Ultimately, the next major roster cuts for the New York Mets may not come down to baseball operations alone they could depend heavily on owner Steve Cohen and his willingness to absorb massive financial losses. In situations where talent and performance are the only considerations, roster decisions are usually straightforward. But when tens of millions of dollars are tied to struggling players, the equation changes dramatically, and ownership becomes a central factor.
While president of baseball operations David Stearns oversees the day-to-day movement of players throughout the organization, everyone understands who ultimately carries the most influence within the franchise. Cohen, whose aggressive spending and outspoken involvement defined his early years as Mets owner, has adopted a noticeably quieter and more reserved role during the 2026 season. Unlike previous years, when his presence was constantly felt through interviews, social media posts, and public commentary, Cohen has mostly remained in the background, occasionally surfacing courtside at New York Knicks games or making brief public remarks.
Even with this lower profile, the Mets have not yet made any truly painful roster decisions involving substantial “dead money” — a sign that the biggest financial calls may still require Cohen’s direct approval. So far, the club has avoided cutting ties with expensive veterans whose contracts would force the organization to pay large sums for players no longer contributing on the field.
The clearest example is pitcher Sean Manaea, whose contract still carries roughly $25 million in obligations through this season and next. What once looked like a solid rotation investment has become one of the organization’s most difficult financial dilemmas. At the same time, Kodai Senga remains another complicated case, with approximately $15 million owed annually over the same period. While there may still be some hope for Senga to rebound, the uncertainty surrounding his health and availability makes the contract increasingly burdensome.
Under normal circumstances, a team might attempt to salvage value from struggling starters by transitioning them into bullpen roles. However, the Mets already find themselves overloaded with underperforming left-handed pitching. David Peterson has endured a miserable season as a starter, forcing the club to use him in shorter relief appearances instead. Although Peterson has at least shown occasional effectiveness in limited innings, Manaea has struggled to provide even that level of consistency. Together, the Mets are paying more than $30 million for pitchers now functioning as little more than long-relief or “bulk inning” options.
Financially, Peterson’s situation is manageable compared to the others. The Mets could designate him for assignment and absorb the remaining $8 million-plus on his contract without completely crippling payroll flexibility. Manaea and Senga are different stories altogether. Their larger contracts and multi-year commitments make releasing them a much more significant organizational decision. Realistically, there is almost no trade market where another club would willingly take on a meaningful portion of those salaries without the Mets covering most of the cost themselves.
Cohen has shown before that he is willing to authorize expensive baseball decisions if he believes they improve the organization long term. During the 2023 trade deadline, the Mets famously paid down large portions of the contracts for Justin Verlander and Max Scherzer in order to secure stronger prospect returns. Similar salary-dump logic applied in moves involving James McCann and Jeff McNeil. In those cases, ownership accepted financial pain in exchange for future flexibility and organizational improvement.
Still, the current situation feels more complicated. Manaea and Senga are not expiring contracts, and their on-field value has declined to the point where rival teams would have little interest unless the Mets essentially paid them to disappear. From a pure baseball perspective, moving on may be the logical choice if performance does not improve. But because the consequences are overwhelmingly financial rather than competitive, the final decision may rest less with Stearns and more with Cohen’s willingness to swallow millions in sunk costs for the sake of reshaping the roster.
Leave a Reply