Steve Cohen’s arrival as the New York Mets’ owner was hailed as a new era — one that would usher in financial freedom, big-name acquisitions, and a real chance to compete in the toughest division in baseball. Mets fans, long frustrated by years of financial restraint under previous ownership, finally had a billionaire with deep pockets leading the charge. Cohen, a hedge fund titan, promised to spare no expense in bringing a championship to Queens. But as the Mets have faced their share of ups and downs since his takeover, one question remains: Is Cohen’s spending spree actually helping the Mets, or is it just setting them up for long-term failure?
The Argument for the Spending Spree: A New Dawn for the Mets
When Cohen purchased the Mets in 2020, the team was in disarray, both on and off the field. The Wilpon family, having owned the team for over 30 years, had repeatedly failed to invest in the team in a way that made them perennial contenders. Under Cohen’s leadership, however, the Mets were immediately active in the free-agent market. The first big splash? Francisco Lindor, one of the game’s brightest stars, was acquired in a blockbuster trade with Cleveland, followed by a massive extension worth over $340 million.
From that point on, Cohen’s willingness to spend became undeniable. The Mets signed Max Scherzer to a $130 million, three-year contract — the largest deal ever handed to a free-agent pitcher. They added Starling Marte, Eduardo Escobar, and Mark Canha in an effort to boost an aging lineup and put them in a position to contend with the juggernaut teams of the National League.
In 2022, the Mets finished with 101 wins, their highest total since 1988, and the future seemed bright. Cohen’s aggressive spending strategy had brought immediate results. For Mets fans, this was a welcome sight after years of mediocrity. The narrative quickly became clear: Cohen’s spending was a sign of commitment and the key to the Mets’ resurgence.
But as the Mets are finding out, money doesn’t always buy success.
The Pitfalls of Overspending: The Risk of a Short-Term Fix
While the Mets’ payroll has ballooned under Cohen’s ownership, raising expectations, the team’s performance hasn’t always matched the financial outlay. The Mets were expected to be a World Series contender in 2023, but despite their hefty roster investments, they underperformed. The addition of Scherzer, while a headline-grabbing move, hasn’t lived up to expectations in terms of performance or durability, especially considering his age. Scherzer’s $43 million annual salary was meant to anchor a rotation that could challenge the best teams in the NL, but instead, it became a topic of frustration as his form declined in the second half of the season.
Is this spending spree sustainable, or just a temporary illusion of success?
There’s no doubt that spending big on stars like Scherzer and Lindor provides immediate on-field impact, but at what long-term cost? A closer look at the Mets’ financial situation reveals that they are heavily invested in players past their prime — Scherzer, for example, will be 40 by the time his contract expires, and Lindor, while still elite, has had moments of inconsistency. The problem with long-term, big-money contracts is that they can quickly become albatrosses, tying up resources that could be used for future upgrades.
Then there’s the looming question of the Mets’ farm system. Despite Cohen’s substantial financial outlay, the Mets’ minor league system has been underwhelming, particularly in comparison to their divisional rivals like the Atlanta Braves, who have built sustained success through strong player development. As of 2024, the Mets find themselves in a situation where their major league roster is bloated with high salaries, but the farm system hasn’t consistently produced homegrown talent capable of complementing those stars.
Is There Such a Thing as Too Much Spending?
One of the major criticisms of Cohen’s approach is that it’s reactionary — the Mets are constantly trying to fill holes with high-priced free agents rather than developing a sustainable, internally driven system. While the willingness to spend is undeniably admirable, there’s also a risk of becoming a “glamour team” that relies too heavily on external fixes rather than fostering long-term stability.
For example, instead of developing young pitchers through their system, the Mets have focused heavily on acquiring veterans like Scherzer and Justin Verlander (who was traded to Houston after one season in New York). This creates a win-now mentality, but it also leaves the team vulnerable in the event of a roster turnover, injury, or an underperforming player. If the team fails to win a championship in the next few years, they could be left with a bloated payroll and a lack of sustainable assets to rebuild.
The Financial Implications: A Taxing Future
The Mets’ payroll is one of the highest in baseball, but that comes with its own set of problems. Due to Cohen’s spending, the team has triggered the luxury tax, a system designed to penalize teams for going over a certain payroll threshold. In the Mets’ case, they are paying a substantial competitive balance tax penalty due to their astronomical payroll. The Mets are now in the unique position of having to balance their high-spending ways with the realities of the luxury tax, which could severely restrict their financial flexibility in the future.
This situation could limit their ability to make future acquisitions or retain homegrown talent at competitive rates. While Cohen’s wealth might allow him to absorb these penalties, the team will eventually face financial constraints if they continue down this path.
The Verdict: Does Cohen’s Spending Help or Hurt the Mets?
The truth likely lies somewhere in the middle. On one hand, Cohen’s financial investment has clearly improved the team’s competitiveness and brought the Mets back into contention for the first time in years. His willingness to spend on elite players has energized the fanbase and shown that he is committed to putting a winning product on the field. For the short term, Cohen’s approach has certainly been beneficial.
However, in the long run, the Mets may find themselves struggling to balance their immediate successes with the sustainability needed to build a championship team. There is a real risk that, if the team fails to make a deep playoff run soon, Cohen’s spending spree could be seen as a wasted opportunity — one that ultimately hurts the team’s financial health, roster balance, and long-term viability.
Ultimately, Steve Cohen’s Mets are at a crossroads. The next few seasons will reveal whether his financial investments are the key to sustained success or whether they represent an expensive gamble that ultimately sets the franchise back. Only time will tell whether Cohen’s approach will result in a championship, or whether it’s simply a flash in the pan in an era defined by spending — not smart, sustainable baseball.
