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

Cubs Potential Offseason Targets: Mike Cameron

Submitted by Rob G. on

I'll go through a few more lower level free agents this week and pick it up to some possible bigger names next week. As we know, there's talk that if the Cubs can move Milton Bradley, they'd put Kosuke Fukudome back to right field and try and improve the outfield defense with a more true center fielder. And that's where Mike Cameron comes in...

Year Age Tm G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+
1995 22 CHW 28 44 38 4 7 2 0 1 2 0 0 3 15 .184 .244 .316 .560 47
1996 23 CHW 11 12 11 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 .091 .167 .091 .258 -31
1997 24 CHW 116 446 379 63 98 18 3 14 55 23 2 55 105 .259 .356 .433 .789 109
1998 25 CHW 141 443 396 53 83 16 5 8 43 27 11 37 101 .210 .285 .336 .621 63
1999 26 CIN 146 636 542 93 139 34 9 21 66 38 12 80 145 .256 .357 .469 .825 105
2000 27 SEA 155 643 543 96 145 28 4 19 78 24 7 78 133 .267 .365 .438 .803 107
2001 28 SEA 150 633 540 99 144 30 5 25 110 34 5 69 155 .267 .353 .480 .832 123
2002 29 SEA 158 640 545 84 130 26 5 25 80 31 8 79 176 .239 .340 .442 .782 109
2003 30 SEA 147 612 534 74 135 31 5 18 76 17 7 70 137 .253 .344 .431 .774 108
2004 31 NYM 140 562 493 76 114 30 1 30 76 22 6 57 143 .231 .319 .479 .798 104
2005 32 NYM 76 343 308 47 84 23 2 12 39 13 1 29 85 .273 .342 .477 .819 114
2006 33 SDP 141 634 552 88 148 34 9 22 83 25 9 71 142 .268 .355 .482 .837 121
2007 34 SDP 151 651 571 88 138 33 6 21 78 18 5 67 160 .242 .328 .431 .759 103
2008 35 MIL 120 508 444 69 108 25 2 25 70 17 5 54 142 .243 .331 .477 .809 110
2009 36 MIL 149 628 544 78 136 32 3 24 70 7 3 75 156 .250 .342 .452 .795 108
15 Seasons 1829 7435 6440 1013 1610 362 59 265 926 296 82 825 1798 .250 .340 .448 .788 106
SEA (4 yrs) 610 2528 2162 353 554 115 19 87 344 106 27 296 601 .256 .350 .448 .798 112
CHW (4 yrs) 296 945 824 121 189 36 8 23 100 50 14 96 224 .229 .315 .376 .691 82
NYM (2 yrs) 216 905 801 123 198 53 3 42 115 35 7 86 228 .247 .328 .478 .806 108
SDP (2 yrs) 292 1285 1123 176 286 67 15 43 161 43 14 138 302 .255 .341 .456 .797 112
MIL (2 yrs) 269 1136 988 147 244 57 5 49 140 24 8 129 298 .247 .337 .464 .801 109
CIN (1 yr) 146 636 542 93 139 34 9 21 66 38 12 80 145 .256 .357 .469 .825 105
AL (8 yrs) 906 3473 2986 474 743 151 27 110 444 156 41 392 825 .249 .341 .428 .769 104
NL (7 yrs) 923 3962 3454 539 867 211 32 155 482 140 41 433 973 .251 .340 .465 .805 109
Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 10/31/2009.
Cubs-Brewers

The offensive numbers are pretty generic, but combined with his defense, he's definitely a plus for any team (anywhere from 2 to 4 Wins Above Replacement according to Fangraphs). UZR has him well above replacement level defensively the last couple of years and for his career and BP agrees with a career 106 Rate2 number. The Fan's Scouting Report makes it the triple crown of defensive road marks along with 3 career Gold Gloves to make me feel confident that he still can patrol center field with the best of them.

Now you know with Cameron's ability to hit 20 HR's or more, Lou is gonna want to use him in the middle of the order to drive in runs, so let's see how he does in that area. I like to look deeper than just the standard RBI counting stat and see what kind of opportunties Cameron has had and thankfully BP neatly keeps track of this. Cameron's OBI% (Other Batters Driven In) since 2006:

10.7% - 2009, 16.5% in 2008, 14.7% in 2007, 15.8% in 2006

Well 2009 was pretty ugly there for Cameron  - Milton Bradley ugly - but he seems to be around the league average(which is about 15%) or better for the most part which I honestly expected to be a little worse with all his K's. It's not something you can put a guarantee on, but let's say he shows a tendency to get the job done.

Still at age 37, I don't think the Cubs should really enterain much more than a 1-yr offer here and hope you get a Bobby Abreu-special that falls in your lap in March for $5-$7M. Considering Cameron's sensitive (as he should be) to some of the bleacher taunting, I don't see this being a match for the Cubs or Cameron.

Tags
2010 Offseason Targets
Mike Cameron

Comments

Submitted by John Beasley on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:36 am

I disagree. Given that there will be just a scant few million available for free agents; given that the team seems insistent on acquiring hitting opposed to pitching, and that hitting just be able to play 2B or CF; given his strong defense; given his power threat; with a contract likely not to exceed $8M and perhaps less than that due to his age and a lot of OFs on the market, I'm not sure I like any hitting free agent as a better fit for this team. The biggest downside - Cameron in the middle of the Cubs lineup is like the single longest stretch that an opposing manager could use a ROOGY.

Submitted by Charlie on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:19 am

Do not pay Mike Cameron $8 million in his age 37 year as his defense declines. We'd be better off re-signing Johnson and spending the extra money on Grabow and or the like. I'd rather offer arbitration to free agents who can bring back draft picks than sign Cameron. Pick up a center fielder in the spring if necessary.

Submitted by Q-Ball on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:23 am

What is the statitical and scouting consensus on Kosuke as a CF? Does he absolutely need to be replaced, or is this a "nice to have?" My casual observations from last year is that I thought he was solid but unspectacular. Didn't make many highlights, plus or minus. He seemed to play a good CF to me. His offensive production looks better as a CF, than a RF, where you expect more power.

[ ]

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:00 pm

"His offensive production looks better as a CF." Except for stolen bases, which is probably the main reason the Cubs don't like him in center. The top three base stealers in the NL play center--Bourn (61), Morgan (42) and Kemp (34). Fifth you have Pierre (30), who played center before he joined the same team as Kemp. Sixth is Dexter Fowler (27). Eleven and twelve are Taveras (25) and Victorino (25). In fifteenth place is McCutcheon with 22. McLouth had 19 SBs with 6 CS's. Beltran missed half the season but he is certainly a base stealer. Chris Young (11) used to steal bases. With an OBP of .311 in 2009, he didn't have many opportunities. Center fielders who don't run much/well: Cameron (7), Fukudome (6), Ross (5), Rasmus (3). Fukudome is probably the worst because he had 10 caught-stealings. This would all be less noticeable in right field. Of course, he has other defects that are more glaring in right.

Submitted by Ryno on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:28 am

Considering Cameron's over-achievement in '09 (especially earlier in the year), I figure he'll probably be overpaid in 2010. Good enough reason to avoid him, but I do like his defensive game and wouldn't be heart-broken if the Cubs got him. When did we last have a center fielder who could belt 15+ homers? I'd be uneasy with $8 mil per, though.

Submitted by Barry on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:15 am

Please no to Cameron. The Cubs need to get younger, faster and more athletic. My suggestion is to try to trade for someone with a bigger upside like Granderson or Upton. If we had Granderson, then I wouldn't mind having Cameron since Granderson doesn't hit lefties very well.

Submitted by The E-Man on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:22 am

Just checked this on B-R, but his batting stats against the Cub's Central main rivals are just not very good career-wise. Blech. At 37, this seems like a guy who could be on the bench for a team like the Yankees, Phillies, etc. Not a "starter" on a team that has Championship goals. Originally, I was thinking "Well, he always killed us..." But the stats say otherwise: .235 .322 .450 .772 Also, his "clutch" stats also are not very good as well. It seems that RJ could do as well, and add in Fuld as the last guy on the team. It just is the Aaron Miles contract that makes me want to puke.

Submitted by Rob G. on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:56 pm

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/11/odds-ends-bradley-rays-twins.html seems like they may consider if Cubs pay most of his contract.. Club officials aren't expecting it to happen but it's something club officials are definitely talking about as they try to figure out a way to repair an offense that scored 115 less runs in 2009 than in 2008. A month ago, it seemed impossible that the Rangers would bring back Bradley. Now there seems some hemming and hawing. The Rangers know that the Cubs are eager to unload Bradley, who has two years and $20 million left on his contract. They know there is a possibility the Cubs could pick up a sizable portion of that contract, a must if the Rangers are going to get involved.

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:55 pm

sorry about that Jon Daniels, I just figured I'd take a shot considering you once traded Adrian Gonzalez and Chris Young away for Adam Eaton...

can I get Rangers 2009 program, Nolan Ryan autographed baseball and some middle infielder that looks good in a uniform but can't control the strike zone? 

[ ]

Submitted by kmokeefe on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:21 pm

more than 50 chances in both years = r^2 of .15 more than 100 chances in both years = r^2 of .19 more than 150 chances in both years = r^2 of .24 more than 200 chances in both years = r^2 of .28 _______________________________________________________________________________________________ I've only taken a few semesters of stats, but those r^2 values seem absolutely dismal to me The point that the rating becomes more consistent as attempts increase is a valid one, but I'd still argue that this article makes more of a case against UZR rather than for it

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:37 pm

i know shit about stats classes but from reading those articles and staying at a Holiday Inn once, I think the point was that they aren't any weaker than a lot of well-accepted offensive metrics. 

The one thing about a lot of these stats which people I think forget is that they aren't measuring true talent, rather performance. I think it's certainly possible to have a bad year defensively or one that looks bad defensively by the numbers like having a bad year offensively.

[ ]

Submitted by crunch on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:50 pm

"The one thing about a lot of these stats which people I think forget is that they aren't measuring true talent, rather performance." that's something a lot of people from "both" sides of looking at stats forget. the "ryan theriot isn't a singles hitting little shit" points people where lambasting me with still weirds me out. you didn't need a single stat to project what he was most-likely to do based on what he did. plain as day no matter how many early slugging hits he ran into. singles...right field, heavy...that was (and for the most part still is) his game. granted, most players aren't as easy to pigeonhole based on their performance OR stats, but theriot was a pretty easy one looking at how he plays the game.

Submitted by The E-Man on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:33 pm

"...seems like they may consider if Cubs pay most of his contract.." If that is correct - and who knows - the Cubs will not be paying "most" of Bradley's contract. It just ain't gonna happen. There will be better offers.

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:15 pm

Cameron, Bradley--how about some fresh air? Castro 2 for 4 today with a run and two ribbies, Vitters a triple in 4 ABs, Gaub a 1-2-3 inning with 2 K's. Castro hitting .423, Vitters .326.

[ ]

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Tue, 11/03/2009 - 11:51 am

When I see a list of prospect busts--I guess that would be everyone on this AFL MVP list except Hanson and possibly Harvey and Fuld--I look for players in the 1B-DH rut. There's always high unemployment in the majors (but not in the minors) for one-way players. Cannon, Shelton and Dubois are in this category. Cannon, Shelton, Dubois and Harvey were 24 in the AFL. Fuld was 25. Duncan was 20 when he was in the AFL, and has played mostly third base, so he looks like somebody who might actually have been an ML prospect. But it appears he doesn't project as an ML third baseman: last year in AAA he played some third but mostly the typical combination of 1B-DH-LF. Casto is 19 and a shortstop, and he projects as a shortstop. The Cubs have done their fans a disservice by not teaching them the difference between a real prospect and a 1B-DH-LF slugging prospect like Dubois and Dopirak.

[ ]

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Tue, 11/03/2009 - 11:41 pm

That last line was supposed to be a slightly oblique way of saying, you (Rob) don't have to pull out this lineup of AFL MVPs who flopped every time I or someone else mentions a Cub prospect in the AFL. It's just a list of 1B-DH-LF types who never had a chance, but the purpose of keeping it polished and dusted is so that nobody can ever suggest that the Cubs might fill some of their glaring personnel needs from within the system. Cedeno, Pie and Patterson are entirely consistent with the point I'm making about two-way players having a real shot. Cedeno is a major leaguer and Pie is headed that way. Patterson had over 1000 games in the big leagues and over 3700 PAs. Dubois had 86 games and 227 PAs. (And he'll never get another, whereas with Patterson, you never know.) Dopirak may not get a cup of coffee, even though he can flat-out hit. Wtf I'm talking about is that the Cubs have changed. They mostly draft two-way players now, so that even a Marquez Smith--whom Neal cited a few days ago as a top-fielding 3B--will have a better shot over the long haul than a Dopirak. So you can put aside your prospect-flop lists. It's a new ballgame.

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Tue, 11/03/2009 - 11:47 pm

It's just a list of 1B-DH-LF types who never had a chance,

says who?

but the purpose of keeping it polished and dusted is so that nobody can ever suggest that the Cubs might fill some of their glaring personnel needs from within the system.

the purpose is to show that a month's worth of stats doesn't mean much, especially in the offensivelly-friendly AFL. Most everyone that was already in the AFL was a prospect before they got there, the fact that they have a good or bad month isn't going to change much in terms of their long-term future.

Wtf I'm talking about is that the Cubs have changed. They mostly draft two-way players now, so that even a Marquez Smith--whom Neal cited a few days ago as a top-fielding 3B--will have a better shot over the long haul than a Dopirak.

actually under Stockstill/McPhail they were mostly drafting pitchers, they also have the most pitchers in the majors than any other organization (they may not anymore, but it was that way for a time). They also drafted plenty of athletes and two-way players and a few corner guys....most of those weren't actually considered major prospects except Dopirak and Choi (who wan't actually drafted).

So you can put aside your prospect-flop lists. It's a new ballgame.

if you say so...

 

Submitted by Rob G. on Mon, 11/02/2009 - 11:37 pm

http://espn.go.com/chicago/columns/blog/_/post/4617267/name/levine

The two sides are talking about a two-year deal for anywhere between a total of $6.5 million and $7.5 million. Grabow's people would like a vesting option for a third year added to the contract.

Also, certain incentives will be built into the package that will include games finished.

Levine lists Harden and Gregg as other Cubs' free agents, think he forgot Reed.

Recent comments

  • 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.

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Of course, McKinstry runs circles around $25 million man Javier Baez on that Tigers team. Guess who gets more playing time?

    But I digress…

  • Sonicwind75 (view)

    Seems like Jed was trying to corner the market on mediocre infielders with last names starting with "M" in acquiring Madrigal, Mastroboney and Zach McKinstry.  

     

    At least he hasn't given any of them a Bote-esque extension.  

  • Childersb3 (view)

    AZ Phil:
    Rookie ball (ACL) starts on May 4th. Do yo think Ramon and Rosario (maybe Delgado) stay in Mesa for the month of May, then go to MB if all goes "solid"?
     

  • 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.

Click HERE for the last 50 comments