Cubs MLB Roster

Cubs Organizational Depth Chart
40-Man Roster Info

40 players are on the MLB RESERVE LIST (roster is full), plus three players are on the 60-DAY IL

26 players on MLB RESERVE LIST are ACTIVE, plus eleven players are on OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT to minors and three players are on the 15-DAY IL

Last updated 6-15-2024

* bats or throws left
# bats both

PITCHERS: 13
Javier Assad
Colten Brewer
Kyle Hendricks
* Shota Imanaga
Mark Leiter Jr
* Luke Little
Tyson Miller
Hector Neris
* Drew Smyly
* Justin Steele
Jameson Taillon
Keegan Thompson
Hayden Wesneski

CATCHERS: 2
Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

INFIELDERS: 6
David Bote
* Michael Busch
Nico Hoerner
Christopher Morel
Dansby Swanson
Patrick Wisdom

OUTFIELDERS: 5
* Cody Bellinger
* Pete Crow-Armstrong
# Ian Happ
Seiya Suzuki
* Mike Tauchman

OPTIONED: 11
Kevin Alcantara, OF
Michael Arias, P
Alexander Canario, OF
Jose Cuas, P
Brennen Davis, OF
Porter Hodge, P 
Nick Madrigal, INF 
* Miles Mastrobuoni, INF
* Matt Mervis, 1B
Daniel Palencia, P 
Luis Vazquez, INF

15-DAY IL: 3
Yency Almonte, P
Ben Brown, P 
* Jordan Wicks, P 

60-DAY IL: 3
Adbert Alzolay, P 
Caleb Kilian, P
Julian Merryweather, P


Minor League Rosters
Rule 5 Draft 
Minor League Free-Agents

What happens if Aramis Ramirez goes away?

Aramis Ramirez had just walked into the clubhouse and told reporters that he'd "probably" played his last game at Wrigley Field, when suddenly there was a loud rumble out on the diamond. 
A giant sink hole had appeared, coincidentally right at the spot Aramis had just vacated.
Fortunately, no one was hurt.
But alert Cub fans will remember this same phenomenon happening right after Ron Santo was traded to the White Sox in 1974, where the hole remained for the next 29 years.
Cubs staff plugged the hole in 2003, when they traded Jose Hernandez, Matt Bruback and a player to be named to the Pirates for Kenny Lofton, Aramis Ramirez, and cash money.

Gazing down into the hole last night, Jeff Baker was heard to say, "Hey, Gary Scott! That you?"

Comments

I think the hole appeared before last night's game. He took a halfassed swipe at the Rickie Weeks ground ball that turned into a run-scoring single (should have been an error). Brenly correctly noted that ARam has the habit of leaving his feet when he doesn't have to. My kid does that, too. He's 12.

Well I suppose if A-Ram goes....it'll be a battle of: Jeff Baker DJ LeMahieu Marquez Smith Josh Vitters Blake DeWitt Steve Ontiveros Vance Law Luis Salazar

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

In terms of PAs, Flaherty led the Cubs' high minors. Flaherty 530 LaHair 523 Jackson 512 Vitters 488 Ridling 485 MGonz 465 If you think Flaherty is a utility player, it's because LeMahieu was being groomed for second and Vitters for third, and Flaherty had to find somewhere else to play. But he was in the lineup every day. Vitters will be in the minors next season while Flaherty will be due to graduate. LeMahieu doesn't hit like a third baseman and will have to vie with Barney. One thing that might be in LeMahieu's favor, even at third--also in Baker's favor--is that Flaherty hits lefty and the Cubs are starting to trend very left-handed.

[ ]

In reply to by VirginiaPhil

If you think Flaherty is a utility player, it's because LeMahieu was being groomed for second and Vitters for third, and Flaherty had to find somewhere else to play. But he was in the lineup every day. well I'm not sure I do, but ultimately my opinion doesn't matter, that's clearly what the Cubs are thinking. You just said it yourself, they were more comfortable keeping Vitters at 3B (and he could easily be moved to 1b, LF or RF) and LeMahieu at 2B, while shifting Flaherty around. If they felt better about Flahery, they'd be shifting the other guys around. I like Flaherty's offensive skillset, although he's a bit old for his leagues and tends to have a hard time initially adjusting, but he's certainly at the age where it's make or break it at the major league level. But he's clearly having some difficulties at 3b and he'd be certainly more valuable as a 2B-men if he can maintain an .800 or above OPS.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

The Cubs have always liked LeMahieu better than Flaherty for second base. At third, the hitting bar goes up too high for LeMahieu, but it's less of a problem for Flaherty. I'm not sure they still "like" Vitters at third, but they want him to succeed there, for Wilken's sake if for no other reason. If Vitters can't field the position at third, the hitting bar goes way up at first and in left. But the Cubs are in no rush to get Vitters to the majors, and he signaled his customary unreadiness by going 1 for 17 in the recent playoff finals. I don't think there is really a question about Flaherty's ability to field third base. If you can play short, you can play third. Flaherty has played 111 games at short in the minors, including 14 this year. Put it all together, and things could fall into place for Flaherty if there's a vacancy at third next season.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

And yet you guys say that LaHair's numbers this month won't tell us anything because they're September games among non-contenders. So apparently some games are more significant than others. I suppose, then, that the importance of individual at-bats can be magnified. Interesting! I do like Elliot Soto, by the way, for what he did during the season, and I've been meaning to give him a shout-out, so thanks for reminding me.
"We just showed a lot of character," said Daytona manager Buddy Bailey. "We had a lot of changes and had to find the right formula. The front office getting Elliot Soto (from Peoria) was a huge factor. It allowed us to put Logan Watkins back at second.
I don't recall what Soto did in the playoffs. I do recall what Szczur did, also what Jae-Hoon Ha did for Tennessee. (And you guys thought I didn't like Soto.)

[ ]

In reply to by springs

The list of guys who don't contribute to the majors because of their bats is probably 20 times the length of guys who don't make it because of their gloves or baserunning. That's sort of like basing drafting a pitcher on their ability to hit. If you draft a hitter in the first round, you need to be pretty damned sure he's going to be able to hit major league pitching at some point. If he can't stick at SS or Catcher, you can move him down the defensive spectrum, but if he can't hit .250, playing center field like a 21 year old Andruw Jones won't mean anything. I work with a guy who could probably cover CF for a major league team... can't hit a curveball to save his life. Helluva softball player, though.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

Simple arithmetic. If you grant that Castro and LeMahieu and Flaherty, say, can play shortstop, there are 7 positions on the field available to them, and 224 starting spots (including DL) on all the ML teams. If one of them happens to throw lefthanded, he's down to 4 positions and 134 spots among all teams. But if he's like Soriano or Dunn and can only play LF or DH, that's only 44 job opportunities. That's before you start to consider hitting. "The list of guys who don't contribute to the majors because of their bats is probably 20 times the length of guys who don't make it because of their gloves or baserunning." Well, you have a convenient category of 4A (AAAA) for all the 1B/LF/DH types who languish in the minors, many of whom could certainly hit well enough in the majors to stick at one of the more defense-oriented positions if they had the requisite skills. Dubois got 227 plate appearances in the majors. Pie has over a thousand, while Corey Patterson is just under 4500. It's all about hitting? There's not much that a slugger like Dubois can do with 227 intermittent PAs, but his OPS (.729) is still higher than Pie's (.673) and Patterson's (.690). But you would say that Dubois is 4-A and it's his bat that's the problem.

[ ]

In reply to by VirginiaPhil

Interesting, but off topic. We were talking about A and B, and you went into a long discussion about B and C. All those guys you listed had a least some success at AAA, whereas Spring's real point, at least a I understood it was talking about decision like Baez versus Starling, where you can see a guy who has physical tools, and you can see a guy who is a good baseball player, and Springs likes the tools over skills. To a certain degree he's right, you're more likely to get the super stars drafting that way, but two all stars, three regulars, and five busts are worth a lot more than one super star and nine busts. I would say that Dubios is too old, and "mastered" AAA at a much later point in life than Pie or Patterson did, which would explain the vast amount of the difference in PT. Then there's also 2003 when Patterson played like a top 50 ballplayer for half a season, that kind of performance is going to get you a lot of chances. There's also a certain amount of organzational favoritism and investment that will get a guy some more PT in the majors. A point I previously argued when comparing LaHair to Pena. But you argument you're making is inherently flawed, because gold glove caliber Ryan Harvey (top of first round) and Kyler Burke (supplemental first rounder) never got any major league PA's and Jason Dubois (14th round, 1999 Colonial Athletic Conference All-Star DH) did. Why? Because you're 20 times more likely to wash out for not being able to hit as you are for not being able to field. You don't have to believe, me, you can look it up yourself. Find guys who could hit AAA pitching very well, and didn't get to the majors. The list will be very short. Then search for guys who could run and throw, but never got to AAA, that list will be much longer. Take any team or any year of the draft as your pool of players, and the answer is going to be roughly the same. Position players washout because they can't hit. Here's the position players the Cubs took before Dubois in 2000: Montanez SS Bobby Hill SS Nick Jackson CF Gary Banks SS J.J. Johnson SS Ryan Jorgensen C Blake Blasi 2B Antoine Cameron OF(?) Jeremy Flanagan OF(?) Lots of guys who could in theory move down the defensive spectrum (and in the case of two of them did). Only one of them got a legitimate shot at the big leagues, and he wasn't drafted for his glove.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

Everybody is a shortstop in little league and, to a slightly lesser extent, high school. Did Montanez project as a major-league shortstop? Obviously not. After his first full year as a pro at age 19, he never played an inning of SS again. That just doesn't happen with Wilken shortstops. They don't slide down a greased "defensive spectrum" the way Montanez (and, I'm sure, other Stockstill picks) did. (Clevenger was supposedly a SS at some level at some point, but never with the Cubs, who put him at catcher right away.) Obviously the pre-Wilken Cubs couldn't discern that Montanez wasn't a middle infielder, and that doomed him as a major leaguer, since as you move down the defensive spectrum you have to move up the offensive spectrum. It seems clear to me that Dubois was a better hitter than Pie or Patterson but had almost no chance of reaching 1,000 PAs in the major, because he wasn't an elite hitter. Vogelbach--and probably at this point Vitters--had better be elite hitters. I don't even know what we're talking about at this point. Thanks for the news flash that you have to be able to hit to get to the majors. edit: Actually, I do know what we're talking about. I'm saying defense is necessary to make the majors and you're saying it's not sufficient. On that much, we can probably agree.

[ ]

In reply to by Charlie

It would almost make up for starting Soriano in LF and having the amazingly average Byrd starting in CF. almost, but not quite just add Beltran to RF and Sabathia to the rotation if he opts out!!!! i do wonder if they could get Reyes on a 6-year deal with a player opt out after 3, if it meant not giving him an NTC for the back half of his deal or some other team-friendly terms. Fans seem to hate those deals, but players like them because they can cash in on a bigger deal if they're doing well. Teams don't mind them too much because they may get out of a big money deal. And if Reyes did opt out, moving Castro back to SS at the ripe old age of 25, probably wouldn't be a big deal. just spit-ballin'

[ ]

In reply to by Charlie

nah, going after Reyes instead of Fielder would not be smart, presuming it's one or the other. Cubs have a farm system of middle infielders and not a single 1b-men or OF that could move to 1B worth mentioning that isn't 5 years away. and as you said, Reyes has actual injury concerns, Fielder has hypothetical ones. but you know, if some savvy GM candidate can talk Ricketts into competing now while still committing to the farm system, it wouldn't be the worst plan. They also need a SP or two and some vastly improved defense. I have a theory, and one I admit I've not looked much into and could be proved bogus, that FA contracts for under 30's, prove to be far more fruitful to a club than the ones handed to 30's and over. Plus the aforementioned savvy GM will hopefully convince Ricketts that the value of FA contracts is in the front end, and you just have to be willing to absorb the loss of value on the backend. Hopefully you make smart choices and limit the backend (hey there Soriano), but essentially every big FA signing gets "too much money" and "too many years". It's the nature of the beast.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

Similar article by Muskat: http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110921&content_id=25… Best part of that article: Asked how he would grade himself as manager, Quade said he was "disappointed in the record." "I'm not disappointed in myself at all," he said... "I look at this as a variety of things, and no one escapes blame, and you understand that going in," Quade said. "But I also look at it as a realist and try to think about the things I could or couldn't control, whether it's the clubhouse or running the game. I evaluate it all. "You sit here and take the blame -- that's what you do." (sounds like he's not taking any blame at all) The only aspect of the team's performance he wasn't happy with was the poor defensive play. "One disappointment, if I had one, that would be it," Quade said. "It wasn't for lack of work on it or concentration or emphasis, from the beginning of Spring Training."

197hits6/DJL5/Johnson9/Baker4/Soto2/Byrd8/Soriano7/LaHair3/Garza1

for Castro appears he got thrown out trying to get triple #10

for Castro, an RBI single LaHair with a double off a lefty as well.

If Cubs don't blow this, Garza could still manage 10 wins on the season with today's game and a win Monday over Padres speaking of Padres up 4-0 in 5th, Pirates down 3-1 in 2nd

[ ]

In reply to by navigator

Garza impressed me in the 9th inning today. Brenly and others have noted how fidgity Garza is, and I know there were (very) low mumblings about possible focus and competitiveness issues with him when we got him from Tampa. But when LeMahieu dropped that pop-up, Garza demanded the ball, gave him a pat on the ass, and threw four straight strikes to Kottaras, the last three of them curves, to K the extra batter he had to face to complete his game that ought to have been a shutout, too. (Even for someone who still isn't crazy about giving up Lee in the trade, I can't complain about Garza--you know, aside from his fielding and ability to handle the bat. Nothing wrong with the way he pitches or handles himself when he's on the rubber.)

[ ]

In reply to by navigator

Garza impressed me in the 9th inning today. Brenly and others have noted how fidgity Garza is, and I know there were (very) low mumblings about possible focus and competitiveness issues with him when we got him from Tampa. But when LeMahieu dropped that pop-up, Garza demanded the ball, gave him a pat on the ass, and threw four straight strikes to Kottaras, the last three of them curves, to K the extra batter he had to face to complete his game that ought to have been a shutout, too. (Even for someone who still isn't crazy about giving up Lee in the trade, I can't complain about Garza--you know, aside from his fielding and ability to handle the bat. Nothing wrong with the way he pitches or handles himself when he's on the rubber.)

Garza impressed me in the 9th inning today. Brenly and others have noted how fidgity Garza is, and I know there were (very) low mumblings about possible focus and competitiveness issues with him when we got him from Tampa. But when LeMahieu dropped that pop-up, Garza demanded the ball, gave him a pat on the ass, and threw four straight strikes to Kottaras, the last three of them curves, to K the extra batter he had to face to complete his game that ought to have been a shutout, too. (Even for someone who still isn't crazy about giving up Lee in the trade, I can't complain about Garza--you know, aside from his fielding and ability to handle the bat. Nothing wrong with the way he pitches or handles himself when he's on the rubber.)

Garza impressed me in the 9th inning today. Brenly and others have noted how fidgity Garza is, and I know there were (very) low mumblings about possible focus and competitiveness issues with him when we got him from Tampa. But when LeMahieu dropped that pop-up, Garza demanded the ball, gave him a pat on the ass, and threw four straight strikes to Kottaras, the last three of them curves, to K the extra batter he had to face to complete his game that ought to have been a shutout, too. (Even for someone who still isn't crazy about giving up Lee in the trade, I can't complain about Garza--you know, aside from his fielding and ability to handle the bat. Nothing wrong with the way he pitches or handles himself when he's on the rubber.)

Recent comments

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    I suspect if you asked Hoyer / Hawkins about the Candelario trade, and they were candid in their reply, in hindsight, from the Cubs front office POV, the problem with the Candelario trade was that they traded prospect capital for a short-term rental, instead of going bigger with more and even better prospects to solve the 3B problem long-term. At least I would hope that is the lesson that was learned. 

  • Finwe Noldaran (view)

    Agreed. The main question for me is: would the core of the team in its current iteration be considered something that just needs to be added to, and then we're contenders; or are we still in the middle of a rebuild, just prayerfully toward the end phase? Because if we're still in a rebuild, selling last year and seeing what we had in our current prospects would have been the way to go; but if the front office felt we had a contendable core that just needed some tweaking, then going all in and acquiring significant bullpen help and a few bats for the lineup would have been the way to go. It seems that riding the fence is where the front office is right now: either bite the bullet and continue the rebuild, or bite the bullet and switch to contender status. Where is our mindset? The off-season this year and last year showed, to me at least, that the front office believes we're still in a rebuild; a lot of their moves felt almost obligatory, to try and convince the fan base that they're not still in a rebuild............

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Agree both with your assessment and with the strategy assuming you are on point. The prospect capital they have will be much more wisely spent on off season big league upgrades rather than mid season rentals. That said, let’s not get too crazy with concept. Ideally, package some of the underperforming veterans and some of the redundant prospects for potential big league upgrades.

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    It is interesting that when the Cubs traded Jake Slaughter for Tyson Miller last month, they were trading a slow-developing 27 year old infield prospect (Slaughter) for a slow developing out of options 28 year old RHRP prospect (Miller) who still had prospect status (as defined by Baseball America) when he was acquired by the Cubs. 

    T. Miller is under club control through 2029, and he lost his prospect status with Baseball America just a few days ago when he reached 50 career MLB innings pitched. 

    So the Slaughter / T. Miller trade was actually a "prospect for prospect" deal when it was made.

  • Finwe Noldaran (view)

    Phil: Completely agree, upgrading the roster and targeting positions of need is paramount (or if some sort of best player available can be had at a price where it would be considered a win), this is the best way to go, irrespective of buying or selling; this is where that internal scouting that was discussed about the other day will be crucial, no to mention pivitol.......

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Agree with you on this. I thought at the time they would have been better off selling as well. But this isn’t the old Cubs fan base of “lovable losers”. After two years of obvious tanking combined with lack of honesty to call it what it was the fan base would have screamed bloody murder had they not made some kind of move and, as bringing in rentals go, the Candelario deal was a decent one.

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    I suspect the Cubs mindset right now would be to use their prospect capital to trade for long-term controllable assets that are better roster fits going forward, specifically targeting a catcher and a third-baseman. 

    This would not be a trade deadline or a contender buy / non-contender sell thing. It would just be upgrading the 26-man roster for 2024 and several years going forward, whether the Cubs were on pace to win 90 games or lose 90 games, doesn't matter. 

    The Cubs have prospect capital (both Top 100 and system depth) that is matched only by the Orioles, and they really need to start spending it while the top prospects are still top prospects (that is, before some of them become "suspects"), and while the system is still deep enough to withstand a bit of a hit. 

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    They didn’t. Herz wasn’t even a top 10 prospect in our system at the time of the trade. He came into yesterdays start with an ERA over 6. Let’s pump the brakes on that trade being a disaster 

  • Bill (view)

    If they thought Candelario would make them the odds on favorite to win the world series, then they would be guilty of idiocy.  Even a young and healthy Babe Ruth would only raise their odds from perhaps 12 to 1 against to 5 to one against.  No one, including the Yankees or Dodgers at their best, have gone into the playoffs as an odds on favorite to win the world series.  There is just too much random variability in baseball for that to happen.

    Never trade a potential superstar for a rental of any ability.

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    Yes, Bill, we all know you think the Cubs should operate like Pittsburgh but on a far more strict budget.