It's Come Down to This: Cody Bellinger vs. Matt Chapman

I don't think Matt Chapman is as good as a fit as others. He's someone who hits the ball hard, but you have to fix his approach. As well, his bat is similar in profile to many players the Cubs have: higher strikeout, flyball, struggles on fastballs (Cubs were in the botom-10 on fastballs last year in wOBA) and is right handed (the Cubs seemingly are looking for a left handed hitter). On top, it's not like he's just had an issue with production last year; it goes back his last 2000 PA's: he's been a 110 wRC+ hitter. Yes he plays 3b, and yes the glove, but I think in terms of style...he's someone the Cubs have. As well, the infield is pretty locked in right now with Swanson and Hoerner. Do we really want to further lock in the infield for the next 3 seasons? 

I'd side with Bellinger. His data suggest he overperformed. With that said, I think Bellinger's ability to play a few positions, his left handed bat, his low-K, high-contact, high-lift bat fits a good profile for the Cubs. He's younger, as well. I wouldn't say he's so much of a good fit they should spend $200m, but in a vacuum, I think Bellinger just fits what the Cubs need better....even if there's some questions on how exactly he fits. 

I think, broadly, they're the same caliber of player and at positions of similar need for the 2024 club.  So I think it's helpful to look at a list of pros and cons for each.

Bellinger Pros

- Bellinger is 2.5 year younger.  This is a huge deal on long term contracts

- Bellinger's offensive style fits the club better.  Chapman is a RHH hitter with poor contact, particularly on pitches up, and light tower power.  We already have two of those in Wisdom and Morel, they just can't play anywhere near Chapman’s caliber of defense

- Bellinger's already tight with the team, showed he works well with the coaches, etc.  Basically he's shown he's an A+ fit with any soft factors you might consider

- Bellinger can float between 1B or any OF spot and play plus defense.  As he gets older he should be able to gracefully slide down tbe defensive spectrum.  Chapman’s a superb 3B defender, but that's that.  And when he gets older 1B is the logical transition spot

- Bellinger doesn't cost a draft pick.  There is the opportunity cost of the pick we would gain if he signs elsewhere, but even there we're talking pick ~75 vs. pick ~45

Chapman Pros

- Chapman’s probably going to get quite a bit less money.  Jeff Passan ballparked it as $175M for Bellinger and $125M for Chapman

- Chapman is a MUCH safer bet to perform.  Last year's 3.5 WAR was the worst season of his career on a per inning basis, he'd never been below 4 (on a prorated basis his rookie year and 2020) before that

- I think most of us would agree that we feel better about the internal options at CF and 1B more than 3B.  So on this roster replacement level is a lower bar for Chapman to climb over

I've said this elsewhere but essentially what it boils down to for me is I think Chapman’s a better option purely for 2024 while Bellinger is a guy I'm more likely to still want on the team in the back half of his deal.

I think it comes down to which player(s) come down from their salary demands first and foremost. And even then Jed may not like what he reads/sees. Maybe if they can get a discount in years with a high yearly salary or something. 

My kinda hot take is that neither of these guys are super exciting and I expect/hope that either would be the 5th best player in our lineup, total WAR wise, and my desire to get one of them is really only driven by the $30m-ish hole in the budget that I would strongly prefer not stay in Ricketts' pocket, and so give me Chapman because his contract structure is less likely to be used an excuse to not pay elite players down the road. 

Huh. This is an excellent piece. I was fully aware of Bellinger's "problems" last season but was completely unaware that Chapman stopped pulling the ball, like AT ALL. That's pretty scary.

26 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

My kinda hot take is that neither of these guys are super exciting and I expect/hope that either would be the 5th best player in our lineup, total WAR wise, and my desire to get one of them is really only driven by the $30m-ish hole in the budget that I would strongly prefer not stay in Ricketts' pocket, and so give me Chapman because his contract structure is less likely to be used an excuse to not pay elite players down the road. 

This is where I'm starting to lean as well.  All things being equal, I like Bellinger as a player better than Chapman.  All things are not equal though.  If Chapman can be signed to a shorter deal, he fills a need for the Cubs and they can let CF shake out between Tauchman, Canario, and PCA.  I just don't think either of these guys are big enough difference makers for me to be comfortable with the potential downside of a bad long-term contract, knowing how those types of contracts have hamstrung (legitimately or not) the Cubs in the past.

I would not cry to the heavens if Jed passed on both and kept playing the long game. I said it before but I don't think Bellinger provides enough of an upgrade over what they could get from Tauchman and PCA this year. There's a pretty decent shot PCA provides 18-20 WAR over his first 6 years. Instead I would buck in the opposite direction and try to see if PCA would take a Colt Keith deal. He probably wouldn't but I would at least open the dialogue. 

I am kind of indifferent on Chapman. On one hand, the defense in rock-solid and he has never had a bad offensive season. But on the other he's RH and pretty redundant in our lineup. However, I don't have the same confidence in our internal options, mostly because of defensive questions. So on a short deal, I would understand if they went with him. 

30 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

I would not cry to the heavens if Jed passed on both and kept playing the long game. I said it before but I don't think Bellinger provides enough of an upgrade over what they could get from Tauchman and PCA this year. There's a pretty decent shot PCA provides 18-20 WAR over his first 6 years. Instead I would buck in the opposite direction and try to see if PCA would take a Colt Keith deal. He probably wouldn't but I would at least open the dialogue. 

 

I am kind of indifferent on Chapman. On one hand, the defense in rock-solid and he has never had a bad offensive season. But on the other he's RH and pretty redundant in our lineup. However, I don't have the same confidence in our internal options, mostly because of defensive questions. So on a short deal, I would understand if they went with him. 

I agree. I was never that hot for Bellinger given that they cannot move Happ or Suzuki over the next three years. Chapman does not make the offense better and might make it worse if he and Swanson go cold at the same time. Besides they are apparently asking for difference maker type money for a guy who isn't really that. 

Chapman and Bellinger likely provide pretty similar value, but what the Cubs need now is offensive production. You can't have Ian Happ being your #2 bat. Happ should be the 4th/5th best hitter in a really good offense. 

5 hours ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

I would not cry to the heavens if Jed passed on both and kept playing the long game. I said it before but I don't think Bellinger provides enough of an upgrade over what they could get from Tauchman and PCA this year. There's a pretty decent shot PCA provides 18-20 WAR over his first 6 years. Instead I would buck in the opposite direction and try to see if PCA would take a Colt Keith deal. He probably wouldn't but I would at least open the dialogue. 

 

I am kind of indifferent on Chapman. On one hand, the defense in rock-solid and he has never had a bad offensive season. But on the other he's RH and pretty redundant in our lineup. However, I don't have the same confidence in our internal options, mostly because of defensive questions. So on a short deal, I would understand if they went with him. 

Going into the seas on with question marks at 1B, 3B, CF, unproven SP, etc., does not bode well for winning a weak NL Central.

20 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Going into the seas on with question marks at 1B, 3B, CF, unproven SP, etc., does not bode well for winning a weak NL Central.

You haven't looked at the other teams in the central have you?

1 hour ago, Backtobanks said:

Going into the seas on with question marks at 1B, 3B, CF, unproven SP, etc., does not bode well for winning a weak NL Central.

Give me a break Grandpa Rossy

Left-handed, defensive versatility, and almost 3 years younger means Bellinger is the better player going forward I think.  The age difference alone is pretty huge.

Also remember Bellinger played about 50 games at 1B, a position that has negative run value adjustment in the WAR calculation.  If he had played all his games in CF his WAR would have been even higher, maybe around 4.5.  His defensive versatility also adds value that isn't reflected in WAR.

7 hours ago, Stratos said:

Left-handed, defensive versatility, and almost 3 years younger means Bellinger is the better player going forward I think.  The age difference alone is pretty huge.

Also remember Bellinger played about 50 games at 1B, a position that has negative run value adjustment in the WAR calculation.  If he had played all his games in CF his WAR would have been even higher, maybe around 4.5.  His defensive versatility also adds value that isn't reflected in WAR.

1. Aware he’s never done it, because of how good he has consistently been at a premium position, but is it really outrageous to think that Chapman could handle first base in a pinch?

2. Kinda feel like you can’t make both the versatility argument AND the ‘well his WAR would have been even better’ argument. If they’re going to play him a bunch at first base, that makes him less valuable. 

16 hours ago, Bertz said:

You haven't looked at the other teams in the central have you?

Yes I have which is why so many people are frustrated with what the Cubs off season.  The NL Central is really weak and we have the assets in money and prospects to be perennial favorites like the Braves, Astros, and Dodgers for the next 5 years.  Instead we seem to be on a mission to be "fiscally responsible", not make trades, and squeak into the playoffs.

6 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Yes I have which is why so many people are frustrated with what the Cubs off season.  The NL Central is really weak and we have the assets in money and prospects to be perennial favorites like the Braves, Astros, and Dodgers for the next 5 years.  Instead we seem to be on a mission to be "fiscally responsible", not make trades, and squeak into the playoffs.

Signing solid, not spectacular players to long term, 9 figure deals is not the way to build a perennial division favorite. Trades can be made at any point. Given where the roster was at the end of the year, there was never a feasible path in a single offseason to turn this team into the clear favorites in the division for the next five years. But there were paths that could potentially decrease the chances of that happening. 

On Opening Day I expect us to be the division favorites in 2024, with a pretty consensus top 5 farm system, and my only real long term contractual concern on the books being whichever of these two we end up with. We'll have Smyly ($6m), Hendricks ($16m), and Barnhart/Mancini/Bote ($16m) coming off the books and no one of significance hitting free agency. Things are fine. 

21 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Yes I have which is why so many people are frustrated with what the Cubs off season.  The NL Central is really weak and we have the assets in money and prospects to be perennial favorites like the Braves, Astros, and Dodgers for the next 5 years.  Instead we seem to be on a mission to be "fiscally responsible", not make trades, and squeak into the playoffs.

Jed and his team believe they are on the precipice of a truly great team fueled by young players and a state-of-the-art development program. They are patiently building what they think to be a solid team that will compete within the division with aspirations for more soon (could be this year). 

I get frustrated too, as a fan. I hope they are right. And if they are not, I hope the Ricketts sacks the lot of them. I don't think that will happen as the people running the Cubs are philosophically aligned with ownership. We have to wait and see what happens. 

Bored, putting off work, etc.

An extremely pessimistic view of the 2025 roster is as follows:

• Offense (years of control remaining): Swanson (5), Nico (2), Happ (2), Seiya (2), Busch (4), either Bellinger (6?) and Wisdom (2)/Madrigal (2) or PCA (4) and Chapman (2?), Morel (4) as the DH, and either Amaya (2-3) or you need to find a catcher
• Pitching: Steele (3), Imanaga (4), Taillon (2), Wicks (4), Assad (4), and then Azlolay (2) and whoever else (a bunch)
• This is essentially the team I expect to field in a couple months, where I expect we'll be slight division favorites. 
• Probably looking at roughly $50m in annual salary to add to this
• This exercise ignores, at league minimum salary and already in the upper levels of the minors: Horton, Shaw, Caissie, Alcantara, Ballesteros, Triantos, Brown, Murray. 

18 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Bored, putting off work, etc.

An extremely pessimistic view of the 2025 roster is as follows:

• Offense (years of control remaining): Swanson (5), Nico (2), Happ (2), Seiya (2), Busch (4), either Bellinger (6?) and Wisdom (2)/Madrigal (2) or PCA (4) and Chapman (2?), Morel (4) as the DH, and either Amaya (2-3) or you need to find a catcher
• Pitching: Steele (3), Imanaga (4), Taillon (2), Wicks (4), Assad (4), and then Azlolay (2) and whoever else (a bunch)
• This is essentially the team I expect to field in a couple months, where I expect we'll be slight division favorites. 
• Probably looking at roughly $50m in annual salary to add to this
• This exercise ignores, at league minimum salary and already in the upper levels of the minors: Horton, Shaw, Caissie, Alcantara, Ballesteros, Triantos, Brown, Murray. 

Luis Vazques, Christian Franklin, Yohenderic Pinango, Brennen Davis (who I have not given up on), and a bunch of young promising pitchers who will be knocking on the door a year from now. 

Edit: I forgot Pablo Alliendo

40 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Bored, putting off work, etc.

An extremely pessimistic view of the 2025 roster is as follows:

• Offense (years of control remaining): Swanson (5), Nico (2), Happ (2), Seiya (2), Busch (4), either Bellinger (6?) and Wisdom (2)/Madrigal (2) or PCA (4) and Chapman (2?), Morel (4) as the DH, and either Amaya (2-3) or you need to find a catcher
• Pitching: Steele (3), Imanaga (4), Taillon (2), Wicks (4), Assad (4), and then Azlolay (2) and whoever else (a bunch)
• This is essentially the team I expect to field in a couple months, where I expect we'll be slight division favorites. 
• Probably looking at roughly $50m in annual salary to add to this
• This exercise ignores, at league minimum salary and already in the upper levels of the minors: Horton, Shaw, Caissie, Alcantara, Ballesteros, Triantos, Brown, Murray. 

This gets to why I *really* hope we can get Bellinger to go the Carlos Correa route and take a deal where he probably opts out again in a year.  I'm not so naive to think every prospect is going to succeed, but like holy crap is our 1B/OF situation crowded.  Attrition can hit this group hard and I think we still end up with pretty enviable depth in a few years.  I like the way you put it out but put another way:

- Two fringe MLB All Star corner outfielders under 30 (Happ, Suzuki)

- Two consensus top 100 prospects in CF, one who's already gotten a taste of MLB (PCA, Alcantara)

- Two consensus top 100 prospects at 1B/COF.  One who is about as MLB-ready as a prospect can possibly be (Busch, Caissie)

- A consensus top 100 infielder who some people think should shift to CF (Triantos)

- I don't have a pithy way of bucketing him but Christopher Morel

- Five more quality prospects who might impact the 1B/OF mix (Ballesteros, Canario, Franklin, McGeary, Murray)

All of this is already at AA or higher, meaning an ETA within a year is reasonable if not the expectation.  If Bellinger's a 125 wRC+ guy who cares, he's a star and we'll happily figure out how to fit all the pieces together.  If he's more like a 110 guy, which a lot of the data from last year points to, that still helps the 2024 Cubs a ton.  But in '25 and beyond?  While he's still a quality player I'd much rather have 1B/OF be Happ, Suzuki, and the kids and have that $25M back to reinvest elsewhere.

6 hours ago, squally1313 said:

Signing solid, not spectacular players to long term, 9 figure deals is not the way to build a perennial division favorite. Trades can be made at any point. Given where the roster was at the end of the year, there was never a feasible path in a single offseason to turn this team into the clear favorites in the division for the next five years. But there were paths that could potentially decrease the chances of that happening. 

On Opening Day I expect us to be the division favorites in 2024, with a pretty consensus top 5 farm system, and my only real long term contractual concern on the books being whichever of these two we end up with. We'll have Smyly ($6m), Hendricks ($16m), and Barnhart/Mancini/Bote ($16m) coming off the books and no one of significance hitting free agency. Things are fine. 

Trades can be made at any point, but Jed doesn't seem to be willing to trade any of our prospects.  I'm not sure we will necessarily be 2024 favorites (especially if we don't sign Bellinger).  The farm system is good and deep, but that doesn't help in 2024 unless we use some of them to acquire what the ML roster needs.  It's great to have high potential prospects, but they're still "just prospects" until they prove themselves at the ML level.

3 hours ago, Backtobanks said:

Trades can be made at any point, but Jed doesn't seem to be willing to trade any of our prospects.  I'm not sure we will necessarily be 2024 favorites (especially if we don't sign Bellinger).  The farm system is good and deep, but that doesn't help in 2024 unless we use some of them to acquire what the ML roster needs.  It's great to have high potential prospects, but they're still "just prospects" until they prove themselves at the ML level.

We traded for the biggest bat at the deadline last year and just traded a pitcher in our top ten who was years away for the guy who will most likely be our starting first baseman. What he lacks in historic major league performance, he makes up for in team control, minimum salaries, and absolutely wrecking minor league pitching. There's been like, three trades this offseason with comparable or better prospects included (Soto, Sale/Grissom, maybe this Polanco trade). What you're looking for just doesn't really exist anywhere in baseball.

The farm system is good, and deep, and all of those dudes I listed above are certainly capable of helping in 2024. I'm not sure how prospects ever 'prove themselves' in your world where you need established starters at every position on opening day. 

Why not attempt to secure both Chapman and Bellinger? The money is there. They have someway covertly been adding to the bullpen. With Chapman and Bellinger manning the corners this imo be the premiere defensive infield in the National Lea, if not all of baseball. Maybe I'm dreaming but wouldn't put a lot of the nay sayers quietly on notice? 

8 hours ago, Billy said:

Why not attempt to secure both Chapman and Bellinger? The money is there. They have someway covertly been adding to the bullpen. With Chapman and Bellinger manning the corners this imo be the premiere defensive infield in the National Lea, if not all of baseball. Maybe I'm dreaming but wouldn't put a lot of the nay sayers quietly on notice? 

It's not that easy. It's as much a logistics problem as it is anything else. If they pay a multi-year salary for a guy who is declining and give him a NTC, he's set in concrete. Even if they don't give him a NTC, his salary may be unmovable. Then they have an old team that is not improvable. 

10 hours ago, Billy said:

Why not attempt to secure both Chapman and Bellinger? The money is there. They have someway covertly been adding to the bullpen. With Chapman and Bellinger manning the corners this imo be the premiere defensive infield in the National Lea, if not all of baseball. Maybe I'm dreaming but wouldn't put a lot of the nay sayers quietly on notice? 

Do you want an 86 win team with a ton of flexibility and logical future openings for the farm system we've spent years building, or do you want an 89 win team where you have 6 of the 9 line up spots (the outfield, chapman, dansby, nico) locked in for the next three years at double digit salaries, with 5 of those players being very much on the wrong side of the aging curve?

Basically, getting both probably makes us the 2024/2025 division favorite, but I think it greatly diminishes the chance of becoming a Braves/Dodgers type team with this group of players.