5 free agent alternatives the Mets could've signed for more payroll flexibility

The benefit of hindsight is a great advantage. We can look back at any scenario in life and come to the best conclusions. There will be plenty of hindsight for the New York Mets offseason to explore as the season progresses. Right now, there’s still a lot of unknown when it comes to the free agents they did choose to add and the ones they didn’t.

It goes without saying that with all free agent pursuits there is much more to it than throwing the most money at a player. Timing. The desire of the player to come to a certain team or situation. All facets matter.

But with hindsight on our side, we can look back at the Mets offseason and see a way where they could have signed different players and come away with a better payroll situation.

1) The Mets save half a million by signing Gio Urshela instead of Joey Wendle

This one is a bit complicated because who knew Gio Urshela would settle for less than $2 million? His injuries as a member of the Los Angeles Angels last year apparently weighed too heavily on the minds of interested clubs. Or maybe the Detroit Tigers who signed him for $1.5 million had enough available playing time for the veteran infielder. A lot goes into every free agent decision and this one certainly is complicated.

The Mets didn’t waste much time adding Joey Wendle to their roster for $2 million. A nice pickup, Urshela is a much better hitter. We can call the defense a draw.

The Mets save $500K here

2) The Mets could have signed Martin Perez for much less than Sean Manaea

Martin Perez is coming off of a much better two-year stretch than Sean Manaea. Perez was an All-Star in 2022 and worth the qualifying offer he accepted from the Texas Rangers for 2023. Although much less impressive last year and eventually moved to the bullpen, the price tag on him makes Perez appealing.

Manaea signed a two-year deal with a player option for the second season worth $28 million. Let’s call it an even $14 million with the AAV to compare it to the $8 million Perez got from the Pittsburgh Pirates. The two lefties had the loss of a rotation spot in common last season. And yet it’s Manaea whose perceived “upside” was able to award him an AAV noticeably higher than what Perez got.

This could be partly on Perez and his agent for not holding out for more money, of course. Worse pitchers seemed to top $10 million.

There was never much of a hint of the Mets looking at Perez as an option. It’s understandable. As steady as he is, Perez is much more of a number four or five starter than Manaea whose potential could have him being closer to a number three.

Perez might be the epitome of an average starter. Owning a 100 ERA+ in his career and a 4.44 ERA, he doesn’t dazzle on the mound. Poor strikeout numbers throughout his career and far more innings logged on his arm, we can’t really blame the Mets for going with Manaea instead. However, if money was something they were looking to save, they could have gotten a decent arm with Perez and saved themselves cash. It’s not unbelievable for Perez to outplay Manaea this year.

The Mets save $6 million here for a total of $6.5 million so far

3) The Mets should have passed completely on Jorge Lopez

Spending $2 million on Jorge Lopez isn’t bad, but in the name of meeting the budget, they could have just as easily passed on him. Michael Tonkin at $1 million at least has a positive season from 2023 to look at for some justification. Not Lopez. He was bad last year. He has been pretty awful with the exception of the first half of 2022 with the Baltimore Orioles.

Abstaining from this contract altogether would’ve been perfectly fine. Hand the bullpen spot over to an optional reliever and save yourself from having to do the inevitable.

The Mets are now in a position where any sort of roster change with the pitching staff will require them to DFA a player. Only Tylor Megill has options. This doesn’t help the club much when they need a bullpen arm.

The Mets are hoping to unlock whatever it was Lopez was able to accomplish in the first half with Baltimore back in 2022. For a guy with a lifetime 5.51 ERA, it’s hard to see how there is much gold on the other side of the door.

Build a better, more sustainable roster than add this project. Nate Lavender, even if it meant having three lefties, would’ve been nice to have around. For the Mets to even recall Shintaro Fujinami at this point, they’ll need someone to get hurt or an arm to get lost in another way.

The Mets save $2 million here for a total of $8.5 million so far

4) The Mets could’ve paid Michael A. Taylor much less than Harrison Bader for similar production

It seems like I can’t discuss anything about the Mets offseason without coming back to Harrison Bader and how egregiously overpriced the contract is. At $10.5 million, he’s hitting the payroll much more than so many others the Mets could’ve added. In fact, they could have had several outfielders for the cost of Bader.

The most comparable one out there was Michael A. Taylor. Signed for $4 million by the Pittsburgh Pirates, he is a more durable center field option with some of the same offensive shortcomings. The Mets were rumored to have interest in him early in the offseason. But at that point Taylor was probably hoping for more dough or at least a two-year deal. The Mets, instead, settled for Bader who was more than willing to take a one-year contract after having such a bad 2023 campaign.

Taylor fits more snuggly on the Mets roster as a fourth outfielder type—which Bader should be. The price tag at $4 million makes him more movable to the bench or another team. It’ll be hard for the Mets to trade Bader without eating at least a part of his contract. 

Bader may very well outperform Taylor this year. But will his value be more than twice as much? The Mets save $6.5 million if they go in this direction—something they probably never would have been able to. Who would’ve guessed Taylor settled for a contract like this? We have hindsight on our side, remember.

Mets save $6.5 million here for a total of $15 million so far