Should the Cubs Reconsider the Lack of a Safety Net for Matt Shaw?

[RandallPnkFloyd]

Image courtesy of © Kamil Krzaczynski-Imagn Images

While there was room for discussion around the extent of it, we know that the Chicago Cubs attempted to sign third baseman Alex Bregman last winter. He eventually landed in Boston, though an opt-out in his contract has him back on the free agent market. The Cubs have already been connected, and such a signing could have a bearing on what shape their infield takes for the remainder of this offseason. 

That's in an entirely hypothetical world, however, and we have little reason to think the chances of a Bregman signing are good at this point. As such, we continue to operate under the assumption that the team's infield will look much the same as it did for most of 2025: Carson Kelly and Miguel Amaya behind the plate, and Michael Busch, Nico Hoerner, Dansby Swanson, and Matt Shaw occupying their spots around the remainder of the dirt. 

At the same time, third base does offer a position of intrigue. Shaw demonstrated improvement as the season wore on, but stretches throughout the regular season and into October showed us that as good as he can be on the defensive side, his offense remains a work in progress. Given that, it might behoove the Cubs to explore more of a safety net than they had at any point in 2025. 

The team's failed pursuit of Bregman left them without a true alternative to Shaw. When he struggled out of the gate (61 wRC+ in April), Craig Counsell was forced to reckon with the absence of a suitable supplement. A collection of Jon Berti, Vidal Bruján, Nicky Lopez, Justin Turner, and Gage Workman filled space both during Shaw's time back in Iowa and other parts of the year. Only Turner finished the year still in the organization, with trade deadline acquisition Willi Castro offering more depth at the position in the season's final two months. 

Turner and Castro hit free agency this winter, with no clear indicator that either would (or should) be back. That means that the Cubs—who finished with exactly 0.0 fWAR from third base in 2025—are going to once again rely on Shaw realizing his next stages of development. That's easier said than done, considering some of the areas of concern around him. 

Shaw was far better in the second half of 2025 than in the first. His line after the All-Star break read .258/.317/.522 with a 130 wRC+, versus a .198/.276/.280 (60 wRC+) slash from the first half. The increase in power output is notable, as Shaw was able to elevate at a rate 11 percentage points above his flyball rate from the first half (46.0 percent). The way he closed the year, however, leaves a much more muddled picture than the splits imply.

For one, Shaw's strikeout rate was up about 4.5 percentage points in the second half (23.9% overall), while his walk rate was down (8.3%). His swing-and-miss rate in September was his second-highest in an individual month, with the 25.5% whiff rate trailing only April (30.8%). His hard-hit rate, which rose steadily as the months wore on, cratered in September, with a 22.0% rate checking in 15 percentage points below his August peak. It all carried into October, where he notched only a pair of hits in 15 plate appearances and provided his only value via the walk (of which he had five). 

That's not to say that Shaw is destined to have another volatile season in 2026. We'll likely continue to see the ups and downs associated with natural development. We just don't know what the peaks and valleys could look like at this point. That's all the more reason for the Cubs to pursue a legitimate safety net for Shaw this time around. 

The goal with such an addition isn't necessarily to prepare for a worst-case scenario. Instead, it's to supplement Shaw in those moments where you don't love a matchup or he needs an opportunity to reset for a day or two. As such, it's not about signing or acquiring a pure third baseman as said safety net. You're looking for a versatile player who can bring at least one particular skill, while not being a total loss filling in at third base defensively—especially given what you lose with Shaw's glove when he's on the bench. 

Consider someone like Luis Urías, who has a career walk rate around 10% and is coming off a year in which he struck out a career-low 13.6 percent of the time. Former Cub Ildemaro Vargas doesn't offer the same level of contact ability, but he hit well enough last year (85 wRC+) and was perfectly average in a small sample at third to offer at least an upgrade over how the team supplemented third base last season. Miguel Andujar could provide a little bit more in the way of power and contact ability, even if his ability to draw walks and his defensive shortcomings don't entirely fit the bill. None are exciting options in a thin free-agent class this side of Bregman, but they could at least provide the type of supplementation that's needed as Shaw continues his development. 

That's something that the Cubs need to prioritize when they build the bench. Swanson and Hoerner are going to provide you with playing time volume and established skill sets. The same largely goes for Busch, even if the team maintains a desire to protect him against certain left-handed arms. It's not just about acquiring a player who can fill in as a body at third base, either. It's about a clear offensive skill set, so that the lineup can hold together when Shaw's development is at the wrong end of its volatility.

View full article

[KJTchoup]

The Cubs offense needs an upgrade, and this is the obvious spot you look to do something.  The team is going to go into the season with either Caissie or Ballesteros getting regular reps, so that is a clear downgrade from what Tucker provided.  Now, both are much better hitters than Shaw, but they will have empty moments.  Shaw would be far better suited in a super sub role than your regular guy at third base.  Bring in a productive bat at third, Shae can be your infield backup at all positions, and you take pressure off the two rookies

[Neuby]

If you're trying to even maintain last seasons offensive output they have to upgrade at third base allowing Shaw to be a super sub. In no order these are some options available for just cash this offseason. 

 

Bregman

Suarez 

Moncada 

Murakami

Kazuma Okamoto

Song

Kim

Bichette 

Polanco 

 

[Jason Ross]

A reminder to everyone that Matt Shaw had a 130 wRC+ post ASB and after his largest mechanical change. His poor 8 games in the playoffs seems to be really weighing on everyone here. His wRC+ was better than Suarez, or Bregman, for example in the second half. Kim was terrible all year at the plate. Song does not project as an MLB starting player. 

As well, the Cubs finished top-5 in runs scored and even were a top-10 offensive team when Tucker struggled down the last two months. 

Beyond just that, these same discussions were had about Pete Crow-Armstrong last year and he rewarded the team with a 109 wRC+. 

We're jumping the shark here. Shaw doesn't need replaced as a starting player based on merit; he as roughly league average even if you just go back to May. He's better than a super sub. Yes, the Cubs should plan with a strong bench as @RandallPnkFloyd says, but a strong bench does not mean relegate Shaw to the bench, especially when the team needs most of the money invested in pitching. 

[Rob]

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

A reminder to everyone that Matt Shaw had a 130 wRC+ post ASB and after his largest mechanical change. His poor 8 games in the playoffs seems to be really weighing on everyone here. His wRC+ was better than Suarez, or Bregman, for example in the second half. Kim was terrible all year at the plate. Song does not project as an MLB starting player. 

As well, the Cubs finished top-5 in runs scored and even were a top-10 offensive team when Tucker struggled down the last two months. 

Beyond just that, these same discussions were had about Pete Crow-Armstrong last year and he rewarded the team with a 109 wRC+. 

We're jumping the shark here. Shaw doesn't need replaced as a starting player based on merit; he as roughly league average even if you just go back to May. He's better than a super sub. Yes, the Cubs should plan with a strong bench as @RandallPnkFloyd says, but a strong bench does not mean relegate Shaw to the bench, especially when the team needs most of the money invested in pitching. 

I'd rather see Shaw traded away for pitching. It's not an indictment of his talent. I just have a hard time rooting for him.

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, Rob said:

I'd rather see Shaw traded away for pitching. It's not an indictment of his talent. I just have a hard time rooting for him.

Yeah, I get that. I think if we're talking about it as a purely human standpoint, if you disagree with his leanings, then that is fair. I have a hard time reconciling that, myself. 

Where I've come down on it is that; 
1. I'm sure I disagree with many, and maybe a vast majority of baseball players on their leaning
2. Michael Busch, while he didn't take time off, was also photo'd with Kirk and I don't think I want to trade him

So I'm at a crossroads where I find it hard to root for him as a human, but once I start getting to that point, I know that I'd probably have to throw the baby out with the bathwater, too, if I wanted to be consistent. 

[Outshined_One]

1 hour ago, KJTchoup said:

Now, both are much better hitters than Shaw, but they will have empty moments.

I strongly disagree with this statement.  Shaw was a consensus top 15-30 prospect in baseball coming out of the 2024 season with a 144 wRC+ across AA and AAA in his age 22 season.  Caissie featured a 139 wRC+ at AAA in his age 22 season and Ballesteros had a 121 wRC+ in AAA in his age 21 season.  Shaw also had the added benefit of being a plus defender at an infield position, which neither has.

This isn't to say that Caissie or Ballesteros won't be better hitters than Shaw in the majors over the course of all their careers, but it is a reminder that Shaw was a premium prospect at this time last year with a really good offensive and defensive profile.  Caissie and Ballesteros could easily see similar struggles as Shaw did this past season, if not worse, in 2026.  Whether penciling Caissie and/or Ballesteros into starting roles in 2026 is a good idea is a post all of its own, but I would not use their projected value as a basis for how Shaw should be used in 2026.

That said, while I've been slightly in favor of trading Shaw, if the Cubs end up keeping him, he's a pretty good bet to end up around the 3 fWAR range, which would make him a Top 10 3B in baseball.  You can upgrade from him, but the position is basically a wasteland across the league and the options to do so are pretty much limited to Bregman, Bichette, and Suarez (unless you believe in one of the Japanese imports).  Shaw's easily a starter on most teams.

However, even if Shaw is the everyday starter, he's going to need days off and injuries are always a possibility.  BJ Murray is pretty much the only person on the farm who *could* man the bench role, but his ceiling is limited and he needs more development.  There's currently no one on the roster who seems like they could be a competent backup, either.

Someone like Paul DeJong seems to make sense as someone who can handle 3B with a bit of pop, but yeah, this is a really thin crop if you're hunting for bench candidates.

[Rob]

1 minute ago, Jason Ross said:

Yeah, I get that. I think if we're talking about it as a purely human standpoint, if you disagree with his leanings, then that is fair. I have a hard time reconciling that, myself. 

Where I've come down on it is that; 
1. I'm sure I disagree with many, and maybe a vast majority of baseball players on their leaning
2. Michael Busch, while he didn't take time off, was also photo'd with Kirk and I don't think I want to trade him

So I'm at a crossroads where I find it hard to root for him as a human, but once I start getting to that point, I know that I'd probably have to throw the baby out with the bathwater, too, if I wanted to be consistent. 

There's no right answer. Awful people exist in our midst. Some of whom are people we root for, unaware of their despicable beliefs.

I wont fault those who are comfortable with the "ignorance is bliss" notion. I've spent time there myself. Likewise, I wont fault those who draw the line between Busch and Shaw, citing Shaw's absence from the team during the middle of a playoff run so he could attend a hate rally celebrating the life of his favorite racist, misogynistic, fascist podcaster -- that seems like a fair line to draw.

But I stopped paying to watch Cubs baseball because of the Ricketts support of Trump. I don't want them getting a dime from me. So I want Ricketts gone. I want Shaw gone. I want Busch gone.

More than that, I want our national politics to get to a place where somebody being on the other side of the aisle means we're arguing about the benign things like the appropriate level of government funding for the arts instead of arguing about whether people should possess basic human rights -- so that I can still root for somebody I disagree with.

[Jason Ross]

39 minutes ago, Rob said:

There's no right answer. Awful people exist in our midst. Some of whom are people we root for, unaware of their despicable beliefs.

I wont fault those who are comfortable with the "ignorance is bliss" notion. I've spent time there myself. Likewise, I wont fault those who draw the line between Busch and Shaw, citing Shaw's absence from the team during the middle of a playoff run so he could attend a hate rally celebrating the life of his favorite racist, misogynistic, fascist podcaster -- that seems like a fair line to draw.

But I stopped paying to watch Cubs baseball because of the Ricketts support of Trump. I don't want them getting a dime from me. So I want Ricketts gone. I want Shaw gone. I want Busch gone.

More than that, I want our national politics to get to a place where somebody being on the other side of the aisle means we're arguing about the benign things like the appropriate level of government funding for the arts instead of arguing about whether people should possess basic human rights -- so that I can still root for somebody I disagree with.

Hey I support all of this. I can assure you, it's a hard line for myself to follow. I teach the Constitution to 8th graders every year. Reconciling how I feel as though our government and ideals are currently being stepped on, knowing that baseball players I root for support that stomping but also writing and podcasting and just loving baseball is a place I find impossible to find where I'm 100% happy with. Sadly, I'm not sure there is a place I could find where something isn't being stepped on. 

[Rob]

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

Sadly, I'm not sure there is a place I could find where something isn't being stepped on. 

Yeah, that's pretty much impossible in this day and age. There really is no ethical consumption under capitalism.

I've come to the conclusion that we all just do the best we can. We draw the lines where we can, but everybody's line is different. I try not to begrudge others where they draw theirs -- provided they've at least shown a modicum of awareness of the issues and some effort to minimize the damage they cause.

I drew my line pretty far -- I want all these horsefeatherss gone. But I indicated in my post that I see where somebody might draw the line between Busch and Shaw, or rely on the "ignorance is bliss" concept. We all just do the best we can.

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, Rob said:

Yeah, that's pretty much impossible in this day and age. There really is no ethical consumption under capitalism.

I've come to the conclusion that we all just do the best we can. We draw the lines where we can, but everybody's line is different. I try not to begrudge others where they draw theirs -- provided they've at least shown a modicum of awareness of the issues and some effort to minimize the damage they cause.

I drew my line pretty far -- I want all these horsefeatherss gone. But I indicated in my post that I see where somebody might draw the line between Busch and Shaw, or rely on the "ignorance is bliss" concept. We all just do the best we can.

It sucks out there. Frankly, I wish we could even go back to just a simpler time where we all were at least okay with saying that the Nazis were the bad-guys and not think twice-about-it. 

[squally1313]

1. Matt Shaw had a 130 wRC in the second half, but the related .354 wOBA was paired with a .309 xwOBA. Still above league average for 3B, but let's not pretend there isn't room for improvement here. 

2. I don't think it's a lock that Caissie or Ballesteros will be better hitters than Shaw, as laid out by OO above, but that says more about Caissie and Ballesteros (negatively) than it does about Shaw (positively). Hitting at a young player in the majors is really hard. 

3. Matt Shaw as a .309 wOBA third baseman still contributes a lot to a baseball team's success. The defense looks to be there (though the metrics aren't), the baserunning is good, it's a good package. We know that, other teams know that (and can see his team control). League average ish hitting infielder with good/elite defense and good/elite baserunning....sound familiar? I think his roster/starting spot represents, along with the DH/RF spot, a chance to steer away from the glove first value and towards just getting the best, MLB-ready bat possible, partly because I don't see Shaw, Caissie, or Ballesteros as high quality 2026 MLB hitters, and partially because those guys represent the best chance we have to supplement pitching outside of the free agent market that is already down the top starter and the top few relievers. 

4. Matt Shaw sucks personally. Most of these guys do, and he sucks in a (to me) more acceptable way than like, Addison Russell or Aroldis Chapman suck. But he also sucks very publicly and so if he wants to go skip games for midterm rallies, I'd be fine with him doing it for another team.

[Arlen]

15 hours ago, Neuby said:

If you're trying to even maintain last seasons offensive output they have to upgrade at third base allowing Shaw to be a super sub. In no order these are some options available for just cash this offseason. 

 

Bregman

Suarez 

Moncada 

Murakami

Kazuma Okamoto

Song

Kim

Bichette 

Polanco 

 

Last year was Matt Shaw's rookie season. Probability is that he'll improve significantly. Maybe dramatically.

[squally1313]

15 hours ago, Arlen said:

Last year was Matt Shaw's rookie season. Probability is that he'll improve significantly. Maybe dramatically.

says who?

[Dfan25]

There’s a new story on the athletic about the Cubs interest in Alex Bregman . Don’t have access to the Athletic , so can’t post anything .

My guess is that is something they would consider if they trade for Edward Cabrera ?

[KCCub]

17 minutes ago, Dfan25 said:

 

There’s a new story on the athletic about the Cubs interest in Alex Bregman . Don’t have access to the Athletic , so can’t post anything .

My guess is that is something they would consider if they trade for Edward Cabrera ?

Yea it seems like the blueprint in a Bregman deal would include moving Shaw for controlled pitching. Plan A was most likely Cease (King/Valdez) and if we miss on those, revisit a Bregman deal and move Shaw for a controlled SP. Shaw + King/Valdez vs Bregman + Ryan/Cabrera/Gore ends up being pretty close in value with the edge for next years team leaning the Bregman side of the deal imo.