Jason Ross

Passan just name dropped Michael Wacha as a Cub target.

Part of it? Yes. The reality of first base is that it's much more "bat reliant" than centerfield (per league data). Primary DH have the highest league wRC+, and first basemen have the second highest (by pretty large margins). In 2023, centerfield was the fourth lowest (behind C, 2b, and 3b). And as recently as 2021 was down all the way to the 93 wRC+ level (95 wRC+ the season before). While there seems an upward trend on CF again, it's likely going to be among the four lowest for the foreseeable future. It's certainly not the only reason, but if we're going to have some questions on his bat, than these questions of "how does the bat play?" and "where does he play?" are probably questions on the forefront of needing to be asked and answered for Bellinger.

I don't think it's fair to point to any single slice and say "that's why", but I don't think we can simply ignore massive hard%, barrel% and EV issues, either. That runs deeper than just the 2 strike BABIP, but I add that into my critique, like every other slice, because each slice adds up. We're talking the 213th best exit velocity in baseball, the 221st best max ev, the 143rd best barrel%... These are all better than they had been recently, but aren't good indicators moving forward, either. We're already trending down to a 123 wRC+ with just BABIP on 2 strike question. But the 2 strike approach can't be the only reason his hard hit% is in the tanker, too. Most hitters who put up the barrel%, the hard% and the EV he put up last year run south of 120 wRC+ so I think it's fair to worry that Bellinger, moving forward, is closer to that of a 115 wRC+ hitter than that of a 125 wRC+ hitter. I appreciate he has versatility, but that versatility really only interests me if we're going to use it. If the goal is to slide him to 1b and let him moonlight in CF on off days once PCA comes up, then I'm not overly excited about paying for that, for say, 6-7 years if we're not confident on the bat playing up past 115 wRC+ at first base. It would offer nice coverage in the even Pete Crow-Armstrong is a failure, but that's when you have to have some reliance on your internal scouting and projections. If the Cubs believe in PCA, then paying for a long term "oh horsefeathers" solution has much less value. None of this is to say I think Bellinger is a bad player. I know FG ran an interesting article on the concept of Parades and Bellinger and their data recently, too. And I understand he's been successful in the past, but I am not sure the past (circa pre-2020) Cody Bellinger has much to do with Cody Bellinger in the future, either. What we have is the most recent version of Bellinger being the most likely thing moving forward, IMO. Where I question Bellinger is on a $180m+, seven year deal. I'm all in on short term, high AAV (when I think his versatility really becomes interesting as that coverage) but then that comes into a host of other questions like "can the Cubs truly afford to wait out their offseason with those hopes?". The Cubs are going to be the true arbiter of how scary those numbers are and perhaps there's more to this than I can see. Maybe the vision is to trade PCA, in which case, as a CF'er, I'm far more willing to cut the bat some slack. Maybe the Cubs are more worried in PCA than I think they are. But as I said, I have my concerns that this is the right player for the Cubs to sink that kind of long term money in. None of this is to suggest your lesser-concern isn't valid, only that I'm not sure I share your confidence in the profile moving forward.

It's not that I want to bargain basement this, it's that we have to ask ourselves "just how much do we believe what Bellinger did in 2023 is repeatable going forward"? He had a ,400 BABIP on 2 strike pitches last year. League BABIP in every count was .297 last year. If Bellinger had a .400 BABIP in general we'd be sounding the alarm bells, but a .400 BABIP with 2 strikes is even scarier. Part of this likely explains why his hard hit% was in the 10th%, his barrel% was 27%, and his exit velocity was in the 22%. There was likely a conscious effort to just...put the ball in play any way and this likely resulted in helping his K% be where it was, while also, likely resulting in a lot of luck based hits. But those numbers are more than just a two strike approach too. Those aren't great indicators of future success. So there's some real concern there, and there should be. Can Cody Bellinger continue to BABIP his way to two strike success? Can he hit for power while not hitting the ball very hard? These are all very real questions a team has to ask. If he's going to be a long term CF, these matter less; CF'ers had a 98 wRC+ last year. But if he's not going to be a CF then the line for league average jumps considerably to 108 wRC+ for a 1b and 110 wRC+ for a DH, At that point, those questions really matter, because his position is important. He's a good CF if he's going to wRC+ 114 next year. He's only a slightly above league average 1b then, and that's just not worth 5-7 years. I don't want the Cubs to play cheap-o small market horsefeathers. I also don't want the Chicago Cubs to lock in a slightly above average 1b because that's just what's available. What this comes down to, for me, is that batted ball data. You have to be very sure this is going to be a 125 wRC+ bat moving forward for the next 4+ years because the likelihood is that even if PCA doesn't work out, he's going to force Bellinger over to 1b for minimum of a year or two, and likely, his best defensive years left for a soon to be 29 year old. Personally...I'm not that sure. I don't have the data that the Cubs do, so they get final deferral here. But I'm pretty skeptical of those things. All of this might change though. If you can get him on a cool-Carlos-Correa-type 3 year, high AAV, multi-opt out thing, you have to be less worried about those things. Grab him for a year, or two, or three and you don't have to worry so much about everything working out perfectly. The Cubs are a big market team and they can do that. But I also don't really want the Cubs to wait out his market hoping that kind of a deal falls into their lap in mid-late-January either. It's a balancing act, and why, I come down on the end of "I'm just not sure I'm that gaga over the idea of Bellinger".

Found it. I guess I read it a little differently than you. This line " No deal ultimately got done yesterday, and there have been reports of the Rays discussing Glasnow deals at a similar level of seriousness with other clubs." sounds less like new information and more along the lines of "the Rays had been previously connected to other teams and no deal happened there, either". But it's kind of murky, so I can see where we may see that sentence in trying to portray a different point. Here is the full quote and the link to the article for anyone who would like it: "News broke recently that the Dodgers and Rays were discussing a deal that would send Tyler Glasnow and Manuel Margot to L.A. in exchange for Ryan Pepiot and Jonny Deluca. No deal ultimately got done yesterday, and there have been reports of the Rays discussing Glasnow deals at a similar level of seriousness with other clubs. Could a deal come together soon? The 6’8” right-hander has struggled to stay healthy throughout his career but would be a major addition to the front of any would-be contender’s rotation; dating back to the 2019 season, Glasnow owns a 3.03 ERA and 2.89 FIP across 60 starts (332 2/3 innings)." Link to MLB Trade Rumors article.

Yeah, I think this is a good point. I'll throw it out there again for anyone who doesn't know me quite that well yet; I cannot stand Tom Ricketts. Cannot. Stand. Tom Ricketts. But he's no better or no worse than almost...any other owner in baseball right now except for the extremes. He's not Steve Cohen. He's not John Fisher. He's...everyone else, basically. I think the next owner will be very much the same guy. Owners now a days want to invest in a team because it's a safe money making venture, especially long term. It's a symptom of being an owner right now across the sport. That's not to absolve them in the least, only stating the reality. But in the end, he's just one of the other guys. We'll get a new Tom Ricketts. Whomever that would be...

Not doubting, but curious on the source?

I feel similar to Chapman as I do Bellinger because both have odd profiles moving forward. Both have odd batted ball data respective to their wRC+. Both rely decently heavily on their glove (Chapman at 3b, Bellinger at CF) in terms of their contract value. And neither I'm entirely confident moving forward on the contracts that are being bandied about. Both play positions of immediate need, but by 2025 those needs may be filled internally with two of the Cubs (arguable) top-five prospects. There are contracts I'd be okay with both on, but I don't think either fill the Cubs most immediate need which is an impact type bat. Bellinger did that last year with weird data, and Chapman's batted ball data looks that way, but with a 110 wRC+ hitter over his last 1800, he simply hasn't been one. I'm kind of at the point where I'd prefer the Cubs to pass on both, go more of a one-year route with the bats, and re-asses before being locked into some hitters I don't fully trust for 5-6+ years.

I think we already knew this, and now looking back, it was always going to be the Dodgers...but still, passing this along:

I wouldn't call Jon Heyman a twitter hack. Sam Olbur (who runs a pretty solid prospect-centric twitter account in his own right) was just relaying information from a Jon Heyman interview (which supports comments made by Sharma today about the Cubs and Yamamoto). Heyman can be a bit of a mouthpiece from time to time, but in terms of being "in the know" he's probably right below the Passan/Rosenthal level.

I am still miffed they gave him a two year contract.

There are worse depth catchers than Jorge Alfaro.

Yeah! He's one of those guys I think has some upside. Funky delivery, good GB%...just needs that sweeper. His fastball is shockingly highly graded (likely due to the funk in the delivery). But he can't be fastball only. We'll see what he does, he's a guy I hope they can fix, but wouldn't cry if they don't. Need to dump him? Alright. Try again with the next guy.

My guess with Cuas is the Cubs see a path to a RHH killer in Cuas. He's got some really good in-zone whiff% but poor chase%. The Cubs were clearly tinkering with his slider to give it more horizontal movement (aka, righty-killer-stuff) and it just wasn't taking right off the bat. I don't think they were going to use Cuas much if not for injury, and instead have him tinker in AAA, but ended up having their hands forced. I expect they're working with him this offseason on tweaking the slider.

Yeah, he had a nice run. That said, it's almost entirely un-repeatable. He posted a .346 ISO. He's either Shohei Ohtani. 14 of his 31 hits (in just 147 PA's) were home runs. Essentially, not ever happening again. I always thought there was a DH there so I hope he can figure something out, seems like a decent enough guy on the outside.

Only if his market falls on its face. Which I just don't think will happen.

Oh, Sarcasm. I'm not a fan of the Bellinger idea unless they trade PCA myself. And I'm pretty convinced they're not doing that. PCA is like, this team's dream player. Wins on the margins, safe floor, controllable, premium position. I can't see them moving him. Maybe they will, I'd be shocked, however.

Frankly, I'd still pump the money there, myself, if this is going to be the offseason. The Cubs have essentially backed themselves in a corner when it comes to acquiring an impact bat at this stage and I don't have any aspirations right now that the Cubs will pursuit Soto with the type of vigor they should next year, either. At that point, I'd rather the Cubs have gone with a Glasnow + another SP (a trade, or an Imanaga) and then looked to acquire Hoskins + another bat (using Wicks? Just spitballing, not necessarily giving specific names or targets). Just go all in on the pitching and make a dominant-ass rotation. But in the end, I agree with the end point that we're getting to a point where this offseason is getting hard to parse out how the Cubs end up having a very successful offseason if they're going to miss here.

Yippie.

Oh, I'm not absolving. I am captain of the "Tom Ricketts Sucks" fan club. But I don't think Jed Hoyer was hired because he has a small market mentality in the way I think some believe. That he was hired because he's risk adverse. I think he was hired to continue to the winning ways Theo Epstein had shown, but presented a plan that was more sustainable and Ricketts bought it hook line and sinker. Ricketts blows. But I'm starting to come around more and more to an idea that the way the team is being built is in many ways a Hoyer issue just as much as a Ricketts issue.

I think Tom Ricketts sucks. But the Levine has suggested the Cubs may run a $240-$250m payroll. That's not just an ownership issue. That's a Jed issue as well.

I'll flip a table if the Cubs do that. That probably puts out a pretty decent W-L product, but it also puts out a team that you know just can't compete with the major teams in the playoffs. It's an awesome way to out-pythag your market. To really maximize some decent, but not elite players. That's a team I think the Brewers build and pull 89 wins, with a 2nd round exit because there's no way that offense can hit against a murders' row of stuff, especially when teams shorten the rotation and lengthen the bullpen. I'll live with the Cubs not getting Ohani or Yamamoto. But damn, I want this team to wake up and remember they're the Chicago Cubs.

I'll lead the damn riot if that's the Cubs plan.

Honestly, my fear is that the Cubs have a small-market mentality with a big budget. I've feared for a few years that what the Cubs aim to do is "Cleveland, but more expensive". This would play out perfectly in a scenario where the Cubs decide, through a combination of acquisition cost, their defenses' ability to maximize ground balls, and contract, to go with Shane Bieber over Tyler Glasnow. And that's not the worst logic, but it's also not the way I feel a team like the Cubs should be built. Use your advantage. I might be proven wrong, and I really hope I am. But this is my fear. At some point you can't worry about min/maxing every single penny on an acquisition. Sometimes it's just about getting the better player.