The New York Yankees are making a serious push for Cody Bellinger - but they’re drawing a hard line on one key detail: contract length. While the Yankees are reportedly willing to meet Bellinger’s average annual value (AAV) demands and sweeten the deal with perks like a signing bonus, no deferred money, and an opt-out clause, they’re holding firm on a five-year maximum. That’s where the negotiations are currently hung up.
From Bellinger’s side, it seems clear that the length of the deal - specifically, a seven-year commitment - is the make-or-break factor. For the 2017 NL Rookie of the Year, locking in long-term stability appears to be the top priority, even more than the annual dollars.
That demand has sparked criticism in some corners, including from former MLB general manager Jim Bowden, who labeled the push for a seventh year “ridiculous.” Bowden’s argument hinges on the current market landscape, where no hitter has landed a deal longer than five years this offseason. He points to players like Kyle Schwarber, Pete Alonso, and Alex Bregman - all of whom, in his view, have more consistent track records than Bellinger - as justification for why teams are hesitant to go long.
But there’s more nuance here than Bowden’s take suggests.
First, let’s address the market comparison. Yes, Schwarber, Alonso, and Bregman have all been productive, but none of them are without blemishes.
Schwarber is a pure DH at this point in his career. Alonso’s glove limits him to first base, and while Bregman is a legitimate two-way contributor, he’s also nearly two years older than Bellinger.
Age matters in free agency, and Bellinger’s youth - he’s still in his prime - gives him leverage that older players don’t have.
Then there’s the defensive value. Bellinger isn’t just a bat.
He’s a plus defender in center field and capable of playing first base at a high level. That versatility adds a layer of value that someone like Alonso simply doesn’t bring.
If Bregman’s recent contract essentially adds up to six years when you factor in his previous deal and opt-outs, it’s fair to ask: why not seven for Bellinger, who brings similar two-way impact and is younger?
Back to Bowden’s point - he did predict earlier this offseason that Bellinger would land a six-year, $168 million deal. If that was the expectation just a few weeks ago, is a seventh year really that far-fetched? Especially for a player who just posted a strong bounce-back season and still offers upside on both sides of the ball?
Of course, the Yankees’ caution isn’t without reason. Long-term deals often come with diminishing returns on the back end.
They’ve lived that reality with DJ LeMahieu, whose six-year deal has already started to look like a burden. So the hesitation is understandable - especially for a front office that’s trying to balance win-now urgency with long-term flexibility.
But Bellinger’s camp has a case, too. The combination of age, defensive versatility, and offensive upside puts him in a unique category among this year’s free agents. If Bregman and others have found ways to stretch their deals to six years or more, it’s not unreasonable for Bellinger to ask for - and expect - the same.
Whether the Yankees ultimately budge remains to be seen. But if history has taught us anything about high-stakes free agency negotiations, it’s that firm lines tend to blur when a team believes a player can help them win - especially in October.