Mariners, Mets Choose Opposite Paths
You probably don’t need me to remind you of this, but, in the 2018 season, the Mariners won a dozen more games than the Mets. The Mariners, for some time, felt ticketed for the playoffs, and they topped out at 24 games over .500. The Mets were 10 games over .500 in the middle of April, but they were under by the first day of June. By early August they were 46-65. The Mets started strong, and they finished strong, but everything in the middle was a catastrophe, and the overall season was bad. The Mariners won. The Mets didn’t. Those are the facts.
Of course, the Mariners did overachieve. According to BaseRuns, the Mariners were only four games better, by underlying performance. The early offseason projections put both these clubs right around average. And yet, despite that similarity, the organizations are veering away from one another. As of a short while ago, the worst-kept secret in baseball is reportedly official. No more hurdles. The Mariners and Mets have agreed to a blockbuster, with the Mets setting their sights on winning in 2019 while the Mariners continue to tear down.
Mets get:
- Edwin Diaz
- Robinson Cano
- $20 million(ish)
Mariners get:
As has been talked about elsewhere, it’s helpful to think of this as two big trades in one. We’ll get to that a little later. What’s immediately clear is that the Mariners are doing more than just “re-imagining” their roster. Moving Diaz puts them in rebuild territory. The Mets, meanwhile, are making a statement acquisition, declaring their intent to win right away under new GM Brodie Van Wagenen. Cano provides short-term help in the infield. Diaz is one of the best closers on the planet. Name value aside, Diaz is the prize in this one, and how he goes will determine how the Mets — and baseball — feel about this decision down the road.
This is a trade involving a superstar. This is a trade involving a high-level reliever. This is a trade involving good prospects, and this is a trade involving the Mets. Everything about this is asking for, begging for, screaming for some manner of hot take. Like everyone else, I’ve been thinking about this for days. I haven’t arrived at a hot take. It’s unquestionably an *interesting* trade, but I’m not convinced it’s particularly lopsided on either end. I think there’s a lot left to figure out, and I don’t know how the Van Wagenen plan will come together over the coming months, but this move doesn’t feel regrettable. It could become regrettable, but based on the information today, fans on both sides have expressed some disappointment. That’s one measure of an even move.
Back to the idea of this being two moves in one. Obviously, this requires taking a few liberties, and one part doesn’t entirely work without the other, but you can think of half of this as Cano and $20 million for Bruce and Swarzak. Cano is due $120 million over the next five years. The additional money pays down a sixth of that. Bruce and Swarzak are major-league players, and they might contribute something, somewhere in 2019, but they’re effectively in here as further salary relief. Combined, they’re due about $36.5 million over the next two years. That means the Mets are getting five years of Cano for roughly $63.5 million. Just about half of the actual commitment. This isn’t the first time players have been used as money, and it won’t be the last.
The other half, therefore, would be Diaz for Kelenic, Dunn, and Bautista. Again, that’s not exactly right, because the Mariners might feel like the Mets are providing additional value by eating more of Cano’s deal than the Mariners would’ve otherwise expected. Had the Mariners traded Diaz alone, perhaps he could’ve fetched a slightly stronger return. Every team in baseball would love to have Edwin Diaz. There’s been criticism that the Mariners hurt themselves by insisting Diaz be packaged with a bad contract, but there are still good prospects coming back. Eric Longenhagen just wrote about them Saturday, and you should read what he said.
It’s hard to know exactly where to go from here, so let’s turn our attention to the household name. The centerpiece of the trade is Diaz. The player the Mets are most excited to get is Diaz. The familiar name is Cano. As much as Cano is being included so that the Mariners can be rid of his contract, it’s important to understand that Cano can still play at a high level, even though he’s 36 years old. Last season, he played at a six-win pace. Statcast loved what he did at the plate. The talk about Cano being a first baseman or a DH ignores that he continues to fare well at second base in both DRS and UZR. Steamer projects Cano for about 3.0 WAR. That’s good! Cano is still good. He’s not just a pure salary dump.
On the other hand, there is the age part. For a quick analysis, I went back to 1974 and looked for position players who, like Cano, were really good between the ages of 33 and 35. Here’s how the following five years each played out:
Still good at 36. That’s in line with Cano’s Steamer projection. Still startable at 37. Things get shaky by 38, and they don’t improve from there. Very obviously, every player is unique, and Cano will have his own individual aging experience, but based on the history, the Mets should count on about two more productive seasons. Maybe two and a half. The back end will probably be ugly, because the back end is almost always ugly.
Eventually, Cano will be a bench player. For now, there’s concern he just blocks the surprisingly exciting Jeff McNeil. I’m not actually worried about that. Rather, I think this is a good thing for the Mets’ depth, which is something they’ve lacked in recent seasons. The roster is going to change further, but today, McNeil offers support at a variety of positions, including second and third. That means that, through Cano, the Mets get additional coverage at first, in case their younger options aren’t ready or able to help. You’ll see what kind of contract Marwin Gonzalez gets as a free agent. McNeil might kind of be the Mets’ own Marwin Gonzalez, albeit less able to play short. It’s important to have capable reinforcements at the ready.
Diaz is sensational. Diaz should give the Mets something they didn’t have. He throws a million miles per hour, and he just struck out 44% of his opponents, plus he’s not yet 25, and he has another four years of team control. This is where the real value is — Diaz is cheap, but if he were a free agent, he might look for $80 – 90 million. All that Mariners overachieving in 2018 was due in large part to their shutdown closer. The Mets are getting a weapon. Diaz is coming off one of the best relief seasons in recent memory.
For another quick study, I examined recent history for relief seasons worth at least 3 WAR. That’s a mighty high bar to clear, and between 1998 – 2017, there were just 33 such seasons. The following year, by average or median, the relievers gave back about 40% of their value. This is important to get: Diaz was great, and Diaz is great, but there’s a good chance he peaked. The Mets can’t expect him to just replicate what he did.
Still, Diaz should be a quality reliever for however long he’s healthy. If the 2019 Mets are a bust, but if Diaz pitches well, he could be flipped for a prospect return. I think on some gut level there exists the thought that, health-wise, Diaz is a ticking time bomb, but there’s no way I know of to back that up objectively. All pitchers are risks, and I can’t demonstrate that Diaz’s own risk level is elevated. Aroldis Chapman hasn’t been horribly injured. Craig Kimbrel has been steady from the start. Going further back, Francisco Rodriguez was good and healthy for a long time. If Diaz’s arm blows out, the Mets would find themselves in a nasty position, but that would be true for any important pitcher. We know now that, at the very least, Diaz passed a physical.
So the Mets are up a second baseman. They’re up a high-leverage reliever. They’re down a sunk-cost reliever, and a sunk-cost outfielder. And then we have the prospects. Once the Mariners determined it was time to step back, it made sense to trade Diaz around the apex of his value. I imagine the Mariners also thought there might not be many future opportunities to trade Cano away, given his age, contract, and no-trade clause. Cano might’ve only wanted to go to New York, and there’s hardly a guarantee a team in New York would always be open-minded. The Mariners have now stepped back, absolutely. But they no longer have baseball’s worst farm system.
Kelenic was the sixth overall pick in the most recent draft, and, generally speaking, such players tend not to be traded so soon. He’s a 19-year-old center fielder who should have enough bat if he shifts to a corner. Kelenic hit pretty well in his first professional exposure, and in Longenhagen’s estimation he’s advanced and relatively high-probability. He remains two years off or so, but he’s a great outfield prospect, and a good centerpiece for Seattle’s return.
Dunn was the 19th overall pick in the 2016 draft. He’s a 23-year-old righty who’s still relatively new to starting, after doing a lot of relieving at Boston College. This past season, Dunn worked his way up to Double-A and struck out more than a quarter of the hitters he faced, so the potential is clear, even if it remains uncertain whether his future role will last 5-6 innings, or 1-2. The whiffs are there, and Dunn has a full repertoire. What remains, as is common, is improving command. In terms of readiness, you can consider Dunn a step behind acquisitions Justus Sheffield and Erik Swanson.
At last, Bautista is a 23-year-old righty reliever who briefly broke into the majors this past season. For the moment, his repertoire consists of a big, swing-and-miss fastball. The other stuff is a couple steps behind. Bautista had a Triple-A ERA over 5, and a 9% walk rate. But he also had a 28% strikeout rate, so he’s one of those relievers who could turn into something meaningful with one tweak. If it were 10 or 15 years ago, evaluators would think of Bautista as a future closer. The game has changed, but he could still help right away.
As for Bruce and Swarzak, they might not last the offseason with the Mariners. I don’t know if anyone will last the offseason with the Mariners. But for whatever it’s worth, they’re not total zeroes. Both players were good as recently as 2017, which is why the Mets signed them to multi-year deals. If they do start the year with Seattle, there’s a certain amount of hope they bounce back just enough to each go for a modest prospect midseason. There’s just a little bit of value, then, beyond just occupying big-league roster spots to keep the club vaguely respectable.
This is a big, fascinating trade. We don’t know everything about the various motivations. It does seem a little weird to see the Mariners backing up, while the similar Mets are trying to move forward. But then, in the American League, the Mariners have to contend with the division-rival Astros, and there are also the Red Sox, Yankees, and Indians. In the National League, there are the Dodgers, but then I think the competition isn’t so stiff. In the Mets’ own division, the Braves, Nationals, and Phillies all hope to be good and competitive in 2019, but there’s not yet a super-team among them. The Mets could have more of an opportunity to win, in other words. It’s not going to be easy, but Van Wagenen has a whole rest of the offseason to put the other pieces together.
Maybe he doesn’t do a great job of finishing the roster. On the Mariners’ end, maybe they haven’t been maximizing their returns. It’s perfectly fair to wonder about both of these organizational plans. But as for this move, this trade — I don’t see anything too terribly objectionable about this trade. The Mets, now, just have to make sure they can win. And the Mariners have to make sure they develop the young players they’re receiving. Because the rest of the teams aren’t sitting still. The pressures here are different, but it’s safe to say the pressure is on.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.

The trade might be fair, but I think both fanbases are upset because if either teams’ owners ate more salary they would have walked away with more talent. That’s a frustrating reality to accept, even if fans of these teams should be used to it by now.
You can say that about any trade.
You’re right, but not every trade has three salary dumps and cash involved.
Indeed. And the emotional component–Seattle fans don’t want to believe last year was a fluke, and Mets fans…well, I dunno, but presumably, even they are wiser than the owners of the team and perhaps think it’s smarter to rebuild (esp if the Nats, Braves, and Phillies are 3 of the 4 best teams in the NL–yes, in this, weird scenario, the Mets are the Rays). Different expectations/goals might be the cause of perception difference rather than actual/perceived value.
Thanks for the good analysis. I think the main objection I have to this trade from the Mariners’ side is that they decided to pay down a bunch of Cano’s contract with some of Diaz’s surplus value. Moving Cano made sense, and so did moving Diaz, but I think everyone agrees they could have gotten more for Diaz if they had moved them separately. How much more? I’m not sure. But how hard would it have been to pay an extra $10-15M to pay down the contract to acquire more young talent? Or to throw in some reliever depth as an enticement? Or do both? If you’re tearing down, hopefully you’re rebuilding as well. I don’t like it when teams tear down but don’t maximize their talent in prospects.
From the Mets’ side, I think the main objection I have is that McNeil is really exciting and it would be nice to play him at his natural position. The Mets do not have a good track record of letting their young talent get out there, and blocking them with expensive veterans who aren’t as good. You would hope that the Mets, under new management, will be more creative and open to making sure McNeil winds up in the lineup (or trading him for something good who will help them now).
But realistically, if they can get value out of both McNeil and Cano it looks like a great move for the next couple years while deGrom is under contract. Getting Cano for approximately market value while getting a closer for less than market value is a really good deal. You can imagine that if Diaz performs like an all-star closer (not even at the level of last year, which was an all-time season) for another couple of years, the Mets could flip him after deGrom’s contract ends for a Kelenic-level headliner, maybe more.
(I also think that relievers are not super-special in ways that isn’t reflected by their WAR…but if the Mets really wanted a reliever, I don’t have a big problem with going for Diaz. He’s so much better than anyone else available, except maybe Kimbrel, and probably not even him.)
One good thing if I’m a Mets fan…moving Bruuce makes it tougher to bury Conforto or Nimmo again.
Being a Mets fan must be a heck of a ride.
It’s frustrating to say the least.
That probably won’t change in 2019.
McNeil might not end up being the loser here. Jeff points out that Cano provides support at first.
Peter Alonso kept hitting for power in Las Vegas after a slow start there, but his K% did spike up to 25.9% (301 PA). He had never previously cleared 20% at any level, and FWIW, Steamer projects that last data point being sticky, seeing a 24.8% K rate in MLB. It also sees his walk rate heading back to what he showed in a year and a half of A ball (15.8% AA, 11% AAA, 8.8% MLB Steamer 2019). And Eric’s reported Alonso’s unlikely to ever become even an average defensive first baseman.
Alonso kind of came out of nowhere at age 23. If you take the worst of his BB rate and K rate spectrums and marry them, like Steamer does, it looks a lot like Jay Bruce, except hitting from the other side of the plate and playing a fringe first base instead of a fringe-average right field.
I think Alonso is a good bat prospect, not calling a bust or anything, but FWIW it caught my eye that Callis/Mayo put him all the way down at #14 on their top 25 AFL list. I feel a lot better about McNeil getting 400-500 PA than Alonso if I’m the Mets and trying to win in 2019, which they clearly are interested in doing.
McNeil will slide over to 3B.
I don’t think they’ll do it, but it would be cool to see what Cano could do at 3B. His arm is still good (I think stronger than McNeil’s) but range is just OK at best. I’d be tempted to try it – let the veteran learn a new position (plus play some 2B and 1B on occasion) and just tell McNeil to worry about raking and adjusting to his first full MLB season.
Frazier was better before 2018 than I realized. 4.3, 2.7 and 3.1 WAR the three seasons before joining the Mets, and rates above average defensively most every season. Steamer has him rebounding to .218/.311/.410, good for a 2.3 WAR season, although it would require him playing 150 games, and Citi’s a tough place to be a power bat.
Please do not think I am saying that Peter Alonso is going to follow in his footsteps, but everything, and i mean everything, that is being said about him could be cut and pasted from the scouting reports on Paul Goldschmidt when he was a prospect. Strikes out too much, so what, terrible defender, not quite, slower than Victor Martinez, does 30 steals answer that garbage. All I am saying is let us wait and see if Alonso can play. The track record of can’t miss prospects isn’t, to be kind, doing too well lately. I will take that 5th rounder in 2012 from Nashville thank you. Just a couple of years ago the Phillies thought they had the next Jimmy Rollins Just today the next Jimmy Rollins was sent packing after failing to show anything with the bat in his hands. Pre-judging prospects is all a shake of the dice and with Monopoly money.
But you’re assuming (w/o basis, in my view) that Cano could have been moved for similar value without Diaz. Maybe the Mets are the only team interested in acquiring Cano for actual value (a possibility, given Cano’s relationship with BVW) and only interested in Cano if Diaz is also traded. And Cano has a NTC too, so Cano has to be interested in the acquiring team as well.
And just because the Mariners didn’t kick in more money here, doesn’t mean they can’t use the same money elsewhere to acquire talent. Intl FA, Yusei Kikuchi, taking on salary in another trade, one or more FA signings, etc, etc.
If they only had interest in Diaz, then just trade Diaz. This whole “we have to trade Robinson Cano” was an artificial crisis. They didn’t have to trade him. So they don’t move him. So what? They’re not any worse off than they were before. You get more talent, and you don’t save the money. Life goes on. Perhaps you dump other players instead, the kinds that don’t require you to give up your dominant closer.
As far as spending that money on the FA market, they’d be much better investing that money in extensions for their prospects who turn out well. But that’s assuming they have prospects who turn out well. You have to get some of those to make it worth it.
(It is possible that DiPoto was told he had to trade him–marching orders from M’s ownership. That meant he had to trade him, but it doesn’t necessarily mean the team had to trade him).
Ok, but all you’re doing is assuming away the issue by calling it an “artificial crisis.”
No doubt, if Cano has a down year next year (through injury, bad luck, or just general poor performance) and his contract becomes totally unmovable, then people would be saying that Dipoto missed his obvious opportunity to move Cano while it was still possible (i.e., after 2018) and his negligence in not doing so has handcuffed the Mariners even further. And people would further say Dipoto was especially negligent in not moving Cano when he could, because the Mariners weren’t going to compete in 2019 anyway. The future article criticizing Dipoto practically writes itself, complete with some clichés about “father time being undefeated” and referencing Cano’s PED suspension and the Albert Pujols albatross.
Then so what? DiPoto gets some bad press. Teams have bad contracts. Life goes on. They’re not the Marlins. It’s not anything that threatens the franchise. There is no crisis. If you really have to, you trade some of your other big contracts. And if Cano is still good (which he is likely to be) then the fans have someone to root for in the lean years. People are talking about Cano’s contract like it’s suffocating the franchise, but it wasn’t and they’re still paying $56M anyway.
Dipoto isn’t trading Cano to avoid “some bad press,” he’s being proactive to put the Mariners in a better position in the future, by getting rid of Cano when he can. And again, even with Cano, the Mariners aren’t competitive.
You’re the one who’s setting up your own subjective test of “crisis” or a “threat to the franchise” to test the trade – needlessly in my view, as I don’t think those are productive benchmarks here. Hell, Albert Pujols’ contract (and Miggy’s, for that matter) isn’t a threat to the Angels’ franchise, but I bet Eppler wishes he had those funds to deploy elsewhere to help his team in other ways.
To point out that Cano is still good now misses the point, because of course he is, that’s the only reason why Dipoto can even craft a deal now that offloads him.
You seem to be misunderstanding me. Generally speaking the Mariners are better off with Cano in another uniform and them saving some amount of money.
But you seem to be under the impression that it’s worth more–either in win/$ or in just overall wins–than actually getting talent. It is not. Spending money on the FA market is something to be avoided, which is one of DiPoto’s strengths: He knows that game is for suckers. (Obviously, saving the money will make the owners richer. This is not my concern, although I understand it is something most ownership groups do care about).
When teams start prioritizing money over talent, that’s when the wheels start coming off. To DiPoto’s credit, he did walk away with some talent here. It’s just clearly not what he could have gotten if he hadn’t decided moving Cano was such a huge priority.
And if you come back and say “well, but then they would still have Cano”, that’s when my answer is: Who cares? It doesn’t matter in terms of the on-field product. It will make some fans happy if he stays, anyway. I don’t think there’s any reason why they should be worried about specifically keeping Cano when there are other big contracts to move, and even more so since they’re paying down half the contract anyway.
In summary: Attaching Alex Colome or Jean Segura, or James Pazos or Roenis Elias or Wade LeBlanc as enticement to get rid of Cano’s contract? Sure, that sounds fine. Taking back Jacoby Ellsbury’s contract? Sure. Eating money? That is fine. Attaching the player who you previously insisted you wouldn’t trade and is one of your two most valuable trade chips? No, don’t do that.
The owner is going to take the choice to save 60 million guaranteed on a bad contract over 60 million in possible prospect surplus value every time.
What do you think of McNeil as a possible super-sub kind of player? I don’t actually like his arm strength in that kind of role (fringey and seems limited to 2B/LF only), but it’s possible that others may have a better idea of him than I do.
Depth is good! and something the Mets have been sorely lacking.
Fringe across the board. He could play a fine 1st, left and SS. Obviously not a + defensive player, but no one who chokes up and swings a bat like he does cannot play a solid slightly below average at every position except catcher.
“I examined recent history for relief seasons worth at least 3 WAR. That’s a mighty high bar to clear, and between 1998 – 2017, there were just 33 such seasons. The following year, by average or median, the relievers gave back about 40% of their value.”
I was curious if the age of the relievers was responsible for some of the lost value in the season after a 3 win relief season. If you cap age at 25, there are only five seasons besides Diaz’ 2018 that topped 3 wins:
2004 Francisco Rodriguez (age 22): 3.7 ? 1.5 (23)
2018 Edwin Diaz (age 24): 3.5 ? n/a (25)
2012 Aroldis Chapman (age 24): 3.3 ? 1.7 (25)
2012 Craig Kimbrel (age 24): 3.3 ? 2.3 (25)
2011 Craig Kimbrel (age 23): 3.2 ? 3.3 (24)
2006 Jonathan Papelbon (age 25): 3.1 ? 2.1 (26)
Avg age season 1: 23.6 repeating forever
Avg WAR season 1: 3.35
Avg WAR season 2: 2.18
Avg WAR2 – WAR1: -1.17 (-34.9%)
It seems age doesn’t have a lot to do with it. It’s just really, really hard to be worth three wins as a reliever, and doubly hard to do it twice in a row. Kimbrel’s 2011-2014 age 23-26 run is incredible in hindsight: 11.1 WAR total, and he had only 20.2 MLB innings prior to the start of that run. I might like this deal more for the Mets than I had expected to. The upside of four years of peak Kimbrel is a huge weapon.
Accumulating 3 WAR as a reliever also requires a lot of opportunities/ innings pitched. Even if a guy is every bit as good the following year, I wonder if there is just a lower likelihood of getting as many opportunities as he did in his monster 3 WAR season before, either because he’s a traditional closer and the game situations don’t call for it or because his team is aware of his heavy workload the year prior and tries to go a bit easier on his usage.
Good point, all of the above pitchers (except 2012–>2013 Kimbrel) pitched fewer innings the following year. Only several innings is 10% of a reliever workload, smaller samples swing the numbers more than starting pitchers or position players.
Kimbrel actually pitched (slightly) more after his second consecutive 3+ WAR season, but that was the year his K/9 dropped from Reptalien 16+ to Mere Mortal 13 and change.
“Still, Diaz should be a quality reliever for however long he’s healthy.”
This is asking a lot of the Mets medical and training staff given their history. Quadruply so for 36-year-old Cano signed for 5 more seasons. The Mets are not known to act rationally with veteran players past their sell-by date (see Reyes, Jose), and I find it difficult to believe that they will move on from Cano if he’s below replacement level with years remaining on his deal. Heck, I find it difficult to believe they would bench him, or drop him down in the order even.
So for me, it’s not that some team went out and acquired Cano for what he can do while he’s still able to perform, it’s that the Mets in particular acquired Cano. There’s just no reason to trust them to handle the next five years of risk at this point.
Van Wagenen has the toughest job in baseball. Not only does he have to lead the baseball operations department of a mediocre team with intense media scrutiny, he also has to do a complete 180 of the organization’s culture and standard operating procedures. Which is probably impossible if the Wilpons remain the owners.
The LOLMets have had some godawful GM’s, but you’re right, they were never the real problem and the real reason the LOLMets have been such a joke for so long. That would be the Wilpons.
Like this a lot for the Mariners. They got rid of Cano, sold high on Diaz (who of course is great, but likely just had his career year and was really overused at times last year), got a good prospect haul back, and even the salary dump guys they are taking on have an outside shot of having good 1st halves (and thus could be traded without Seattle covering their whole salaries).
I thought the Mets were making out well when it was rumored that the money changing hands was $60M – but at $20M this is a pretty clear win for Seattle.
Definitely the best of their 3 big trades so far. Not a huge fan of the others.
Well at least as a New York Mariners fan, I can watch the Mets and Yankees.
Unlike the Mariners and the LOLMets, the Yankees have a real general manager.
I keep liking this more for Seattle, but it still confuses me as a whole.
If ever we needed one last Jeff and Matt LL podcast, the time is now! Get the band back together, were awful again!
A related topic for Jeff: is BVW following some not-so-big footsteps in being a new GM trying to win the offseason? Hahn, Preller, perhaps Dipoto himself, etc.
This feels reminiscent of the Kemp to SD, and the Kimbrel to SD trades all in one. New GM wants to make a splash, doesn’t care about clubhouse reputations, winds up with a great closer, a bad attitude player, and the team sucks.
I have never heard of Cano as a bad attitude player. There is a heck of a lot of risk taking on Cano, but he played all over last year when Gordon had taken over 2nd and mostly seemed fine with it. I think Cano’s attitude is the least of their worries.
By all the accounts that I’ve heard and read Cano is a positive factor in the clubhouse. Where have you heard otherwise?
Who was the Pads answer to deGrom and Syndergaard? With conforto, Rosario and Nimmo showing they can compete at the big league level and that pitching staff it makes sense to go for it. Do I love mortgaging the future for it? Not necessarily, but I’d rather they try with this core than scrap it all.
I would be willing to bet that the Mariners are a still a .500 or better team in 2019 and the Mets do not improve to better than .500
The Mariners get better on offense at 3 positions and regress at 3 positions with the sum total being about the same OPS+ overall as they produced in 2018.
They should see a significant improvement on defense with Smith in CF, Crawford at SS, Santana at 1B, and Gordon at 2B full time after the 2018 team was in the bottom 3rd in baseball.
Where the Mariners will see a huge dropoff in performance is in pitching. They replaced 5 MLB pitchers with 1 MLB reliever and 2 rookies and 3 AA or above prospects who have a shot at making it to the majors in 2019.
With the completion of the Mets and Phillies trades, the Mariners will have saved $36 million in payroll for 2019 and an additional $90.55 million from 2020-2023 after figuring in the $34.3 million in salaries they are taking on for Bruce and Santana.
With 2019 payroll projected to be under $110 million after these trades, the Mariners now have wiggle room to add a starter and some veteran replacements in the pen.
The addition of a starter like Kikuchi and one of Familia/Robertson/Britton/Ottavino/Miller/Kelly at $10-11MM AAV along with another veteran reliever would put them on a footing to match their 2018 win totals in 2019.
None of those signings precludes more trades from diPoto. In fact, I would be surprised if we don’t see another Mariners trade by the Winter Meetings.
If they can make some strategic additions like say Kikuchi, Andrew Miller, and Brad Brach, possibly even Ervin Santana on a one year deal, do not be surprised to see the Mariners back in the running for a WC in 2019.
I’m not seeing how the pitchers you mentioned can replace the pitchers traded away. Paxton and Diaz combined for seven and a half wins last year. If they were trying to contend this year, they would have just kept the pitchers. You have to be bullish on any two relievers from that pool to combine to even approach what Diaz just did. Paxton was 20th in SP WAR last year, if you drop IP to 150 so he’s even on the list.
I’ll have some of what he’s smoking.
Brach and Santana are not Diaz and Paxton. I do agree the defense is probably a step up, but that’s not making up for their missing bats. And if you think Santana/Bruce/Crawford/Smith = Segura/Cruz/Cano idk what to tell you.
I love it, the Mets have the first half of 2019 to see if they can compete and fire sale if they don’t. In that case they will get back better than Kelenic for Syndergaard/DeGrom, not to mention comparable value for Diaz
Good point. They’re actually in a position to be flexible because they have their all of their starting pitchers hitting free agency at different times. Wheeler (FA 2020,) DeGrom (FA 2021,) Syndergaard (FA 2022,) and Matz (FA 2023) all hit FA in consecutive years. Of these, DeGrom and Syndergaard can get you substantial returns, although you’d have to sell by latest trade deadline the year before their last arb year to get something approaching full value. Say next year goes sour and they trade DeGrom and Wheeler this year at the deadline. Wheeler would be a straight up rental so he wouldn’t get too much, but DeGrom would fetch something good, and between the two of them there’s some real near ML ready talent. So you then have the luxury of taking another year to watch how the club progresses and how the returns look like they’re coming along to supplement it, and identify an area of need before trading Syndergaard, if you end up needing to.
In regards to the salary, something that I haven’t thought of until now is that the Mets absorbing Cano money could be part of them actually using money gained previous and over the next 3 years from Wright’s contract. Considering insurance is picking up 75% of his contract, the money saved could go a long way towards covering most of Cano’s money, while still freeing the Mets up to spend on actual holes they have.
Granted, I know we’re talking about the Wilpons, but maybe Brodie convinced them to finally use Wright’s money?
Yes, the M’s could have gotten more for Diaz if they hadn’t packaged him with Cano, but then they’d still have Cano.
The thing they got from the Diaz trade was salary relief. That’s arguably more valuable than prospects, because prospects are uncertain, but money is always money.