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

Z Traded to Marlins

Pending physicals and the commish offices approval, the Cubs will send Carlos Zambrano and $15M to the Marlins for RHP Chris Volstad. More to come later tonight when I get a moment.

Comments

Was there ever any resolution to the 30 day suspension without pay situation? Did the MLBPA get a judgement?

At least our new pitcher could probably kick our old pitcher's ass. 6'8" 230 lbs? That's like 15% more pitcher!

[ ]

In reply to by Charlie

nah, I was thinking of Farns/Affeldt. This was when he was with Detroit. Googled it was just to make sure that it existed, but he stormed out of the pen in a fight, and when things were cooling down, he picked up Affeldt and slammed him into the ground. The Wilson one was a good one as well though. Farnsy's been in his fair share of intriguing fights I guess. Watching the Wilson video right now, what the hell was Wilson thinking? Heck, everyone knew Farnsy's rep as an emotional (to say the least) guy, and he was jawing with Farnsy only a couple feet away. It wasn't even a typical Farnsy bad pitch - just looked like the pitch got away from him. There's a video of the Farns/Affeldt thing from a fan in the stand on youtube. Don't see too much, but around the 2:08 mark is when Farnsy escalated things. As a side note, glad to see Farnsy is still going strong. Strange to think that he's been one of the better arms from those mid-90's drafts. His control has sharpened as he's gotten older.

volstad is in transition as a pitcher. okay, he "only" has a low 90s fastball (90-92, usually), but he's got a decent curve and a decent slider...and a change. he's starting to use (and therefore hang) his slider more. he's also getting better at hitting the strike zone, though that's not always been a positive thing. i would not get bent out of shape about what he did last season in the majors or minors. imo...if the guy can help himself from being a 30+HR-given-up pitcher he can put up some respectable mid-rotation numbers...and he's got 3 years of club control.

If/once Garza is traded, who has the inside edge for the #2 starter: Wells, T-Wood or Volstad? This could possibly be the worst starting rotation in the majors. Collecting young #5 starters under club control appears to be replacing collecting second basemen.

[ ]

In reply to by Sonicwind75

i sure as hell hope they are done collecting guys like wood/volstad at this point...especially with randy wells still around (who i don't mind as much as some) and cashner still having a lot to prove as far as his "ace potential" goes. they got 3+ solid middle/end-rotation starting options for years who happen to be mlb-ready now. if garza's going next it's time to bulk up the bats or find a 2013-sure-thing top rotation SP, imo.

Since there is little chance Z will be on the team in 2013 and they are not likely to get draft pick compensation, it seems the Cubs turned a short term asset (which has little value to them) into a long term asset.

[ ]

In reply to by Dusty Baylor

It'll be two years before Jedstin can field a competitive team anyway, so two years of Volstd for one of Z is worth shaking the headache imo... Also in two years, Joey Votto is a 30 year old free agent... No chance the Reds can keep him. He might be just the right guy at just the right time and he fits the Jedstein mold. Fuck Fielder, give Pena a two year deal and wait for Votto.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

When the Zambrano deal was bruited yesterday, you dropped your payroll estimate from $80 to $70 million. Apparently you thought the trade would net the Cubs the difference, around $10 million. The actual net is something like $1 or $1.5 million. In theory, the Cubs could have let the Marlins keep Volstad and taken a low-minors prospect instead, and saved some millions. That way, they wouldn't have had to sell off the copper piping in the men's room to reach the $70 million target. Isn't dumping salary more important than getting a rotation starter in return for Z?

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

You seem to care about the payroll amount as though it shares a direct correlation with the number of wins the team will have. This must be the reason that you constantly bitch about the payroll going down. I understand why VA Phil made his comment.

[ ]

In reply to by Jumbo

I'm just frustrated by the fact that we are punting a season for no apparent reason. I think a big market team should act like a big market team. Either way, I'll get over it. It's just going to make following the Cubs a pointless exercise in 2012.

[ ]

In reply to by VirginiaPhil

Volstad's estimated salary arbitration number is 2.6M and Cubs are allegedly paying $15M of Z's contracts (although some reports say between 15 and 16M). My guess is it's $15.4M and essentially the Cubs are saving nothing on the deal.

[ ]

In reply to by CincyKid

Why can't Jedstein field a competitive team for two years? I've heard the statement a few times, but it makes no sense. The Cubs have $70 million coming off the books over the next year ($20 in 2011, $50 in 2012). That's more money than 10 teams spent on their entire major league payroll in 2011. If JedStein can't build a competitive team with that much money then they probably don't deserve to have their jobs. And who knows what might happen with Votto in a couple of years. He could be extended, accept arb, be traded and then extended, break his neck, etc. Counting on him being available in two years is just wishful thinking at this point.

[ ]

In reply to by Sweet Lou

The issue isn't whether they could throw some money at a few vets and make some token run at the playoffs. It's whether you want go through the yo-yo cycle of Hendry of boom or bust or do you want a sustained level of success of never winning less than 86 games as Theo did in Boston. Sure, they could have maybe squeezed all those players into their budget that AZ Phil suggested in the WWJHD post, which I have my doubts they could have fit in their payroll, but I have bigger doubts on expecting Beltran, Ramirez, Soriano, etc to stay healthy and then you'd be stuck in more bad deals. You have to trust a little that they have a plan and they should be allowed to execute it.

If I got this right, with Z gone and Kerry Wood unsigned as yet there's only 6 Cubs left who played on the 2008 team: Dempster, Marmol, Wells, Samardzija, Soto, and Soriano.

Our current slotting of pitchers reminds me of the pitching staff the year after Greg Maddux left for Atlanta (he was with the Braves in 1993). It was a rotation without a #1 and Mike Morgan was supposed to step up. The 1993 Cubs did win 84 games though so I guess the net results will probably be much better from that staff. I'm assuming Garza isn't getting traded since the market seems to be rapidly thinning. 1993 Cubs rotation: Mike Morgan (starts 32); 10-15 Jose Guzman (starts 30); 12-10 Greg Hibbard (starts 31); 15-11 Mike Harkey (starts 28); 10-10 Frank Castillo (starts 25); 5-8 2012 Cubs rotation (as of January 2012): Matt Garza (as Morgan) Ryan Dempster (as Guzman) Travis Wood (as Hibbard) Chris Volstadt (as Harkey) Randy Wells (as Castillo) I realize at best Zambrano hasn't been more than a #3 starter for awhile so I don't consider our staff that much worse without him. But looking at the current starting staff, it won't look as ugly if they can get a #1 sometime in the next 2-3 seasons. Not sure how that happens unless this season's draft pick at #6 can select the next David Price/Mark Prior near ready college ace who needs just a short amount of seasoning in the minors (or the 2013 draft's #1-2 pick comes our way due to the current asset reallocation strategy).

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

tough to see that level of power development for Marwin in one off-season. Not impossible, after all, Casey McGehee had a sudden surge, but tough to see it happen. A couple years down the line, perhaps. That said, I think Marwin is going to have a good chance to win the Astros starting shortstop job.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

i completely forgot they dealt for Lowrie. Edit: Their third base situation is pretty ugly. Not so sure that, at some point in the year, that Marwin at short and Jed at 3rd wouldn't be the best defensive and offensive combination. Anyhow, yeah, totally blanked on the Melancon trade when I typed that.

Quick question for Phil or anyone else aware of the details: Even though it is very unlikely Z will finish in the top 4 Cy Young voting for 2012, if he did, is it not the case that now Florida lives with that possible outcome and the Cubs are totally off the hook?

[ ]

In reply to by Jim Hickmans Bat

Wed, 01/04/2012 - 10:10pm — Jim Hickmans Bat Z 2013 obligation Quick question for Phil or anyone else aware of the details: Even though it is very unlikely Z will finish in the top 4 Cy Young voting for 2012, if he did, is it not the case that now Florida lives with that possible outcome and the Cubs are totally off the hook? ================================= JIM H: The Cubs could agree in advance to pay all or part of any potential vesting option, but the new team (the Marlins) would normally be on the hook for 100% of the 2013 $19.25M vesting player-option should Big Z qualify for it and exercise the option. Also, if the player-option does not vest, or if it does vest and Zambrano does not exercise his 2013 $19.25M player option, the Marlins could choose to offer Zambrano a one-year guaranteed contract for 2013 with a salary equal to the average salary of the 125 highest-paid players in MLB in 2012 (which this year would have been about $12M) even though it would be more than a 20% cut from his 2012 salary, and if Zambrano declines the contract offer and signs a major league contract with another MLB club for 2013, the Marlins would get a compensation pick between the 1st & 2nd rounds in the June 2013 First-Year Player Draft. So in effect, the Marlins could end up getting a Supplemental 1st round draft pick in 2013 in return for getting one year of Zambrano for around $3M (essentially the same salary they would have had to pay Chris Volstad, who is eligible for salary arbitration for the first time this off-season).

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

If the Cubs DID agree to cover some of Z's potential vesting option though, wouldn't that info have been included in the announcement? The absence of any such info leads to the conclusion that the Cubs are indeed off the hook here. As for the Marlins, seems unlikely they'd play things as deep as you suggest Phil, but you are right--that would be pretty damn savvy to turn in essence Chris Volstad (who was rumored to be non-tender candidate anyway) into a supplemental 1st rounder for free, with a free year of Zambrano's services as a bonus. Nice job by the Marlins here.

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

I'd venture that if Z is good enough to be a top 3 Cy Young pitcher. He will be worth that option. I would also guess that he would decline that option and try to pull himself a multi-year deal. I can't wait to see who else will go in the firesale!!!! No doubt Joe Ricketts is the proudest papa in all of Chicago land right now. We are seeing record profits for the Ricketts clan in 2012!!!!!!!!

I for one am sad. I'm sure most people are happy to see him go (even if Vulvastad isn't much of a prize). Despite his, uh, quirks, Z was one of my favorite Cubs (seeing him attempt leg out a triple in spring training only to slip and fall on his ass was a shining moment) and I hate to see him end his career with another team.

[ ]

In reply to by The Joe

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:25am — The Joe I for one am sad. I'm sure most people are happy to see him go (even if Vulvastad isn't much of a prize). Despite his, uh, quirks, Z was one of my favorite Cubs (seeing him attempt leg out a triple in spring training only to slip and fall on his ass was a shining moment) and I hate to see him end his career with another team. ============================================= THE JOE: Carlos Zambrano is one of the nicest guys I've ever met. He used to organize games at Fitch Park during the off-season for MLB and minor league players who live in the Phoenix area ("Z" was the DH), and he spent a lot of time riding his bicycle up & down Center Street and hanging with the Cubs minor leaguers at Fitch Park during Spring Training, taking BP and sometimes DH-ing in minor league ST games when he wasn't scheduled to pitch in a Cactus League game. Baseball was not Zambrano's favorite sport, though. I think he likes soccer and boxing more than baseball.

I think Theo & co are doing an amazing job! I love Z and think he'll have a great year in Fla. Change of scenery is all he needs, new blood around him, not being big dog Etc. But back to Theo. picture being hired to come to a floundering business and being tasked with not just getting it on its feet, but making it The Best. Big distinction! You are not gonna mortgage your future with mid-long term contracts to "the best employees available" you are gonna want the best there is. You cannot accomplish this without some form of discerning patience. Plus the business you took over had painful few assets and a lot of veteran employees taking long lunches and collecting a paycheck, despite their diminishing skills and the company's complete failure on the market! Top reasons why things look the way they do right now: 1.) you don't want to fill roster spots with players who don't fit your model, just cause they are good and available. 2.) you don't want to block positions where your likely to need an upgrade to be a champion. Especially via free agency in which you over pay on returns. 3.) you don't want to over pay for peak years on players before your system is ready to peak (Fielder obviously, and likely Garza too). 4.) you don't want to deplete your assets to acquire players via trade when you have too many spots to fill and precious few assets. 5.) you have no control over who is a free agent, who you inherited when you took the job, and to some degree who is available via trade. I know none of this is groundbreaking, but it's important to see it laid out. I respect Theo for taking the job and for holding firm to an overhaul. We want to be the BEST, not pretty good, or marketable, or 'fun' for fans. We've had that for years and we all know how that is going with regards to the WS bottom line. I choose to believe and have every reason to believe that Ricketts and Theo want their legacy to be of the Championship variety. To those of you who believe there is any other motive or incompetency at play, I really think you are mistaken. Theo knows more than any of us about being a GM and not only that - but - each of his moves are making sense in the context of building a long term winner. I don't believe you can compete now and build a gold star organization at once, given the state of the organization when he came here. I think that is dreaming. All that said I think this team will be fun to watch AND outperform last year's team by the time it is assembled for opening day 2012.

For the record (literally) 72 victories is still not necessarily a watershed moment. I couldn't watch last year's team - gonna be hard to be less interesting than 2011 Cubs.

Recent comments

  • Childersb3 (view)

    Tauchman gets a pinch hit RBI single with a liner to RF. This is his spot. He's a solid 4th OF. But he isn't a DH. 

    He takes pitches. Useful. I still believe in having good hitters.

    You don't want your DH to be your weak link (other than your C maybe)

  • crunch (view)

    bit of a hot take here, but i'm gonna say it.

    the 2024 marlins don't seem to be good at doing baseballs.

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    Phil, will the call up for a double header restart that 15 days on assignment for a pitcher? Like will wesneski’s 15 days start yesterday, or if he’s the 27th man, will that mean 15 days from tomorrow?

    I hope that makes sense. It sounds clearer in my head.

  • Charlie (view)

    Tauchman obviously brings value to the roster as a 4th outfielder who can and should play frequently. Him appearing frequently at DH indicated that the team lacks a valuable DH. 

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Totally onboard with your thoughts concerning today’s lineup. Not sure about your take on Tauchman though.

    The guy typically doesn’t pound the ball out out of the park, and his BA is quite unimpressive. But he brings something unique to the table that the undisciplined batters of the past didn’t. He always provides a quality at bat and he makes the opposing pitcher work because he has a great eye for the zone and protects the plate with two strikes exceptionally well. In addition to making him a base runner more often than it seems through his walks, that kind of at bat wears a pitcher down both mentally and physically so that the other guys who may hit the ball harder are more apt to take advantage of subsequent mistakes and do their damage.

    I can’t remember a time when the Cubs valued this kind of contribution but this year they have a couple of guys doing it, with Happ being the other. It doesn’t make for gaudy stats but it definitely contributes to winning ball games. I do believe that’s why Tauchman has garnered so much playing time.

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    Miles Mastrobuoni cannot be recalled until he has spent at least ten days on optional assignment, unless he is recalled to replace a position player who is placed on an MLB inactive list (IL, Paternity, Bereavement / Family Medical). 

     

    And for a pitcher it's 15 days on optional assignment before he can be recalled, unless he is replacing a pitcher who is placed on an MLB inactive list (IL, Paternity, or Bereavement / Family Medical). 

     

    And a pitcher (or a position player, but almost always it's a pitcher) can be recalled as the 27th man for a doubleheader regardless of how many days he has been on optional assignment, but then he must be sent back down again the next day. 

     

    That's why the Cubs had to wait as long as they did to send Jose Cuas down and recall Keegan Thompson. Thompson needed to spend the first 15 days of the MLB regular season on optional assignment before he could be recalled (and he spent EXACTLY the first 15 days of the MLB regular season on optional assignment before he was recalled). 

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    Indeed they do TJW!

    For the record I’m not in favor of solely building a team through paying big to free agents. But I’m also of the mind that when you develop really good players, get them signed to extensions that buy out a couple years of free agency, including with team options. And supplement the home grown players with free agent splashes or using excess prospects to trade for stars under team control for a few years. Sort of what Atlanta does, basically. Everyone talks about the dodgers but I feel that Atlanta is the peak organization at the current moment.

    That said, the constant roster churn is very Rays- ish. What they do is incredible, but it’s extremely hard to do which is why they’re the only ones frequently successful that employ that strategy. I definitely do not want to see a large market team like ours follow that model closely. But I don’t think free agent frenzies is always the answer. It’s really only the Dodgers that play in that realm. I could see an argument for the Mets too. The Yankees don’t really operate like that anymore since the elder Steinbrenner passed. Though I would say the reigning champions built a good deal of that team through free agent spending.

  • Childersb3 (view)

    The issue is the Cubs are 11-7 and have been on the road for 12 of those 18.  We should be at least 13-5, maybe 14-4. Jed isn't feeling any pressure to play anyone he doesn't see fit.
    But Canario on the bench, Morel not at 3B for Madrigal and Wisdom in RF wasn't what I thought would happen in this series.
    I was hoping for Morel at 3B, Canario in RF, Wisdom at DH and Madrigal as a pinch hitter or late replacement.
    Maybe Madrigal starts 1 game against the three LHSP for Miami.
    I'm thinking Canario goes back to Iowa on Sunday night for Mastrobuoni after the Miami LHers are gone.
    Canario needs ABs in Iowa and not bench time in MLB.
    With Seiya out for a while Wisdom is safe unless his SOs are just overwhelmingly bad.

    My real issue with the lineup isn't Madrigal. I'm not a fan, but I've given up on that one.
    It's Tauchman getting a large number of ABs as the de factor DH and everyday player.
    I didn't realize that was going to be the case.
    We need a better LH DH. PCA or ONKC need to force the issue in about a month.
    But, even if they do so, Jed doesn't have to change anything if the Cubs stay a few over .500!!!

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Totally depends on the team and the player involved. If your team’s philosophy is to pay huge dollars to bet on the future performance of past stars in order to win championships then, yes, all of the factors you mentioned are important.

    If on the other hand, if the team’s primary focus is to identify and develop future stars in an effort to win a championship, and you’re a young player looking to establish yourself as a star, that’s a fit too. Otherwise your buried within your own organization.

    Your comment about bringing up Canario for the purposes of sitting him illustrates perfectly the dangers of rewarding a non-performing, highly paid player over a hungry young prospect, like Canario, who is perpetually without a roster spot except as an insurance call up, but too good to trade. Totally disincentivizing the performance of the prospect and likely diminishing it.

    Sticking it to your prospects and providing lousy baseball to your fans, the consumers and source of revenue for your sport, solely so that the next free agent gamble finds your team to be a comfortable landing spot even if he sucks? I suppose  that makes sense to some teams but it’s definitely not the way I want to see my team run.

    Once again, DJL, our differences in philosophy emerge!

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    That’s just kinda how it works though, for every team. No team plays their best guys all the time. No team is comprising of their best 26 even removing injuries.

    When baseball became a business, like REALLY a business, it became important to keep some of the vets happy, which in turn keeps agents happy and keeps the team with a good reputation among players and agents. No one wants to play for a team that has a bad reputation in the same way no one wants to work for a company that has a bad rep.

    Don’t get me wrong, I hate it too. But there’s nothing anyone can do about it.

    On that topic, I find it silly the Cubs brought up Canario to sit as much as he has. He’s going to get Velazquez’d, and it’s a shame.