Luke Weaver was a better buy for the NY Mets than his unsigned free agent peer

The Luke Weaver signing gives the New York Mets a clear bullpen addition with a defined role and a familiar profile. It is also a move that invites comparison, because Weaver was not signed in a vacuum. The bullpen market offered multiple paths that appeared similar on the surface, with differences that only become apparent once you slow down and examine how this team is built.

That context is what makes this decision worth unpacking. When teams choose between comparable arms, the separation often comes from details that do not jump out in a headline. Cost, recent performance trends, comfort in high-leverage environments, and how cleanly a pitcher fits into a specific market all start to matter. The Mets made a choice here. The reasons behind it deserve a closer look.

The Mets move for Luke Weaver asks if Pete Fairbanks made more sense

Weaver’s career only really makes sense once you separate the versions of him. The starter never quite clicked. The reliever did, and it did so loudly enough to reset his entire trajectory. Over the last two seasons with the Yankees, Weaver became a reliable late-inning option by leaning into shorter outings, sharper stuff, and a role that played to his strengths instead of exposing his limits. That shift matters because the Mets are not buying a reclamation project. They are buying the version of Weaver that already worked.

The surface numbers hold up just fine on their own. In 2025, Weaver posted a 3.62 ERA with a 1.02 WHIP and a 27.5 percent strikeout rate across 64.2 innings. That came on the heels of a breakout 2024 relief season when he ran a 2.89 ERA, a .93 WHIP, and a 31.1 percent strikeout rate over a heavy 84-inning workload. Pete Fairbanks has been steady as well, including a strong 2025 with a 2.83 ERA, a 1.04 WHIP, and a 24.2 percent strikeout rate, plus a multi-year run as a quality closer. This is not about one pitcher being good and the other being flawed. It is about where the margins start to tilt.

Those margins show up most clearly once you move past ERA. Weaver’s 2025 xERA sat at 2.98, nearly a full run lower than his actual results despite some uneven stretches. His underlying profile tells a similar story. Higher chase, whiff, and strikeout rates than Fairbanks, along with a better expected batting average against. Weaver ranked in the top 18 percent of the league in all of those categories, and his .195 xBAA placed him in the top five percent. That combination points to repeatable quality rather than outcomes hanging in the balance.

Then there is the contract. Two years and $22 million matter when the alternative projects north of $14 million per season. Fairbanks’ talent is real, but so is his injury history, including lat tears, strains, and nerve issues. Paying a premium AAV for that risk is a different calculation. Weaver offers the Mets comparable performance indicators at a lower cost, and he has recent proof that he can perform in New York, in big spots, with real expectations attached. That is not everything, but it is enough to make this choice feel intentional rather than cautious.