Cubs MLB Roster

Cubs Organizational Depth Chart
40-Man Roster Info

40 players are on the MLB RESERVE LIST (roster is full), plus two players are 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 4-18-2024
 
* bats or throws left
# bats both

PITCHERS: 13
Yency Almonte
Adbert Alzolay 
Javier Assad
Colten Brewer
Ben Brown
Kyle Hendricks
* Shota Imanaga
Mark Leiter Jr
Hector Neris 
* Drew Smyly
Jameson Taillon 
Keegan Thompson
* Jordan Wicks

CATCHERS: 2
Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

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

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

OPTIONED: 12 
Kevin Alcantara, OF 
Michael Arias, P 
Pete Crow-Armstrong, OF 
Jose Cuas, P 
Brennen Davis, OF 
Porter Hodge, P 
* Luke Little, P 
* Miles Mastrobuoni, INF
* Matt Mervis, 1B 
Daniel Palencia, P 
Luis Vazquez, INF 
Hayden Wesneski, P 

10-DAY IL: 1 
Seiya Suzuki, OF

15-DAY IL: 
* Justin Steele, P   

60-DAY IL: 2 
Caleb Kilian, P 
Julian Merryweather, P
 




Minor League Rosters
Rule 5 Draft 
Minor League Free-Agents

Addition by Subtraction; The Sequel

Submitted by Rob G. on

After the Cubs disappointed in 2004, the offseason motto was addition by subtraction as the Cubs let Moises Alou and Matt Clement leave and desperately tried to move clubhouse cancer Sammy Sosa.

As we recall, the Cubs just got worse in 2005 and now baseball's worst organizational strategy is about to be revisited.

...Instead, the Cubs' biggest splash leading up to the 2009 season was signing switch-hitting outfielder Milton Bradley to a three-year, $30 million contract in January.

On Monday, when baseball executives gather in Indianapolis for the Winter Meetings, there will be much less neon. The Cubs' goals have changed, too. Now, it's addition by subtraction, as Hendry tries to move Bradley.

They usually don't let you make sequels after the first movie fails, but that's not stopping the Cubs.

"Last year, we had about 10 changes here," Piniella said. "If we have half that, that's a nice number. Some changes [last year] were out of necessity. I see us being selective in what we do."

The necessity was created because Lou threw a temper tantrum about a left-handed power bat and then his enabler Jim Hendry had to make a bunch of unnecessary and superfluous moves to fit Bradley's contract into the budget. Now that their problem child has acted up and made them look bad, the Cubs are doing what any rich, narcissistic parent would do...pay to send them away so he's someone else's problem rather than actually dealing with it and trying to make it work.

Tags
Cubs offseason

Comments

[ ]

Submitted by thedirtbag on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:08 pm

It is scary to say, but I think that the Cubs turnaround is largely placed on the shoulders of Soriano. Soto will obviously need to be better and based on Fangraphs analysis, he will be, but Soriano coming off of surgery will need to bounce back showing no ill effects and that his numbers are not deteriorating with age. Need a healthy year from everyone obviously, but the line up can be stretched out if Soriano finds his stroke again.

Submitted by The Real Neal on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:31 am

I am starting to think the Cubs may be coming around to a reconciliation with Bradley as we move further away from the end of the regular season. You see the Hendry quote and the Wells quote and Lee's comments, and though you could say that they are more about trying to rebuild trade value for Bradley, it could be that as the memories of the clubhouse tensions fade cooler heads are starting to prevail. The main "problem" with bringing back Bradley from a baseball perspective is the outfield defense. Marlon Byrd, however, isn't going to be a significant upgrade there - and he is also going to again load the bottom half of our lineup with right handed hitters. Coco Crisp would be a defensive upgrade, and if you buy into his walking tendencies last year a pretty nice leadoff hitter. I would guess that he could be had for less than Byrd, based on his option not being picked up at "Byrd" type money.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:06 am

How in the hell did the Cubs not have some sort of "Behavior Clause" in that Bradley contract? You outbid everyone else by an extra year and probably 14-16 million dollars. You wouldn't try to build any safeguard into a deal with a guy with Milton's history?

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:41 am

$7M in 2010, $6.5M vesting option for 2011 if he pitches 50 innings

Submitted by Cubster on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:53 am

thinking out loud, such a deal could fit nicely into Tampa Bay's plans, particularly if they decide to trade Carl Crawford, which would relieve the payroll of $10 million for 2010. --- Carl Crawford would make me likee this one. Hmmm...Burrell and Crawford for Bradley (to even up the $$), add in one of Marshall or Gorz, 1 of Berg/Stevens, and 1-2 A/AA Pitching prospects. Then flip Burrell for something else that is contract neutral wrt Burrel (Castillo?)l.

[ ]

Submitted by GO CUBBIES on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:37 pm

"Crawford $10 million For Marshall,Stevens and Carpenter. Would you make that deal?" I wouldn't, but why wouldn't the Cubs show interest in throwing in a couple of good prospects (Vitters, Cashner?)+ Marshall (or whoever) for Crawford? They want Granderson, but not Crawford? I know Crawford plays leftfield, but you would think with his speed he would be fine in center (definitely better than Byrd or K-Fuk, IMHO), plus he brings a leadoff bat that can hit lefties & righties.

[ ]

Submitted by The Real Neal on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:43 pm

I was thinking the same thing. McCann, Bradley and Jones back-back-back in the lineup would give a lot of opposing managers fits. The problem is that they're going to want to trade Lowe for him (if they'll take Bradley) and Lowe is owed a lot of money. He had a high BABIP last year, but his K rate dropped over 1K/9. I'd guess he'd probably have around a 4 ERA next year playing in front of the Cubs infield defense. If the Braves were to even the salary for the next two years, I'd probably do the trade. It would come back to bite us in the butt in 2012 though.

[ ]

Submitted by Sweet Lou on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:10 pm

At least in theory, this may not be too far fetched. Atlanta owes Derek Lowe $45 million over the next three years. The Cubs owe Bradley $21 million over the next two years. That's a difference of $24 million. Of course, the Cubs are likely going to have to pay another team a good chuck of change to take on Bradley. The rumor was that they would have to eat $16 million for Texas to consider a trade. So if you subtract whatever the Cubs will have to pay to get rid of Bradley from the difference between Bradley's and Lowe's contracts, it becomes much more workable. Oh yeah, and Atlanta would have to agree to a Bradley for Lowe trade.

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:34 pm

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2009/12/granderson-still-a-tiger.h… since it's Rogers I assume none if it is true
MLB sources indicate that the Tigers are asking for multiple major-league-ready players to move Granderson or right-hander Edwin Jackson. The Cubs, according to team sources, would love to fill their center-field vacancy with Granderson, but aren't willing to part with top prospect Starlin Castro, a 19-year-old shortstop.

[ ]

Submitted by The Real Neal on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:46 pm

Jake Fox and Mike Fountainout are MLB ready... They can have Stevens too, I am feeling generous. Seriously, though, they need a SS, a CF, a 2B and a catcher, right? Depending on how strictly you apply the term "MLB ready" we have all those things, except a catcher.

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:02 pm

that's 4 2-3 star/C prospects that aren't planned to compete for any jobs with the Cubs this spring. Atkins and Colvin I guess have a small shot... if they really like Colvin then maybe...I know Dambrowski is in love with radar gun readings like Hendry, so I think you need Jackson, Cashner or Dolis in there Barney or Lee, Jackson or Cashner, one of Castillo, Colvin, Flaherty seems a little more reasonable to me if I were the Tigers. They certainly have no reason to be desperate to move him this season, they can do this all again next year when he actually gets expensive.

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 12:22 pm

they have Ordonez, Robertson and Willis coming off their books next year, they can be patient for something worthwhile. he's never been worth less than $14M by Fangraphs rudimentary value system and he's set to make $5.5, $8.25M and $10M with a $13M club option. He's gonna be cheap relative to his contributions and Tigers can certainly afford to be patient dealing him.

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Fri, 12/04/2009 - 12:52 am

it's a half season worth, that's like thinking Jeff Baker is good at hitting after his August I would guess Jones would be a lot like Fukudome if he played a few full seasons out there, he could handle it, but you'd want someone better. but that's all kind of moot point, because he didn't play much CF in his career and everyone thinks of him as one of the whiny losers that tried to follow Sosa in RF. Had he and presumably played as well as he did in that half season the entire time, he would have been a more valuable player during his career.

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Sat, 12/05/2009 - 12:37 am

Catching fly balls over a few months or a year could be explained by the randomness of a ball coming off a bat, some might just come right at you or you were better positioned at a luckier rate... general rule of thumb is a season worth of defensive stats is worth about 2 months of PA's... on a somewhat related note, a pretty good explanation of why all the advanced defensive metrics(although the article focuses on UZR) are problematic if use them in isolation, mgl makes an appearance in the comments to essentially say he's right.

[ ]

Submitted by The Real Neal on Sun, 12/06/2009 - 12:20 pm

I'm not sure I follow. Don't the 'advanced metrics' all just basically say "if a ball is hit here, on this trajectory you catch it"? Obviously there's some sample size things - like if there's only one line drive hit to a zone in and you happen to catch it, perhaps for one of the reasons you mention, that's going to look good. Have you got a link for your rule of thumb? It's not very intuitive, it's the exact opposite.

Recent comments

  • crunch (view)

    masterboney is a luxury on a team that has multiple, capable options for 2nd, SS, and 3rd without him around.  i don't hate the guy, but if madrigal is sticking around then masterboney is expendable.

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    I THINK I agree with that decision. They committed to Wicks as a starter and, while he hasn’t been stellar I don’t think he’s been bad enough to undo that commitment.

    That said, Wesneski’s performance last night dictates he be the next righty up.

    Quite the dilemma. They have many good options, particularly in relief, but not many great ones. And complicating the situation is that the pitchers being paid the most are by and large performing the worst - or in Taillon’s case, at least to this point, not at all.

  • Childersb3 (view)

    Wesneski and Mastrobuoni to Iowa

    Taillon and Wisdom up

    Wesneski can't pitch for a couple of days after the 4 IP from last night. But Jed picked Wicks over Wesneski.

  • crunch (view)

    booooooooooo

    also, wisdom and taillon are both in chicago.

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Tonight’s game postponed. Split games on Saturday.

  • crunch (view)

    cubs getting crazy good at not having player moves leak.

    taillon we 100% know is pitching tonight.  who he's replacing and any additional moves are unknown as far as i can tell.

    p.wisdom was not in today's lineup in iowa (rained out) and he was removed from the game last night mid-game, but not for injury.  good bet he's with the team in the bigs, too.

  • Bill (view)

    A good rule of thumb is that if you trade a near-ready high ceiling prospect, you should get at least two far-away high ceiling prospects in return.  Like all rules-of-thumb, it depends upon the specific circumstances, but certainly, we weren't going to get Busch for either prospect alone.

  • Sonicwind75 (view)

    Right on schedule, just read an article in Baseball America entitled "10 MLB Prospects Outside The Top 100 Who Have Our Attention".  Zyhir Hope was one of the prospects featured. It stated that he's "one of the biggest arrow-up sleeper prospects in the lower levels right now."

     

    Not sharing to be negative about the trade, getting a top 100 prospect who is MLB ready should carry a heavy prospect cost.  But man, Dodger sure are good at identifying and developing young talent. Andrew Friedman seems to have successfully merged Ray's development with Yankees financial might to create a juggernaut of an organization.  

  • Sonicwind75 (view)

    I suspect Brown will spend some time in the bullpen due to inning restrictions.  Pitched only 93 innings last year and career high is 104 innings in 2022.  I would expect them to be cautious with a young player with his injury history.

  • Childersb3 (view)

    I wanted Almonte gone last week, but that was before Merryweather went down and Little got demoted. Almonte in his last 5 appearances has gone 4.1 IP with no ER or Runs. NO hits, 3 BBs and 8 SO. He did hit 96 with his 2S FB in AZ on Tues.
    I don't see Jed waiving him when we have injuries all over and guys with options that can be sent down.
    I probably won't like the move Jed makes, but he can't play the "let's hope no one wants his 1.7mil remaining deal and we can hide him in Iowa" card.
    That's why I think the current Bullpen stays as is and Wicks goes to Iowa.
    I don't like that, but that's the fix I see.
    We'll find out soon enough!!!

Click HERE for the last 50 comments