Cubs MLB Roster

Cubs Organizational Depth Chart
40-Man Roster Info

40 players are on the MLB RESERVE LIST (roster is full), plus one player is on the 60-DAY IL 

26 players on MLB RESERVE LIST are ACTIVE, twelve players are on OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT to minors, one player is on the 15-DAY IL, and one player is on the 10-DAY IL

Last updated 3-28-2024
 
* bats or throws left
# bats both

PITCHERS: 13
Yency Almonte
Adbert Alzolay 
Javier Assad
Jose Cuas
Kyle Hendricks
* Shota Imanaga
Mark Leiter Jr
* Luke Little
Julian Merryweather
Hector Neris 
* Drew Smyly
* Justin Steele
* Jordan Wicks

CATCHERS: 2
Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

INFIELDERS: 7
* Michael Busch 
Garrett Cooper
Nico Hoerner
Nick Madrigal
* Miles Mastrobuoni
Christopher Morel
Dansby Swanson

OUTFIELDERS: 4
* Cody Bellinger 
# Ian Happ
Seiya Suzuki
* Mike Tauchman 

OPTIONED: 12 
Kevin Alcantara, OF 
Michael Arias, P 
Ben Brown, P 
Alexander Canario, OF 
Pete Crow-Armstrong, OF 
Brennen Davis, OF 
Porter Hodge, P 
* Matt Mervis, 1B 
Daniel Palencia, P 
Keegan Thompson, P 
Luis Vazquez, INF 
Hayden Wesneski, P 

10-DAY IL: 1 
Patrick Wisdom, INF 

15-DAY IL: 1 
Jameson Taillon, P 

60-DAY IL: 1 
Caleb Kilian, P 

 



 

Minor League Rosters
Rule 5 Draft 
Minor League Free-Agents

Dodgers @ Cubs: Bolsinger vs Lester (Game 51)

It's a new day and a new month. Let's hope that neither one includes Kris Bryant at SS.
LAD (28-25): RHP Bolsinger (1-1, 4.50)
CHC (35-15): LHP Jon Lester (5-3, 2.48)
First pitch: 7:05pmCST

Lester beat the Phillies on Friday (6.1 IP, 1 ER, 7 K, 2 BB). He went 3-2 with a 3.29 in May. The Dodgers are 28-107 (.262) against him. Crawford is 10-36, and Kendrick is 7-25.

Bolsinger, a Chicago native, won against the Reds his last time out (5.2 IP, 2 ER, 6 K, 1 BB). It was only his second start of the season, after working through an oblique injury. He had a no-decision against the Cubs last June (4.2 IP, 2 ER, 6 K, 2 BB). The Cubs are 6-20 (.300) against him. Russell is 2-2, and Heyward is 2-4.

Maeda (4-3, 3.00) versus Hendricks (3-4, 2.93) to close out the set tomorrow at 1:20pmCST.

Go, Cubs!

Comments

When I said in a previous thread that I wouldn't be happy until Bryant played shortstop, I was only kidding. Since The Great Maddonnini is reading my comments, I'd like to offer these words of advice. Awww, screw it, you're doing great. I can't even quibble with Richard yesterday. If you can't bring in your loogy to get out three lefty hitting dudes, then it's time for a new loogy. But that's on Theo, not you. Oh, and let's have dinner sometime. The wife really wants to meet you. You're buying.

Marlon Byrd popped for PED's...(cues up Casablanca clip)

Image removed.

@vincethepolack Source: Tribe's Marlon Byrd tested positive for PEDs, again. Previously suspended 50 games after testing positive in 2012. Announcement soon

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

On Clayton Richard: Hard to believe that Richard's ERA is 8.00 and his FIP is 3.34 (according to Baseball-Reference, which is third best in the bullpen behind Rondon and Strop. That's a huge difference. What I've seen from Richard is many of the hits are ground balls he's supposed to get, but get through gaps. Needs to do a better job locating his pitches as Joe said last night.

[ ]

In reply to by John Beasley

I think Blue Jays come back and win the division. I think Red Sox will collapse at some point when Bogaerts and Bradley Jr. go cold. My preseason prediction was that the Red Sox would finish sub .500, David Price can't solely make this team win again. Player-wise, they're pretty much the same as last year, just didn't get this production from Bogaerts and Bradley Jr. last year and never expected it this year. Now I expect to be shot down on this. Everyone seemed to be high on the Red Sox except for me.

[ ]

In reply to by chitownmvp01

AL East was pretty much a toss-up to start season. Red Sox didn't change a lot from last season but they massively underperformed last year too and a bunch of young guys just took longer to get in their groove. They're now getting the Porcello they expected to get and RodrIguez and Wright are improvements, plus Price has underperformed so far.  I think predicting them to collapse would be akin to predicting Cubs to collapse last year. That offense is legit and they should have just enough pitching and have a deeper system than Cubs to make trades if needed.

That being said O's and Blue Jays could definitely catch up. I think Yanks are just too old offensively and SP pitching is kind of weak. Rays chances are flaming out with every disappointing Archer start.

[ ]

In reply to by johann

heyward's OPS is a sneaky good .603 OPS...or not, whatever. 27th out of 32 RF's in MLB in ob%...32nd out of 32 in slugging...31st out of 32 in OPS (j.upton bringing up the rear here)... that said, hurrah for cubs fans stuffing the ballot and all that, but in a way we need the best out there because home field in the WS is on the line and that matters again.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

So as the voting nears its close, we find the position in the AL where some ballot-stuffing could help a clearly weaker player get voted into the game over a clearly stronger player, and turn it into a campagin:  Support your 2016 Cubs: Vote for Prince Fielder, All-Star 1st Baseman!

[ ]

In reply to by johann

I presume Ross wasn't on the ballot.

This usually levels out after the first few ballots and a disproportional amount of home games and hot starts for teams and players.

Bryant and Rizzo seem like locks weighing popularity and stats.  Zobrist and D. Murphy should get closer by the end but I bet Zobrist holds him off. Russell has a shot at SS as there is no real name to vote for there, might just depend on if anyone gets hot here in June.  OF will probably be Harper, McCutchen, Cespedes with Braun and Fowler being possibilities.

...and yet another patented lester 4-out inning avoiding the double play ball on a comebacker to the pitcher.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

JUST IGNORE IT got that? no? you don't. of course. pitch counts don't matter, i get it...throwing more pitches doesn't matter...cool. big leads don't matter...neither does getting an extra base because of those leads. putting yourself at a disadvantage isn't a big deal because odds don't matter...only outcomes...the win stat is suddenly a relevant stat again...aaron sele deserved more cy young consideration than he got. this kind of thing happens so much to so many other pitchers that it's as common as the rain and the sun in the sky and not at all something uniquely noteworthy. awesome. i mean, hell, someone tried to bunt directly to lester in this game knowing it wouldn't be a double play...only that it only went 5ft in front of the plate and ross fielded it. but hey, that happens all the time...absolutely normal things going on. man, this record is getting scratchy as hell. gotta keep spinning those greatest hits for the fans, though. seriously, though...see you next time. try to help yourself...or help yourself to a comment. none of this matters.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

I thought that would have been a tough DP for most pitchers -- wheel and long throw to 2B on a ball not hit very hard. I am constantly amazed that more teams don't bunt, particularly when Lester is dealing like he was tonight. Fortunately, his remarkable talent enables him to overcome this weakness. A 2.29 ERA? 10K, 0 BB? Ball don't lie.

[ ]

In reply to by billybucks

for the first time that i noticed, they intentionally tried to bunt to lester to stay out of the double play tonight. it died on the dirt and ross managed to field it to nail the runner at 2nd...which is extra remarkable given that runners get a few extra steps to lead-off by default. it may have happened before as a cub, but that was a new one for me.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

The runner actually went back to first initially if I remember right so not sure that few extra feet thing matters here. It was a very slowly hit ball that wasn't handled perfectly and that was the difference and it could have been a double play but it could also have been a no outs play. I just don't think this specific play fits into your 4 outs mantra.

[ ]

In reply to by johann

looking at it on replay right now (MLB TV is awesome) i disagree. the play was there. that said, we really gonna play like it would even be considered given that he...well...doesn't do it pretty much ever? he lets guys go to 2nd and 3rd with guys on 1st and 2nd without going for the lead out at 3rd or the double play.

Per espn: Lester leads the MLB with 8 starts giving up 1 or fewer ER. Give that man a raise!

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

yes. he should have. *thumbs up* for a start, he would have thrown less pitches in that game...and other games in the past where this has been an issue...of which there are many...some which he's added double-digits amount of pitches to his pitch count. there are very few instances where throwing less pitches to the opposing team isn't considered a good thing...none that come to mind. it's also not a good thing to let runners on 1st and 2nd advance to 2nd and 3rd when getting the lead runner or starting a double play are 2 better options than jogging to 1st for an underhanded throw...that's happened at least twice just this season and it happened last year, too. letting runners get huge leads that your specialized catcher has to control for you the best he can from 60 extra feet away also isn't a good thing. some would argue having to have a specialized catcher around on the 25-man roster isn't a great thing in itself. some people, for some reason, think he doesn't need a specialized catcher even though watching what d.ross is doing out there sends a different message to some other people. i'm not gonna get too far ahead in this, though, it's taken long enough for you to realize the point above. we have time...another 4.5 to 5.5 years of it. (yeah i know your comment above was sarcasm, but i'm doing a thing there. let's roll with it.) making excuses for bad play while demanding it's something to be ignored by fans as if lester's going to always come out clean is kinda f'n stupid. lester allowing guys to have huge leads off base or turning double plays into single outs is not an effective way to lead MLB with 8 starts giving up 1 or fewer ER. no one's looking for answers because everyone already knows the answer. how/if lester arrives to that answer is going to be interesting and independent of any chatter on TCR. in the meantime, yeah, the only pitcher in MLB who can't seem to throw a ball unless it's off a mound who's gonna be around another 4.5 - 5.5 years is kinda an interesting "thing." it's not even the most important thing about lester given his enormous talent elsewhere...it's just a mack truck sized glaring hole in his game that affects many parts of the gameplay and the team, including 25-man roster construction where montero is under contract next year and the emerging catcher-of-the-future isn't a defensive strong-man aside from his arm strength. hell, this is a team scared to lose t.federowicz so badly he's taking up space on the 25-man roster. he hasn't been useful for 3 weeks, yet he's still here with his 4 plate appearances and 2 innings of D behind the plate to show for those 3 weeks. let that sink in. this is a team marching to the playoffs that has a healthy bench player with 4 PA and 2 innings of D in the past 3 weeks. the reason he's still around has a lot to do with the pitcher mentioned in the above rant...pretty much the biggest reason. the team needs a D-heavy run-game controlling option, not just now in case of d.ross injury/rest but going forward. he fits into the cubs present and possibly future plans because of lester's shortcomings. tl;dr - fire bad, ugg unn ugg ugg...or just read the last 4 paragraphs.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Federowicz is on the roster because Lester can't throw to bases? Hmm, I thought it was because Maddon likes the flexibility to pinch hit/run for Ross and/or Montero when the need arises. As per, you've climbed up on the cross. No one has said "igore Lester not being able to throw." The end result is what matters, and not turning that DP last night didn't matter. He threw 113 pitches. How many would the DP have cut out? Would it matter? It's like you think you're the only person who has noticed Lester can't throw and you're hellbent on telling us why it COULD matter. We get it. Also, swing planes, high-paid managers, Maddon's "antics." "none of this matters" (until he wants to discuss it) CrunchMemes™

[ ]

In reply to by Tito

...and rob and tito miss the point. it's as predictable as rob and tito showing up to post on a crunch-said-something-about-lester post. i would suggest reading it again, but that's a lot to ignore and that would be a lot to ask. ...i would suggest reading it again anyway. also, your theory on federowicz's 4ab and 2 innings of play the last 3 weeks is interesting, tito...stretched out to a normal season it comes out to about 32ab and 16 innings of play in an entire season...which is a waste of a roster space unless there's some other reason he's still around. not much is interesting about rob's temper tantrum.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

I Haven't seen anything from Fed I like but from what I have read the reason they're keeping him up is because both Montero and Ross are older and Montero has already had an injury issue. So if something were to happen to one of them they trust Fed to be able to handle the pitching staff overall more than Contreras who they dont want to bring up right now. So it's a lot more to do with age and injury risk of catchers than Lester's throwing issues.

[ ]

In reply to by johann

i realize that's what has been said...and it's as valid, if not more valid, than what seems to be happening...but just like lester saying he doesn't need a personal catcher, what i'm seeing vs what's being said leads me to believe it's not true, or at least not the whole story. this is a playoff quality team carrying a second D-heavy running-game controlling catcher that doesn't actually play. they're not even keeping him fresh...they're not even using him. that said, all i got is a theory. im willing to toss that to the "check back on this later" pile... i think they have a 2017 plan for fed...and i think that plan involves lester.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

"i think they have a 2017 plan for fed...and i think that plan involves lester." Probably so. Ross is retiring, Federowicz has a 35% career CS rate, and Montero has caught 1 out of 18 attempted stealers this year. What you're missing, though, is that the Cub brass doesn't like to tamper with a successful pitcher's settled behavior. Even if it's broke--in terms of holding baserunners--don't fix it! Fix it in the low minors, or forget about it. I believed then, and still believe, that Larry Rothschild wrecked Rich Hill's career with the Cubs when, after the 2007 season, he tried to teach Hill a slide step and other new tricks. Hill had a very ideosyncratic delivery. After Rothschild experimented on him, it was all arm and back pain and wildness for Hill.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

not much is interesting about rob's temper tantrum.

says the guy that vomited out 10 paragraphs of dribble off an innocuous comment about how a few hours after a Lester CG 1-run effort the last comment on here was from you about a double play that you think should have been turned. Yes, my temper tantrum of 9 words!!!

Or was it the comparision to a thin-skinned troglodyte that spews bullshit constantly and then attacks the people that call him out on that bullshit without actually addressing the bullshit? I'm still very comfortable making that analogy.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

% that this exchange has been about:

 - trying to persuade another person of a viewpoint:  .01%

-  LOOK AT ME!!!!!  60%

-  We are an old married couple who harbor more obscure resentments than we can even remember. 39.99%

Please, stop. I respect you both and neither of you are helping yourselves, or TCR, through this.

Meanwhile, baseball...

[ ]

In reply to by Transmission

I respect you as well, but if you believe anything I ever write is about look at me, then #1... I apologize for not making a clearer point. But more importantly, #2 is that you could not be more wrong on my motives.

On the other hand, I have a strong antipathy for bullshit and will happily call it out when I see it. In past years, it took the form of hours and hours of meticously making my point with things like facts and links in an attempt to persuade. Sometimes I was wrong, a few times I may have been right. Mostly it fell on blind eyes and deaf ears and people just waiting for their turn to talk and to get the last word in. So now I occasionally make a joke....

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

do you own mlb tv? you can watch the play 100 times if you want. it happened in the 1st...it's not hard to find. what you think happened isn't what happened. dude was barely 1/2 way to 2nd when lester got control of the ball to throw to 1st and there was a fielder covering 2nd. WATCH IT AGAIN. that happened. go ahead, watch it. aside from that, we gonna pretend lester is suddenly going to start doing something he doesn't do? watch it again...1st inning...15/16 ptiches in. after that stick around for the next pitch where ross throws to 2nd because of the lead seager is taking...because lester doesn't hold runners. that's a 2-for-1. watch it. ---- here...i made a picture for those without mlb tv...he didn't even consider 2nd. http://i.imgur.com/jvppua6.png

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

removing the "old married couple" part of the equation (this was a good point by Transmission), maybe just look at the other  comments from people that aren't me or Tito (since we clearly have an agenda against you and are suppressing your rights to spew bullshit)  that disagreed with your assessment of the play.

read it. read it again...go ahead, read it.  READ IT AGAIN!!!

 

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

"your willful ignorance of what actually happened on that play is noted. I realize you believe yourself to be the Donald to our lamestream media, but in reality, you're just full of s***." "Or was it the comparision to a thin-skinned troglodyte that spews bullshit constantly and then attacks the people that call him out on that bullshit without actually addressing the bullshit?" etc etc... did you see the video yet? did you see the picture i posted? http://i.imgur.com/jvppua6.png do you want to go to prom with me? is wrestling fixed?

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Again, I didn't see the play. That photo, to me, doesn't show him running. It shows him fielding it and not turning to throw to second. Sorry if you disagree with my assessment of this Zapruder film photo of the play. Your perspective is obviously coming from having seen it happen. I also don't doubt he didn't consider throwing to second. The larger point that you don't care about is that it was inconsequential to the outcome of the game.

[ ]

In reply to by Tito

he already fielded it...he's turned sideways with his glove facing 1st...he's walking towards 1st...he's in full control of the ball. he never considered 2nd. the larger point is there was a double play there and...hell, just re-read every f'n paragraph i initially wrote. i didn't write about how lester screwing himself out of an out and pitching more pitches was consequential to the result of this single game.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Maybe you should re-read. I agreed that he wouldn't have considered throwing to second. That photo doesn't prove he's walking. It looks like he'd just fielded it and was deciding (if he were to be considering a decision, that is). And as I'll mention yet again, our perspectives on what the photo is exactly showing is different because you saw the play and I didn't. So what if there was a double play there? They won they game. He pitched great. WE KNOW HE HAS THE YIPS. This is not new information.

[ ]

In reply to by Tito

i'm telling you he's walking. i took that from a screencap of a video that i watched. that's a thing that happened. it's not theory. it's proven. not believing it or being skeptical of it doesn't make it not true. the video evidence is there for those who have access. so what if there's a double play there? that's not the point of my long ass rant. they won the game. that's not the point of my long ass rant. he pitched great. that's not the point of my long ass rant. i'm also not trying to inform you of something new. that's not the point of my long ass rant.

[ ]

In reply to by Tito

it's not an opinion. he fielded the ball in front of him. that's him turning to first with the ball under control. this isn't the moment of him fielding or a fraction of a second after he got the ball under control. this is him putting the play in motion at 1st after he decided that's what he's going to do. watch the video if you can. i'm describing something that happened, not how i feel about it. this isn't secret knowledge only i have access to and suppressing all other outlets for discovery.

[ ]

In reply to by Tito

@Tito: He could have wheeled around and made a throw to 2b and probably would have got him. But it would have been rushed and since he does indeed have the yips he would have probably thrown it into CF. He made the smart move and took the safe out instead of risking the potential disaster inning.

Also, I should point this fun out....Bullshit/Moving goalpoasts detector:

"dude was barely 1/2 way"

"is barely past 1/3rd the way there."

actually pic: more than half way (I could draw lines and stuff).

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

http://i.imgur.com/jvppua6.png this speaks for itself. he's in full control of the ball and already turned to make the play to 1st. you can interpret that any way you want because the ultimate point is he wasn't going to consider throwing to 2nd anyway. it sure as hell didn't warrant your initial angsty-as-hell take on anyone who thinks that would have been a double play ball for almost every pitcher in the game not named lester. check yourself before you get amped up and throw more of your "your willful ignorance of what actually happened on that play is noted" bullshit around while pretending to be the arbiter and enforcer of calling out bullshit. it's not a good look.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

the actual point was that it didn't matter...it rarely matters...and even when it does matter, Lester is better than 90% of the league. It's akin to worrying about Maddux or Arrietta holding on runners.

also...there were others not named Tito or me that disagreed with your assessment of the play, hence the "willful ignorance" statement.

and just because...red line was 370 pixels, yellow was 240 pixels, not an exact science, but certainly more scientific than "1/2 way, no...a 1/3 of the way."

Image removed.

I also mentioned my actual take on the specific play above, although it's not particularly vital to the point,  which you're also ignoring. You're relating this as if I'm questioning whether you misplaced a comma in your essay, when in reality I'm saying your entire essay is garbage.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

he's already had control of the ball and going to 1st with it at this point in the play! he fielded the ball in front of him. you show this to most people and many would tell you even at this point the DP is still in play. you're really gonna go this route? he had a play at 2nd, period. he probably had a double play if he was capable of going to 2nd with anything but an under-handed shuffle pass like he's fond to at 1st (the only base he generally goes to). the amount of people that would look even your breakdown and go "i dunno" about this being a double play ball for anyone but lester would most likely be an extremely small number. long story made shorter, he didn't even consider 2nd. also, pretending "not holding runners" is some isolated single aspect of what's going on is asinine. d.keuchel doesn't hold runners...he doesn't have nearly the same issues lester has. it's lester-specific issues...they're spelled out in the rant above, read it sometime. on another point in your post, you think lester doesn't need a personal D-heavy catcher so we're getting nowhere with that part of the assessment and i dunno how you can watch what ross does for lester out there and assume it's not only important, but needed. that was part of the rant you're dismissing, too.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

I'm not going any route, there were others that disagreed about this specific play. I personally didn't really care about the play that much, I was amused that a few hours after the game the last comment made and first comment I saw was you talking about a missed double play. I made a joke...you missed it as you do and took it personally.

I haven't made any breakdown of the play so I'm not sure what you're talking about. If it's that pic I posted, it's not a breakdown of the play, it was me calling out your bullshit and how you like to argue by changing the "goalposts" as you said. First you said 1/2 way, then a not even a 1/3rd and the pic you referred to show neither. My assessment of the actual play is in here in a reply to Tito where I pretty much agree with you that he probably did have a play there if he wasn't Jon Lester. (and I happen to be the only one on this thread that actually has agreed with you so far...there were others that disagreed with you).

My point is that most, if not all teams ,employ at least one D-heavy catcher actually.  My other point is that Lester's yips are inconsequential over 32-35 starts although they may very well cost a game or two and let's all pray it's not in the playoffs. My final point is you are and have been a bullshit artist for the 10+ years I've read this board.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

no, i got your joke. i just responded to it with things i wanted to say about the situation rather than telling you to stfu or otherwise non-contributing dismissive angst. we gonna pretend that "joke" had nothing to do with something that wasn't started by you being triggered because i made a lester post...since, you know, it was referencing that...and this triggering happens occasionally? you're also, again, missing the point with the lester+catcher thing...you're way way way way missing the point. you're not even on the same page. you're also, again, missing other points in my rant. arguing that outcomes is all that matter, and putting yourself in bad situations is ignorable, is akin to championing the win stat. outcomes are ultimately what matters, but substance matters, too. this whole thing has nothing to do with whether lester wins, it's about the bad odds he stacks against himself and how he needs a personalized 25-man roster addition to make up for those odds. do you REALLY think this team would go into 2017 with montero + contreas at catcher, like most teams would? do you REALLY think lester is not going to have his own personal D-heavy runner-holding catcher? do you REALLY think fed still being around has nothing to do with that? also, hey, i meant the runner going to 1st being 1/3rd the way there. i screwed that up. the runner at 2nd was a bit over 1/2 way there. my bad. does that change things? no. see, we're back where we were. it doesn't matter. you seriously can look at that picture and/or the video and not see a play at 2nd or a double play. i find that mindblowing, like, not even close to reasonable.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

no, i got your joke.

I doubt you did and you're backtracking now...one doesn't respond to a joke with 10 paragraphs of venom if they got it, unless they have no ability to laugh at themselves.

missing the point with the lester+catcher thing...you're way way way way missing the point. you're not even on the same page.

I'm probably missing your point because you're terrible at making them, but I know what point I'm making.

is akin to championing the win stat.

yes, if someone was making a horrible comparision as you are right now. The actual metaphor you want is comparing Lester's YIPS to Arrietta or Maddux or name a pitcher that didn't hold on runners and was still very good, in other words, stuff that may hurt a team, but is a very small part of the game and something like 98 out of 100 times does not end up mattering. It's like arguing if a team is good at stolen bases, it's nice, but you can win a World Series without it. If Lester could make these throws without issue it would be nice, but it ultimately is a very small grain of sand on a very large beach.

do you REALLY think fed still being around has nothing to do with that?

I don't know honestly, didn't Maddon have 3 catchers at Tampa for some stretches too? Although hardly needed in the AL. Fed wasn't around for the first month so doesn't make sense they have to have him now just for Lester, although I guess they had Schwarber. I'm guessing it has more to do with possibly losing him if they tried to move him through waivers. I believe he's out of options. Not that they care that much about losing him, but there's no obvious other need now.  Plus Maddon enjoying the flexibility with a healthy dose of being 20+ games over .500 and playing around with guys. Ross catches Lester anyway, keeping Fed around doesn't make sense there unless they want to pinch-hit for Ross as soon as Lester is out of the game, which they don't do at all. Per usual, your theory and argument has no factual basis, just a bullshit theory to push a "Lester's YIPS are seriously detrimental to the team" argument that has no factual basis either.

you seriously can look at that picture and/or the video and not see a play at 2nd or a double play. i find that mindblowing, like, not even close to reasonable.

I mean, what? Seriously, wtf? I mean, holy shit, I explained my actual thoughts on the specific play quite clearly and never argued much against it.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

"I doubt you did and you're backtracking now..." yes, you making up my mind for me has been an ongoing issue. "Per usual, your theory and argument has no factual basis, just a bullshit theory to push a "Lester's YIPS are seriously detrimental to the team" argument that has no factual basis either." disagree...for reasons laid out in the rant you disagree with so strongly you've made up your mind there's no facts in it...even though there are. you keep saying it's lies and bullshit, but it doesn't make it bullshit just because you've made up your mind. points... yes, his shortcomings occasionally causes him to throw more pitches...sometimes double-digits more pitches. yes, he gives away outs by only being able to go for 1 base when a double play is in play. yes, watching him ignore lead runners because he's only going to 1st is in no way an advantage to lester, nor is it something that makes his inning neutral. yes, he needs his own personal catcher based on what we keep seeing d.ross do out there because of what lester isn't doing...and yes, this may impact a team that would ordinarily just carry montero and contreras next year by having to use another roster spot on another catcher...and that very catcher may be the same guy who's had 4 ab's and 2 innings behind the plate in the last 22 days. this is not bullshit. these are things most people don't consider positive. there's more to it if you'd like to re-read the original rant. you keep saying we should focus on outcomes rather than what's happening outside of those outcomes. i say that's bullshit and it flies in the face of digging deeper into how an player can effect both a game and the roster. this isn't an issue that only touches a single part of the game...and throwing maddux's name around like what we see with j.lester and his catcher is anything like we saw with maddux is some true bullshit considering the amount of gold gloves 1 person has and how the other can only throw underhanded to 1 base on the diamond.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

you keep saying we should focus on outcomes rather than what's happening outside of those outcomes

nope. A bit hilarious that you would think that me of all people would stoop to that considering my rather long history of championing sabermetric analysis, but on the other hand you only type to try to prove yourself right rather than reading what other people are saying, so I guess I should expect that.

 I'm saying you should look at everything and then assess how much or how little Lester's YIPS actually have an affect within a season and a game.  And that should probably be a good gauge on how much is worth writing about. Currently your gauge and output on the subject is somewhere around "Lester's YIPS are costing the Cubs dearly at the moment and could be even worse. DOOM!".

When the reality is that "Lester's YIPS are a very small concern and a very small percentage of  what actually makes a good pitcher."

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

"I'm saying you should look at everything and then assess how much or how little Lester's YIPS actually have an affect within a season and a game." yeah, i am looking at everything...you just don't like some of the things i'm looking at and you're going as far to tell me to ignore it in one breath and that it's lies in another. "Currently your gauge and output on the subject is somewhere around "Lester's YIPS are costing the Cubs dearly at the moment and could be even worse. DOOM!"." well, that's a shitty take on it...and far off...but that would require you taking what i say at face value rather than you adding your own dash of angst to them to redefine what i'm saying. you're elevating through the damn roof the points im making. you can't even accept them because you're too busy both calling them lies and telling me to ignore them in the same breath. yes, you want these points ignored. yes, you don't believe he needs a personal catcher. i think it's worth talking about given how clown-show f'n odd it is. i think he needs a personal catcher. you're not preaching gospel. you're not the end point of the discussion. a guy who can't throw to any base except 1st base underhanded and relies on his catcher to make up for his shortcomings...and how you can ignore the catcher in this equation as not an important part of how lester is effective...is something this all leads up to. it's a narrative that you don't buy into partly because you want it dismissed and partly because you don't believe he needs a personal catcher.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

yes, you want these points ignored. yes, you don't believe he needs a personal catcher. i think they shouldn't be ignored. i think he needs a personal catcher.

I probably stated awhile ago like when they signed that Ross wasn't signed to JUST catch Lester, but that obviously hasn't turned out to be the case. I also think Lester would be just fine with other catchers, that a personal catcher is not a new thing in baseball and that getting players that compliment each other is smart front office manuevering.  Cubs signed Heyward because they wanted someone that would improve their outfield defense and improve their contact at the plate. They signed Zobrist instead of a power hitting 2b-men because they wanted a contact hitter to offset all the K's. A team signs a left-handed hitter because they have too many righties, AJ Pierzynski still has a job...this is normal to me and no big deal.

Never say never, but they're not going to keep Fed around for a whole year wasting a spot while trying to win a World Series. There's a 100 guys like Fed that can replace Ross next year. (My actual money would go on trading Montero, and going with Contreras and a FA-defensive-minded catcher next year). But I really don't think the Cubs front office is really worrying about making sure Fed is around for next year. They probably want him for this year for as long as they can though, he knows the staff from spring training and might be trying to eye a good time that they could sneak him through waivers or a more obvious need arises. I honestly don't know for sure, mostly I think Maddon just likes the roster flexibility and has the luxury at the moment.

you're not preaching gospel. you're not the end point of the discussion

That was a laugh out loud moment. Oh sweet hypocrisy....

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

I believe Federowicz is still on the 25 man roster because the Cubs don't want to bring Contreras up yet. They would loose Federowicz if he was put on waivers. I don't think Lester has anything to do with Federowicz's being on the roster. I believe Contreras will be brought up later this year and Federowicz  go. 

My 2 cents

[ ]

In reply to by michael2z

...but why is having a D-heavy run-controlling catcher that rarely plays that important? at what point has it ever been that important...especially since he's not actually playing. why does it matter if he's lost if his main attribute is being a defensive whizz on a team that has montero under contract and a AAA catcher that's nearly a sure thing to be on the roster next year...aside from the role d.ross performs for lester... he's being treated like dead weight, not used, yet he fills a very important role being kept around. we're going to have to wait because this won't be "found out" until much later, but i'm going on a strong hunch that fed is viewed as lester's catcher next year.

[ ]

In reply to by michael2z

v.caratini for a start...his D is ready even if he's in AA. that said, he's having trouble with the running game getting out of the crouch while getting back in the game. t.davis isn't much of an option out of AAA. ...or they could bite the bullet and call up conteras like they did with fed...who's pretty much been sitting on the bench for 3 weeks. that's not an ideal option even if contreras is most likely going to break with the team next year early in the season and sept. callup is likely. there's trade options, too...adequate D catcher with good receiving skills generally don't break the bank and the cubs have the roster slots. fed is a top-notch high-end D + run game guy. i honestly believe the reason he's still around is solely because the cubs don't want to lose him...but i believe that fear is based around not just d.ross going down this year, but what his role may be next year. i'm not advocating getting rid of fed...i just think he's around for a much broader reason than some think, specifically because of a role he can fill...very specifically with lester.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Wasn't Fed brought up because they wanted Conteras to get more work behind the plate before they bring him up, probably late this year? That obviously hasn't changed. Isn't it more likely that Fed hasn't been put on waivers because the Cubs don't want to do any of the other options you detailed rather than they are keeping him around to catch for Lester next year? Seems quite a stretch to me

[ ]

In reply to by michael2z

yeah, and they most likely dont wanna start contreras's clock yet. no matter how the "fed thing" plays out, it's going to be determined in the future. some are claiming the flexibility he provides for maddon is important, or maddon likes 3 catchers, but the past 22 days fed's had 4ab and caught 2 innings of ball. that's not flexibility...that's dead weight.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Or....Maddon already struggles to find enough ABs for Baez, Soler & LaStella, as well as the suddenly interesting Szczur. Doesn't make sense to call up some kid to sit. Enough players can play either IF or OF, so they don't really need a player in either area-- maybe what Maddon wants is a 3rd C who doesn't need a lot of playing time. We know he loves good D.

[ ]

In reply to by billybucks

4ab and 2 innings of D in the past 22 days. i cannot think of the last time a healthy player on any of maddon's rosters came close to doing something like that...if at all, ever. he's a catcher on a team with a 39 year old elderly catcher and another catcher coming back from injury. he's not getting starts, he's not getting 1/2 games even when the score lopsided, and he's pretty much the dead-last RH pinch hit option. that's not stuggling for ABs, that's sitting on the bench doing nothing. i can't imagine this going on for too much longer without someone asking questions about his use, though.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

"v.caratini for a start...his D is ready" I don't know where you get that. Caratini is a 22-year-old switch-hitting catcher with an OPS just under .800 in double A. Second-round draft pick--he's all about offense. The guy they like to talk about defensively is his backup, Brockmeyer. Ever notice that the catchers who make the Cubs' major-league roster these days have one thing in common, an unusual ability to frame pitches? Castillo was weak in that department, and they couldn't get rid of him fast enough, in spite of his having a gun that made a strong impression on Hendry and Fleita and even on Dale Sveum. The catching situation is fine, it's the way they like it, it seems to be working. Try to understand where they're coming from. The last two or three years, watching this team, I've learned a lot about baseball that I never knew before. What have you learned?

[ ]

In reply to by VirginiaPhil

The Cubs consider Willson Contereras, Victor Caratini, and P. J. Higgins their top three catching prospects playing for full-season affiliates.

Contreras is almost ready, Caratini is progressing in all areas except his thowing (which is a ptroblem right now), and Higgins is developing fast after being moved back to catcher at Minor League Camp (he was a part-time catcher in college, but he was not used at all as a catcher in his pro debut season in 2015). 

BTW, the Cubs will almost certainly add Caratini to their MLB 40-man roster post-2016 (he is Rule 5  Draft-eligible for the first time next December). 

[ ]

In reply to by michael2z

MICHAEL2Z: This is exactly the reason Tim Federowicz is still on the roster. It really doesn't have anything to do with Lester or 2017. 

The Cubs believe Federowicz will be claimed off waivers if they try and outright him, and they want him as insurance in case anything happens to Ross or Montero (which the Cubs think is a reasonable possibility given their age and injury history). Federowicz worked with the Cubs MLB pitching staff throughout Spring Training up until Opening Day (long after Contereras was sent to Minor League Camp), and the Cubs believe he is the best option to replace either Montero or Ross next time one of them goes on the DL. But he's definitely the THIRD catcher. He's not part of the catching rotation.    
It's fairly obvious that Maddon does not have any special tactical use for Federowicz in games, although having Federowicz on the roster does make it easier to PH or PR for Ross and/or Montero without running out of catchers. But Federowicz is not a typical "3rd catcher," who is usually an offensive-first guy who can play other positions and catch in a pinch (kind of like what Schwarber did last year). 

So think of Federowicz as a 2016 insurance policy. Contreras isn't ready, and Federowicz knows the Cubs pitchers backward & forward. He's actually kind of like a Rule 5 pick stashed on the 25-man roster, at least until the Cubs are convinced that Contreras is "ready."  

I think the Cubs will probably go into the 2017 season with Contreras and Montero and a third catcher (NOT Schwarber) who will catch Lester. Perhaps somebody like Jarrod Saltalamacchia, who was Lester's catcher in Boston in 2012-13, and who can play 1B if the Cubs want to give Rizzo a day off against a tough LHSP on a day Lester isn't starting. 

Montero is like a "big brother" to fellow Venezuelan Contreras, and I think the Cubs will want Montero to be around to mentor Contreras in his rookie season. So I don't expect the Cubs to try and move Montero after this season (he's signed through 2017).  

As far as Schwarber goes, if he does catch again, I don't think it would be before 2018 (when perhaps he would replace Montero). He's going to have enough to deal with in 2017 just trying to hit with power and run the bases.   

I read TCR every day. I comment very rarely but not solely on your posts. Come down off the cross.

Recent comments

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    I think if you had ranked players by how much the team could ill afford to have them miss significant time, Steele would be right at the top of the list.

  • crunch (view)

    steele MRI on friday.  counsell expects an IL stint.

    no current plans for his rotation replacement.

  • hellfrozeover (view)

    I would say also in the bright side column is Busch looked pretty good overall at the plate. Alzolay…man, that hurts but most of the time he’s not giving up a homer to that guy. To me the worst was almonte hanging that pitch to Garcia. He hung another one to the next hitter too and got away with it on an 0-1. 

  • crunch (view)

    amaya blocked like 6-8 of smyly's pitches in the dirt very cleanly...not even an exaggeration, smyly threw a ton of pitches bouncing in tonight.

    neris looking like his old self was a relief (no pun), too.

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    In looking for bright spots the defense was outstanding tonight. The “stars” are going to need to shine quite a bit brighter than they did tonight offensively though for this to be a successful season.

  • Eric S (view)

    Good baseball game. Hopefully Steele is pitching again in April (but I’m not counting on it). 

  • crunch (view)

    boo.

  • crunch (view)

    smyly to face the 2/3/4 hitters with a man on 2nd in extras.

    this doesn't seem like a 8 million dollar managerial decision.

  • crunch (view)

    i 100% agree with you, but i dunno how jed wants to run things.  the default is delay.  i would choose brown.

    like hellfrozeover says, could be smyly since he's technically fresh and stretched.

    anyway, on a pure talent basis....brown is the best option.

  • Childersb3 (view)

    Use pitchers when you believe they're good. Don't plan their clock.

    I'm sorry. I'm simply anti-clock/contract management. Play guys when they show real MLB potential talent.

    If Brown hadn't been hurt with the Lat Strain he would've gotten the call, and not Wick.

    Give him a chance. 

    But Wesneski probably gets it