Cubs MLB Roster

Cubs Organizational Depth Chart
40-Man Roster Info

39 players are on the MLB RESERVE LIST (one slot is open), plus two players are on the 60-DAY IL and one player has been DESIGNATED FOR ASSIGNMENT (DFA)   

26 players on MLB RESERVE LIST are ACTIVE, and nine players are on OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT to minors, three players are on the 15-DAY IL, and one player is on the 10-DAY IL

Last updated 4-23-2024
 
* bats or throws left
# bats both

PITCHERS: 13
Yency Almonte
Adbert Alzolay 
Javier Assad
Colten Brewer
Ben Brown
* Shota Imanaga
Mark Leiter Jr
* Luke Little
Hector Neris 
Jameson Taillon 
Keegan Thompson
Hayden Wesneski 
* Jordan Wicks

CATCHERS: 2
Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

INFIELDERS: 7
* Michael Busch 
Nico Hoerner
Nick Madrigal
Christopher Morel
* Matt Mervis
Dansby Swanson
Patrick Wisdom

OUTFIELDERS: 4
* Cody Bellinger 
# Ian Happ
Seiya Suzuki
* Mike Tauchman 

OPTIONED: 9 
Kevin Alcantara, OF 
Michael Arias, P 
Pete Crow-Armstrong, OF 
Jose Cuas, P 
Brennen Davis, OF 
Porter Hodge, P 
* Miles Mastrobuoni, INF
Daniel Palencia, P 
Luis Vazquez, INF 

10-DAY IL: 1 
Seiya Suzuki, OF

15-DAY IL: 3
Kyle Hendricks, P 
* Drew Smyly, P 
* Justin Steele, P   

60-DAY IL: 2 
Caleb Kilian, P 
Julian Merryweather, P

DFA: 1 
Garrett Cooper, 1B 
 





Minor League Rosters
Rule 5 Draft 
Minor League Free-Agents

Cubs @ Nationals: Hammel vs Strasberg (Game 64)

Pretty, pretty, pretty good. CHC (44-19): RHP Jason Hammel (7-2, 2.36)
WAS (40-25): RHP Stephen Strasberg (10-0, 3.03)
First pitch: 3:05pmCST

Hammel lost in Atlanta on Friday (5.2 IP, 3 ER, 4 K, 0 BB). The Nats are 39-143 (.273) against him. Ramos is 3-9 with 2 HR.

Strasberg got beat up a bit but won against the Phillies his last time out (7 IP, 4 ER, 10 K, 1 BB). We missed him during the four-game set at Wrigley--but not really. The Cubs are 24-86 (.279) against him. Heyward is 14-34 with a HR.

It’s an off day tomorrow, then the Pirates come to town, when we’ll see TBA versus Arrieta (10-1, 1.86) at 1:20pmCST on Friday.

Go Cubs!

Comments

I hope Almora Jr gets the start. He earned it. I still remember the play the other day where he slid in left field and did an Addison Russell, pushing his leg out as he slid and using to brace his slide into the wall and pop up in an instant. Amazing for a guy who hasn't played that outfield. It's Almora Jr because, I suspect, Phat Albert wants to be called that in honor of his father. So for me, it's always gonna be Almora Jr.

[ ]

In reply to by Old and Blue

If that's his preference (and your point makes a lot of sense), I'm all for it. But, if it's another media botch, I will fight! Almora gets the start. Sitting Dex with a day off tomorrow - Joe must think he needs some rest. 5-for-his-last 31 with no BB and 10K. By the way -- anybody seen Matt Szczur lately? 3AB in the last week. Gotta be tough for him

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Crunch -- I am now with you. The Federowicz thing is just getting silly. He's got to go when one of the DL guys (LaStella/Soler) comes back. The question is -- who goes when the second DL guy (presumably Soler) comes back? Is it better for Almora to play every day at Iowa or be part-time for the Cubs? Given that Joe uses a lot of guys (sorry Szczur) and will replace Soler late in most games, and that Almora is the assumed CF next year, it may make sense to keep him up.

[ ]

In reply to by billybucks

it's not a very popular theory (an extremely unpopular theory), but i still think he's around for 2017/lester. i do think it's really weird he's not seeing late-inning replacement work at the very least, though. in the past 35 days he's has 2 innings of work with the glove and 5 plate appearances...crazy.

I think they are holding Federowicz for two reasons -- to give Contrearas more time to get ready and to put themselves in position to get some return when he is moved. Even if the Cubs go with Montero and Ross, if one is injured, Contrearas is a phone call away. Another 4-6 weeks of catching won't hurt his development. And ML teams are always looking for catchers. Not like the Cubs will get a windfall foe Fed but I suspect he is probably worth a lottery ticket from somewhere.

leadoff HR's are neat...especially off ace pitchers. ...so is following it with a double.

k.bryant with a nice OF assist getting the out on werthless at 2nd...sweet.

This game would give me a stroke...if the Cubs weren't insanely good and didn't have a 45 game lead in the division. However...this game also reminds me how little the regular season means this year and how much I would be dying if this was game 3 of a 5 game playoff series.

Two blown saves with 2 different pitchers. They don't deserve this one... Help THEO with another bullpen arm!

Warren looked horrible from pitch #1.  That was a bummer loss. Might only be be up 8.5 games after tonight. #perspective

Cubs just need to trade for Chapman and Miller and be done with it.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

If it took Schwarber I would do that in a heartbeat for a lock down bullpen past the 6th inning. Theo seems in love with him though so not sure that would happen. /edit and looking like Cardinals and Pirates both losing tonight so overall we came out of this series still looking pretty darn good

I think likelihood would be Chapman if anything as a rental. Miller cost gonna be Schwarbs +

[ ]

In reply to by The E-Man

E-MAN: If the Yankees want back an approximate equivalent to what they gave up to get Chapman, the return from the Cubs would probably be something like Adam Warren, Ian Happ, Carl Edwards Jr, and Dan Vogelbach. The Cubs would then be able to recoup a compensation draft pick if they extend a Qualifying Offer to Chapman post-2016 (presuming he doesn't accept it, but if he does, the Cubs get him for 2017). 

For Miller, it would probably be something like Schwarber+Happ+Edwards 

Sean Doolittle (OAK) and Arodys Vizcaino (ATL) have more years of club control than Miller (Vizcaino through 2019 and Doolittle through 2018 with 2019-20 club options) and wouldn't cost the Cubs Schwarber, although Happ & Edwards would probably be the starting point for both plus one or two additional pieces (like Vogelbach and Zagunis to OAK or Clifton, Underwood, or P. Johnson to ATL).  

I realize all is well and all, but....the nagging problem is the inability to beat good teams in close games on the road. The STL walk-off loss, and this one, with both Strop and Rondon giving up runs...I realize they can't be perfect, but it would have been a huge win. Instead, it validates the Nats and gives them confidence. Crap.

[ ]

In reply to by billybucks

It's like game 64, what does confidence have to do with anything> The Cubs swept the Mets in the regular season last year, a lot good that did. Shit like that doesn't matter one bit. It was a close game, you're gonna lose them about 50% of the time even if you're good. No team has ever beaten those odds on a long term basis. They beat the same good team yesterday 4-3.  Beat St. Louis 9-8 and 2-1 on the road earlier. Much ado about nothing...other than Warren looks like a chump lately and Grimm and Richard need to be gone sooner rather than later.

[ ]

In reply to by billybucks

The "can't beat good teams on the road in close games" thing is a little emotional "you" talking now. Weren't you saying how good the same thing was last night? Maybe someone else... I am more concerned with Adam Warren who now has a +4.00 ERA and Maddon really does not want to use him much at all. Maybe the Grand Slam he gave up with the team leading by 5 didn't endear him to Joe. To give up Castro for this? Really? That, plus, a lock-down lefty reliever would be killer. The team is still awesome and is gonna make the Playoffs.

[ ]

In reply to by The E-Man

Yeah -- that was clearly some emotion there. Blowing a game twice against one of the top teams in the league will do that...plus, the Dusty thing. It would really suck if he beat the Cubs in the playoffs. I mean, like, really really suck. But, the Cardinals give up 2 in the 8th and 2 in the 9th to lose 4-1. Rosenthal's ERA now over 4. Let's go win the next 6 and basically clinch the division.

june 15th, cubs lose game #20...last of the teams to lose 20. may 28th was the last time team(s) got to 20 losses.

What's the season record against the Nats this year? Oh, yeah. Note to Theo - it's hard to make throws from home plate to second and third when your back is messed up. Please investigate. Thanks.

[ ]

In reply to by jacos

This will be very interesting. I can't see bringing him up to sit a lot so you almost have to think something is happening with Montero who has been overall terrible. He still knows how to handle the pitching staff though and Contreras would have to learn very quickly if he becomes the primary receiver. The additional bat in the lineup will be wonderful though and he certainly can't be worse defensively than Montero who also seemed to have a lot of trouble getting the ball out of his glove on throws. Like Montero Contreras also takes walks so no downgrade there.

[ ]

In reply to by Tito

*triggering intensifies* also, meme...i don't think you know how that word works. i meant to bring that up last time you got a crush on me. we'll have another opportunity to discuss it sometime later. *hugs*

[ ]

In reply to by John Beasley

Yeah with two older catchers and Montero with back issues I get why they wanted to keep someone like Fed. You didn't need to worry about playing time and he was there just in case. Contreras is someone you have to play though and more than just a spot here and there. Maybe they'll keep three catchers for a bit as Ross mentors Contreras and he gets to know the pitching staff but eventually he needs to be the primary receiver.

[ ]

In reply to by Tito

Carrie Muskat is saying they definitely want to have Montero and Ross mentor Contreras in the majors. I can understand that and I know Contreras needs works on some aspects of his defense, including pitch framing which Montero is very good at. He's also going to need to be taught how to handle a personality like Lackey and not give ground which I'm sure takes some time. I just really hope he's catching at least a couple times a week because I really want to see that bat this year.

[ ]

In reply to by Tito

Willson Contreras was a catcher as a 16-year old amateur in Venezuela, but the Cubs moved him to 3B as soon as they signed him in 2009, and he played only 3B for a couple of years before being morphed into a "four-corner" (3B-1B-LF-RF) guy. Then after three poor seasons as a hitter, he was almost like "might as well" moved (back) to catcher in 2012. 

So Contreras does have experience playing the so-called four corners, and while he is below-average defensively at all four positions, he can play those positions in a pinch. That should give Maddon more versatility than he had with Federowicz as the #3 catcher, at least the type of versatility he had when Kyle Schwarber was the #3 catcher.

No question Contreras is MLB-ready as a hitter (he's in the midst of a 20-game hitting streak at AAA), and now he can be eased into the catcher job gradually at the MLB level, with "big brother" Miguel Montero available to mentor him along the way.   

Contreras just needs to find a way to control his emotions on the field, because "pitch framing" is really just a matter of influencing the home plate umpire to give you the close calls, whether it be by mechanical means or by schmoozing the umpire and staying on his good side (like Ross and Montero do) so at least you get a fair shot to get the close calls.

There are certain MLB umpires where if you piss them off by showing them up when you get called out on strikes (as Contreras has done repeatedly in the minors), they will hold it against you going forward. So young catchers have to be especially aware of not doing that. 

Beginning today (6/16), automatic Article XX-B "no trade" restrictions have been removed from Trevor Cahill, Jason Heyward, Joe Nathan, John Lackey, and Ben Zobrist, although Heyward and Zobrist have contractual "no trade" rights that extend through the 2018 season (and Jon Lester has contractual "no trade" rights that extend through the length of his contract).

The 2015-16 International Signing Period (ISP) concluded yesterday (6/15), and after a 16-day "quiet period" when international free-agents subject to International Signing Bonus Pool (ISBP) restrictions cannot be signed, the 2016-17 ISP begins on July 2nd. 

Because the Cubs exceeded their 2015-16 ISBP by more than 15%, they will be restricted to signing international free-agents subject to ISBP restrictions to contracts with a maximum $300K signing bonus for the next two ISP (2016-17 and 2017-18), meaning until 7-2-2018 (preuming the ISBP rules are not changed in the next CBA).

INTERNATIONAL SIGNING POOL

There is a maximum limit on the aggregate amount of money each MLB club can pay as signing bonuses to international first-year players before penalties begin to accrue.

Each MLB club is assigned an International Signing Bonus Pool (ISBP) for each International Signing Period (ISP). A club’s ISBP is based upon the club’s winning percentage from the previous season. (Clubs that finish with lower winning percentages will receive a larger ISBP than clubs with higher winning percentages, with the ISBP increasing inverse to the previous season’s standings). In the case of two clubs finishing with the same winning percentage the previous season, league standings from two seasons back will be used to break the tie. If the clubs are still tied, league standings from three seasons back, four seasons back, etc, will be used to break the tie.

The Cubs ISBP for the 2016-17 ISP is $2,063,100 (it was $3,230,700 in the 2015-16 ISP), and because the Cubs exceeded their 2015-16 ISBP by more than 15%, they will not be allowed to sign any international free-agent subject to ISBP signing bonus limits to a contract with a signing bonus in excess of $300K in both the 2016-17 and 2017-18 ISP.    

A club's ISBP consists of four separate "Signing Bonus Values" (SBV) plus an additional $700,000. Each SBV corresponds to a particular "slot," and each slot is assigned a specific cash value (TBA prior to the start of the ISP).  

A Signing Bonus Value (SBV) can be traded, but with some restrictions:

1. An SBV can only be traded during the International Signing Period (ISP) to which the SBV was assigned (July 2nd through June 15th of the following year);

2. An SBV cannot be sold for cash. However, cash can be exchanged if it is used to offset the salary or salaries of a player or players acquired in return for the SBV;

3. An SBV cannot be substituted for a "Player to Be Named Later" (PTBNL);

4. The entire SBV must be assigned to the other club when it is traded;

5. A club may not acquire an SBV in a trade if the club has already paid signing bonuses equal to or in excess of its ISBP;

6. Once acquired, an SBV can be traded ("flipped") to a third club, as long as the third club has not already paid signing bonuses equal to or in excess of its ISBP;

7. A club's originally assigned ISBP can be increased by a maximum of 50%. If a club acquires an SBV in a trade that causes the club's ISBP to increase to an amount that is more than 50% above the club's originally-assigned ISBP, the portion of the SBV that caused the club's ISBP to increase to an amount that is more than 50% above the club's originally-assigned ISBP is subtracted from the SBV. 

A signing bonus paid to a first-year international player age 23 or older who has spent all or part of at least five seasons playing in an MLB-recognized foreign professional or "major" league does not count against the club’s ISBP. (A signing bonus paid to a first-year Cuban international player age 23 or older who has spent all or part of at least three seasons playing in Serie Nacional does not count against the club’s 2013-14 ISBP, then beginning with the 2014-15 ISP, a signing bonus paid to a first-year Cuban international player age 23 or older who has spent all or part of at least five seasons playing in Serie Nacional does not count against the club’s ISBP).

Also, a club’s six highest signing bonuses of $50,000 or less and ALL signing bonuses of $7,500 or less that are paid to first-year international players do not count against the club’s ISBP. (Beginning in July 2014, only signing bonuses of $10,000 or less that are paid to first-year international players will not count against a club’s ISBP).

The penalty for a club paying signing bonuses in excess of its ISBP is a tax (no draft picks are forfeited) and a restriction on bonuses that can be paid to international players during the next ISP: 

1. A club that pays signing bonuses that exceed its ISBP by 5% or less must pay a 75% tax on the ISBP overage, but there are no restrictions on bonuses in the next ISP.

2. A club that pays signing bonuses that exceed its ISBP by 5-10% must pay a 75% tax on the ISBP overage, and is permitted to sign only one international first-year player to a bonus of $500K or more in the next ISP. 

3. A club that pays signing bonuses that exceed its 2013-14 ISBP by 10-15% must pay a 100% tax on the overage, and is prohibited from paying a bonus in excess of $500K to any international first-year player in the 2014-15 ISP; then beginning with the 2014-15 ISBP, a club that pays signing bonuses that exceed its ISBP by 10-15% must pay a 100% tax on the ISBP overage, and no player may be signed to a bonus of $300K or more in the next ISP. 

4. A club that pays signing bonuses that exceed its 2013-14 ISBP by 15%+ must pay a 100% tax on the overage, and is prohibited from paying a bonus in excess of $250K to any international first-year player in the 2014-15 ISP; then beginning with the 2014-15 ISBP, a club that pays signing bonuses that exceed its ISBP by 15%+ must pay a 100% tax on the ISBP overage, and no player may be signed to a bonus of $300K or more in the next two ISPs. 

Money collected from the tax on clubs that exceed their ISBP will be used to further the development of international baseball.  

A player subject to ISBP restrictions cannot be signed to a Major League contract. 

I'm getting an issue coming to the site where it'll sometimes say it's offline and if I click on the "retry for a live version" it'll usually work though it sometimes takes a couple tries. This happens both on by laptop using firefox and iPhone using Dolphin. I cleared cookies on laptop and still happening.

Recent comments

  • crunch (view)

    PCA finally gets a hit!  2r HR!!!

  • Charlie (view)

    They certainly could be coupled. It could also be the case that a team needs good players at the heart of the team and if they are not coming from one source (development) they have to be sought out elsewhere. I don't see the evidence needed to infer the cause. 

  • crunch (view)

    bases loaded for the cubs, 0 out...and no runs score.

    cubbery.

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Walker was a complimentary piece who was well past his prime. Edmonds, Holliday, Ozzie Smith and a few others were good trades. Notably, they have almost always been quiet in the free agent market. But the fundamental workings of the organization were always based primarily upon the constant output of a well oiled minor league organization. That organization has ground to a halt. And when did that hard stop start to happen? Right at the beginning of the Goldschmidt/Arenado era, perpetuated by the Contreras signing, followed by the rotation purchases during the last offseason. The timing is undeniable and, in my mind, not coincidental.

    Again, we are all saying that player development became deemphasized. I’m just linking it directly to the recent trades and involvement in the free agent market. I don’t see how the two concepts can be decoupled.

  • Charlie (view)

    The Cards also traded for both Jim Edmonds and Larry Walker. It's the developing part that has fallen off. Of course, it could also be the case that there are no more Matt Carpenters left to pull out of the hat. 

  • Childersb3 (view)

    Cubs sign 28 yr old RHRP Daniel Missaki. He was in MiLB from his 17yr old to 19yr old years and did pretty well.
    He's been in Mexico and Japan the last four years and has done well also.
    He's supposedly Japanese and Brazilian.
    Interesting sign. We obviously need to RP in the system
    Injuries are mounting everywhere!!

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Sure, they made generally short term trades for established players to enhance what they already had or traded for players early enough in their careers that they were essentially Cardinals from the start. What they never did was to try to use the more established players as foundational cornerstones.

    Essentially we’re saying the same thing. They have given up on player development to the point that even their prospects that make it to the bigs flop so that they have to do things like buy most of their rotation and hope for the best.

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    I don’t buy that. They had been doing that for years.

    They did it with Matt Holliday. They did it with John Lackey. They did it with Mark Mulder. They did it with Jason Heyward, who had a great year for them. I’m sure there’s more but those come to mind immediately.

    I attribute it more to a breakdown in what they’re doing in terms of development than a culture thing.

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    They won those trades and sacrificed their culture. That’s exactly their problem.

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    The other part that’s kind of crazy is they made two very high profile trades, one for Goldschmidt and one for Arenado, and they very clearly won those trades. They just haven’t been able to develop players the last handful of years the way they usually do.

    I guess the moral there is it’s hard to stay on top of your game and be good at what you do in perpetuity.