After Falling Short On Kyle Tucker, Mets Bet Big On Bo Bichette

It didn’t take long. After the Dodgers inked Kyle Tucker to a massive free agent deal that I covered here, it predictably influenced the next major MLB free agent signing, with Bo Bichette signing a three-year, $126 million deal with the Mets. They apparently stole him from the division rival Phillies, who had ongoing negotiations with Bichette, but the financial game changed when the Tucker deal dropped.

In the aftermath of the Winter Meetings, ESPN writer Kiley McDaniel updated his free agent salary projections. He had originally pegged Bichette for a five-year, $130 deal. After Kyle Schwarber went back to the Phillies for five years, $150 million, he increased his projection to the exact same terms of the Schwarber deal. I personally thought Bichette was worth his initial projection, and from experience I know that sometimes you must overextend to get a player you really want/need. That might explain an increase to his revised prediction level.

But $42 million a year? For a player who has never been worth that much in a season, whose all-around prime is likely behind him, who has had multiple recent injury issues, who will be moving to third base (a position he has never played before), in the wrong way on the defensive spectrum? Sure, this deal covers his age 28-30 seasons and I really like the bat, but there are enough significant concerns her to rule out going way over market value for Bichette.

But what exactly is market value these days? As I wrote in the Tucker article, the market has been fundamentally changed. Is Bo Bichette worth 70% of Tucker’s annual salary, over a term one year shorter? Well, maybe. But if Tucker’s $60 million per annum salary is nuts, then 70% of that for 70% of the player is also nuts.

Mets’ owner Steve Cohen was in pretty hard on Tucker, and thought he had a pretty good shot at signing him for a slightly less ridiculous AAV over a similar term, and the Dodgers steamrolled in. He was not going to sit idly by and let his fierce divisional rival ink Bichette for a deal that might have mirrored McDaniel’s predicted terms (or even one a bit above that). So he blew away Bichette with an offer he couldn’t refuse.

Never mind that he isn’t a particularly good fit with the Mets. I’m buying the bat, and could see Bichette as a solid defensive 2B or an acceptable SS. But 3B? You either can or can’t play that position, and there’s absolutely no evidence that Bichette can. Third base is all about quick twitch reactions, and a plus throwing arm helps. I’m not seeing it. The Mets have already added Marcus Semien at second, a steady but unspectacular player at this stage of his career. They’ve also added Jorge Polanco and will likely also ask him to play 1B, where he’s never played. They still employ relative youngsters Brett Baty and Mark Vientos, both of whom play the spot Bichette is being shoehorned into. This is some real Island Of Misfit Toys stuff.

Successfully landing Tucker would have filled a huge hole – currently the Mets are projected to start both a rookie with zero MLB at bats (Carson Benge) and Tyrone Taylor – a fourth outfielder at best at this stage of his career – in the outfield alongside Juan Soto. Instead either Vientos or Baty will be on the bench everyday as things stand, with the other in the DH slot.

Whatever you might say about the Dodgers, they chase the right guys. Their roster makes sense, with no gaping holes. Of course, they are rich enough to have viable Plans B, C, D and E in place – and they had to use each and every one of them to beat the Blue Jays in the World Series.

The Mets’ Plan A appears to be incomplete and inefficient. Heck, at this point they could pivot and overpay Cody Bellinger to replace Taylor for the cozy sum of $40+ million per year. And at this point, would anyone blame them or be surprised in any way? We’ve entered the wild, wild west, and nothing should surprise anyone.