Options, Options: Cody Bellinger Returns to the Cubs

For as strong as his 2023 campaign had been, and for as well positioned as he was in this winter’s market, Cody Bellinger‘s free agency was always hampered by questions of sustainability. His debut season with the Cubs followed two unsettlingly bad years with the Dodgers, and the metrics underlying last season’s resurgence were comparatively modest relative to his production, raising the possibility if not the likelihood of regression. In light of those issues, even as he placed third on our Top 50 Free Agents list heading into the offseason and reportedly sought a contract as high as $250 million, it seemed quite likely he’d come away with considerably less. He did, agreeing to return to the Cubs on a three-year, $80 million deal, one that contains opt-outs after the first two seasons, and one that was still pending a physical as of this writing.
Effectively, this is a pillow contract, negotiated by the agent who created the term, Scott Boras. The 28-year-old Bellinger will get the opportunity to show that his 2023 performance was no fluke, with two chances before his age-30 season to secure a much bigger payday. He’s guaranteed $30 million in 2024, with salaries of $30 million in ’25 and $20 million in ’26 if he hasn’t exercised his opt-outs, according to ESPN’s Jeff Passan.
Bellinger came to the Cubs after an eventful 10-year run in the Dodgers’ organization, one that began when the son of former utilityman Clay Bellinger was drafted in the fourth round out of an Arizona high school in 2013. He hit 39 home runs while winning NL Rookie of the Year honors in 2017, and smacked 47 homers two years later while taking home the NL MVP award. His timely hitting and spectacular fielding during the 2020 postseason helped the Dodgers to their first championship since 1988, but one of those timely hits precipitated his fall. Celebrating what proved to be the decisive home run in Game 7 of the 2020 NLCS against the Braves, the exuberant Bellinger dislocated his right (non-throwing) shoulder after bashing forearms with teammate Enrique Hernández. He underwent arthroscopic labrum surgery after the World Series, started slowly in spring training, and then in the fourth game of the season suffered a hairline fracture in his left fibula, knocking him out for eight weeks. Unable to find his rhythm as he recovered from both shoulder and leg issues, he hit a gruesome .165/.240/.302 (47 wRC+) with -1.0 WAR in 350 plate appearances, though he showed signs of life during the playoffs when he adopted a shortened swing with lower hand placement; he hit .353/.436/.471 (146 wRC+) across 39 plate appearances in 12 postseason games. While he got off to a solid start in 2022, he couldn’t maintain it despite endlessly tinkering with his swing. Exceptional defense in center field kept him in the lineup, but he hit just .210/.265/.389 (83 wRC+) with 1.8 WAR, and was nontendered following the season.
Less than three weeks later, Bellinger agreed to a one-year deal with the Cubs, one that paid him $12.5 million for 2023 with a $1 million bonus for winning NL Comeback Player of the Year honors (which he did) and a $5 million buyout on a $25 million mutual option for ’24. He declined his end of the option as well as the $20.325 million qualifying offer he received, and entered the market as the top free agent position player, behind only pitcher/designated hitter Shohei Ohtani and pitcher Yoshinobu Yamamoto on our list.
For Bellinger, last year’s change of scenery proved to be just what the doctor ordered. Reuniting with Cubs hitting coach Dustin Kelly and assistant Johnny Washington, both of whom he had worked with in the Dodgers’ system, Bellinger focused on adjusting his mechanics, particularly with regards to his hand placement and back hip, allowing him to use his lower body better. He further adapted his approach by pulling the ball with less frequency than at any time since his rookie season, and shortening his swing with two strikes to focus on contact. The result was his best season since 2019, as he hit .307/.356/.525 (134 wRC+) with 26 homers and 20 steals in 130 games — he missed nearly four weeks with a left knee contusion — while cutting his strikeout rate from 27.3% to 15.6%. Coupled with solid defense in center field, his 4.1 WAR tied for 20th in the NL and was the second-best showing of his career.
Bellinger’s intent is worth noting when digging into his underlying metrics, as he sacrificed some power in exchange for contact en route to the lowest exit velocity, barrel rate, and hard-hit rate of his career:
| Season | BBE | EV | Barrel% | HardHit% | AVG | xBA | SLG | xSLG | wOBA | xwOBA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 337 | 90.8 | 11.6% | 45.7% | .267 | .254 | .581 | .540 | .380 | .365 |
| 2018 | 409 | 89.8 | 8.6% | 38.1% | .260 | .237 | .470 | .432 | .345 | .327 |
| 2019 | 454 | 91.1 | 12.6% | 45.6% | .305 | .319 | .629 | .635 | .415 | .430 |
| 2020 | 171 | 89.3 | 9.4% | 41.5% | .239 | .284 | .455 | .494 | .337 | .374 |
| 2021 | 224 | 89.3 | 7.1% | 34.4% | .165 | .209 | .302 | .358 | .237 | .281 |
| 2022 | 360 | 89.4 | 8.3% | 38.1% | .210 | .213 | .389 | .354 | .284 | .278 |
| 2023 | 424 | 87.9 | 6.1% | 31.4% | .307 | .270 | .525 | .434 | .370 | .327 |
Bellinger’s barrel rate placed in just the 27th percentile, his exit velo in the 22nd percentile, and his hard-hit rate in the 10th percentile. He outdid his expected slugging percentage by 91 points, and his expected wOBA by 43 points; both gaps ranked third in the majors among batting title qualifiers (502 PA). On the other hand, his .279 AVG and .312 wOBA with two strikes ranked second and seventh in the majors, thanks in large part to his consistency in collecting hits despite soft contact, a topic that MLB.com’s Mike Petriello and our own Esteban Rivera both investigated.
All of that created something of a puzzle for Bellinger’s suitors — most prominently the Blue Jays (considered the favorites to sign him as of mid-December) and Giants, with the Mariners and Yankees also connected to him via rumors. Bellinger’s deal always seemed unlikely to approach the hot air of the $200 million-plus Borasphere, but in our Top 50 exercise, Ben Clemens projected him to get a six-year, $150 million contract, and our crowdsource expected a six-year, $144 million one. Other outlets went even higher.
As the Blue Jays dragged their feet this winter, the Giants turned to Jung Hoo Lee, and the Cubs refused to act like a large-market team, Bellinger’s anticipated market never fully materialized, with the aforementioned issues undoubtedly playing a part, as well. By ZiPS, he did well to get as much as he did:
| Year | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | DR | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | .267 | .327 | .441 | 487 | 80 | 130 | 24 | 2 | 19 | 73 | 44 | 92 | 14 | 108 | 3 | 2.7 |
| 2025 | .262 | .323 | .427 | 485 | 78 | 127 | 24 | 1 | 18 | 72 | 44 | 91 | 13 | 103 | 3 | 2.3 |
| 2026 | .263 | .325 | .425 | 475 | 76 | 125 | 24 | 1 | 17 | 69 | 44 | 89 | 11 | 103 | 3 | 2.3 |
ZiPS projects just a three-year, $70 million contract for that forecast, per Dan Szymborski, though perhaps that’s not surprising given that Bellinger has had just one good season out of the last three. Based on the percentile breakdowns, it appears the system gives him only about a 10% to 20% chance of matching or exceeding last year’s performance:
| Percentile | 2B | HR | BA | OBP | SLG | OPS+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 95% | 34 | 29 | .317 | .380 | .544 | 146 | 5.2 |
| 90% | 31 | 27 | .304 | .367 | .520 | 137 | 4.6 |
| 80% | 28 | 24 | .291 | .353 | .498 | 127 | 4.0 |
| 70% | 27 | 22 | .282 | .345 | .478 | 122 | 3.5 |
| 60% | 25 | 21 | .274 | .336 | .465 | 115 | 3.1 |
| 50% | 24 | 19 | .267 | .327 | .441 | 108 | 2.7 |
| 40% | 23 | 17 | .257 | .320 | .429 | 102 | 2.2 |
| 30% | 22 | 16 | .250 | .313 | .415 | 97 | 1.9 |
| 20% | 20 | 14 | .241 | .303 | .400 | 90 | 1.4 |
| 10% | 18 | 13 | .228 | .289 | .374 | 82 | 0.8 |
| 5% | 16 | 11 | .221 | .283 | .357 | 74 | 0.3 |
Bellinger probably doesn’t have to match his 2023 numbers to justify opting out, and he does have two chances to decide when to enter the market again. Still, a mediocre 2024 followed by a strong ’25 would probably leave teams with similar questions to the ones they confronted this winter.
As for how he fits into the Cubs, the key word is flexibility. The team already had Ian Happ and Seiya Suzuki, both entering their age-29 seasons and on multi-year deals, set for the outfield corners. Prior to Bellinger’s re-signing, Pete Crow-Armstrong, the 20th-ranked prospect on our Top 100 list, appeared likely to take over as the Chicago’s regular center fielder. A 2020 first-round pick acquired from the Mets in the Javier Báez trade at the ’21 deadline, Crow-Armstrong hit a combined .283/.365/.511 (127 wRC+) in 73 games at Double-A Tennessee and 34 games at Triple-A Iowa. He went just 0-for-14 with three walks and two sacrifice hits in a cup of coffee with the Cubs, though to be fair, he started just three of the 13 games in which he appeared. He’s considered an elite center fielder who’s fearless on the basepaths and should produce at least average power. “If he can plug that hole over time, he’ll be a five-tool superstar,” wrote our prospect team of Eric Longenhagen and Tess Taruskin. “More likely, he’ll have some 20-25 homer seasons amid a ton of strikeouts and a low OBP, with peak years resembling Mike Cameron’s (though almost certainly not to that level of annual consistency).”
Given Crow-Armstrong’s age (he turns 22 on March 25) and modest amount of upper-level experience, it always seemed possible that he would start the season in the minors before rejoining the Cubs. Now it would appear even more likely. If he hits his way back to the majors in a hurry, the Cubs could use him in center field and play Bellinger at first base, where lefty-swinging rookie Michael Busch was slated to be the starter or at least the long half of a platoon with righty Patrick Wisdom. The 26-year-old Busch, no. 84 on our prospect list, is considered a bat-only prospect who last played first base regularly at North Carolina, and who may be better suited to DH duty. Alternately, Bellinger has experience in both left field (315.1 innings, though none since 2018) and right (989 innings, the bulk of them in 2019), and Happ has experience at every defensive position except shortstop and catcher, though he hasn’t played the infield since 2021, when he totaled 36 innings, mostly at second base. Also in the category of moving parts is Christopher Morel, who last year saw time at all three outfield positions plus second base, shortstop, and third base; he was projected to get the bulk of the work at DH but also to be in the third base mix along with Nick Madrigal. Suffice to say that new manager Craig Counsell will have options for how to piece his lineup together, and that a clearer picture may emerge during spring training.
Via our Depth Charts projections, here’s a comparison of how the situation looked before the signing and immediately after, in terms of estimated plate appearances:
| Player | Pre/Post-Signing | 1B | 3B | LF | CF | RF | DH | Total PA* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bellinger | Post | 280 | 245 | 98 | 623 | |||
| Busch | Pre | 308 | 91 | 49 | 469 | |||
| Busch | Post | 252 | 63 | 84 | 420 | |||
| Crow-Armstrong | Pre | 420 | 420 | |||||
| Crow-Armstrong | Post | 350 | 350 | |||||
| Happ | Pre | 623 | 42 | 665 | ||||
| Happ | Post | 651 | 14 | 665 | ||||
| Madrigal | Pre | 357 | 371 | |||||
| Madrigal | Post | 294 | 301 | |||||
| Morel | Pre | 35 | 49 | 35 | 14 | 21 | 378 | 553 |
| Morel | Post | 126 | 21 | 14 | 14 | 329 | 518 | |
| Suzuki | Pre | 441 | 161 | 602 | ||||
| Suzuki | Post | 406 | 182 | 588 | ||||
| Tauchman | Pre | 21 | 203 | 147 | 371 | |||
| Tauchman | Post | 14 | 70 | 168 | 252 | |||
| Wisdom | Pre | 245 | 126 | 14 | 35 | 420 | ||
| Wisdom | Post | 133 | 182 | 357 |
In terms of overall playing time, the real loser of the Bellinger deal is Mike Tauchman, a capable center fielder who hit .252/.363/.377 (107 wRC+) last year, with Crow-Armstrong, Madrigal, and Wisdom also losing substantial time. Keep in mind that all of this is based on best guesses just as exhibition season has opened, and before the Cubs have even confirmed the deal. A lot could still change.
Particularly with the Cardinals, Brewers, Cubs, and Reds each projected to win between 79 and 85 games, the NL Central is expected to be a dogfight. Any impactful addition could be the difference between reaching the postseason — something the Cubs haven’t done since 2020 — and staying home. By bringing back Bellinger, the team has given itself a better shot at playing in October without assuming a huge long-term risk. Bellinger, for his part, gets to return to a comfortable situation with a contending team, while also knowing that he can play his way into a bigger contract. It will be fascinating to see how this all unfolds.
Brooklyn-based Jay Jaffe is a senior writer for FanGraphs, the author of The Cooperstown Casebook (Thomas Dunne Books, 2017) and the creator of the JAWS (Jaffe WAR Score) metric for Hall of Fame analysis. He founded the Futility Infielder website (2001), was a columnist for Baseball Prospectus (2005-2012) and a contributing writer for Sports Illustrated (2012-2018). He has been a recurring guest on MLB Network and a member of the BBWAA since 2011, and a Hall of Fame voter since 2021. Follow him on BlueSky @jayjaffe.bsky.social.
I like that for Cody. It’s not likely he’ll have a better platform season, but since last year was so different than the two prior seasons, he can definitely improve his market just by doing something similar to last year. Meanwhile he locks in an $80m floor if things go haywire. Not sure I see a lot of upside for the cubs, but I am pro-giving away the Ricketts’ money.
Agree 100% re Ricketts’ $$$. Even separate from my being a Milwaukee boy.
The benefit for the Cubs is they needed a big, short term LH bat (until Caissie is mlb ready) and they now have it. Cubs dont want lots of years because they have a top farm system, so it really doesnt hurt them if Belli opts out
I’d go one further and say it’s better for the Cubs if he opts out. The only way he doesn’t is if he’s not gonna get more than 2/50 on the market. And if that’s the case, then things went very badly for him. Better if he just has a good year and you get that before he opts out.
It’s _absolutely_ better for the Cubs in the instance that he opts out.
I am not at all convinced that this is a better deal than the FG crowdsource, because with his injury history he should take the guaranteed money and run. But as far as pillow contracts go it doesn’t get much better than this. He gets *three* shots to establish a new normal, and if one fails he comes back the next year. And who knows, maybe a team wasn’t willing to offer him a $150M deal anyway.
I think it is pretty much unquestionably worse. It’s about the best 3/$80m deal a player could sign, but $64m guaranteed is $64m guaranteed.
I understand this as “betting on yourself with a decent hedge,” which makes sense. I wonder what he could have gotten for just a one-year deal? Probably not that much more, so the couple extra years and guarantee make perfect sense. Since teams just don’t shell out top AAV for uncertain players regardless, the insurance policy probably didn’t even “cost” him very much.
I think this is a good deal for the cubs. They get most likely 3 win player for 2024 at a slight overpay and improve their team to a point where they are now even odds to win the division with the cardinals, brewers, and reds. They at the same time dont have to overpay for his likely down seasons that are 3-4 seasons away with a big 6-7 year contract he was looking for.
So ZIPs thought Bellinger merited 3 years/$70 mill with no opt-outs?
Strikes me as a horrible deal for the Cubs. He’ll be pushing either a great prospect to the bench or a good one. If only the good one, then Bellinger has got to hit like last year to justify $30 mill at first base. In Wisdom, Tauchman, Morel and Madrigal the Cubs already have a great bench, so their specific Replacement Level is higher than most anyone else’s.
That’s actually the upside. The downside? If Bellinger returns to hitting a la ’21+’22, Cubbies just pissed $80 mill into the toilet.
Boras sure is good at this, ain’t he?
If Wisdom, Tauchman, Morel and Madrigal are all on the bench, who is in the field?
Busch, Hoerner, Swanson, ?, Suzuki, Happ and Crow-Armstrong?
Who is the good prospect? Morel has a good bat but no position.
Busch, of course.
As you are likely to find out, Busch should not be playing the field very much and ideally would be the DH, with Bellinger at first and PCR in CF for an ideal defensive alignment.
Both sides needed each other. Right now ZiPS projects the Cubs two games back of St. Louis. This move has to make them the favorites. Obviously, without Bellinger they would have had a piecemeal job putting their outfield and DH in their lineup each day.
And what’s the point of signing a manager for the most money ever if the actual product on the field is mediocre? As it stands now, I see this as a good team and they’ll probably upgrade their starting rotation at the deadline.
Bellinger probably could’ve gotten 150 mil if he’d signed earlier. Now, if he stinks he’s only guaranteed 80. If he has similar numbers to last year and opts out he MIGHT get the 150 next year.
So he gambled 60-70 mil guaranteed to get an extra 30 this year and hope for the $ to come next offseason.
Either way, Bellinger got 100 mil less guaranteed than Boras himself has said he was hoping for. Not sure what you’re seeing that’s so good?
That he gambled, lost on that gamble (as we all sometime do) and still walked away with a guaranteed $80 mill in exchange for a 1-year commitment.
Which is a way better deal for the Cubs than risking 6 years and 150.
they already have a replacement for him if he is able to opt out. or they could just re sign him
How did he lose on the gamble? What specific offers did he have and then lose? Seems like MLB teams weren’t stepping forward on the deal he wanted, so Boras constructed one of his pillow contracts, with the difference today is his pillow contracts today gets the player two or three years guaranteed with opt outs.
Coming off being non-tendered by the Dodgers and having a bad year in 2022, so far Boras has landed him close to $100 million, with no downside if he collapses again, and if he repeats 2023, he can go back out and get more.
I might have missed some offers he had, but if not, fans (and media) speculating what a player might get is quite different than turning down offers.
It’s been widely reported Boras was seeking 200 million for Bellinger.
That isn’t fans speculating, it’s the agent himself saying it’s what he wants. That his client ended up signing for less than half that doesn’t seem like a good look to me.
I haven’t seen any direct quote from Boras saying this, just a lot of “Reportedly, Boras was asking for…” or “short of the reported $200m that Boras had asked for…” which is not the same thing. If you saw it published, could you link it? I would think Boras would be savvy enough to have a response to the inevitable followup were that the case
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/39141080/mlb-free-agency-cody-bellinger-cubs-blue-jays-2023-24
Jesse Rogers reported according to “sources familiar” Boras was seeking 200 million
Why is this worse than $200? He got 30 AAV for his first two years.
He needed 28.5 over 7 years for a 200 million deal. He’s got two shots to get 140 million more
Seems he traded some certainty for future optionality. He keeps putting up 4 WAR seasons, he’ll get 200 million +.
Even if he is similarly productive in 2024 as he was in 2023, I don’t know that there will be suitors lining up to pay 5/140 if they weren’t willing to pay 7/200 on the front-end.
Or in other words, if you won’t pay for his age 29-35 seasons, you probably aren’t really enthusiastic about paying for his age 31-35 seasons regardless of what 29-30 look like. Those out years at the end of the contract will be the least productive ones.
Why is 80 million worse than 200 million? it’s 120 million less.
It’s a fair contract for Bellinger, but i doubt it’s anywhere close to the amount of guaranteed money he and Boras envisioned going into the off season.
That’s all i’m saying.
So, not a quote? I’m not trying to troll, but this $200m issue feels a lot like the tail wagging the dog
Without using the quoted $200m, I think being the best offensive player on the free agent market, and being 28 years old, getting this kind of deal feels disappointing.
Hard to argue with that framing
Sure, players and agents are going to shoot for as much as they can get. Doesn’t mean they’ll get it. Boras always overshoots based on the rumors that get leaked, then he often “settles” for less than reports, but above where the team wants. The player wins.
In this case, the Boras 4 all have issues that will restrict them from getting top dollar because these players can’t be considered great players. Bellinger’s down years in 2021-22, and bad peripherals in ’23 have teams pausing. He’ll need to repeat it. Chapman is in the same boat. Excellent fielder, but his hitting collapsed after April. He’s another guy who is going to need one of Boras’ pillow contracts. Snell has never been bad, but how does a team value him? Is he great, or simply good? Snell and Boras are shooting for great money, as they should, but I think he’s another guy who will need to build in an opt out to prove ’23 is repeatable. Montgomery is probably the safest bet, but rumors indicate he’s being priced as a front-end starter, but he’s really more mid-range.
Unless these players are losing money (and I don’t believe they have), then I don’t blame any of them for trying to get the most they can, but their collective histories, and this specific market, are working against absolute top dollar. That can change for them after ’24 if they can repeat.
What the player/agent wants and what teams are willing to offer are different things. We know Boras/Bellinger were looking for 200M. We don’t know what teams were offering him, if anything at all. Teams said to be in on him by the media went in different directions. Blue Jays re-upped with Kiermaier at $10.5M. Nobody knows if the budget constrained Mariners even talked about signing Bellinger, and it’s highly likely that it wasn’t a conversation because they slashed a bunch of payroll before retooling via trades and signing Garver. Giants went with Lee right out of the gate so it’s safe to assume they didn’t want to go anywhere near Bellinger’s (well, Boras’s) demands. Nobody went into a bidding war for him, so he went back to the Cubs hat in hand.
If my worst gamble ended up with an $80m contract to a team widely considered to be a viable playoff contender and still maintained the opportunity to still get another 8 or 9 digit deal, I would not feel badly. It doesn’t seem like anyone’s arm is twisted here. Bellinger had success there and was liked. I also believe that he could have gotten something like 1 yr/$35m in a few other spots, but this gives him a sizeable-but-not-bonkers contract despite having a very iffy track record and preserves flexibility. Why not call it a win-win?
Perhaps I’m naive, but I don’t care so much for how much player X was rumored to sign for (iirc, wasn’t Ohtani *maybe* going to break $400m?) I get that many people care about these narratives; keep your stove hot however you like, but make sure to step outside and take a deep breath of oxygen now and then 😉
*Now* — if I’m Amed Rosario getting a fraction of the money that Tim Anderson and Whit Merrifeld got, you better believe I’m finding a new agent.
It’s been an odd off season. The focus is on the Boras 4, but there are many other legit MLB players still sitting out there. It’s late February! Not necessarily stars, but solid role players and even some starting pitchers. I’m wondering if by lowering the bar to make the postseason, maybe teams are less willing now to pay the price for wins on the margin?
Of course, the Phillies are paying a premium for Merrifield’s floor, while the Marlins are paying one for Anderson’s ceiling.
Rosario’s low-ceiling/subterranean floor combo isn’t quite as appealing.
Again, I feel like if $80M is the best Bellinger could do for ages 29-31, I don’t think there’s much of a chance there’s a 9-figure deal waiting for him afterwards.
If he repeats his success and with better peripherals, he’ll probably get it.
Hell, if his peripherals and production meet in the middle this year, 6/$150m will be the low end for a good defensive CF with a .350 wOBA.
Perhaps! I’m still struggling to see all of this demand suddenly materialize for a guy one year older than when the demand didn’t materialize the previous year.
One free agent market is different from the next. Different teams in the mix, especially if he backs up his 2023 with a strong 2024.
Well sure – if he repeats his success AND has better peripherals, then he’s banked $30M for 2024 and will give another go at free agency next offseason. Great gamble on his part.
But you can also argue worst-case scenario just as well as you can best-case: if the next three years are terrible – if those rough Statcast numbers (EV, barrel%, HardHit) are the start of a downward trend, if 2023’s improvement is a blip on the radar and he reverts to his 2021 hitting form – then he’ll bank a handsome $80M over the next three years, but the next payday will be a pretty precipitous drop therefrom.
Right now, his last three seasons are two nightmares and one “Good-but-lucky” one.
He needs to show health and consistency.
He didn’t get “$80m from 29-31.”
He got $80m with an opt-out after each year from 29-31.
If he’s good this year, it’s a 1/$30m deal and he hits FA.
If this year is a bit down and he’s good next year, it’s a 2/$60m deal and he hits FA.
2025 is discounted because the only reason he’ll play that year is if literally everything goes wrong.
This ignores the options in the deal; if he has another big year, he’s definitely getting that amount. And if he doesn’t, he’s still getting $80m.
Sure, those 4 guys are great bench players. The problem is that they’re not good starters for a contender, and one or two of them will still need to start most games even with Bellinger added to the team.
He is lucky he got what he did, those statcast numbers look putrid. Ev, barrel %, hardhit all dropping precipitiously.
He would still have a lot of value from center field defense if he were a league average hitter, but it’s true that those statcast metrics are terrifying.
Yeah, Bellinger has to show this is a new normal rather than a decline.
After all, his 2023 xwOBA plus good CF defense is a 3 win guy.
Probably from the drastic change in approach. He hit a lot of soft liners the other way in 2-strike counts for base hits but still yanked 26 homers. Max EV was still solid at 109.2 mph (which ticked up from his putrid 2021-22 seasons). SweetSpot% was elite last year as well. It’ll be interesting to see if he can keep going like this, if he can get back to his peak years now that he’s further away from the injuries that sapped his production, or if it all comes crashing down.
I don’t like this deal very much for the Cubs at all.
Cody has downside and upside protection, the Cubs have neither.
I don’t think that’s accurate. The cubs are on the hook for $80m if he sucks, but they do have downside protection. It’s just built into the contract. He would have gotten more than $80m guaranteed without opt outs. So the cubs got less overall risk to give him the ability to opt out.
How do we know he would have gotten more than $80M w/o optouts?
The only upside for the Cubs is if he outperforms $30M for this year. I guess if he wins MVP…
Cubs are taking all the downside risk.
As a Brewers fan I’m all for this deal.
Is that because the Brewers are aiming more for 2026 in the first place? Therefore, it doesn’t matter as much to you guys that the Cubs got a big bat for 2024, while if he’s still on the Cubs in 2026, it means Bellinger had two more mediocre or worse years and will likely continue to do so in 2026.
Because opt outs are valuable, so you wouldn’t give him the exact same amount for a contract with opt outs as you would for a contract with no opt outs. So unless the cubs are just fully not understanding basic economic incentives, which their owners are dbags but I don’t think they fail to understand economic incentives, then they absolutely would have given him more money without the opt outs.
I also don’t like this contract for the Cubs, but not for this reason. Most free agent contracts have a lot more downside than upside, but if the upside means you win the division teams are often willing to accept that bargain.
They got the guy they wanted for at least 70 mil less than he was projected to get. If he’s great and opts out at the end of the year, Cubs got their money’s worth out of him this year and already have somebody in the system ready to take his spot next year.
what’s not to like?
Any of his stats that suggest he grossly out performed his expected last year in ways that aren’t replicable if his statcast numbers don’t improve drastically.
and he was still projected to get 140-150 mil guaranteed. The Cubs signed him for half that.
The only way this isn’t a good deal for the Cubs is if you think they (or some other team) could’ve signed Bellinger for less money and fewer years than the Cubs gave him.
That doesn’t seem realistic. when’s the last time a guy projected for 150 ended up signing a 1 year deal for 20?
If he regresses to his Statcast numbers he’s still a 3 WAR guy!
I mean, everyone can always be cheaper? Overpayz is standard Disney and fan reaction to a FA deal across all sports
Re: “projected”
One way to look at it is to anchor your expectations to what the pundits were saying. And in that case, it seems like a bargain.
I prefer to anchor to a projection system like ZiPS, which has him overpaid even without considering the opt-outs.
There’s a tendency in fandom to believe that everything that went right last year will continue to go right and things that went wrong will improve. Bellinger had a great performance last year on very suspect underlying metrics (and this is on the heels of two lousy years). I think it’s much more likely that he turns back into a pumpkin than the Cubs are happy with this deal.
YMMV.
The ZiPS 3 Year Projections value him at $26.6m/650 – and that number ignores UBR!
Exactly. The Cubs paid exactly what Bellinger is projected to be worth.
If he does well enough to opt out, they got a bargain on his one year.
if he completely bombs, they’re on the hook for fewer years and less money than most people expected.
Yeah, it’s a really good deal for both sides.
Ignores UBR, but includes about 100 PA he’s not likely to have.
If Bellinger does great, he gets $30 million and is a free agent again next year.
If Bellinger does bad, the Cubs are stuck with an 80 million dollar contract.
Not sure he is worth $30 million for even one year, but if it puts the Cubs into the playoffs, so be it.
Bellinger had 4.1 WAR last year. Fangraphs values 1 WAR at 8 million, so Bellinger was worth 32 mil last year. I’m sure the Cubs would be thrilled to get 4 WAR out of him again
and he’d probably opt out allowing PCA to take over in center
If you think the Cubs will get 4 WAR out of him on his walk year, I agree, but he looks like he is in for some regression. I would prefer to be very wrong.
If he does regress to a .330 wOBA, his CF defense will still make him worth ~3 WAR.
Yeah, but the point is that 3 WAR is not worth $30M, especially when considering that $/WAR is non-linear.
But it’s also not an egregious overpay, especially given that they’re under the tax.
A $250M deal was always ludicrous and wasn’t going to happen, but what prevented him from getting a deal in the Brandon Nimmo range is the teams that desperately needed a center fielder mostly weren’t spending. Bellinger’s walk year is similar to Nimmo’s was before, although the concerns are with the bat and not the defense. After the Giants signed their guy nobody needed a center fielder that badly and had anything close to that in their budget. The Cubs like Bellinger, but they didn’t NEED him.
As a Cubs fan I like this. In part because it felt preordained that Belly was getting resigned, and $200M+ felt like a crippling mistake.
PCA does not seem ready to be a starter on a playoff team – at least not on a team like the Cubs that lacks 6-win players so can’t afford punt a position. 1B and 3B were big question marks. $30M for a one-year placeholder – who is beloved in the clubhouse – is a no-brainer. People will get hurt, the kids will get their chances to play, and the ones who take the most advantage will be rewarded quickly. Love the positional flexibility this gives the team, it leaves 3B as the biggest hole – one that Morel/ Wisdom/ Madrigal/ Busch can hopefully fill.
If Bellinger is back in 2025 that isn’t ideal, but it means he was hurt and/or bad. He could bounce back that year and be decent again. Or worst case the $50M in 2025-26 is a sandbag / sunk cost. As a Cubs fan I have no problem with ownership taking on that risk. It’s not my money and it wouldn’t sink them too much considering they haven’t hit a luxury tax threshold in a few years.
Seriously, I know that there’s not much of a downside in saying your guy should get a contract twice as rich as any team should reasonably spend. Maybe Arte Moreno makes another impulse decision, or something like it. But did holding out for a $250M as an initial ask cost him the chance to get a contract, say, around $150M? How many teams that were interested in him figured it wasn’t worth their time?
I wonder also if Boras was telling him privately he legitimately thought he could get him close to that.
Either way Bellinger ended up getting way less guaranteed money than most people thought….which isn’t a great look for Boras in my opinion.
FSB
3/80 is right in the AAV range of what they wanted though. He still gets to make 25-30M a year and he can try again for bigger contracts when he’s 29, 30, and 31, respectively. IIRC he was looking for something in that 7-10 year/200-250M range. For a pillow contract, it’s really awesome for Bellinger.
Where’s this $250M number coming from?
Some news report, which could mean the source heard it wrong or something.
That’s what MLBTR predicted in November. 11 years 260 million. They’re usually pretty close. Obviously not this time.
MLBTR
I’m a fan of the coverage this provides the Cubs. The lineup adds a high contact LHH who gets the ball in the air and saw a meaty resurgence in his max EV, he hits better than Crow-Armstrong, defends better than Busch, and doesn’t really block either. I was hoping for a deal like this, seemed obvious he wasn’t going to get the kind of deals the league and Disney were putting out for easy PR. This team’s deeeep
Probably the only downside is the Ricketts get to point to this deal as a sign of their unending generosity and commitment to winning. Cubs fans and sports fans on the whole, a real rebellious bunch, have taken to the salary cap like flies to a zapper so using up cap space is very impressive to many just by itself
What do you think Bellinger would do if he has a decent season but not one good enough to be worth even close to $50M over two years? Does he opt out and still try for a pretty big long-term deal while he’s still only 29 and has raised his projected floor, or does he stay for another year at a still hefty $30M salary while gambling that he doesn’t tank his value again in 2025?
I don’t think there’s a feasible scenario where he’s decent but not good enough to top $50. That’s like Lourdes Gurriel and Jorge Soler got $42m. They’re both older than Bellinger will be after next year and neither have ever been as good as him (and Soler basically can’t even play of now, let alone well). Bellinger would have to be bad to not be looking at more than $50m after next year.
Well, yeah, he could still get well over $50M overall on a long-term deal in that situation. That’s why I said he could still risk opting out and going for the long-term deal.
The issue is that he would not be worth $50M over TWO years, or in other words his long-term deal would provide him well under $25M/year as the average annual value. As such, he also has the choice of staying for another year at $30M and try to have another good year in order to maximize his overall earnings in combination of that $30M in 2025 and what he would get on a long-term contract after that.
If he puts up his 50th percentile (2.7 fWAR) I would imagine he just stays for 30 mil. Soler and Gurriel for 3/42 in one of the weakest free agent class for hitters ever, 1/30 in a worse market (for Belli), even if he is slightly better/younger seems good for him. If you put up under 3 WAR you just aren’t getting 100mil+ unless your name is Trevor Story.
I’m surprised that nobody’s mentioned the fact that if Belly re-enters free agency next year, he can’t get another QO. So if he turns in a season that doesn’t meaningfully alter perceptions of him either way, he should actually do better than [best fully guaranteed offer he turned down]-$30M. On the Cubs end, this means that Belly also needs to be worth more than $30M+the comp pick.
Still, I like this for the Cubs. They’re at a point where winning 2-4 more games matters a ton, but they don’t really want a long term commitment — but few players will actually take that. And the blocking prospects thing doesn’t really matter: if Bellinger and their high minors bats are all good, they’re probably cruising to well over 90 wins, and nobody will really care how they got there. If that doesn’t happen, or if they have injuries, they’re in for more of a fight, which is exactly the situation you want impact free agents for.
This also might push back the promotion of one of their big prospects (probably PCA?) until past super 2, and there’s a chance that’s worth a decent fraction of $30M, as well.
This deal is equivalent to 1 year 30 million + the negative effective value of years 2 and 3, because the option only goes through if he can’t beat it on the market.
So something like a 1 year 35-40 million actually?
I love this deal and I’m surprised more teams weren’t in on Bellinger at this price. Is he going to be an MVP winner again? Unlikely. Is he even going to post a 4 win season again? Nobody really knows. But the Cubs needed his left-handed bat and the insurance he provides for PCA and Busch if they’re not ready for prime time. $80 million is a substantial gamble to be sure, but (as many have already said) a great season will likely lead to another opt-out. If he struggles, you aren’t hamstrung for the next 6-7 years. It always made the most sense for him to return to Chicago and I’m glad they got it done.
I would imagine a few more teams were in on Bellinger at this price months ago. Of course, Boras probably shooed those teams away.
Nice read, love the estimates on playing time. Thanks jay
If Chapman would have signed for something like this it could have been a better move for the Cubs. He seems similar in value at a greater position of need. Also can Morel really play 14 games in CF?
Except Chapman hasn’t really mashed with the bat since the high offensive year of 2019. Even with those two bad years, Bellinger still has a better recent offensive track record and is also younger.
Two things. 1) It somehow feels like Boris simultaneously did a good and bad job here. Everyone projected Bellinger for more total dollars than this and it’s hard to think Boras couldn’t have done better if there was a more reasonable initial asking price. But then a guaranteed $30M in yr1 and yr2 is impressive.
2) I really think Boras needs to adapt and cease his wait until the very end of offseason strategy (especially for position players). Sure, in the past it has worked generally well but things feel different now. His old strategy of appealing to directly to owners seems very dated now (owners poor mouth and seem even more loath to spend than they used to be), several teams have legitimate revenue shortfalls with the RSN bubble, and most teams spend all their offseason dollars before spring training starts. And how is it wise to let the handful of teams that would be in on a premium position player fill their needs elsewhere and no longer be in the market as a legitimate competitive bidder?
I think his strategies of waiting until a week into spring training can still work, just not for players with glaring red flags (Bellinger’s EVs, Snell’s inability to go deep into games, Chapman’s declining offense, Correa’s foot issues, etc.). However, his other upper tier clients like Bryce Harper and Corey Seager are legitimate superstars who can and do get the 9 figure deals every time, regardless of whether they sign in the middle of November or the first week of March.
I hate this deal for the Cubs. $30M a year in yr1 and yr2 is super high for someone who is not a star. I think we can all agree at this point that Bellinger’s premium power is not coming back (it’s been gone since 2019). All the projections have him b/t 2.1-2.8 WAR next year and it’s really not hard to argue with since he was extremely lucky last year (after being horrible the two years before). Bader is projected for 2.1 WAR over fewer games and only cost 1/$10. Think the Mets would have been much better off using this money on Bader+pitching or maybe just signing Sonny Gray for roughly the same contract they just gave Bellinger.
I had a typo and wrote Mets instead of Cubs in the last sentence so doesn’t make sense : (
Still doesn’t make sense
If Cody takes a modest step back overall offensively, say the K rate creeps back to 20% and the wrc+ drops 3-5 points, but he posts a 112 max EV again with an 8% barrel rate I bet he opts out. Teams would probably feel better about that profile for 5×135 than his 2023 profile.
I can’t imagine anyone is going 5/135 if he takes a modest step back offensively
…
…
Did you miss the “3-5 points” part, or can you “not imagine anyone going 5/$135m” for a good defensive CF coming off consecutive 130 wRC+ seasons, with the second having stronger underlying stats?
Well, there goes the EW minor league free agent draft.
This is the first time I’d seen that in 2019, Bellinger actually underperformed his expected stats. What an amazing season! I’m glad he had a good season last year, but it didn’t have the shape of prime Bellinger. I fear we’ll never see that from him again, but I am rooting for the guy.