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

TCR Friday Notes

Al at BCB scores an interview with Crane Kenney and Tom Ricketts.

BCB: Are you open to expanding the payroll a little if there’s an acquisition, let’s say, the middle of this season that might help get the Cubs over the top into the playoffs? Jim Hendry comes and says I’d like to get this guy it’ll cost $8 million, are you...

TR: I’m not sure .. probably not an $8 million mid -season addition, but what we’re always talking about and what Jim likes to do … we’re going to play out the first half of the season we’ll see what we need I think it’s good I think he has a philosophy to bring in a fresh guy or two at the trade deadline to help push the team forward the last couple months. We’ll be open minded to that stuff.

There's plenty of interesting information in there, along with a healthy dose of Trib bashing by Crane Kenney.

- Now that the Ricketts are in charge, hopefullly they'll spice up the Cubs advertising. Not that I'm particularly hopeful after the first ad which pretty much just sells the Wrigley experience and history. That is a WGN ad, so it's very possible the Cubs management had nothing to do with it either. The reason I bring up the advertising is the folks that run the Rockies, Twins and Mariners campaigns know what they're doing.

It would be nice to see a little Cubs personality in the ads, there's certainly enough ad agencies in Chicago willing to take up the task.

- There seems to be some strong sentiment that Ron Gardenhire isn't a good manager. I could probably count on one hand how many Twins games I've watched over the last few years, but nothing has struck me as too odd in terms of in-game management. What is odd is that the Twins have won 5 of 8 division titles and been above .500 7 of those 8 years with a middle of the road payroll for the most part. I'd be comfortable with Dusty Baker butchering arms and his crayon-drawn lineups for the Cubs if it saw them make the playoffs with that kind of consistency. I'll turn the mic over to Rob Neyer for the finish.

Let me tell you something, though: There aren't many Earl Weavers and Davey Johnsons out there. Some guys really know the numbers, and some guys really know how to handle 25 men at a time. And the numbers? Friends, there are only so many things a manager can do with the numbers. You've got your nine guys who play most days, and you've got your dozen pitchers with generally prescribed roles ... that doesn't leave much room for managerial maneuvering.

You take the manager who (just) knows the numbers, I'll take the manager who (just) knows how to keep his players playing for six months, and I'll beat you 55-60 percent of the time. Ron Gardenhire? He's won 55 percent of the games he's managed.

- Another big buzz around MLB was the idea of floating realignment.

The committee already has made good on Selig's promise by discussing a radical form of "floating" realignment in which teams would not be fixed to a division, but free to change divisions from year-to-year based on geography, payroll and their plans to contend or not.



The concept gained strong support among committee members, many of whom believe there are non-economic avenues that should be explored to improve competitive balance, similar to the NFL's former use of scheduling to help parity (in which weaker teams were awarded a weaker schedule the next season).

The devil is in the details though and to be fair, it was nothing more than throwing out an idea at the moment. Back when I started writing online back in 2004, I recall suggesting an idea to realign the divisions based more on payrolls and media markets, so I'm intrigued by the idea, as impractical as it sounds at the moment.

- I'm on vacation next week and hopefully have secured a few guest bloggers to keep things going. Treat them well. Arizona Phil will be around as well although the Cubs are away most of the week.

Comments

Northeast: Boston Toronto New York A New York N Philadephia Southeast: Washington Baltimore Atlanta Florida Tampa Bay Midwest: Chicago N Chicago A Milwaukee Minnesota St. Louis Ghettoss: Pittsburgh Cleveland Cincinnati Detroit Kansas City California: San Francisco Oakland Los Angeles A Los Angeles N San Diego Freaks: Houston Texas Colorado Arizona Seattle For the record, the alignment we currently have is way better than the proposed floating crap. Tampa Bay had the chance to join the NL and screwed themselves; Toronto is a big market team in mid market facepaint; and Baltimore - well, I'd feel bad for Baltimore if the owner wasn't such a dick.

[ ]

In reply to by John Beasley

For the record, the alignment we currently have is way better than the proposed floating crap How do you know? couple of ideas were thrown into the pool, let's see if anything floats. I think it would be nearly impossible to enact, but I like the idea of the discussion. Desipio had the idea of getting rid of the divisions which I don't mind, but I think they need to contract 2 teams or add 2 teams. This 16/14 league disparity isn't particularly fair. Get rid of the unbalanced schedule and the top 4 teams make it in each league.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

The topic of competitive balance in baseball is one of my favorites, and one of the hardest to solve, both because of the economics and the politics surrounding the issue. Floating realignment sounds crazy and may turn out to be completely unworkable, but at least MLB is being open minded. In my opinion, something has to be done. There is probably one-third of the teams (without taking a head count) that enter the season with no realistic chance of contending. Not only is that demoralizing to the fans of these teams, but it's destructive to the general interest in the game. Why should a kid growing up in Pittsburgh care about baseball. The team hasn't had a winning season in 17 years. And if he doesn't have an interest in his hometown team, why care about the game at all? Better to follow football or some other sport. Baseball has to eventually deal with this issue. Opening up the discussion to all ideas is a step in the right direction.

[ ]

In reply to by Sweet Lou

I have to disagree with this. The Marlins contend pretty regularly. The Rays beat the Red Sox and the Yankees two years ago. The system is not so flawed that teams don't have a chance. It is so flawed that poorly run teams don't have a chance, but you can say the same thing about the NFL and the NBA.

[ ]

In reply to by John Beasley

If they were going to do it just on geography, it would be hard to have the divisions equal size based on travel distance. I personally would like something like this to maximize rivalries and fan travel, but of course this would never fly: Colonial Division: Boston New York New York Philadelphia Rustbelt Division: Toronto Detroit Cincinnati Cleveland Pittsburgh Railroad and Beer Division: Chicago Chicago Minnesota St. Louis Milwaukee Kansas City Pacific Coast Division: Seattle San Francisco Oakland Los Angeles Los Angeles San Diego Southeast Division: Tampa Miami Atlanta Baltimore Washington DC Mountain and Desert Division: Houston Dallas Phoenix Denver

[ ]

In reply to by WISCGRAD

Assholes Division: Boston New York New York Philadelphia Stick to Football Division: Baltimore Washington DC Cleveland Pittsburgh Flyover Divison: Chicago Chicago Minnesota Detroit Kansas City Go Surfing Division: Seattle San Francisco Oakland Los Angeles Los Angeles San Diego Hill Jack's Division: Atlanta St Louis Cincinnati Houston Texas Milwaukee Shouldn't Have Team Division: Phoenix Denver Tampa Miami Toronto ~yes I'm in a bad. why do you ask?~

[ ]

In reply to by jacos

How is Atlanta not in the asshole divisio... oh... nevermind I see.

If I were Crane I wouldn't be burning a bridges. You can only play make believe baseball man for so long.

I don't understand the Gardenhire bashing. What has he done that's so bad? I don't follow the Twins very closely, but where is the hate coming from? Considering he has led his team to five division titles in eight years, I would think Gardenhire is in line for praise rather than damnation. What other manager has been able to accomplish that feat? Now take out the clubs with payrolls in the top 50% of all teams. Who's left? I'm not exactly sure how to judge a baseball manager. Some guys talk a good game and some guys just win games (some guys don't do either). Gardenhire may not end up on Leno or Letterman, but his teams do win games. That's good enough for me.

[ ]

In reply to by Sweet Lou

almost everyone hates their manager after enough time unless you're one of the rare ones...gard's just been on the job a long time and lately they keep losing the ALDS. it's beyond the just "making it" stage at this point...the fans seem to want a little closure. ...as if that's his fault. he's not exactly out there making bonehead decision after bonehead decision while his 55-65m teams work their way through a season. his players seem happy. most of the complaints i've read from players leaving there is the joy of not having to play on that turf or shag flies in the dome.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

high five

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

lol, I second the high five.

Fontenot, Diamond and Theriot with good games. Jeff Baker finally gets a hit. J. Jackson not ready for prime time, 3 runs in 0.2 IP.

NATIONAL LEAGUE: EAST: NYM PHI PIT WAS NORTH: CUBS COL MIL STL SOUTH: ATL CIN FLA HOU WEST: AZ LAD SD SF AMERICAN LEAGUE: EAST: BOS NYY TOR NORTH: CHW CLE DET MIN SOUTH: BAL KC TB TEX WEST: LAA OAK SEA Four division winners and two WC teams, with the two WC teams playing a best 2-out-of-3 "play-in" series at the two division winners with the worst records pre-LDS. If the MLBPA would agree to eliminate the DH and cut active rosters from 25 to 24 and reduce the MLB Reserve List limit from 40 to 36, two expansion teams could be added (probably Portland and Charlotte), with Portland going to the A. L. West and Charlotte to the A. L. South, and Baltimore to the A. L. East from A. L. South. If the economics could be worked out, MLB might consider expanding to either Mexico City or Monterrey instead of Portland or Charlotte. Also, Rule 5 should be changed to where clubs can select as many players as slots they have open on their MLB Reserve List, but any player selected must be kept on the drafting club's 40-man roster (hopefully to be reduced to a 36-man roster limit) for one year (until the next Rule 5 Draft), and the drafting club cannot trade or outrighht the player to the minors for one year. However, the drafting club would be allowed to option the player to the minors, just like any other player on the 40-man roster. Combining this change in Rule 5 with cutting the 40-man roster from 40 to 36 would redistribute talent at the prospect level, helping small market/low revenue clubs acquire talented players and improve from within, without the need for a salary cap or a payroll tax or any other form of revenue sharing.

Vitters the winning hit, LeMahieu and Burke 1 for 1, Flaherty and Jackson 0 for 1 in the Vegas game.

[ ]

In reply to by Cubster

That's a pretty flattering picture of her what with it being a little out of focus. Even under the ESPN make-up she looks a little rough to me. Kind like seeing a porn star in HD. You don't want to look to closely

Cubs vs Homer Bailey, 1-1 bottom 3 Adduci doobel, Barney rbi single after Castro advances runner other than the kids, it's Soriano, ARam and Tracy. Sean Marshall 3 IP, 2H, 1 HR.

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!!!