Chicago Cubs Have "Renewed Interest" In Alex Bregman

Pushing up the price for Boston since their trade with the Pirates to keep them out of the pitching market, they may or may not be in. 

It's not substantial enough for its own rumor, but related to the smoke around Bregman is this from Jeff Passan's Winter Meetings preview this AM

Quote

What's clear is that there's a group of teams that will spend on a big bat (Phillies, Red Sox, Blue Jays), a number surveying multiple options (Yankees, Mets, Cubs) and a handful that would do so opportunistically (Orioles, Tigers, Reds, Pirates). Others could emerge depending on how the market plays out and what trade possibilities emerge.

So the interest apparently isn't just in Bregman as a one-off. 

15 minutes ago, Bertz said:

It's not substantial enough for its own rumor, but related to the smoke around Bregman is this from Jeff Passan's Winter Meetings preview this AM

So the interest apparently isn't just in Bregman as a one-off. 

Hmm, on the high end we have Bregman/Olonso who make sense or at least know the Cubs have been interested in the past. Also Bichette could make some sense in the same realm of what they would do with Bregman. 

On the lower end, you have Goldschmidt/Hoskins as RH bats who play 1b. 

I'll be super pissed off if this team signs a Bregman just because they think they cant get him on a 4-5 year deal at $30M AAV and Tucker signs a mid to upper 30's deal.

Bregman feels like a contingency since Boras is gonna Boras and drag his FA as long as possible.  So if they strike out on a FA target they had higher hopes for(King?) and trade prices are uncomfortably high, the option to use Shaw or Nico to get a SP and put the money towards Bregman will still be there.  I don’t love this if it means trading Shaw and I’m skeptical that Nico can help you get a playoff SP, but it’s early in the offseason so we’ll have to see if that could play out

i dont think jed is giving bregman a 6 year deal unless there's an opt-out every 3 months

Bregman does fit the Cubs MO. They can get him and not lose a draft pick, for one. Next, they want a right handed bat over a lefty bat. Bregman may take 5 years, instead of a mega deal of 10+ for Tucker. At the TDL there were rumors teams wanted Shaw. This would allow them to deal Shaw. I would much rather have Tucker, but the Cubs just are not going to be in that. So accepting that, Bregman makes a lot of sense. 

1 hour ago, Cuzi said:

I'll be super pissed off if this team signs a Bregman just because they think they cant get him on a 4-5 year deal at $30M AAV and Tucker signs a mid to upper 30's deal.

I get this and understand your point. But not signing Tucker is going to be the outcome regardless of what they do. They are not getting him. So now we move on. Bregman would be a good FA signing for them. 

28 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I get this and understand your point. But not signing Tucker is going to be the outcome regardless of what they do. They are not getting him. So now we move on. Bregman would be a good FA signing for them. 

Nah. I don't move on. I stop supporting the mindset.

Building an inferior team in a more expensive way just to limit the numbers of years committed is completely stupid. This team wants to zig when the market is zagging, and they are more than capable of just matching the market. You had one of the best bats in the game, under 30 years old, that is projected to be one of the cheaper, recent, mega deals and you walk away because it's going to be too long of a contract. But talking to a 32 year old and paying him just slightly less of the annual budget through age 37 makes all the sense in the world.

Something interesting Sahadev Sharma brought up on his podcast: Alex Bregman would have actually hit more homers at Wrigley than he did at Fenway this past year.  Philly and Sacramento are the only parks he would have been expected to hit more.

A bit surprising because I think the vibe is that he's, while not as extreme, in the Paredes/Bellinger mold.

OK so sign Bregman 5/140 and trade Shaw to the Marlins for Cabrera (and now he's closer to Mar a Lago so he'll be happy).

3 hours ago, imb said:

i dont think jed is giving bregman a 6 year deal unless there's an opt-out every 3 months

After every at-bat, someone comes out with a new contract to sign

1 hour ago, Derwood said:

After every at-bat, someone comes out with a new contract to sign

Bregman just gonna be walking around with the Money in the Bank briefcase.

2 hours ago, Post Count Padder said:

OK so sign Bregman 5/140 and trade Shaw to the Marlins for Cabrera (and now he's closer to Mar a Lago so he'll be happy).

I think the idea is Bregman at third, Shaw at utility in '26 then to 2B and Nico allow to leave after 2026. 

If the Cubs didn't have Owen Caissie or Mo, you'd think they'd be in on Kyle Tucker.  They'd likely lose the bid of course LOL, but the interest would be there.

5 hours ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

I think the idea is Bregman at third, Shaw at utility in '26 then to 2B and Nico allow to leave after 2026. 

That's what I think too.  And any injury to Nico/Dansby/Bregman and Shaw is in the lineup  I still don't like him though due to age+years he'll get.

He was also one of the Astros sign-stealing cheaters, so there's that.

5 hours ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

I think the idea is Bregman at third, Shaw at utility in '26 then to 2B and Nico allow to leave after 2026. 

I hate letting Nico walk, he couldn't possibly be that expensive to extend.

8 hours ago, Tangled Up in Plaid said:

I hate letting Nico walk, he couldn't possibly be that expensive to extend.

Yeah, after '26 I'd rather trade Dansby, even if it means eating a little of that contract if that's what it takes to extend Hoerner.  How do you let 6WAR coming into his prime walk?

18 minutes ago, Bull said:

Yeah, after '26 I'd rather trade Dansby, even if it means eating a little of that contract if that's what it takes to extend Hoerner.  How do you let 6WAR coming into his prime walk?

Unfortunately, it would take eating more than a little of Dansby's contract.  I don't think there would be much interest in a 33-year-old SS owed $81 million over 3 years.

Does getting Bregman require us to trade Shaw? Remember Bregman was hurt last year.  Infield depth is not a bad thing.  

14 minutes ago, BKHoo said:

Does getting Bregman require us to trade Shaw? Remember Bregman was hurt last year.  Infield depth is not a bad thing.  

The team hasn't done anything of substance to handle their pitching. They need an impact SP and still a handful of BP arms, one of which you should be able to count on. Signing Bregman to, say $25m AAV will eat up half of what you have left and it'd be near impossible to acquire an impact SP and a BP on $25m. A trade would have to happen. 

Considering Shaw isn't a good enough hitter to be a DH, you wouldn't *have* to trade him...but he'd become the most odd-man-out. 

18 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

The team hasn't done anything of substance to handle their pitching. They need an impact SP and still a handful of BP arms, one of which you should be able to count on. Signing Bregman to, say $25m AAV will eat up half of what you have left and it'd be near impossible to acquire an impact SP and a BP on $25m. A trade would have to happen. 

Considering Shaw isn't a good enough hitter to be a DH, you wouldn't *have* to trade him...but he'd become the most odd-man-out. 

Also, if you believe reports at the TDL, Shaw was mentioned often. So, yes, I believe if they signed Bregman, Shaw would be dealt along with whatever else is needed, for a young cheap, potential TOR, controlled arm. (Cabrera, Gore or Ryan) Then you add a pen arm or two plus a bench bat. 

9 hours ago, Tangled Up in Plaid said:

I hate letting Nico walk, he couldn't possibly be that expensive to extend.

What do you consider “not that expensive”? I think he will cost plenty. 

10 hours ago, Tangled Up in Plaid said:

I hate letting Nico walk, he couldn't possibly be that expensive to extend.

I don't like it either. If the Cubs do sign Bregman, I rather trade Shaw for his pitching counterpart but the option of letting Nico walk is there. 

I actually think you still trade one of Mo/Caissie unless someone (the Nats might?) absolutely insists on Shaw in a SP trade.

Shaw mashed lefties last year with a 125 wRC+, we have no adequate short term depth on the infield, and then of course Hoerner is in his walk year.  Shaw is much less redundant even after a Bregman signing than the lesser of Mo/Caissie.  Also randomly he's fast enough I bet he could back up CF if we gave him ST to learn.