Bellinger to the Yanks

[markedman5]

 

[torts]

[Brock Beauchamp]

The Cubs got a lot better by basically swapping Tucker for Bellinger. It's a good thing for the Brewers that the Cubs' PoBO is risk averse and their owner is cheap. There's really no reason for the Cubs not to roster both Bellinger and Tucker, they have the money to do so.

[markedman5]

They don’t want to go over the luxury tax……..to me that doesn’t make him cheap…..it makes him sane.

But I understand in the current climate that is a minority opinion.

[markedman5]

Interesting twist……lol

 

[edfunderburk]

Cubs add Tucker but lose Bellinger & Parades.

Is that an upgrade?

[edfunderburk]

5 hours ago, markedman5 said:

Interesting twist……lol

 

That is hilarious - I wonder who is more uncomfortable - one of these two players or this lady?

[JosephC]

Cots has the Cubs about 61 million away from the luxury tax threshold after this move.  If their goal was to stay under the luxury tax, they either didn't need to move Bellinger or they have a couple big moves happening.  Any word on where Alex Bregman may be headed?  Roster Resource currently projects Matt Shaw as their starting third baseman.  Shaw is a former 1st round pick but his selection was so recent that he is not on the 40-man roster yet.

[Jopal78]

15 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The Cubs got a lot better by basically swapping Tucker for Bellinger. It's a good thing for the Brewers that the Cubs' PoBO is risk averse and their owner is cheap. There's really no reason for the Cubs not to roster both Bellinger and Tucker, they have the money to do so.

It has less to do with cash than playing time. Ian Happ and Crow-Armstrong are locked into LF and CF. Michael Busch is going to play everyday at 1B.
 

When the Cubs traded for Tucker it meant the end of Bellinger (and possibly Seiya Suzuki) in Chicago.  Given his anticipated production there was no reason to pay Bellinger nearly 60 million dollars the next two years  to come off the bench and DH. 
 

What is interesting is if the Cubs had simply placed Bellinger on waivers would he have been claimed? Seems to me the Cubs kicked in cash to simply get a player in return: one who was a minor league free agent a year ago at this time. 

[DR28]

I've seen about Boston after Bregman to play 2B.

Also saw, Cubs may be shifting focus to Burnes now.

[Brock Beauchamp]

25 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

It has less to do with cash than playing time. Ian Happ and Crow-Armstrong are locked into LF and CF. Michael Busch is going to play everyday at 1B.

Bellinger wasn't a great roster fit on the Cubs, for sure. My commentary is more of the Cubs as a whole, not specifically how they managed the Bellinger deal. If they were going to dump Bellinger and turn it around to sign Bregman, that makes a lot of sense given their revenues and ability to play in deeper waters. They just... don't do that.

The Cubs shouldn't even hesitate to blow right by the CBT. But, thankfully for the Brewers, they won't do that.

[Playing Catch]

I hate that the Cubs are making good decisions. Does this not bother anyone else? And why did the [expletive] Yankees bail them out of a bad decision??

Brewers should sign Bregman, and then just trade him next off-season.

[AKCheesehead]

2 hours ago, Playing Catch said:

I hate that the Cubs are making good decisions. Does this not bother anyone else? And why did the [expletive] Yankees bail them out of a bad decision??

Brewers should sign Bregman, and then just trade him next off-season.

A little.  But even the best of decisions can still potentially blow up in your face.  That's what I'm always hoping happens for the cubs.

[Underachiever]

2 hours ago, AKCheesehead said:

A little.  But even the best of decisions can still potentially blow up in your face.  That's what I'm always hoping happens for the cubs.

Hey, the Brewers' manager has a Manager of the Year award. **Check** Cubs' manager doesn't. **Mate**