Levine: Alex Bregman Open to Short-Term Deals, Cubs Have Talked to Scott Boras About It

[Jason Ross]

13 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Fair. Honestly I don’t want to trade Nico anyway. And, TBH, if signing Bregman only happens if they trade Nico I would rather they not sign Bregman. And I really hate the idea of Nico for prospects.

I know on the surface that a lot of people hate this Bregman in - Nico out (for prospects) idea, but I've tried to step back and examine it, and I think if we zoom out, there's logic behind it. Once again, the concept here is "flexibility". So how does it achieve that?

- Currently, the Cubs could probably use a SP. If the Cubs accomplish the Bregman/Hoerner switcharoo, the Cubs don't change this math, probably, in any meaningful way. They can still have money under the LT (roughly $10m) to acquire, probably, any deadline deal SP you can imagine. On top of that, they recoup the prospects lost by signing Bregman and maybe then some - it could help pay for that SP at the deadline.

- As well, this allows you to wait and see how prospects go. Matt wrote a cool article on Jordan Wicks. If you think Zombro can get Wicks' slider fixed, and say, mid-year. he's cooking, maybe you don't need that SP any more. By moving Hoerner for prospects, now you can fix another hole (say, that opened up via injury, or maybe you fix catcher if Amaya is tanking) in the event Wicks, Horton, Birdsell or Brown just run with a rotational spot and you don't need a SP as bad. 

- It gives the Cubs an offensive boost. Perhaps the two have similar value, but you can also see a pathway where if you get Bregman to change his swing decisions in a way closer to 2023-Bregman, you could conceivably add a win over Hoerner.

- It shifts Matt Shaw to 2b. If we remain honest with ourselves, this is probably his best position, especially for his rookie season and settling his bat in. The bar is usually lower at 2b offensively. 

- The worry I see people having is that Bregman would opt out, leaving us with a hole, or maybe that the Cubs wouldn't be able to sign Tucker. And I get that. And there's a situation where you lose both. But that could conceivably open up a world of possibilities the next offseason in what looks like a pretty good free agent class. You could realistically be able to waltz into next offseason with a bunch of money once again, and a lot of flexibility. You could target Vlad, you could go after a SP like Gallen, or Cease...there's options. And you'd probably still have prospect capital. 

- This would also shift a need in 2027 to 2026. Currently we look to need to replace four starters in 2027...this would allow you to move that need a year up. Replacing four starters in one year is a lot of shopping. This helps you move that math around.

It does create some risk. You do have less settled in the 2026 year than if you kept Hoerner. And you could possibly have Bregman have a terrible season and opt-in (though I think this feels pretty low). And I don't want to suggest that this is an amazing, super, uber awesome plan that I'd particularly do. But I also get this plan and can see the argument that this continues to give Hoyer flexibility within the 2025 season and beyond. 

 

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

Really? You are the second person to think Nico for Clarke Schmidt is a hard no from the Cubs. What am I missing? I feel Cuzi loved Schmidt. Haven’t heard from him. Just curious, what does surplus value show these guys at? I am not saying you are wrong, I might be. I just thought Schmidt was more valuable. Keep in mind, if the Cubs got Bregman, I would rather no trade is made. I am only saying if one HAD to be made I thought this was fair. 

It would be trading 2 years of a 4 WAR player on a good contract for 3 years of a 2 WAR player.  Schmidt is an average pitcher.

[KCCub]

3 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Two points, one on each side:

2. The projections for Schmidt as shown above show 108 innings pitched, and I'm not totally sure what drives that number, but I was under the impression it was some sort of dynamic playing time projection analysis where he is coming in as the 5th/6th starter in the current Yankees rotation and that's just what normal fringe starters usually get in terms of innings. He threw 96 total last year and 159 in 2023 so he's capable of more. Basically what I'm saying if he got traded to the White Sox tomorrow he'd be their opening day starter, I would imagine his innings would go up (to that 150 IP number, maybe), and I would then imagine his projected fWAR would increase because I can't imagine his rate stats would take too much of a hit, right? Said another way, the rate stats give every pitcher some miniscule amount of projected fWAR per inning, and then it gets multiplied by how much they think he's going to play, which is somewhat a factor of the roster he's on. But I might be thinking about that wrong. 

This is true. ZiPS DC (Factors innings/playing time on current depth chart/team context) has him at 132 IP this season for the Yankees at 2 fWAR. Still the same underlying projected numbers, just more innings equaling more fWAR.

At the end of the day, all Fangraphs projection systems have him projected just under a 4 ERA, which is Jamo like, but if we're looking for a game 2 playoff starter with our one major SP move, then I'm hoping we are aiming higher. 

5 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

So if I am reading this right you are suggesting if Schmidt did throw 160 innings his value might be close to Nico. Is this correct? 

He put up 159 IP in 2023 at 2 fWAR (4.64 ERA, 4.33 xERA, 4.36 xFIP). The lack of track record is really the concern here e.g. can he go 150+ IP 3 consecutive years and maintain his xERA of 3.78 that he had last season in only 85 IP or is it more likely to be around 4.5 when he's putting up that many IP. 

[Dfan25]

 

[Bertz]

Something worth noting: teams don't make formal offers until a deal is almost done.  So now we know the Cubs and Astros have done so.

I'd be shocked if this isn't resolved in the next 48 hours. 

[Randall Simon]

Cross Moncada off the list for the bench. We must really think we have a shot at Bregman.

[WhyCantWeWin]

The longer this drags on the more likely i think he returns to the astros and tries FA again next year

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Dfan25 said:

 

We're screwed.  With around 32m left minus about 8m in space what is plan B?

Could always try to get Robertson on a good deal, maybe 10m.  Or some kind of trade, even eating salary for a year

[Rcal10]

I’ve seen this play out too often. Cubs are going to come away with MAYBE Canha and that will be it. Ricketts will pocket $25M of money he didn’t spend and then the off season will be complete. And they won’t use it to extend Tucker and probably won’t used it if they add at the trade deadline. Another off season tease.  

[Stratos]

Is Arenado an option here?  Would he even be worth the bother?

Edited February 7, 2025 by Stratos

[Randall Simon]

9 minutes ago, Stratos said:

Is Arenado an option here?  Would he even be worth the bother?

No. Would rather just play Shaw. 

[Rcal10]

I don’t care that they don’t end up with Bregman. What I do care about is all the penny pinching because they fell for Bregman using them to try to get a better off elsewhere. They should have just gotten a better pitcher than Rea, maybe signed Robinson and probably should have signed Grichik and Moncada. They wouldn’t have enough for all of those moves, but at least a few. Now guys are signed and they have money and nothing to spend it on. And even that would be ok if they used it to extend Tucker. But I have no faith they will do that either. They had a chance to be a clear favorite for this division. They may still win it, but they did waste an opportunity to be even better. 

[squally1313]

41 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I’ve seen this play out too often. Cubs are going to come away with MAYBE Canha and that will be it. Ricketts will pocket $25M of money he didn’t spend and then the off season will be complete. And they won’t use it to extend Tucker and probably won’t used it if they add at the trade deadline. Another off season tease.  

1. When have you seen this play out 'too often'?

2. We all read the second paragraph of that tweet right?

3. Does the season start tomorrow?

[Stratos]

44 minutes ago, Randall Simon said:

No. Would rather just play Shaw. 

I think he's owed the equivalent of 60m over the next 3 years by the Cards.  A bunch of it deferred through 2041 lol

[Stratos]

25 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t care that they don’t end up with Bregman. What I do care about is all the penny pinching because they fell for Bregman using them to try to get a better off elsewhere. They should have just gotten a better pitcher than Rea, maybe signed Robinson and probably should have signed Grichik and Moncada. They wouldn’t have enough for all of those moves, but at least a few. Now guys are signed and they have money and nothing to spend it on. And even that would be ok if they used it to extend Tucker. But I have no faith they will do that either. They had a chance to be a clear favorite for this division. They may still win it, but they did waste an opportunity to be even better. 

Robertson, Jansen, Pivetta, Canha, Turner etc still left out there, plus Bregman and a bunch of relievers and bench guys.  If Pivetta comes down enough he'd be worth the QO pick.  I have no issues with Rea for depth at 5m, that's worth the 1 WAR or so he can give.

We have about 22-24 left to spend, maybe a bit more, and no less than 4 solid options out there that can improve the team.

[chibears55]

I dont have a problem trading Nico and his remaining 2 yrs on his deal if they sign Bregman, but I dont want prospects for Nico either, I prefer if they do trade him, they get at least a middle of the rotation type SP for him or better if they have to add a prospect.

The Cubs lineup could use a change and added punch outside of just adding Tucker and Shaw.

Adding both Bregman and Tucker to the middle of the lineup would or should add alot of punch to the order and would also help guys like Swanson, Happ, and Suzuki get better pitches to hit with those 2 protecting them.

[MarkBellhorn]

To not meet in the middle seems odd on both his part and the Cubs. Moncada's already banked over $100M in his career at age 29 before todays deal.

[Bertz]

It's 2025.  Having ~$20M left over in your baseball budget is hardly some Brewster's Millions style challenge.

[ToolDRT]

This whole thing has me confused. The astros have to have a better offer than us. It seems they’re even giving him the years he wants as well. I can’t imagine his market will improve that dramatically when he’s a year older. You’d imagine there’s a chance the tigers are still higher and he just doesn’t want to go there? 

[squally1313]

29 minutes ago, ToolDRT said:

This whole thing has me confused. The astros have to have a better offer than us. It seems they’re even giving him the years he wants as well. I can’t imagine his market will improve that dramatically when he’s a year older. You’d imagine there’s a chance the tigers are still higher and he just doesn’t want to go there? 

The part I can mostly suss out is that the Astros original deal was 6/$156m, and he's made $30m annually the last two years, so I think he at least miffed (offended?) by their offer being a pay decrease. Also saw something about him wanting to beat Devers in AAV, who is making $31.3m or so. There was an improved offer today, who knows what that means, in the same report it says it's still not good enough. Then there's also the matter of how much of it is deferred. If it's 6/$200 but paid out $10m at a time over the next 20 years, that's probably not going to do it either.

I can't imagine the Cubs are offering AAV much higher than that Devers deal. Past that, even with a Hoerner tradea you still end up a little tight. But something like 4 years, $100m, with the actual cash split being $40m in year one and then $20m the next three years, gives him an attractive payday with the opt-out chance to go establish himself as the top AAV 3B next offseason. 

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, ToolDRT said:

This whole thing has me confused. The astros have to have a better offer than us. It seems they’re even giving him the years he wants as well. I can’t imagine his market will improve that dramatically when he’s a year older. You’d imagine there’s a chance the tigers are still higher and he just doesn’t want to go there? 

Reminder that alleged "offers" as rumors can just be Boras planting lies used for leverage in negotiation.  It could also be that nobody is offering more than 4 or 5 years at this point, or Astros have moved on.

We don't know what to believe so everything is with a grain of salt.

Edited February 7, 2025 by Stratos

[Rcal10]

9 hours ago, squally1313 said:

1. When have you seen this play out 'too often'?

2. We all read the second paragraph of that tweet right?

3. Does the season start tomorrow?

1 Cubs fall short of an opportunity to be clear favorites in division by not doing enough in the off season. 
2. I read the tweet. Cubs aren’t getting Bregman. And I am fine with that anyway. What I wish they did was already have better talent in the team then what they have. Instead of low salary dumpster dive, back end guys like Morgan, Thielbar, Rea, Brasier, Berti, Lopez, any number of pen arms they signed hoping to catch lightening in a bottle, trade for or sign some better players. 
3. yes, there is time left. And if he does do more I will acknowledge my overreaction. But what I see is maybe a bat added for the bench and we go to spring training after a good offseason that could have taken a bigger step and been a great off season. But, hey, at least Ricketts saved $25M. 
NOTE: my post was more out of frustration that guys are signing and we aren’t getting them. I honestly don’t think we are getting Bregman. So I want a better starting pitcher and a good bench. The issue with a staring pitcher is most likely it has to come via trade. And you need another team for that. I am not sure I see that happening. 

[chibears55]

Im just thinking here but maybe Bregman just dont want to go back to Houston or play in Detroit and just waiting on the Cubs who just may be trying to get a trade done for Nico before finalizing a deal with Bregman. 

Maybe Tucker and Pressly has convinced him to join them in Chicago 🤷‍♂️

Moving Nico who is owed 11.5 this season and add someone like Michael King who owed 4 mil this season,  can give the Cubs and extra 7.5 towards using on Bregman and or maybe towards another reliever. 

It possible they can be trying get a 3rd team involved on this

 

[chibears55]

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

What I wish they did was already have better talent in the team then what they have. Instead of low salary dumpster dive, back end guys like Morgan, Thielbar, Rea, Brasier, Berti, Lopez, any number of pen arms they signed hoping to catch lightening in a bottle, trade for or sign some better players. 

Sometimes I think Hoyer does this because it gives their prospects added time in Iowa to get ready before bringing them up, and it easier to just release the dumpster dives or keep them in Iowa for depth because the cost is low.

[Randall Simon]

17 minutes ago, chibears55 said:

Im just thinking here but maybe Bregman just dont want to go back to Houston or play in Detroit and just waiting on the Cubs who just may be trying to get a trade done for Nico before finalizing a deal with Bregman. 

Maybe Tucker and Pressly has convinced him to join them in Chicago 🤷‍♂️

Moving Nico who is owed 11.5 this season and add someone like Michael King who owed 4 mil this season,  can give the Cubs and extra 7.5 towards using on Bregman and or maybe towards another reliever. 

It possible they can be trying get a 3rd team involved on this

 

It wouldn't be King, because the Pads are known to be trying to dump salary. A Nico for King swap would result in SD adding salary, which they would not agree to.