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

A Cub Fan's Blessings & Wishes

As the holidays draw near it's time to start making lists. Even in the wake of seasons as lackluster as 2010 there are things to be grateful for. Take, for instance, the following:

1. The Cubs still don't have a mascot.

2. Most of the seats at Wrigley Field are still unobstructed.

3. Most of the events staged there are still baseball games.

4. Ron Santo still works there.

5. The scoreboard is still [literally] alive.

6. The Triple A team still plays where I live.

7. We're out from under Rothschild's contract & burdensome last name.

8. All of the other contracts are a year older.

9. Cubs are undefeated & unbeatable for another four-plus months.

10. Sunshine is a known cure for Ricketts.

Enough with Thanksgiving. What about a Christmas list?

1. A .648 winning % [aka, 24 -13].

2. A bullpen made up of one year contracts.

3. An honest year's work out of Zambrano.

4. A decent year's work out of Soriano.

5. Above average grades for the sophomore C's.

6. Another home[y] for Fukodome?

7. Hi-ho Silva! Away?

8. A pulse for Len; a muzzle for Bob.

9. A new sweater for Pat; a clue for Ron.

10. A once-in-a-lifetime season for all of us!

Comments

how about the ghost of Harry? which reminds me, the wish list should have included an end to the guest celeb sing-alongs...

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Those guys were awful. I enjoyed Drunk Mike Bielecki. I remember one game when they were having Otto and Bielecki make their picks for the Keys to the Game. They would each pick 2-3 keys and compare after the game who might have been most accurate. It was typical boring junk. But one game Bielecki showed up in the press box with Chip (I think) and Otto. Otto went first, and one of his keys to the game was to score more runs than the other team. Bielecki appeared to have started imbibing early, and was glazed over a bit, but not enough to not turn to Otto and say, "really? your key is to score more runs than the other team?" and proceed to roll his eyes. Shortly after that he was no longer on the Cubs coverage. Lol.

via ye olde world o roto: "The Cubs could pursue free agent Lance Berkman, according to MLB.com's Carrie Muskat. According to Berkman, the Cubs are one of the teams that has talked to his agent, but the A's have been the "most aggressive" interested party. "

Break out the old 'we've got wood' t-shirts? Apparently, Ken Davidoff says the Yanks are only offering arbitration to Javier Vasquez. http://twitter.com/KenDavidoff/status/7211169584517120# per roto...
The Yankees declined to offer arbitration to Kerry Wood.
This is contrary to previous reports and it's unclear why New York changed its mind. Wood is a Type B free agent and would have netted the Yankees a draft pick if he signed elsewhere, but perhaps the club was afraid he'd accept the offer and stick them with a tab around the $10.5 million he earned this past season. The 33-year-old turned in a stellar 1.23 ERA and 0.69 WHIP in 26 innings this year for the Yankees and is hoping to spin that success into a multi-year contract and a ninth-inning job.
Source: Ken Davidoff (Newsday) on Twitter

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

I'm not saying it has to be Dunn (though he will be the cheapest acceptable option) Adrian Gonzalez, Price Fielder, Adam Dunn, Albert Pujols Take your pick out of that group? It still doesn't change that its beyond bad roster management to go cheap at First, so we can bring Kerry Wood back to pitch the 7th. I surely hope we aren't falling back into the days of letting the marketing dept shape the personnel moves of this franchise?

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Why else would we be hearing this KW talk then? What does KW provide to this franchise that 30 other available cheaper relievers couldn't? We've got 10-15 Legitimate MLB prospect pitchers who are within a year or two of helping the MLB staff. We've got exactly 1 bat on the horizon. And he's more a projected 7th place hitter who will be in AA this year. All I am saying is allocate the resources where they will do the most good. Signing a viable long term First Baseman ACCOMPLISHES THAT. Signing a washed up former local icon doesn't. This ain't rocket surgery people

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

i dunno what kerry wood has to do with dunn. ...and it's not like the cubs are the only club out there going "well, he's not much of a 1st baseman." hell, the cubs have at least been in contact with dunn. we got a hell of a shaky-D SS on the club and the 1st base market is rarely horrible...hell, next year it gets better barring teams handing out extensions. like it or not there's just not a lot of desire for dunn coming from anyone this early and the cubs seem to be exploring other options at 1st. i really don't think it has anything to do with trying to accommodate signing kerry wood, myself. hell, outside of speculation i haven't heard any cubs/wood links yet.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

Submitted by The Real Neal on Wed, 11/24/2010 - 7:04pm. It's funny how people get all worked up over the Cubs hypothetically overpaying for ex-Cubs, instead of actually thinking about who's most likely to provide the best bang for the buck. ============================ REAL NEAL: Of the FA RH set-up guys with closer experience who wouldn't cost the Cubs a draft pick, I'd go after Dan Wheeler, but I wouldn't have a problem with the Cubs signing Kerry Wood, either. The main thing is to find a decent candidate who understands the situation (Marmol is the closer, except on days when he's not available, or if he gets hurt). It probably will requuire a two-year contract with a base salary around $5M per year plus another $2M in performance bonuses each year based on GF in case Marmol gets hurt.

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

Wheeler would be OK, but it doesn't quite have the swing and miss stuff I'd like to see in a guy we could throw into a fire type situation. I'd be all for signing Mark Prior if he's in the 90's again and has his nasty curve back. Kevin Gregg may make sense now that Rothschild and Pinhead are gone, speaking of former Cubs. My point really is that there are a lot of guys out there that can fill that role, and I wouldn't rule out former Cubs because of some built up angst from 2006. I wouldn't offer $5 million guaranteed, either. Something like $3 million with a vesting option for a second year at a little more guaranteed. The Cubs just aren't in a place where paying $5 million for setup men makes sense.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

Kerry has also taken hometown discounts in the past. I'm not sure if he would accept less than market value now, but he is more likely to do so than other pen righties out there. At least it's worth a conversation with Cubs brass. The Cubs shouldn't let their pen affect their 1B choice, however. Big market team, and all that. Hopefully they don't forget it.

[ ]

In reply to by Tony S.

Submitted by Tony S. on Thu, 11/25/2010 - 11:38am. Agree on the hometown discounts from Wood, but what really is the market for RH setup men at this point? If memory serves, there's more than a few out there... ============================================ TONY S: RH set-up man Joaquin Benoit got three years/$16.5M ($5.5M per year) from Detroit last week.

[ ]

In reply to by Stevens

i thought the scenario for 2011 was that the cubs are a big-market team with a small-market amount of discretionary income? hence the need to contemplate colvin, or soto? or both? or, perhaps hendry can rope-a-dope until the july 31 trade deadline and pull off a magical 4-team trade netting them adrian g from san diego for some of the nearly ready aa and aaa rosters?

j.garland 1yr/5m with LAD. nothing special, but nice pricetag coming off of 200ip and decent numbers (even if in SD).

MLBTR via ESPN: Cubs have 'shown interest' in Bonderman, Harang, Millwood, Vasquez, and Padilla, as well as Garland before he went off the market; however, Vasquez appears headed to either FLA or WAS.

gwah...i hope all this "need for SP" that seems to exist for the cubs doesn't result in r.wells for c.davis. ugg. /end speculation

wow...money isn't everything to some... "The contract between the Marlins and Javier Vazquez will be worth between $6-7 million, according to FoxSports.com's Ken Rosenthal." sure, he wasn't due for 15m or anything, but he probably could have held out for something closer to 10m. wonder if there's incentives attached...

"According to FOXSports.com's Jon Paul Morosi, the Cubs are showing interest in free agent first baseman Carlos Pena." f'n meh...just meh...

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

Or for AGonz next year? Or we give it to Pena for 3 plus an option and hope Rudy J can bring his avg up? There aren't any perfect answers for damn sure, and on a team, let's be honest, not 'intent' on winning this year? There are worse answers. I'll take the HR and vet 'leadership', although I think his D is getting blown out of proportion...? *edit I'm not smart on UZR or UZR/150, but his haven't been positive since 08, and he's a 32 y/o 1B

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

First, I don't think 3/36 gets Dunn. Second, I don't think Dunn's worth his asking price anymore. Third, I like AGonz at that contract, not Fielder, don't think his body will hold up. Now, Fielder at 5/110 or the like? Absolutely. Still think Gonz is a better idea. And what these questions boil down to, do the Cubs want a new franchise player? Are they willing to pay for that? The last attempt was Soriano, and we're still reeling from that one. Also, need to look at it from fan's view vs. owner's view. We can sit around and bitch about Soriano, they've gotta pay him $18m for shit, that's going to make you a bit gun-shy. I think AGonz is a guy you can build around, absolutely. But for Dunn, we had a better team two years ago to slap his bat into the middle of, now it'd just be a f'n waste. Pitching and defense, friends, pitching and defense. And this team hasn't had defense in a long time.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

I know the Cubs are rumored to have major interest in Adrian Gonzalez, but I can't picture Ricketts giving the OK to sign him to that kind of a deal. Plus we would have to have a very competitive bid since the Red Sox have long been expected to go after him. And personally, I'm just not interested in signing anyone, even Latin superstar Jesus Christ, to a $20 million or more per year deal. We've seen firsthand how these big deals handcuff teams.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

I don't see how the Cubs could do another $20 mill-ish a year contract while they other guys vastly underperforming their current large contracts (Soriano, Fukudome, Zambrano, Silva/Bradley). Seems to me that if you screw up a few very large contracts, or screw up a few large contracts very badly, that you are in a very tough position until those contracts are up--and that trying to patch up during that time, instead of developing the minor leagues and waiting it out--makes throwing good money after bad very likely.

[ ]

In reply to by Charlie

You run the risk of being over reactionary in saying you WON'T do any more big contracts though. The Cubs biggest advantage in the Division is their much greater financial resources. I don't want it to be acceptable for ownership to go cheap. Rest assured they won't pass the savings back to the fans. It would be nice to have a steady supply of ML talent coming up through the system. I just don't believe its all that close to actually happening.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

All of the Yankees players you mentioned contributed to their team, they aren't bad contracts in the sense that the player is significantly under-performing their salary and can't be traded due to their massive contract and poor play, forgetting about any no-trade clauses. My being gunshy is from the Cubs/Hendry not making a huge contract that has worked out very well for the team. I don't know if it's Hendry or what (yeah, it's probably Hendry), but the Soriano, Fukudome, Zambrano, deals haven't looked too good. To be fair, the Z deal was the market rate at the time, and Fukudome had other teams bidding similar or even higher prices (I think the White Sox offered more money than the Cubs). Soriano was a case where we outbid everyone to land a star player and make a splash that turned out more like a dribble. Other big $$$ Hendry deals, DLee turned out pretty well, but he didn't approach $20 mil per. ARam was mostly a success, despite the frequent injuries. The Bradley deal was awful. But again, those 3 contracts are not in the ballpark of what $$$ A Gonzalez will demand, or Cliff Lee, etc. How many $20 mil per year deals can you point to in baseball that work out well for their teams long term? Very, very few. A player might give them 2-3 years of good production, but these guys all seem to be in their 30's when they sign these 7+ year deals and as soon as they start their natural decline, or suffer an injury that speeds up their decline (Soriano's legs), the deals look awful.

[ ]

In reply to by Paul Noce

Well, you're changing the point that you initially stated. If you said "paying Adrian Gonzalez $21 million for seven years will cripple the team when he ages poorly", that's a defensible arguement. Just saying "The Cubs cannot afford $20 million contracts" isn't. The Cubs can afford those contracs, if they choose wisely. No one anywhere thought the Soriano contract was a wise one, most people considered it a necessary evil, at best. That being said, with two playoff appearances and another competitive year, at this point, fiscally it probably wasn't a bad deal. The remainder of it though... The Bonds contract didn't cripple the Giants, the Maddux contract worked out OK for the Braves, the aforementioned Ramirez deal got two World Series for the Red Sox. There are examples, Hendry just hasn't figured out where to find them yet.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

It just shows the flaw in what the Cubs value when evaluating players. They are/have been a stone aged, scouting based franchise. Soriano was flashy and "5 tool". He looked good in a uniform. Lets target him. Same can be said for Bradley as well. You can absolutely win by paying guys market rates. It just needs to be the correct guys. And market rate doesn't have to mean 20% OVER market rate.

[ ]

In reply to by Paul Noce

I thought you could have time and market adjusted their salaries. Replace $20 million with "Highest Paid Free agents." The Giants, for example, paid Bonds $15 million in 2002, which made him the 2nd highest paid player in the league and accounted for 19% of their payroll. A $20 million player would only account for 14% of the Cubs 2010 opening day payroll (according to Cot's)

In addressing the comment that the Cubs may/may not be gun-shy about taking on another big-ticket contract long-term, I think that this becomes more likely when a couple of things happen: 1. The Cubs get a "cash-cow" subscription-only cable package, ala the YES Network, or, 2. The team starts winning consistently. It seems as if since #1 will be at least a two more year wait when their CSN contract expires, this would mean #2 would need to happen for this guy to spend big money on a team where he barely afforded it. At this point, most people believe that the Cubs at current have the #4 starting pitching staff in the Division! And, when comparing it to what's going on in Philly, SF, or even Cincy, we have a long way to go to match up with the likes of Randy Wells, Tom Gorzo, Fat-Ass, Thomas Cloudy-Diamond, et. al. We will see how this develops after the Winter Meetings, and as Spring Training gets going. Ricketts, as others have pointed out, is "house poor" right now, and cannot afford to re-do the plumbing, or add new appliances in the kitchen. It will be a difficult, "low-expectations" year in 2011, and I would be shocked if the Cubs took on any long-term, big-money deals on at all. But - I was pretty shocked when the Cubs signed Soriano. Anyway, how can anyone complain when we have new troughs to pee in? I mean, just what are your priorities here?

[ ]

In reply to by The E-Man

In my post I was saying I am gun-shy about taking on new big $$ contracts. I doubt Hendry is gun-shy. Hendry loves credit cards, but his Sugar Daddy cut him off. What is amusing though is how Ricketts claims the team is so broke. They're in the top 5 teams for revenue, don't give us that crap. The team sucks because it was poorly assembled and given over-market contracts to many players, not because of any revenue problems.

[ ]

In reply to by Paul Noce

While arguably true about the contracts, Ricketts is going to use the revenue to recover from the purchase, while using some to address the real concerns on Waveland, the facilities themselves (like new troughs to pee in). The good news about those tacks is that with a) Ricketts better off financially long-term and b) better facilities for the team, etc., the Cubs have a better chance of becoming a winning franchise, not a one-time winning team. It just (most likely) won't start in 2011.

From Bruce Levine's blg today: "Unless ownership changes its mind, the Cubs will have to make their additions with as little as $5 million-$7 million in available payroll. Even before the Ricketts family took over the Cubs in October 2009, payroll had been flat since December 2008, when the Tribune Co. declared bankruptcy and owner Sam Zell told team executive Crane Kenney and general manager Jim Hendry that spending money on any free agent or trade was done. Hendry was a half day away from obtaining Jake Peavy and his $60 million contract from the San Diego Padres before Zell pulled the plug. Since that day, Hendry has had to make trades -- like the Mark DeRosa deal and Milton Bradley transaction -- on a dollar-for-dollar basis. The only way he's been able to add players is trading money in order to spend it. He adds: "bottom feeders" are two words that describe the Cubs this year. Ugh.

A question for anyone on either side of the Dunn fence: We all know his defensive shortcomings and what he brings to the table offensively. So, will his D cancel out his strengths on offense? Will he produce more runs or cost more runs? OK, that's two questions, I guess.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

If that's UZR (which I think it is) it does not count catching throws from infielders, and it used to not include line drives (MGL thought catching line drives by infielders was total luck), though not sure if that's been added. It's not totally useless, but it's not very good either. Just sort by WAR to see where Dunn would stand, based on last year to incorporate offense and defense, I guess. The Fangraphs guys do a lot of interesting things, but their logic and reasononing ability is substandard compared to their "competition".

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

if there's 6 worse 1st than dunn that metric rating needs some heavy work. hell, if there's 2 worse...etc... no range, no glove, no arm, no reach...haven't seen enough of him trying to dig balls on throws... he's a man without a position. the guy hits 40hr a year and once again no one gives a damn. coming out of CIN he was a man without a position who had a flippant attitude toward the game who took a 2yr/20m deal with a non-contender. after 2 years he's still a man without a position and the buzz on him seems to be as tame as 2 years ago.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

yeah, i wouldn't go by any aggregate. this is an easy one. if you've seen him at 1st for more than a few games (if necessary) it's painfully evident how clumbsy he is there. heck, he can't even play LF anymore. ...and besides all that. i'd like to know what's up with him besides his D shortcomings that produces so little interest in the guy. a few months ago i'd say he was due for 15m multi-year...now it seems no NL teams want a piece of him and he's not being linked to hardly anyone. the #1 power hitter on the market and guys like VMart are getting 12m to fill a DH role for a contender. sure, he can "emergency/backup C" but his D there is pretty cruddy.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

well first full year, but he didn't show any improvement ever in the outfield, what makes you think he'll try to get better at 1b? And more likely whatever he does learn, he'll give back by just getting old. and what makes you ignore that the people who get paid to watch him, don't think he should be playing the position? anyway, Cubs are obviously not spending unless they move some contracts, so it's all becoming moot.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

Not sure what question I dodged? Most reports were that his defese at first was acceptable. Except for an "anonymous scout" who crowed about his defense after he turned down the Nationals extension offer. I'm not advocating putting the guy at Short or Center. First base is a place you can stash a marginal glove. To me it's worth the gamble to fix a bottom 10 offense in 2011. Just my opinion.

With Andy LaRoche having cleared Outright Waivers and elected free-agency, I could see the Cubs trying to sign him to a 2011 minor league contract with an NRI to Spring Training. The idea would be for the Cubs to send LaRoche to AAA with the promise that he would be brought up no later than September 1st (or sooner if Aramis Ramirez is traded or goes down with an injury), and if he is added to a 40-man roster prior to the end of the season he would be eligible for salary-arbitration post-2011. And then if he can re-estasblish his bat at AAA, LaRoche would be a candidate to replace Aramis Ramirez post-2011 if A-Ram leaves as a FA. LaRoche was dropped from the Pirates 40-man roster now mainly because he is eligible for salary arbitration for the first time post-2010, but also because he is out of minor league options. So if the Cubs do sign him, he needs to be signed to a minor league deal so that he would not have to get through waivers if he doesn't make the Cubs 2011 25-man Opening Day roster out of Spring Training. LaRoche was a BA MLB Top 100 prospect four seasons in a row (2005-08), and he hit a respectable 258/330/401 with 29 doubles and 12 HR in 150 games with Pittsburgh in 2009 after being acquired from the Dodgers in the LAD-PIT-BOS Manny Ramirez three-way deal in 2008. But then he struggled at the plate in 2010 and lost his startting job to Bucs #1 prospect Pedro Alvarez. However, LaRoche is still just 27 years old and could possibly resurrect his career in 2011 with a full-season of regular playing time at AAA. Marquez Smith is presently projected as the starting 3B at Iowa, but the fact that the Cubs did not add him to the 40-man roster would seem to indicate that they aren't completely sold on him as an MLB prospect, and wouldn't be overly disappointed if they lose him in the Rule 5 Draft. Like Marquez Smith, Andy LaRoche does not really have the versatility or atleticism to play other positions, so what you would be getting is an everyday 3B, not a utility player or bench guy. It's just a question of whether he can fulfill the tremendous potential he showed coming up through the Dodgers system, or if he has gradually morphed into a 4-A guy.

Recent comments

  • 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?

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    In my opinion, the biggest "affirmative" mistake the Cubs made in the off-season (that is, doing something they should not have done), was blowing $9M in 2024 AAV on Hector Neris. What the Cubs actually need is an alternate closer to be in the pen and available to close if Alzolay pitched the day before (David Robertson would have been perfect), because with his forearm issue last September, I would be VERY wary of over-using Alzolay. I'm not even sure I would pitch him two days in a row!  

    And of course what the Cubs REALLY need is a second TOR SP to pair with Justin Steele. That's where the Cubs are going to need to be willing to package prospects (like the Padres did to acquire Dylan Cease, the Orioles did to acquire Corbin Burnes, and the Dodgers did to acquire Tyler Glasnow). Obviously those ships have sailed, but I would say right now the Cubs need to look very hard at trying to acquire LHSP Jesus Luzardo from the Marlins (and maybe LHP A. J. Puk as well).