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

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

Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

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

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

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

Projected 2021 Cubs Alternate Training Site Roster

3/31 UPDATE:

Waivers were secured and the Cubs have sent INF Ildemaro Vargas outright to AAA Iowa and he will be assigned to the Alternate Training Site (ATS), the Cubs have signed INF Andrew Romine (Austin's brother) to a 2021 minor league contract and he will be assigned to the ATS, RHP James Norwood has been Designated for Assignment and he cannot be assigned to the ATS while he is a Designated Player, and RHP Tyson Miller is on the Cubs MLB CoiViD-19 Related IL and he cannot be assigned to ATS until he is reinstated from the IL.



Here is the projected 28-man roster for the Cubs Alternate Training Site in South Bend that will be active until the start of the AAA regular season in May:
* bats or throws left
# bats both

Joe Biagini
Juan Gamez
* Ben Holmes
Jake Jewell
Trevor Megill
Ryan Meisinger
Shelby Miller
Tommy Nance
James Norwood
Michael Rucker
* Kyle Ryan
* Justin Steele
Kohl Stewart
Robert Stock
Pedro Strop
* Brad Wieck

Erick Castillo
# Taylor Gushue
P. J. Higgins
# Jose Lobaton

Abiatal Avelino
Trent Giambrone
Nico Hoerner
Patrick Wisdom

* Nick Martini
Cameron Maybin
* Ian Miller
* Rafael Ortega


I see P.J. Higgins is listed on the Alt. Roster. I guess there is still time to move him to the 26 man opening roster. I dont think Romaine will be ready.

[ ]

In reply to by Hagsag

I noticed that too. I think it's because Phil is assuming the Cubs are going to sign someone like Lucroy to fill in for Romine. Team has been quite hesitant to give the role to Higgins.

Also of note is Vargas is not included. He's a likely candidate to get grabbed off waivers.

[ ]

In reply to by First.Pitch.120

I'm sure that's what they're trying to do right now! But this is also one of the easier times to pass players through waivers, as most teams aren't going to want to tell players who previously had made the opening day roster that they changed their minds, and the fact that so many players are being DFA'd right before the roster deadline

Do we know how many players they are allowed to have at the alternate site? Without a few more fielders they'll struggle to play actual games again. 

[ ]

In reply to by bradsbeard

BRADSBEARD: The ATS roster limit was set at 28, but like all things CoViD it is subject to change.

ATS teams will be playing three or four games a week versus other nearby ATS squads, although travel must be by ground tansportation with no overnighters. So clubs will be limited to playing other ATS squads that are located within a few hours drive time so that the round trip can be accomplished within the same day.  

Also, unlike last season the teams will not be playing just intrasquad / sim games, so the Cubs will have enough players with positional versatility to play "real" games versus other ATS teams. 

mlbtr says Dan Vogelbach has made the Brewers opening day roster. That should guarantee his $1.4M contract. Glad to see him stick around. 

Disclaimer: I'm going to pretend like I know what I'm talking about below. Please know that I'm just a geeky Cubs fan trying to make sense of the world! All of my thoughts are scattered and some might not even make sense. Sorry in advance. :) 
  • So I'm struggling with all the debate on Twitter and other social media about Rizzo's potential extension. Some are saying "sign him at any cost" because we owe it to him. Some are saying that we've low-balled him with a 4/$60 or 5/$70 million contract offer. But we all know that if the Cubs give Rizzo 5/$100 or something similar, the Cubs will eventually be lambasted for rewarding past experience for an aging veteran and missing out on potential free agent signings, trades, or extensions of our younger players. 

  • (Quick aside: The first two times Mark Grace hit free agency, he was only offered a one-year contract for the same salary as he made the year prior (actually a little less the second time). Only then was he rewarded with a five year contract (at the same rate of pay he had received the three prior years).) 

  • The fact of the matter is that there is a salary cap, and the Cubs spend right up to the luxury tax threshold almost every year. I think that's more than fair to ask. That being the case, if we want to pay 4-5 position players "what they're worth," then we'll have to cut back on pitcher salaries. When I did the math a month ago, I came to the understanding that we could offer Contreras, Rizzo, Baez, and Happ four year contracts worth $15/year (well below market value). OBVIOUSLY, they can each probably get more on the open market, so they would be choosing to stay with the Cubs and give a hometown discount. This would allow the Cubs to spend in other areas. If they didn't want to sign for that, it would become a deeper rebuild. Why give contracts to players who will be entering their 30's when you're about to start rebuilding the team with players in their early 20's? 

  • In my opinion, when negotiating several contracts in one off-season, it seems smart to start with the lowest salaried player and work towards the priciest so they don't compare themselves to the previously signed contract. I think the Cubs hoped to get Rizzo signed to a $15/year contract at a relatively short term. Then, do the same with Contreras since catchers don't age well and Willson is possibly on the wrong side of his peak performance. Baez and Bryant are as good as gone in my mind because I can't honestly pay them what they will likely get on the open market without KNOWING that it was a bad investment! Baez and Bryant are both "broken" in my mind and although they bring various levels of defense, excitement, power potential, and market attraction, I don't think they're worth more than $15 million per year to the Cubs. 

  • I'd honestly rather try to develop some players to replace them (we have a TON of promising young kids who should be able to play those positions in a few years) and fill in with free agents/replacement level players until they're ready. We need to spend our money on starting pitchers (aces like 2014 Jon Lester would be ideal) if they'll consider coming to the north side or if we have the trade capital to make it happen. We've got Henricks. I'm willing to overspend for free agents like Robbie Ray (if he finds his control this year) and Eduardo Rodriguez who could be available next off-season. Re-sign Davies and the best pitcher out of Arrieta, Williams and Miller, and then let Alzolay and Marquez duke it out for the spot starter role next year. And then try for some aces again the next off-season. 

  • So giving Rizzo 4/$60 works for me, but much more than that seems like a bad investment that might end up costing us a player down the line. At least the Cubs made an offer. Rizzo definitely was worth WAY MORE than this past contract, but GM's know not to reward past performance, only to reward future expected performance. Baseball is a business and there are limits to how much a team can spend. It's just unfortunate that it has to be so cut and dried for as awesome a person as Rizzo is. 

[ ]

In reply to by Wrigley Rat

rizzo's probably gonna want around 25m a year given he's got a great glove to match the 30 double/30 homer output with high .300's ob% (also a lefty).  he may be looking more than that.  it wouldn't be shocking if he was looking more considering his years of consistent performance.

great 1st baseman, but he's turning 32 in a few months.  he's also a guy who's a nearly sure thing to get a QO and decline it, so him leaving also comes with an extra bonus draft pick.

Sorry for the lack of gameday posts. I haven't been able to access the admin/writer side of the site.

I know it's just one game, but in a game where our bullpen looked shaky, Duane Underwood looked pretty damn good striking out the side. I bet it felt great for him too.

Th weather is more fitting baseball for game 2 -- highs in the 60s. Jake may not be thrilled, however, with the wind blowing out to RF and gusting in the 20s.

AZ Phil, couple questions  - your opinion:

1. Who gets DFAd when T. Miller comes of Covid19 IL?

2. When do you think full season MiLB rosters get finalized?

[ ]

In reply to by George Altman


1. Not just Tyson Miller being on the CoViD-19 Related IL, but Shelby Miller (supposedly) has a player opt-out sometime in April or May, and given the way he threw at Spring Training I doubt that the Cubs will want to let him go just yet. So the Cubs might need two slots on the 40 (one for T. Miller and one for S. Miller) in the near future. 

As for how they get those two slots, it's always possible that one or two of the players presently on the MLB 10-day IL (Jonathan Holder, Austin Romine, and/or Rowan Wick) could be transferred to the 60-day IL. Of the three, Holder is probably the most-likely candidate to be transferred, but with Tony Wolters now on the roster, getting Romine back on the Active List is not quite as urgent. 

I would say right now the most-likely DFA candidates are Kohl Stewart, Kyle Ryan, and Brad Wieck, but it's always possible that Rossi might get frustrated with one or more of the relievers who started the season in the pen and somebody could get cut (traded or released). The only pitcher in the pen with a "usable" option is Jason Adam, and he is probably one of the most trusted guys out there. 

2. No official word yet on the minor league season or when it will start so all there is right now are reserve lists. What I have heard is that the de facto AAA group will remain at the Alternate Training Site (ATS) in South Bend until the AAA season starts (tentatively scheduled to begin the first week in May), but AA and the two single-A clubs will remain in Mesa indefinitely and might not start their seasons until June or maybe even July.

With the draft now pushed back to the All-Star Break, MLB originally planned for the two remaining U. S. short-season leagues (AZL and GCL) to run from mid-May to mid-October and be essentially Extended Spring Training / Instructs leagues with no official games or official stats, but that is still TBA. 

[ ]

In reply to by bradsbeard

BRADSBEARD: A couple or three things to keep in mind about Tony Wolters is that he was drafted and signed by the Indians out of HS as a SS in 2010, he played a lot of SS and 2B in the minors before being converted to catcher post-2012, and he has played 2B-3B-SS-LF in addition to catcher with the Rockies (with no errors in 25 MLB games at 2B).

So he has above-average speed and athleticism for a catcher, he has a career OBP of .394 in 33 MLB PA as a PH (way over his OBP as a starter), and his splits vs LHP and RHP are fairly even, although he has no power (he is a classic controlled-swing "singles hitter," which is a lot like P. J. Higgins' profile). 

The main problem is, although Wolters has a minor league option available, he will accrue five years of MLB Service Time as of 4/11, at which point he can't be optioned or outrighted to the minors without his consent, and I don't know if Austin Romine will be ready to be reinstated before 4/11. So it's very possible that the Cubs will keep Wolters as a 5th man on the bench (C-INF-LHPH) and cut back to an eight man bullpen when Romine is reinstated. 

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

Remember, the only pitchers with "usable" options on the Cubs MLB 26-man roster right now are Jason Adam, Adbert Alzolay, and Trevor Williams, plus Jonathan Holder, Tyson Miller, and Rowan Wick whenever they are reinstated from the IL. 

Alec Mills, Dillon Maples, and Rex Brothers are out of minor league options, and everybody else (Arrieta, Chafin, Davies, Hendricks, Kimbrel, Tepera, Winkler, and Workman) has Article XIX-A status (meaning player must give his consent before he can be optioned or outrighted to the minors), and Brothers will attain Article XIX-A status on 4/9. 

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

Rex Brothers and Tony Wolters reached five years of MLB Service Time this weekend, so Brothers now cannot be sent outright to the minors without his consent (he is out of minor league options) and Wolters (who has a minor league option left) now cannot be optioned or outrighted to the minors without his consent. 

Keep in mind that a player with Article XIX-A status can sign a waiver which allows the club to send the player to the minors without his consent within 45 days after being added to the 40-man roster, but Brothers and Wolters did not have Article XIX-A status when they were added to the 40 (they just got Article XIX-A status this weekend), so they could not have signed the 45-day waiver prior to being added to the 40.  

So an Article XIX-A player who does not give his consent to be sent to the minors must either be retained on the MLB 40-man roster and MLB 26-man Active List indefinitely, traded, or released, and if he is released the club is responsible for what remains of the player's salary offset only by the pro-rated MLB minimum salary if he subsequently signs a major league contract with another MLB club or signs a minor league contract with another MLB club and then has his contract selected and is added to the MLB 40-man roster.    

Brothers and Wolters previously had Article XX-D status, which is when a player does not have to give his consent to be sent to the minors but he can elect free-agency immediately after being outrighted (but if he does elect free-agency after being outrighted his contract is terminated with no termination pay), or he can accept the outright assignment and defer free-agency until after the conclusion of the MLB regular season and be paid in full, but if he accepts the outright assignment and defers free-agency until after the conclusion of the MLB regular season but then is added back to the MLB 40-man roster prior to the conclusion of the MLB regular season, he cannot elect free-agency.   

A player gets Article XX-B status if he has accrued less than five years of MLB Service Time and has been outrighted previously in his career and/or if he has accrued at least  three years of MLB Service Time or has "Super Two" status in salary arbitration.

Unfortunately, the Cubs now have 18 p[layers with Article XIX-A status on their 26-man Activi List roster (Arrieta, Baez, Brothers, Bryant, Chafin, Davies, Duffy, Hendricks, Heyward, Kimbrel. Marisnick, Pederson, Rizzo, Sogard, Tepera, Winkler, Wolters, and Workman), one with Article XIX-A status on the 10-day IL (Romine), plus Contreras, Happ, Williams, Holder and Wick (both are on the 10-day IL), and Ryan and Stewart (both presently on optional assignment to the minors) have Article XX-D status, and Maples and Mills are out of minor league options, so there is not a lot of roster flexibility. 

The only players presently on the Cubs 26-man Active List roster (or on an MLB IL) who can be optioned to the minors without restriction are Adam, Alzolay, Bote, Happ, Holder (on 10-day IL), T. Miller (on CoViD-19 Related IL), Wick (on 10-day IL), and Williams. 

riggs stephenson getting some love on a marquee broadcast stat leader board (3rd OB% @wrigley field).

he's one of the lesser known great oldschool cubs (1926-34).  the guy who replaced him, augie galan, was also rather good.

Since it is a virtual lock that James Norwood will be claimed off waivers (he throws 99 MPH and he has one minor league option left), if the Cubs want to trade him instead of losing him off waivers, they will need to do so before 2 PM (Eastern) on Monday.

That's because in order to place him on waivers and have the 47-hour "waiver ride" end within the 7-day DFA period, Norwood would have to be placed on waivers no later than Monday (the daily "waiver call" is 2 PM Eastern) so that the outcome of the waiver request will be known by 1 PM (Eastern) on Wednesday (1 PM Eastern on Wednesday being the deadline to claim anyone placed on waivers on Monday).  

My guess is (like Duane Underwood Jr) James Norwood will be traded sometime prior to 2 PM (Eastern) on Monday, possibly on Sunday, or maybe Monday morning, for a "second tier" prospect who doesn't require a slot on the MLB 40-man roster (much like 1B Shendrik Apostel, who was acquired by the Cubs from the Pirates for Dunderwood). You've got to figure there are a number of MLB clubs who think they can teach Norwood the reliable secondary pitch he needs to offset his high velo FB. 

I do understand why the Cubs have given up on Norwood (watching him labor through his outings in Spring Training was brutal), but high-90's FB don't grow on trees, and there is always somebody out there who believes they can do what others were unable to do. 

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

The Cubs have traded RHRP James Norwood to the San Diego Padres for 25-year old 6'8 250+ minor league RHRP Dauris Valdez.

Valdez is not on the Padres MLB 40-man roster, but he is Rule 5 Draft eligible post-2021 (as he was post-2019 and post-2020), and if he is not added to the 40 he will be under club control through the 2022 season. 

Norwood was Designated for Assignment last Wednesday and so if the Cubs wanted to trade him he had to be traded no later than 2 PM (Eastern) today, because if he wan't traded by that time he would have had to have been placed on Outright Assignment Waivers so that he would clear waivers by Wednesday (the DFA period is seven days). A player cannot be traded while he is on waivers.    

Valdez pitched in the Arizona Fall League post-2018 where he was the primary closer for the Peoria Javelinas (and he was dominating, too), and then he pitched at AA in 2019. He did not pitch in the minors last season because the minor league season was canceled, but he did pitch (briefly) in the Dominican Winter League post-2020. 

Dunderwood? Harsh nickname. He's looking good as a Pirate, so that's Karma per the Baseball Gods. 

Again, on the ex-Cub front, four (count em, are listed)  per mlbtr...

Kyle SchwarberJon LesterJosh Harrison and Alex Avila are among the players expected to be sidelined if the Nationals begin play early next week, reports Jesse Dougherty of the Washington Post (Twitter link). Four Nats players have tested positive for the coronavirus, while five more are currently in quarantine as close contacts. It isn’t clear which (if any) of Schwarber, Lester, Harrison and Avila have tested positive versus being close contacts. 

...and the Nats have signed ex-Cub Jonathan LuCroy.

kimbrel works back to back days and gets a save.

another stellar outing.  1ip 0h 0bb 2k.

[ ]

In reply to by Dolorous Jon Lester

it's not fair to evaluate the guys we got in the darvish trade at least until they graduate from high school...kinda jumping the gun over here.

even if this trade works out with darvish/davies coming close enough to each other in production to not care, there's no way there wasn't a package of talent with more close-to-MLB-ready guys available.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob Richardson

i base this on nothing, but i suspect this is jed's way of putting his own fingerprint on his cubs legacy out of the shadow of theo.

...not based out of any bad feelings or ego, but a source of personal pride.  once again, based on nothing.

it was a weird trade to get so many extremely young guys who are 3+ years away at a minimum, and most likely closer to 4-5+ years.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

It's not fair to judge the players received yet, but I meant it in the sense that the imperative didn't outwardly seem as much "get the best talent" as "get the contract off the books." And three years of Yu even at the price (which isnt exorbitant) will be more valuable than a half year of Kimbrel even if he's pitching like it's 2014 Kimbrel.

[ ]

In reply to by Dolorous Jon Lester

"Nearness to MLB in the Darvish trade" seems a bit "Getting the right astological signs in the Matt Garza swap". Entirely not even the point.

If I'm trying to jump-start the organiization with a financial mandate from the owner, as Jed was, "getting it all" in the Darvish trade was likely impossible. He likely had to "turn the page" on something.

My hunch, and this will, eventually, be the thing I want to know from Hoyer.....

"Tom. Is there going to be a lengthy work-stoppage in 2022?"

If yes, I'm dealing for assets in 2023 and beyond, and I'll piece 2021 together with move-able assets. 

[ ]

In reply to by tim815

I don't think we entirely disagree. Trading Darvish was always going to hurt. Though there's something to be said for these 13 year olds they acquired... in the event of a work stoppage, wouldn't the fact they're further away/ more raw be additionally detrimental to lose however long in their development?

Two things I found extremely bothersome, regardless of any other factors were:

1. Padres were clearly willing to include actual top talent, shown by the Snell deal days before.

2. That whole "we're still trying to compete this year" bullshit. Sure they went out and signed a handful of decent players to one year deals, but those deals likely had an eye toward potential to be traded away in July

[ ]

In reply to by Dolorous Jon Lester

"Screw this season. We're treating it like we did 2013. And there's going to be a lockout in December."

That might be as honest as roster manipulation at a Seattle rotary meeting, but saying the quiet things out loud isn't usually advised by the executives or owners.

Or Rob Manfred.

AZ Phil, has Bailey Clark been released? I dont see him on any minor laegue roster.

Following along on the Yu conversation, I went back to look at the 2018 team.  I remember feeling really frustrated with that team for alot of the season & the #163/WC losses feeling like the culmination of a trend.

However, just looking at the #s I can't remember why I was feeling that way... can someone jog my memory? 

On paper, the CHC finsished with a tie for the most wins in the NL.  They didn't really fade down the stretch to a horrible degree (16-12 in Sept & 6-4 in last 10).  You' like to see better than 10-9 & 11-8 vs. PIT/CIN, but that's not exactly a smoking gun.

Was it the maddening inconsistency?  The avg runs/game was ok, but I see that in 49 games they scored >= 7 runs and in 39 games they scored <= 1 run.  Losing too many close ones that felt winnable? Looks like they were 6-12 (-ish) in low scoring one run games (ie, 1-0 / 2-1). 

I think I may have answered my own question, but would like confirmation from the masses.

[ ]

In reply to by First.Pitch.120

The offense petered out. They were gassed, with a lack of actualy days off.Toss in a heaping side of "Don't look behind you, someone might be catching up", and the team added a very unpopular player in Daniel Murphy.

Fans were grappling with the "core" not getting better every year.

A cumulative effect of "wasn't this supposed to be a dynasty" turning to "this isn't going to be a dynasty", with Addison Russell spiraling in the wrong direction.

Phil, do you know if they will open access to the backfields at Riverview anytime soon? It has been really frustrating.

Recent comments

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Baseball used to be called the “thinking man’s game”. One tool I’m realizing PCA isn’t given enough credit for is his mind. He’s cocky but at the same time very humble. He seems to fully realize he’s overmatched by big league pitching. Hence, the bunting. I’m convinced that’s of his own doing, not his coaching, because the team, and indeed the whole of baseball, doesn’t think that way any more.

    So what does the constant threat of the bunt do?

    1. Maximizes the use of his greatest offensive tool at this point, his speed.
    2. Provides his greatest chance of adding offensive value while simultaneously seeing more MLB pitching.
    3. Pulls in the corner infielders and may cause the second baseman to cheat toward first, thereby increasing the chances that a batted ball when he does swing away goes through the infield.
    4. May alter the pitcher’s motion knowing that at any time during the at bat there is a strong chance he may be forced to field his position.

      This is an aspect of baseball that unfortunately seems to have been lost. Compare this to the predictable approach of Christopher Morel, who a pitcher knows is capable of hitting the occasional mistake a long way but also knows that all he has to do at least at this point in Morel’s career is throw high gas and he will most likely get a strike out.
  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Sorry, that’s what happens when you obtain a rental for a playoff run. Oddly, most teams wouldn’t be willing to give up arguably the best offensive player available at the deadline for nothing. They’re going to want the best players they can get in return. And there will be competition and plenty of solid offers for that player that have to be bettered. That’s baseball.

    Just last week there was talk of obtaining Elias Diaz from the Rockies for a ton of potential major league talent. The chances would be 50-50 at best that we could extend him and this team had and still has less chance at a playoff run than last year’s team when the Candelario trade was made.

    We can’t on the one hand urge the team to use their prospect depth to make judicious trades to improve the team’s chances and then turn around and piss and moan every time one of the traded prospects happens to have a great game. We’re a better fan base than that!

  • azbobbop (view)

    Center fielder always has the right of way 

  • Finwe Noldaran (view)

    Well, maybe I just said that to myself to try and justify the deal............

  • Bill (view)

    Not that I heard of.  He was traded for Candelario because we felt a couple of months of Candelario was more valuable than a future 6 years of herz would be.

  • Finwe Noldaran (view)

    I hear that, I just feel like I remember reading when we traded him that he was going to be Rule 5 eligible, and we needed a roster spot, et cetera, et cetera.......

  • Finwe Noldaran (view)

    Just realized I haven't been B. Davis or Alcantara or Aliendo at all recently?

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Quite possible. Another one of the promising arms a bit below the untouchable higher tier. Once again, a “Not happy to see him go but a deal had to be done” situation.

  • Finwe Noldaran (view)

    Aha, so the Nationals may have requested him? 

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Traded him and Kevin Made for the Jeimer Candelario rental last year.