NEWSLETTER
I’m going to put this Pete Alonso rumor in the vein of a “yeah, I saw it, here it is, but let’s chill for now”-type situation.
Jon Heyman wrote about the expected trade market for the New York Mets this trade season, and the Cubs came in for a mention:
You already know who it’s about: Pete Alonso. Emphasis mine:
“Though he’ll score big in free agency once non-contending teams are in play, sluggers generally are less coveted than pitchers at the deadline. Does anyone remember what the Yankees gave up for Anthony Rizzo? (Alexander Vizcaino and Kevin Alcantara) Or what the Red Sox surrendered for Kyle Schwarber? (Aldo Ramirez) Or for that matter what the Tigers got for J.D. Martinez? (Dawel Lugo, Sergio Alcantara and Jose King) The one exception was Mark Teixeira, who brought Texas a haul. But Teixeira had extra control when the Braves outbid the Yankees, Red Sox and others.
The Cubs are the obvious potential suitor. One rival suggested the Astros, Mariners and Jays as possibilities (if those teams buy.) One thing to remember: Because the Mets are again in Steve Cohen luxury-tax territory, they’d only receive a fourth-round draft choice if they tagged Alonso with a qualifying offer.”
Heyman’s implication that Alcántara isn’t a notable prospect notwithstanding (he certainly wasn’t a household name at the time of the trade, though!), the point is that players like Alonso tend not to net huge returns at the deadline if traded. Usually, it’s something more than the draft pick compensation, but not necessarily top-100 prospect types.
For the Mets, the decision will largely be about whether they will seriously pursue Alonso in free agency. If they plan to, then they may not want to trade him to another club, where he can see how well he could exist outside of New York (or where he might otherwise be wooed by a new team that is also interested in pursuing him in free agency). We know that players CAN re-sign with the team that traded them a few months earlier, but it’s just so rare.
If the Mets plan to move on regardless, then it’ll just be a very simple calculus: Can we get more than a fourth round pick in return for him? (They can, by the way, so if they aren’t looking long-term, Alonso will be traded.)
That’s all interesting stuff as the next two months come, and Pete Alonso’s free agency will also certainly be an interesting one. Alonso, 29, is hitting .235/.311/.460/122 wRC+ this year, after a similar slash line last season, which is not the kind of performance that is going to net a first-base-only guy a $200+ million contract in his 30s. He is still hitting his homers, though (46 last year, 12 so far this year).
For now, the reason I’m not drilling down too deeply is because we’re just so far away from the point where we can say with confidence that the Cubs will be buying in July (especially given how brutal things have been lately).
I think selling is relatively unlikely (the Cubs don’t have a ton of trade pieces of the type that net good returns at the deadline), but that doesn’t mean I think aggressive buying is definitely going to be the play. The Cubs’ front office is very likely to see how things go over the next month and a half before picking a lane.
When they do, would Alonso be a target? Maybe so, depending on how things have gone at DH/1B with the rotating cast in those spots. If Pete Crow-Armstrong really breaks out and you’ve got to use Cody Bellinger primarily at first base, then you’re evaluating what you have in Michael Busch and Christopher Morel at DH – maybe Pete Alonso becomes a square peg (and the round hole would actually be at third base in that scenario).
It’s also a maybe so if the Cubs have eyes on Alonso long-term, and there were previously some two-directional rumors on that front. They might want to get him in the door, show him a competitive stretch during a Chicago summer, and try to have an edge in free agency. A lot of that depends on how the Cubs view Busch, Morel, Owen Caissie, and (to a lesser degree at this point) Matt Mervis long-term. You’d still want an Alonso-type bat in your lineup regardless, but you also have to figure out how to best deploy resources to generate the most possible wins. The Cubs are never going to spend infinitely like the Steve Cohen Mets (who, uh, suck by the way, and whose performance is generating this very discussion).
I can make all the arguments in any direction right now, in large part because I don’t have so much of the information I will have by, say, July 20. That’s when it’s going to be much more useful to really analyze whether this is a fit, what the price tag would be, and what the long-term play is.
… not that I won’t be digging deeply on the rumors long before that if the Cubs just freaking start winning some games.
