It Feels Like This is the Crucial Piece of Info We've Been Missing All Along About Cubs Offseason

[Matthew Trueblood]

One partial, still-valid explanation of the Cubs' somewhat puzzling behavior and messaging this offseason is that they face constraints related to the payroll, imposed by ownership. On Tuesday, another, much more completely explanatory fact came to light.

Image courtesy of © David Banks-Imagn Images

If we're being honest, it didn't make that much sense for the Cubs to take an interest in trading Cody Bellinger this winter. Sure, you could squint and see it, if they really wanted a major shakeup of their positional corps and/or if they believe they need a major infusion of pitching talent but need to stay budget-neutral. On balance, though, it's a confusing reality to which we've all been reconciling ourselves since Bellinger opted in to his deal after the World Series.

It seems like Bellinger playing right field, with Seiya Suzuki at DH, Pete Crow-Armstrong in center and Ian Happ in left, was a really nice configuration. We even saw Suzuki find a gorgeous rhythm as the everyday DH down the stretch in 2024, batting .326/.433/.500 in 37 games and 171 plate appearances to finish the season after moving into that role. It's harder than a casual baseball fan might guess to find guys who can thrive as the DH. Suzuki, who was a disastrously bad right fielder beginning in early 2023, made the transition seamlessly, and it seemed like all parties should be fairly comfortable with keeping that good thing going.

Now, we can all understand what was happening, and why the team has seemed so unsure of what to do for the last month.

Ohhh. If Suzuki didn't like being a DH, it's a lot easier to see why some alternative arrangements would need to be explored.

If it was difficult to grasp why the Cubs would want to trade Bellinger under our old understanding of the situation, their recently reported openness to trading Suzuki (and specifically, the idea that they were dead-set on trading one or the other) was downright inscrutable. If one tossed out the idea that they were just being extraordinarily cheap, it was inexplicable. Now, it's extremely explicable.

A situation in which Suzuki is unwilling to be the everyday DH is a totally different set of problems than we thought Jed Hoyer was trying to solve. His bat was more than good enough, for the bulk of last season, to write him in at that spot and bring him back, shopping only for the player who might allow him to be clearly second-best in the lineup, rather than its anchor. However, if he feels he has to play the outfield (and, although his agent does not explicitly suggest this to be the case in the above, if he wants out unless he can be given that chance), then the Cubs have to do something big.

Trading Bellinger is one solution, because then, Suzuki goes back to right field. Clearing the money owed to Bellinger gets important in a hurry if you think the Cubs have to replace his bat with a DH like Pete Alonso, Anthony Santander, or J.D. Martinez, in addition to spending young talent on further help for the starting rotation. Before that could happen, though, you'd think the Cubs would want some concrete reason to believe that he'll be better there than he was for the last year and a half he spent in that position.

Moving Suzuki to left is not an option. Ian Happ has a no-trade clause he's much less likely to waive, and too much of his value comes from his superb defense to obliterate that value by sliding him to DH, all the while risking a big downgrade if the sun of right field turns out not to have been Suzuki's problem. 

That leaves the possibility of trading Suzuki himself. In light of this new information about his preferences (which sure sound strong), that feels much more plausible than it did a few days ago. Certainly, the team can't keep both Bellinger and Suzuki if the latter is unwilling to be the regular DH from here on out. Suzuki would have more trade value, of course, because he's a better hitter and is on a less expensive, less player-friendly contract. However, he'd also leave a bigger hole in the lineup and force you to do something bigger to replace him. It's a big dilemma, and now, we can well understand why the team has proceeded cautiously all along.

This is bad news, I think, because the best version of the 2025 Cubs I foresaw before learning this had Suzuki as the DH almost all the time. Now, it seems like multiple major moves need to be made to get to a version that matches or betters that one. Still, it's enlightening, and thus something of a relief. Why have the Cubs acted a little weird all winter? This is why. And this could explain some of the really exciting possibilities being floated through the rumor mill, as neatly as it explains the more maddening notes.

View full article

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I think the subsequent commentary from other (better) reporters than Rogers puts this situation in a different light.  But maybe more to the point, I don't think that Jed is going to let Seiya's preference for RF over DH drive the direction of the offseason that will define if he keeps his job.  

[Bertz]

Yeah I mentioned in a comment on your Tucker column this AM but the Athletic mentioning yesterday that Suzuki could be moved if Bellinger wasn't was a real "wait what?!" moment for me.  Brushing off Joel Sherman as not knowing anything about anything west of Jersey is easy, but Sharma saying something has more weight.  I wouldn't take this as a good thing per se, but I do think it's less bad, probably much less, than most of the alternative explanations for what Sharma reported.

Speaking of those alternative explanations, does this soften what we think the restrictions are on payroll?  The genesis of the "they're cutting payroll!" panic was the deluge of Bellinger rumors.  Payroll being cut was mostly shot down, but we collectively settled on "but they absolutely will not cross the LT."  With the Bellinger stuff having a very non-financial explanation, I wonder if there's another $5-10M more in the couch cushions than we expected.  Like this year they go into the season at the LT line and if they end up over so be it.

[Matthew Trueblood]

56 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Yeah I mentioned in a comment on your Tucker column this AM but the Athletic mentioning yesterday that Suzuki could be moved if Bellinger wasn't was a real "wait what?!" moment for me.  Brushing off Joel Sherman as not knowing anything about anything west of Jersey is easy, but Sharma saying something has more weight.  I wouldn't take this as a good thing per se, but I do think it's less bad, probably much less, than most of the alternative explanations for what Sharma reported.

Speaking of those alternative explanations, does this soften what we think the restrictions are on payroll?  The genesis of the "they're cutting payroll!" panic was the deluge of Bellinger rumors.  Payroll being cut was mostly shot down, but we collectively settled on "but they absolutely will not cross the LT."  With the Bellinger stuff having a very non-financial explanation, I wonder if there's another $5-10M more in the couch cushions than we expected.  Like this year they go into the season at the LT line and if they end up over so be it.

Well, to give my own reporting to it, I feel pretty sure they will stay below the CBT 1 line. But they still have plenty to spend. Think $230 million, in real money not CBT value, and you're close. But yeah, I feel more confident that they're not dipping down into the $215 million range or something than I did before, because I was having a hard time squaring what I was hearing about their willingness to spend with the urgency of their interest in these trade possibilities. This reconciles those two things for me.