Potential Landing Spots For A Cody Bellinger Trade

Do we think there's any chance that, in the same way a Nico Hoerner trade doesn't require a backfill because of Matt Shaw, the team doesn't view a need to backfill Cody Bellinger because of Owen Caissie?

The team will CERTAINLY not open next year with both Shaw and Caissie slated for everyday at bats.  But would they allow for either depending on circumstances?  Add a bench player at the same position on the opposite side of the plate for some early season platoon protection, and otherwise focus the freed up resources on pitching?

13 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Do we think there's any chance that, in the same way a Nico Hoerner trade doesn't require a backfill because of Matt Shaw, the team doesn't view a need to backfill Cody Bellinger because of Owen Caissie?

The team will CERTAINLY not open next year with both Shaw and Caissie slated for everyday at bats.  But would they allow for either depending on circumstances?  Add a bench player at the same position on the opposite side of the plate for some early season platoon protection, and otherwise focus the freed up resources on pitching?

If the  Cubs trades Bellinger for someone like Castillo either Cassie or Shaw can take Bellinger’s spot. Doesn’t have to be Cassie. Shaw can be the DH. 

2 hours ago, KCCub said:

It’s a Bellinger article but apparently Seiya is mentioned. Ugh 
 

I would be so far beyond pissed off

I don't expect the team to hand Shaw the opening day 2B role if Nico is traded.  It may be someone with half an eye towards Shaw earning the spot by the end of 2025(a multi-position 10th man capable of holding down 2B like Castro or Lowe would be most ideal), but I don't think they're gonna sign Josh Rojas as a platoon hedge and have plan A for offensive value from the position coming via Shaw in some form.

I have even more doubts about them doing the same for Caissie, who plays higher up the offensive spectrum, had worse AAA performance, and is a riskier transition with his much greater swing and miss.

21 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

If the  Cubs trades Bellinger for someone like Castillo either Cassie or Shaw can take Bellinger’s spot. Doesn’t have to be Cassie. Shaw can be the DH. 

Yes if Seiya moves back to RF then anyone in the org can play DH.  Shaw, Cassie, Mervis, Alcantara, Triantos, Canario, Ballesteros etc.  They could all compete in ST and throughout the season, and maybe have a platoon.  Chance they could sign a cheaper guy like JD Martinez too.

I have no idea what they'd do with the money saved on Bellinger though if they aren't interested in Soto or a top SP.  They're not big pen spenders.

12 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

I would be so far beyond pissed off

They're not trading their best hitter Seiya with hitting lineup they have, unless they intend to try to sign Soto, which seems like a pipe dream.  But if that were the case keeping Seiya over Bellinger would seem a no brainer.

What is nice with all these rumors is that if true it seems that Jed is trying hard to find a way to improve the team, looking for trades and whatnot.

You've gotta think some kind of trade happens, and likely sooner than later since any money freed would give them more flexibility in FA before more players are signed by other teams.

Just now, Stratos said:

They're not trading their best hitter Seiya with hitting lineup they have, unless they intend to try to sign Soto, which seems like a pipe dream.  But if that were the case keeping Seiya over Bellinger would seem a no brainer.

In a world filled with common sense yes, but I don't have so much faith in Jed.

7 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

In a world filled with common sense yes, but I don't have so much faith in Jed.

For me, it's less about not having faith in Jed, though I'm OK if this is a make or break year for him. My frustration is that it seems apparent he has to move salary to accomplish what he wants to do this offseason. And it's not like we're talking about Preller or Dombrowski, so what he's looking to do in the first place is likely nothing wild.

6 minutes ago, Illiterate Scholar said:

For me, it's less about not having faith in Jed, though I'm OK if this is a make or break year for him. My frustration is that it seems apparent he has to move salary to accomplish what he wants to do this offseason. And it's not like we're talking about Preller or Dombrowski, so what he's looking to do in the first place is likely nothing wild.

That's the wild part. Without beating a dead horse harder, he put himself in this position (created by the owners' greed). But he's worked under the owners for a decade and knows how they operate.

I don't see how he makes the team better by trading Bellinger and Nico. He's once again banking on the winds of variability (literally). 

8 hours ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

I don't expect the team to hand Shaw the opening day 2B role if Nico is traded.  It may be someone with half an eye towards Shaw earning the spot by the end of 2025(a multi-position 10th man capable of holding down 2B like Castro or Lowe would be most ideal), but I don't think they're gonna sign Josh Rojas as a platoon hedge and have plan A for offensive value from the position coming via Shaw in some form.

I have even more doubts about them doing the same for Caissie, who plays higher up the offensive spectrum, had worse AAA performance, and is a riskier transition with his much greater swing and miss.

I doubt they would hand it to him on a platter with like, Luis Vazquez or Miles Mastrobuoni as his competition - I think if you send an INF out, you have to get an INF in. But I do think that the infielder would be a speed bump type over anyone who stands a real threat. The goal, seemingly, is to shed some salary places to reallocate it elsewhere, and I would imagine they'd spend a low amount on that backup infielder (especially if they kept Triantos as a hedge for injuries). But I think that depends on how the Cubs are modeling Shaw internally. I think we'd see their confidence on Shaw based on who they brought in, so perhaps I'm downplaying it, too.

On the Shaw/Caissie thing - I'm the biggest Caissie guy out there and I agree that I have more concerns with Caissie on OD than Shaw. Shaw just doesn't have many red flags right now - he's making a ton of contact, he's hitting the ball super hard, he's not hitting a massive amount of grounders, he's hitting velocity at Triple-A at a pretty excellent rate...if we want to find the "concerns" a lot of it comes down to "Idk, he looks funny and maybe that'll be an issue", which isn't necessarily to downplay the leg kick and the strange toe-in, but more-so to say that to date, it's been an issue...never. Not at any level prior. Not at Premier 12. MLB pitchers are the best in the world and they can exploit you like no other, so if it is exploitable, they'll do that. But he also wouldn't be the first guy who "looks funny" when he does things and still is successful. Other than that, it's "I'd like to see him pull the ball more" stuff and maybe he has an issue with sweepers (but it's pretty small sample size stuff and could just not be as big of an issue as the sample suggests. Worth noting, but nothing I'm terrified of yet).

Caissie made a lot of swing adjustments last year himself. More power, more pull, more lift. Good things! But he sacrificed contact to do so. He dropped from around league-averagish to the mid-high 60%'s and while I chalk some of that up to learning how to embrace a new swing, I'd like to see him smooth that out more. Caissie has more data-specific things I can find as "red flaggy" than Shaw. I expect him to struggle more than Shaw at the next level because he doesn't have that excellent hit tool that Shaw has to help carry him a bit. 

I would expect both to struggle initially because prospects are just doing that more and more league wide and I hate pretending our prospects are special or different because they're ours. But I think Shaw comes out of the fog faster than Caissie, especially if we're starting them on Opening Day as starters. 

14 hours ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Maybe a hot take is I’d be more comfortable taking that swing with Caissie rather than Shaw. Sign someone like Dylan Carlson (CF capable, career 122 wRC+ v LHP) as the 4/5th OF, have Suzuki available, have a RHH 5th OF even Alcantara faIc, and there’s some room for him to take a lump or several. Move from Hoerner to Shaw and there’s not so much infrastructure if he dare slip up and destroy the universal dream of a $/WAR belt 

Well said.

Sadly Jed and Co. do seem more interested in belts than rings. 

(I'd prefer both stay at AAA until they force the issue,)

Bob says the Dbacks tríed to get the Cubs to take Montgomery for Bellinger .

15 minutes ago, Dfan25 said:

Bob says the Dbacks tríed to get the Cubs to take Montgomery for Bellinger .

If it weren't for Boyd, I'd have had some interest in Montgomery as our reclamation project for the rotation. He was awful last season, but he's got a track record and I can give a partial pass for last year based on the way Boras handled his free agency.

I doubt he goes back to being a 4 win pitcher, but he could easily get back to being a solid 3rd or 4th starter.

1 hour ago, Dfan25 said:

Bob says the Dbacks tríed to get the Cubs to take Montgomery for Bellinger .

Very very gross

I like Jordan Montgomery as a bounce back candidate.  But his deal is much further underwater than Bellinger's (at least for 2025).  I think the Dbacks would need to eat additional money or throw in additional player (relief help).  I would doubt there's a satisfactory intersection between a deal that makes sense for the Cubs and for the Dbacks.

2 hours ago, Bertz said:

I like Jordan Montgomery as a bounce back candidate.  But his deal is much further underwater than Bellinger's (at least for 2025).  I think the Dbacks would need to eat additional money or throw in additional player (relief help).  I would doubt there's a satisfactory intersection between a deal that makes sense for the Cubs and for the Dbacks.

Would Puk in the deal even it out? Gives the Cubs a pen arm. 

15 hours ago, Bertz said:

I like Jordan Montgomery as a bounce back candidate.  But his deal is much further underwater than Bellinger's (at least for 2025).  I think the Dbacks would need to eat additional money or throw in additional player (relief help).  I would doubt there's a satisfactory intersection between a deal that makes sense for the Cubs and for the Dbacks.

I like him as a bounce back candidate, but not for this team. This team has too many young starters knocking on the door that could do what you hope Montgomery would do in a 50th percentile bounce back year. 

Bellinger for Montgomery seems pretty even to me.

Sounds like lots of interest for Bellinger out there.

9 hours ago, TomtheBombadil said:

I’d much rather have Puk than Montgomery in some Bellinger hypothetical 

This is a pretty obvious comment. But no one is giving up someone like Puk for Bellinger. He would have to be with Montgomery, not instead of Montgomery. I wasn’t asking which is better. I was asking that if Puk was added. Would that make Montgomery someone the Cubs would take for Bellinger. 

14 minutes ago, Stratos said:

Bellinger for Montgomery seems pretty even to me.

Sounds like lots of interest for Bellinger out there.

Has to be more than Montgomery, IMO. 

1 hour ago, Stratos said:

Bellinger for Montgomery seems pretty even to me.

Sounds like lots of interest for Bellinger out there.

Except that while one guy slightly underperformed his contract only putting up 2.2 fWAR the other was amongst the worst SP in baseball posting 117 innings of 6.23 ERA ball. One was a solid but over paid everyday starter, the other was a disaster on a big contract that actively hurt his team . They are not the same just because they're both overpaid. 

54 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

Except that while one guy slightly underperformed his contract only putting up 2.2 fWAR the other was amongst the worst SP in baseball posting 117 innings of 6.23 ERA ball. One was a solid but over paid everyday starter, the other was a disaster on a big contract that actively hurt his team . They are not the same just because they're both overpaid. 

 

Yeah but the xFIP is almost 2 runs lower than his ERA and he only signed with the team on March 29, didn't have a ST, didn't work in the winter with the team etc, fired Boras because of it.  His whole season was messed up.

I think Belli's contract might even be worse because of the extra year and 5m buyout next offseason.

8 minutes ago, Stratos said:

Yeah but the xFIP is almost 2 runs lower than his ERA and he only signed with the team on March 29, didn't have a ST, didn't work in the winter with the team etc, fired Boras because of it.  His whole season was messed up.

I think Belli's contract might even be worse because of the extra year and 5m buyout next offseason.

I get your idea that he might have been bad because of the late start and might be a very good bounce back candidate. I might even agree with that. But you went a little too far suggesting Cody’s contract is worse. It isn’t. And TBH, Cubs can play the season with Cody on the team and I would be fine with it. I think he is much less of a risk than Montgomery.