After the Mets dealt Max Scherzer to the Rangers (and Justin Verlander to the Astros, among other trades) at the deadline this past season, Scherzer spoke about what the team had told him regarding their direction as he weighed whether or not to waive his no-trade clause.
Basically, as Scherzer told it after speaking to then-GM Billy Eppler, 2024 "was not going to be a reload situation in New York," with it being "more of a transition year" as the club focused more on 2025 and 2026.
Without focusing too much on the current reality -- that the above was paraphrased second-hand information from a disgruntled former player who had spoken to a GM who no longer works for the team -- there were two major issues with it at the time.
The first issue was that if the Mets were indeed focusing on 2025 and 2026, it absolutely did not mean they were "punting" on 2024 -- a false narrative many ran with at the time and have continued to push this offseason.
What it meant was that they might not go as wild in terms of total spending this offseason as they did in prior offseasons and that they would be even more cautious when it came to dealing their most prized prospects -- three of whom were acquired at the 2023 deadline.
The second was that by using common sense and deductive reasoning, and by examining a roster with plenty of elite players and a wave of young talent close to contributing, it was clear that the Mets had no intention of doing anything in 2024 but (at the very least) competing for a playoff spot.
To sum it up, the Mets possibly having lower expectations entering the 2024 season than they had entering 2023 (when they were among the top picks to win the World Series) did not mean they intended to be non-competitive.
When new president of baseball operations David Stearns was asked at his introductory news conference what being competitive would mean to him in 2024, he said it meant being a "true playoff contender."