This is a question that many have been wondering about, “what about the core?” We learned that, as long as the Chicago Cubs are competing, they will add come July 31st. We even learned that finances won’t be an issue when they do look at potential trade partners. That’s well and good, but what are we doing about the current core of Javier Baez, Anthony Rizzo, and Kris Bryant?
One thing I would like to address right now is the idea that the Cubs should trade as many of these players as they can to rebuild. FFS! What the heck do you think this organization is!? The Chicago Freaking Cubs are not the Kansas City Royals, the Tampa Bay Rays, the Pittsburgh Pirates, or any other small market team. The Cubs made several revenue generating moves to shield themselves from need to rebuild, the Cubs have said rebuilding isn’t something they’ll do again, and even Theo Epstein – orchestrator of the most brilliant rebuild in the history of rebuilds – says they are bad for the game of baseball.
Not only are rebuilds incredibly difficult to pull off and have work (see the 26 teams that have tried and failed) but you need 29 other teams to be worse than you once you are ready to compete. Then, and oh by the way, Cubs fandom has changed. Have you logged into any number of irrational Cubs fan pages on Facebook!? Cubs go on a stretch with a record of 27 and 12, then lose two games and the team sucks again. With the “incredible” support that the team gets now (yes, incredible is supposed to be read sarcastically) these fans won’t be there during a season or two of 70 win seasons.
When Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer spoke of “threading the needle” over the last few seasons, they have always meant to be able to compete with the core (or most of) while strategically putting them in a good position for years down the road. That is what the Yu Darvish trade was about, far more than money (while that was a part of it). I know a lot of folks were disappointed by the return, and I am in that group as well, but it does appear that the Cubs got some ballers in return.
So the real goal here should be identifying the players that could be moved, like Darvish was, for players to help down the road. But, another goal is finding a way to sign as many of Baez, Rizzo, and Bryant as they can. Why let guys like that go when they can be the centerpiece of what you do for the next six years, like they were for the last six?
Signability
The biggest question, still, is the signability of these guys. In Spring Training, I think the Cubs were smart to try and lock up Rizzo, as he is the most “signable” of the three. Now, it does appear that the Cubs and Rizzo aren’t exactly on the same page in terms of salary and Rizzo has suggested he will not discuss an extension during the season. I would also suggest that, even though the public perception is the offer to Rizzo was low, perhaps Rizzo isn’t concerned and feels an extension can happen quickly after the season ends. Now, that doesn’t eliminate the possibility that the Cubs can come to Rizz with a deal in July and he signs it.
I know a lot of fans believe Bryant is the hardest one to sign, but honestly the hardest one – and has been for several years – is Baez.
There was a deal offered before the start of the 2020 season for around $180 million. That would have made Baez the highest paid shortstop in baseball (at the time) and would have kept him in Chicago for a long time. Then, as players sometimes do, he had a horrible 2020 season, being rated out as one of the three worst offensive players in baseball. In fact, if you look at offensive production over 2020 and 2021, Baez is still rated as the sixth worst in baseball (79 wRC+).
Baez believes he is a player in the class of Francisco Lindor and Fernando Tatis Jr., and for at least the 2018 season, he was. Now, when you look at these monster deals, a giant part of them is the value you bring back to the club. This can be in production, as well as monetarily. Let’s look at the Bryce Harper deal in Philadelphia.
Every team that were bidding on Harper was doing so with two levels of value. What his on-field production could bring to the team *and* what his marketability would bring in as far as revenue. We have been groomed to believe that each win above replacement is worth between $7.5 and $8 million. Harper is getting an average of $25 (and change) million a season on his new deal. His first season in Philly, his play was worth $36.8 million (Fangraphs). So, the Phills received roughly $11 million in value alone on his performance. Not sure what his marketing value can do, well, according to internet searches Harper was ranked 99th of 100 of all athletes – where no other baseball player was represented on the list. He’s signed deals with Nike, Rawlings, Topps, Gatorade, Jaguar, Hallmark, Blind Barber, and T-Mobile. All of these sponsorships needed a slew of new commercials and print media with Harper in his new uniform.
Then the slew of new jersey sales his signing provoked. Him coming to the Phillies may have paid off in $150 million in souvenirs alone. This is why I think it is funny when someone suggests no player is worth the money. All you’re really saying is, “I don’t understand baseball finances,” which is ok because I spend some time researching them and *I* don’t fully understand them.
So, an investment in Baez – who is a top three most exciting player in the game to watch – has a similar appeal. He’s popular, he has an undeniable worldwide following, and paying Baez is a gamble on his future. We know that fans will buy a Javier Baez jersey. We know they buy Baez shirzies and any other Baez goods. The Cubs will make their money on almost any Baez deal they put out there. The issue is what else can they afford in terms of being respectful towards the Competitive Balance Tax. While I would argue all but maybe three or four teams in baseball can have multiple $20 million plus AAV deals, you can’t have multiple $20 million AAV deals that are for mostly defensive guys.
I would love the Cubs to retain Baez, I just think that if you get Rizzo inked, Baez becomes a liability as you have Jason Heyward, Rizzo, and I would value Bryant and his ability to play every position on the diamond while being a strong offensive player too.
But here is the issue, unless the Cubs come to Scott Boras with a ridiculously strong offer, he’s not calling Bryant to discuss terms. That isn’t a knock on Boras or on Bryant, it is simply the fact that players don’t like negotiating mid-season, especially with free agency four and a half months away. So, if the Cubs toss an offer out to KB and he decides to wait till after the season, the Cubs could end up missing out on two players that should be kept around.
What’s likely to happen
There are going to be new projections on the financial status of the Chicago Cubs come July. As they learn more-and-more about where they stand on that front, the likelihood of opening conversations goes up. If the Cubs are competing, the idea of trading any of these three go out the window. So, naturally, the Cubs should put more focus on signing extensions.
If the Cubs fall off some and find themselves in third in the NL Central or even more than five games out of first, they will take a multifaceted approach to these guys.
What I mean is, the Cubs will put a minimum requirement on what they expect in return if they were to shop any of them. At the same time, they will likely work up possible extensions for any of the three, or two of the three. If they don’t see something they like from a trade perspective, they then put the extension offer out there. They would likely time this out to still give them a shot if that extension is declined or if they learn they are far apart on terms.
What I’m thinking will happen is, around July 23rd, the Cubs will have some idea on where any possible trade options sit. They’ll then go up through the 29th trying to lock down extensions. Finally, if that doesn’t pan out, they have two days to reignite any possible trade discussions or even locking the final touches on an extension.
This is a technique many hockey teams take while going into a trade deadline, and while it doesn’t always work out in baseball, the Cubs seem to be in a perfect position to try it. All three of these players have explained how they want to remain a Cub. There is a business case to keep them and a business case to move some of them. But, you can’t just move them to move them. The value has to come back in return and if it isn’t there, sign them.
Ultimately, I think two of the three will be a Cub in 2022 and whoever leaves it will hurt a lot. Not only have these guys equally shared being the face of this team over the past seven years, but they accomplished more in those seven years than any trio outside Johnny Evers, Joe Tinker, and Frank Chance have.
