Jump to content
North Side Baseball
  • Cubs News & Analysis

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


    Matt Ostrowski

    The endgame of free agency is just about upon us. The Cubs still need a bat for the heart of their order, and the options are dwindling.

    Image courtesy of © Jonathan Dyer - USA Today Sports

    Cubs Video

    Last week, we took a look at the ZiPS projections for the 2024 Chicago Cubs. Within that article, I had openly wondered if, based off of those projections and the current roster, Cody Bellinger was the best investment for the Cubs to be making with their remaining money this offseason.

    Matt Chapman is also available, and while he had a worse 2023 season by most metrics, his expected statistics were better; he’s likely to cost less money than Bellinger; and ZiPS projected him to outperform Bellinger in 2024. With both players still on the board, and both linked to the Cubs, I thought that this comparison deserved a much deeper look.

    As previously mentioned, if we look purely at what was actually produced in 2023, Bellinger would by far be the better investment, especially considering he is two years younger than Chapman.

    Player

    AVG

    OBP

    SLG

    HR

    wOBA

    WAR

    Matt Chapman

    .240

    .330

    .424

    17

    .328

    3.5

    Cody Bellinger

    .307

    .356

    .525

    26

    .370

    4.1

    However, if we were to look at each player’s expected stats and batted-ball metrics, courtesy of Baseball Savant, we see a completely different story:

    Player

    Barrel %

    Launch Angle

    Exit Velocity

    xBA

    xSLG

    xwOBA

    Matt Chapman

    16.8%

    18.3

    93.4

    .229

    .454

    .336

    Cody Bellinger

    6.1%

    17.2

    87.9

    .268

    .434

    .327

    Chapman hit the ball significantly harder and at roughly the same launch angle for the entirety of a season in which he slugged more than 100 points lower than Bellinger and hit nine fewer home runs. Does this automatically make Bellinger a bad investment, and Chapman a good one?

    Sorry, but no. If things were that easy, then there’d be a whole lot less intrigue in baseball. As Cubs fans, we all know the story with Bellinger in 2023, but in case you need a refresher: Bellinger posted a career-low strikeout rate by making a whole lot more contact and shortening up with two strikes. This led to him hitting .281 with two strikes, second to only contact machine Luis Arráez.

    The bad news? That .281 batting average came along with an unsustainable .387 BABIP. Did Bellinger find a new way to succeed as a hitter, or did he dink and dunk his way to a batting average that will be difficult to repeat?

    The other area where Bellinger far outperformed his expected statistics is on fly balls. According to Baseball Savant, Bellinger posted a .497 wOBA on fly balls in 2023. His xwOBA, though, was just .344. That difference of .153 was the 12th-highest in all of baseball. 

    One way a hitter can outperform his expected stats like this is by pulling a lot of his fly balls. Not only are fences shorter in the corners (and thus, you do not have to hit the ball as far), but almost any hitter’s power is going to be out in front of the plate, after they have generated more bat speed. 

    All of that aside, even if you only account for hard-hit baseballs, hitters still perform better when they hit the ball in the air to the pull side. MLB hitters as a whole posted a 827 wRC+ in 2023 when they hit a hard fly ball (95 mph or more) to the pull side, per FanGraphs. That drops to a 271 wRC+ on hard-hit fly balls to center field, and a 337 wRC+ on hard-hit fly balls to the opposite field. 

    Well, 45.5 percent of Bellinger’s hard hit fly balls were to the pull side. That was 15th in MLB among players who had at least 50 of those batted ball events. He was very good at hitting the ball in the air, hard, and to the pull side. Which brings me back to Chapman and those Baseball Savant expected stats. On fly balls in 2023, Chapman posted a .381 wOBA. His xwOBA? .547. That difference of .166 points was sixth-worst in all of baseball. 

    If you have been following to this point, I have a feeling you know what is coming next. The Blue Jays’ third baseman did not pull a lot of his hard-hit fly balls. In fact, he only pulled 9.5 percent of them. Not a typo: 9.5 percent! That was the worst mark in baseball, and if you’re thinking that that sounds really bad, well that is because it is! The worst mark in 2022 was Alec Bohm at 17.3 percent. 

    I had suspected, with this knowledge, that if we looked at a spray chart of all of the outs that Chapman made in 2023, that we would see a whole lot of long fly outs to center and right field. You be the judge:

    Av9QMVwiMEKp2rENMftEMck3GcDd_hMhbT6B2bOH

    I’d say we found the reason for the underperformance, or at least one of them. Has this always been an issue for Chapman? While he hasn’t ever excelled at pulling fly balls, it was never this bad: in 2022, he pulled 37 percent of his hard-hit fly balls, and in 2021 he pulled 33.3 percent of them. 

    This parallel is just absolutely fascinating to me. Two players, both linked to the Cubs, and both would slot in perfectly at positions of need, with Bellinger taking over center field or Chapman taking over third base. One far overperformed his expected stats, in no small part due to pulling a lot of his fly balls. The other far underperformed them, in no small part due to pulling, somehow, almost none of his fly balls. 

    Which would be the better investment for the Cubs? I know the actual production from Chapman was not great for the last two months of the season, but I would tend to think his propensity to hit his fly balls the other way is easily fixable. Matt Trueblood wrote about this back in early December. He would also cost less, and figures to be elite defensively at third base for a few more years. On the flip side, while I do think Bellinger could continue to overperform on his fly balls, I don’t think his two-strike results are sustainable, and I have less faith in him sustaining his good defense in center field as he ages.

    Who's your guy? Is there another big-name free agent the Cubs should consider instead of either one? Lay it on us in the comments.

    Follow North Side Baseball For Chicago Cubs News & Analysis

    Recent Cubs Articles

    Recent Cubs Videos


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    We Got The Whole 9

    Posted

    I understand people are anxious about 2024 but the high-aversion to letting a couple rookies plug holes is a little weird to me, especially considering what happened the last time the team went all-in on their prospects. 

    • Like 1
    Backtobanks

    Posted

    1 hour ago, squally1313 said:

    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.

    Posters keep mentioning becoming perennial contenders like the Braves/Dodgers/Astros, but first you have to win in 2024 and 2025 and then worry about 2026 and beyond. 

    squally1313

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

    Posters keep mentioning becoming perennial contenders like the Braves/Dodgers/Astros, but first you have to win in 2024 and 2025 and then worry about 2026 and beyond. 

    image.png.54f85cda7bb3820c70933674a135502b.png

    Cuzi

    Posted (edited)

    44 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

    I understand people are anxious about 2024 but the high-aversion to letting a couple rookies plug holes is a little weird to me, especially considering what happened the last time the team went all-in on their prospects. 

    The last time the team went all in on prospects it was Rizzo that had already established himself and then a legitimate handful of top 7 draft picks.

    Going in with guys like Kris Bryant, Javier Baez, Addison Russell, and Anthony Rizzo who developed into a 5 WAR player 2 years before 2016 and inserting Contreras into a catching rotation that included David Ross and Miguel Montero, is a little bit different than giving the keys to a bunch of mid grade prospects with average MLB projections.

    Edited by Cuzi
    • Like 2
    We Got The Whole 9

    Posted (edited)

    8 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

    The last time the team went all in on prospects it was Rizzo that had already established himself and then a legitimate handful of top 7 draft picks.

    This time around they are coming off of an 84 win season with established yet still young players forming the foundation, and there are 3 holes, not 13. So now they can put a little stock in players drafted 19th, 13th, and 7th; enough to where they may not need to sign long-term deals with players with spotty track records, at least. 

    Edited by We Got The Whole 9
    • Like 1
    squally1313

    Posted

    The issue with signing both those guys to me is that that's essentially your team for the Dansby Swanson era (final name still to be determined), and there's no chance for me that it turns into a powerhouse. We lose the financial flexibility to pick up elite level talent, and we severely limit the opportunity for any of the offensive prospects to turn into elite talent for the Cubs. I'm generally pro the 2023 team, the current roster, and dealing with having too much talent when we get there. But when your offense through 2026 is Happ, Bellinger, Seiya, Chapman, Swanson, Hoerner, a catcher, a DH, and a first baseman/centerfielder, and you can't afford an elite talent to fill one of those slots, you have an offense without an elite bat and very little chance for one to develop. 

    • Like 1
    We Got The Whole 9

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Cuzi said:

    The last time the team went all in on prospects it was Rizzo that had already established himself and then a legitimate handful of top 7 draft picks.

    Going in with guys like Kris Bryant, Javier Baez, Addison Russell, and Anthony Rizzo who developed into a 5 WAR player 2 years before 2016 and inserting Contreras into a catching rotation that included David Ross and Miguel Montero, is a little bit different than giving the keys to a bunch of mid grade prospects with average MLB projections.

    They don't need to give the keys to a bunch of prospects this time around. We are talking about 2-3 spots. The situations are not the same but people are just terrified of throwing rookies into the fire this time. 

     

    And PCA is certainly not a mid-grade prospect with average projections. Nor is Horton. Shaw's case is arguable; he has a ton of helium across the industry right now and is solidly a top 50 guy. This is not like trying an org's 15th best prospect. He's top 5 in one of the strongest orgs in the league. Probably most comparable to Baez in some respects.

     

    Like stop being so scared we may not be divisonal favorites in 2024. Give the kids some runway, that's all I am saying. 

    Cuzi

    Posted

    28 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

    Like stop being so scared we may not be divisonal favorites in 2024. Give the kids some runway, that's all I am saying. 

    Like stop being scared of blocking prospects 2-3 years away. The only one potentially getting blocked would be PCA with Bellinger. By the time anyone else is getting a call up Hoerner, Happ, and Suzuki have 1 year left.

    • Like 1
    We Got The Whole 9

    Posted

    8 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

    Like stop being scared of blocking prospects 2-3 years away. The only one potentially getting blocked would be PCA with Bellinger. By the time anyone else is getting a call up Hoerner, Happ, and Suzuki have 1 year left.

    Good young players who produce for 700K are the horsefeathers. 

    Cuzi

    Posted

    14 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

    Good young players who produce for 700K are the horsefeathers. 

    You act like they grow on trees. Minor leaguers have like a 15% success rate of being even an average MLBer. I would rather the Cubs not worry about signing 3 guys to $150M contracts when teams like the Padres are out there signing 3 guys to $300M contracts.

    squally1313

    Posted

    24 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

    Like stop being scared of blocking prospects 2-3 years away. The only one potentially getting blocked would be PCA with Bellinger. By the time anyone else is getting a call up Hoerner, Happ, and Suzuki have 1 year left.

    But neither of these guys are that good. You don't worry about prospects when you discuss Juan Soto or Ohtani or Jose Ramirez or whatever. Chapman is projected as the 29th best offensive player, which seems generous, and Bellinger is projected for the 81st best, which seems pessimistic. Split the difference and these guys are the 50th or so best offensive players in baseball that would be locked in at over $20m a year. And we just took ourselves financially out of any elite talent hitting the market. 

    Cuzi

    Posted

    1 minute ago, squally1313 said:

    But neither of these guys are that good. You don't worry about prospects when you discuss Juan Soto or Ohtani or Jose Ramirez or whatever. Chapman is projected as the 29th best offensive player, which seems generous, and Bellinger is projected for the 81st best, which seems pessimistic. Split the difference and these guys are the 50th or so best offensive players in baseball that would be locked in at over $20m a year. And we just took ourselves financially out of any elite talent hitting the market. 

    Lets get one thing straight. This team is not signing elite talent. Just forget about that already. They've passed on elite talent 3 FAs in a row.

    • Like 2
    We Got The Whole 9

    Posted

    8 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

    You act like they grow on trees. Minor leaguers have like a 15% success rate of being even an average MLBer. I would rather the Cubs not worry about signing 3 guys to $150M contracts when teams like the Padres are out there signing 3 guys to $300M contracts.

    I think Jed Hoyer deserves a lot of latitude when it comes to prospects he appears to have high faith in. When he deems that a guy will be a solid regular in the MLB, he is generally right.

    squally1313

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

    Lets get one thing straight. This team is not signing elite talent. Just forget about that already. They've passed on elite talent 3 FAs in a row.

    Let's pretend that's the case. What's your plan then? Fill the lineup with long term contracts of non-elite guys? 

    Cuzi

    Posted (edited)

    5 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

    Let's pretend that's the case. What's your plan then? Fill the lineup with long term contracts of non-elite guys? 

    I dont have a plan. I'm not sitting down at the table. But I'm for damn sure not going to shy away from 3+ WAR players at ~$20M/year. If they like Bellinger and Chapman at a certain price and that price is acceptable to the player at some point in the future then sign them. I'm not worrying about a damn prospect 2 years away.

    You are worried about the last 3 or so years of the "Swanson era" while conveniently ignoring the first 3 years.

    Edited by Cuzi
    • Like 2
    squally1313

    Posted

    7 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

    I dont have a plan. I'm not sitting down at the table. But I'm for damn sure not going to shy away from 3+ WAR players at ~$20M/year. If they like Bellinger and Chapman at a certain price and that price is acceptable to the player at some point in the future then sign them. I'm not worrying about a damn prospect 2 years away.

    You are worried about the last 3 or so years of the "Swanson era" while conveniently ignoring the first 3 years.

    I'm pretty confident that we'll be the betting and projection favorite for the division on opening day. We have, based on the rankings that came out today, 5 prospects in the top 50, all of which are in the upper levels of the minor leagues. We currently have zero contracts outside of the dead money on the books this year that annoy me. The next three years are going to be just fine.

    There's no path to becoming the Dodgers or Braves in the short term, and there probably never was at any point this offseason. Bellinger and Chapman doesn't put us anywhere close. 

    squally1313

    Posted

    I guess, to look at it another way, if you want to go all in on immediate success, which is fine....wouldn't you focus on taking those prospects that are all two years away in your mind, but in theory have plenty of value on the market, and trading those guys for immediate contributors? Why beat everyone else on the open market for two non-elite guys when you could consolidate all this talent that isn't ready and you want to block anyways into guys with higher ceilings or more reasonable contract terms? Or is that something else that you don't think Hoyer does?

    • Like 1
    Cuzi

    Posted (edited)

    I'm not against trading prospects. We are talking about 3 WAR players here. Even a guy like PCA has a pretty minute chance of being that. I dont think I would trade PCA at this stage before giving him a legitimate shot at MLB, given how close he is to being ready to get that shot and the potential availability of his position. But for someone like Alcantara, I have no fucks given.

    But who are you targeting for 3B in a trade? There aren't many more established than Chapman readily available. The list is Alex Bregman and Isaac Paredes. Bregman isn't getting traded and if you dont like Bellinger's batted ball profile then I doubt Paredes is making you erect.

    Edited by Cuzi
    squally1313

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

    I'm not against trading prospects. We are talking about 3 WAR players here. Even a guy like PCA has a pretty minute chance of being that. I dont think I would trade PCA at this stage before giving him a legitimate shot at MLB, given how close he is to being ready to get that shot and the potential availability of his position. But for someone like Alcantara, I have no fucks given.

    I know, the projections are pessimistic, wrong, whatever. But Bellinger isn't projected to be a 3 WAR guy next year, and that is presumably with the computers thinking he'll spend most of his time in centerfield (and crediting him accordingly). So if you want to give PCA a legitimate shot, you're either waiting for an injury, temporary solution, or you just signed a 2.5 fWAR first baseman to a long term deal, $20+m/year deal. 

    Basically: Sign Chapman because we have the money lying around anyways. Win the division with that team. Upgrade from there. 

    We Got The Whole 9

    Posted

    57 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

    I'm not against trading prospects. We are talking about 3 WAR players here. Even a guy like PCA has a pretty minute chance of being that. I dont think I would trade PCA at this stage before giving him a legitimate shot at MLB, given how close he is to being ready to get that shot and the potential availability of his position. But for someone like Alcantara, I have no fucks given.

    But who are you targeting for 3B in a trade? There aren't many more established than Chapman readily available. The list is Alex Bregman and Isaac Paredes. Bregman isn't getting traded and if you dont like Bellinger's batted ball profile then I doubt Paredes is making you erect.

    FTR I would also have no qualms trading Alcantara in the right deal. 

    Backtobanks

    Posted

    2 hours ago, squally1313 said:

    But neither of these guys are that good. You don't worry about prospects when you discuss Juan Soto or Ohtani or Jose Ramirez or whatever. Chapman is projected as the 29th best offensive player, which seems generous, and Bellinger is projected for the 81st best, which seems pessimistic. Split the difference and these guys are the 50th or so best offensive players in baseball that would be locked in at over $20m a year. And we just took ourselves financially out of any elite talent hitting the market. 

    50th best offensive player means they are probably the 2nd best offensive player on the team.  

    Backtobanks

    Posted

    4 hours ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

    This time around they are coming off of an 84 win season with established yet still young players forming the foundation, and there are 3 holes, not 13. So now they can put a little stock in players drafted 19th, 13th, and 7th; enough to where they may not need to sign long-term deals with players with spotty track records, at least. 

    But we don't have Zobrist, Fowler, Heyward, Lester, Arrieta, Wood, Lackey, and Chapman providing support in case they don't succeed.

     

    squally1313

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

    50th best offensive player means they are probably the 2nd best offensive player on the team.  

    Dansby projected for 25th, Hoerner for 31st. For anyone who's curious, Happ is 83rd, Busch is 89th, Seiya is 96th in the top 100. So yeah, 7 in the top 100 would be pretty impressive, and more than the Dodgers (5) and Braves (6). However, that again makes the lack of top end talent pretty glaring given that we knew the huge gap in overall talent. Dodgers go 4, 18, 20, 43, 48, Braves go 1, 16, 21, 37, 39, 52. 

    We Got The Whole 9

    Posted

    17 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

    But we don't have Zobrist, Fowler, Heyward, Lester, Arrieta, Wood, Lackey, and Chapman providing support in case they don't succeed.

     

    What the hell are you talking about. There are plenty of long-tenured Cubs and weathered vets on the roster.

    Stratos

    Posted

    The only 2 ways this team can get better is by increasing spending efficiency (increasing surplus) or increasing total spending (payroll).

    The latter probably isn't going to happen, they've never spent significantly over the LT.




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...