The Cubs should sign Brendan Rodgers next

Last weekend, the Chicago Cubs made the biggest headlines of the new year by signing Alex Bregman – three-time All-Star, two-time top-five MVP finisher and 2017 World Series champion – on a five-year contract worth $175 million. It’s the second-richest contract signed this offseason in terms of total sticker price, and even after accounting for significant deferrals, it’s the second-highest AAV of all contracts signed so far this winter.

I don’t want to repeat too much of what Davy Andrews covered in his article, but it’s certainly an interesting move. The Cubs weren’t exactly looking for on-field help Matt Shaw, Dansby SwansonAnd Nico Hoerner (from left to right) and occupies the three positions that Bregman could conceivably occupy. Hoerner is in his final year of team control, and you could say Shaw – my pick for NL Rookie of the Year – was a bit of a disappointment in 2025. (I think a 93 wRC+ and 1.5 WAR in 126 games are fine for a starting third baseman, although Bregman would probably represent a significant upgrade.)

But for now, both incumbents remain in the Cubs organization, leaving the manager in a bit of a bind. Craig Counsell to sort. Nevertheless, I know what the Cubs’ next move should be: signing Brendan Rodgers.

At first glance that makes no sense. As I just said, the Cubs don’t need any extra help on the field. Plus, Rodgers just isn’t that good anymore. From a career high of 1.8 WAR in 2022, the former No. 3 overall pick was undrafted by the Rockies after 2024 — which is a pretty ominous omen in itself — before moving on to the Astros, who needed help after Bregman’s departure.

Rodgers didn’t let everyone forget about the old man: in 43 games, he hit .191/.266/.278, with a strikeout rate of 35.9%. That is clearly below replacement level; I won’t bother Rodgers any further by telling you how much. Rodgers is clearly no better than Shaw. I’m not entirely sure he’s better than Scott Kingerythe former top prospect became a cautionary tale and became Cubs non-roster invitee who is currently Chicago’s sixth infielder.

“Is this a joke?” I hear you ask.

No. It’s a bit. There is a difference.

I said Rodgers is a former No. 1 pick. 3 overall choice. The two guys who came before him, as you may have heard this weekend, were Swanson and Bregman. In his column, Davy mentioned Bregman No. 2 (he wore No. 8 in college) as a reminder of his draft position. That’s exactly the kind of over-the-top grinder act that made Bregman great.

Having the top two picks in one draft class on the same team is not new. Once Swanson and Bregman reach an agreement, they will be the fifth such combination in Major League history:

Five pairings from 51 draft classes means you would expect this to happen about 10% of the time. Paul Skenes And Dylan Crewsthe top two picks in the 2023 draft also played together during their junior year at LSU, if you want to be as inclusive as possible. And even if many of the early combinations involved players bouncing around late in their careers, the Swanson-Bregman combination will likely be about as important to the Cubs as the Correa-Buxton alliance was to the Twins for three and a half seasons before that.

But the Cubs could make history by signing Rodgers, as none of the five teams that previously used the top two picks in a draft class at the same time have ever locked down the entire draft. Those No. 3 picks, in chronological order for anyone interested: Bobby Witt father, Dustin Hermanson, Erik Hosmer, Mike Zuninoand Rodgers. All guys who have had an important career in the big league – not a Kyle Sleeth found among them! This opportunity has come and gone before and wasted.

It’s also worth noting that the Cubs know the top of the 2015 draft class better than anyone. The No. 5 pick in that draft was Kyle Tuckerthe (presumably now) former Cub who probably would have been a better $30 million per year spender than Bregman. No. 9 was Ian Happ. If the Cubs want to continue collecting the entire set, no. 4 overall choice Dillon Tate is both still active and currently without a team.

I agree that Tate, a pitcher, would be a better fit for Chicago’s roster than Rodgers. This is a bit of a difficult top three to put together, as it is one of only three draft classes in history (along with 2011 and 2014) in which all three picks played the same position. And while the top draft in many sports often comes down to potential, both Swanson and Bregman were top national championship players — and conference rivals, no less. If you’re looking for examples of players who have so much in common and go first and second in the draft, you’ll end up searching all day; this could be a unique circumstance across all Big Four men’s sports leagues.

Even more so as both Swanson and Bregman are entering their second decade of stellar big league production. That’s a rarity, regardless of whether they ever ended up on the same team. As much as we worry about every pick, even the best players selected in each division have a long uphill road before they reach the big leagues. So with this on my mind, I decided to see how this duo (or trio) stacks up against the best top groups in baseball history.

The top three picks in five draft classes have combined for 100 or more WAR:

Swanson, Bregman and Rodgers are at 74.0, which is 13th. Not a bad performance, especially considering all three players are still active and two of them are still productive. But the top of this list does speak to a methodological error in tallying career WAR.

A-Rod single-handedly produced more WAR than any of the top three except his own year (obviously), 1997 and 2010. Each of those two groups had two current or future Hall of Famers, plus a third guy who had a serious big league career. Justin Verlander dragged along his classmates from 2004, Matt Bush And Philip Humberin the top 10. The 10th and 11th most productive top three came in 1987 and 1966. The first had Ken Griffey Jr.; the latter had Reggie Jackson. Go ahead and see if you can name any of the other four players involved.

I’m reminded of a chapter from Bill James’ New Historical Baseball Summary in which he attempted to rank the best baseball playing families using profit shares (actually WAR by another name). Except when he added up the numbers, instead of the Alous or the Bondses or the Alomars, the family that kept floating to the top became Babe Ruttewho had no immediate family members known to play any form of professional sport.

So I use the same solution that James used: WAR produced by the career leader of the class counts once. The WAR of the second best player counts double, and the WAR of the weakest player counts three. Here are the top 11 classes by that standard:

Why 11? Because that’s where the Cubs infielders (and future infielder, if I have my way) landed. Unless disaster strikes, they will break into the top 10 this season, and what an obscure top 10 it will be.

Rodgers is a bit of an obvious drag here, especially compared to such a no. 3 choices as Molitor, Machado, Williams and Glaus. Judged only as a duo, Swanson and Bregman rank eighth in total combined WAR as the star power of A-Rod, Jones, Griffey, and so on proves to be decisive. But according to the weighted system (the second-best player’s WAR counts twice) they already rank fourth all-time. They only follow 1993 (A-Rod and Dreifort), 1985 (Surhoff and Will Clark) and 1990 (Chipper Jones and Tony Clark). Right behind them on this list: the legendary 2005 class, headlined Justin Upton And Alex Gordonthat have been dragging Jeff Clemens’s sub-replacement stats round as a millstone.

At this point, I don’t think Bregman and Swanson have a realistic chance of turning this into a draft class with two Hall of Famers in the first three picks (but I’m not the expert; go bug Jay about it), but 2015 looks a lot like 1985: Two Hall of Very Good players, plus a third guy. Another thing these two classes have in common.