The idea that the Cubs have to trade Bryant to get under the luxury tax threshold is really not supported by the data.
Right now, the Cubs are at around $210 (lux tax basis), around $2 over the threshold. And my calc is usually a little conservative. And they can put together a legitimate, full 26 man roster with the players already here. It may not be an "optimized" roster, but it would be a legitimate MLB roster.
I find it hard to believe that the Cubs would have done stuff like exercise the Quintana option and tender Almora if it meant that they had to trade Bryant.
If they trade Bryant (or Contreras or whoever), it will be a baseball decision. It may not be with 2020 only in mind, but it will be a baseball decision.
I agree. I suspect that if there were no luxury tax, they would still be trying to trade Bryant for many reasons.
He is a free agent in, at most, two years, and he seems the least likely to be willing to sign at a number that is acceptable to the Cubs. Allowing him to walk away with nothing but a draft choice would set the program back substantially. And he can bring back a return that can still contribute to to team next year, and bring in a meaningful prospect or two that can help further down the line. And the money they save from his salary next year can be used to bring in a useful free agent this season or next.
I doubt that the Cubs will trade him for less than what they feel is his fair value, but if they are going to trade someone, he seems to be the most logical. But biggest question is whether or not they can get decent value for him until his free agency question is resolved. One year of Bryant will bring back substantially less than two, and may make him more valuable in trade at trade deadline if there is someone that is in desperate need at that time.
By the way, DEEG is right. I used the term salary cap rather than luxury tax. I am not sure that there is a practical difference this winter, but it was not accurate.