NY Mets rumors: Signing Tanner Scott odds shouldn't be dismissed so quickly

As unrealistic of a dream scenario as it may be for the New York Mets to sign Tanner Scott, the salary he should be seeking this offseason isn’t the problem. After last offseason where the Mets seemed to look exclusively at relievers with upside at a low cost, it’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking they’ll do exactly the same this winter. After all, they haven’t had anything of significance to the bullpen.

The Mets meeting with Scott is an exciting turn to at least suggest the team is open to the idea of signing a player of his abilities. They know he’s going to come at a high cost. A meeting wouldn’t have happened unless they were willing to at least dabble in the territory of what he’ll get paid.

Instead of thinking about each individual player on the roster and how much they’re getting paid, think of the bullpen as one combined asset. Other than Edwin Diaz, the Mets aren’t paying anyone else a whole lot of money. They’ve cleverly added multiple players this offseason to split contracts, minor league deals, and waiver claims. Many of these players have options. The depth is there. Why not use one of the seven spots on a big ticket item when everyone else is costing a small portion of your payroll?

If the Mets aren’t signing Tanner Scott, it should be because of the years, not money

Scott went into this winter as the overwhelming best reliever on the market. Two straight years of dominance albeit without a whole lot of saves logged still managed to land him as a favorite to become someone’s closer this offseason. A multi-year deal with a contract that has an AAV rivaling what the Mets are paying Edwin Diaz was what many believed he could get, but perhaps not.

No reliever, or at least one expected to stay in the bullpen, has gotten more than a two-year deal yet. The money has been somewhat modest in comparison to what teams are paying starters.

What the Mets bullpen looks like right now

The quantity part of what the Mets needed to do with their bullpen is close to finished. The surest things they have in the projected bullpen for the coming season are Diaz and Jose Butto. Reed Garrett and Dedniel Nunez earned enough credibility last year to be as near to locks as it gets for this season. This leaves us with only three more roster spots because of the planned six-man rotation. Griffin Canning, Sean Reid-Foley, and Danny Young three easy guesses as to who could join them.

It’s not exactly an inspiring bunch even with Diaz and Butto present. Nunez is promising. Garrett had a few too many meltdowns to completely trust him. The club has some alternatives such as Kevin Herget whom they claimed on waivers early in the offseason. Huascar Brazoban is still around as well, but feels more like minor league depth to begin the year.

For a couple of reasons, the Mets are going to want to keep open a roster spot they can utilize for a fresh arm without having to DFA anyone. Last year’s bullpen began with multiple pitchers on the brink of elimination from the start. It came to pass quickly with Michael Tonkin and Yohan Ramirez DFA’d before April was over.

Scott is a difference-maker in relief for the Mets who’d immediately shorten games and even allow Carlos Mendoza to toy with the idea of using him in the ninth and Diaz in the eighth when the situation calls for it. Based on how Butto was used last year as well with multiple days off between appearances but 3+ innings at a time on a regular basis, the Mets might have less of a traditional bullpen in the best way possible.

One last consideration: Diaz has a player option for 2026 and 2027 with a team option in 2028. He’s not going to be around forever. Is it so farfetched to believe Scott is a replacement?

At 30, even a two-year deal can let Scott re-enter the free agent marketplace and cash in again with inflated rates in two years. A three or four year deal is what he’s expected to seek out. It’s only money and as Steve Cohen showed with Juan Soto, there was no limitation as to where he’d go. Could the same be true of Scott?