Scouts and execs on Mets’ Frankie Montas signing, and what comes next

Will Frankie Montas be the 2025 version of Sean Manaea and/or Luis Severino? That’s obviously what the Mets are hoping for, but is it realistic to expect similar success on another short-term upside gamble?

And is this a strategy that is going to define the Mets’ offseason, with David Stearns trusting his own instincts and the tweaks/improvements his pitching lab can make as opposed to investing in long-term deals for more expensive free agent starters?

I asked those questions of scouts and team executives around MLB on Monday. And while there was no clear consensus, there were a couple of dominant themes:

1. It seemed easier to see the high-ceiling possibilities for Manaea and Severino, based on their resumes, going into last year. Still, in what will be Montas’ second full season back from shoulder surgery, there is a case to be made for him being more than merely an innings-eater.

2. For a team with championship expectations in 2025, the Mets would be leaving too much to chance if they don’t add more accomplished pitching to their starting rotation, whether that’s re-signing Manaea or shelling out big bucks for a Corbin Burnes or a Max Fried, or even trading for Garrett Crochet.

“It’s hard to do that every year, no matter how good your process is,” said one team exec, referring to the Mets’ 2024 success with Manaea and Severino. “Nobody likes having to commit to long-term deals for pitchers because of the obvious risks, but it’s the cost of doing business unless you’re developing a ton of young pitching.

“The Mets need more certainty in their rotation. I can see their thinking on Montas: He was better the last two months after going to Milwaukee, and (Stearns) probably has some intel on that, but it would be a stretch to say Montas gives them a lot of certainty.”

A couple of notable points there:

Though the Mets do seem to be making significant strides toward producing homegrown pitching again, as I wrote in a story last season about notable changes in their drafting/developing philosophy, they can’t count on it for 2025 after Christian Scott needed Tommy John surgery and other key prospects stalled at the Triple-A level, most notably Brandon Sproat and Blade Tidwell.

Also, a few of the scouts and execs pointed out that Kodai Senga has to be at least a bit of a question mark for 2025, based on missing almost all of 2024, especially in terms of how many innings he can give the Mets.

All of which does seem to shine a light on the need for more “certainty,” the word that execs like to use, in the starting rotation that right now features Senga, Montas, David Peterson, Jose Butto, Tylor Megill, and Paul Blackburn, who will be coming back from surgery to repair a cerebrospinal fluid leak.

Said one scout: “Even if Montas works out I’d say they need two more quality starters, given their expectations for next season.”

Added another: “I get it if Stearns wants to stay away from long-term deals for pitchers — and maybe some of that depends on whether they get (Juan) Soto. And I do think a couple of their prospects, like Sproat and Tidwell, have a chance to help them at some point next season. But they’re going to have to spend on pitching. I’d look at Montas as giving them a more solid floor for the rotation.”

Others mentioned the possibility of trading with the Chicago White Sox for Crochet, the caveat being that scouts generally regard the Mets’ farm system as having several quality prospects but perhaps not the one must-have player that might be needed if the bidding is strong for the Sox left-hander.

So, finally, what about Montas?

I didn’t find the same enthusiasm I recall last year that scouts had for Manaea or Severino, but the ones I spoke to on Monday did offer Stearns a benefit of the doubt similar to what I sense from Mets fans, based on his track record in identifying undervalued pitching.

In addition, regarding the “intel” the team exec referenced earlier, Stearns likely still has contacts with the Brewers that may have influenced his belief in Montas, based on the way he pitched in August and September, when his numbers were mostly better than they were the first four months with the Cincinnati Reds.

Overall his ERA in 11 starts with Milwaukee was 4.55, compared to 5.01 with the Reds, but aside from one late-season clunker against Arizona, Montas pitched to a 3.62 ERA for the Brewers.

Most notably, his strikeouts were up significantly — 11.0 per nine innings compared to 7.5 with the Reds — and he gave up fewer hits than innings pitched. His fastball velocity was up a tick, averaging 96 mph, but his walk rate and home run rate were problematic, raising questions for scouts about his command.

“I think he got stronger and felt better about trusting his shoulder as the season went along,” said one scout. “He still has good stuff. He has velocity and his ball moves, and he has a good split at times, but he gave up a lot of mistake-pitch home runs, and the walks hurt him.

“The Mets probably see his command getting better in his second year after shoulder surgery. And I’m sure they think they can do some things in their lab with pitch shapes and pitch selection that could make him an above-average starter again.”

To that point, by the measure of ERA+, which takes into account ballpark and other league factors, Montas has been a below-average starter in recent years. His last above-average season was 2022 in Oakland, when his 116 ERA+ was above the league-average 100.

Earlier in his career, at age 26 in 2019, that ERA+ number was a dominant 164 over 16 starts.

“He’ll never be that guy again,” said another scout, “but I wouldn’t rule out getting back to his pre-injury form. Sometimes guys with good stuff can make a jump in that second year.”

Perhaps that’s why the Mets were willing to guarantee Montas $34 million over two years (Montas reportedly has a player option after 2025). The AAV seems a bit high, but the short term makes the risk fairly low.

In any case, a Manaea-like rise to dominance seems a bit far-fetched. Which leads to the bigger question: Who else does Stearns have in mind for the 2025 starting rotation?