Cubs MLB Roster

Cubs Organizational Depth Chart
40-Man Roster Info

37 players are on the MLB RESERVE LIST (three slots are open)

Last updated 11-17-2023
 
* bats or throws left
# bats both

PITCHERS: 20
Adbert Alzolay 
Michael Arias
Javier Assad
Ben Brown
Jose Cuas
Kyle Hendricks
Porter Hodge
* Bailey Horn
Caleb Kilian
Mark Leiter Jr
* Luke Little
Julian Merryweather
Daniel Palencia
Michael Rucker
* Drew Smyly
* Justin Steele
Jameson Taillon
Keegan Thompson
Hayden Wesneski 
* Jordan Wicks

CATCHERS: 2
Miguel Amaya
Yan Gomes

INFIELDERS: 8
Nico Hoerner
Nick Madrigal
* Miles Mastrobuoni
* Matt Mervis
Christopher Morel
Dansby Swanson
Luis Vazquez
Patrick Wisdom

OUTFIELDERS: 7
Kevin Alcantara
Alexander Canario
* Pete Crow-Armstrong
Brennen Davis
# Ian Happ
Seiya Suzuki
* Mike Tauchman

 


Minor League Rosters
Rule 5 Draft 
Minor League Free-Agents

Morelli Hits, Suarez Fans, Cubs Win at Papago

Submitted by Arizona Phil on
Jesus Morelli reached base five times on a double, three singles, and a walk, scored twice, and drove-in a run, and Larry Suarez came out of the bullpen to throw 3.1 IP of one hit ball with seven strikeouts, as the EXST Cubs defeated the EXST Athletics 8-6 in Cactus League Extended Spring Training action this morning at Connie Mack Field at the Papago Park Sports Complex in Phoenix.

The game was extended an extra half-inning to allow all of the A’s pitchers who were due to throw today to get their scheduled work.

Here is today’s abridged box score (Cubs players only):

LINEUP:
1a. Eduardo Gonzalez, CF: 2-4 (K, 2B, 1B, F-7, R, RBI)
1b. Blair Springfield, CF: 0-1 (K, BB, R)
2a. Yaniel Cabezas, C: 1-5 (E-6, K, 1B, F-9, 6-3)
2b. Max Kwan, PH: 0-1 (K)
3a. Rafael Valdes, 2B: 0-4 (4-3, F-8, 5-2 FC, 6-3)
3b. Marco Hernandez, 2B: 1-2 (K, 1B)
4a. Wilson Contreras, DH: 1-4 (6-3, K, 4-3, 1B, R)
4b. Carlos Romero, PH-DH-C: 1-2 (K, 1B, RBI)
5. Jesus Morelli, LF: 4-5 (1B, 1B, 1B, 2B, BB, 5-3, 2 R, RBI)
6. Reggie Golden, RF: 2-4 (1B, 1B, HBP, K, K, 2 R, SB, CS)
7. Wes Darvill, SS: 1-4 (1B, K+WP, 1-4 SH, K, F-9, R, RBI)
8. Dustin Geiger, 1B: 1-4 (F-8 SF, 6-3, K, 1B, P-5, RBI)
9. Gregori Gonzalez, 3B: 1-4 (F-8, 1B, BB, 6-4 FC, K, SB)

PITCHERS:
1. Austin Reed: 3.1 IP, 4 H, 3 R (2 ER), 2 BB, 2 K, 2 HBP, 68 pitches (36 strikes), 2/5 GO/FO
2. Larry Suarez: 3.1 IP, 1 H, 1 R (1 ER), 0 BB, 7 K, 2 WP, 51 pitches (34 strikes), 2/1 GO/FO
3. Charles Thomas: 2.1 IP, 3 H, 2 R (2 ER), 1 BB, 2 K, 2 WP, 53 pitches (28 strikes), 2/3 GO/FO

ERRORS: 1
CF Eduardo Gonzalez - E8 (throwing error allowed batter who hit RBI double to advance to 3rd base – eventually scored unearned run)-

CATCHERS DEFENSE:
Yaniel Cabezas: 1-1 CS

ATTENDANCE: 8

WEATHER: Overcast and VERY breezy with temperatures in the 70’s

Tags
Extended Spring Training
Larry Suarez
EXST Cubs
Jesus Morelli

Comments

Submitted by navigator on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 05:03 am

He'll be Soriano's legs>> “This is the way I see using him right now,” Manager Mike Quade said. “It’s a perfect situation if we get Soriano on late in the game and then why waste a bunt? We put Tony in. Let’s find out if he can steal a base. Then we bunt him to third. It’s a nice tool to have. And he’s a pretty good player.”

[ ]

Submitted by Dusty Baylor on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 05:42 pm

"The Cubs traded two guys who look to be as good as Garza" That's what I was asking, which 2. I wasn't asking about a time machine. How is this a bad trade, if hypothetically, Guyer, Archer, Chirinos, and Lee only combine for that 1 game? I agree that giving up all 5 players for just Garza is too much...as I am pretty confident in saying that Fernando Perez will not amount to much, and Rosscup is an unknown quantity....my argument has always been that this is the type of move you make if you're 1 piece away from contending. I'm pretty sure we all knew (know) that the Cubs were not 1 piece from contention.

[ ]

Submitted by The Real Neal on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 05:30 pm

How is this a bad trade, if hypothetically, Guyer, Archer, Chirinos, and Lee only combine for that 1 game? I guess it's really two different questions. There's the "decision" to make the trade and there's "how did the trade work out"? The decision to make the trade, was and always be a bad decision, because based on the information available at the time, it was a bad decision. Ironically a team in position to make such a trade, where adding a couple of wins for 2010 at the expense of some prospects is probably the Rays. The second question: How did the trade work out? We won't really have an answer for that at least for a couple of years. There's no point reviewing that now, and even if as I mentioned, all the four guys wash out or are hall of famers, it doesn't change the flawed, reactive decision making process that Hendry used in the first place. It was a terribly stupid idea. That will never change. Compare it to the Ramirez/Lofton trade for reference.

[ ]

Submitted by springs on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 05:42 pm

A trade is based on the value of something at the time the trade is made. Let's look at this in terms of financial transactions. Let's say the market price of gold (per tradeable unit) is $1500. Assume you convince someone to sell you the gold for $1400. If three years from now, the price of gold has dropped to $1200, did you make a bad trade when you purchased it? Of course not. The value of baseball players is much less quantifiable, but the analogy holds. As the goal for a baseball team is to win, the value of Garza will, however, differ for whom he plays. If he were playing for a team in contention, his value would be higher. Likewise, the value of prospects differs for teams that could win now or teams that are rebuilding. Retaining Archer and Lee and holding out for their development would be a choice with more value to the Cubs than for an aging contender like the Yankees, who have a greater chance at immediate "value" in terms of making the playoffs and winning a championship. With (or in my opinion even without) those considerations, the trade is not good for the Cubs. Personally I think the value of the players was greater than that of Garza; after last season, Archer alone could be projected to put up Garza-like numbers by the time he was in his mid 20s. Lee's potential is quite high and could be a key player in a future contender if he develops. Guyer finally had a healthy season and put up exceptional numbers; even if he were only a fourth OF, his speed/power combo would be valuable. And Chirinos showed potential to be a very good backup catcher, if not a starter. In my opinion, in terms of straight up projection of future performance, the Cubs paid too much. When you include the fact that, despite adding Garza, no rational analyst believed the Cubs would be a contender, the value of the trade diminishes even further. If your goal is winning and trading prospects for a veteran is not going to make the Cubs a winning team, the potential upside of the prospects is significantly more valuable to the Cubs than the veteran's skills. While the prospects may never develop, the possibility that they do develop means a higher possibility to become a winning team than the neglible chance of winning brought to the Cubs by Garza. If the traded prospects never become anything of note, that is a judgment on the value of the prospects years later. The value must be judged at the time the trade was made. And at that time, the Cubs paid way too much for Matt Garza.

[ ]

Submitted by The Real Neal on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 05:25 pm

Edit* Changed because I realized what I said didn't really make a difference. The Cubs saved no money on Garza this year, he actually costs them $3.8 million, since that what he made over the guy he replaced. The point that the Cubs shouldn't have made this trade, just like the Pirates shouldn't sign Jayson Werth. Adding the player doesn't give you a significant boost to making the playoffs, you don't do it. The Cubs could have made this trade next year, saved $4 million and paid less in prospects, with no real change to their 2011 season. Going from 80 to 83 wins is not going to change their bottom line much at all.

[ ]

Submitted by springs on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 05:05 pm

While I don't agree with TRN's statement that the Cubs are a bottom half system, an obvious answer to your question is that many teams put prospects in AAA. Tenn and Daytona do look good, but Iowa is mostly full of non-prospects and the Peoria team has one or two gems, but otherwise doesn't look so great. More importantly, wins and losses aren't really the best judge of minor league prospects...would you rather have Chris Archer or a player like Austen Bibens-Dirx, who is 3-1? Perhaps TRN's reference to bottom half minors is figurative, stating that making trades like the Garza trade strips the system while not making the Cubs a contender. That trade is a mistake. And, as Crunch states, if the Cubs believed they would be a contender, that should be evidence for their termination.

[ ]

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Fri, 05/20/2011 - 05:33 pm

I doubt that that's possible, though the idea circulates around here a lot. You draft 40 players every year, plus all the Pacific and Latin players, and your couple out of fifty-odd who make the team are third-stringers, while other teams get first-stringers. Meanwhile, your minor league teams crush theirs. Wouldn't they (the other teams) draft first-stringers PLUS second- and third-stringers, since they are supposed to be better at this drafting business than you are? It makes no sense. It's just fan-Cubbery, or Cub-fannery. Cub fans, heal thyselves.

[ ]

Submitted by toonsterwu on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 05:34 pm

somewhat as a side note, but I'm still taking a wait and see on Hak-ju Lee's bat. He had a ridiculous April line (.451/.533/.686), but his May line has come down a lot (.328/.386/.422). He's still sporting a fairly high BABIP, but then again, he should have a higher BABIP. I'm not that sold Lee's hit tool is that good that he's going to be a consistent .300+ hitter, though, and I think the May line is closer to what his power potential is. Chirinos was pressing a bit early, and his approach/discipline got out of whack. I still expect him to rebound and be in the majors at some point, as a backup backstop at the very least. All that said, in regards to the trade - I think trades need to be viewed with a factor of the situation then, and what happens down the line. When the trade was made, I thought it made sense for both sides, and I don't think anything's changed my mind about that. I agree that using statistics now to determine winners or losers is fairly useless. If you liked the trade then, you should like it now, irrespective of how the individual pieces have done so far.

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 05:25 pm

It's been a mystery to me why Matt Szczur hasn't played since Tuesday the 10th, but I found this in the Peoria Journal-Star today:
Matt Szczur is day-to-day. He missed the weekend series at Kane County for his college graduation and is “not feeling right” according to Kopitzke.
I heard about the graduation, but this is eight games in a row. (Unless he got separate degrees in running, passing and receiving.)

Submitted by navigator on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 05:26 pm

The Cubs have 4 relief pitchers with ERA's below 3.00 Jeff Samardzija Kerry Wood Sean Marshall Carlos Marmol So which Cub reliever leads the staff with the most appearances? tick tick tick (turn your computer screen/or head upside down to read) oəʇɐɯ soɔɹɐɯ

Recent comments

  • crunch (view)

    i know it's still very early, but i'd like to go into the xmas-to-newyears part of the off-season with something more than...*checks list*...patrick wisdom avoids arbitration with a 1-year deal

    also, steven brault retired and was spotted at the winter meetings with a demo reel and making contacts trying to break into broadcasting (not a joke).  unless he's more optimistic than talented (we already know he can sing) he should make it one day because he seems to be very serious about it.

  • Cubster (view)

    I blame Jason Schmidt’s 3/44

  • Craig A. (view)

    Was all that stuff with the Blue Jays just to squeeze an extra $10 million/yr out of the Dodgers?  It's more than enough to cover his California income taxes!

  • crunch (view)

    unless he pitches into his late-30 that is gonna sting.  a 70m DH...ow.

    it's great to take care of 2 roster spots in 1 player, and i'm sure the team will cut into the pay with the amount of merch/etc he can sell just by being attached to the team....but yeah, i'm not mad the cubs didn't go that extreme.

  • WebAdmin (view)

    Shohei Ohtani to join Dodgers according to ESPN. 10 years for $700 m

  • Cubster (view)

    I'm getting the feeling that Todd Walker might be a Shaw comp. A valuable hit first player but limited albeit not awful on defense. Hopefully, he has more upside. Not a bad floor if Steve Garvey is his ceiling.

  • Wrigley Rat (view)

    AZ Phil - If that's the level of return, I would want NO part of that trade to Cleveland for Clase and Bieber. I have some faith that the Cubs have a strong plan for which prospects they will keep (even if they dangle them in trade talks) and which they will move, because they have plenty of solid prospects they can trade but they shouldn't be trading any of the ones they hope will be future core players. Some guys are redundant, so I hope they choose the right players to keep and the right players to move. It's always important for a team to know its own minor league players better than scouts from other teams (obviously), but I don't think that's always been the case for the Cubs and many other clubs. 

    Cubster - I watched an interview with Carter Hawkins a couple days ago where he said that although Morel hasn't gotten into any Dominican games at 1B, the Cubs did send coaches down with Morel to work on first base skills during practice. So he is developing those skills, whether the Cubs end up using him there or not will probably be dependent on a lot of factors including how those coaches think he looks at the position while training. 

  • tim815 (view)

    He could still play SS at Double-A, but Vazquez, Hoerner, and Swanson are much better defensively, arm strength or not. I'd be good leaving Shaw at SS with McGeary and Ballesteros around, but by the first of June (?), 1B might make sense in DM.

  • crunch (view)

    i have no reason to see a problem, it just seems like it's his most obvious reason to give pause on him at 1st.

    the cubs situation dictates 2nd/SS isn't an option.  his arm dictates 3rd isn't an option.  1st or CF seems to be his best path and he's only played CF in summer ball back in highschool/college...and of course PCA is a better + closer to the bigs CF.

    it's a lot safer to say he's made for 1st than it is he's made for 3rd.  even as a SS his arm is weak, and it's not like his glove is so great he needs to stay in the middle-IF.

  • Arizona Phil (view)

    CRUNCH: Steve Garvey (one of Shaw's comps as a hitter) was a 5'10 right-handed throwing first-baseman with a rag arm. Jeff Bagwell (another Shaw comp) was a 6'0 right-handed throwing first-baseman with a rag arm. Carlos Santana (who played 1B for Counsell in Milwaukee last season and is an above-average defensive first-baseman) is 5'11. It's not like Shaw is 5'7 or 5'8. I don't really see the problem. 

Click HERE for the last 50 comments