Introducing TCR's Cubs 40-Man Roster

Just wanted to give everyone a head's up about one of our new pages: the Cubs 40-Man Roster. We think it's an improvement over the one at cubs.com. The two neatest features are that you can sort by column and you've got each players' option year info at your fingertips, which was mined from Arizona Phil's wonderful work.  


You can access it either by the "TCR Junk Drawer" menu link up top or the sidebar link under "Quick Links".


Let us know if there's any other info you think should be added. Ideally it would be nice to put service time up there for each player, but that's a bit difficult to keep track of on a consistent basis. Possibly we could use Opening Day and then various other benchmarks within the season to update it.
Return to Homepage

Comments

Cool.

Cedeno's got 3rd on his resume and Pie, probably RF... Aram Ram should probably have DL listed as a position.

I'll add Cedeno's. I don't have a hard and fast rule on the positions to be honest, but generally they should have played some in the majors or the spring. Of course, Fontenot has played some shortstop this spring, but I won't list him as one until he does it in some games that count.


Sort of my own discretion type thing, but I'll listen to suggestions. Another example is Eric Patterson, who is obviously being groomed for a utility role, so I've added all the positions so far that I've caught him playing. Pie, who certainly could step in at LF or RF, is pretty much being groomed just for center right now. Hope that makes some sense...

Yeah, this is great! Indeed an improvement over Cubs.com.

Also, how does Cot's Baseball Contracts figure out service time. They list that for each player. Zambrano is at 6.042 - although I'm not sure exactly what that translates into.

You got me...


I've never been able to find a good resource (other than Arizona Phil's occasional postings) for service time. There's no place I've found that updates it consistently and correcty.

I guess it has something to do with games on the active roster, which you could figure out with a little effort looking at a player's transaction history. The really tough part is all the cockamaimee rules about going down for a certain time and it still counting as ML service time.

The key is a "little effort". I need something I can just look at, copy over and then only have to update once in awhile.



6.042 means he has 6 years and 42 days. A full year is 172 days.

Cots gets his service time info from the NL and AL books put out by MLB for the press. They're basically roster info and it has the service time in that player's section.

Thanks for the info...


I did a bit of research and think I've found accurate service time for all MLB players through 2007. That is to say, it verifies what Cot's has. I will try to add with a disclaimer that it is through Opening Day. Then maybe update at the All-Star Break.

Rob,
I just got my season tickets from the Cubs and in it they list a very detailed roster with service time among other things. If you want a copy I can scan it and email it to you. Let me know.

Yeah, send it along, my email should be posted on the fantasy league page to send an attachment. I can use it to check my work.


Do me a favor and check Juan Mateo for me though as soon as you get a moment.

They have Mateo at 0+125.

That's what Cot's had as well...must have spent that DL time on the active roster that I missed.



You've got mail!

Let me know if there is a problem.

Any idea how they came up with 172 instead of 162?

  

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 03/12/2008 - 7:19pm.

Any idea how they came up with 172 instead of 162?

 

=========================================== 

ROB G: The MLB regular season is 182 days long, but per the CBA, a "full season" is 172 days.as far as determining Service Time. So even if a player spends 182 days on an MLB roster in a given season, the player accrues 172 days of MLB ST. And if a player spends less than 20 days on optional assignment in a given season, the player gets credit for a "full season" of MLB Service Time. 

It's basically the length of the season when you look at off days and the like.

Looks great guys.

Thanks for the cool feature.

Just a nitpick: Ascanio's correct last name is Ascanio, not Ascaino :)

thanks, I butcher it everytime.

Should begin playing in Goodyear in 2010.....

http://1530homer.com/pages/ctrent.html

earlier it was mentioned that WFAN was reporting this deal was close to done...

Both teams denying they've even talked...

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extra...

theriot followed by soriano?

...okay.

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/spor...

...okay...whatever...

Dlee should back second.

that's brilliantly stupid...

 

 

Maybe Lou's trying out Soriano in the second slot before the arrival of Brian Roberts next week.

(I'm mostly joking....)

At least Lou shows that he's willing to try new things. Maybe he will finally get it right with the

Murton
Kfuk
Aramis
DLee
Soriano
DeRosa
Soto
Theriot

Lineup?

Pure Genius! I assume Murton will play Centerfield and leadoff or does he play shortstop?

I forgot how much of a base running threat that Murton can be...not to mention his natural ability to play center field.

I hope you are picking up the sarcasm

Timmer:

I think that you are dead-on with the Roberts Theory. This way, Soriano's move out of the lead-off spot is done before Roberts' arrival, and thus is not a result of Roberts' acquisiiton. This pre-emptive stike takes pressure of Roberts when he does (?) arrive next week.

Theriot's number is wrong on the chart.

Nice catch....messed up E-Pat's too. Think they're all correct now.

Phew. Lieber is still older than I am. I feel better.

Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts. Roberts.

That is all.

I want to point out again to anyone getting their hopes up about Brian Roberts...

In recent years when a player is exposed or busted for buying/receiving/taking steroids or HGH, they typically show up for Spring Training off the juice and have a bad or significantly down year.

Jason Giambi and Jay Gibbons come to mind, I know there have been others that I'm missing right this second, heck, even Miguel Tejada last season showed up smaller, if I remember correctly and had a down year.

So my question and point is, has anyone heard any report about Roberts looking different this Spring, and, if he is off the stuff, his stats are likely going to go back to the player he was pre-2005, when he wasn't a very good player at all. His numbers across the board stunk his first 3 seasons. He miraculously became a pretty good player the exact moment he claims he only took one shot of HGH.

It would be the Cubs luck to trade for a guy who has a crappy year because he's deflated, and to give 3-5 inexpensive youngsters to get him is questionable.

Personally, he's an admitted cheater, I don't want him on my team regardless of whether he is on or off the stuff. Everyone of these cheaters should be banned for life, including any Cubs player who might be on it.

If he was taking roids he will shrink and have a disappointing season...however, if he is purely an HGH type cheater, he should be good. Remember, they don't test for HGH so why would he quite "the stuff?" A B-Rob acquisition should be just fine.

Ex-cub Sergio Meatball out until June with "Elbow Strain"...can Tommy John surgery be far behind (that was the scenerio for Angel Guzman before TJ surgery)

CMuskat updates us on Angel Guzman...

Aches and pains: Angel Guzman, rehabbing from Tommy John elbow reconstruction surgery last August on his right elbow, began throwing every other day this week. Guzman has yet to throw off a mound but is building up arm strength by increasing the distance of his throws. This week, he's throwing from 90 feet.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080312&c...

He's always had a special place in my heart after that day he spanked Roy Halladay.

I do like that Soriano isn't crying about this move. Here is his quote:

"I don't know -- whatever he feels is right and works for the team, I'm OK with it," Soriano said. "If he thinks batting second I can help the team more, I'm OK with that."

Translation..."I make 18,000,000 dollars no matter where I hit."

What Marquis would have said: "If I don't bat lead off, they should trade me to a ball club that could use my strikeouts, injured legs, and low OBP at the number one spot."

soriano must have no family to think about. what a selfish jerk.

i guess given the conceptions people have about soriano and his attitude and/or love of the #1 slot its at least nice to know he's gonna go along with it without issue.

This made me giggle.

I have to say, though, batting him second is a curious choice. On the Wolf Report I looked at that, and #2 is where he hit the worse:
http://wolf-report.blogspot.com/2008/02/where-to-s...

i'll take soriano hitting 2nd over 1st, but putting theriot 1st seems a little bit 'meh'.

if soriano strands a leadoff runner with a K there's always the 3/4 guys to get their crack at it...not like he'll be some double play candidate (unless his legs arent 100%...not like he's a groundball guy anyway).

theriot...he'd be one hell of an average leadoff guy at his best. he's an intelligent baserunner, but not exactly top tier fast.

maybe something brian roberts related will make it moot...maybe...

I like Theriot as leadoff because he's a pesky little shit. No pitcher wants to start an inning blowing 8 or 9 pitches on guy like him. Then there are the "intangibles" like after a long leadoff at-bat, will the pitcher be as effective the rest of the inning?

There might not be a lot to this logic (in other words it might be total crap), but I wouldn't automatically dismiss Theriot as a bad leadoff batter based only on stats.

And of course, I agree with you and everyone else on Brian Roberts. I don't see how we can start the season without him.

I heard one time that correlation is not causation.

Uh no, that's not a good comparison at all.

That is like if Lou said to Marquis 'Last year you were our number four starter, but this year you're going to be the number five starter'. Moving from the rotation to the bullpen is closer to moving from the starting lineup to the bench.

And for those guys who missed it, Lou apologized aboput his Marquis comments, not the other way around. Why was that? Maybe, and I know I am just spitballing here, but just maybe, Marquis didn't do anything wrong, other than answer a question honestly.

A mediocre bullpen guy is has to get buy on one or two year contracts for maybe $3 million a year. A mediocre starter can get a 3 or 4 year contract for $8 to $10 million. Marquis is looking at the difference between a $35 million career and a $50 million career, after which he'll be lucky to make $100K a year. He wants to do the best job he can to set up his kids, and maybe even his grandkids in living a life in comfort. What's exactly your beef with that?

If your boss came to you tomorrow and said 'Hi, this is John. Even though you performed as expected last year, I've brough in John to take your job. We need you to sell sandwiches and fruit to your co-workers and empty the wastebaskets - don't worry you're not going to take a pay cut.' What are you going to say 'That sounds great, where's the lunch cart?'

no one wants to hear a guy making his loot make a "thinking about my family" comment unless it involves moving his family to another city. right or wrong the mass public perception of marquis's comments didn't come out well on his end.

lou apologized for his comments most likely cuz its an easy way to end a possible distraction (and so far it seems its mostly working given how bad it could be right now). some managers have different levels of what they'll air out in the press...you got your jim "there is crying in baseball, gee shucks guys" leeland, there's ozzie "open book" smith, and there's dusty "are you guys still here?" baker.

"right or wrong the mass public perception of marquis's comments didn't come out well on his end."

Maybe you should think for yourself instead of framing your oppinoins in context of what mass publice perception tells you to think?

I do think for myself. So do the millions around me. It's a measurable metric with very little grey area since its perception and not an application of a stat.

If you saw the Simpsons/American Idol episode you saw Homer lead his protoge to a loss in the episode because he wrote a song which played on privilege and money compared to a majority of society. The joke/resolution worked because of an assumed perception of how a majority of society would view played off of what was coming out of his mouth.

following up...a perception doesnt have to be right or wrong...it just has to exist.

if you delve into "why" then you got a whole different ballgame.

to a society and its health the "why" is more important than what it is (in most cases), but the perception still exists regardless.

100s of years ago it was common perception the sun revolved around the earth or the earth was flat or etc...pick one...whether its true, false, unfair, or ignorant didn't matter.

That's a stupid example. If someone came into an office building to someone who works their ass off in a cubicle doing difficult work and said, hey, sell sandwhiches during lunchtime for the same pay - no thinking, no work, etc. I'd be all for it. Find me a janitor making 100K and I bet he's a happy man.

Submitted by WISCGRAD on Thu, 03/13/2008 - 7:51am.
That's a stupid example. If someone came into an office building to someone who works their ass off in a cubicle doing difficult work and said, hey, sell sandwhiches during lunchtime for the same pay - no thinking, no work, etc. I'd be all for it. Find me a janitor making 100K and I bet he's a happy man.
===========================================================

I agree wholeheartedly. I've been trying for 5 years to get transferred to the mailroom/mail delivery guy's position at my facility at my current pay.

And then your company goes under (or your contract runs out) and you have to find anotther job.

'Well most recently I was a mail boy, as you can see on my resume... so I guess I would like to start out at $110K a year'. 'Mailboys here make $28K a year' 'OK, I'll take it'. Your wife and kids are going to be pleased to hear that.

Funny when you start to extrapolate ideas how they work out. Plus you're going to be bored out of your mind sorting and deliverying mail very shortly... unless you're a simpleton.

Except now you've extrapolated the concept far away from your original argument. I think if I've just made 21 million dollars over the past three years and IF (and this is a HUGE IF) I can only found another bullpen (mailroom job) that would pay me say 3 million a year, my family will still be ok. If you think it cost 7 million dollars to feed a family for a year you are as delusional as Marquis.

If anything, the logic would be reversed. If I used to be a solid technician, but our company was stacked with great technicians, and I was mostly concerned with helping the team so I did some other jobs for them, and the company was sucessful and my bosses (manager + GM) loved me; then my next employer might feel that I am less of a risk. Rather than the current image that he is unhappy, won't listen, thinks he is better than he is, and has already left two teams on less than great terms (perhaps soon to be a third).

After this contract is up he will have earned over $30 million in his career and he will be just 31.

Just FYI, only 1.5% of all households in the US earn over $250,000 annually, and most of that group even fall below Marquis. I think his grandparents will be just fine...

"Except now you've extrapolated the concept far away from your original argument."

In what way did I do this? My original argument is that Marquis is playing for his next contract this year. You're ignoring the facts that 1. Every breadwinner for his family wants to secure his familie's security for a long time 2. Bullpen pitchers get paid significantly less than starters.

" Rather than the current image that he is unhappy"

Do a suvey of everyone in baseball and ask 'you have two guys who are starters. One of them wants to be a starter and one doesn't care. Which one do you want on your team?'. See what you get.

"Just FYI, only 1.5% of all households in the US earn over $250,000 annually, and most of that group even fall below Marquis. I think his grandparents will be just fine"

Spoken like someone who has never heard of things like income taxes and math. Say Marquis makes $50 million in his career. That's $25 million after income tax and agent fees, assuming no inheritance tax. He has four children who have 3 kids a piece. That's around $1.5 million a piece. If they don't spend that money and get a 7% inflation adjusted income that's $85 K a year for the the grandkids. In 2035 that's not going to be all that much money.

I don't really want to get into a big thing here with you, nor do I like getting insulted either.

But contrary to what you may think, I have indeed heard of math and taxes. I guess though I forgot how much millionaires suffer in trying to make ends meet. Not being a millionaire, I confess I can't speak personally about this plight.

But I'd like to point out that it's not like his $50 million is all the money he will ever earn in life. If he is at all smart with his money he'd put it into some high interest IRAs or something. I mean I can walk down to any local bank and get a CD that pays 3% or more - and the market is WAY down. Since you are good at math you would already know that at just 3% annually you will double your money in the 20th year.

But the main issue is not math. It's attitude. If I did do a survey I'd ask: "You have a back of the rotation starter on your team. Would you prefer option a) player indicates he'd like to start but would go to the bullpen, whatever helps the team, or b) player indicates he only wants to start and hints at asking for a trade if not granted a starting role." I think my responses will be siginifcantly different than the ones you'd get. Dempster also shows that you can move back to the rotation from the pen, and if he were signed by a team to be a starter the next go around he'd get starter money.

So anyway, I'm done with this argument. Sure, he wants to start, so would I, so would most anybody. Everyone knows Leiber wants to start too. If we know Marquis wants to start, he doesn't really have to tell us. You tow the company line, rely on the cliches, and work your butt off. It's like Marquis has never watched Bull Durham, he needs Kevin Costner to give him some tips on how to talk to the media - "I'm just happy to be here, I just want to take one day at a time, I'm just honored to play this game." etc. There is a reason why we have them. Marquis is free to say what he wants, but I'm also free not to be a fan anymore, and I doubt I'm alone.

You're assuming I'm not already bored out of my mind....plus I'd get more exercise.

I would rather see Soriano at the number 3 spot

Fukudome (.400 career OBP)
DeRosa or Theriot
Soriano
DLee
Ramirez
Soto
Theriot or DeRosa
Pie
Pitcher

Fukudome has a NA career OBP.

Just a reminder.

Hideki Matsui dropped .060 from his career OBP in his first season with the Yankees.

Ichiro dropped .037

Kaz Matsui dropped roughly .031

If you're expecting Fukudome to put up a .400 OBP in MLB you're going to be in for a rude awakening. His OBP in the central league was only .392 by the way.

There's two reasons you should expect his OBP to drop, even if he maintains the same discipline that he had in the NL. The first is that home runs are hits. Some of his balls that went out for HR's in Japan are going to be caught here. The second is if he doesn't hit as many home runs, pitchers will not be as worried about throwing him strikes.

What about that website that generates the best lineup. I'd like to see a manager try that a couple times, just for the hell of it.

There's a few things not to like about that website.

It doesn't have any baserunning.

Not all OPS's (or does it use slugging and OBP, either way) are the same. There's a big differencet between a guy who has a .800 OPS with a .400 slugging than one who has a .500 slugging.

Likewise all slugging % aren't the same. Jim Thome (.563) and Curtis Granderson (.552) had similar slugging% last year but the way they got there was totally different.

To do it properly you would break down each hitter into % chance to have an outcome:

% single , %walk, %HBP, %2B %GIDP *when applicable)

Add the players % to steal, move up on an out or take an extra base on a hit

That would give you a worthwile tool, and I imagine that some organizations are doing that (Brewers?).

This is what I was trying to say the other day when we were talking about hitting a higher OBP guy at the top regardless of other factors. I just said it way more stupider than you did.

most interseting is that soriano stated he would use the same approach
no no to bunts so lead off man gets on soriano strikes out man on first
one out .
i do like previous points that this sets it up for roberts trade please
just let marquis be in it

Probably been mentioned but we'll say it anyway: Ted Lilly is a lefty, not a righty.

We'll assume this was an accident and not a slight.... for now.

According to WGN morning news today, Cubs have to bidders for naming rights and neither will change the name Wrigley Field.

Instead it will be the Chicago Cubs presented by....Mentos, Walgreens, Trulink fence.

How about the Cubs presented by the City of Chicago? They can use the bargaining chip of the Lincolnshire Cubs as leverage.

I soooooo need some real baseball already.

As long as they aren't sponsored by Head-On, applied directly to the forehead, Head-on, applied directly to the forehead, Head-on, applied directly to the forehead.

to=two

To means two too.

to-uche

Thank you TCR!

Love having a quick, sortable resource for service time.

All hail Rob G & AZ Phil!

X
  • Sign in with Twitter