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

Cubs Roll Nine Spot

Brad Snyder smacked a grand slam home run and Bobby Scales batted twice and drove in three runs with two singles to highlight a nine-run 7th, as the Cubs shutout the White Sox 13-0 before an all-time record crowd of 13,010 at Dwight Patterson Field at HoHoKam Park this afternoon in hot & sunny Mesa, Arizona.  

box score

 

The Cubs were held hitless through the first three innings, before they mounted a two-out rally in the bottom of the 4th against Sox right-hander Ehren Wassermann.

Mike Fontenot lined a single to center and Brad Snyder roped a single to right, before Koyie Hill slammed a double off the right field fence, driving in both runners and giving the Cubs a 2-0 lead. 

The Cubs scored twice more with one out in the bottom of the 5th off Octavio Dotel, as Aaron Miles bounced a "seeing-eye" 15-hopper through box into centerfield, and Derrek Lee lined a "knucleball" single in front of Jermaine Dye in right. Micah Hoffpauir followed with a line single to right that plated Miles and sent D-Lee to 3rd, and then Lee scored on a 5-4 FC RBI by Aramis Ramirez.

The Cubs finished their scoring in the 7th, as Sox right-hander Adam Russell had one of those Innings from Hell a pitcher can experience sometimes in a Spring Training game.

Jake Fox got the inning started, as he was hit by a pitch. Hoffpauir then roped a single to right, before Aramis Ramirez reached base on an E-6 by Sox shortstop Brent Lillibridge on what should have been a "room service" DP ball. Bobby Scales lined a bases-loaded single to left-center to score Fox, and then Brad Snyder crushed a grand slam to deep right-center, giving the Cubs a 9-0 lead. (There is a contest in the bottom of the 7th, where some lucky fan can win $500 from one of the local Indian casinos if a Cubs player hits a grand slam...). 

But the Cubs weren't done yet!

Welington Castillo drew a walk, and Sam Fuld and Doug Deeds singled to load the bases. Andres Blanco then singled to drive in two runs, and after Fox popped out and Steve Clevenger struck out, Luis Rivas drew a walk to reload the bases, and Scales followed with still another bases-loaded line-drive RBI single, this time driving in two runs. 

All of the scoring overshadowed a fine group performance by the Cubs Pitchers. 

Aaron Heilman got the start and was masterful, working two innings (22 pitches - 17 strikes - 2/0 GO/FO), allowing just one ground ball hit while striking out four and walking none. His sinker looked very good.

Kevin Gregg (19 pitches - 12 strikes 1/1 GO/FO) allowed a double while striking out one in his one inning of work, and Neal Cotts (20 pitches - 11 strikes - 0/3 GO/FO) labored a bit while allowing a hit (also a double) and a walk in his inning.

Rule 5 pick David Patton only threw nine pitches in the 5th, so Manager Lou Piniella sent him out for a second inning. Patton was (like Heilman) a strike machine today (26 pitches - 21 strikes), allowing just a harmless single while stiking out two 

Ken Kadokura nibbled his way through the 7th (27 pitches - only 14 strikes), allowing a hit and a walk, but Jason Waddell got through the 8th in about two minutes, throwing only six pitches (resulting in one ground out and two fly outs).

Esmailin Caridad worked a scoreles 9th (17 pitches - 12 strikes - 1/1 GO/FO), although his outing was extended a bit longer than it should have gone when he committed a throwing error on an easy comebacker to the mound. But Caridad has good stuff and works fast, and he looks like he could be ready to pitch in the big leagues right now.

On defense, Doug Deeds made a fine catch crashing into the wall in LF in the 8th.

The Cubs are now 4-0 in Cactus League play, and will travel to Peoria tomorrow to play the San Diego Padres.  

Comments

Count me in the "open to Schilling" idea. I'm not a huge fan of his politics, but he is a winner, a gamer, and brings a knowledge of pitching I think benefits the young kids we have on staff. He, Harden, and Heilman as a #5 starter is fine by me.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

nope. you ignore the point. who gives a flying F what his politics are? Freaking Zambrano is Venezuelan and would consider playing for his country in the WBC. You think I care? No. To borrow a line (and mildly change) from my good friend Ferris: I don't care if they're commies, doesn't change the fact that my team hasn't won a championship in 100 years. In the end the comment was total bullsh!t. And you all know it.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

The comment was not total bullshit. As crunch said, notice the BUT. All he was saying was "I don't really like the guy, but if he can help the team I am all for it." We all said the same thing about Edmonds. It wasn't politics, but instead past team affiliation, but it was the same point, we all felt it would be hard to root for him but of course were OK with the signing if he helped the Cubs win. Also, don't confuse politics with love of country. I know many Venezuelans in the US who love their country and are deeply proud of being Venezuelan, but they hate the fact that it has been taken over a by a megalomaniac dictator.

[ ]

In reply to by WISCGRAD

My understanding of Chad's point is that if you say something like this: "Statement A --> BUT <-- statement B (which completely negates statement A)", then the whole comment is pretty irrelevant. Rhetorically, what you've just done is make one statement and pretended to disregard it, except that if the statement can be disregarded it was not much worth saying. So the point was probably to call the information in statement A to everyone's attention while creating a personal defense with statement B. I should know. I do this all the time. By accident. Then I go back and think, why did I post that? Of course, that's if you view this message board as a forum for argument/debate. If you view it as a discussion within a friendly community, then the original statement is not irrelevant—it is self-revelation and offers the rest of the community the opportunity to respond.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

says you. it was crystal clear to me. there's no hidden/sneaky message. it's very plain english. i dont like this aspect, but the guy blah blah baseball relevant things. i don't like jim edmonds because, but... "negating statements" are for people looking for conspiracy. it's a lot easier to just read the statement as is...which says "i have a personal opinion about a guy, but he'll probably be good for the team so whatever" there is NOTHING wrong or negating about the statement. it's a statement...not a competition. i don't like jim edmonds because he blah blah blah, but he's an advantage to the cubs for his pay and cant hurt. i don't expect that to be followed by "BUT YOU HATE EDMONDS SO THE 2ND HALF OF THAT MEANS NOTHING AND I WON'T TAKE IT INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE ONLY 1/2 YOUR OPINION COUNTS EVEN THOUGH YOU WENT THROUGH THE TROUBLE TO PUT A QUALIFIER IN!" less conspiracy, more face value...

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

you know what stop being a pussy and forget the qualifier. say what you mean and mean what you say. regardless, what the fuck do you know anyway? This wasn't your post I was talking about and you have no business being in this trying to defend him. He's a partisan cub fan and doesn't like the fact that Schilling is a republican. Until he says differently, i"m taking him on what he wrote.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

Are you kidding about this? Do you know anything about Venezeulan politics at all? Why is this scenario any different? You don't like who is in charge of the country, but you play anyway. Do you have any basis for calling Chavez a dictator or are you just parroting the rhetoric of the right? Is it a player's fault that Chavez in charge of the country he is from? Hell, the player may like Chavez. How the hell do you think he stays in power? He uses oil revenue to give people shit. People like free gas, free healthcare, state jobs, etc. It's not a mystery. In the latest referendum on Chavez's new constitution two weeks ago, he wins 55% of the vote. This means that about half of the people like him and about half don't. Why if you are a player do you punish the entire population by not participating in a team that they will surely follow and root for? Simply because you don't like the fact that Chavez is in charge, a feeling about half of your fellow citizens share? What is the point? There is no logic behind this.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

You know, I am not an expert on pretty much anything talked about on here. But considering I am just finishing a PhD in Political Science (with a focus in authoritarianism and Latin American Politics no less) I have to tell you that you are flat out wrong on this. It's not as simple as calling a leader a dictator or not. What is your definition? Scholars have been debating it for years. These aren't binaries. Many would argue that the steps Bush took to erode civil liberties made him a dictator. I also never said that vote totals had anything to do with defining a regime as a dictatorship. You do realize that there are HUGE differences between Saddam and Chavez right? And that Chavez actually LOST the last vote on the referendum last year? Meaning that elections are a fair representation of how the general public feels on issues. And again, why the fuck would someone from Venezuela not want to represent the 26 million people of the country and the society they grew up in simply because Chad doesn't like Chavez? To merge our threads. I am guessing that Shilling dislikes Obama more than many of the Venezuelan players dislike Chavez. The idea that either would abstain from representing their countries is stupid.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

No, I don't know that Hitler is an elected official. Probably because he isn't. He was appointed Chancellor in 1933 (not 1932 FYI), despite the Nazi party only having ever achieved 37% of the vote in the Reichstag (and his party had just LOST 34 seats in the previous election). He then used the Reichstag fire and other events to push through the Enabling Act which let him govern without the constitution. Also, I have to say the "what about Hitler" argument is so played. By comparing everything to Hitler you can make a lot of stuff seem ridiculous. Chavez isn't Hitler and you know it. It's a dumb point to try to make. But to your question. If there was say German sprinter training in the United States in 1932, and he decides wants to run for his country - Germany - in the Los Angeles Olympics in 1932, I have ABSOLUTELY NO problem with this. Why would you? Hell, Hitler is not even in power yet. WWII is still 7 years away. Human rights violations at this point are not extensive. Etc. But even if you were correct and this was the case in 1932, I still don't see how that makes all Germans somehow ashamed to be German. Why do they stop having pride in their country? Just because they don't like the leadership? Why wouldn't they want to represent the German people? While it doesn't hold true all the time, the idea behind international sporting events like the Olympics and WBC is that sports can rise above politics. I think it is great that the Cubans can participate despite US animosity toward the Castro regime. Likewise with Venezuela. I think it is great that China can host the Olympics. When politics does come into these things - like with the 1980 Boycott - they usually have no effect and are heavily criticized. So again, I don't see your point at all. Henry Blanco doesn't think his participation in the WBC is a referendum on Chavez's politics. He sees it as playing for the pride of being Venezeulan, something that has its roots long before Chavez came to power and will remain long after he is gone. It's as simple as that. Oh, and good one, calling me a Communist. I mean, wow, I don't have a comeback for that one.

[ ]

In reply to by WISCGRAD

is it even worth mentioning that these people making huge money in VEN are the ones not benefiting from chavez's politics? it's probably also worth mentioning for those that may think VEN is a 3rd world country that it's actually pretty modern in the urban areas...US-style modern. yeah, their slums surrounding the cities may be those "3rd world style" views we're used to seeing, but the country isn't hunkered in mud huts with no shot at life except what the govt. provides them. ...this is rant continuation, btw...just adding along...

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Also, no, Venezuela is not dirt poor. It's much like the rest of it's neighbors in the region. It's developing and the urban areas look very much like the US or Europe, but the rural areas and urban slums are pretty bad. Income inequality is high. But Venezuela is not a mass police state either. Freedom House ranks all countries based on political rights and civil liberties. In its latest (2008) rankings it has about 80 countries as bad or worse than the Venezuela. So the idea that Venezuela today is somehow like living in Nazi Germany or in Burma today is ridiculous.

[ ]

In reply to by Jordan

"I guess I'm more concerned with how often he injects himself into the political realm while serving as very public sports figure, and less about which party he ascribes to." Again just more bullshit. Admit that you have a problem rooting for a republican. Your original statement was an indictment of his beliefs and not his actions. I highly doubt you would care if he had done the same things but only while campaigning for Obama.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

Chad, Please utilize whatever semblance of reading comprehension skills you might have. You can either A) Take my post at face value and stop being a complete douche about it, or B) Color it through your own misguided world-view complete with fatalistic, always-the-victim, deep-rooted insecurities. See, how does it feel to have someone baselessly misconstrue and over-analyze your words which were meant to be straightforward? If the Cubs signed fucking Rahm Emanuel, I'd hope the dude would eschew partisan politics while having a solid .300 .400 .950 year w/ 40 HR and 125 RBI....but I can only dream, cant I?

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

This tangent you're on has nothing to do with what you're supposed to be ranting about, but you think it does so there's really nothing more to be done with it...at least from me, anyway. You will find the answers to everything if you just read everything. Your conspiracy is off-mark, but you refuse to move off it even in the face of explanations. There's not much more to be done with that.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

your questions have nothing to do with your original tangent you got on. rather than accepting explainations you choose to reject them then ask questions based off your assumption. this is what's going on here and why i'm not playing. this got stupid long ago and for some reason you really really really don't want to believe people are telling the truth explaining things to you. this whole political-love polarizing thing is gonna give you a heart attack.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

I don't say this often... but Chad is right on this one. The "I don't like his politics" was pretty clearly talking about his ideologies more than his actions. With that said, I have no problem with the original comment - it is valid. I too don't like Schilling's politics, but I too would be interested in having him pitch for the Cubs... if he can still pitch. There were many athletes campaigning for Obama in this last election cycle, but I don't hear many people complaining about their politics.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

I just read all of this and it is completely stupid. Jordan admits that he is not "a huge fan of his politics." Who cares if this means because he is a Republican or because he is political in general? Why does it matter? Because he immediately follows it up with, "but he can help the team so I would be ok with it." So who cares? But if Jordan is not saying it, I will: I have a fucking problem with Schilling being a Republican. I'd rather root for players that I like personally. In my ideal world, every player on the Cubs would not be racist, sexist, or discriminate against gays, and would try to help the environment, give to charity, support education, and in just in general share my liberal views. But my first preference is to see the Cubs win, and if they need 25 former convicts to pull it off, then I will wear orange jumpsuits in their honor all season long.

[ ]

In reply to by WISCGRAD

here's a tip, don't bring up an issue then immediately ask us to forget you said it. If it's a non-issue then don't bring it up. And i love how you try to parallel being a republican with being "racist, sexist, or discriminate against gays" and then try to paint them as people who would not "try to help the environment, give to charity, support education, and in just in general share my liberal views"

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

this politics stuff consumes you. it's not a sport...it doesn't need a class war or a verbal beatdown to prove anything. your general attitude in this whole post is pretty disgusting and verbally violent toward others. you're gonna have a f'n heart attack defending an idealology that no one's attacking. this is about schilling, not any of us...no matter how much you wanna tie it in. person A has an issue with someone (MUCH LIKE YOURS WITH DELGADO AND EVIDENTLY VEN. PLAYERS) and then says he can look past that if it helps the team. you choose to concentrate on the fact that a person can have an opinion yet you can look past the core of the statement, the meaning of the statement, and the entire gist of the statement. what the hell is your problem with this? it's cut/dry and sane thinking only you don't like it because it dares to touch on the Grand Ol' Party. you're gonna drop dead of a heart attack over this crap in between calling everyone a bunch of stupid names.

[ ]

In reply to by Tito

that comment wouldn't have happened if Schilling was a democrat. Ask any republican on this board if we would have made that comment? i will be money that no one would. We, for the most part, have an easier time accepting people on the other side. Yeah, sounds weird, doesn't it. Don't believe me? Then ask us how we stomach the entertainment industry. FYI, my hero is Alec Baldwin. I'm a HUGE fan of his and will watch anything that he's in.

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

the fact you actually believe what you just typed makes me wonder what planet chad is like. that 1st sentence says a lot...a whole lot. and no, i don't need an explanation on why it's "the truth" because...well, i'm not going to explain myself and believe me, i don't want to know why it's "the truth"...absolutely 0 interest. i'll just say that 1st and last sentence says a lot and there's no arguing with someone who believes that flat-earth logic.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

i live in planet hollywood. here conservatives hide and don't tell people that they are republicans. i live it everyday. you won't get jobs in this town if people know you're a republican. you'll get berated at work. it's not pretty. and believe me, it happens/happened to me as I was outed a couple of years ago. But go ahead and think that it doesn't happen.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

you're mocking aside, i have been berated in more than one office. and i know people who have been too. make fun all you want but it's very real. Dennis Prager talks about it all the time. He theorizes that if a conservative group set up a booth on campus as did a liberal group set up a booth in a very conservative area, taht the liberal group would be treated very well while the conservative group would be harassed. I totally agree with him

[ ]

In reply to by Chad

What world do you live in? I've lived in a conservative Catholic town in Iowa and liberal Madison. The pro-gay rights group had batteries thrown at them in Iowa. The same shit happens in both places. It's just that liberal groups chose, for the most part, not to have talks and protests in stupid places where they have no support. Conservative often do this on purpose, as strategy, to get on TV and attempt to get people to feel sympathetic for them. It's calculated. It's why the ID groups love to be turned down for opportunities for talks, because they can then talk about how unfair the world is that their "science" is not included with the others.

[ ]

In reply to by Charlie

Good luck with the definition part... I consider myself more middle of the road than most, and would say I'm fiscally more of a Republican and socially more of a Democrat. This is a tough one to argue, because people at both ends of the spectrum are so skewed in their beliefs that they can't tolerate any viewpoint besides their own. I just try to be consistent with what I believe. I'm not sure how someone can be for the death penalty and dead-set against abortions (I am for both, by the way). That one always blows my mind... Let's get back to arguing baseball and leave the political banter to the "experts" like Bill O'Reilly and Bill Maher. Nothing good can come of people discussing politics, except feelings getting hurt and respect being lost, and the common bond we share here is Cubs baseball, anyways. Hard to believe a discussion started to talk about the possibility of a guy like Schilling playing for the Cubs turned into a 100-post detour into political history and arguing over the more evil party in America.

[ ]

In reply to by big_lowitzki

no i'm not dave. i am not calling the conservatives "tolerant". I am saying that the act more civilly overall. i would gladly put this to the test. i'll set up a college republican station in the middle of UCLA and you can put up a ACLU booth in a very conservative area. we videotape the results. I will bet you that you would get ignored while i would be repeatedly harassed.

[ ]

In reply to by big_lowitzki

so let's just keep it to the comment that started this: a booth set up at UCLA's campus for a College Republican's group would be harassed and worse (i would bet money that the booth would be destroyed) while a ACLU booth in a very conservative area would be untouched and the people at the booth would be treated much better. Again, I said better.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-01-cubs-white-sox-gamer-chicma… ----- "The game was the first of five exhibitions between the crosstown rivals, including two Wednesday and Thursday in Las Vegas. The real deal begins in June with series at Wrigley and U.S. Cellular Field, and it should be more heated after Piniella inadvertently hung up on Guillen last week. "Evidently he was a little upset because he wanted to use the DH today, and I couldn't hear who it was so I hung up on him," Piniella said with a laugh. Guillen tried to call back, and Piniella hung up on him again. Afterward, Guillen told friends it was easier for him to reach President Barack Obama than Piniella. But the two finally connected a couple of days ago. "I told Ozzie when I left a message, 'Whatever you want, we'll accommodate you,' " Piniella said. "So today he told me, 'Can I have a couple of your players?' "

Not sure if this is old news or not... Orioles' Hill scratched with elbow stiffness "FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP)—Baltimore Orioles left-hander Rich Hill was scratched from Sunday’s spring training start with elbow stiffness, an annoying setback for a pitcher eager to restart his stalled major league career. Hill was scheduled to face the Washington Nationals in Viera, Fla., but was left at Baltimore’s camp after developing stiffness in his left elbow Saturday. The injury is not perceived as serious, but the Orioles—and Hill—aren’t taking chances." Full Story

Conservative groups stage anti-gay protests, which I would think would disturb you.

Recent comments

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    That’s a fantastic deal for SF

  • 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?