Cubs MLB Roster

Cubs Organizational Depth Chart
40-Man Roster Info

40 players are on the MLB RESERVE LIST (roster is full) 

42 players are at MLB Spring Training 

31 players on MLB RESERVE LIST are ACTIVE at MLB Spring Training, and nine players are on OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT to minors. 
11 players are MLB Spring Training NON-ROSTER INVITEES (NRI) 

Last updated 3-17-2024
 
* bats or throws left
# bats both

PITCHERS: 17
Yency Almonte
Adbert Alzolay 
Javier Assad
Jose Cuas
Kyle Hendricks
* Shota Imanaga
Caleb Kilian
Mark Leiter Jr
* Luke Little
Julian Merryweather
Hector Neris 
Daniel Palencia
* Drew Smyly
* Justin Steele
Jameson Taillon
Hayden Wesneski 
* Jordan Wicks

NRI PITCHERS: 5 
Colten Brewer 
Carl Edwards Jr 
* Edwin Escobar 
* Richard Lovelady 
* Thomas Pannone 

CATCHERS: 2
Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

NRI CATCHERS: 2  
Jorge Alfaro 
Joe Hudson 

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

NRI INFIELDERS: 3 
David Bote 
Garrett Cooper
* Dominic Smith

OUTFIELDERS: 5
* Cody Bellinger 
Alexander Canario
# Ian Happ
Seiya Suzuki
* Mike Tauchman 

NRI OUTFIELDERS: 1 
* David Peralta

OPTIONED:
Kevin Alcantara, OF 
Michael Arias, P 
Ben Brown, RHP 
Pete Crow-Armstrong, OF 
Brennen Davis, OF 
Porter Hodge, RHP 
* Matt Mervis, 1B 
Keegan Thompson, P 
Luis Vazquez, INF 

 



Minor League Rosters
Rule 5 Draft 
Minor League Free-Agents

Opening Day Roster

The Cubs have been busy this past week, making final roster cuts that pared their Spring Training roster (originally 58 players in February) down to a 25-man roster on Opening Day. The 25-man Opening Day roster limit and clubs having to cut players the last week of Spring Training to get down to the limit is one of the ìRights of Spring Training,î in some cases the ìlast riteî (so to speak) for a player. But the 25-man Opening Day roster is actually a fairly recent invention. While the idea that clubs can activate their entire 40-man roster for the last month of the season--giving young players a ìcup of coffeeî or ìfull trialî after the minor leagues close on or about Labor Day--goes back about 100 years, the idea that clubs must operate with only 25 players from Opening Day through August 31st does not. A SABR researcher named Clifford Blau has actually compiled a history of roster limits, and it is interesting to note the changes over the years on his chart. 1968 was the first season in MLB history where clubs had to cut their 40-man roster down to 25 on Opening Day. During the previous 11 seasons (1957-1967), MLB clubs had to cut their 40-man rosters to 28 by Opening Day, and then to 25 by the 31st day of season. If you look back at the Opening Day rosters from that 11-year period, you would note that at least two of the three ìextraî players carried during the first month of the season were usually pitchers (and that was before the days of starting pitchers having their workoads limited by arbitrary pitch counts!). Most clubs circa 1957-67 normally carried nine or ten pitchers May through August, but they would often carry as many as 12 pitchers during the month of April. It was recognized even then that pitchers needed more time than position players to get ready for the start of the season, and having an extra couple of arms available during the first month was understood to be advisable. By May, all starting pitchers were expected to be ready to handle a full work-load (pitch a complete game, if possible), and the three extra guys (including usually a couple of pitchers) were optioned or outrighted to the minors, traded, or released. Prior to 1957, the roster limit remained at 40 until the 31st day of the season. That doesnít mean all clubs would actually carry 40 players during the month of April, just like clubs today do not activate their entire 40-man roster on September 1st just because they have the right to do so. When the roster limit remained at 40 until the 31st day of the season, clubs would (in reality) carry maybe five extra players, with the other ten usually being young players who werenít ready to play in the big leagues, and so they would be optioned to the minors to get a chance to play every day. The type of player who would be kept around during the first month back when the 40-man roster cut-down date was the 31st day of the season would be veterans at the end of their careers trying to remain in the big leagues for a little while longer, "4-A" minor league players (that is, guys who had ìmasteredî AAA but who were having difficulty making the transition to MLB), and Rule 5 Draft picks, ìbonus players,î and players who were out of minor league options (in other words, players who could not be sent to the minors without first clearing waivers). In the 1920ís, 30ís, and 40ís, the 40-man roster (or 48-man roster with a 30-man roster limit during the ìheartî of the season in 1945 and 1946 as player returned from WWII) ìcut-downî date was even later than the 31st day of the season, in some cases as late as May 15th, or even June 15th in some years! And prior to 1977, clubs had no 25-man ìminimumî roster requirement as they do now. Clubs having financial problems could play with 22 or 23 players if they wanted to do that, and some did. Beginning in 1977, the CBA required clubs to maintain a 24-man minimum active roster during the regular season, and this was expanded to a 25-man minimum (as it stands now) in 1991. So there is nothing ìwritten in stoneî when it comes to MLB clubs having to cut their 40-man rosters down to 25 players by Opening Day, or even maintaining a 25-man roster during the regular season. The current roster limits and a cut-down to 25 players on Opening Day are fairly recent inventions and are totally arbitrary, and could easily be changed in future CBAs (the current one expires on December 19th). 2006 CHICAGO CUBS OPENING DAY ROSTER * Disabled List PITCHERS (11 + 3 on 15-day DL) : Ryan Dempster Scott Eyre Bob Howry Greg Maddux Sean Marshall * Wade Miller (15-day DL as of 3/31) Will Ohman * Mark Prior (15-day DL as of 03/24) Glendon Rusch Jerome Williams Scott Williamson * Kerry Wood (15-day DL as of 03/24) Michael Wuertz Carlos Zambrano CATCHERS (2): Michael Barrett Henry Blanco INFIELDERS (7): Freddie Bynum Ronny Cedeno Jerry Hairston, Jr Derrek Lee Neifi Perez Aramis Ramirez Todd Walker OUTFIELDERS (5): Jacque Jones John Mabry Matt Murton Angel Pagan Juan Pierre ================================= OPTIONED TO AAA IOWA (8): David Aardsma, RHP Angel Guzman, RHP Rich Hill, LHP Roberto Novoa, RHP Felix Pie, OF Jae-Kuk Ryu, RHP Geovany Soto, C Ryan Theriot, INF OPTIONED TO AA WEST TENN (4): Brian Dopirak, 1B Carlos Marmol, RHP Scott Moore, 3B Jose Reyes, C

Comments

from the other thread, right as it died cincy tomorrow: 47 degrees 20% chance of rain 25 MPH WINDS out of the west. (aka OUT TOWARDS RIGHT FIELD....wow, get ready for another power showing in cincy) get out the zambrano sinker!!! also, it looks like it's raining now and will continue to rain until about 3 am.....great, the cubs get to start their season on a slick track....be sure to stretch, ARam... also, no surprises in dusty's lineup. no qualms from me on this one: Pierre Walker Lee Ramirez Jones Barrett Murton Cedeno Zambrano

Question for AZ Phil or anyone -- Can a player agree to a minor league assignment, even if he is out of options? I know that once a player is out of options, a team can't send him down (i.e. another solution -- usually a trade --must be found), but I'm wondering if the player can waive that requirement if he wants to. For example, Wellemeyer seemed pretty bummed about being traded, but the Cubs had no choice but to trade him after it was determined that he wasn't going to make the 25 man roster. Given the fact that he is supposedly a lifelong Cub fan, could he have agreed to one last minor league assignment to prove himself?

Without being too picky, it's be nice to see Murton hitting ahead of Barrett. I hope there's no rainout tomorrow, even though I thought the Sox rain delay was funny. Worth your $500, people? LOL.

Re Wellmeyer and options in general The problem as I understand is that once a player runs out of options he has to clear waivers from every other MLB team ( starting with the worst teams first) . If a team claims such a player he has to go on the 40 man roster but I believe Hendry believed that given the constant need for half way decent arms, Wellmeyer would have been claimed so getting even a little something for him was better than letting him be claimed for nothing

cubs.com lists a 41st player on the 40-man roster, pitcher Clay Rapada, who pitched in High-A Daytona last year

re: options you can't individually negotiate away rights that are agreed upon in the collective bargaining agreement (see: ARod not being able to say "make my contract smaller" in order to be traded to the red sox) the players' union doesn't want precedents to be set that could make teams expect for other players to do similar things for them later. it's stupid, but that's the labor unions for you.

It's not stupid, it's the whole concept of collective bargaining.

This was done to make sure that talented players were not kept from playing by orginizations that may simply not have needed their talent at the time. A team is given pleny of time "options" to get a player to the MLB level and keep him there but when they have used this up OTHER teams get a chance to pick him up and let him play Same reasoning behind the rule 5 draft. It is a perfectly logical rule, good for the player and baseball. Wellemeyer might be "bummed" having grown up a Cub fan or whatever but he will get chance to play in the MLB this season which he probably would not if he had been kept

Yeah, labor unions. They're what's wrong with everything. If only huge corporations could find a way to get a little power in this country, huh?

NATE: Clay Rapada is NOT on the 40-man roster. He was just one of several players from the Minor League Camp who were invited to accompany the cubs to Las Vegas.

#3 of 11: By 433 (April 2, 2006 11:43 PM) Question for AZ Phil or anyone -- Can a player agree to a minor league assignment, even if he is out of options? I know that once a player is out of options, a team can't send him down (i.e. another solution -- usually a trade --must be found), but I'm wondering if the player can waive that requirement if he wants to. For example, Wellemeyer seemed pretty bummed about being traded, but the Cubs had no choice but to trade him after it was determined that he wasn't going to make the 25 man roster. Given the fact that he is supposedly a lifelong Cub fan, could he have agreed to one last minor league assignment to prove himself? -- 433: The only way the Cubs could have sent Todd Wellemeyer to Iowa out of Spring Training is if he had been placed on Outright Waivers, and wasn't claimed by anybody (as happened with David Kelton at this time last year). But the fact that the Marlins were willing to give up two players for him means the Cubs weren't going to get Welly through waivers anyway, so that's that. The only way a player can refuse an outright assignment to the minor leagues is if he has at least three years of MLB service time and/or has been outrighted to the minors previously in his career. Such a player can choose to be a free-agent immediately, or else defer the choice until the end of the MLB regular season. If the player accepts the minor league assignment and defers the opportunity to be a free-agent until after the season, the club then has the option to reacquire the player and place him back on the 40-man roster anytime up to ten days after the close of the regular season. Players with at least six years of combined minor league/major league service time who are outrighted to the minor leagues for the first time in their career or who have less than three years of MLB service time would be eligible for free-agency as a so-called "six-year minor league free-agent" if not added to an MLB 40-man roster within ten days after the close of the MLB regular season (as was the case with David Kelton last year).

433, the player can accept a minor league assignment if he is out of options and clears waivers. It would be an interesting question if a player wanted to accept the minor league assignment rather than be claimed by another MLB team. I will have to look that up. In normal times, it would be inconceivable that a player would refuse a major league claim in lieu of a minor league assignment--especially given the salary difference. But I guess it is even conceivable that a player could prefer AAA Iowa (with likelihood of promotion) than being claimed by the Kansas City Royals. AZ Phil, I believe the stricter roster limits that began in 1968 were a direct result of expansion. Baseball was adding 4 teams in 1969 (San Diego and Montreal in the NL, Seattle Pilots and Kansas City in the AL). This was the largest single-year expansion in modern times and third time baseball had expanded in the 1960s. The perceived woeful experience of the 1961 and 1962 expansion teams (Los Angeles Angels, Washington Senators in the AL in 1961 and Houston Colt .45s and New York Mets) no doubt caused pressure to limit rosters so as to "free up" more talented players for the expansion teams.

To clarify my prior response on outrighting--AZ Phil is right about when a player cannot refuse an assignment. And it turns out that the situation that I was interested in does not arise. The "six year minor league free agent," or a player that has been outrighted before, or a player with more than three years major league playing time, do not go through the waiver process, they can become total free agents, free to sign either a major or minor league conract anywhere. That is how guys like Marquis Grissom, Augie Ojeda, et al. become "non-roster Spring Training invitees." Sorry for any confusion my prior post might create.

OK, I think see what 433 was asking. Could Todd Wellemeyer refuse to go to a team that claims him off waivers and go to the minors with the Cubs instead? No, he has to go to the team that claims him, because he doesn't have any "no trade'" rights. The only way a player can refuse a waiver claim is if he has "no trade" rights (written in his contract like with Kerry Wood, 10/5 man, Type XX FA through June 15, et al).

Perhaps AZ Phil or another expert can help me on this ... but I recall one year in which all MLB clubs had a -- let's call it a "gentleman's agreement" ("collusion" being such an ugly word) to use a 24-man roster - that is, one player fewer than they were allowed to have, in order to save money. This was in the 1960s, if my now-porous memory is serving me correctly. The "agreement" didn't last very long - as soon as one club broke it, all the others did. Does anyone else know anything about this blip in MLB labor relations?

*Worth your $500, people? LOL.* What price do you put on seeing the WS Banner raised?

What price do you put on seeing the WS Banner raised? Doh!

#16 of 18: By Brown Line (April 3, 2006 12:03 PM) Perhaps AZ Phil or another expert can help me on this ... but I recall one year in which all MLB clubs had a -- let's call it a "gentleman's agreement" ("collusion" being such an ugly word) to use a 24-man roster - that is, one player fewer than they were allowed to have, in order to save money. This was in the 1960s, if my now-porous memory is serving me correctly. The "agreement" didn't last very long - as soon as one club broke it, all the others did. Does anyone else know anything about this blip in MLB labor relations? -- BROWN-LINE: After a 24-man roster limit was put into the CBA in 1977, the owners tried a half-ysar experiment (April through June 1978) where clubs rosters were set at 24, but it was abandoned. In 1987, as part of the Grand Ueberroth Collusion Plan of 1987-89, teams "coincidentally, individuually, and independently" decided to play with only 24 players (which they had had the right to do since 1977, but had only talked about doing for years). They continued to go with 24-man rosters for a total of three full years (1987 through 1989), until the lockout of 1990 resulted in a new CBA that permitted clubs to play with 24 players in 1990, but required clubs to go to 25-man rosters (minimum) in 1991. However, several clubs jumped the gun and went to 25-man rosters on Opening Day 1990, so all of the other MLB teams immediately went to 25-man rosters, too, so as to not be at a competitive disadvantage. And that was the end of the 24-man roster.

Recent comments

  • crunch (view)

    SF snags b.snell...2/62m

  • Cubster (view)

    AZ Phil: THAT is an awesome report worth multiple thanks. I’m sure it will be worth reposting in an “I told you so” in about 2-3 years.

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    The actual deadline to select a post-2023 Article XX-B MLB free agent signed to 2024 minor league contract (Cooper, Edwards, and Peralta) to the MLB 40-man roster is not MLB Opening Day, it is 12 PM (Eastern) this coming Sunday (3/24). 

    However, the Cubs could notify the player prior to the deadline that the player is not going to get added to the 40 on Sunday, which would allow the player to opt out early. Otherwise the player can opt out anytime after the Sunday deadline (if he was not added to the 40 by that time). 

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    Today is an off day for both the Cubs MLB players and the Cubs minor league players.  

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    For those of you keeping track, so far nine players have been called up to Mesa from the Cubs Dominican Academy for Minor League Camp and they will be playing in the ACL in 2024: 

    * bats or throws left 

    Angel Cepeda, INF 
    * Miguel Cruz, P
    Yidel Diaz, C 
    * Albert Gutierrez, 1B
    Fraiman Marte, P  
    Francis Reynoso, P (ex-1B) 
    Derniche Valdez, INF 
    Edward Vargas, OF 
    Jeral Vizcaino, P 

    And once again, despite what you might read at Baseball Reference and at milb.com, Albert Gutierrez is absolutely positively a left-handed hitter (only), NOT a right-handed hitter.

    Probably not too surprisingly, D. Valdez was the Cubs #1 prospect in the DSL last season, Cepeda was the DSL Cubs best all-around SS prospect not named Derniche Valdez, Gutierrez was the DSL Cubs top power hitting prospect not named Derniche Valdez, E. Vargas was the DSL Cubs top outfield prospect (and Cepeda and E. Vargas were also the DSL Cubs top two hitting prospects), Y. Diaz was the DSL Cubs top catching prospect, and M. Cruz was the DSL Cubs top pitching prospect. 

    F. Marte (ex-STL) and J. Vizcaino (ex-MIL) are older pitchers (both are 22) who were signed by the Cubs after being released by other organizations and then had really good years working out of the bullpen for the Cubs in the DSL last season. 

    The elephant in the room is 21-year old Francis Reynoso, a big dude (6'5) who was a position player (1B) at the Cardinals Dominican Academy for a couple of years, then was released by STL in 2022, and then signed by the Cubs and converted to a RHP at the Cubs Dominican Academy (and he projects as a high-velo "high-leverage" RP in the states). He had a monster year for the DSL Cubs last season (his first year as a pitcher). 

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    DJL: The only players who definitely have opt outs are Cooper, Edwards, and Peralta (Opening Day, 5/1, and 6/1), and that's because they are post-2023 Article XX-B MLB free agents who signed 2024 minor league contracts and (by rule) they get those opt outs automatically. 

    Otherwise, any player signed to a 2024 minor league contract - MIGHT or - MIGHT NOT - have an opt out in their contract, but it is an individual thing, and if there are contractual opt outs the opt out(s) might not necessarily be Opening Day. It could be 5/1, or 6/1, or 7/1 (TBD).

    Because of their extensive pro experience, the players who most-likely have contractual opt outs are Alfaro, Escobar, and D. Smith, but (again), not necessarily Opening Day. 

    Also, just because a player has the right to opt out doesn't mean he will. 

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    I love the idea that Madrigal heads to Iowa in case Morel can’t handle third.

    The one point that intrigues me here is Cooper over Smith. I feel like the Cubs really like Smith and don’t want to lose him. Could be wrong. He def seems like an opt out if he misses the opening day roster

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    Childersb3: Both Madrigal and Wisdom can be optioned without any restriction. Their consent is not required. 

    They both can be outrighted without restriction, too (presuming the player is not claimed off waivers), but if outrighted they can choose to elect free agency (immediately, or deferred until after the end of the MLB season).

    If the player is outrighted and elects free-agency immediately he forfeits what remains of his salary.

    If he accepts the assignment and defers free agency until after the conclusion of the season, he continues to get his salary, and he could be added back to the 40 anytime prior to becoming a free-agent (club option). 

  • Childersb3 (view)

    Phil, 
    Madrigal and Wisdom can or cannot refuse being optioned to the Minors?
    If they can refuse it, wouldn't they elect to leave the Cubs org?

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    In my opinion, the biggest "affirmative" mistake the Cubs made in the off-season (that is, doing something they should not have done), was blowing $9M in 2024 AAV on Hector Neris. What the Cubs actually need is an alternate closer to be in the pen and available to close if Alzolay pitched the day before (David Robertson would have been perfect), because with his forearm issue last September, I would be VERY wary of over-using Alzolay. I'm not even sure I would pitch him two days in a row!  

    And of course what the Cubs REALLY need is a second TOR SP to pair with Justin Steele. That's where the Cubs are going to need to be willing to package prospects (like the Padres did to acquire Dylan Cease, the Orioles did to acquire Corbin Burnes, and the Dodgers did to acquire Tyler Glasnow). Obviously those ships have sailed, but I would say right now the Cubs need to look very hard at trying to acquire LHSP Jesus Luzardo from the Marlins (and maybe LHP A. J. Puk as well).