Cubs MLB Roster

Cubs Organizational Depth Chart
40-Man Roster Info

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

28 players on MLB RESERVE LIST are ACTIVE, and twelve players are on OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT to minors. 

Last updated 3-26-2024
 
* bats or throws left
# bats both

PITCHERS: 15
Yency Almonte
Adbert Alzolay 
Javier Assad
Jose Cuas
Kyle Hendricks
* Shota Imanaga
Caleb Kilian
Mark Leiter Jr
* Luke Little
Julian Merryweather
Hector Neris 
* Drew Smyly
* Justin Steele
Jameson Taillon
* Jordan Wicks

CATCHERS: 2
Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

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

OUTFIELDERS: 4
* Cody Bellinger 
Alexander Canario
# 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 

 



 

Minor League Rosters
Rule 5 Draft 
Minor League Free-Agents

Brett Jackson Makes A List and Other Cubs Minutiae

The rush of major league prospect rankings are about to make their way out and MLB/MILB.com and Jonathon Mayo is the first out of the gate. OF Brett Jackson is the only Cub and is listed as the #46 best prospect in all of baseball. Just traded Cub, Chris Archer, finished one spot below Jackson at #47. You can always view past rankings at Wiklifield, where you can discover such things as Starlin Castro being rated #22 last season.  From the video clip on Jackson they had this to say...

"Each tool may not wow you, but he can do a little bit of everything and has the potential to be a 20/20 type player in the future."

In other news, if you care to call it that, the Cubs signed Todd Wellemeyer to an $800K non-guaranteed deal with another $400K in incentives. Hendry must be on a contract quota or something.

Clay Rapada ended up where you'd expect an ex-Cub minor leaguer to end up.

In Bruce Levine's weekly chat, he says the Cubs may add a veteran middle infielder with Orlando Cabrera, Julio Lugo and Chirstian Guzman being named. He calls out the two Jackson's (Brett and Jay) as the most likely call-ups in 2011.

Comments

that he'll be somewhere else in 2011 http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110123&content_id=16…
I really don't care, to tell you the truth," he said about the need to make the 25-man roster. "I'm very, very excited with how things are going and me being down there [in Arizona] since early November. How I'm working out, how I'm throwing the ball, how I'm throwing off the mound already, I'm very, very excited.
kidding around, seems to be working hard this offseason and counting on Mark Riggins to keep him on the team.

I don't understand the comment, "I'm throwing off the mound already...". Did he have some type of injury I don't remember? Do they not throw off a mound in winter when they initially start throwing? Can someone explain?

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

a little birdy told me they ranked #20th and would be top 10 before the trade. Something about still having the most prospects in the 100-150 range other then the Royals. A lot of average to just above average potential major leaguers at the moment. -correction- a lot of players that could be above average or better and what he calls high floor players.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

if you agree with that assessment, what does that mean for the Cubs? my take, make some more Matt Garza like trades (or Aramis Ramirez or Derrek Lee if you will), trading away depth for your potential young All-star talent. Instead of overpaying for over 30 guys on the free agent market, target arbitration and near FA players that teams are looking to move. At least you get them younger and at a better point in their career path. also, if Hendry doesn't trade them all away, the Cubs should be better able to withstand injuries with a constant pipeline of talent that could replace ineffective or injured players.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

Even if we put the debate on Garza's merit aside, how many more trades like that can we expect to make? The current 25 man roster isn't a championship caliber team. Say we made one more trade like that, picking up Billy Butler for the Jackson twins, Castillo and Dollis, and don't sign Pena - are we now the favorites or even one of the favorites in the NL central? The team needs a major boost, like adding 10 to 14 WAR. The best way to do that, in my mind is replace the Byrd's, Bakers and Fukudome's with guys who are pre-arb produce at similar levels, and then make one or two astute moves in free agency. Maybe for 2013 only two of those four guys are average ML starters - but they're doing it for less than a million bucks combined, while we're paying Garza $11 million for maybe one more win. Doing that two or three times, doesn't seem to help the overall problem. There's also the other issue, that I don't think we get these guys to sign at "hometown discounts"... when they get traded from Pittsburgh or Florida because the team doesn't want to sign them long term - they're going to come to the Cubs with a "time to get paid" mindset.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

Billy Butler? Really? Lol.... Ok..so you think that this trade would be made? Wouldn't the Jacksons, and Castillo all be rated ahead of Chirinos and Guyer? I agree that making a series of trades like this is no way to build a team, but the Cubs gave up a good pitching prospect, a SS who is 2-3 years away, and may or my not develop any power/and still be blocked by Castro, a guy who may just have had a career year in AA...at age 24..who hit 70 points above his career average in 1042 PA's, and a 26 year old Catcher converted from the infield..who has 55 at bats in AAA, and was behind Castillo on the depth chart. Basically, the Cubs gave upa good pitching prospect, and a 19 year old SS with little power, for Matt Garza, a MLB starting pitcher who will turn 27 this season, and is a the very least, a solid #3 start...maybe a #2. Ok.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

Fine Neal...Fine. If Guyer repeats his success, Archer makes the Rays rotation, Chirinos sticks as a backup catcher, and Hak Ju Lee is the starting SS in 2013, it will be a failed trade. Also possible, Garza pitches well for the Cubs 2011-2013....Archer becomes a bullpen arm for a very deep pitching staff in Tampa Bay...Guyer struggles in AAA, and becomes a tweener...a little power...a little speed, not enough of them to be a starting OF.... Chirinos becomes Crash Davis....touring AA and AAA until he becomes a coach, and Hak-Ju Lee doesn't hit enough to get out of AAA except as a defensive replacement. Again..I will freaking repeat: as has always been my assertion...I like Garza, I just don't understand the move this season, with so many holes on this team. I did not want to give up Archer, or even Lee. But Chirinos, and Guyer? A little old to get real excited about AA success, but could possibly become a 4th/5th OF type and a backup catcher. Maybe.

[ ]

In reply to by Dusty Baylor

A player drafted out of college being 24 is not old for AA. Guyer's production was rather stellar and I am not sure why people discount it so significantly...it was really the first year he was truly healthy and he got better as the year went on. I don't like the trade because I don't like trading prospects with huge upside...Guyer has speed, hit .340+ at a high level and showed at least significant xb hit power if not chance for 20 hrs. Archer has #1 starter potential and Lee has lead-off hitter/40 sb potential. That said, if we received a star for these players, that would be understandable. I wouldn't complain if we received someone who could make a difference...instead we received someone who appears his ceiling is being a #2. And people here justify it by downgrading the value of our prospects traded, which is just attempts to retain hope. If the trade was so wise, why did the Rays make the trade? And if you state that it was because they are not in contention, then you are stating we shouldn't have done the trade. If you are stating that they can replace Garza with their own talent and more cheaply, then perhaps we should have looked to deal for a better (or cheaper) player.

[ ]

In reply to by springs

guyer is neat, but prospect vs. MLB expectation is what i'm personally dealing with. for instance...castro is neat, but at the end of the day we got a guy who's upside is production vs. cost. he's a contact hitting low-power guy who should be cheap for 3-4 years. after that...unless the power shows... *shrug* guyer, if he can stay at CF, is interesting. a team that needs a roaming LF/RF/CF type he's interesting, too. as a regular he's a guy with doubles power who isn't very exciting at LF or RF unless the team can make up for it elsewhere. he's not going to take walks. he's gonna go up there and swing. he looks like a good #2 or 7/8 hitter as it stands if he can find a place to be a starter.

Jeff Samardzija says in the interview that he doesn't know where he will be in 2011. Well, since he is out of minor league options, he can't be optioned to the minors, and since he has "no trade" rights, he can't be traded or placed on Outright Waivers without waiving the NTC in advance. So if Samardzija does not waive his NTC, the only way the Cubs can remove him from the 25-man roster in 2011 is by Outright Release, and then the Cubs would be on the hook for The Shark's $2.8M salary (minus the prorated portion of the MLB minimum salary should he sign a major league contract with another MLB club). The Cubs will be able to change all of this after the 2011 season, however. The Cubs hold a $3M club option for 2012 that they are almost certain to decline (it could have been a mutual option if Samardzija was eligible for salary arbitration post-2011, but he won't have enough MLB service time to be eligible). Once the Cubs decline their 2012 club option, Samardzija reverts to being an "auto renewal" player without "no trade" rights, and the Cubs can either auto-renew him and sign him for 2012 with a maximum 20% pay cut from 2011 (meaning he would get no less than $2.24M if he is automatically renewed), or they can outright him to the minors (and it's unlikely that he would get claimed, because the claiming club would be stuck with paying Samardzija at least $2.24M in 2012), or he could get non-tendered on 12/2, which would have the effect of making Samardzija a free-agent, although the Cubs would be able to re-sign him to a major league or minor league contract without worrying about the 20% cut rule. So in a way, you could say Samardzija is a "Super Rule 5 Player" in 2011, because not only can't the Cubs option him to the minors, they can't even outright him unless he gives his approval (waives his NTC) in advance. Samardzija really has the Cubs by the balls.

[ ]

In reply to by Jim Hickmans Bat

Submitted by Jim Hickmans Bat on Wed, 01/26/2011 - 3:20pm. >>Samardzija really has the Cubs by the balls.<< I don't get this statement. Based on your explanation, the Shark has the Cubs on the hook for $2.8MM this year, but that's it. If they release him, that's all they owe. And if he signs a major league contract elsewhere, they get $400K of that money back. If he isn't good enough to make the Cubs middle relief corps, then what's wrong with cutting him if the cost is only $2.4MM? Heck, some teams release guys that are owed three or four times that money. ============================================= JIM H: Of course the Cubs could release Samardzija and eat $2.4M if he signs a major league deal with another club (or somewhere close to $2.8M if he signs a minor league deal elsewhere), and the Cubs have certainly eaten larger contracts in the past. But because of the money he's making and his NTC, Samardzija has a lot more Spring Training "roster leverage" than most players with his level of experience and MLB service time, more than the typical Rule 5 player (like David Patton in 2009 for instance). The Cubs might ultimately decide to release The Shark, but I highly doubt they would do so coming out of Spring Training, even if he gets crushed in Cactus League outings. Or he might surprise a lot of people and turn out to be really good. He did pitch fairly well out of the Cubs bullpen when he first got called up in 2008, and new Cubs pitching coach Mark Riggins thinks that's how he will be used in 2011. And you don't have to be Carlos Marmol to be the 12th man on the staff.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

We paid more than Texas for Garza. Texas, in case you didn't see, actually is contending for a championship. We are not. Perhaps Garza is good, but we overpaid for him and we aren't winning a championship. With all due respect, you are not looking at this trade in any perspective of where the Cubs currently stand. And somehow, because a minor league pitcher doesn't have great control, he isn't a good prospect? Sometimes that is true and sometimes they are Randy Johnson. Teams close to a championship should trade potential #1s with control issues for #2-3 starters to help them. Teams competing for 4th place should'nt make this trade -- if they should, then why did the Rays do the trade?

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

A SS has to hit more than 1 hr a year, period. They don't have to be juicers and hit 30 hr's, but these single hitting SS's are everywhere. Every team has a bunch of those guys in the minors. Maybe not with Lee's talent, but until Lee turns that potential into production, he's still just a singles hitting SS. I'll trade a guy like that for a proven, productive, and mind you, cheap, young, and team controlled starting pitcher every day of the year. And as for Archer, if he has to be moved to the bullpen (as some of these scouts/analysts are suggesting), even if he becomes a very good closer, that's still a no-brainer trade. SP's who give you 200 quality ip's are worth more than elite closers. How many teams have you seen win the world series or make it deep in the playoffs with average SP? Not many. How many make it deep with an average closer? A ton. Unless Lee and Archer both become proven, big time players, and not one year wonder's, the Cubs should be the winners in this trade easy.

[ ]

In reply to by Paul Noce

Ozzie Smith slugged .328 over 19 seasons. Vizquel slugged .354 over 22 seasons. Lee slugged .351 last year. Vizquel committed 25 errors, mostly in AA, at age 21, the earliest season BR has defensive records for. Smith was a perennial all star, a hall of famer, a magician. No one is comparing Lee to Smith; but there's no reason Lee couldn't become a perennial GG like Omar Vizquel, maybe a little better hitter, maybe not as good a glove--who knows? The reason I'm not crying about trading Lee is that I don't think he could have taken SS away from Castro. But they might have waited a couple of years and gotten more for him.

Manny signed for 1/2M, Vlad wanted 2/16M and is now down to 1/8M that still no one wants to pay.

Rotoworld's assessment of...got everything in there but "and he's ugly too"
the 34-year-old is going to have to turn elsewhere. He doesn't have good range, he doesn't have a good arm, he doesn't hit anything but singles and now he's pretty old. Someone will give him a non-roster invitation to spring camp, but will be a shock if he makes a big league roster.

Recent comments

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    For sure. This lineup isn’t exactly stacked as is, and subbing out a Cooper or even a Tauchman for Madrigal won’t do it any favors.

  • crunch (view)

    the ESPN bottom graphic taking up 1/8th of the screen sucks.

    i only use ESPN during baseball season and i'm forced to watch a baseball broadcast designed to be broadcast in sports bars and betting parlors where the news/scores of other games is as important as what you're actually tuned in to watch.

  • crunch (view)

    morel triple to start the season....yeaaaaaaaaaaaaah

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    LHP Blake Weiman appears to have been the last cut from the AAA Iowa roster. He is with the Tennessee group at Minor League Camp.

     

  • crunch (view)

    bruce bochy is hobbling rather badly for a guy who's had 2 hip replacements.  his gait is extremely wonky taking the lineup card to the ump.

  • crunch (view)

    yeah, for me this isn't about who's better at 3rd.  it's madrigal, period.  for me it's about who's not hitting in the lineup because madrigal is in the lineup.

    occasional play at 3rd for madrigal, okay.  going with the steele/ground-ball matchup...meh, but okay, whatever.

    seeing madrigal get significant starting time...no thanks.

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    Yeah I am very disappointed Madrigal is starting. He has no business as a starter. He is AAA insurance, a back up at best. Sure his defense looks fine because he plays far enough in that his noodle arm isn’t totally exposed. It comes at the cost of 3B range.

    He’s garbage, and a team serious about winning would NOT have him starting opening day.

  • crunch (view)

    in other news, it took 3 PA before a.rizzo got his 1st HBP of the season.

  • Eric S (view)

    With two home runs (so far) and 5 rbi today … clearly Nick Martini is the straw that stirs the Reds drink 😳

  • crunch (view)

    madrigal at 3rd...morel at DH.

    making room for madrigal or/and masterboney to get a significant amount of ABs is a misuse of the roster.  if it needed to get taken care of this offseason, they had tons of time to figure that out.

    morel played almost exclusively at 3rd in winter ball and they had him almost exclusively there all spring when he wasn't DH'ing.

    madrigal doing a good job with the glove for a bit over 2 chances per game...is that worth more than what he brings with the bat 4-5 PA a game?  it's 2024 and we got glenn beckert 2.0 manning 3rd base.

    this is a tauchman or cooper DH situation based on bat, alone.  cooper is 3/7 with a double off eovaldi if you want to play the most successful matchup.

    anyway, i hope this is a temporary thing, not business as usual for the rest of the season.  it will be telling if morel is not used at 3rd when an extreme fly ball pitcher like imanaga is on the mound.