Are the Chicago Cubs Actually "Cheap"?

[Brian Kelder]

The Cubs are frugal. Tom Ricketts is cheap. The Cubs will never have a generational player. All of these are popular takes online and on talk radio. They don't hold merit. The Cubs do spend. They just have a spread the wealth strategy. They like sensible contracts instead of the splurge. (Don’t stop reading! I’ll get to Kyle Tucker!)

Image courtesy of © Brad Penner-Imagn Images

First, the Cubs have spent recently. Check this list if you want to compare. From 2015 to today, the Cubs have ranked 13-14-8-4-2-6-10-15-12-9. They have spent in the past to sustain a winner, just not at the level of the Mets, Dodgers, Yankees, or even Red Sox. Cheap and frugal don't describe a team always in the top half of spending.

If you want to argue market size and expectations, that's a fair critique. Another solid argument is if the Cubs will ever play at the top of the mountain and acquire the next Wrigley Field Hero. Looking at the free agent landscape from 2022 on is instructive.

Since 2020, the top ten largest contracts in baseball have been signed. Currently, the Cubs have gutted their salary by $40-50 million. The Yu Darvish dump was step one. Kyle Schwarber departed, and the guys who won the World Series were dealt at the deadline. The Cubs would not want to sign a major free agent or entice someone who plans to win in their first season with the club.

While all this was happening, many free-agent contracts were signed for over $200 million. Just this offseason, Max Fried signed a $218 million deal with the New York Yankees. The first question is, were the Cubs even players for any of these contracts?

In the top ten, only Shohei Ohtani was pursued by the Cubs at the time of his free agency. They did sit every other one of these free agencies out, although the coffers did open a bit after 2021. Let's look at the top free agents, starting with 2023.

2023:

• Yoshinobu Yamamoto: not a finalist
• Blake Snell: not pursued
• Cody Bellinger: signed to a player-friendly contract by Chicago
• Aaron Nola: There is no chance he left Philadelphia
• Josh Hader: did not pursue
• Matt Chapman: LOL, Christopher Morel!

2022:

• Aaron Judge: not a contender for him
• Jacob deGrom: not a contender
• Trea Turner: not a contender
• Carlos Correa: Did offer a large contract
• Xander Bogaerts: Did offer a large contract
• Dansby Swanson: Signed by Cubs to a large contract, but less than Correa and Bogaerts
• Carlos Rodon: Not a Cub consideration

2021:

• Carlos Correa: Not this time
• Corey Seager/Marcus Semien: Rangers combo, not involved
• Kris Bryant: ...
• Max Scherzer: Not interested

So the takeaway is that the Cubs will spend on the right target, correct? Well, not so fast. Juan Soto and the aforementioned Yamamoto beg to differ. The Cubs obviously would love to have these guys on their team. They just don't see the risk of a long, heavy-money deal as worth the downside.

Instead of these talented players on admittedly risky contracts, the Cubs want to invest in several players one tier below this, spending around $15-20 million per year for them. Marcus Stroman and Seiya Suzuki were signed, Ian Happ extended, Nico Hoerner extended, Jameson Taillon signed, and Shota Imanaga signed. All of these guys have their merits but will not engender excitement by themselves.

This strategy has benefits. The Cubs are not locked into an albatross contract, even if Dansby Swanson has been mildly underwhelming. The team has maintained flexibility for the future, and despite current attempts to dump Cody Bellinger, it does not need to trade players to save money.

The downside is the lack of star power this allows you to obtain. With the ever-increasing cost of a game, a $20-per-month tab to stream Marquee, and the $30 beer bats. As a Cub fan in a long-distance relationship with the team living in North Carolina, it sure would entice me to have a Bryce Harper, or even a long-term Cub like Kyle Schwarber, to watch at the plate. The non-pursuit of Juan Soto simply adds salt to that wound.

This strategy can, of course, lead to success. The Kansas City Royals won a World Series in 2015 utilizing this model. However, history shows you need a Hall of Fame bat in the lineup, or at least someone with an MVP-caliber season. For example:

2024 Dodgers; Shohei Ohtani, Mookie Betts, Freddie Freeman

2023 Rangers: Corey Seager MVP-level season

2022 Astros: Jose Altuve, Kyle Tucker (more on him later), Yordan Alvarez

2021 Braves: Freddie Freeman

2019 Nationals: Juan Soto

2018 Red Sox: Mookie Betts

2010s era Giants: Buster Posey

Going back further, the Yankees had Derek Jeter, Mickey Mantle, Lou Gehrig, and many others; the Cardinals Albert Pujols; the Red Sox had multiple seasons of David Ortiz; the Oakland A's Rickey Henderson, the Twins Kirby Puckett; the Orioles Cal Ripken Jr, and the Pirates Roberto Clemente and Willie Stargell.

The Cubs are trying to replicate the 2005 White Sox, 1988 Dodgers, and the Royals from 2015. These did work but were not a blueprint for the sustained success Jed Hoyer has preached over the past four seasons. The 1989 Dodgers, for example, won only 74 games. The 2006 White Sox finished in third place in their division. The Royals in 2016 were a .500 team. Hoping your team over-performs projections for multiple seasons is not how a team with long-term winning designs should operate.

Lightning can strike, as these examples above show. However, sustainability is in question. Players' performance varies from season to season, and without the Aaron Judge-level bat, negative regression can sink teams from season to season.

Long-term Cub fans know all about one-hit wonders. 1984, 1989, 1998, 2003, and 2008 were all fun, but we all remember the years after. You do need to win in one season before winning in multiple. Years of being a Cub fan have destroyed confidence that building a Dodgers or Yankees level of success with this approach is fruitless.

This is not a Ricketts issue. Sources tell me Tom gives the front office free rein to spend money however they choose within a given budget. This can be for long-term or short-term deals. He could have done so if Jed Hoyer had sought to sign Juan Soto or even Max Fried. If Kyle Tucker is acquired, Jed would be allowed to extend him within the budget.

It's as simple as that. Jed Hoyer will not extend contracts to the heavy players in free agency unless there's some sort of carrot for him to nibble on in return. Cody Bellinger, for example, signed a large deal. Based on rumors that the team was trying to offload the salary, they expected it to be a one-year deal and were not pleased with the results. Dansby Swanson was the Cubs' version of getting uncomfortable, and team results probably have not emboldened Jed Hoyer to follow the same path.

The thing is, the Cubs do spend. Fans of the Pirates have been clamoring for years to have the payroll level the Cubs do. The Marlins have been in a low-budget rebuild for over a decade. Even the crosstown White Sox just traded their potential ace for prospects. The Cubs will spend to a certain level.

Jed Hoyer hopes to build an entire roster without holes. This is shown in the recently concluded winter meetings. There is a solid player at every position; after adding Matthew Boyd, the roster sports nine rotation candidates. In the case of Swanson and Bellinger, he has spent big on a roster built to win with depth.

Hoyer has counted on his prospects to find the great player that so far has eluded him. The current farm system is the most Hoyer-esque thing. According to FanGraphs, He has many solid prospects but none with over a 50 future value. None project to be over an average regular, meaning no project to be upgraded over the current roster. It's always risky to count on young players breaking out, and it doesn't seem like this group will follow the path that led to 2016.

Note: this article was written to this point before the Kyle Tucker deal. The rest is after.

Kyle Tucker, of course, was acquired and fits right into this salary structure. He’ll make just shy of $17 million in the last year before free agency. The Cubs can change this entire narrative if they extend their first star player since Anthony Rizzo.

The Cubs spend, but not long term, and for high dollars. I’m holding off on the Tucker jersey purchase; he might be gone next season. It looks like a shirsey is appropriate for the Cubs' spending trend.

View full article

[Brock Beauchamp]

The team isn't way off the mark in payroll but they're below where they should be. As the premier team in the third-largest market, the Cubs should be hovering somewhere around fifth in payroll, give or take a few slots depending on their competitive cycle.

If Hoyer has avoided top-shelf free agents from 2022-2024 because he didn't feel the timing was right, that's fine. But if he avoids them in perpetuity, that's a mistake. The Cubs should be playing in those waters on a semi-regular basis.