Cubs trade candidate: Brandon Lowe |
The other day, we talked about the Cubs' desire to find not only a bench/utility bat but a left-handed utility bat that can help this team win. Granted, there are going to be a lot of options for the Cubs. The question is how important they feel that adding bench pieces is for this team.
One name that hasn't officially popped yet but could in the coming days is Tampa Bay Rays second baseman Brandon Lowe. Lowe may not be the ideal target for this team, but given his ability to play 2B/SS/3B, he may be someone they took a look at, as the Cubs do value versatility on their roster. Anytime you have a player with the versatility that Lowe brings, they instantly become an attractable piece for many teams. With limited versatile bats on the market, the need for Lowe becomes that much higher, which could drive up the price tag to a level the Cubs may not want to go to for a bench piece. The difference between Lowe and the rest of the MLB free agents is that Lowe isn't actually a free agent and can only be had via a trade. Everyone knows the Cubs are in the market to make trades, but would they be willing to deal for Lowe even if he is a good enough bat to make this team better? Knowing the limited financial budget the Cubs are planning to operate on, this team will have to get creative when it comes to adding pieces, and the trade market could be the best way to get the additions they are looking for. When it comes to Lowe, there is a lot to look for as he is still just 30 years and, for the most part, has been a very consistent hitter since day one. Even though his .245/.330/.482/126 slash line may indicate differently, but he is still a player you know will produce when counted on, and his overall numbers across the board have always been consistent. Not to mention that he bats lefty, which the Cubs need, and can provide some power, hitting roughly 20 homers a season. You can see the fit that he brings to this lineup, as he would be an upgrade over Nick Madrigal and Miles Mastrobuoni. While his offensive metrics are mostly above average, his defensive metrics are average at best, and that is something to consider when looking at this Cubs team. They pride themselves on defense, especially up the middle, so adding a player who isn't the best defensive player isn't an ideal signing. Looking at the Cubs' financial status, Lowe is scheduled to get paid 10.5 million this season, with a team option for next season that will get him to 11.5 in 2026. That is 23 million over the next two seasons, which is a bargain compared to what many players on the open market will covet. Not only is he a quality bat off the bench, but his veteran presence and versatility could be a more important value than even some realize. However, the biggest takeaway from going after a guy like Lowe is that he isn't a two-day-a-week player. In other words, you're not acquiring him to be a bench player but instead more of a platoon player who could start at a variety of spots multiple times a week. That alone is why the Cubs may not be the fit, but with Nico Hoerner undergoing forearm surgery and possibly not being available for opening day, the Cubs may have an opening at second unless Matt Shaw is called up. At that point, you can no longer go to Hoerner, as Shaw would be the guy going forward. Dansby Swanson is locked in long-term at second, so Lowe wouldn't be brought in to play there. The Cubs just traded for Isaac Paredes last season, so it would be weird to see him get traded back to the team he came from. Regardless, the Cubs need to figure out how to add to their roster this offseason and Lowe would be a nice piece to have on your roster regardless of the role he plays. Given what the Cubs have for assets, Lowe isn't what you call a superstar player so it would play into the Cubs hands for what they would have to give up for him. Again, this doesn't seem like a likely fit, but if he is being dangled in trade talks, there is no reason why the Cubs shouldn't, at the very least, check-in and see what the Rays are asking.
