Out of more than 200 reader questions about the New York Mets, Pete Alonso’s name came up more than 50 times.
There’s no better place to start this installment of the Mets mailbag than with Alonso’s free agency. Other topics include the rotation, infield mix and under-the-radar minor leaguers who could make an impact in 2025. I plan to cover other issues in another mailbag feature in the coming days.
Pete Alonso has been a great Met and a fan favorite. Why are they playing such hardball in these negotiations? Why not sign him for basically what he’s asking for? — Bill L.
Are the Mets and Alonso so far apart that they can’t get this done sooner rather than later? — Laurence L.
Pete Alonso? Please? — Matthew F.
A lot of people asked essentially the same question regarding Alonso and the Mets: Why haven’t they come to an agreement on a deal?
The guess here is contract length.
Last week, I outlined why the two parties may see things differently when it comes to the long haul.
At the start of the offseason, The Athletic’s Tim Britton projected Alonso to receive $140 million over five years. Alonso’s camp could argue he deserves more than five years because of his high-end power and track record for durability. Meanwhile, after going wild for Juan Soto, the Mets may prefer to keep things at five years or even go shorter than that on other players (particularly those not in their mid-20s).
Readers wanted to know if Alex Bregman would fit with the Mets, but there’s not much evidence that he’s a serious target. (Alex Slitz/Getty Images)
I would like to see the Mets sign both Alex Bregman and Pete Alonso, moving Mark Vientos to designated hitter. Any possibility? — Anonymous
I never rule anything out in free agency. Crazy things happen — no one forgets the whole Carlos Correa situation, right? Opportunities tend to emerge in January and February; prices come down, markets gain clarity, etc. And in the past, owner Steve Cohen seized such chances. But barring a complete collapse of both players’ markets, I don’t see much of a possibility of the Mets landing both Alonso and Bregman.
So far, my reporting on the subject hasn’t led me to think of Bregman as a serious target. Bregman should net a long-term deal. Things can always evolve and markets can change, but signing Bregman to a long-term deal would run counter to what I had heard (and reported here) a few weeks ago.
What’s the plan if the Mets don’t re-sign Alonso? — Ray F.
I don’t have an exact answer. Obviously, they could do a few different things. That includes making a trade for a different first baseman (perhaps this depends on where Alonso ends up in this scenario) or acquiring someone else to play third base and moving Mark Vientos to first base. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Mets liked their alternative internal options for third base (Brett Baty, Ronny Mauricio, etc.) enough to give them a try.
If you only could make one more signing or trade for the Mets, who would you acquire? — Joe B.
I’d sign Alonso. He fits great with the Mets’ lineup. Many people devalue the idea of “protection” in a lineup these days and I agree with them; it matters more who gets on base for a club’s best batter. But I can also see the other side, how a big presence behind Soto offers help, even if it’s more mental. As a smaller consideration, I’d like to see more of Mark Vientos at third base. I thought he was OK there last season. Some of the instances where he had trouble involved instinctual plays, and I wonder how much he can improve.
But I also understand hesitation on going long for Alonso. A lot of teams these days would see a 30-year-old, right-handed batting first baseman with a ton of power but no other above-average tools as a short-term investment. Still, as a homegrown player with a proven track record in New York, perhaps the Mets end up paying a little more for Alonso. Ideally, if I were running a club, I’d do a four-year deal with multiple opt-outs. Would Alonso do that? I am unsure. The market may end up telling him and agent Scott Boras that it’s the best option, but I wouldn’t blame them for sticking things out longer. It only takes one team …
Do you suspect the Mets are done with their rotation? — Jonathan T.
Pretty much. After the Mets agreed to a deal with Sean Manaea, I reported that the club felt good about its rotation. I interpreted that to mean, independent of a Roki Sasaki pursuit, they were set with their starting pitchers.
After all, they already have five (Kodai Senga, Manaea, David Peterson, Frankie Montas, Clay Holmes), with a few others (Griffin Canning, Paul Blackburn, Tylor Megill) seemingly vying for a sixth spot. The Mets want to go into the season with 8-10 starters they can count on as legitimate options.
While fans pine for an ace, the situation reminds me of last year. After the Mets signed Manaea last January to his original deal with the club, I reported that they were done with the rotation. Back then, it ended up being the case, too.
Will the Mets sign/trade for a starting pitcher if they lose out on Roki Sasaki? — Bob L.
No. Mets president of baseball operations David Stearns acknowledged at last month’s Winter Meetings that he must operate as if landing Sasaki would be a bonus.
Wouldn’t Jose Quintana have been a better depth option than Griffin Canning, especially after his strong showing in postseason relief appearances? — Robert R.
Sure. But would Quintana re-sign with the Mets for Canning’s role? Probably not. Canning is in the mix as a depth starter. He signed a one-year deal for $4.25 million, plus incentives. Quintana should be able to double that salary with a more secure job, like a club’s fourth or fifth starter or perhaps lead a young rebuilding team’s rotation (perhaps the Chicago White Sox?) in a mentoring role.
Will the Mets bring up Ronny Mauricio to be a utility infielder, or prefer to keep him in minors for more at-bats? — Sam G.
That may depend on whether the Mets sign another utility infielder. They checked on a few early on in the offseason. But at the Winter Meetings, I heard they were feeling good about their younger players. My interpretation, which is speculative and not a report: Maybe if prices come down for a utility-type, they’d get more involved, but they wouldn’t mind entering the spring with an open mind about their young players’ chances of making the team. In regards to Mauricio, Mets officials like the progress he has made recently. But we are still talking about a young player who didn’t play at all in 2024 — getting him reps might be preferable. In the case of Luisangel Acuña, it’s probably wise to keep his stint with the Mets in perspective: It was just 14 games, and he struggled to find consistency in Triple A before a surprise September call-up. In all cases, these players probably need to demonstrate positive signs in spring training before anyone pencils them in anywhere on the major-league roster.
Which prospect, outside of the obvious ones, has a legit chance to impact the 2025 Mets? — J.P. J.
Based on conversations with evaluators holding strong knowledge of the Mets’ farm system, I’ll offer two right-handed pitchers: Jonathan Pintaro and Luis Moreno.
The Mets picked up Pintaro last year out of the Pioneer League. He’s 27, so he quickly worked his way from High-A Brooklyn to Double-A Binghamton to Triple-A Syracuse. Across the three levels, he had a 2.68 ERA in 74 innings (four with Syracuse, 34 with Binghamton). He ended his year pitching in the Arizona Fall League.
Moreno, 25, spent most of 2024 with Binghamton, where he had a 4.27 ERA and 107 strikeouts in 103 1/3 innings. He has impressed scouts this winter; while pitching in the Dominican Republic, he has a 1.83 ERA and 37 strikeouts in 39 1/3 innings.
(Top photo of Pete Alonso: Wally Skalij / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)
