These Braves contracts are proof the NY Mets need to be careful about early extensions

Locking up promising young players before they fully blossom into stars has become en vogue in the MLB right now, especially among smaller-market teams. Big-market clubs like the New York Mets often try to emulate small-market success stories in order to truly grab a stranglehold on the market. Typically speaking, once they jump on a trend, it no longer becomes viable for these lower-revenue clubs, giving them a bigger piece of the pie.

With that said, there's a certain urge to see the club begin to lock up its future foundational pieces. Both Carson Benge and Nolan McLean authored seasons that have them as NL Rookie of the Year frontrunners. That makes this pair of youngsters seem like prime candidates for this treatment, despite still being years away from hitting arbitration.

One could even throw A.J. Ewing into that mix. While the speedster slumped after an initial burst, he busted out of his doldrums in a big way in September after a visit from Keith Hernandez, hitting .309/.380/.481. Locking up the 22-year-old after an up-and-down rookie campaign might seem like a way to secure a below-market deal.

But not all early extensions are huge wins for the organization. There's an often-overlooked downside, and New York's prime, recently dispatched from the postseason rival, the Atlanta Braves, shows us the reason why.

Three Braves early extensions prove why the Mets need to be wary of committing too early to their young stars

In many ways, the Braves were the poster child for this trend, blazing a trail with this philosophy before it became popular. At the start of the 2019 season, Atlanta gave Ronald Acuña Jr. an eight-year, $100 million extension despite the outfielder having just one year of big league experience. He responded immediately by hitting 41 home runs and stealing 37 bases, and then went on to put forth a 41-73 campaign in 2023.

The deal was worth just a $12.5 million average annual value and gives the Braves $17 million team options for him for 2027 and 2028. Even with his injury concerns, it's been a steal for Atlanta.

At the same time, the Braves gave Ozzie Albies a seven-year, $35 million extension that came with two team options for $7 million each. Atlanta exercised one of those options last offseason and now has a decision to make for 2027.

Albies is a bit of a different story than Acuña Jr., in that his career has been much more up and down, posting sub-1.5 fWAR seasons in four of the last five years. Still, at that price tag he's so cheap that they can afford to roll with him and hope for the best.

These deals used to be about trade-offs. Players traded earning power for financial security. Teams traded flexibility for cost control. However, now these deals are about certainty. Players are getting certainty that they won't be non-tendered if injury or poor play arises. Teams get the certainty of paying around average arbitration values, while maybe coming in slightly below market value for the free agent years they buy out, if they're lucky.

The Braves are a perfect example of how these deals have changed. Three in particular stand out.

Ahead of the 2023 season, Atlanta gave then-budding ace Spencer Strider a six-year, $75 million contract. He gave them a stellar first year, throwing 186 2/3 innings over 32 starts, with a 3.86 ERA and a 36.8% strikeout rate. Since then, though, injuries have taken their toll. Strider has made just 33 starts over the past three years, posting a 4.78 ERA in that span. In 2026, they paid him $20 million to make eight starts and record a 5.31 ERA. Now coming off an elbow issue, he'll cost them $22 million in both 2027 and 2028.

On August 1, 2022, the Braves gave Austin Riley the most lucrative contract in franchise history, despite the fact that he still had all three of his arbitration-eligible seasons remaining. It was a 10-year, $212 million pact that took effect in the 2023 season and runs through 2032. While his 2023 season was a repeat of what had earned him such a massive extension, 2024 and 2025 were injury-plagued disappointments.

Now 29 years old, Riley was healthy in 2026, playing 159 games. Despite that, the injuries may have already taken their toll as he hit a disappointing .219/.390/.364, with 19 homers and a career-worst 31.9% strikeout rate. With so many years remaining, this has the potential to become one of the worst contracts in baseball.

Finally, there's the case of Sean Murphy. After acquiring Murphy from the Athletics ahead of the 2023 season, they bestowed him with a six-year, $73 million contract. Injuries immediately became a factor, and Murphy has spent the last three years posting sub-.200 batting averages. Now usurped by Drake Baldwin, Murphy is a backup catcher making an average of $12.17 million annually. Not only that, his 2026 line of .186/.256/.300 was the worst of his career. There are still two years and $30 million left on the deal.

In all three cases, injuries played a role. There's also something else at play. We often assume that player development is linear when it's not. All of the Mets' youngsters have important improvements they must make. The hope is that those come in time for the 2027 season, but they might not for several years, if at all.

With all that said, it's important for the Mets to be prudent and not get caught up in the latest fad. The crosstown Yankees have a staunch, anti-extension policy, preferring to make their players prove it and relying on the fact that they have the financial wherewithal to keep them in the fold when free agency rolls around. The Mets don't have to be as inflexible, but they'd be wise to make their young guns earn it before they start throwing around cash.

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Follow