Tomorrow Is Not Promised. Today, Bo Bichette Is a Met.
The stove is piping hot, my friends.
Just over 12 hours after Kyle Tucker’s bombshell signing with the Dodgers, Bo Bichette is also on the move. To the New York Mets, on a three-year, $126 million contract with opt-outs after each of the first two seasons. A shortstop throughout his career to this point, Bichette is expected to play third base for the Mets, who have a pretty solid incumbent shortstop already.
Bichette and the Dodgers had been in discussions over a short-term, high-AAV deal like the one Tucker ultimately signed, but Bichette, like most free agents, seemed to be interested in a contract with more term and overall value, but a lower annual salary. Back in August, I made a case for Bichette to cash in by pitching him as Trea Turner, but slow. And when America went to bed on Thursday, the smart money was on Bichette signing with the Phillies, who had already invested $300 million in Original Recipe Turner.
The Mets were reeling from Tucker’s rejection, amidst mortifying vagueposting from Steve Cohen. (Seriously, if you’re worth more than $500 million, you should not be allowed on social media.) But credit to Cohen and David Stearns, who suddenly found themselves with $220 million earmarked for Tucker, and no Tucker to spend that money on. They not only grabbed the next-best bat left on the market, in so doing they put a finger in the eye of their division rival.
The Phillies were in position to offer Bichette more security, but no one — except the Dodgers, obviously — could compete with the Mets’ offer in terms of cash up front. Their pursuit of Bichette had always been opportunistic to some extent, made possible by other teams’ lack of interest in signing the former Blue Jay to a long-term deal. So within about two hours of Bichette’s deal with the Mets being announced, the Phillies pivoted back to Plan A and brought back catcher J.T. Realmuto.
Philadelphia’s offer — reportedly $200 million over seven years — was in line with standard practice. No one thought Bichette would’ve been worth $28 million in his age-34 season, but you pay a little more on the back end in order to not have to pay sticker price for the player’s prime. It’s how the Phillies got Turner and Bryce Harper, how the Yankees got Gerrit Cole, how the Dodgers got Shohei Ohtani, and so on, and so on.
But when the Dodgers outbid everyone for Tucker — $57.1 million AAV after accounting for deferrals, by far the largest salary in baseball history — they did away with the artifice. They’re paying a star player full value for his prime years alone, and letting someone else deal with the decline phase.
Now the Mets are doing the same with Bichette, giving him the joint-sixth-largest AAV in baseball history, and the third-largest — behind Tucker and Juan Soto — for a position player.
Bichette is nowhere near the third-best position player in baseball, but he’s uniquely positioned to take advantage of this contract structure, which allows him to hit free agency again, next year, without being tagged with a qualifying offer.
The obvious template for Bichette is Alex Bregman, another feisty, undersized infielder. Last year, Bregman spurned longer offers to sign a three-year, $120 million contract, less deferrals, with opt-outs, with the Red Sox. Bregman pocketed $40 million, posted a good year (.273/.360/.462, 3.5 WAR), opted out, and signed a five-year, $175 million contract with the Cubs.
If Bichette opts out after this season and signs exactly that contract a year from now, he’ll make $217 million over six years, which puts him in the black versus the Phillies’ offer. And that estimate is probably conservative.
Bregman got drafted out of college and signed an extension with the Astros during his team control years; he was three years older when he hit free agency than Bichette is now. Bichette, who turns 28 in March, is actually the sixth-youngest position player in this free agent/posting class, and four of the five players ahead of him were non-tendered after putting up negative WAR in 2025. The only player available on the open market this winter who was younger than Bichette and has a reasonable chance of being worth a crap is Munetaka Murakami.
If Bichette posts another season in the neighborhood of 4 WAR and re-enters free agency before his age-29 season, he’ll still be one of the youngest players in the class. If he wants to sign his seven-year, settle-down-forever deal then, he’ll still be able to do so.
Damn, that’s a lot of ink spilled about economics. Let’s get to the fun part: What can Bo do for the Mets? Here’s what ZiPS says:
| Year | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | .294 | .339 | .445 | 555 | 73 | 163 | 31 | 1 | 17 | 80 | 37 | 97 | 5 | 121 | 3.8 |
| 2027 | .287 | .335 | .433 | 550 | 71 | 158 | 30 | 1 | 16 | 78 | 38 | 96 | 5 | 117 | 3.4 |
| 2028 | .284 | .332 | .431 | 538 | 68 | 153 | 29 | 1 | 16 | 75 | 37 | 94 | 4 | 116 | 3.1 |
If you want to go the projected contract value route, that’s $39 million over one year, $76 million over two, and $111 million over three. So more or less what the Mets are going to pay him, with the caveat that if Bichette produces anything like the season ZiPS foresees in 2026, the last two years of this contract are going to be academic.
Offensively, Bichette is a known quantity; I mentioned the Slow Trea Turner thing up top, and that applies. He’s an ultra-high-contact spray hitter. He doesn’t walk much, but for a hitter with 20-homer power, he barely ever swings and misses. Bichette has a .294 career batting average, which doesn’t seem remarkable if you grew up watching Ichiro and Derek Jeter and reading about Ted Williams and Tony Gwynn, but I don’t think most people appreciate how rare that kind of hitter is these days.
You want to know how many active hitters there are right now with a .300 career batting average? Two: Jose Altuve and Freddie Freeman, at .303 and .300, respectively. Altuve shed three points of career batting average in 2025, so there’s a decent chance that by this time next year there will be zero active .300 hitters.
Having a mega-aggressive hitter like Bichette will make for an interesting contrast with Soto, one of the most selective hitters of all time. In a playoff series — which, getting there is the minimum expectation for the Mets — it’ll force opponents to come up with a diversity of approaches against New York’s most dangerous hitters.
Will this approach age well? I don’t know. Bichette already doesn’t have a ton of bat speed, and if he doesn’t moderate his approach into his 30s, he could end up declining quickly. But with a three-year contract, that is absolutely not the Mets’ problem.
The big question mark for Bichette is his defense. He was never a great defensive shortstop to begin with, and lower-body injuries have sapped his range over the past two seasons; in 2025, he had first-percentile defensive range at the position.
The Mets, with Francisco Lindor and Marcus Semien as a double play combination, are one of the least likely teams in baseball to be tempted to throw Bichette out at short. Bichette has more of a traditional second baseman’s body type, but he’s been just fine fielding what balls he’s been able to reach, and his arm has actually graded out better than Semien’s recently, so I don’t expect third base to be an insurmountable challenge.
The only awkward part of Bichette’s fit with the Mets is what this means for Brett Baty and Mark Vientos. Removing Brandon Nimmo and Pete Alonso from the lineup would have opened up space for New York’s two talented-but-frustrating corner infielders to slide down the defensive spectrum. But then the Mets went out and got not only Semien and Bichette, but also Jorge Polanco. It’s a different logjam than before, but a logjam nonetheless.
Both Baty and Vientos are in their final year of team control before arbitration — not that I’d expect Cohen, who has a truly antisocial level of personal wealth, to sweat the odd couple million in any case. They would be effective, if underutilized, as a DH platoon and injury insurance. Or the Mets could take advantage of other teams’ need for corner infield help — just this week I wrote about the Red Sox as a potential buyer — and shore up a pitching staff that invites one to tug one’s collar and grimace.
These are problems for another day. A team with Bo Bichette in the lineup is better than a team without Bo Bichette in the lineup. The Mets don’t have to think about this any more deeply than that.
Michael is a writer at FanGraphs. Previously, he was a staff writer at The Ringer and D1Baseball, and his work has appeared at Grantland, Baseball Prospectus, The Atlantic, ESPN.com, and various ill-remembered Phillies blogs. Follow him on Twitter, if you must, @MichaelBaumann.
The Mets are gonna be a really weird team.
As a longtime fan, I feel like that is the status quo. Hopefully they can make things work, though!
That should be a nice change of pace for them.
That was my first reaction too. This team is thin in the outfield and thick in the infield now. That sounds wrong, but I think it works.
It was ever thus.
They badly need an outfielder at this point (you have to think this roster has a Nimmo-shaped hole), but presumably that and/or pitching depth are now going to be addressed by dealing from the pile of young infielders (Vientos, Baty, Mauricio) in whom Stearns has apparently never much believed. And yes, this makes the team better, lopsided roster aside, but you have to think a lot of Mets fans are thinking “why didn’t you just spend the same pile of money on Pete in the first place?”
Pete is a liability in the field today and will be a liability at the plate in 3 years time. IMO, better to match terms of the offer to the actual value, rather than tying up cash for grumpy old men.
Now they have taken Bichette off the market, Vientos/Baty/Mauricio have (somewhat) greater value. I expect Stearns may flip one of them and a pitcher to the Sawx for an outfielder….
Interesting times!
Baty plus what = Duran?
I don’t even know if the Red Sox want Baty given their drive to make their lineup less left-handed, and I sure wouldn’t give up Duran in a deal where Baty was anything more than an afterthought.
I don’t have a clue what they could offer to get the Red Sox to trade Duran, or even Abreu. It’s not like the Red Sox are short on upper level pitching either.
Could they do a 3 team trade – Mason Miller to the Red Sox, Duran to the Mets, and upper level pitching prospects to the Padres? (Obviously other moving parts to balance out the value)
I definitely wouldn’t do that either if I were the Red Sox but this could be the basis of a crazy 7-team trade where every outstanding trade rumor gets resolved. I want to see it.
The Padres, Mets, Red Sox, Brewers, Cardinals, D-Backs, and Nationals collaborate on a deal where Ketel Marte, Mason Miller, Jarren Duran, Freddy Peralta, Brendan Donovan, Mackenzie Gore, Brett Baty, and numerous upper-level FV50-caliber prospects change organizations.
Yesssss
get er done!
The catch: All those players you named except Baty go to the Dodgers.
Vientos on the other hand would fit Fenway great. And he’s the kind of guy Boston likes lately – talented but flawed and above all cheap. They want a RH infield bat who can pull everything in sight. The Mets have a guy like that.
Yeah but he’s a dreadful defensive third baseman on the level of Devers on the defensive end obviously not on the offensive end.
+ Sproat or Tong should do it. Maybe an interesting T-30 guy to top it off.
But I also don’t think they A) need Duran that badly and B) Baty is now quite important as their 3B safety net for next season if (when) Bichette opts out. So play Baty at 1B next year and rest Polanco’s knees as primary DH and sometimes INF.
Instead, I focus on flipping Vientos for a solid, Nootbar-type LF. Hold on to all the kids and see who rises to the top, and allow him to contribute. Mets give up a young guy with legit 30 HR pop, but who has already failed out of the defensive spectrum (which Stearns has made obvious is not a defensive skillset he has much tolerance for).
Excellent post we’re in full agreement.
I think the Sox are aiming higher than that if they’re trading one of their OF.
Because they think he’ll age badly why must people not get that?
Sorry double post my bad
Re: Pete
Because he should be a DH now, but is probably going to insist to continue to be a liability at 1B for the next 2 years.
The Mets have a controllable 1B/DH type already at the moment in Vientos, who is obviously not as good, but a fraction of the cost.
And then Soto needs to move to 1B himself at some point.
That would be a whole bunch of dollars settling at the bottom of the defensive spectrum that the Mets are trying to avoid.
But yes, a lot of Mets fans are asking that question (and generally ignoring the answer).
This is three dimensional baseball chess at its best! Stearns gains a lot of positional flexibility and now can mix and match on the field and with potential trading partners. Perhaps more interesting, this has deprived both the Phillies and the Red Sox of a potential signing in an area where they have more need than the Mets.
As a note, I think we are so used to long contracts that we view the short “High AAV” contracts as an aberration. What if they aren’t? What if teams are finally waking up to the fact that it might be better to pay for actual production, rather than extend and pretend?
I’d like to see an article on that!
And since it’s a 110% tax on the contract and Cohen isn’t dumb, Bichette is actually worth $90m plus.
think the Mets see this as a one-year deal, that someone Bichette’s age would likely opt out.
you mentioned the Red Sox – do you think there is some sort of package that can be made centering around Yoshida and either Baty or Mauricio? I figure Yoshida is only owed two years on his deal,and would seem to be more attainable than a guy like Duran.
Yoshida’s negative trade value is literally whatever he is owed at this point. He wouldn’t be even worth a roster spot on half of teams right now.
The Mets don’t have a platoon partner for Tyrone Taylor and they really, really need one. But if they’re going to go this route, they’re probably asking about Luke Raley or Jesus Sanchez first before they even consider Yoshida. And then they would probably still say no.
Yoshida’s just stuck where he is until the Sox finally decide to straight up cut him.
That’s terrible Yoshida adds nothing
So they get him for one year at a very high salary, only keep him if he turns into an albatross, and lose a draft pick. This reeks of “we need to do something because we lost out on the other guy.”
According to Will Sammon, (who is as well connected as anyone), and he reports that they’ve talked to Bichette since November and met with him a week ago.
@salty, I’m not sure he will opt out (but obviously could be wrong); if he is worth 4WAR – which is great, it’s more than is projected for Pete – that’s about $35Mn in value (my rough non pointy head estimate).
I wonder if a bigger shift is taking place – with the Mets, Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox and Phillies becoming increasingly guy shy about long contracts, BB’s bid next year might be exactly on top of what the Mets are giving him…plus they can always restructure the contract.
I would love it if the FG staff could look at the question of changing contract terms. We’ve grown used to this high AAVs as being the exception, not the rule…but I am beginning to question that ‘received wisdom.’
The Phillies offered Bichette seven years.
Probably had to be done to get him signed but I will never be a fan of dropping a year 1 opt out on a QO player
Are they going to trade Baty now? Then what’s your plan next year? This deal is obviously based on Bregman’s, are they going to make the same mistake the Red Sox did with Bregman?
Baty is as good as gone
I kind of think so, too – but maybe he stays and Mauricio goes. Stearns has no ties to either player, so both seem expendable. Would the Padres find either desirable as part of a package for Pivetta and/or Laureano? The system seems deep enough to get there, but it’d be best to unload one of their corner IFs off the 40-man in the process.
The Padres need a SP and 1B. Why would they want Baty?
I was thinking he’d be a solid 1B and a nice, cheap, ready-made option for a team that’s 20mm over the cap. I think they would find a package of him and DPete attractive if they look to reduce salary.
Not necessarily, he’s still a great 3B insurance policy when Bichette bolts after next season.
Maybe they’ll try Baty in the OF. That’s a Pirate move if I’ve ever seen one.
Red Sox have a good team with a questionable infield. Mets have a good team with a questionable non Soto OF and pitching but a superb infield
It sure seems like this is the obvious situation, except that the most logical player for the Red Sox on the Mets’ roster is Bichette, who also doesn’t really fit on the Mets because what is probably his best position is covered by Semien.
I sure wouldn’t trade Duran for Baty. No way. Not even Baty and one of their FV50 pitchers for Duran. Maybe Baty + Sproat for Wilyer Abreu.
That means trade Semien for a pitcher
If I were the Red Sox I would do Yoshida and Bello for Semien. That could work. But the Mets did just trade for Semien, so who knows.
Going back to his Milwaukee days, Stearns has always loved up the middle defense. I don’t think he trades Semien to play Bichette at 2b. Bichette will never be a GGer, but I can see him playing average defense at 3B. Certainly better than Vientos, probably similar to Bath defensively.
This was a really well-written and enjoyable read.
Bichette signing makes me wonder if they’d like to undo Nimmo for Semien.
Doubtful. I think they wanted to dump Nimmo’s money regardless.
I don’t think they would, because this offseason is clearly being driven by something other than positional fit.
No they wanted out of Nimmo’s contract especially with five years left.
would have been fine with Jays resigning Bo but I had two big worries about him going forward. First, is that he really only has one skill. It’s a doozy of a skill but his bat to ball/hand-eye coordination/hit tool is great and everything else is mediocre or worse. If that skill degrades at all, there’s just nothing left. He has so-so power, isn’t a good fielder or baserunner, doesn’t have a good eye. There’s no way to compensate for that the way another player might sacrifice some walks for more power or something. This would have been a bigger concern for a longer-term deal though. My big worry with Bo shorter-term is his sudden drop in athleticism. He looks like a different person than he did a few years ago. He looked really slow and unathletic this year and starting to get injuries that come with that. It’s normal part of aging but unusual for athletes in their mid-20s. It’s quite possible Bo has another great hitting year and plays a decent 3B but I think there’s a lot of risk here as well.
I think you mean that Bo does not take many walks (he doesn’t) … but I would argue that claiming he does not have a “good eye” is … wild … when we all acknowledge his absolutely (still) elite bat-to-ball skills. I have no idea how one could almost continuously lead the league in hits (when healthy) and NOT have a good eye.
But, no, he certainly does not walk much. He is up there to hit, and so far, that is exactly what he does. (…and like you, I think that is a skill likely to degrade. Whether or not he then decides to start taking more walks…?)
I think this is more about confusion/difference of opinion in terminology. To me, same as Glevin, having a “good eye” is about being able to identify balls vs strikes and therefore swing mostly at strikes while avoiding swings at balls. Bo has a well above average O-swing %, so he’s not very good at laying off bad pitches, now he makes well above average contact on those pitches similar to his great in zone contact, but its likely that its not good contact and he would be more productive taking the ball then making weak contact just because he can put the bat on the ball so often.
Correct. He has a hit tool. Can maybe squint and see a league average power tool, but probably not. Can’t run, can’t field, can’t throw. Bat speed falls off a cliff around 31, and he wasn’t coming from elite bat speed prior.
He’s 2023 Ozzie Albies if you trade his range and arm. He just was nominally a short stop so it feel like he should get more.
Side note: the Albies deal always felt terrible but the fact that his platform year would have been 2023 makes it worse. He wouldn’t have gotten what Bichette did because of the whole “he’s a short stop!” thing but my god did that deal screw him over.
Am I the only one who is not “tugging my collar and grimacing” about the Mets pitching? Maybe there’s no ace, but McLean, Holmes, and Peterson are all viable starters; who knows what they’ll get out of Senga and Manaea, but they also have Sproat, Tong, and Christian Scott as depth, among others. If they bring in someone like Valdez, that’s great, but I’d rather them try out the young guys than bring in some random 4/5 starter as filler.
IDK about the bullpen but I would absolutely be comfortable going into the season with the starters they have. However I am not going to be at all comfortable with the rotation if, as rumors suggest, they still intend to deal Peterson and/or Senga.
I had a whole post about how I don’t believe those 8 guys can throw enough IP, but the minor league guys (mostly) threw more last year than I thought.
But I still think that rotation’s a high wire act. If Senga gets hurt, or Manaea’s ineffective, then you’re reliant on all of the young guys being effective and available, and AIUI you’re not supposed to assume that from young pitchers.
I think McLean is gonna be an ace from the jump as he sure looked like his first six weeks in the majors. Agree with the rest good post.
None of those are guys you should rely on to be in the rotation by July or to be potential playoff starters. It’s a reasonably talented group and I’m a really big fan of Sproat and Scott, but it’s light on experience and “proven ace” types. So for a team with championship plans, this is the weakness.
What were the cutoffs used to eliminate Arraez as an active .300 hitter? Did he not show up as active because he is unsigned?
I suspect yes, this because it is technically true. But typically the FanGraphs folks add in a caveat or footnote of sorts wherein they would note that Arraez technically does not qualify, but will likely have a team come March, etc.
All to say: Likely a bit of an oversight.*
*…and as I write this, I see the Mariners JUST picked him up!**
**…both making him active and demonstrating that weirdly missing caveat!
Don’t see the Arraez news anywhere? Also would make next to zero sense with Naylor at 1st, and Raleigh needing to DH some
I think tarvis was just spitballing an example.
Had to be a cutoff. Jacob Wilson’s currently a career .300 hitter, as well.
Yeah, but Wilson has fewer than 700 career PA, whereas Arraez and Bichette both have 3000+
Not gonna math it out, but Judge is sitting at .294 and over his last 1100 ABs (the last two seasons, exactly), he’s hit .326. Trea Turner is at .297
Also, what’s your PA/AB cutoff? Because Arraez is well over .300 (in ~3500 PA).
I assume Arraez didn’t come up because he is a free agent, and they don’t come up on the leaderboards here when you select active roster.
It’s a fair question, though, if you did AVG+ what is .294 in like 2000 numbers? Obviously the way teams play defense, pitching, approach etc is all different now so it’s impossible to say but Luis Arraez is a career .317 hitter and he fees like a .330 or .340 guy
Is Bo a .320 in what we would consider a normal offensive environment?
I got around to mathing it out; playing around varying levels of PA/AB, Judge would have to hit about .350 next year to move his career average to .300.
Feels like the point of this was more so to prevent the Phillies from improving than to make the Mets good
Preventing your most hated rivals from improving is just about as valuable as making your own team good. Bichette adds a win or two over what Baty may have produced as well, and they still have the resources/time to improve the spots they absolutely need to fix up!
Maybe, but Bichette has never played third base before. Not even in the minors
So now they have an overstocked INF, an understocked 0F, and have to make more moves. They’re making it very complicated just to go sideways. The offseason plan could have been very simple: 1) re-sign Alonso 2) sign a SP 3) give kids a chance. The fans would have been happy.
Being sentimental and catering to the wfan/bluesky/twitter crowds just isn’t it.
You mean there’s a big silent majority of Mets fans who wanted to replace Alonso with Jorge Polanco?
Who cares what the fans think? This isn’t a democracy. And what does it even mean to say Polanco “replaced” Alonso? No front office thinks that way. If they save money at one position, they can spend it on another.
“Who cares what the fans think?” That might be a good motto for the Miami Marlins, but if I were an owner looking for a GM to maximize the value of my franchise and an applicant said that, it would be the end of the interview.
A little history: the 1977 trade of Tom Seaver nearly killed the Mets franchise. Attendance per game date immediately dropped about 11% after the trade (from its pre-trade pace) and by 1979 was at 54% of its 1976 level. The alienation of the fan base led directly to the 1980 sale of the franchise to the Wilpon consortium.
Granted, Alonso isn’t Seaver in value or sentiment, but yeah, I’m pushing back on the notion that you can run a real-life franchise like a Yahoo team. Rooting passionately for whatever baseball corporation happens to be located in your city is fundamentally an irrational and sentimental act, and teams that don’t factor that into their decisions aren’t maximizing their value. For all their evilness, the Yankees (the Mets’ direct competitor) understand that.
The primary job of the front office is to put together a winning roster. The best way to boost franchise value and attendance is to win games. Now if you want to criticize the Mets’ offseason from that perspective, go for it. But if I were an owner looking for a GM to maximize the value of my franchise and an applicant said that they would make decisions contrary to their internal models and approach to satisfy fan sentiment, it would be the end of the interview.
Well, I did. I said they made all those moves to go sideways, and that there was a simpler way to improve without pissing off their fan base. I don’t criticize the Nimmo & McNeil trades, there was a logic to them. But Alonso was one of the few impact position players they’ve developed in 60 years and an obvious fan favorite. Letting him walk for no persuasive reason was a mistake. When all is said and done, it won’t save them much if any money, it forced them to scramble to fill the hole in their lineup, and ultimately it crowded out Baty. Nobody’s arguing that a bad team of familiar faces is preferable to a good team. I said that fan sentiment and team identity should be a consideration in roster decisions, not a be all and end all.
Fan sentiment and team identity shouldn’t be anywhere near roster decisions. Previous Met regimes have made decisions based on ticket sales and trying to appease fans.
This regime is cold, cutthroat, and doesn’t give a crap about a particular player’s popularity with the fan base. Winning. Only a winning. As a Mets fan that’s seen plenty of sentimental moments but very little winning, I have never been more excited or confident in a front office
No, there’s a loud likely majority that refuses to accept that Pete is a DH right now, and has a historical skillset that is foolish to invest long term into.
It’s such an odd fit. It’s like he was like shit I gotta sign somebody. I have a feeling Bichette isn’t going to age well, but it’s just a random gut feeling based on lack of athleticism, having a rebound in a contract year, etc. But having him at third seems crazy. Pretty weak arm for a 3rd baseman. Polanco isn’t necessarily good at third either, and Bichette wouldn’t want to move down the defensive spectrum if he has any intention of opting out, because his bat would only be slightly positive at first. It won’t happen but I’d wonder if they would be better if they swapped positions?
It totally is a panic move by Cohen after losing Tucker to the Dodgers but if panic buying a 4-5ish win player is wrong then by God I don’t want to ever be right.
He has a stronger arm than Baty per statcast and there are numerous guys with not great arms that are fine third baseman.
Those guys usually half adequate range though
True but Kai Correa helped turned JD Davis into an above average defender maybe he does the same with Bichette.
I had the same thought. I’m wondering if Bichette is Hanley Ramirez, a guy that plays a terrible SS that people assume will improve down the defensive spectrum but is really just a DH
Assuming he opts out, I don’t see how 90m for one year of Bichette is worth it
Agreed. Zero upside deal for the Mets.
weird you think there’s no upside to having a 135 wRC+ hitter in the middle of your lineup for a season.
Mets saved the Phillies from an awful mistake and also made their defense worse and did not improve their OF. This is a win for Phillies.
Enjoy Alec Bohm as your clean up guy.
Maybe there were no winners here…
Maybe the winners were the friends we made along the way…
So let me get this straight:
The Mets displaced their young 2-win third baseman who has way less value at any other position for a guy who can opt out after one year and has never played third base. At least not that I can see. Now Baty has no role for a year, but he could have a role in two. Also, the guy they are theoretically going to play at first base has basically never played there either, and might be DH from now on. And they are going to start Tyrone Taylor and Carson Benge in the outfield, because they traded away their starting left fielder to Texas for another infielder and traded the guy who used to moonlight there to Oakland in a salary dump.
The Cubs displaced their young 2-win third baseman who has way less value at a non-infield position for a guy who will be there for several years, and also whose swing might not work well in their stadium. But they also have a second baseman who is going to be up for free agency next year, so in theory they could send him back to the minors to convert back to second base. Except that Hoerner was more valuable than Bregman last year and way younger and would have signed a cheaper extension, so it makes no sense to choose Bregman over him. Meanwhile, they have decided to roll with an entire rotation filled with question mark in their rotation, hoping that it all works out.
The Red Sox lost that third baseman that the Cubs signed, so now they have multiple injury-prone infielders penciled in at all three of their non-1B spots; they absolutely require at least one starting caliber infielder, and probably two. They also have four starting caliber outfielders, including one who put up almost 7 wins a couple years ago and is somehow the one everyone focuses on. They also have a DH (who is also nominally an outfielder) who they stubbornly refuse to move on from despite iffy production, and another outfielder who they tried to make an infielder last year and is signed for another 6 years or something like that. They decided that the right move was to sign a starting pitcher, bumping the starting prospect with the best fastball in the minors out of a major league job, as well as the guy who was nearly unhittable in four major league starts last year.
Why does it seem like these teams are more interested in a budget than a plan? These are three of the biggest market teams in MLB, and they might all be top 5 in terms of resources behind the Yankees and Dodgers. At the worst they are Top 7. They all had years that were disappointing for one year or another last year, and they clearly wanted to spend. And now we have…this. I would suggest a trade but with how little the teams seem to care about holes in their roster, I don’t think it will happen.
Why would you assume that Taylor and Benge are both going to start in the OF at this point in the offseason?
Because those are the best two candidates for their CF and LF vacancy currently on the roster? And the only free agent starting-caliber outfielders left are Cody Bellinger and maybe Harrison Bader? Where Bellinger is demanding a 7-year deal and Bader already had one unhappy season with the Mets?
Who else? I mean I’d assume a trade is going to happen, but as it stands now who else would it be? I guess they could move an infielder to the outfield.
Granted, the outfield market this year is shockingly bad (which is part of why a guy with as little star quality as Kyle Tucker just set the new record for AAV); all the same, it’s hard to envision them not bringing in another OF.
I agree there are strange roster fit things occurring here. Think it’s fine for Cubs to keep Shaw around as a super sub and starter next year should Hoerner leave. But Mets and Red Sox really have to follow these signings with a trade to make it all make sense.
I think Sterns has never really cared for Baty/Vientos/Mauricio so he doesn’t mind if he has to sell low here. Conversely, I’m really not convinced Breslow had a good backup plan if the missed on Bregman.
Re: Boston
I wonder if Bregman just wasnt that big of a part of their plan. I mean sure they got within $10M of the winning bid but they also know they can pivot if they had to as they weren’t that motivated to beat the Cubs in a war for a 32 year old with a recent injury entering his decline phase. Signing Ranger Suarez to be their #3 and trading one of their lesser starters to fix up 3B is a viable plan. As is trading out one of their many outfielders to do the same thing. Hell, they could even sign Geno Suarez to a 1-2 year deal for a fraction of what Bregman just signed and get roughly equal production. They’ve essentially both been 4ish WAR players the last few seasons.
It’s hard to say what happens until games are played but I can totally see a scenario in which Semien breaks or gets demoted to a reserve role due to his age and declining skills, they move Bichette to 2B, and then Baty/whichever infield prospect doesn’t get dealt away becomes the 3B.
They are all assuming 2027 won’t happen and so players won’t get paid that year, which I do think is part of the calculus for all these short deals
With the Cubs, I think part of it is simply the specific players involved. There have been years of Bregman rumors, I think they simply love him in particular, and don’t have a ton of faith in Shaw (potentially connected to Law’s report on his work ethic, leaving the team last year, etc.).
They’ve definitely down a pitcher; though I do like Cabrera, as risky as he is. But they haven’t really had an ace presence since Darvish. Imai would’ve likely been a good fit too, but there’s no one else on the market I’m screaming for. I’d love a trade for Dollander or Gore, though, ideally keeping Wiggins (and Nico) somehow.
Stearns is doing some underpants gnomes–style team construction.
1. Clear the roster
2.
3. Playoffs!
The team still has no viable OF plan, and Baty/Vientos is a ridiculous plan for DH. Oh, and they still need a SP.
Baty/Vientos filling the DH spot and filling in at other spots when guys are hurt or need rest actually seems like a fine plan!
It gives them about the same DH production (±110 wRC+) as last year, when they got 0.7 WAR from the position. Wow. If you squint, they might be #3 in the division instead of #4.
Their plan for DH should be Polanco. With Bichette at first and Baty at third. But it will not happen for a number of reasons. I think the best you can hope for is a Baty / Vientos platoon at first with Polanco at DH.
Maybe that is what happens, and if that’s the case I’d be fine with it. I’m totally cool with at least waiting to see how Polanco looks at first, though. People who know a lot more about baseball than I do keep saying they think he’ll be fine there.
I don’t think the question is whether he can do it. The question is whether he can play the field and stay healthy. I’m about 75% of the way there on the first one and 25% of the way there on the second.
Fair. I honestly am not stressing about where guys are going to play at this point. 2B and SS seem pretty set (and Bichette could fill in for either if needed); Bichette, Baty, or Vientos could play 3B on any given day; Polanco, Baty, or Vientos could play 1B; and if everyone is healthy you’d have a couple of guys left over on any given day to either DH or PH. And maybe somebody starts to moonlight in the OF. Lucas Duda did it, how hard can it be?
Duda was a disaster in the OF.
Big reason is the opt out. No one is gonna him more than this if he opts out as a first baseman. But ya, that’s the right course of action
Something I’ve been wondering, are the Mets gearing up to dip under the tax line in a few years? Thus preferring Semiens shorter deal and signing short high AAV deals now
they’re just using their financial muscle to avoid paying for a player’s decline years
I think they are myself.
If enough of the kids hit at once in one year, it gives them a really easy exit from the tax threshold. Don’t know if that happens next off season, one after, etc., but they’ll have the option to pivot that way if they so choose.
Lindor has to be one of the highest workload players in the league since his debut, maybe by far, and I see the Semien and Bichette pickups as a resounding show of support. Great infield….I preferred Bregman bc of the pulled flyballs approach but Bichette’s dynamic afaIct
There seems to be a few common threads in all of Stearns moves this year. These seem to be his main constraints he is working with, namely that he:
a) Doesn’t want to sacrifice prime years of Soto and Lindor, he wants to win now.
b) Sees long contracts after age of 33 to be risky, especially with all the money tied up to Soto and Lindor.
c) 1B and 3B might be handled well and cheaply by Baty, Vientos, and less so Mauricio, but none have been dependable (although Baty is on a more clear upward progression).
d) Has a handful of young prospects at the cusp of being called up (i.e. Benge, Williams, Reimer, and Ewing. He wants to have a path for them by 2027 without losing an arbitration year by calling them up early this year, nor having an option for not playing them if they fail.
e) With the three young starting pitchers, he prefers to swap offense for defense for building more confidence and growth.
Based on all of these factors, everything seems to be to plan. He replaced 5 aging years each of Alonso and Nimmo in their 30s (along with McNeil) for a couple of years of Polanco, Semien, and Bichette.
He seems to be betting on Bichette having a good year and opting out, equaling one good year at market value. If so, little risk in signing him. He can trade him at the trade deadline (and/or Vientos/Baty) for prospects or pitching help.
After 2027 Bichette and Polanco will be gone and we’ll have a better understanding of which of our prospects are starter worthy, without having to punt on 2026 and/or 2027 due to giving lots of playing time to prospects.
I think the probability of BB opting out is lower than people expect. However, we must wait to see the next agreement between the owners and the union to assess this. Interesting year, for sure!
2027 is almost assuredly going to be partly it fully wiped out, which is why most of those young players won’t game a service year burned this year.
Stearns already played those kinds of games with Alvarez last year, and it probably cost them they playoffs.
No chance will they wipe the season out I doubt any games are missed.
I knew if the Mets re-signed Alonso at or exceeding his free market value it would signal that Stearns had been overridden by his boss, because there’s no way he’d pay a 1B. It goes back to the manner in which the concepts which worked in Milwaukee seem to be self-defeating in New York.
I wonder, if Stearns were the GM of Toronto a year ago, would he have just let Vladdy walk out of principle, even though it fit his budget?
Second-best hitter left in the market? I’m curious who would rank ahead of Bichette. Bellinger? I can’t think of anyone else, and if so, I think you may be underrating Bo and overrating Belli. Cody hit like an all-star in Yankee Stadium, but check his road numbers last season: .241/.301/.414. Those are good numbers for a utility infielder. Bichette, on the other hand, hit as well on the road as at home.I suspect one of the reasons Bellinger remains unsigned is that GMs can read a home/road split at least as well as we can.
Yeah, there’s a home/road split, but the road split you gave is basically league average (.245/.315/.404) with a little less OBP and a little more power. I don’t think people realize just how depressed offense numbers are, but scoring stays up due to the increased HR rate from previous eras.
I read that to mean ‘2nd best behind Tucker’. Though maybe he meant Bellinger?
If it said “second best hitter left on the market” as rallyboy said then it wouldn’t be the off-market Tucker. Must be Bellinger
I think teams have (correctly?) identified that if you can’t get who you want at your position of need, you acquire talent w/o regard for that need and then trade from that position of strength. Though we haven’t seen that much of the trading yet.
The trade market is inefficient because teams don’t want to look bad.
I’m not a Met fan but when I read Mr Bauman write “Cohen who has a truly antisocial level of personal wealth” I’m left with a few questions.
1) what is this Marxist drivel doing in Fangraphs.?
2) what is an appropriate level of wealth that meets your approval?
3)I look forward to your writing of the level of personal wealth of all owners that meets the Michael Bauman seal of approval.
People really call any random thing “Marxist”
1. If you think Marxism just means “being against billionaires,” you need to do more reading.
2. Let’s start with 999 million and work our way down until we all have enough free or affordable food, education, housing, and medical care.
3. I don’t really enjoy Baumann’s writing that much (because of the repaired random references to obscure people and events), but he’s not wrong here.
I’m genuinely curious: do you believe that one person having X amount of wealth means that someone else has Y-X wealth?
No answer, just downvotes. To put it more at your level, saying that wealth is a zero-sum game is the same as saying immigrants take jobs from “hard working Americans”.
I like the move yes they have a lot of young infielders but besides for Baty I’m not high on them. Vientos is a putrid defensive player, and has awful is zone contact issues, Acuna is a straight up garbage hitter and Mauricio can’t hit lefties and has terrible plate discipline.
Yes, Bichette was a terrible shortstop and there is risk he’ll be a be a butcher at third but I’ll take the chance. Who knows maybe like Xavier Edwards was a dreadful shortstop and moved to second and was a plus defender there maybe Bichette could do the same at third? I might be a Pollyanna though.
When it came to Baty at first blush I thought he’d become the first baseman with Polanco as the dh with Bichette here, but there’s a chance he’ll be moved for pitching or an OFer. The Mets are planning to use him like McNeil was used as a guy that plays a handful of positions and plays most days.
I preferred Tucker, but Bichette is a four war player and the Mets are better than they were yesterday.
I also think they’ll trade for an OFer and I believe in Benge.
I still think they sign Bellinger because this contract should not limit them from doing so if they want.
If Bichette takes to 3B, it should open his opportunities if/when he opts out. Maybe I’m totally reading this wrong, but it looks like a glorified one year contract to me.
Bellinger seems like the type of all-around player the front office would commit longer too. Hopefully there’s some clarity on that front in the coming days.
there’s just no chance Stearns signs anyone for more than 4 years, which seems to be Bellinger’s requirement.
Yup Bellinger seems steadfast in wanting a long term deal and he isn’t getting one from the Mets.
Not to be a Mets fan apologist, but Stearns was there when they signed Soto. To say there’s no chance in Stearns signing anyone to a longer-term contract is incorrect.
And while I’ll agree that Stearns is generally reticent on doing it, Bellinger’s overall ability and his long-term projected defensive value starting in the OF and eventually landing at 1B would seem to be the type of player he would be willing to commit to for 6 or 7 years.
He’s strong defensively, has a high contact approach which the Mets have made a priority on improving this offseason, and he brings additional speed/athleticism to the table. He seems like a great fit, but of course he’d be a great fit for a number of teams.
Soto is a generational hitter that’s why they stretched that far. Bellinger isn’t that.
Soto got 15 years because he was 25 at the time and Juan Soto. He was the grand FA prize, and acquiring him had a minimum cost of a mega contract.
Bellinger is fine player that fits the current roster quite well, but neither a generational talent, nor a hard requirement for their remaining OF hole.
The Mets can totally find a trade partner for a LF that delivers close-enough production, so there is nothing forcing them to give Bellinger the sort of 4+ year contract they’ve purposely been avoiding all off-season long.
Is it $10M per WAR now for valuation purposes? I thought it was still 8 or 9.
I think linear models underestimate star players. Basically each win a player produces should be valued higher — there’s scarcity in having individual players who provide a lot of value.
I suspect a linear model works fine up until you get to ~All-Star level (~4 WAR). And for pitchers, especially relievers, who the hell knows?
100% this. It’s not a linear thing, it’s a pyramid. A huge base of 0-1 WAR players, vanishingly few at the tippy-top (7-8 wins+)
What’s confusing about this: Throughout the offseason, we were told the Mets were focused on run prevention. If they started the season today, they would have a first baseman (no matter who that is) who has little or no experience at the bag, a third baseman who hasn’t put in any significant time at that position, and a leftfielder (if it is Baty as currently rumored) who has little experience at that post. I suspect another move on offense, perhaps a trade of an infielder for an outfielder, is in the offing. The Red Sox just lost Bregman. I wonder if they would trade Jarren Duran for Baty and somebody. Even in an off-year, Duran hit better than any outfielder (other than Soto) on the Mets’ roster. He’s also a good outfielder.
I can’t see how Polanco/Baty would be worse than Pete at first. We’ll get an outfielder not named Bellinger. And Bo will probably be an equal to Baty at 3B once he gets the hang of it. IMO, it is easier to transition from SS to 3B/2B than any other position shift (short of LF/RF. I still don’t understand why they are considered to be such different positions).
Statcast is the only system to define Alonso as worse than “slightly below average.” Now, it’s the best system, and I wouldn’t bet on it being wrong, but I also wouldn’t entirely trust it to make evaluations on the second hardest position to evaluate (after catcher).
If you argument for Alonso being “terrible defensively” is just OAA and only the last two years, I think you are over trusting it.
As a Mets fan that subjectively likes Pete, visually he plays 1B the way you’d expect a -10 OAA to look playing 1B. Hes as much of a 1B as Jeter was a SS, and hasn’t been moved off the position for the same reasons
In the abstract, I suspect LF/RF isn’t huge, but a RF has to deal with making longer throws (specifically, 3B).
It is also highly dependent on which stadium you play in. There’s an astronomical difference in between playing LF and RF in Fenway, Yankee Stadium or Houston, as immediate examples.
Not enough people watching Blue Jays games before this year, even this year before the playoffs. Worst defending shortstop in baseball, body falling apart, gets slower with both his feet and swing speed year over year. He is a replacement level infielder when the BABIP is down.
Have fun getting scared everytime a ball is hit in general direction Mets fans…it’s a horrible feeling to have all summer.
He’s played 130 plus games in four of the last five years.
He is definitely not a shortstop. Whether he can play third base or not? I wouldn’t gamble that much personally, he seems like a much better candidate to be average at second. Third base requires weird and kind of extreme skills. It’s a huge gamble at this price but anyone who says they know he can or can’t do it is probably overconfident.
He actually hit pretty well this year! He’s BABIP-reliant but he typically makes strong enough contact that it makes sense. He posted a .342 BABIP this year and his xwOBA was less than 10 points lower than his wOBA. Scary player to invest that much in, but the good has pretty much always outweighed the bad except for 2024.
third base does not take any weird or unique skills that a middle infielder can’t handle. this is a weird take – moving down the defensive spectrum isn’t a massive hurdle.
Would you be saying this if a team signed a CF to play right?
When we really break it down, the difference between playing SS and 3B is….. standing 12 feet to the right?
SS are expected to go to both their left and their right (unless you’re Derek Jeter). They often have to throw in unusual positions and on the run. And they have to cover on DPs/SB attempts.
3B rarely have to go to their right. They get to make more plays from a solid footing on the whole. The throws are longer, obviously.
I think we saw in the peak shifting era why many 3B were not SS.
As a Brewers fan with great familiarity with Stearns’ philosophies and methodologies, I’ve concluded that working with a blank checkbook has left him totally befuddled, because this team makes no sense.
The general faith in the guy among Mets fans is beginning to seem a bit unwarranted to me as well. At a minimum — since Stearns himself clearly just refuses to say — I would really like to hear, from someone who still thinks there is a plan, what exactly they think the plan is. I can see that there are certain tenets he won’t budge on, like hating long-term deals under almost all circumstances, but I cannot, at this point, see what his vision for the team’s future actually is beyond a revolving door of high-dollar, short-term hired guns.
The issue for every paper GM rosterbaitor is that this isnt OOTP, the players are real people and it’s not as simple as plugging them into a spreadsheet like they’re widgets. Some guys just dont want to play for you. Trea Turner was only signing on the east coast. Corbin Burnes was only signing on the west coast. Pete Fairbanks doesnt want to – actually maybe cant – play for a team north of Georgia
When you’re a small market GM, a lot of decisions are kind of already made for you. You have to let guys walk or trade them before they walk to replenish. You cant go after most guys in free agency. You really can only pick one or two big investments at a time so you’re able to do all the due diligence to make sure he’s the perfect fit
When you are able to be in on every guy, that’s very different. Especially when you’re the Mets and you do all the make work to draw up the deals and then guys just call LA and ask them to bid 1 dollar more and they’ll sign with them
Yeah, I agree. This is also obviously part of a real-world GM/PBO/whatever’s job in that situation — creating an attractive workplace, having a good pitch, and so on, rather than just counting on the big numbers to do all the talking for you. The blank checks don’t seem to be working quite as well as planned, so it’s probably time to work on some of the non-monetary factors too!
the truth really is just that the Dodgers offer more of everything a player wants, including money.
As a Jays fan I’ve loved watching Bichette grow and play over the years. It is sad he is now elsewhere, but that contract … wow. Can’t blame him one iota for taking it. Knowing he could be on the market next winter helps a little. Thankful he didn’t go the Yankees, Red Sox, or Dodgers though.
People talk about this being a de facto one year contract… Why would Bo opt out next year if the players are being locked out?
The players don’t get paid in 2027 regardless of whether he opts out, so he probably would rather be a free agent after a good year, especially if only part of 2027 is cancelled. No one wants to risk struggling in a small sample size if only 60-80 games end up being played.
This definitely does explain, at a minimum, why all this year’s “short” deals are 3+ years rather than two. If you don’t have a guarantee through 2028 you don’t have much to fall back on.
The opts out being after each of the first two seasons as opposed to after years 2 and 3 in the Tucker contract is a big deal. It heavily limits the upside for the Mets both in terms of total WAR/how much better does this make the team and surplus value. If he has a great season, then you certainly paid for it, and then he’s certainly opting out and you only get that great player for one year. If he has anything less than a great season, you get less than what you paid for and then he’s either gone or he gets to keep taking the massive amounts of money you could be spending on better players for another year or (in his sole discretion at the time) two.