Laura Albanese: Mets' Bo Bichette opting in for another year doesn't look so bad anymore
Mets' Bo Bichette watches his home run during the third inning against the White Sox in Chicago on Saturday. Credit: AP/Jessie Alcheh
When Mets owner Steve Cohen addressed the media for the first time since spring training this past week, he was quizzed about something that isn’t really asked quite as much as it used to be: How can you tell if a player is built to succeed in New York?
In an analytically driven sport, some see that factor as overblown, or evidence of the New York market’s self-importance. And frankly, sometimes it is. Many players will play to the back of their baseball cards regardless of increased media scrutiny or this city’s highly reactive fan base. But we’ve also seen evidence to the contrary, and Cohen acknowledged as much.
“I think we do extensive due diligence [on whether someone can play here] and we try to get to know the player as well as we can,” he said. “But that’s a hard one, right? . . . It’s not easy to come to New York with a big media presence and a lot of eyes on you. It’s not easy to change teams in general, and so you have to expect some adjustment process. It’s not true with everybody, but we’ve seen it a lot.”
A few months ago, a statement like that would have had fans praying for Bo Bichette to exercise his player option at the end of this season and opt out. Now it should have them doing the opposite.
It seems unlikely that Bichette will turn down a guaranteed $42 million after what has been a down season for him. One of the few reasons for even thinking of doing so is if he simply wants out of New York.
But though his detractors will say he let them down when they needed him the most, he also pulled off one of the harder things to do in this city. He took the boos, he stayed steady and he turned it around.
Bichette — who homered and singled in the Mets’ 10-5 victory over the White Sox on Saturday night — was batting .213 on June 2, but he collected four hits on June 3 and slashed .316/.353/.479 in a 67-game span. He hit eight of his 13 homers and collected 37 of his 65 RBIs. He currently is hitting .268 with a .712 OPS.
Entering Saturday, his .292 batting average with runners in scoring position was second on the team to Jared Young, and Bichette has had more than double the number of at-bats in that situation (106) than Young (52).
You can hold a grudge if you want, or you can think about what that means for 2027. See, one of the reasons Bichette was the target of so much vitriol is because he was one of the few players healthy enough to stay on the field and take it. He’s the only Met to have played all 129 games this year. He has played third, second and shortstop without a whiff of complaint. And tellingly, he adapted to new environs in an unfriendly atmosphere.
In short, he made himself into the type of player who can play in New York.
Contrast that with the guy the Mets were pursuing before they pivoted to Bichette.
Kyle Tucker has had nothing short of a nightmare season with the Dodgers, a team that, despite also playing in a large media market, is far better suited to insulating its struggling players than the Mets are. Fans in Los Angeles generally are more relaxed, the team is coming off back-to-back championships, and if you’re in the weeds, you can find a good bit of cover in the countless stars around you.
But Tucker is playing under the onus of a big contract — four years, $240 million — and was hitting .186 at home compared to .272 on the road entering Saturday. He was booed heavily after failing to catch a fly ball last Sunday and was spotted crying in the dugout.
Dodgers fans, confronted with the reality that players are (gasp) people, too, changed course and gave Tucker a standing ovation Friday. But the whole ordeal has further underlined how difficult it can be to dig yourself out of a mental hole in a new, more intimidating city.
Bichette now has been there, done that. He left the only franchise he’s ever known, changed countries and suited up daily for the worst team money can buy. He endured countless questions about his inability to produce and was jeered so often, you’d think his first name actually had an extra “o’’ at the end.
Was he part of the problem? Yes. But he’s also part of the solution, even if that solution is a full season away.
In his conversation, Cohen noted that the Mets perhaps were felled by changing too much too quickly. They gutted their coaching staff and tore the roster to the studs. There’s no doubt that there’s plenty of work to do to avoid a similar fate next year, but if Bichette opts in, that’s another layer of stability in an offseason that not only will include an uninspired free-agent class but a thorny labor negotiation that seems primed to delay the 2027 season.
That will be up to Bichette. Sure, $42 million is a lot of money, but he’s not exactly strapped for cash. Don’t forget that $40 million signing bonus or the $5 million the Mets will owe him if he opts out.
There could be a temptation to go somewhere a little less relentless, a little less chaotic. Or he can take his payday here and keep proving to himself and to this fan base that he has the ability to succeed where others have failed.
Because how do you tell if a player is built to succeed in New York?
Answer: He shows you.
Laura Albanese is the Mets beat writer for Newsday. She's been covering MLB since 2014 after starting at Newsday as an intern seven years earlier.
