Just a little more to share on the big Pete Crow-Armstrong extension, which lands just in time for PCA to celebrate his 24th birthday today. Nice gift.
Here’s the salary breakdown, and a few more particulars:
Details of Pete Crow Armstrong’s 6-year, $115 million contract extension:Signing Bonus: $5 million2027: $10M2028: $10M2029: $10M2030: $20M2031: $30M2032: $30MEscalators:Base salary in 2031 increases by:$2,000,000 for each MVP in 2027-2030 ($1,000,000 if 2nd or 3rd;…
— Bob Nightengale (@BNightengale) March 25, 2026Base in 2031 and 2032 increases by $2 mil for every MVP award he wins starting in 2027. Up $1 mil for 2nd/3rd place finish, $750k for 4th/5th and $500k for 6-10. t.co/09SOacYL00
— Jesse Rogers (@JesseRogersESPN) March 25, 2026I know the Pete Crow-Armstrong extension is being described as six years and $115 million, starting in 2027. That does seem to be the official structure of the deal based on these reports, and there may well be good reasons for doing it that way. But it is at least plausible – viewing from the outside – that it would be more beneficial to the Cubs to make it seven years and $116 million, starting right now. It’s the same deal from PCA’s perspective, but, for the Cubs, it’s a lower average annual value, which COULD save them money across the life of the contract, depending on how frequently they go over the luxury tax.
If that’s not the deal, then there must be some good reason for having him play a one-year deal in 2026 for just above the league minimum, and then having the new deal kick in for 2027; I just don’t know what that would be outside of wanting to save a little money in 2026, specifically, since the Cubs are already over the luxury tax. Maybe they’re trying to avoid the top tier where the baseball penalties kick in? That actually could be a pretty good explanation now that I say it out loud.
Either way, I do think it’s more accurate from a “this is what they’re giving and this is what they’re getting” standpoint to think about this as seven years and $116 million, rather than six years and $115 million. Because, well, that’s what it is (as in, for purposes of comparing it to other deals). The Cubs are guaranteeing all seven of the years as of today, as well as about $116 million total, in exchange for getting those two free agent years at the back end.
Without any club options tacked on, it’s a whole lot to pay in advance to get those free agent years at something just under market rate (as we sit here today, if we’re ballparking $27-$30 million each for the two FA years). But if PCA blows up at the plate, which we know is at least possible, then you’re talking about a guy who price tag for those two years would be MUCH higher … and those would be only the first two years of the ten-year deal you’d have to give him. So I get it for the Cubs, especially when you fold in the coming Collective Bargaining Agreement changes that COULD make a deal like this all the more palatable (what if arbitration changes fundamentally? what if free agency arrives a year earlier? what if the cap/floor system has grandfather provisions that advantage teams with long-term deals in place? etc., etc., and that’s to say nothing of the general spending increases we see post-new-CBA).
I want to add that there are also some soft-value factors in getting really good, magnetic players locked up long-term. It adds value for the fans. It adds value in the clubhouse, potentially. And it adds a little bit to the recruitment manual, both because it shows you take care of your players, and because it shows future pitchers that they’ll have a superstar defensive center fielder behind them for a long time.
There’s also conceivable value for Pete Crow-Armstrong, himself, beyond just the money (which, yo, that’s life-changing even for a guy with actor parents who received a huge signing bonus out of the draft). Maybe there is comfort in knowing he’s wanted in a place where he’s happy, and he can really put down mental roots for the next seven years. That, in turn, could open up even better performance. It certainly does for some guys who get extended, and then can put that part of the business out of mind.
Hence then, the article about a few more details and thoughts on the pca extension was published today ( ) and is available on Bleacher Nation ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( A Few More Details and Thoughts on the PCA Extension )
Also on site :