Evaluating the Mets’ Signing of Bo Bichette
The Mets’ offseason took a sharp and sudden turn when, less than a day after missing out on Kyle Tucker, they pivoted to signing Bo Bichette. The 27-year-old shortstop turned down a long-term offer from the Phillies in favor of a highly flexible deal with New York: three years, $126 million, complete with opt-outs after each of the first two seasons.
Bichette hardly needs an introduction. Beyond his memorable home run in last year’s World Series, he has been one of baseball’s more productive shortstops since debuting in 2019. He owns a career 120 wRC+ and has topped 3.8 fWAR in every season except one. That lone exception came in 2024, when injuries, most notably a calf issue, limited his effectiveness. Overall, he is a strong player who occasionally flirts with star-level production, the kind of talent teams usually welcome.
That said, Bichette is not without quirks. A decade ago, his aggressive swing tendencies and high chase rates would have raised serious red flags. Today, advanced metrics show that his approach works well enough, as he tends to attack pitches he can do damage with. Likewise, what once might have been dismissed as an unsustainably high BABIP is now supported by batted-ball data that confirms his ability to find holes in the defense.
Still, the flaws remain noticeable. A more selective approach at the plate would help. More pulled fly balls would help. While his age works in his favor, his exit velocities have already started to trend downward, including both his maximum and 90th percentile readings. Lower-body injuries, including recurring calf trouble and a knee issue last season, add another layer of concern. Defensively, his play at shortstop has declined from below average to untenable, though that issue is somewhat mitigated by the Mets moving him off the position.
Even if one is optimistic about those concerns, the roster fit is undeniably strange. Before Bichette’s arrival, the Mets’ infield looked settled, with Baty, Lindor, Semien, and Polanco in place, while the outfield remained a clear weakness. Now, Bichette is expected to play a position he has never handled before, and Baty has been pushed into a super-utility role. The result feels like an inefficient use of resources that limits the overall impact of the signing.
Financially, the move is extremely costly. The Mets are on the hook for roughly $42 million in salary for 2026 alone, plus an estimated $30–35 million in competitive balance tax penalties. They also forfeit their second- and fifth-highest draft picks in 2026, costing an estimated $1.5–2 million in bonus pool value, along with $1 million in international free agent money. Compounding the issue, the opt-out structure leaves New York exposed. If Bichette performs well and proves healthy, he can walk away for a larger deal at age 28, leaving the Mets with no long-term benefit. If injuries persist or his defense continues to decline, the Mets absorb all the downside.
This assessment could change as the rest of the offseason unfolds. Perhaps Baty is traded for a high-impact player, or another starter or outfielder is added, making his utility role more valuable. For now, though, the move appears expensive and poorly aligned with the team’s most pressing needs.
There’s also the optics to consider. The Mets seemed confident they would land Kyle Tucker, at least judging by public messaging from ownership. While choosing not to reset the market for Tucker can be justified on baseball grounds, projecting certainty and then coming up short creates an unflattering narrative, especially when it happens repeatedly.
It’s always risky to second-guess a front office widely viewed as progressive and analytically driven. Even so, this signing feels less like a carefully targeted upgrade and more like a reactionary move. At best, it’s a flawed decision; at worst, it suggests panic. As it stands, the Bo Bichette signing earns a C-.
Leave a Reply