Cubs BCB After Dark: Are the Cubs better off with Alex Bregman?

We’re open for business here at BCB After Dark: the grooviest spot for night owls, early risers, new parents and Cubs fans abroad. It’s so good to see you this evening. Come in out of the cold. There’s no cover charge. We still have a few tables available. Bring your own beverage.

BCB After Dark is the place for you to talk baseball, music, movies, or anything else you need to get off your chest, as long as it is within the rules of the site. The late-nighters are encouraged to get the party started, but everyone else is invited to join in as you wake up the next morning and into the afternoon.

Last night I asked you which team is the “dark horse” candidate to win the National League Central? The projection systems say it’s Pittsburgh, but you still think it’s Cincinnati by a margin of 66 to 34 percent.

Here’s the part where we listen to music and talk movies. The BCB Winter Science Fiction Classic is in the third round and getting close to the end, but you’re always welcome to join in. But you’re free to skip that if you choose. You won’t hurt my feelings.

We lost clarinetist and band leader Ken Peplowski on Monday at the age of 66. Peplowski died doing what he loved, as he was on a jazz cruise ship where he was scheduled to perform when he was found dead. No cause of death was revealed, although the obituary notes that he was diagnosed with multiple myeloma in 2021.

Peplowski played all kinds of jazz, but he was most famous for his work at keeping the big band sound alive. Here’s he keeps that tradition by playing the jazz standard “Body and Soul” with a band, alongside fellow clarinet player Victor Gomes, pianist Dan Nimmer and drummer Marion Felder.

This is from 2018.

You voted in the BCB Winter Science Fiction Classic and 2001: A Space Odyssey advances to the Final Four with a win over Planet of the Apes. The Kubrick classic will take on Godzilla in the semifinals. Those early hominids are going to need a lot of bones to take down Godzilla.

Tonight we’re picking a third film to go on to the semifinals between Alien and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

Alien (1979). Directed by Ridley Scott. Starring Sigourney Weaver, Tom Skerritt, Harry Dean Stanton, and Veronica Cartwright.

Here’s what I wrote about Alien last time.

Here’s a way that director Scott uses that Hitchcockian definition of suspense, where we the audience knows more than the characters on the screen and are left anticipating the action.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) Directed by Nicholas Meyer. Starring William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy and Ricardo Montalban.

Here’s what I wrote last time about Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

Here’s the scene leading up to William Shatner’s now-famous and much-memed line “Khaaaan!”

Both of these films spawned media empires. Yes, Star Trek existed before TWOK, but this film was expected to be the end to the series. Instead, it’s success led to 11 more feature films, nine live-action television series, two animated series and a whole mess of related other stuff. Alien led to eight more movies and now a TV series. What both of them did, which a standalone film isn’t expected to do, is create worlds for other people to play in. And it seems that the public can’t get enough of either one.

So now it’s time to vote.

You have until Monday to vote. Up next, the final third-round matchup between Terminator 2: Judgment Day and Back to the Future.

Welcome back to everyone who skips the music and movies.

The talk of most of last season was whether or not the Cubs would re-sign outfielder Kyle Tucker. Obviously the answer was no, as Tucker signed a four-year, $240 million deal with the Dodgers with an opt-out after two and three years. So basically far fewer years that most of us had expected, but for a lot more annual salary, although half of that $60 million a year is deferred. Even with the deferrals, the deal set a record of $57.1 million annual value as MLB calculates it.

Instead of making that deal, the Cubs pivoted and signed third baseman Alex Bregman to a five-year, $175 million deal. There are some deferrals in that deal as well, so that brings the “present day” value down to around $30.5 million a year. That’s still a record annual deal for the Cubs, even if the total value of the deal falls a bit short of what Jason Heyward got a decade ago.

Despite the differences in money, the latest Steamer projections from Fangraphs have almost no difference in total value between the two of them. Tucker is projected to be a 3.9 WAR player and Bregman is projected at 3.8. So did the Cubs make a clever move here?

Well, maybe, maybe not. For one, other projection systems figure their values differently and some of them have Tucker projected a bit higher than that. But what I’m more interested in is what David Adler wrote about in this article, that Bregman and Tucker reach that value in different ways.

Tucker is projected to be a top-ten hitter in the game with a wRC+ of 139, with 100 being average. Bregman’s projection of 121 wRC+ is quite good, but it’s not elite like Tucker’s is. However, Bregman makes up the difference with defense. Bregman is a third baseman and that’s a more important defensive position than right field. Secondly, Bregman is a very good defensive third baseman. Once upon a time Tucker was a good defensive right fielder, but anyone who saw him play right field last year knows that those days are gone. So Bregman makes up the difference in value with Tucker by playing better defense at a more demanding position.

So putting the terms of the contracts aside, which player would have given the Cubs a better chance to win a title in 2026? Did the Cubs need Tucker’s power and left-handed bat or Bregman’s steady bat and defense more?

There’s also the issue of roster construction to take into account, even if you accept that both players provide equal value. Signing Bregman sends incumbent third baseman Matt Shaw to a bench role where, presumably, he will get fewer at-bats than he did in 2025. There is some cost to that as Shaw was a pretty good hitter in the second half of last year, hitting .258/.317/.522 after the All-Star Break. So when figuring Bregman’s value to the team, you have to subtract the value of all those plate appearances that Shaw won’t be getting in 2026.

On the other hand, Shaw takes over the utility infield position from Vidal Bruján and Willi Castro. I don’t have to tell you that both of those players produced at below replacement level in 2025. You would assume that Shaw would be better than that.

Had the Cubs re-signed Tucker, that would have pushed Seiya Suzuki back into the DH role. That helps because while the defensive metrics did not like Tucker’s defense in right field at all last year, they thought Suzuki was even worse. So there’s a defensive downgrade going from Tucker to Suzuki in right field.

Moving Suzuki back to the DH spot also means that rookie Moisés Ballesteros either spends the season back in Iowa or gets traded to another team. And Steamer projects Ballesteros to put up a wRC+ of 107 this year. That’s almost the same as the 105 wRC+ that they predict for Matt Shaw. So one way or the other, one of these bats would be seeing less playing time.

There’s also the issue of their presence in the clubhouse, which I have no way of measuring. But the Cubs made a big deal about Bregman’s reputation as a positive teammate when they signed him.

So set the contracts aside. Tucker is younger, which is a big reason why he got more money than Bregman. But their respective ages are pretty irrelevant for who will produce more in 2026.

Also set aside what you think Tucker and Bregman will do in 2027 and 2028. Vote only on who makes the team better in 2026. Which player gives the Cubs a better chance to win this year?

Thanks for stopping by tonight. We hope you had a pleasant experience. Please get home safely. Stay warm and dry. Tell your friends about us. Recycle any cans and bottles. Tip your waitstaff. And join us again next week for more BCB After Dark.

Read the full article here