo Alfonzo, Rey Ordonez, Jay Payton, Benny Agbayani, Bobby Jones were homegrown.

Piazza, Al Leiter, and John Olerud were acquired by trade-and-extend after their previous teams didn't really want them, and were pretty well seen as Mets.

Mike Hampton, Derek Bell, Glendon Rusch were also acquired in trades, but they weren't the core of the team.

Todd Pratt was a FA, but journeyman filler.

Todd Zeile and Robin Ventura were really the only high profile free-agent signings. They did come across as mercenaries to some extent, but those were short term deals and not nearly as overblown as this offseason looks.

Among the four major US sports, only baseball can have a Steve Cohen situation happen.

Is this true? I don't know all the details of the salary caps of the other sports but my understanding is that salary caps are usually applied over, say, 3 years average. Teams go over the cap all the time then dump players to reset. And how are they peanalized if they violate it -- fines, loss of draft picks? What would happen if a team is willing to pay the price to stay over the cap?

If the number cited earlier is accurate, the Mets are paying a whopping $100 M penalty for 2023. That penalty will only get worse and draft position only get worse going forward if they don't reset which it might not even be possible to do now. What more does the NFL or NBA do in such a case? (I don't know, I'm asking.)

The "Cohen problem" is arguably more a "letting small market owners run the league" problem. Given the revenues, the CBT threshold is ludicrously low and allowing the small market teams to run payrolls of $50-80M while paying them $230+ M out of the common/shared revenue is ludicrous. And god only knows what the MLB league office is supposed to do with an extra $50 M a year in the "industry growth fund" -- good time to own an urban baseball academy I guess.

So I agree that having 2-3 teams running payrolls $100 M above anybody else and about 3 times the average team is not a good idea but neither is allowing the Pirates, Marlins, A's etc. to make a mockery of the other end of the "competitive balance" system.

So yes, maybe a more NBA style "players get 45% of total revenue" system is a viable solution -- I have no problem with that if the revenues can be verified and a sensible method or "payroll balance" exists. I wouldn't be surprised if the MLBPA would be better off with that sort of system but they've never wanted it.

Let's not go overboard hyping the latter. The Wilpons were big fans too, remember?

And when the Wilpons "had" Madoff money, they let Omar sign Pedro, Beltran, Wagner, K-Rod, and trade for Delgado and LoDuca, all within the space of a couple of years. It just turned out they weren't rich enough to own a baseball team. Obviously not this level of spending, but this is unprecedented.

If I can bond with John Lackey I don't think you guys will have much trouble bonding with whoever Cohen's next $300 M signing will be tomorrow as long as you win.

Maybe I’m overestimating the importance of better reaction times at third. But again, I tend to think it’s reasonable that Correa will be as good a third baseman as shortstop, just not likely a better one, even less so to make up the positional difference.

And I think that's reasonable. It really all depends on what Correa's specific skill set is. If his primary advantage over other SSs is superior range then that's not likely to be much of a help at 3B ... and then if his reaction time and arm are more average 3B (or worse) then he'll be a pretty ordinary 3B. If his advantage vs the typical SS is a big arm and a quick first step then he should be a good 3B, probably with better range than the average 3B. (3B get more but SS have plenty of rockets hit at them too ... hands are usually pretty quick and guys without good hands make a lot of errors at SS.)

At that point we get into the Mets' decision-making. In general, you'd hope a team would move him to third because they think he's well-suited to it or at least better-suited to 3B than 2B. And presumably they either much prefer Lindor at SS or they think Correa is easier to move than Lindor or at least think Correa/Lindor/McNeil is better than Lindor/Correa/McNeil or McNeil/Correa/Lindor or Escobar/Lindor/Correa with McNeil in LF or .... Maybe the Giants looked at the medicals, thought "we'll be moving him to 3B in 2 years and we don't think he's worth 12/$365 as a 3B (or we have a young 3B on the way or ...)" while Cohen is happy to pay 12/$315 for a 3B.

Dock him half a win a year and the ZiPS comes in at 36 WAR which I still think the Mets will be happy with. (Sorry, I keep referring to the Giants as 12/$365 ... it was 13/$350, not sure where I came up with $365).

Not quite as much. I had to look these up.

Edgardo Alfonzo, Rey Ordonez, Jay Payton, Benny Agbayani, Bobby Jones were homegrown.

Piazza, Al Leiter, and John Olerud were acquired by trade-and-extend after their previous teams didn't really want them, and were pretty well seen as Mets.

Mike Hampton, Derek Bell, Glendon Rusch were also acquired in trades, but they weren't the core of the team.

Todd Pratt was a FA, but journeyman filler.

Todd Zeile and Robin Ventura were really the only high profile free-agent signings. They did come across as mercenaries to some extent, but those were short term deals and not nearly as overblown as this offseason looks.

That's five homegrown players, including three full-time starting position players (same as 2023--Alonso, McNeil, Nimmo). And only Alfonzo was a true star.

All the other stars were mercenaries (Piazza, Ventura, Zeile, Leiter, Hampton; I'm also thinking of Hersheiser, Benitez (still a recent import then), Rogers (a deadline deal, to be fair, but an important player), Rickey!, and Yoshii. It was a lot). We can quibble about Bobby Jones I guess, but you can see my point. Steve Phillips had a reputation for dealing prospects, and it was well earned.

@57: You joke, but last year Crawford had 0.1 WAR so the Giants would literally be happy to have a replacement level player.

there's a clear drop in the power numbers (HR, RBI, SLG)

RBI is an opportunity number, not a power number.

Just as a for instance, Joey Votto...

In '11, had 29 HR, .531 SLG, and 103 RBI in 719 PA
In '16, had 29 HR, .550 SLG, and 97 RBI in 677 PA
In '15, had 29 HR, .541 SLG, and 80 RBI in 695 PA

Walt: where are you getting the career zips projection for Correa? I googled it but all I got was FG page and an article but no career thing. Thanks.

#82 - Oh I know. I just still like rbi's, batting average, and pitcher wins, even knowing that they're mostly "fun" stats rather than value descriptive ones. ;-)

#77:
NHL - hard cap and floor - your payroll must be between the floor and the cap (you can go 10% over in the offseason, and you can get below in the offseason, but I don't know until when).
NHL has Long-Term Injury Reserve (LTIR), where players on LTIR don't count towards the cap, so some older players are on permanent LTIR. The catch is that teams which start the season with players on LTIR have their seasonal cap equal to their cap figure at the start of the season. NHL has closed loopholes of long contracts and players retiring, the only loophole left is when a player is out for a season, and is ready near the playoffs, he can be activated after the regular season and is not counted towards the cap.

NBA - you can't go over the cap. You have to spend on the payroll at least 95% of the cap over three seasons, or you pay the players association the balance. Of course, the NBA has the Bird rule - you can resign your own player even if you are over the cap. That's how warriors are running some 50% over the cap.
Both NBA and NHL have set structure for rookies, term and amount. Both have term limit on FA contracts (and extensions). NBA has limited maximum salary based on the time in the league and awards, and NHL has the limit at 20% of the cap in the season when the contract is signed.
NHL cap is based on the average, I think NBA is based on the salary figure in that year.

NFL - hard cap. Based on the average. Cap space can be transferred into the next season. Similar as in NBA, over 3 or 4 years you have to spend very close to 100% of the cap (95%+, maybe 98%). The cap can't be circumvented, the charge can be transferred into the future using signing bonuses and such. The cap is equal to the paid salary (and all seasonal bonuses) in that year + the equal share of signing bonuses. NHL allows void years, there was an agreement not to use them before, but practically every team used them during Covid years. For example, you sign a player for 3 years, $45M, pay him $30M in signing bonus, $5M per year, and add two void years, and instead of $15M, $15M, $15M, your cap is $11M, $11M, $11M, $6M, $6M, and he is a FA after the third year. It was needed to avoid massive roster crunch when the cap went down because of Covid.
NHL has fixed salary structure for rookies based on the draft slot.

The Cohen situation is more akin to the premier league/European football and I think the league should think long and hard about letting this go much longer. They may have to agree a hard floor to get a hard cap

If the Met's have all the money in the world why did they let DeGrom walk and more importantly why didn't they snag Judge?

That's not really that odd, as stockpiling all-pro talent in the NFL isn't nearly as easy as it is in MLB.

I just meant for me personally it’s strange for both of my teams to suddenly be expected to win championships when that hasn’t been the case for basically as long as I’ve been an active sports fan. It’s been rare enough for either of them individually, let alone at the same time. Bills obviously haven’t had any expectations prior to the last couple on multiple decades, and the Mets have been considered World Series contenders in like 2000 (maybe?), 2007, and 2016. And neither of them have been the outright betting favorite like they are now (Mets are tied with the Astros right now and the Bills were favorites before the season and many sites still list them as top even now).

Does anyone have a feel for how much The Mets revenue is per year if you total in tickets, merch, tv contract, etc?

For the first time, there is a team owner who genuinely doesn't care what the financial penalties are for spending limitless money.

That might be an overstatement. Cohen is certainly willing to spend, but it remains to be seen what his limits may be. Prior to the Correa signing, the Mets retained some of their own free agents (Diaz & Nimmo most notably) at increased cost while also paying more to replace their free agents who left (deGrom, Walker, Bassitt most notably). But Cohen didn’t go after Aaron Judge, try to corner the market on premier shortstops to prevent rivals from improving, or pursue every top free agent. Correa fell into the Mets lap once the Giants balked, but I’m not sure that means the Mets have no limits rather than very high limits. We know that Cohen will go to a ~ $380M payroll for at least 1 year, with an additional ~ $100M+ going to the competitive balance tax. That’s certainly a lot of money, but we don’t actually know what he’ll do next year.

If the Mets have all the money in the world why did they let DeGrom walk and more importantly why didn't they snag Judge?

I prefer the Verlander signing to the deGrom one, based on contracts.
and I'm not convinced they could have pulled Judge away from The Bronx (or SF) for any price whatsoever.

I was going more off of last year than career hitting numbers (which might have been a mistake), but there's a clear drop in the power numbers (HR, RBI, SLG) from the top shortstops vs the top third basemen.

Whereas Correa has the highest OPS+ amongst the shortstop group, he'd be last amongst the 3B.

One year is probably not a fair way to assess though, and there's very good reasons to use adjusted stats for evaluating hitting rather than HR, RBI, SLG (I see you acknowledged this above, so not harping at you just adding context for what's to follow). Looking at 2019-2022 he would be at 130 OPS+, and the top 3B in those seasons were 138, 137, 136, 136, 131, 130. Ub a pack just behind the top 4 with the next 2, at least I don't differentiate between a point or 2 of OPS+ over a time span like that. Even for the 2022 season you put up I wouldn't say he was "last" at 3B. His 140 OPS+ is not really different than Riley and Devers at 142 and 141. It's just not that fine of a measure.

Yeah, he's further down the list on counting stats, but that's in part due to less playing time. I'd say that's the concern for him rather than performance, it's health. RBI we all know are teammate dependent, and batting order position plays a role as well. Correa spent a bit over 78% of his time batting 2nd, which limits RBI opportunities. Machado hit 3rd 77% of the time, Arendado 74% batting 4th and the remainder batting 3rd, Ramirez hit exclusively in the 3rd position. Put him into the 3 hole behind McNeil and Lindor and I'm sure he'll have more RBI than 2022.

Anyway, as you said, lots of good takes here, and it will be fun to watch him and see how it plays out.

[90]. You also knew that the Mets’ payroll limit was 288MM because they couldn’t afford to keep their “best player” Jacob deGrom.

Nobody is asserting that there is literally no limit to how much the guy will spend on payroll. He’s willing to spend way more than anyone else. Is 500 million (including CBT) not enough for you?

Regarding Correa and whether he'll be able to handle third base, in the 2017 WBC Puerto Rico had Baez, Correa and Lindor all on the team and in the starting lineup. Baez was the 2B, Lindor was the SS and Correa was the 3B. From what I remember watching those games, Correa handled the position well. That was nearly six years ago so no telling how aging and injuries since then may impact his moving to third now, but at least for anyone wondering how Correa would do moving to 3B there is some precedent of him playing the position and doing it well.

Nobody is asserting that there is literally no limit to how much the guy will spend on payroll.

Some have said exactly that, most recently in #60, which I even quoted in #90. How’d you miss that, or the similar references to ‘unlimited resources’ in prior threads? Are there new definitions of “unlimited” & “limitless” that I’ve missed?

[95] Ok, you win the argument—Steve Cohen does not literally have infinity dollars. Buy yourself a beer to celebrate.

The soft NBA cap allows for a pretty big difference between spending. You hit high enough penalties that Michael Jordan or the Grizzlies owners really can't afford to run huge payrolls while it's nothing to Joe Lacob.

Headline spotted on MLB TV just before the top of the hour:

ARE THE METS THE NEW EVIL EMPIRE?

@96: My grandson collected sticks in the park today and sold them to me for infinity dollars. So I don't have infinity dollars either.

The biggest issue for me is that even if you give Correa credit for 150 Gs in the COVID year (which you shouldn't do) he's averaged 122.5 games per season from age 20 to 27. That's a huge red flag.

To be clear, I fully agree re. 2020, but if we're including that season, then this decade:
2020: 58 out of 60 games
2021: 148 out of 162 games
2022: 136 out of 162 games, and part of that was an 8 game covid IL stint.

That'd 342 games out of a possible 384. Correa's played about ~89% of the time, or 144 games per 162. Per chance, 144 is exactly what Correa would have played had he not had covid this year (and assuming he didn't get hurt otherwise.)

Correa certain has an elevated risk profile and I'm certain there's at least a yellow flag involving Correa's medicals and the old leg injury (ligament damage? potential arthritis?) that seems to have scared off SFG. However, Minnesota was willing to go 10/290 and they don't have the resources to absorb bad back end years quite so easily. So... I'll worry about that bridge when the Mets cross it.