Ranking the Four Scott Boras Guys as Cubs Free-Agent Fits

Obviously, the focus for most Cubs fans over the last couple of months has been Cody Bellinger. It's Bellinger both the organization and the fan base know best, and Bellinger has been viewed as both the most likely and the best fit of this quartet. Two months ago, that was almost unquestionable, but a few things have changed. Let's update our preference list, shall we?

1. Blake Snell
At the beginning of this winter, Snell and the Cubs didn't seem like a good or likely fit. He was in position to demand well in excess of $200 million, after winning his second Cy Young Award in the last six years this past season. He has tremendous stuff, and his command might be underrated, but his approach makes him both frustrating to watch and hard to project. Moreover, he's not exactly a paragon of durability. Those two Cy Young campaigns are the only two in his career in which he's reached even 130 innings.

Yeah, we're past all that now. While Boras's style is to set a price and wait for the market to meet it, the probability of any team meeting his original one for Snell has plummeted. Snell's more likely to get a deal akin to that of Aaron Nola (seven years, $172 million) than to approach the Stephen Strasburg contract (seven years, $245 million) of several winters ago. With the Cubs having already reinforced the rotation with Shota Imanaga, they can afford to risk a few missed starts in order to land a true ace.

2. Jordan Montgomery
It's much less clear in which direction Montgomery's asking price has drifted as the hot stove has burned itself through. He entered the marketplace well south of Snell and Nola in terms of earning power, but because his chief strength (excellent durability, with the capacity to pitch 180-200 innings per year and take the ball every time his spot in the rotation) is the weakness of so many others in today's pitching landscape, Montgomery might only be getting more valuable as spring training draws near.

For reasons we discussed way back in December, though, he holds all kinds of appeal for the Cubs. This organization likes strike-throwers. They like guys who command the ball to both sides of the plate, and they even (anachronistically, almost) like a good curveball in a starter, rather than the increasingly popular sliders and sweepers that dominate the league. Add Montgomery to this rotation, and the innings the Cubs are projected to get from that unit rise significantly--as does the overall upside of the group. Signing Montgomery would also free up some trade capital for the team.

3. Matt Chapman
The argument against Chapman is simple: He's not an elite hitter, and signing him would cost a bunch of money and a draft pick. He'd make both Nick Madrigal and Patrick Wisdom strictly bench players, and rob the team of any real opportunity to get something in exchange for them if they decide to move on from them. He's not quite redundant, but he doesn't solve the lineup's remaining problems all that nicely. He'd block the position for Matt Shaw, for whom that's the clearest path to playing time with the parent club right now.

The argument for him is even neater, though: He's an elite defender. He's as good as Madrigal with the glove at the hot corner, and he's a much better hitter than Madrigal, even if he'd still hit sixth or seventh in an ideally constructed contender's lineup. He's no longer likely to get $150 million or so. A shorter-term deal is a very real option. Chapman would complete an infield defense that would Hoover up ground balls as well as any in the league, and he'd lengthen the lineup, although without solving the larger problem that the team's top hitters aren't imposing enough.

4. Cody Bellinger
Putting Bellinger this low feels wrong, but there's a reason why he's still a free agent. In fact, there are several, but let's focus on one: the Cubs have refused to pay Boras's asking price for him. Resisting those demands got much easier for Jed Hoyer when he traded for Michael Busch last month. With Busch in the mix, the urgency to bring back Bellinger--the need for that left-handed bat, the need for a first baseman--diminished significantly. It wasn't a leverage play. Busch is a great addition in his own right, without regard to Bellinger. It did still increase the Cubs' leverage, though, and it makes bringing in Bellinger less critical.

The other thing here is that, at this stage, Bellinger might not be the big investment the Cubs prefer to make in the lineup for the long term. Signing him makes it harder for Pete Crow-Armstrong, Alexander Canario, and Kevin Alcántara to carve out their roles (immediate or otherwise) in the outfield, or else it crimps and distorts the playing time allocations for Busch and Christopher Morel, since it seems the organization doesn't trust either guy at third base. It also forecloses the possibility of signing either Juan Soto or Pete Alonso next winter.

Perhaps the notion of the Cubs doing that sounds laughable, anyway, given Hoyer's reluctance to pay up the way those stars require when they hit free agency, but Bellinger's long-term home is first base. The corner outfield spots are spoken for in the short term. Make Bellinger a Cub for the next six years (or more) and you can cross the top two names on next winter's market off right away. It's a part of the cost that has to be considered.

Crazy though it might sound, there's a chance the Cubs could sign two of these players. In that case, though, it would almost certainly be Montgomery and Chapman. Montgomery is the only one of the four without a qualifying offer attached to him--the only one who wouldn't cost the team a draft pick. Chapman would, but if the team signed both Montgomery and Chapman but let Bellinger go elsewhere, they'd only lose a tiny bit of draft capital, because Bellinger would net them a pick just a round later than the one they'd lose for Chapman. Meanwhile, the team would get a lot better. They'd probably emerge as favorites in the NL Central, after all.

All four of these guys are appealing. Ranking Bellinger fourth doesn't mean he's not worth trying to sign anymore. Since the Busch deal, though, he's become less of a priority, and some alternatives have surpassed him in terms of desirability. The endgame of this offseason is upon us. Soon, the Cubs (and these four free agents, plus a bunch of others) need to make their decisions and their moves. There are still plenty of talented players available, but their availability is as much an indictment of the Cubs front office as it is a salve for the frustration of fans. It's time to make the big moves on which the team has waited as long as possible.

How do you rank these four remaining star free agents? Who would you want, if the team were to sign two of the four?