Analyzing Each Scenario for the Cubs' Bench In 2026

It's hardly top-of-mind within what had been a stagnant Chicago Cubs offseason prior to Wednesday afternoon, but filling out the bench still remains a part of Jed Hoyer's to-do list this winter. There was enough turnover within the reserve group last year that one imagines leadership would want to solidify that corps a bit more ahead of the 2026 campaign. 

In general, the Cubs have their starting lineup in place. This week's trade of Owen Caissie and prospects to the Miami Marlins in exchange for starting pitcher Edward Cabrera likely settled the awkward setup between right field and designated hitter spot. What could have been a logjam of Caissie, Seiya Suzuki, Moisés Ballesteros, and even Kevin Alcántara for two spots now figures to feature Suzuki on the grass, Ballesteros as the designated hitter, and Alcántara providing support either way. But between Matt Shaw's 2025 inconsistency and injuries that will inevitably manifest, the team will have to do better than last season's collection of Jon Berti, Gage Workman, Vidal Bruján, Nicky Lopez, Willi Castro, and Carlos Santana. Thus, with little room remaining with which to operate on the backup side of things, the team will want to get their moves correct. 

We know, at present, what shape the majority of the bench will take. The automatic call is that the team will have one of Carson Kelly or Miguel Amaya holding down a spot as the No. 2 catcher. For the purpose of this discussion, we'll assume Kelly gets the edge in playing time over Amaya. Tyler Austin signing a major-league deal with the team indicates he'll slot into the Justin Turner role as a supplement to Michael Busch at first base and work in as a designated hitter and pinch hitter. Perhaps some corner outfield time is in the cards for him, as well. Assuming the Cubs run with a four-man bench, that's already half the group sorted. And potentially a third player already in the mix in the form of a young outfielder. 

Following the Caissie-for-Cabrera trade, it's now difficult to visualize a world in which Kevin Alcántara isn't on the team's bench to start the year. While Ballesteros would likely only be on the roster as a regular designated hitter as opposed to a pure bench bat, Alcántara would offer coverage for the outfield while allowing Suzuki to rotate into that spot in the event that Ballesteros is not holding it down regularly. In terms of a pure bench role, Alcántara's ability to play center field should also leave him well-suited to provide the occasional breather for Pete Crow-Armstrong. Regardless of those logistics, he should get the first crack at a gig as the fourth outfielder.

From there, things start to get dicey in terms of players actually in the organization. While a bench featuring each of Caissie and Alcántara was possible prior to the trade, it also wouldn't have been ideal. This presents an opportunity to pursue an upgrade to the infield depth. It's not complete necessity given how consistent Nico Hoerner and Dansby Swanson have been over a 162-game season, but considering Shaw's history and the natural aim of maximizing flexibility, you'd like someone adept at handling infield work in a reserve role. The issue is that the Cubs don't employ such a player at present, save for minor-league signing Scott Kingery.

While versatile, Kingery hasn't hit in nearly a half-decade. You'd be looking at a continuation of the hellish Workman-Berti-Bruján-Lopez cycle in that case. It's not out of the realm of possibility, but it would also assume that the Cubs don't seek to add at least competition for him in that spot or outright sign someone to a big league deal to handle the job. If they prefer to stay in house, the Cubs will have to determine if James Triantos is worthy of a big-league spot and are comfortable with him on the bench the majority of the time. Either scenario might force the Cubs to bring in another outside addition on some level.

Thus, the current shape of the bench can go a couple of (wildly) different routes.

The first scenario is simple. You have the assumed trio of Amaya, Austin, and Alcántara to supplement the starters and roll out one of Kingery — who would have to win the job and be added to the 40-man during spring training — or Triantos as the fourth guy. Triantos would be the wild card in this first scenario. He didn't hit at all last year (76 wRC+ in Iowa), but was added to the 40-man this offseason all the same. He has a bit of positional versatility in the tank, too, which could help the Cubs if they're reluctant to add another contract to the books for what would amount to a depth player on the infield. It's certainly the path of least resistance. Of course, another iteration of the Kingery minor-league deal could also present itself and further complicate the picture at a low price point.

Scenario No. 2 would be the much more significant of the two. We know the team has been linked to free agent infielders Alex Bregman and Bo Bichette to varying degrees over the past few weeks. Should the team succeed in signing one of the two, we can assume that it would kick Shaw to the bench to serve a utility role in support of the signee, Swanson, and Hoerner. It allows Craig Counsell to play matchups for his young hitter while providing a breather for the heavy game load of the other three and opens up the ability to more comfortably rotate one of them into the DH role for a spell, should he choose to do so. 

There is, technically, an additional leg to that scenario to be opened up by the second one where a signing takes place, Hoerner is traded, and Shaw is moved over to the keystone. In which case the Cubs would have to circle back to the Kingery-Triantos quandary as the reserve infielder. Now that the team has their coveted cost-controlled starter, though, it's harder to imagine they move a top contact hitter with baserunning prowess. They'd likely let him play out the final year of his contract before flipping Shaw over the second base in 2027. 

These would appear, at least broadly, to be the two most likely scenarios. The first is the simplest from a logistical standpoint, wherein you create competition for the last bench spot and let it play out amongst non-guaranteed contracts and the prospect. The second requires quite a bit more legwork in relation to the payroll. Ultimately, as structurally sound as the positional side of the Cubs roster has been all offseason (on paper), the bench situation remains a muddled one. There are 40-man spots and player development considerations involved. Perhaps the remaining time this winter will present some answers on this front. If not, the spring exhibition season will lend itself to solutions on its own. But there still remains plenty of uncertainty as to how this picture could find a bit of lucidity by March and April.