Do you want Bo to stay or go?

[Benjamin Grimm]

Are you hoping that Bo Bichette returns to the Mets in 2027? Or would you rather see him go?

[Centerfield]

In a regular free agent season I would vote to have him go. But given this crappy class I voted to stay. But the crappy class is probably why he’ll go. 

[MFS62]

Stay. Now that he got his shit together, he's quietly having a productive year.

Later

[Radar]

I would like him to stay but with a restructuring of an extension. My feeling is at two year left at 42/mi. He will not opt out this off season. Maybe next year if plays well.

[metirish]

I voted I hope he stays , which is a change of heart , he is obviously a very good player and will benefit from this first year in Flushing 

[seawolf17]

Look, New York is a hard place to play. Lots of guys struggle. The spotlight is huge.

I'm glad to see he's coming around and although like the rest of you, I'd be very surprised if he didn't opt out, I'd love to be able to ink him into the lineup for 2027, at least.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I voted Stay as well. I think the 2027 Mets would be a better team with him than without him.

The conventional wisdom, for whatever it's worth, seems to be that he's expected to stay, and perhaps opt out after 2027 instead of after 2026. 

[Edgy MD]

I want him to do what he will.

[Gwreck]

5 minutes ago, Edgy MD said:

I want him to do what he will.

Weird take.

I want what’s best for the Mets.  That is Bichette staying with the team for 2027.  The alternate options are not nearly as good, save perhaps Teruaki Sato (who may or not even be posted).

[Gwreck]

3 hours ago, Radar said:

I would like him to stay but with a restructuring of an extension. 

This is an interesting point.  If Bichette is going to opt out (and he might) it’ll be because he can get more than the $84 M the Mets would already have to pay.

If Bichette says he wants 2 more years and another $80M added, do the Mets give that to him?  Would some other team?

[Edgy MD]

44 minutes ago, Gwreck said:

Weird take.

I want what’s best for the Mets.  That is Bichette staying with the team for 2027.  The alternate options are not nearly as good, save perhaps Teruaki Sato (who may or not even be posted).

I don't want anyone on the team who doesn't want to be there.

He has an insane amount of money on the table.  If he wants to push that away and look for more, he goes with my blessing, and the Mets get a new chance to spend that money.  If he wants to return to the team and prove he is better than the season he has had, then he has my blessing and respect.  That is a courageous move.

And a wise team can prosper either way.  Guys who are where they want to be is the foundation for good things.  Guys who are not are a tough weight to carry.  I don't think that's weird. 

[Gwreck]

43 minutes ago, Edgy MD said:

I don't want anyone on the team who doesn't want to be there.

He has an insane amount of money on the table.  If he wants to push that away and look for more, he goes with my blessing,

How then do you evaluate a Sean Manaea?  

Sean exercised an opt-out/declined a player option after the 2024 season because he (correctly) assessed that he was underpaid relative to the market.  Turns out the Mets wound up signing him for longer and more.  

Does that mean he didn’t want to be on the team since he “pushed away” money to look for more?

[Radar]

1 hour ago, Gwreck said:

This is an interesting point.  If Bichette is going to opt out (and he might) it’ll be because he can get more than the $84 M the Mets would already have to pay.

If Bichette says he wants 2 more years and another $80M added, do the Mets give that to him?  Would some other team?

I doubt they go 40 million for two more years. I'd look longer term less aav.

[The Hot Corner]

I hope he stays.  The Mets have enough holes to fill this offseason.  Bo Bichette (like Carson Benge) turned things around after a slow start and put together a pretty solid season. 

[Edgy MD]

1 hour ago, Gwreck said:

Does that mean he didn’t want to be on the team since he “pushed away” money to look for more?

Clearly the Mets wanted him more than he wanted them, and they let themselves get taken.

[Radar]

11 hours ago, Edgy MD said:

Clearly the Mets wanted him more than he wanted them, and they let themselves get taken.

Agree but they really create a hole in the infield without him.

[seawolf17]

And Bichette is only 28; signed theoretically through 30. I'd say a year or two on the end is a pretty safe bet for the Mets.

[metsmarathon]

All things being equal the Mets are a better offense with him than without. 
 

however it’s possible the Mets are a better team with his salary applied differently…
 

but I don’t see him opting out this year. Maybe next year, depending on what happens with the cba. 
 

But I really like the look of the offense and defense with him being a big part of it next year. And he seems to be becoming part of the culture of the team wherein we desperately need some newfound continuity. 

[smg58]

A fully healthy Bichette is a good player, but he's not worth remotely close to $42M a year.  And the fact that he's struggled in two of the past three seasons would make a longer deal at a somewhat lower salary a bad gamble.  If he opts out, spend the money elsewhere.

[Edgy MD]

3 hours ago, metsmarathon said:

but I don’t see him opting out this year. Maybe next year, depending on what happens with the cba. 

This is key.  The looming threat of a work stoppage has the potential to make the winter market un-naturally soft.

[Gwreck]

1 hour ago, smg58 said:

If he opts out, spend the money elsewhere.

Where, exactly?

Obviously there’s Tarik Skubal.  But the premium free agents dry up real fast after him, which can lead to having to overpay for lesser talent.  

If Bichette leaves, would the Mets sign both Skubal and Brandon Lowe?

[Edgy MD]

You don't always spend on free agents.  Sometimes, your big offseason investment is trading for an expensive player on another team.  Sometimes, like with LIndor, it's a trade-and-sign.

Sometimes, you spend on free agents, but put the money into two or three guys.

It opens all kinds of interesting possibilities.

[smg58]

You have to be in on Skubal.  Otherwise, one of Arozarena/Suzuki and one of Arraez/Lowe would be nice.  Ty France is a relatively under-the-radar play that would help out a lot as well.  

As for third base?  The options are painfully limited, but I wouldn't assume out of hand that a Mauricio/Vientos platoon wouldn't work.  I certainly wouldn't pay more for Bichette than any of the free agents I mentioned above.

[Edgy MD]

Teruaki Sato doesn't consider the options as limited as all that.

[Radar]

1 hour ago, smg58 said:

You have to be in on Skubal.  Otherwise, one of Arozarena/Suzuki and one of Arraez/Lowe would be nice.  Ty France is a relatively under-the-radar play that would help out a lot as well.  

As for third base?  The options are painfully limited, but I wouldn't assume out of hand that a Mauricio/Vientos platoon wouldn't work.  I certainly wouldn't pay more for Bichette than any of the free agents I mentioned above.

Mauricio/Vientos?? Did you say Mauricio/Vientos?? P!ease tell me what you see that I don't. I'd be surprised if they even are on this team if it's financially possible otherwise.

[Edgy MD]

I wouldn't be surprised.

[ashie62]

I wouldn't be surprised but I consider it unlikely 

[Gwreck]

3 hours ago, Edgy MD said:

You don't always spend on free agents.  Sometimes, your big offseason investment is trading for an expensive player on another team.  Sometimes, like with LIndor, it's a trade-and-sign.

No doubt, but was surprised to see you bring that up given prior discussion of your views that trades are bad.

I remain interested in suggestions of whom the Mets might trade for (or sign) to play third that is a better option than Bichette as I don’t know if I’ve found one.

[Edgy MD]

I wouldn't be surprised.  I disagree with the ethics of trading players, and I believe one can build a great team without it, but I certainly know it exists and that teams do it all the time.

I've already mentioned one potential improvement (Teruaki Sato) above, but you don't have to improve at third.  You just have to improve at how you spend that $42 million dollars.

[The Hot Corner]

I firmly believe that the Mets are much better off with Bichette  at third base, than they would be with a posible  platoon of Vientos and Mauricio. I really don't want Vientos/Mauricio  playing major (starting) roles for the Mets.  

Vientos has had one productive season as a hitter.  Even then, he struck out 1 out of every 3 at bats.  The other 3 seasons, including the past two he is a .230 hitter that doesn't walk, doesn't run well, and is a defensive liability at both corner infield positions.  His only real asset is that he has power, but a "swing hard and hope you occasionally connect"  type of hitter is not what I want Mets to build around.

Mauricio has not had as much opportunity to prove himself at the Major League level, but he has failed to reliably produce when he has had a chance.  He is so bad as a right handed hitter, I wonder why the Mets don't have him bat exclusively from the left side.  He at least has the ability to play adequate defense at 3 infield positions.  Hopefully, he can be healthy and productive in the future, but I find myself doubtful he will be more than a left handed hitting utility infileder/DH role player.  Rather redundant with Baty also on the team.