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

Castro vs. Barney

Provided with no comment (click on the links if you're not familiar with the saber stats)

Darwin Barney (Age 26):

  • 268/309/389 .306 wOBA, 85 wRC+
  • 4.9 BB%, 9.5 K%
  • 31 XBH, 31 RBI, 48 R, 6/7 SB
  • 7.9 UZR, 2.0 WAR

Starlin Castro (Age 22):

  • 272/301/414 .303 wOBA, 83 wRC+
  • 3.9 BB%, 16 K%
  • 32 XBH, 52 RBI, 53 R, 17/27 SB
  • 7.1 UZR, 2.1 WAR

Comments

I'm assuming these are year 2012 numbers, not career stats. The old codger Rush fan in me keeps wanting to write 2112 whenever I refer to 2012. I really hate that. Barney has turned into a better player than I ever thought he would be, actually. And Castro - I think his improving defense (I remember a really low UZR last year) may be impacting his hitting a bit from the standpoint of focus, but for all I know that theory is baloney. I doubt Castro really projects much higher than a .800 something OPS /15 homer guy, but that isn't too bad.

Jed rushed Castro into the bigs. Shoulda been seasoned one more year at Tacoma. / : 0

While I like Barney, I really hope people aren't starting to pass judgement on a 22 year old player who's shown clear indication he works to get better (defense).

[ ]

In reply to by johann

Definitely. It's really hard to know how far Castro can go still. I think it's to be expected that he hits a bit of a bump. Hitting at that level is just such a hard thing to do and he started off like he had figured it out really early. But he's struggled some this year. That's okay, so did Josh Hamilton for a really long stretch.

[ ]

In reply to by johann

I'm not a regular poster here, but it cracks me up to see how many folks around these parts are on the bash a 22-year old wagon. The kid hasn't even filled out yet... I see Castro sliding to 2B and making more of a Brandon Phillips comparison. In 2003, Phillips played 112 games at 22 yrs with a .981 FLD%... was out of the Bigs until 2006 when he posted a .977 with the Reds at 26 yrs, after the tribe gave up on him. Since '06 Phillips has averaged a 3.48 WAR. I'm not saying Castro is going to develop into a GG caliber SS/2B, but offensively he has a very similar in body type as phillips and an average projection of .300-22-85-20 would make him a pretty damn valuable 2B going forward, especially if Baez stays at SS.

While I have been on the Barney bandwagon (which has broken down on LaHair, apparently) since I saw him in the CWS, he seems to be a #8 batter. He is better than Theriot with more range, and unless HoyStein gets something in a package for real value, it seems like he is the kind of player Jed likes up the middle to save runs. It is a great thing to have. As Goldstein says, "He's a baseball player who will play in the Big Leagues for ten years and deservedly so."

some Muskat tweet tidbits: today is Rizzo's 23rd birthday cub record thru 108 games is 2011 and 2012 is identical: 43-65 lineup... Jakkkkson sits, Soriano returns: DeJesus, Barney, Rizzo, Soriano, Castro, Castillo, Vitters, Mather (RF), Samardzija

My problem with Barney is that on a really good team you can aford to have a good field no hit 2B. However, on a crappy team you can't afford that luxury. Is it worth keeping him 2 - 3 years until we become good? My vote is no, get something for him while you still can. If he could only draw walks and get his ob% to .340 - .350 or so, he would be worth keeping.

[ ]

In reply to by TJ

I see this sentiment on Barney a lot from posters and talk shows all over, and I get it. Where it stops for me is -- Barney for who? Is the return worth 1 to 3 WAR value more than Barney? Would the Cubs be just trading a so-so MLB player for someone else's so-so player? That's my take whenever the subject of trading Barney or Castro for Upton or, for that matter, almost any trade (except veterans/big contracts for prospects) at this point in TheJedi's 'rebuilding' project. Fundamentally, I'd like to see Ricketts spend $60-70M on FA's this off-season for no other reason than he probably can. Perversely, I'd like to see him have to decide - better team? or better ballpark? However, what do the Cubs get back? More Crawfords, Lackeys, and Soriano's? Or worse than that - 4 to 5 year deals that when the 'waves' of MLB-ready prospects arrive, there's 4 to 5 pieces of dead weight soaking up $60M in payroll where $500K prospects could produce better. I love adding FA's, but who? For how long? Playing where? Blocking who in 3 years?

[ ]

In reply to by George Altman

This is my point. Why not have the best defensive 2B in the middle of our infield for a few years? As GA states, realistically, unless it is some kind of a nice package of players, who do you get back for Barney that makes it worthwhile?

people can still use UZR while keeping a straight face? also, d.barney is nearing 100 games without an error.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

I actually don't even really have the foggiest understanding of UZR. It reminds me a bit of QB ratings in football, which does have this empirical formula that I don't give a shit about in the slightest. In Castro's case, it just so happens that his UZR sucked and now it doesn't, and my eyes also tell me that he has improved in the field.

6:35 (EST) start time for a mid-week game in SD? okay, sure. also, after watching the "away" feed for what feels like a week i can finally watch some len/bob on wgn.

dejesus is working hard to make the cubs pay him $1.5m to go away next season rather than paying the full $6.5m to keep him around. i wouldn't complain seeing him next year if he at least picks up the hitting/ob% part of his game. he's not fallen sharply yet, but his minimal power hasn't reappeared and he's in a cruddy 2nd half slump so far...

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Wed, 08/08/2012 - 5:06pm — crunch dejesus is working hard to make the cubs pay him $1.5m to go away next season rather than paying the full $6.5m to keep him around. i wouldn't complain seeing him next year if he at least picks up the hitting/ob% part of his game. he's not fallen sharply yet, but his minimal power hasn't reappeared and he's in a cruddy 2nd half slump so far... ========================= CRUNCH: DeJesus signed a three-year $15M contract ($10M guaranteed) last off-season where he gets $4.25M (guaranteed) per season 2012-13 plus a third year club option ($6.5M or $1.5M buy-out) for 2014. So unless he gets traded in the meantime, DeJesus will almost certainly be back in a Cub uniform in 2013.

Umpire Bill Miller took a pitch directly to the mask on a fastball where the catcher was crossed up in the bottom of the first inning in Oakland. Later on, twice during the game he rang up a batter on strike two. During the bottom of the sixth, the second base umpire left the game, then came back suited up with the home plate equipment. When the second base umpire came back out with two outs, Miller handed him his baseballs without a word and left. I watched the bottom of the sixth on mlb tv archive, and it looked like the switchover was something the umpires discussed beforehand.

[ ]

In reply to by QuietMan

he's a good dude, pretty good evaluator imo...but didn't manage the big organizational picture. And for all I know, a lot of that blame could be the ownership in flux, he poured a lot of resources into the major league team, but should have been doing the same into the minor league system at that time (2007 time period of course). But who knows how much flexibility he had... Ricketts seem to get it though and I know TheJedi do...be nice if I knew their timeframe because right now it seems like 2015 which is gonna piss off a lot of fans.

excerpt from Kevin Goldstein on the Brett Jackkkkson call up:
If Jackson can close some of the massive holes in his swing, he's a true five-tool player. He has above-average raw power and speed, and the ability to post a string of 20/20 seasons. That gives him excellent long-term potential. However, the "ifs" regarding his swing are gigantic ones. He has a good understanding of the strike zone and is not prone to chasing, but he's not a sound hitter. There isn't an obvious flaw in his swing, or a tendency to chase sliders or something like that, he's just not that good of a hitter. The hope is that he can display enough power, speed and defense to make up for a low batting average.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=17915

[ ]

In reply to by Cubster

Interesting thing about Jackson is that the sky is the limit. Well, not a Troutish sky, maybe, but it's high. Problem is that the opposite is also true. He could be a permanent member of the Mendoza club.

[ ]

In reply to by Cubster

I'm getting my first looks at Jackson. Maybe Goldstein has seen him a lot, or maybe he is just improvising. But the Jackson I'm seeing is very "prone to chasing." I don't see much difference between Jackson right now and Colvin last year. On two strikes, they start hacking and don't stop till it's strike three. Sveum said this yesterday: "We're learning a lot about him, and it's basically come down to swinging out of the strike zone. It's not like he's swinging through anything." That's the opposite of what Goldstein is saying. A "massive hole" means you swing through pitches. I don't want to get into name-calling, but if you can't figure out that pitchers at this level don't throw strikes if you don't force them to, then you didn't get into Berkeley on your SAT scores.

[ ]

In reply to by VirginiaPhil

Reports on Jackson in the minors have always been that he has a good command of the strike zone but that he swings through strikes a lot. Maybe Sveum has seen the opposite, but let's trust the larger sample size for now. And maybe Jackson is going through a phase (during his first MLB callup) where is chasing--doesn't mean that's what caused his K rate in his minor league career.

[ ]

In reply to by Charlie

"Reports on Jackson in the minors have always been that he has a good command of the strike zone etc." Professional scouts who write such reports--and also turn in hotel and fast-food receipts--do not file their reports on the internet. We may not have seen reliable reports on Jackson. Sveum has said a few times that he wanted to see the strikeout machine with his own eyes, because the numbers didn't make sense. Sveum has pointed out that even in games where Jackson got a few extra-base hits, the outs would all be strikeouts. It's odd for a player to either hit the ball hard or miss it completely. What happened to the popups and the easy grounders to second and short? The data sample, small though it is, shows Jackson "protecting the plate" or whatever it's called when you swing at everything on two strikes. That approach becomes untenable in the majors and also the high minors, where pitchers have learned how to make hitters look foolish. As for Dr. Aaron's point about Jackson's career OBP versus Colvin's: that's a very good question and I don't have an immediate answer, but I suppose it would be possible to be a very patient hitter until you have two strikes, at which point you go into the panic mode that produces the large number of strikeouts. If the count goes to 3-1, then 3-2, maybe you don't panic, because you can smell a walk. You might get a lot of walks without actually working the count. To me, working the count means getting from 0-2 or 1-2 to 3-2.

[ ]

In reply to by VirginiaPhil

I think Brant Brown might end up being a good comp to Bjax. It's something I've largely thought all year. Big kid with some speed and power. Can play CF. Tons of swing and miss in their games. Brant was able to have a couple of good MLB years. He brought us a great pitcher in trade. Ultimately a bit of a letdown.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

"Tons of swing and miss" But did Brown have any swing-and-hit? Look at his age-23 and 24 seasons--in AA, for Pete's sake. 5 or 6 home runs, .390 SLG. Jackson: 20 HRs last year, 10 of them in AAA; 15 homers this year. Career SLG: .488. Sometimes I feel sympathy for Cub fans who grew up in the Gary Scott era. In retrospect, I was pretty lucky in the '60s.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

'87 was the middle of a long dormant period for me--far from Chicago, WGN cable not locally available, etc. Woke up briefly in '98 for Soto-McGuire, then for good about the time Dusty arrived. Without looking it up, can't place Scott or Brown accurately in the 80's-90's.

[ ]

In reply to by VirginiaPhil

Brant Brown came on the scene during the 98 season. He played a serviceable CF and flashed some power, and hit 290-ish. Looked like he might be a player. We dealt him that offseason for Jon Lieber.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

Hey man, you can trust years of scouting or you can trust the few days of observation from the guy who's successfully leading the Cubs to a record just under .400. I'll trust the major league manager; it's what my gut tells me.

Recent comments

  • Childersb3 (view)

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

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

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

  • crunch (view)

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

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

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

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

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

  • Charlie (view)

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

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

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

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

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

  • Arizona Phil (view)

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

     

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

     

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

     

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

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    Indeed they do TJW!

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

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

  • Childersb3 (view)

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

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

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

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

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

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

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

    Once again, DJL, our differences in philosophy emerge!

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

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

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

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

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