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

Baseball America's Top 10 Cubs Prospects for 2011

BA put out it's top 10 Cubs' prospects today. I usually put together the compilation of all the major lists, but don't quite have the time today. I'll try put together something later this week. To the rankings...

  1. Chris Archer
  2. Brett Jackson
  3. Trey McNutt
  4. Hak-Ju Lee
  5. Josh Vitters
  6. Chris Carpenter
  7. Matt Szczur
  8. Hayden Simpson
  9. Rafael Dolis
  10. Brandon Guyer

I am amused that they don't think Alfonso Soriano will be with the team in 2014, but Carlos Zambrano will.

I'm more curious where guys like Archer, Jackson and McNutt will end up in the top 100 overall list, because you know, every team has to have a #1 prospect no matter how good or bad the system is.

Past lists can be found at Wiklified.

Comments

Marvin Lewis somehow keeps his job with Cincy, he's the Jim Hendry of football at this point. Broncos want a 2nd round pick for Orton, my daughters want a pony. We'll see who blinks first.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

To be fair to Marvin, that's a pretty crappy situation he's in. Bad ownership, no scouting department, and your franchise QB not playing up to par. Add in two aging WR's that don't provide good chemistry, and it's tough. I think the Broncos might get a 2nd for Orton. This is an overrated QB class. Blaine Gabbert is being talked about in the early-mid first, and I like Gabbert, but not that high. Mallett has a lot more work, and Jake Locker needs to go on the Aaron Rodgers plan. Cam Newton probably goes in the first on "hype/excitement", but he's a work in progress. Orton was very solid this year. I consider him more of a plus game manager, but that's still good enough. If you are a team that needs a vet QB ... a first on a QB or fill another need and grab Orton, who isn't old? For example, let's say ... the Cardinals. Grab Orton and fill a need with the first makes a ton of sense. The Niners make some sense as well (and they have an extra 4th to fill a need). Even the Vikings make some sense, although it sounds like a lot of FA's are preparing to bolt.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

Teams give a lot for QB's. Remember the Matt Schaub trade? Swap of 8 and 10, plus 2nd rounders in 07 and 08. Each team calculates future value of picks slightly differently (mostly to rationalize a deal), but that was late first-early 2nd round value for a 25 year old QB with minimal experience (161 regular season attempts before the trade). I don't love Orton, but he's coming off two back to back years of 3500+ yards and has shown a lot more improvement from 2005. Put him in an offense that maximizes his skills (ability to read defenses and make the intermediate throws) and he can excel. With the way the spread offense is en vogue these days, that's a lot of teams where he could potentially fit. Taking a step back and looking at the teams that might be looking for QB's - Niners - A lot of decisions to be made, but they have a decent-solid offensive line (when healthy), a good RB, and good, albeit, prima donna-ish, WR options. A good QB plugged in there could get things churning. Defensively, a lot more issues (do they stick with the 3-4 ... if so, Manusky rotated his rush backers, but at some point, you need an elite guy. If not, then they need a top edge guy). The understated thing about the upcoming draft is that, while it is DL heavy, there are few guys that project as elite pass rushers at the top right now (Bowers, Quinn (but he missed this year)). Vikings - Comes down to what happens with a lot of the veterans. A lot of defensive voids to fill, but say they manage to bring back most of the guys, sans Pat Williams, and the CB's get healthy. Then, they could be a good QB away from being competitivve again. That said, my gut feeling is that Cam Newton's floor is Minnesota. Just a feel on that one. Cardinals - Their offensive playcalling and OL has to improve, but Larry Fitz is about to hit FA soon. The best way to keep him around would be to improve the QB spot ASAP. I think Panthers are going Luck if he comes out. If not, I think they give Clausen another twirl. Best QB (Luck that is) prospect in the past decade, IMO. I think it's quite possible that they'll garner high 2nd value. It might not come in a straight high 2nd pick swap (though I wouldn't rule it out), and may depend more on how "value", though. Broncos are an interesting spot for any new HC. on the one hand, there's Elway hanging over, and you might have to go with Tebow, Moreno, Thomas as your key offensive skill guys, all with enough questions, along with big questions defensively. On the other hand, there's a decent OL, you potentially have two solid edge guys, and if you can net an pick or two for Orton, you could potentially have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds to rebuild with (2nd from Miami for B. Marshall).

[ ]

In reply to by toonsterwu

Orton was in the best offense he'll ever get to play for with Denver. I think they throw the ball 99.5% of the time (unofficial numbers) and as shitty as McDaniels was a player evaluator and head coach, he can scheme offense. I don't doubt Orton will have some demand, I doubt it will be of 2nd round value, especially not high 2nd round value without the Broncos having to throw in a pick of their own. Schaub being unproven was an asset for the Falcons at the time, he was well regarded as someone that deserved a starting job and could put up big numbers. For the most part, he's proven them right. Orton is regarded as guy to keep the spot warm or compete with other guys for the job. I do think Cardinals would be a decent fit for him though.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

if you take a step back and look at McD's offense, though, it's base principles run with a lot of what other NFL teams are doing - spreading it out, finding mismatches. I don't think Orton is limited to only having success in McD's offense - his basic template for success (Orton that is) is to find a situation where he's allowed to read the field and deliver. He's basically Matt Cassel. I think you might have a case that he won't get a straight 2nd round pick (I do think it's possible, but I think there's a better case that they won't get a straight pick), but I definitely think he'll garner 2nd round value. He'll be the 2nd most highly sought after veteran QB this offseason (Kolb being first). Only time will tell.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

Yup. As a UVA fan, it pains me to say it, but yeah, his arm isn't top notch (and yet, most consider him an elite QB - I believe he was on John Clayton's elite QB list). But if you watch Houston games, they scheme very well to hide his deficiencies. He struggles occasionally on the deep balls and the hard 15 yard out type stuff. I mean, Schaub's arm is still above average for NFL standards, but nothing special. Personally, I think Schaub is a plus game manager as well, except that he's in a great offense with top personnel. Add in a strong run game, and the QB looks that much better.

I was impressed by the concluding line in the summary: "One pro scout who covered the Cubs opined that they had more future big leaguers than any other organization." I realize that a future big leaguer is not necessarily a budding star, but big-league position players is just what the Cubs have been uniquely bad at producing. Things will change for the better once the Cubs have built their own talent infrastructure. Also, someone tell Matt Szczur that he projects as the starting CF in 2014--get his mind off of football.

Best Power Hitter Brett Jackson Praise for Jackson or slam on the system? I seem to remember Jim Callis saying in a chat or on the radio that he thought Hak-Ju Lee would finish just outside the top 100 overall (101-110 range).

[ ]

In reply to by QuietMan

Submitted by QuietMan on Tue, 01/04/2011 - 5:04pm. Best Power Hitter Brett Jackson Praise for Jackson or slam on the system? I seem to remember Jim Callis saying in a chat or on the radio that he thought Hak-Ju Lee would finish just outside the top 100 overall (101-110 range). =========================================== Q-MAN: In his afternoon chat, BA's Jim Caliis says Josh Vitters and Reggie Golden probably have more raw power than Brett Jackson, but that B. Jackson has the most "usable" power (meaning he is more-likely to hit HR in MLB, because he is more-likely to succeed at the big league level). I would agree with that. Also, during the course of the chat Callis mentioned that Alberto Cabrera is #11, Robinson Chirinos is #16, Welington Castillo is #17, Reggie Golden is #20, Logan Watkins is #21, and Ryan Flaherty is #22. Also, by deduction it's clear that Robinson Lopez, Jay Jackson, and D. J. Lemahieu are each rated somewhere in the Top 20, Brooks Raley is in the Top 30 (but Austin Kirk, Chris Rusin, Jeffry Antigua, Cam Greathouse, and Ben Wells are not), and Matt Cerda is #31. So therefore there are three more unknowns in the Top 20, three more #23-25, and four more in the Top 30. Also, John Gaub and Kyler Burke dropped out of the Top 30 (Burke was #11 last year), although Burke is still rated as having the "Best Outfield Arm" in the system. Callis says the Cubs farm system is presently ranked #8 (overall) by BA because of its depth, is at the top of the N. L. Central with the Reds, and if Castro and Cashner still qualified as prospects the Cubs system would probably be ranked #2 (overall) behind only Kansas City.

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2011/01/04/innocent-until-proven-guilty/
I don’t think the Hall of Fame is a court. I don’t think a non-vote for the Hall of Fame is declaring guilt either. Ed is exactly right, when he says the Hall of Fame is an honor not a right. But you know what this part of the Baseball Hall of Fame really is? It’s a room in the baseball museum in Cooperstown where they put the plaques of the greatest players in baseball history. It’s a tourist attraction. It’s a place where fans go and remember their childhood, reminisce about the game, consider their connections. It’s so easy to get high and mighty about this thing, so easy to lose the whole point. I’m not sure how the Hall of Fame became about innocent and guilty in the first place. It’s a room overflowing with cheaters and liars and gamblers and fools. It’s a room overflowing with heroes and devoted fathers and good neighbors and nice men. But, really, it’s a room with the greatest baseball players ever along with some very good players along with some good players who had powerful lobbyists.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

I wish one writer would bring up that Bagwell never bothered to champion the cause of testing for PED's. This "it wasn't my fault that other players used them" excuse is just lame. It was your fault, as well as the fault of all the players who didn't. You had 15 years to fix the problem, and never bothered because you thought you were making more money from it, so enjoy the consequences.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/3163822-419/cubs-garza-dea…
A major-league source said Tuesday the Cubs were close to trading for the power-pitching right-hander, just as the Rangers were committing a big multiyear deal to third baseman Adrian Beltre and appeared to be pursuing free-agent closer Rafael Soriano.
Kapman says 3 prospects would be involved Levine earlier mentioned Hak-Ju Lee and Chirinos as likely being two of them. I imagine a decent SP would be the other one.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

about time this got/gets done... this better not turn into another brian roberts... even though i don't think garza turns the cubs into some powerhouse i feel it at least makes them competitive...plus i like having garza under club control for a few years so it's not just some token move. dumpster/z/garza would at least put a solid 3 up top even if dumpster is the only real #1 type and a lot of clubs are sporting 2 #1 types...some with both guys better than the cubs #1.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

I'm not against that. Ideally, we'd protect Archer or McNutt, but realistically, one of them, probably McNutt, would be wanted. If that's the case, that'd make it tougher to swallow, but ... I don't think I'd be against it. You gotta give up something to get something ... and McNutt/Lee/Chirinos for a solid starting arm ... isn't great, but it isn't bad.

I'm not completely convinced of this system right now? Archer and McNutt both kind of came out of nowhere last year. Jackson seems like a fairly sure Mike Cameron-esque prospect. Then everyone past the top 3 have huge question marks. I wonder how much of the hype is big market hype? Similar to the Yankees and Red Sox prospects always being over hyped.

joining Pat Gillick will be (drumroll) Blyleven(79.7%) and Alomar (90%) 581 ballots were cast.

[ ]

In reply to by Paul Noce

I watched that MLB HoF special. It got interesting at one point when they had Gammons, Heyman, and Verducci on with Costas. Costas talked about not considering a player's morality with the steroid issue but instead consider the authenticity of their on-field performance, i.e., Mantle very well might not have been as nice a person as McGwire but you can't argue that his on-field performance wasn't more authentic than McGwire's. But then they talked about Bonds and Clemons, two guys that were going to be HoF'ers until they started using PEDs. Now it's questionable how voters will respond. Heyman said that if they were a Hall of Famer before they took steroids he's still going to vote for them. That got Verducci a little upset, who said if you cheated you should be in the Hall and he's not voting for any of these guys. Gammons didn't say much on the issue other than he liked the idea Costas had about changing the discussion to authenticity of stats. But I swear when Heyman said he would vote for steroid cheaters like Bonds and Clemens, there was a tiny nodding of the head by Gammons. I might be imagining things since he never chimed it. Verducci said that some people say, 'well, there are racists and drunks and other bad apples in the Hall, what makes the steroid user's different?', and he said that the steroid users changed the outcome of games by cheating.

MLB Network has a Hall of Fame special coverage going on now (1PM Central time). Barry Larkin got 62 of the 75 percent needed. Among newcomers, Jeff Bagwell received 42 percent; Rafael Palmeiro, 11.

[ ]

In reply to by Paul Noce

Roberto Alomar 523 90.0% Bert Blyleven 463 79.7% Barry Larkin 361 62.1% Jack Morris 311 53.5% Lee Smith 263 45.3% Jeff Bagwell 242 41.7% Tim Raines 218 37.5% Edgar Martinez 191 32.9% Alan Trammell 141 24.3% Larry Walker 118 20.3% Mark McGwire 115 19.8% Fred McGriff 104 17.9% Dave Parker 89 15.3% - was his last chance Don Mattingly 79 13.6% Dale Murphy 73 12.6% Rafael Palmeiro 64 11.0% Juan Gonzalez 30 5.2% ------------------------------- Off of next year's ballot Harold Baines 28 4.8% John Franco 27 4.6% Kevin Brown 12 2.1% Tino Martinez 6 1.0% Marquis Grissom 4 0.7% Al Leiter 4 0.7% John Olerud 4 0.7% B.J. Surhoff 2 0.3% Bret Boone 1 0.2% Benito Santiago 1 0.2% Carlos Baerga 0 0.0% Lenny Harris 0 0.0% Bobby Higginson 0 0.0% Charles Johnson 0 0.0% Raul Mondesi 0 0.0% Kirk Rueter 0 0.0%

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

I might buy the first reason. and at his best was a lot better than Palmeiro. if you go by BR's WAR totals, Palmeiro's best season was 7.4, McGwire's was 7.2. So I don't think your statement is as definite as you'd like it to be. Palmeiro has a higher career WAR, RBI's RUNS, BA and passed 500 HR's and 3000 hits. There's a certainly a good argument to be made on who was the best player at the top of their games, there's not much of one for who had the better career. But anyway, obviously both are being penalized for 'roids, just figuring out why Palmeiro is being penalized more at the moment.

Recent comments

  • 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.

  • 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.