Today the Killers list turns the corner — or rather turns to the teams receiving less-than-acceptable production in the outfield corners. While still focusing on teams that meet the loose definition of contenders (Playoff Odds of at least 9.5%), and that have gotten about 0.6 WAR or less out of a position thus far — which prorates to 1.0 WAR over a full season — I have also incorporated our Depth Charts’ rest-of-season WAR projections into the equation for an additional perspective. Sometimes that may suggest that the team will clear the bar by a significant margin, but even so, I’ve included them here because the team’s performance at that spot is worth a look.

As noted previously, some of these situations are more dire than others, particularly when taken in the context of the rest of their roster. I’ve batched the two corners together into one supersized roundup because three of the seven teams below the WAR cutoff for left field also make the list for right field, and because there’s plenty of crossover in play with regards to personnel. The capsules are listed in order of their left field rankings first, while noting those three crossover teams with an asterisk. As always, I don’t expect every team here to go out and track down upgrades before the July 30 deadline, but these are teams to keep an eye on. All statistics are through July 14.

Read the rest of this entry »

Today, we turn our attention to the second base Killers. While still focusing on teams that meet the loose definition of contenders (a .500 record or Playoff Odds of at least 9.5%), and that have gotten about 0.6 WAR or less out of a position thus far — which prorates to 1.0 WAR over a full season — I have also incorporated our Depth Charts’ rest-of-season WAR projections into the equation for an additional perspective. Sometimes that may suggest that the team will clear the bar by a significant margin; as you can see by the table below, four of the six teams listed here project to receive more than a win from their current cast of second base options. Even so, I’ve included them here because the team’s performance at that spot is worth a look, and the incumbent may no longer appear to be the best option.

Particularly in light of those projections, I don’t expect every team to go out and track down an upgrade before the July 30 deadline, though I’ll note that some of the players cited within for their poor performance are themselves change-of-scenery candidates; one team’s problem may be another team’s solution, albeit not necessarily an ideal one. Either way, I’m less concerned with those solutions – many of which have more moving parts involved than a single trade — than I am with the problems. Unless otherwise indicated, all statistics are through Sunday.

Read the rest of this entry »

FanGraphs was at the Futures Game in Arlington on Saturday. In total, 16 pitchers appeared in the seven-inning game. The following are some quick notes on every pitcher who toed the rubber during All-Star weekend’s premier prospect event. Obviously one game isn’t enough on its own to move the needle significantly for any of these guys — they all have a large body of work that can better inform our evaluations — but it’s useful to see whose stuff ticks up when they’re in an environment like the Futures Game and get to let it eat in a shorter burst than they’re accustomed to. Read the rest of this entry »

The National League Wild Card race is wide open, with eight of the league’s 15 teams separated by a grand total of four and a half games in the standings. Five of those teams are currently below .500, their flaws on display on a daily basis — and some of those teams are at a particular disadvantage when it comes to their defenses.

On Wednesday, I investigated what a handful of the major defensive metrics — Defensive Runs Saved, Ultimate Zone Rating, Statcast’s Fielding Run Value (FRV), and our catcher framing metric (hereafter abbreviated as FRM, as it is on our stat pages) — told us about the teams with the best defenses. Some of them appear to be playoff-bound, while others are barely hanging onto hope thanks in part to those defenses, among them the Diamondbacks. Read the rest of this entry »

Baseball is truly a game of goops and gunks. Clubbies prepare pearls with Lena Blackburne Baseball Rubbing Mud. Position players paste their bats with pine tar and pamper their gloves with leather conditioner. Trainers soothe sore muscles with Icy Hot or Tiger Balm, and coaches spray the field with foul streaks of tobacco juice. Between innings, players wolf down caramel-filled stroopwafels specially designed to replenish high-performance athletes while fans slather hot dogs with mustard, ketchup, relish, chili, and blindingly yellow nacho cheese sauce that is, in fact, none of those three things. And of course, pitchers have been known to secret everything from sunscreen to petroleum jelly to Spider Tack on their person. If it defies easy categorization as a solid or a liquid, there’s a place for it at the ballpark.

Rosin sits somewhere in the middle. It’s powdered plant resin that sits on the mound inside not one but two cloth bags, but it doesn’t work its magic in that form. It requires a liquid to coax out its adhesive properties. The only approved liquid is sweat, for which a player might go to their hair or their forearm, but even then, there are limits. David Cone demonstrated the power of rosin after Max Scherzer’s ejection last April. With just a small amount of water and rosin, enough to create only the slightest discoloration on his fingers, Cone could create enough tack to make the baseball defy gravity. Read the rest of this entry »

Willie Mays was the gold standard. We can debate whether he was the greatest baseball player who ever lived or merely on the short list of those with a claim to the title. Based upon both the legend and the statistics, we’re on more solid ground declaring that Mays was the game’s greatest all-around player, accounting for his skill and achievement at the plate, on the bases, and in the field. Combining tremendous power, exceptional speed that factored on both sides of the ball, and preternatural grace afield, the man could do it all on the diamond, and he did it with an endearing, charismatic flair. “The Say Hey Kid” — a nickname bestowed upon him when he was so fresh on the scene that he didn’t know his teammates’ names — projected a youthful exuberance and an innocence that made him an icon.

Mays began his professional career while still in high school, with the Birmingham Black Barons, signing a $250-a-month contract in July 1948, when he was just 17 years old. He was supposed to return to Birmingham this week, one of three Negro Leagues alumni from the 1920-48 period — along with Bill Greason and Ron Teasley — slated to attend a major league game tonight between the Cardinals and Giants at historic Rickwood Field, the country’s oldest professional ballpark. Sadly, Mays passed away two days ago, in an assisted living facility, at the age of 93.

Willie Mays gave this statement to Dusty Baker on Monday, a day before Willie passed, to share with the city of Birmingham: pic.twitter.com/hQ0XmRKsmc

— John Shea (@JohnSheaHey) June 19, 2024

Mays was elected to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 1979. At the time of his death, he was its oldest living member, a distinction he inherited when Tommy Lasorda died on January 7, 2021, and one that now belongs to 90-year-old Luis Aparicio. Read the rest of this entry »

Of all 193 relief pitchers with at least 20 innings pitched this season, exactly three have thrown four distinct types of fastballs a minimum of 20 times each: Reed Garrett, Chris Martin, and Cole Sands. They all have one non-fastball offering, but none of them throw it more than a quarter of the time. Justin Choi wrote recently about the strategic options available to pitchers with more than one fastball, but four? Four whole fastballs? These guys feel like doomsday preppers getting ready for some apocalyptic scenario where money is now worthless and fastballs are the new currency.

But anytime a new strategy pops up in baseball, it’s worth checking to see if the outliers are onto something others should attempt, or if their “one weird trick” to pitching works only for them. Shoot, maybe it doesn’t even work for them all that well. Regardless, we’re gonna get to the bottom of what’s going on with these pitchers and all the fastballs they’re hoarding.

Reed Garrett

Garrett has thrown 34.2 innings for the Mets so far this season, posting a 3.12 ERA and a 3.17 FIP. He’s struck out 37% of the batters he’s faced and walked 12%. His performance this year has earned him an ERA- of 81, firmly better than average. What the averages aren’t telling you is that Garrett started the season with a 0.57 ERA in March and April, a ridiculous run that earned him a full breakdown on his evolution from last season by Ben Clemens on April 23. But that April ERA had to buy new pants after swelling to 6.08 in May. His performance has regressed somewhat in June, settling somewhere between those extremes. The current version of Garrett is probably more representative of what the Mets should expect from him moving forward.

The table below shows a breakdown of Garrett’s pitch repertoire with the usage and a few metrics for evaluating each offering (run value per 100 pitches thrown, xwOBA, Stuff+, and Location+). The two most common fastball types (four-seamers, sinkers) that most pitchers feature at the center of their arsenals are the pitches he throws the least. But the metrics linked to Garrett’s outcomes — either actual outcomes (RV100) or expectations based on the characteristics of the outcomes (xwOBA) — agree with his decision to de-emphasizing those pitches. They like Garrett’s four-seamer the least, even though it has his highest velocity and second best Stuff+. The pitch’s Location+ score reveals its critical flaw: a lack of command. Stuff+, RV100, and xwOBA agree that his sweeper and splitter are his two best pitches. Based on usage, Garrett agrees with that assessment.

His pitches mostly hover around league average in terms of individual characteristics, but the sweeper and splitter are both a tick or two harder than average and generate a bit more spin leading to more horizontal break, which is likely why Stuff+ likes them more than the rest of Garrett’s arsenal.

He makes the most of middling pitches by playing them off one another. The sweeper and cutter mirror the spin direction of the sinker and the splitter. As a result the pitches look similar out of the hand but fork in four different directions as they approach the plate to keep the hitter guessing (see movement plot below). So even if hitters guess the horizontal direction correctly, they’ve still got two similarly spinning pitches that fan out vertically as they approach the plate.

Garrett deploys all of his pitches no matter the handedness of the hitter, but he does vary the flavor of his approach. To lefties, Garrett likes to fill the zone with his cutter and dangle the splitter down and away when looking for a chase. To righties, he keeps the hitter off balance by throwing the sweeper to a variety of locations, but then comes down and inside at varying speeds with the splitter and the sinker.

The flowchart below gives us an idea of Garrett’s sequencing habits. He tends to start hitters with a cutter or sweeper. Once ahead in the count, he’s more likely to play around on the periphery of the zone with his sweeper and splitter, whereas while behind in the count he rolls with the four-seamer and cutter as more zone-friendly options. The wOBA values for plate appearances passing through each given count indicate the approach works well in early counts and with two strikes, but not as well when the count forces him back into the zone, in part because his four-seam command limits his ability to actually hit the zone with that pitch when circumstances demand it.

Here’s a representative example of how hitters respond to Garrett’s two-strike splitter.

Looking at swing metrics by pitch type, each pitch adds a valuable tool to his kit. The splitter is Garrett’s best combo play for inducing swings (56% swing rate) without courting disaster. The pitch owns his best swinging-strike rate (30%) and second lowest hard-hit rate (20%) when batters do connect. He gets batters to swing at 74% of the sinkers he throws in the zone, he uses the sweeper to induce weak contact (17% hard-hit rate), and turns to the cutter to mix things up. The four-seamer is the weak link in the chain so long as it keeps taking the scenic route to the catcher’s mitt.

Chris Martin

Martin has thrown 21.1 innings for the Red Sox in 2024, logging a 4.22 ERA with a 3.90 FIP. He’s struck out 28.2% of the batters he’s faced while walking just 2.4% of them. He has been on the IL since June 5 while proactively seeking help with anxiety.

Again, we’ll start with a synopsis of each pitch he throws according to the value metrics. Stuff+, RV100, and xwOBA all like his splitter best. The pitch is very similar to Garrett’s splitter from a velo/movement/spin perspective, but he doesn’t throw it nearly as much. His four-seamer is his next best pitch by RV100 and xwOBA, but fourth best by Stuff+. However, he locates it well enough to still get results. Martin’s cutter is his consensus third-best pitch, striking a balance between stuff and command to get the job done. Like Garrett, Martin’s non-fastball pitch is a sweeper, but unlike Garrett, he throws it so infrequently that it’s hardly worth discussing.

His pitch characteristics all hover around average, thrown maybe a tick or two harder, but with slightly less spin and therefore less movement. What helps overcome somewhat middling profiles is a distinct release point created by his long levers. Though his delivery is composed of a pretty standard three-quarters-ish arm slot, the arm attached to his 6’8” frame allows him to release the ball several inches higher and farther to his right than other pitchers throwing from a similar slot.

Rather than mirroring the spin on his offerings like Garrett, Martin takes a different approach to cultivating deceit. The puzzle for his hitters is more akin to spotting the difference between two nearly identical photos. All of Martin’s pitches spin in a similar direction, and his four-seamer, sinker, and cutter do so at almost the same spin rates. Where they differ is in the amount of active spin, or the amount of spin contributing to the pitch’s movement. The four-seamer, as one might expect, has the most active spin and the most rise. The sinker has a little less active spin and creates more horizontal break and more drop. The cutter drops in a comparable fashion to the sinker, but refuses to follow his fellow fastballs and break toward the third base side. Then there’s the splitter that spins at a much slower rate and with less active spin, which translates to roughly the same amount of horizontal movement as his four-seamer, but with even more drop than the sinker. Yet another carbon copy, but with a small but crucial edit.

Martin uses the same theory to guide his approach to both righties and lefties: Fill the zone with the primary fastball(s), use one of the secondary fastballs as a threat inside, and pepper the bottom of the zone with splitters. Against right-handers the four-seamer and cutter are the pitches he consistently throws to all parts of the zone and the sinker backs the hitter off the inner half of the plate. Against left-handers, Martin stays away from the sinker, so the cutter becomes the weapon he aims inside, while the four-seamer and the splitter maintain their existing roles.

The job of each fastball is further etched in stone by Martin’s sequencing, visualized below. He starts an overwhelming majority of hitters with the four-seamer or cutter and sticks to those zone-friendly pitches if he falls behind in the count. But if he gets ahead, Martin starts mixing in the splitter and sinker. His results tend to be better if he gets to those splitter/sinker counts, but it’s unclear whether that’s because of the effectiveness of those pitches or because he gets too predictable in unfavorable counts.

The swing metrics indicate Martin’s cutter is his best option for getting swings (55% swing rate) that lead to either strikes (13% swinging-strike rate) or weak contact (27% hard-hit rate). The splitter is his overall best bet for a swinging strike (19%), but when hitters do make contact, it yields the highest hard-hit rate (70%). The sinker is most effective when thrown in the zone because it has the lowest out-of-zone swing rate (18%) and in-zone contact rate (78%) compared to Martin’s other offerings. And avoiding contact is key, since the sinker has the second highest hard-hit rate (67%) of the bunch.

Cole Sands

Sands has pitched 32 innings for the Twins this season. Those innings have amounted to a 4.22 ERA and a 3.30 FIP. His strikeout rate sits at 28% and his walk rate is a measly 3%. Sands’ season trajectory mimics Garrett’s: on a rocket to the moon in April, a crash landing in May, and now back up and cruising at altitude in June. At his peak, Sands was striking out Shohei Ohtani on three pitches, and Minnesota was considering stretching him out to start while managing injuries in the rotation; now he’s settled into a multi-inning relief role.

Digging into Sands’ repertoire via the pitch evaluation metrics, his cutter, curveball, and splitter all clock in right around average according to Stuff+, but RV100 favors the four-seamer and hates the curve and split. Comparing the curveball’s xwOBA (.305) to its wOBA (.372) suggests the pitch’s actual outcomes have been a bit unlucky compared to what’s expected based on the batted ball characteristics, which in turn is likely deflating its RV100. Meanwhile the four-seamer and sinker both have better wOBAs when compared to their xwOBAs, suggesting some good luck has swung their way and their RV100s might be a little full of themselves. Luck doesn’t explain the metrics’ diverging opinions on the splitter, suggesting something is amiss with Sands’ execution. Hopefully, this contradiction will untangle itself as we proceed.

In terms of the movement profile broken down in the table below, Sands, like Garrett, mirrors the spin of his breaking ball relative to the four-seamer, sinker, and splitter in an attempt to disguise their true identities until it’s too late for the hitter to react. And concealing those identities is necessary because, as with the other two pitchers, Sands’ pitch characteristics are far more average than overpowering. The furthest he deviates from average is with his extension, but unfortunately he deviates in the wrong direction. His 5.8-foot extension puts Sands roughly six to eight inches below league average. Releasing the ball farther from home plate gives the hitter more of a chance to identify the pitch’s trajectory, which likely explains the lower Stuff+ scores relative to what Garrett and Martin receive for comparable pitches. And while we’re talking pitch trajectory, the extra couple inches of drop on his splitter relative to an average right-handed offering of the pitch might be too much of a good thing; at times it dives too far, too quickly to really tempt hitters.

How the pitches move relative to one another is basically a hybrid of what we’ve seen so far from Garrett and Martin. The fastballs land on the movement plot in roughly the same orientation as the other two, aside from being stretched more vertically. Sands’ curveball operates similarly to Garrett’s sweeper, just with more drop.

Like Martin, Sands doesn’t throw his sinker to lefties, but beyond that omission, Sands attacks hitters in the exact same manner regardless of handedness. He aims to fill up the zone with his four-seamer, works arm side with the cutter and sinker, and keeps the ball down and/or to the glove side with the splitter and curve.

Sands mostly sticks to the standard sequencing playbook, but he’ll reach for any of his non-splitter offerings to begin a plate appearance. If he gets ahead, expect a heavy mix of splitters and curveballs; if he falls behind, expect him to thrown mostly cutters and four-seamers. His adequate command keeps him competitive, since even after falling behind, the average outcomes remain respectable and in line with the more favorable counts.

The swing metrics suggest Sands’ cutter is his best option for inducing weak contact (51% swing rate, 32% hard-hit rate), the four-seamer has the lowest in-zone contact rate (80%) to pair with the second highest in-zone swing rate (71%), and the curveball is best for forcing swings out of the zone (35%) that lead to either a strike (14% swinging-strike rate) or weak contact (25% hard-hit rate).

***

With the four-fastball approach to relief pitching now fully dissected on the lab table before us, I can’t truly say we’ve discovered the next big thing that pitchers everywhere will be rushing to replicate. Though Garrett, Martin, and Sands are the only three relievers doing this out of almost 200, their approach is not as novel as those numbers suggest. What they’re actually doing is leaning on all of the classic pitching fundamentals: changing the hitter’s eye level, attacking the zone to get ahead in the count and then make the hitter chase, varying speeds, varying locations, keeping the hitter off balance. Most relievers execute these fundamentals using one or two overpowering pitches, or in lieu of dominant stuff, they cobble together a few crafty junk pitches. Garrett, Martin, and Sands pitch as if they were junkballers, but instead of throwing knuckleballs or Bugs Bunny changeups, they take their collection of middling fastballs and deploy them as junkballs. They mix and match movement profiles and velocities so hitters can’t sit on certain pitches or locations. They do all the same stuff every pitcher does; they just dress it up a little different. Which in and of itself is novel enough to still be impactful. After all, 10 Things I Hate About You is a singularly great movie, but it’s also a classic Shakespeare play, just dressed up a little differently.

NEW YORK — In the early going on Friday night, it appeared that Luis Severino would wind up among the rocks at whatever bottom the Mets had found in recent weeks. The 30-year-old righty has been one of the team’s top starters since moving across town following a dismal final season with the Yankees, but facing the Diamondbacks and former teammate Jordan Montgomery, Severino struggled early, surrendering three first-inning runs while burning through 28 pitches. His teammates picked him up, however, and he salvaged a respectable 97-pitch outing that helped the Mets string together their first back-to-back victories in over three weeks.

“A battle for him today, especially the first couple of innings,” said Mets manager Carlos Mendoza while noting that Severino had trouble reaching his usual velocity. “It was a night where he wasn’t at his best and still found a way to go back out for the sixth and kept us in the game.” Severino’s final line score — 5.1 innings, six hits, five runs (four earned), one walk, and four strikeouts — won’t be mistaken for a gem, but just getting that far felt like a major accomplishment given the way his evening began.

The Diamondbacks pounced upon Severino from the game’s first pitch, a 93-mph sinker on the outside edge that Corbin Carroll dumped into left field before taking second on a balk. Severino then hit Ketel Marte in the left leg and surrendered a 102-mph RBI single to Joc Pederson, with Marte taking third. Severino finally recorded his first out by striking out Christian Walker on a low-and-away sweeper, but Pederson stole second on the third strike, then took third when the next batter, Lourdes Gurriel Jr., threaded a 99-mph single through the left side of the infield, scoring Marte. Pederson came home when Jake McCarthy grounded to second base and beat the throw from shortstop Francisco Lindor, putting the Mets in a 3-0 hole before they’d swung a bat. Severino then fell behind Eugenio Suárez 2-0 before battling back and getting him to fly out to right. Read the rest of this entry »

Matt Vierling has been swinging a hot bat with the Detroit Tigers. Over his last 11 games, the 27-year-old third baseman/outfielder is 16-for-41 with four doubles, a triple, four home runs, and 13 RBIs. His slash line over the span is .390/.435/.829 bringing his seasonal mark to a solid .292/.324/.509. While by no means an offensive force, he has nonetheless been an integral part of the lineup. Since being acquired by Detroit from Philadelphia prior to last season as part of the five-player Gregory Soto swap. Vierling has the second-most hits (175) on the team, and a respectable 106 wRC+.

Defensive versatility adds to Vierling’s value — his big-league ledger includes games at 3B, 2B, CF, RF, and LF — and there is a chance that another non-DH position could eventually be added to the list. Given the right circumstances, he might even pitch. It would be familiar territory. Vierling thrived on the mound as a prep, then was a two-way player at the University of Notre Dame from 2016-2018.

A Perfect Game showcase in Minneapolis is a standout memory for the St. Louis, Missouri native. Vierling recalls Carson Kelly’s brother, Parker, being one of his teammates, while Ke’Bryan Hayes and Josh Naylor — “I pitched against him if I remember correctly” — were among his notable opponents. Playing well against that type of talent garnered him attention from colleges and professional scouts alike, and while his bat showed promise, it was the arm that stood out the most. Read the rest of this entry »

Welcome back to Top of the Order, where every Tuesday and Friday I’ll be starting your baseball day with some news, notes, and thoughts about the game we love.

The Mets entered this season caught in the middle of contending and rebuilding, and that was by design. Their strategy during the offseason was to assemble veteran players on short-term contracts who could either help the team make a wild-card push if things went well or flip them at the deadline if the club floundered. And, oh boy, floundered is putting it mildly. After sitting a game above .500 at the end of April, the Mets have posted an abysmal 8-19 (.296) record in May. I didn’t expect to be declaring them as hard sellers on May 31, but that’s pretty much their only viable option at this point unless they turn things around quickly. Shortstop Francisco Lindor acknowledged as much after Wednesday night’s game.

“The front office is going to make decisions no matter what. Whether it’s to add or subtract, whether it’s to focus on the next season or focus on August and September, they’ve got to make decisions,” Lindor said. “We don’t have 100-plus games for that moment, but we do have time to make sure we are above water. I’ve always said stay above the water. Before the All-Star break and before the trade deadline, you’ve got to stay above the water. You can’t have the water be nose deep. I’m not a good swimmer. We’ve got to make sure — we’ve got to find ways to get the water to at least our shoulders because [otherwise] that’s when the decisions come in, [and] it’s the one we don’t want.”

If, indeed, the verdict from the front office is not the one Lindor wants, these are some of the players the Mets could trade away by the July 30 deadline.

The Shiniest Rental

Pete Alonso is more Mercedes-Benz than Rolls-Royce these days, as I’m pretty convinced his best days are already behind him at age 29. He has a 121 wRC+ since the beginning of last season, down from 137 he posted over his first four years. A righty first base-only is a risky proposition in free agency, and his lack of positional flexibility will dampen his trade value as well. He’s undoubtedly an impact bat who lengthens any lineup, and despite his dip in production, he’s still one of the game’s great home run hitters. The thing is, he’s no longer in that upper echelon of dangerous, all-around hitters.

For that reason, along with the fact that he’s on an expiring contract, the Mets shouldn’t expect a package of multiple top prospects for him. I think he’ll get a return closer to the one the Orioles got for Trey Mancini two deadlines ago. The Mets could, of course, make a trade more enticing by paying down some of Alonso’s salary. As it stands, whichever team acquires him will have to pay about $6.8 million for the remainder of the season.

Further complicating things is that the best contenders all have fairly capable first basemen. Every team currently in playoff a position is getting at least league-average offensive production from that position. From my vantage point, Alonso would fit best with the Mariners or Rays, teams that both lack power production and are not getting much from their DHs at the moment: Entering play Thursday, Seattle’s DH wRC+ was of 79; Tampa Bay’s was 85.

Another factor to consider: The Mets may decide that any potential trade return would be less valuable to them than the draft pick compensation they’d receive if Alonso were to decline their qualifying offer. This seems unlikely, though, because the Mets cleared the last luxury tax line last year, so the pick they’d get if Alonso walks in free agency would come after the fourth round of the 2025 draft. If the Mets can’t get a prospect or two worth more than a fourth-round pick for Alonso, they should hold onto him and use those extra two months to work out an extension or try to re-sign him after the season.

Everyone Needs Pitching

The Mets were smart to load up on rental pitching in hopes that those hurlers would bounce back enough to either (a) help lead the Mets to the playoffs or (b) be worth something to someone else in a trade. So far, pretty good results there!

Luis Severino (on a one-year deal worth $13 million) still isn’t dominating as he was back in his peak years of 2017 and 2018, with his strikeout rate up only a point-and-a-half from his horrendous final act with the Yankees last year. But his newfound sinker — now representing 19% of his pitches, per Statcast (3% last year) — has served to deaden the contact against him considerably, with the average exit velocity he’s allowing down 3 mph; his groundball rate is up nearly nine points. The lack of swing-and-miss, and his corresponding reliance on contact, makes him more of a mid-rotation arm than a frontline starter, but he’d clearly be an upgrade for just about any team looking for starting pitching.

Sean Manaea is in a more complicated situation, as his two-year, $28 million contract allows him to opt out after this season. It’s certainly trending that way with a 3.16 ERA (3.46 FIP, 4.20 xERA) in 10 starts, making it an almost certainty that he’ll test free agency this offseason so long as he stays healthy. But that’s a double-edged sword: Teams may be scared to acquire him in the event that he gets hurt or underperforms and they’re saddled with his $13.5 million salary for 2025, and the Mets may market him as a player with over a year of club control left and ask for a more valuable return as a result.

Throwing Darts

I don’t think any of these players would return much in a trade, but considering the Mets acquired a guy who’s now a top-100 prospect for Tommy Pham at last year’s deadline, it’s always worth crossing your fingers and hoping that your pro scouting department comes back with under-the-radar names that you can add to the organization:

• Putting J.D. Martinez in this section feels a little rude given his pedigree, but he’s a DH-only who’s popped just four homers in 30 games (including the go-ahead blast in last night’s 3-2 win over the Diamondbacks) and is striking out a third of the time. The same factors that caused Martinez to sign at the very end of spring training will work against his trade value, too.

• Harrison Bader has played like an ideal bottom-of-the-order bat, with an above-average wRC+, and he actually has reverse splits this year that belie his career norms. As usual, he’s done his best work in the field, with 2 DRS and 4 OAA in center. At absolute minimum, he’d be a perfect fourth outfielder for a contender.

• Adam Ottavino has hit a rough patch, with his ERA soaring from 2.95 to 5.48 over the course of just four appearances in which he allowed seven runs across three innings. Still, he’s struck out opponents at his highest rate since his breakout 2018 season, and his FIP (3.55) and xERA (3.07) portend better results to come.

• Jose Quintana isn’t the contact-suppression king he was last year; he’s already allowed nine homers in 58.2 innings after surrendering just five in 75.2 innings last season. But the guy takes the ball every fifth day, and there’ll be a team willing to give up a lottery-ticket prospect for him, especially if the Mets pay down some of his $4 million-plus that he’ll be owed after the deadline.

• Omar Narváez and Tomás Nido haven’t hit well, and one of them will be DFA’d well before the trade deadline, whenever Francisco Alvarez comes back. The other could, I suppose, be moved in July, though catchers are rarely moved at the deadline.

Cross Them Off The List

Not every rental can always be traded, of course, no matter how extensive the rebuild is. Brooks Raley would’ve been a hot commodity at the deadline, but he’ll be out until sometime next season after undergoing Tommy John surgery this week.

The Mets also have long-term contracts for Lindor, Brandon Nimmo, Edwin Díaz, and Jeff McNeil on the books, but I’d be extremely surprised if any of them are moved. All four are underperforming (and Díaz is currently on the IL with a shoulder impingement), though I still think Lindor, Nimmo, and Díaz can be key parts of the next good Mets team.

Even if the initial reaction to the trades are underwhelming — rentals just don’t return all that much — this should be a formative deadline for the Mets. I don’t expect them to get a Luisangel Acuña– or Drew Gilbert-level prospect, nor do I see their moves signaling a hard reset for 2025 or an expansive rebuild. But as David Stearns and Steve Cohen look to recalibrate and lay a foundation for the future, they’re certainly not going to just sit on their hands and hold onto anybody if the right deal is there.