Article: The Cubs Refuse To Spend Like A Big Market Team

[Brandon Glick]

The 2023-24 MLB offseason is more than halfway over, and every single team has added at least one player to their major-league roster. Every team, that is, except the Chicago Cubs.

Image courtesy of © David Banks-USA TODAY Sports

I promise, I’d like to be more positive than this. I like it when the Cubs are good, and when they’re adding good players to their team. Unfortunately, the Cubs haven’t been good for a few years now, and they haven’t added a single player to the team, let alone a good one, all winter.

There’s real cognitive dissonance at play here, especially when you consider how close the Cubs felt to making some noise late last season. Hell, the team shocked everyone by buying at the 2023 trade deadline, opting to bring in talent like third basemen Jeimer Candelario (now on the Reds) rather than shipping away obvious trade bait like Marcus Stroman or Cody Bellinger. It all serves to make their inactivity this deep into the offseason that much more confusing.

We’ve talked at length about the Cubs’ penchant for patience, and their desire to find a good deal. Belaboring those points here will only induce more aggravation than is necessary. Instead, it’s time to look at Cubs’ decision-making process through the macro lens of the sport itself. 

The Collective Bargaining Agreement is meant (in part) to act as a set of guardrails, to protect players, owners, and, ideally, the long-term parity of baseball. Within that lengthy legislation is a set of clauses specifically designed to level the playing field between the two prevailing classes of MLB franchises: the big-market teams and the small-market teams. 

Dive into the nitty-gritty of the details if you like, but the most important thing to highlight is that small-market teams receive a collection of assets to help them compete with the (should-be) free spenders of the league. Those assets include, but are not limited to: competitive-balance picks in the amateur draft, extra cap space in their international signing bonus pool, and revenue-sharing dollars.

Not all of the compensatory allowances are directly funneled into the baseball operations side of a franchise; there have been many reports of small-market owners simply pocketing their slice of the revenue-sharing pie. Regardless, the reason those teams get these accommodations in the first place is because of the hypothetical difference between their payrolls, and the payrolls of teams like the Yankees, Dodgers, and Cubs.

Spending doesn’t guarantee anything (the 2023 Mets and Padres could host a seminar on that topic), but it does create a floor. The more money allocated to the payroll, the better the players on the team will be. Inexpensive, young talent will always be the lifeblood of the sport, but established veterans capable of producing at a consistent, All-Star level are required to navigate the tumult of an entire season, regardless of their cost. 

Thus, small-market teams field competitive rosters by leveraging their additional resources on the prospect side of things, and big-market teams do so by spending money on players who have already established themselves at the MLB level. In effect, the Cubs are actively putting themselves at a disadvantage by not outspending their rivals to a degree commensurate with their financial advantages. 

The only times the Cubs have exceeded the luxury-tax threshold in the last 20 years wer in their World Series championship season (when they barely exceeded it, by roughly $3 million) of 2016, and in their massively disappointing 2019 decline-phase campaign. Paying the luxury tax isn’t a prerequisite to winning the World Series, but being willing to do so aids in the ability to flesh out a roster during competitive windows. Artificially capping the budget, whether it’s by the mandate of the Ricketts family or the front office’s internal philosophy, is keeping the Cubs in the middle class of MLB teams: they’re too big to receive competitive-balance considerations, but unwilling to spend with the tycoons on the coasts. 

The Cubs have done good work to get to this new competitive window so quickly, after slamming the last one closed. The farm system is among the best in baseball, the long-term accounting books are clean, and there’s a symbiotic relationship being developed between manager Craig Counsell and the front office. All the pieces are in place to challenge the league’s elite organizations. The question now is whether the Cubs will actually allow themselves to do what’s necessary to get there.

View full article

[CubinNY]

I’m not necessarily broken up about Ohtani and Soto. But they need a very good starting pitcher and power, preferably LH. They need at least one late inning reliever and probably some bench slugging as well. 
 

Bellinger only makes sense if they think he can play CF for the contract or at least until Happ or Suzuki are gone. 
 

id really like if they get imanaga, but that’s not likely. 
 

We have to come to terms with how the Ricketts want to run the Cubs. Not an easy task. 

[Billy62]

I heard a saying once, I don't even think it was baseball related, but it was something like this. "Every nickel that I spend today, comes back to us dressed up as a dollar". That said, I don't wish to see the Cubs out there spending like a drunken sailor. But I think they need to be realistic. Standing pat, while the Dodgers for one are really improving their armor is sort of foolish. If your end game is to get into the playoffs, and then you find yourself squared off with that sort of team, what was the point in getting to the playoffs in the first place. I think the team needs a consistent power bat or two in the lineup, and last year showed that the bullpen really needed to be strengthened. Now, I know we are looking to farm system to address some of those needs. If last season wasn't an indicator, that there not just quite ready yet, I'm not sure what more needs to be shown. Perhaps some of these youngsters turn the corner this spring.......that would be beautiful. I'd love to have a Mervis or Canario thumping the ball all over the park, and putting a few on the streets. But, what if they are not ready or even worse, never will be? The pitching. Some guys are going to be alright....and some guys aren't. It needs to be fixed so that the team can compete and not just repeat the fade job they did last season. Especially if we are not going to have the services of Stroman going forward. That spot in the rotation needs to be filled with a quality starter. So watching every other team improve itself while at the same time watching this club taking a step backwards, has been frustrating to watch. I can only hope that the club has an end game in their sights and that come this spring all the "doubt and worry" will be for naught. 

[Rcal10]

7 minutes ago, Billy62 said:

I heard a saying once, I don't even think it was baseball related, but it was something like this. "Every nickel that I spend today, comes back to us dressed up as a dollar". That said, I don't wish to see the Cubs out there spending like a drunken sailor. But I think they need to be realistic. Standing pat, while the Dodgers for one are really improving their armor is sort of foolish. If your end game is to get into the playoffs, and then you find yourself squared off with that sort of team, what was the point in getting to the playoffs in the first place. I think the team needs a consistent power bat or two in the lineup, and last year showed that the bullpen really needed to be strengthened. Now, I know we are looking to farm system to address some of those needs. If last season wasn't an indicator, that there not just quite ready yet, I'm not sure what more needs to be shown. Perhaps some of these youngsters turn the corner this spring.......that would be beautiful. I'd love to have a Mervis or Canario thumping the ball all over the park, and putting a few on the streets. But, what if they are not ready or even worse, never will be? The pitching. Some guys are going to be alright....and some guys aren't. It needs to be fixed so that the team can compete and not just repeat the fade job they did last season. Especially if we are not going to have the services of Stroman going forward. That spot in the rotation needs to be filled with a quality starter. So watching every other team improve itself while at the same time watching this club taking a step backwards, has been frustrating to watch. I can only hope that the club has an end game in their sights and that come this spring all the "doubt and worry" will be for naught. 

The problem is the cubs end game puts way more emphasis on being fiscally responsible and making as much money as they can than it does winning. If they happen to win along they way that’s fine. But the profit is the only thing that matters. Not acting like a large market is putting them at a disadvantage over the entire league. And they just refuse to take advantage of their only advantage, revenue. 

[Backtobanks]

2 hours ago, CubinNY said:

I’m not necessarily broken up about Ohtani and Soto. But they need a very good starting pitcher and power, preferably LH. They need at least one late inning reliever and probably some bench slugging as well. 
 

Bellinger only makes sense if they think he can play CF for the contract or at least until Happ or Suzuki are gone. 
 

id really like if they get imanaga, but that’s not likely. 
 

We have to come to terms with how the Ricketts want to run the Cubs. Not an easy task. 

Bellinger is the perfect fit for the Cubs: power hitter, LH, plays CF, good defense, and certainly can fill all of those roles for probably 4 more years.  I'm too old to worry about the 2028 Cubs.  

 

[Ragman]

Using the chart of luxury tax spending you included in this article, it might be fair to point out that the three teams who have grossly outspent the league (Yankees, Dodgers, and Mets) have exactly one WS trophy in the past decade between them, and that was the Dodgers during the partially aborted 2020 crapshoot of a season. As you pointed out, spending provides no guarantee of success. The Cubs have spent at a level commiserate with the Braves and the Rangers, who with the Astros (not listed on here because they are at a level even lower than the teams on this list) have won the past three championships. It may be frustrating for fans to not see offseason improvements, but maybe the Cubs do have a clue what they're doing. 

[CubinNY]

7 minutes ago, Ragman said:

Using the chart of luxury tax spending you included in this article, it might be fair to point out that the three teams who have grossly outspent the league (Yankees, Dodgers, and Mets) have exactly one WS trophy in the past decade between them, and that was the Dodgers during the partially aborted 2020 crapshoot of a season. As you pointed out, spending provides no guarantee of success. The Cubs have spent at a level commiserate with the Braves and the Rangers, who with the Astros (not listed on here because they are at a level even lower than the teams on this list) have won the past three championships. It may be frustrating for fans to not see offseason improvements, but maybe the Cubs do have a clue what they're doing. 

There are also no trophies for who spends the least amount of money to win the most games. 

[Jason Ross]

10 minutes ago, Ragman said:

Using the chart of luxury tax spending you included in this article, it might be fair to point out that the three teams who have grossly outspent the league (Yankees, Dodgers, and Mets) have exactly one WS trophy in the past decade between them, and that was the Dodgers during the partially aborted 2020 crapshoot of a season. As you pointed out, spending provides no guarantee of success. The Cubs have spent at a level commiserate with the Braves and the Rangers, who with the Astros (not listed on here because they are at a level even lower than the teams on this list) have won the past three championships. It may be frustrating for fans to not see offseason improvements, but maybe the Cubs do have a clue what they're doing. 

First off, welcome to NSBB!

Secondly, while I think it's fine to point out World Series wins, I think it's important to remember that while the ultimate goal is a World Series, the more and more the playoffs increase in size and scope, the less and less a World Series should be what we define as "ultimate success". The playoffs, while an entertaining experience, rarely crowns the best team, but all the Cubs front office and spending can do is put out the best team on the field. Luxury tax spending certainly gives teams a strong floor, and while teams like Houston have managed to avoid the luxury tax, so have, for example, the Anaheim Angels, and I don't want to be them. 

In the end, I think the Cubs have a clue what they're doing, I don't think they're run by complete idiots top to bottom. I also think they rarely bring to the forefront the full bore of their financial advantage, either. Twice in a decade the Cubs decided to do, what resulted in a full tear down and spending could have helped avoid a second tear down (note: none of this is suggesting the Cubs should have dished out the contracts Bryant/Baez received, only that they could have spent more in the 2020-2022 seasons to avoid bottoming out). These don't have to be mutually exclusive. I think the Cubs are pretty decently run. I also think they would be aided if they were willing to spend more like a top-5 market.

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 hour ago, Ragman said:

Using the chart of luxury tax spending you included in this article, it might be fair to point out that the three teams who have grossly outspent the league (Yankees, Dodgers, and Mets) have exactly one WS trophy in the past decade between them, and that was the Dodgers during the partially aborted 2020 crapshoot of a season. As you pointed out, spending provides no guarantee of success. The Cubs have spent at a level commiserate with the Braves and the Rangers, who with the Astros (not listed on here because they are at a level even lower than the teams on this list) have won the past three championships. It may be frustrating for fans to not see offseason improvements, but maybe the Cubs do have a clue what they're doing. 

Houston outspends the Cubs by a lot, though. The past three years the Astros have outspent the Cubs by $50m, $32m, and $49m. 

[Derwood]

*Reads topic title*

*Sees Cubs are #7 in MLB in payroll*

*fin*

[chopsx9]

6 hours ago, CubinNY said:

Bellinger only makes sense if they think he can play CF for the contract or at least until Happ or Suzuki are gone. 

I just don't agree with this.  He is 4 years younger than when Freeman signed his big contact.  He CAN certainly play CF until Happ or Suzuki are done but he doesn't have to.  Is Xander Bogaerts going to be playing SS or even 2B when he is 42?  Now if you can show me that Bellinger wants $200M over 3 years then I'll revisit.  There is value in Bellingers versatility that is lacking in lots of other players.  He likely would have been over 5 WAR had he played a full season last year; has come close to 8 in another - which is almost 1 WAR more than Juan Soto has ever achieved and their WAR on a per game basis was pretty close last year .  He's 28 years old,  and isn't going to cost any players - you want the Cubs to spend money?  Then this is the type of player they should be spending money on and if they want top level talent that's the kind of contract their going to have to sign.

[We Got The Whole 9]

1 hour ago, chopsx9 said:

I just don't agree with this.  He is 4 years younger than when Freeman signed his big contact.  He CAN certainly play CF until Happ or Suzuki are done but he doesn't have to.  Is Xander Bogaerts going to be playing SS or even 2B when he is 42?  Now if you can show me that Bellinger wants $200M over 3 years then I'll revisit.  There is value in Bellingers versatility that is lacking in lots of other players.  He likely would have been over 5 WAR had he played a full season last year; has come close to 8 in another - which is almost 1 WAR more than Juan Soto has ever achieved and their WAR on a per game basis was pretty close last year .  He's 28 years old,  and isn't going to cost any players - you want the Cubs to spend money?  Then this is the type of player they should be spending money on and if they want top level talent that's the kind of contract their going to have to sign.

People - front offices included - don't believe in how he achieved 4 war. If you split the difference in his woba and xwoba then he's more like a 115-120 hitter and 3 war. He doesnt get credit for time missed due to injury. 3 war players don't get 25 AAV long term often.

[Tryptamine]

2 hours ago, Derwood said:

*Reads topic title*

*Sees Cubs are #7 in MLB in payroll*

*fin*

Is #7 really a win?

[Rcal10]

14 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

People - front offices included - don't believe in how he achieved 4 war. If you split the difference in his woba and xwoba then he's more like a 115-120 hitter and 3 war. He doesnt get credit for time missed due to injury. 3 war players don't get 25 AAV long term often.

A 3 war player is not ridiculously overpaid at $25M annual. If he actually did sign a 7 year deal and averaged a 3 war yearly that wouldn’t be an awful signing. 

[Derwood]

16 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

Is #7 really a win?

Don't know what you'd categorize as "win", but here is where they stand mid-offseason:

[Rcal10]

5 minutes ago, Derwood said:

Don't know what you'd categorize as "win", but here is where they stand mid-offseason:

How are the Dodgers that low? They signed Otani costing them $46M annual, Yamamoto at $30M. They have Betts and Freeman for more than $50M between them and traded for Glasnow who cost $25M. That is about $150 for those 5 players. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

29 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

A 3 war player is not ridiculously overpaid at $25M annual. If he actually did sign a 7 year deal and averaged a 3 war yearly that wouldn’t be an awful signing. 

That's not how aging curves generally work though. Can you name a player who got a 7/175 deal coming off a 3 war season?

[Jason Ross]

36 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

A 3 war player is not ridiculously overpaid at $25M annual. If he actually did sign a 7 year deal and averaged a 3 war yearly that wouldn’t be an awful signing. 

It might be an okay contract if a player was going to remain a 3 fWAR player over those 7 years. You usually want to get your surplus value up front to account for years on the backend, however. Signing a 3 win player to 7/$25m AAV probably isn't going to end up being a very good contract once you factor in aging, injuries and the like. Players rarely stay static 3 win players into their mid-30's (which isn't to say that players can't be 3 win players, only that aging curves suggest a 3 win player in his mid-late-20's will fall off some).

[Stratos]

There's no point in judging this offseason until the start of ST and OD.  Let's hope they at least spend up to around the CBT line or above.

[Backtobanks]

1 hour ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

People - front offices included - don't believe in how he achieved 4 war. If you split the difference in his woba and xwoba then he's more like a 115-120 hitter and 3 war. He doesnt get credit for time missed due to injury. 3 war players don't get 25 AAV long term often.

I'm tired of naysayers cherry-picking certain stats to dismiss what Bellinger has done. His .307/.356/.525/.881 with 26HR, 97RBI, and an OPS of 133 not only shows that he has recovered from a devasting injury, but that he should be mentioned offensively with or ahead of other top CFs like Mullins, Buxton, Robert, Nimmo, etc.

[Stratos]

We should be happy Ricketts bulldozed most of the historic Wrigley Field we all grew up with and turned it into a casino to line his pockets while refusing to put much if any of that extra revenue back into payroll.

Tommy Boy is a greedy arse getting rich off our enthusiasm and loyalty and playing us for fools, we all know it.

[Rcal10]

51 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

It might be an okay contract if a player was going to remain a 3 fWAR player over those 7 years. You usually want to get your surplus value up front to account for years on the backend, however. Signing a 3 win player to 7/$25m AAV probably isn't going to end up being a very good contract once you factor in aging, injuries and the like. Players rarely stay static 3 win players into their mid-30's (which isn't to say that players can't be 3 win players, only that aging curves suggest a 3 win player in his mid-late-20's will fall off some).

Very true. But Bellinger wasn’t a 3 war player last year. So if he signed a 7/$175M contract he wouldn’t be getting that contract off a 3 war season. No matter how many want so discredit his season(and I don’t mean you) he had a war better than 3. And he could do that again for several seasons IMO. So he would be over 3 for maybe 3 of those year and maybe eight around 3 for a few to settle in at maybe 2.5 his last year or two. I just don’t see tjat contract being an albatross to the team or even some sort of crazy overpay. 

[chopsx9]

3 hours ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

That's not how aging curves generally work though. Can you name a player who got a 7/175 deal coming off a 3 war season?

But he wasn't a 3 win player - just saying he was doesn't make it so.  He was at 8 WAR the year before his injury.  If he'd played a full season he'd likely have been over 5 last year. Its not like he doesn't have a track record.  Freeman signed a 6/162 contract at a season with a same or lower WAR after you equalize games played than Bellinger had last year.  He was 4 years older and can't play the OF.  Again stick David Bote at first if you are going to fixate on hard hit rate over actual results of 4 injury free years.

[We Got The Whole 9]

9 hours ago, chopsx9 said:

But he wasn't a 3 win player - just saying he was doesn't make it so.  He was at 8 WAR the year before his injury.  If he'd played a full season he'd likely have been over 5 last year. Its not like he doesn't have a track record.  Freeman signed a 6/162 contract at a season with a same or lower WAR after you equalize games played than Bellinger had last year.  He was 4 years older and can't play the OF.  Again stick David Bote at first if you are going to fixate on hard hit rate over actual results of 4 injury free years.

He's pretty clearly not being viewed as a 4-5 win CF. Otherwise he'd have a bigger market IMO. 

[Guest234]

Is there a truthful biography of the story of how Poppa Joe built his business, seems to me his philosophy explained would be a good guide as to how the Cubs are administered. He is the person who made the basic financial base for team ownership.