Article: It's Come Down to This: Cody Bellinger vs. Matt Chapman

[squally1313]

10 hours ago, Billy said:

Why not attempt to secure both Chapman and Bellinger? The money is there. They have someway covertly been adding to the bullpen. With Chapman and Bellinger manning the corners this imo be the premiere defensive infield in the National Lea, if not all of baseball. Maybe I'm dreaming but wouldn't put a lot of the nay sayers quietly on notice? 

Do you want an 86 win team with a ton of flexibility and logical future openings for the farm system we've spent years building, or do you want an 89 win team where you have 6 of the 9 line up spots (the outfield, chapman, dansby, nico) locked in for the next three years at double digit salaries, with 5 of those players being very much on the wrong side of the aging curve?

Basically, getting both probably makes us the 2024/2025 division favorite, but I think it greatly diminishes the chance of becoming a Braves/Dodgers type team with this group of players.

[We Got The Whole 9]

I understand people are anxious about 2024 but the high-aversion to letting a couple rookies plug holes is a little weird to me, especially considering what happened the last time the team went all-in on their prospects. 

[Backtobanks]

1 hour ago, squally1313 said:

Do you want an 86 win team with a ton of flexibility and logical future openings for the farm system we've spent years building, or do you want an 89 win team where you have 6 of the 9 line up spots (the outfield, chapman, dansby, nico) locked in for the next three years at double digit salaries, with 5 of those players being very much on the wrong side of the aging curve?

Basically, getting both probably makes us the 2024/2025 division favorite, but I think it greatly diminishes the chance of becoming a Braves/Dodgers type team with this group of players.

Posters keep mentioning becoming perennial contenders like the Braves/Dodgers/Astros, but first you have to win in 2024 and 2025 and then worry about 2026 and beyond. 

[squally1313]

3 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Posters keep mentioning becoming perennial contenders like the Braves/Dodgers/Astros, but first you have to win in 2024 and 2025 and then worry about 2026 and beyond. 

[Cuzi]

44 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

I understand people are anxious about 2024 but the high-aversion to letting a couple rookies plug holes is a little weird to me, especially considering what happened the last time the team went all-in on their prospects. 

The last time the team went all in on prospects it was Rizzo that had already established himself and then a legitimate handful of top 7 draft picks.

Going in with guys like Kris Bryant, Javier Baez, Addison Russell, and Anthony Rizzo who developed into a 5 WAR player 2 years before 2016 and inserting Contreras into a catching rotation that included David Ross and Miguel Montero, is a little bit different than giving the keys to a bunch of mid grade prospects with average MLB projections.

Edited January 31, 2024 by Cuzi

[We Got The Whole 9]

8 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

The last time the team went all in on prospects it was Rizzo that had already established himself and then a legitimate handful of top 7 draft picks.

This time around they are coming off of an 84 win season with established yet still young players forming the foundation, and there are 3 holes, not 13. So now they can put a little stock in players drafted 19th, 13th, and 7th; enough to where they may not need to sign long-term deals with players with spotty track records, at least. 

Edited January 31, 2024 by We Got The Whole 9

[squally1313]

The issue with signing both those guys to me is that that's essentially your team for the Dansby Swanson era (final name still to be determined), and there's no chance for me that it turns into a powerhouse. We lose the financial flexibility to pick up elite level talent, and we severely limit the opportunity for any of the offensive prospects to turn into elite talent for the Cubs. I'm generally pro the 2023 team, the current roster, and dealing with having too much talent when we get there. But when your offense through 2026 is Happ, Bellinger, Seiya, Chapman, Swanson, Hoerner, a catcher, a DH, and a first baseman/centerfielder, and you can't afford an elite talent to fill one of those slots, you have an offense without an elite bat and very little chance for one to develop. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

1 hour ago, Cuzi said:

The last time the team went all in on prospects it was Rizzo that had already established himself and then a legitimate handful of top 7 draft picks.

Going in with guys like Kris Bryant, Javier Baez, Addison Russell, and Anthony Rizzo who developed into a 5 WAR player 2 years before 2016 and inserting Contreras into a catching rotation that included David Ross and Miguel Montero, is a little bit different than giving the keys to a bunch of mid grade prospects with average MLB projections.

They don't need to give the keys to a bunch of prospects this time around. We are talking about 2-3 spots. The situations are not the same but people are just terrified of throwing rookies into the fire this time. 

 

And PCA is certainly not a mid-grade prospect with average projections. Nor is Horton. Shaw's case is arguable; he has a ton of helium across the industry right now and is solidly a top 50 guy. This is not like trying an org's 15th best prospect. He's top 5 in one of the strongest orgs in the league. Probably most comparable to Baez in some respects.

 

Like stop being so scared we may not be divisonal favorites in 2024. Give the kids some runway, that's all I am saying. 

[Cuzi]

28 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Like stop being so scared we may not be divisonal favorites in 2024. Give the kids some runway, that's all I am saying. 

Like stop being scared of blocking prospects 2-3 years away. The only one potentially getting blocked would be PCA with Bellinger. By the time anyone else is getting a call up Hoerner, Happ, and Suzuki have 1 year left.

[We Got The Whole 9]

8 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Like stop being scared of blocking prospects 2-3 years away. The only one potentially getting blocked would be PCA with Bellinger. By the time anyone else is getting a call up Hoerner, Happ, and Suzuki have 1 year left.

Good young players who produce for 700K are the horsefeathers. 

[Cuzi]

14 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Good young players who produce for 700K are the horsefeathers. 

You act like they grow on trees. Minor leaguers have like a 15% success rate of being even an average MLBer. I would rather the Cubs not worry about signing 3 guys to $150M contracts when teams like the Padres are out there signing 3 guys to $300M contracts.

[squally1313]

24 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Like stop being scared of blocking prospects 2-3 years away. The only one potentially getting blocked would be PCA with Bellinger. By the time anyone else is getting a call up Hoerner, Happ, and Suzuki have 1 year left.

But neither of these guys are that good. You don't worry about prospects when you discuss Juan Soto or Ohtani or Jose Ramirez or whatever. Chapman is projected as the 29th best offensive player, which seems generous, and Bellinger is projected for the 81st best, which seems pessimistic. Split the difference and these guys are the 50th or so best offensive players in baseball that would be locked in at over $20m a year. And we just took ourselves financially out of any elite talent hitting the market. 

[Cuzi]

1 minute ago, squally1313 said:

But neither of these guys are that good. You don't worry about prospects when you discuss Juan Soto or Ohtani or Jose Ramirez or whatever. Chapman is projected as the 29th best offensive player, which seems generous, and Bellinger is projected for the 81st best, which seems pessimistic. Split the difference and these guys are the 50th or so best offensive players in baseball that would be locked in at over $20m a year. And we just took ourselves financially out of any elite talent hitting the market. 

Lets get one thing straight. This team is not signing elite talent. Just forget about that already. They've passed on elite talent 3 FAs in a row.

[We Got The Whole 9]

8 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

You act like they grow on trees. Minor leaguers have like a 15% success rate of being even an average MLBer. I would rather the Cubs not worry about signing 3 guys to $150M contracts when teams like the Padres are out there signing 3 guys to $300M contracts.

I think Jed Hoyer deserves a lot of latitude when it comes to prospects he appears to have high faith in. When he deems that a guy will be a solid regular in the MLB, he is generally right.

[squally1313]

3 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Lets get one thing straight. This team is not signing elite talent. Just forget about that already. They've passed on elite talent 3 FAs in a row.

Let's pretend that's the case. What's your plan then? Fill the lineup with long term contracts of non-elite guys? 

[Cuzi]

5 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Let's pretend that's the case. What's your plan then? Fill the lineup with long term contracts of non-elite guys? 

I dont have a plan. I'm not sitting down at the table. But I'm for damn sure not going to shy away from 3+ WAR players at ~$20M/year. If they like Bellinger and Chapman at a certain price and that price is acceptable to the player at some point in the future then sign them. I'm not worrying about a damn prospect 2 years away.

You are worried about the last 3 or so years of the "Swanson era" while conveniently ignoring the first 3 years.

Edited January 31, 2024 by Cuzi

[squally1313]

7 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I dont have a plan. I'm not sitting down at the table. But I'm for damn sure not going to shy away from 3+ WAR players at ~$20M/year. If they like Bellinger and Chapman at a certain price and that price is acceptable to the player at some point in the future then sign them. I'm not worrying about a damn prospect 2 years away.

You are worried about the last 3 or so years of the "Swanson era" while conveniently ignoring the first 3 years.

I'm pretty confident that we'll be the betting and projection favorite for the division on opening day. We have, based on the rankings that came out today, 5 prospects in the top 50, all of which are in the upper levels of the minor leagues. We currently have zero contracts outside of the dead money on the books this year that annoy me. The next three years are going to be just fine.

There's no path to becoming the Dodgers or Braves in the short term, and there probably never was at any point this offseason. Bellinger and Chapman doesn't put us anywhere close. 

[squally1313]

I guess, to look at it another way, if you want to go all in on immediate success, which is fine....wouldn't you focus on taking those prospects that are all two years away in your mind, but in theory have plenty of value on the market, and trading those guys for immediate contributors? Why beat everyone else on the open market for two non-elite guys when you could consolidate all this talent that isn't ready and you want to block anyways into guys with higher ceilings or more reasonable contract terms? Or is that something else that you don't think Hoyer does?

[Cuzi]

I'm not against trading prospects. We are talking about 3 WAR players here. Even a guy like PCA has a pretty minute chance of being that. I dont think I would trade PCA at this stage before giving him a legitimate shot at MLB, given how close he is to being ready to get that shot and the potential availability of his position. But for someone like Alcantara, I have no fucks given.

But who are you targeting for 3B in a trade? There aren't many more established than Chapman readily available. The list is Alex Bregman and Isaac Paredes. Bregman isn't getting traded and if you dont like Bellinger's batted ball profile then I doubt Paredes is making you erect.

Edited January 31, 2024 by Cuzi

[squally1313]

4 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I'm not against trading prospects. We are talking about 3 WAR players here. Even a guy like PCA has a pretty minute chance of being that. I dont think I would trade PCA at this stage before giving him a legitimate shot at MLB, given how close he is to being ready to get that shot and the potential availability of his position. But for someone like Alcantara, I have no fucks given.

I know, the projections are pessimistic, wrong, whatever. But Bellinger isn't projected to be a 3 WAR guy next year, and that is presumably with the computers thinking he'll spend most of his time in centerfield (and crediting him accordingly). So if you want to give PCA a legitimate shot, you're either waiting for an injury, temporary solution, or you just signed a 2.5 fWAR first baseman to a long term deal, $20+m/year deal. 

Basically: Sign Chapman because we have the money lying around anyways. Win the division with that team. Upgrade from there. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

57 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I'm not against trading prospects. We are talking about 3 WAR players here. Even a guy like PCA has a pretty minute chance of being that. I dont think I would trade PCA at this stage before giving him a legitimate shot at MLB, given how close he is to being ready to get that shot and the potential availability of his position. But for someone like Alcantara, I have no fucks given.

But who are you targeting for 3B in a trade? There aren't many more established than Chapman readily available. The list is Alex Bregman and Isaac Paredes. Bregman isn't getting traded and if you dont like Bellinger's batted ball profile then I doubt Paredes is making you erect.

FTR I would also have no qualms trading Alcantara in the right deal. 

[Backtobanks]

2 hours ago, squally1313 said:

But neither of these guys are that good. You don't worry about prospects when you discuss Juan Soto or Ohtani or Jose Ramirez or whatever. Chapman is projected as the 29th best offensive player, which seems generous, and Bellinger is projected for the 81st best, which seems pessimistic. Split the difference and these guys are the 50th or so best offensive players in baseball that would be locked in at over $20m a year. And we just took ourselves financially out of any elite talent hitting the market. 

50th best offensive player means they are probably the 2nd best offensive player on the team.  

[Backtobanks]

4 hours ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

This time around they are coming off of an 84 win season with established yet still young players forming the foundation, and there are 3 holes, not 13. So now they can put a little stock in players drafted 19th, 13th, and 7th; enough to where they may not need to sign long-term deals with players with spotty track records, at least. 

But we don't have Zobrist, Fowler, Heyward, Lester, Arrieta, Wood, Lackey, and Chapman providing support in case they don't succeed.

 

[squally1313]

4 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

50th best offensive player means they are probably the 2nd best offensive player on the team.  

Dansby projected for 25th, Hoerner for 31st. For anyone who's curious, Happ is 83rd, Busch is 89th, Seiya is 96th in the top 100. So yeah, 7 in the top 100 would be pretty impressive, and more than the Dodgers (5) and Braves (6). However, that again makes the lack of top end talent pretty glaring given that we knew the huge gap in overall talent. Dodgers go 4, 18, 20, 43, 48, Braves go 1, 16, 21, 37, 39, 52. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

17 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

But we don't have Zobrist, Fowler, Heyward, Lester, Arrieta, Wood, Lackey, and Chapman providing support in case they don't succeed.

 

What the hell are you talking about. There are plenty of long-tenured Cubs and weathered vets on the roster.