1) On what conceivable basis do you conclude that the “Mets are better with Pete than without”? He’s *already 2 years into decline and he just turned 30. By far his best season was his first. You have no knowledge of what impact signing Pete has on Vladdy or Murakami. - ThreadSky

About ThreadSky

marcstein.bsky.social • 45 days ago

1) On what conceivable basis do you conclude that the “Mets are better with Pete than without”? He’s *already 2 years into decline and he just turned 30. By far his best season was his first. You have no knowledge of what impact signing Pete has on Vladdy or Murakami.

Comments

tedcanova.bsky.social•45 days ago

Maybe it’s because we’re fans of a New York team, that we think free agents will automatically come to the Mets. But there’s not a lot of history that we would get Guerrero and others and I’d rather win it all next year with Pete than assume the best about new players in 2026.

tedcanova.bsky.social•45 days ago

And I appreciate your thoughtful take.

tedcanova.bsky.social•45 days ago

We have always been impatient with our players. Jeff Kent, Kevin Mitchell, Edgardo Alfonso, Daniel Murphy, even Straw, you can probably name a few more. I want consistency and that’s one strong reason behind my take.

marcstein.bsky.social•45 days ago

2) You take no note of the fact that *no one else has offered Pete ***anything — not do you question why. He’s going to be worse this year than last — they’re way better off without him, which is why they don’t want him.

tedcanova.bsky.social•45 days ago

Well, that’s why we’re fans. To see how our players perform each year and Im not convinced he’s going to be worse than he was last year. In fact, maybe he shouldn’t have played 162 games plus the playoffs, that some days off would’ve been good for him.

marcstein.bsky.social•45 days ago

Posting Rules

Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply