This one really got people fired up. The Athletic’s Keith Law recently wrote an article dissecting the ramifications of Alex Bregman’s free agent contract with the Chicago Cubs. Law isn’t the only analyst who has written or speculated about the possibility that the Cubs will now trade one of their infielders, but there was one specific line that stood out when talking about Matt Shaw that was surprising.
Look, I know the first thing most people are going to comment on are Law’s obvious feelings towards Shaw’s affiliation with Turning Point USA and Charlie Kirk and you’re free to do so, but if you’re really a stick to sports kind of commenter how about we discuss what Law has been hearing.
A few things here. I’ve been saying this since last offseason, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for the Cubs to trade either Nico Hoerner or Matt Shaw. I don’t care that they signed Bregman because guess what, injuries happen, it’s actually good to have depth, quality depth and roster flexibility by keeping your good players. So, right away I’m a little skeptical at the assumption that they’ll trade someone.
At best, the Shaw discussion from Law was one-sided. Yes, Shaw struggled for several months as a rookie, needed a reset at Triple-A and ultimately cooled down during the last few weeks of the regular season and in the playoffs. However, to ignore Shaw’s second-half performance is a mistake.
Following the All-Star break Shaw was red-hot at the plate and for about five weeks he was the best hitter on the team. After hitting rock bottom in July, when he was given time for a mental reset on the bench in New York, Shaw responded by slashing .258/.317/.522, with 11 home runs in 205 plate appearances in the final 2.5 months of the season.
Shaw’s .522 slugging % was tied with Jorge Polanco for the 24th highest mark among qualified hitters in the second half of 2025. That’s out of 160 players with at least 200 plate appearances after the All-Star break.
Law writes, “the most obvious candidate is Shaw, whose rookie season was a disappointment at the plate thanks to some frequent mechanical changes and, according to people I’ve spoken to, resistance to help from the Cubs’ staff.”
Lots of fans are accusing Law of making up that information about Shaw being resistant to help from the Cubs’ staff, but I won’t. Think whatever you want about Law and his own personal feelings, but he’s not going to go out and purposefully slander a player because of the people he surrounds himself with. Law speaks to so many people in the baseball industry maybe on the daily, so I’m not questioning his sources.
Yet, I can’t help but question when he may have heard this or what motivation those people may have when feeding Law that info.
I’ll add this and it’s probably the most important factor in the discussion about Shaw. Law pointed out how the young infielder made frequent mechanical changes in his rookie campaign and the Cubs obviously saw that, so how does the team feel?
Well, back in August, when Shaw was in the midst of his best stretch offensively, The Athletic’s Sahadev Sharma wrote an article on Shaw’s adjustments. Cubs manager Craig Counsell said the following.
“Matt’s always going to be a bit of a tinkerer mechanically,” Counsell said. “It’s going to look different from time to time. We’ve seen enough different stances this year that you know you’re going to see that throughout his career. But it’s just this journey of getting better. He’s comfortable trying new things and hearing new things to make him better. If you keep doing that, whether it looks a little bit different some days, that’s great.”
Doesn’t really appear as though Counsell was all too concerned or frustrated by Shaw’s ongoing mechanical changes.
The key for me is whether or not Shaw improves. Is he making adjustments to get better. He went from a 60 wRC+ and two home runs in his first 232 plate appearances to a 130 wRC+ and 11 home runs in his last 205 plate appearances as a rookie. Did he do it on his own? Did he ignore coaches? Did he eventually listen coaches and also mixed in his own adjustments? Does it matter if he continues to show improvement, getting to better results by whatever method works best for him?
