Cubs MLB Roster

Cubs Organizational Depth Chart
40-Man Roster Info

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


28 players are on the MLB ACTIVE LIST, plus seven are on OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT to minors, two are on the 10-DAY IL, and three are on the 15-DAY IL


Last updated 9-22-20239
 
* bats or throws left
# bats both

PITCHERS: 14
Javier Assad
Jose Cuas
Kyle Hendricks
Mark Leiter Jr
* Luke Little
Julian Merryweather
Daniel Palencia
* Drew Smyly
* Justin Steele
Marcus Stroman
Jameson Taillon
Keegan Thompson
Hayden Wesneski
* Jordan Wicks

CATCHERS: 2
Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

INFIELDERS: 6
Nico Hoerner
* Miles Mastrobuoni
Christopher Morel
Dansby Swanson
Patrick Wisdom
* Jared Young

OUTFIELDERS: 6
* Cody Bellinger
Alexander Canario
* Pete Crow-Armstrong
# Ian Happ
Seiya Suzuki
* Mike Tauchman

OPTIONED: 7
Keven Alcantara, OF 
Ben Brown, P  
Brennen Davis, OF 
Jeremiah Estrada, P
Caleb Kilian, P 
* Matt Mervis, 1B 
Michael Rucker, P

10-DAY IL: 2
Jeimer Candelario, 1B
Nick Madrigal, INF

15-DAY IL: 3
Adbert Alzolay, P
Brad Boxberger, P 
Michael Fulmer, P 

60-DAY IL: 4
Nick Burdi, P
Codi Heuer, P
* Brandon Hughes, P
Ethan Roberts, P
 

Minor League Rosters

Rule 5 Draft 
Minor League Free-Agents

What happens if Aramis Ramirez goes away?

Submitted by CubbyBlue on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:38 am

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

Submitted by garsky on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:06 am

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.

Submitted by Dusty Baylor on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:15 am

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

[ ]

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:36 pm

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.

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:00 pm

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.

[ ]

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:08 pm

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.

[ ]

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Thu, 09/22/2011 - 09:29 pm

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.)

[ ]

Submitted by The Real Neal on Thu, 09/22/2011 - 09:49 pm

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.

[ ]

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 09:11 pm

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.

[ ]

Submitted by The Real Neal on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 09:27 pm

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.

[ ]

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 09:08 pm

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.

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:51 pm

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'

[ ]

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:22 pm

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.

[ ]

Submitted by Paul Noce on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:30 pm

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."

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:19 pm

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

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:33 pm

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

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:10 pm

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

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:16 pm

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

[ ]

Submitted by Charlie on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:43 pm

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.)

[ ]

Submitted by Charlie on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:44 pm

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.)

Submitted by Old and Blue on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:30 pm

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.)

Submitted by Charlie on Wed, 09/21/2011 - 09:35 pm

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 09/23/2023 - 09:02 pm (view)

    The deadline for trading players on an MLB Reserve List (40-man roster) and players who were outrighted to the minors after signing a 2023 MLB contract was August 1st, but trades involving players on a minor league reserve list are prohibited beginning at 12 PM (Eastern) on the 7th day prior to the originally-scheduled conclusion of the 2023 MLB regular season (Sunday 9/24) through the last day of the MLB regular season (including a day on which a regular season game is played after the originally-scheduled conclusion of the MLB regular season).   
     

  • Arizona Phil 09/23/2023 - 09:58 pm (view)

    jdrnym: 

    As you know, the abbreviation "DFA" stands for "Designated for Assignment." 

    There are three types of assignments: 

    1. Trade Assignment (when a player is traded from one MLB club to another)
    2. Outright Assignment (when a player is sent to the club's minor league Domestic Reserve List after Outright Assignment Waivers have been secured).
    3. Optional Assignment (when a player is optioned to the minors, subject to being recalled at a later time). 

    So when a player is Designated for Assignment, the player can either be traded, outrighted to the minors, or optioned to the minors. 

    Normally a player is not Designated for Assignment and then optioned to the minors, because the club could just option the player to the minors immediately without a DFA.

    Back in the day It was not that unusual for a player to be Designated for Assignment so that Optional Assignment Waivers could be secured (Optional Assignment Waivers were required before certain players could be optioned to the minors, and just like the old Trade Assignment Waivers, Optional Assignment Waivers were revocable if a player was claimed). Optional Assignment Waivers were eliminated in 2016 and Trade Assignment Waivers were eliminated in 2021, so all revocable waivers have been eliminated. What's left are Outright Assignment Waivers and Outright Release Waivers, and both are irrevocable once requested.  

    With the new five option limit whereby a player can (with a couple of exceptions) be optioned to the minors no more than five times in a given season before Outright Assignment Waivers must be secured (and it - IS - Outright Assignment Waivers that must be secured, even though it is for the purpose of an Optional Assignment), it now might be necessary for a club to DFA a player to clear a spot on the MLB 26-man roster (MLB 28-man roster in September) for another player and to allow for the two days (actually 47 hours) required to run a player through waivers. After the two day Waiver Claiming Period concludes (and presuming the player isn't claimed), the player can be returned to the MLB 40-man roster and optioned to the minors (even after being Designated for Assignment). But for that to happen, the player can - NOT - be replaced on the MLB 40-man roster by another player after being Designated for Assignment.  

    However, in the case of Jordan Luplow, he had - NOT - been optioned to the minors five times in the 2023 season prior to be optioned to AAA St. Paul on 9/18, so the Twins did not need to DFA Luplow in order to secure Outright Assignment Waivers so that he could be optioned to the minors a sixth time. But because he was Designated for Assignment and not replaced on the 40 by another player after the DFA, the Twins could option him to the minors (and return him to the 40) even after he was Designated for Assignment, because an Optional Assignment is one of the three types of assignments.

    So Luplow was Designated for Assignment even though he didn't need to be, and then the Twins returned him to their MLB 40-man roster and optioned him to the minors a couple of days later (which they can do, since Luplow wasn't replaced on the 40 by another player after he was Designated for Assignment). What the Twins did (DFA Luplow and then option him to the minors a couple of days later) was within the rules. It's just very odd and doesn't make a lot of sense. 

    So I will offer the most logical reason I can think of to explain why the Twins did this:  

    The Twins DFA'd Luplow because they intended to reinstate Chris Paddack from the 60-day IL, but then Carlos Correa suddenly needed to go on the 10-day IL and so they decided they wanted to keep Luplow on the 40-man roster (and on Optional Assignment to AAA) and didn't want to risk losing him off waivers or by him electing free-agency after being outrighted. Luplow has Article XX-D rights (he has been outrighted to the minors previously in his career), so he would had the right to elect free-agency after he was outrighted. There was also the possibility that he would have been claimed of waivers, and obviously the Twins felt they might need his RH bat after losing Correa and with Royce Lewis having left a game with a hamstring injury that led to an IL assignment. 

    Also, if Luplow was outrighted instead of being optioned, he would no longer be automatically eligible to play in the post-season (except as a possible injury replacement).

    Not only did Carlos Correa go on the IL, Royce Lewis went on the IL, too, two days after Correa went on the IL and two days after Luplow was optioned to AAA, so the Twins did in fact end up needing Luplow after all, and recalled him just a couple of days after he was optioned to replace Lewis on the MLB 28-man roster. 

    So that all I've got. That is the only thing that makes sense. The Twins DFA'd Luplow because they had intended to replace him on the 40 with another player (probably Paddack) and hoped that they would be able to run him through waivers and that he wouldn't get claimed and that he would accept an Outright Assignment, but then they suddenly changed their minds because of the injury to Correa and the possibility that Lewis might also have to go on the IL (which did, in fact, happen the next day).

    So the Twins were able to return Luplow to the 40 because he hadn't been replaced on the 40 by another player after he was Designated for Assignment, then they optioned him to St. Paul, and then they recalled him after Royce Lewis was placed on the 10-day IL (the minimum 10-day optional assignment being waived because Luplow replaced a player (Royce Lewis) who was placed on an MLB IL. 

  • crunch 09/23/2023 - 09:00 pm (view)

    CIN out here blowing a 9-0 lead they built through 3 innings.  9-9 tie in the 7th.

  • crunch 09/23/2023 - 09:05 pm (view)

    boxburger 10d IL, k.thompson back up.  it's his right forearm (again).

  • crunch 09/23/2023 - 09:12 pm (view)

    merryweather got out of it, but he loaded the bases with 1 out.  of course ross got cuas up in the pen...thankfully he didn't need to come in.

    looks like cuas gets the 9th.

  • crunch 09/23/2023 - 09:46 pm (view)

    4ip 2h 0bb 6k, 49 pitches.  no idea why they're giving the pen the last 2 innings when he's out there dealing like this and only threw 49 pitches.  he was supposed to pitch tomorrow and he's fresh.

  • crunch 09/23/2023 - 09:52 pm (view)

    ...and assad is now a pen arm, evidently...odd move given recent success.  i guess wicks starts tomorrow?

  • crunch 09/22/2023 - 09:16 pm (view)

    ARZ, MIA, and CIN all lose.  nice.

  • crunch 09/22/2023 - 09:54 pm (view)

    stroman is now the saturday starter...okay, then.

  • jdrnym 09/22/2023 - 09:52 pm (view)

    Phil,

    Jordan Luplow was DFA'd by the Twins on Monday and was ultimately optioned and then recalled today. I didn't think that was possible since optional waivers were eliminated years ago. How did that work for the Twins?

Click HERE for the last 50 comments