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

WISCGRAD's Archives

Cubs Complete Outfield By Signing Dexter Fowler and Shane Victorino

In less than 24 hours, the Cubs have significantly altered their outfield situation for 2016. Yesterday, Dexter Fowler was re-signed to a one-year $8 million contract with a $5 million buyout or $9 million mutal option for 2017, and joined the team in a surprise, heart-warming moment. Fowler will start in CF and lead-off most days, with Jason Heyward now slotted for starting everyday in RF, with the ability to move to CF to give Fowler a dayoff or as part of  late inning double switches.

2016 Hall of Fame Results

Ken Griffey Jr. was elected to the Hall of Fame on the first ballot, receiving 99.32% of the vote. He becomes the 51st player elected in their first year. His percentage of votes is the highest all-time. Mike Piazza was also elected in his fourth year on the ballot. 

With three players (Maddux, Glavine, Thomas) elected in 2014 and four players (Johnson, Martinez, Smoltz, and Biggio) elected in 2015, this now makes a total of nine players elected in a three-year span. This is only the third time that has happened in history, following 1954-56 and 1936-38.

2016 Hall of Fame Predictions

This year’s Hall of Fame ballot has 32 players total, including 15 newcomers, for voters to consider. Last year’s elections saw four worthy candidates elected—Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz, and Craig Biggio—and only one new-comer—Ken Griffey Jr.—is likely to get elected this year. This election is thus a crucial one for down-ballot players, especially given the reduction in the number of years a player can remain on the ballot from 15 to 10 made in 2015.

Opening Day Roster Predictions

The Cubs made flurry of moves at the recent Winter Meetings, including signing Jason Heyward, Ben Zobrist, and John Lackey and trading Starlin Castro to the Yankees for Adam Warren. The bulk of the roster is now set, and we can already take a look at the potential Opening Day roster and the battles for the few remaining slots on it.

Wild Card Roster Predictions

Reports have indicated that the Cubs are toying with either a 16-9 or 15-10 position players to pitchers roster for the Wild Card game. Here's my quick take on the likely roster:

C: Miguel Montero
C: David Ross
1B: Anthony Rizzo
2B: Starlin Castro
IF: Javier Baez
IF: Tommy La Stella
SS: Addison Russell
3B: Kris Bryant
OF: Dexter Fowler
OF: Kyle Schwarber
OF: Chris Coghlan
OF: Jorge Soler
OF: Austin Jackson
OF: Chris Denorfia
OF: Quintin Berry

Lester is Terrible at Containing the Running Game, and It Doesn't Seem to Matter

Jon Lester has already given up 30 stolen bases this year, eight more than his career high of 22 set in 2010. His inability to throw to first has been much maligned in the media and by fans. But how much does it matter? It turns out, not really that much. Sure, it would be better if Lester held runners closer and gave up fewer stolen bases, no one is arguing otherwise, but the facts demonstrate that the failure to contain the running game has had a negligible effect on Lester and the Cubs’ overall performance. Moreover, it appears that opposing teams are becoming too aggressive and running into outs—Lester already has more runners caught stealing (6) so far this year than all of last year (5).

The game-by-game breakdown below shows that only 5 runners the entire season who stole bases off Lester eventually scored. Most notably, Billy Hamilton has scored 3 times after stealing off Lester. But Hamilton, who leads the majors by a wide margin with 47 stolen bases already, tends to do that to everyone—and on one he stole 3B and would have scored from 2B on the following hit anyway. Charlie Blackmon, who is 4th in the majors with 27 steals, also scored following a stolen base in the game yesterday. Finally, Jason Heyward (15 stolen bases on the year) stole 2B to get himself into scoring position and later scored on July 6, though he should not have been on base anyway since he reached on an error. In other words, in 132.2 IP, Lester has given up just 4 earned runs that can be partially attributed to stolen bases—three to Hamilton and one to Blackmon, players who had a good chance of stealing those bases even if Lester were good at holding runners (and that counts the Hamilton steal of 3B where he would have scored from 2B anyway). Finally, of the 6 runners caught stealing, at least 4 likely cost the opposing teams runs, including Jimmy Rollins caught inexplicably trying to steal 3B with runners on 1st and 2nd to the end the 2nd inning on June 25th.

Overall, the effect of the running game on runs given up by Lester appears very normal. Jake Arrieta, for example, has given up 14 stolen bases on the year, including 3 in one game twice. And while I am not going to do a full breakdown of all of his games, runners who stole bases in both of those 3-stolen base games scored. Full game-by-game breakdown for Lester after the break.

They Should Have Passed

The recent announcement that Edwin Jackson was DFAed finally ends the long saga of undoubtedly Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer’s worst acquisition for the Cubs. Jackson, signed to a 4-year/$52 million contract prior to the 2013 season, struggled mightily in 2013 and 2014 before being demoted to the bullpen. Overall, he finished with a 5.37 ERA in 347 innings with the Cubs. Yet Jackson isn’t the only player the front office should have passed on. Below I review the top “misses” since Epstein/Hoyer took over in late October 2011. I've listed them in chronological order rather than ranking them: feel free to weigh in on which you think is the worst or if there are any clunkers that I missed (I've tried to purge some recent players from memory, so omissions are possible).  

The Cubs-Cardinals Rivalry in Perspective

After this weekend's Cardinals sweep of the Cubs, many fans have been wondering if this really is as much of a rivalry as the media makes it out to be. The perception seems to be that the fans are not as into it as they are other rivalries (perhaps White Sox, Royals), and that it has been a mostly one-sided match-up in recent years. While it is difficult to measure the first claim, we can examine the second. The table below shows the last 20 years of Cubs-Cardinals match-ups, including the head-to-head record for that year and each team’s overall winning percentage at the end of the season. Overall, the Cubs’ record vs. the Cardinals for the past 20 years has been 147-165, or a .471 winning percentage, which suggest the teams have played each other at much closer to parity than perceptions suggest. The Cubs have mostly held their own. This is even more impressive when looking at the season winning percentages. The Cardinals have had the better season record in 15 of the last 20 seasons, yet the Cubs have taken 9 of the head-to-head matchups. In several seasons (2005, 2006, and 2010) the Cubs far exceeded expectations: below-.500 Cubs teams dominated much better Cardinals teams on the season. These are small sample sizes and anything can happen in a short series, so we can’t take much away from this. But it should at least be clear that the Cardinals have had an advantage in the rivalry in recent decades but that is largely due to them fielding far superior teams, and that advantage hasn’t been as big as we might think.     

Projecting End-of-Season Statistics

The Cubs will play their 54th game tonight, which will put them at the one-third mark of the baseball season. I thought it would be interesting to see what each player’s full season stats would be if we project out based on these first two months. For most players, it was as simple as taking their current stats (as of yesterday prior to the game) and multiplying by three. But for players who started in the minors or were injured, I have taken that into consideration and examined the percentage of days they have been on the roster when making the calculations. For Soler, I removed three weeks’ worth of stats to account for his current injury. The normal caveats, of course, apply. Players can get injured at any time, fall into slumps, or get hot, and so these will most definitely not look the final lines for a lot of these players. But it should provide a quick sense of how good/bad of a season players are currently having.

The Cubs' Hot Start in Perspective

Records after just 20 games should be taken with a grain of salt. The standard small sample size caveats apply, and particular matchups or hot/cold streaks can skew a team's win-loss record considerably. Still, it's better to be off to a good start than a bad one, and good teams tend to play at least decently across most 20-game stretches throughout the season. The Cubs are off to a hot 12-8 start that places them 4th in the NL and 7th in the majors by winning percentage. How does this compare to recent Cub teams? The table below shows the record for the first 20 games for all Cubs teams since 1980 and their corresponding final season records. As you can see, prior to this year, the Cubs have only been above .500 through their first 20 games in 10 of the past 35 seasons. Doing so is no guarantee of end-of-season success, but the team finished above .500 in 7 of those 10 seasons, making the playoffs in 4 of them. The other three seasons can seemingly be explained away. The 1985 Cubs were very much the same team that won the division title in 1984, but injuries to the pitching staff (Rick Sutcliffe, Steve Trout, Scott Sanderson, and Dennis Eckersley all spent time on the DL) hamstrung the squad. Similarly, the 2006 team started off well, but a Derrek Lee injury in late April started the team on a slide it couldn’t recover from, especially with Kerry Wood and Mark Prior out for most of the year. I can’t explain away 1980 as well, but the 11-9 start was probably a function of going 5-2 against the lowly Mets, who would finish 67-95 on the year. So, while there are no guarantees, there is a lot to like about the Cubs’ early season success in 2015 and a hot start certainly bodes well for the season as a whole.

Do Spring Training Wins and Losses Matter?

You hear it every year. If a team is doing poorly in spring training, its general manager, manager, and players are likely to say: “Spring training games don’t count, we aren’t concerned with our record, guys are working on things, we are giving young players some looks” etc. They will also state clearly that spring training performance will have no bearing on the regular season, usually with some “throwing out/away” and “starting over” metaphor.

In contrast, if a team is doing well in spring training, you are likely to hear that they “like to win no matter what, everything is clicking and the team is playing well,” and of course that the “momentum will carry us into the regular season.”

The Cubs started 0-6-1 this spring training and still sit at just 6-9-1. During these early days Anthony Rizzo stated definitively: “It is Spring Training, yes. Does it matter if we lost? No.” Manager Joe Maddon walked a bit on the line, downplaying the record and emphasizing the type of play he was seeing (the good and the bad), but also hinting that winning mattered: “Of course it does,” Maddon said, “You always want to win.”

So does winning in spring training matter? I surveyed the field to see what we know, if anything, about the relationship between spring training and regular season performance.

Can the Cubs Really Improve Enough to Make the Playoffs?

The Cubs won 73 games last year, which was the most the team had won since 2010 and a respectable improvement on the 66 wins from 2013. But 73 is still a long way from the playoffs. It took 88 wins to make it last year and looking back the last 25 years that is almost always what it takes (other than about a dozen odd exceptions). Yet many pundits are giving the Cubs a strong chance of climbing all the way to the playoffs, and Cubs fans, of course, are hopeful of such a rise. So what does it look like when a team climbs from a win total in the low 70s one year to the high 80s the next? Is it about free agent acquisitions, recovery from injuries, or maturing young talent? Is there a typical path that teams take and are the Cubs on that path?

To answer these questions, I examined all playoff teams over the past 25 years (since 1990) and noted the number of wins they had the prior year. I excluded years 1994-1996 given the strike-shortened schedules that made comparisons difficult. Overall, there were 166 playoff teams in that span, and most were in the playoffs or had solid records the prior year (the average was 87 wins). There were, however, 41 teams that finished below .500 the year before. Of those, there were 16 teams that had 73 wins or less. This includes the Cubs three times. I touch on all 16 teams below to highlight some the paths teams have taken and conclude with thoughts on whether or not such a jump is realistic for the 2015 Cubs.

 

Just How Good Was Ernie Banks?

A lot of ink has been spilled the last few days remembering and honoring the late, great Ernie Banks. Besides being, by all acounts, a wonderful person and ambassador for the game, he was also undoubtedly one of the best baseball players ever, as his many accolades attest. First Ballot Hall of Famer. 14X All Star. Two-Time National League MVP. Gold Glove Winner. His appearances on the major career leaderboards further illustrate his legacy. More than 40 years after he retired he is still 22nd in Home Runs, 29th in RBI, 35th in Extra Base Hits, 34th in Total Bases, 14th in Intentional Walks. More advanced metrics paint an even stronger picture: Banks is in the top 100 all time in Runs Created, Win Probability Added, and MVP Shares, and Baseball Reference has him ranked as the 119th best player in baseball history and the 82nd best position player in history by WAR.

What makes all of this even more impressive is that Banks really had two careers. The first was as an elite short stop. The second, following a knee injury, was as an above average first baseman. While he continued to put up impressive counting stats and had a few good seasons after the switch, the vast majority of his career value occurred prior to the move. To illustrate, Banks accumulated 54.8 WAR through 1961 (his age 30 season) and then only 12.3 WAR over his remaining 10 seasons. His early peak was so good, if he had simply retired following the 1961 season he would still rank as the 146th best position player of all time--just between Enos Slaughter and Billy Herman, two Hall of Famers.

To more deeply examine just how talented Banks was in his prime, I examined his peak WAR at short stop historically. I followed the Baseball Reference definition of "peak" as a player's 7 best seasons--but I restricted it to a player's seven best season at short stop (a season in which they played more games at SS than any other position). The 7 seasons did not have to be consecutive, though in Banks' case they were. From 1954-1960 Banks was primarily a short stop and he accumulated 49.7 WAR. You can see in the table below how he stacks up historically. If you had to select a short stop and could select any player in history in the prime or peak of his career, Banks would certainly be a top five pick, behind only Wagner, A-Rod, Ripken, and Vaughan.

Who is Next for 3,000 Hits?

Accumulating 3,000 hits in a career used to be an automatic ticket to the Baseball Hall of Fame, and all eligible players in the modern era sailed in on the first ballot until Rafael Palmeiro in 2011. It was easy to disregard Palmeiro, however, given his suspension do to PEDs; yet Craig Biggio, with 3,060 hits in his career, also failed to get in on his first try, taking three years to finally overcome the 75% threshold. This suggests that the magic number of 3,000 has lost some of its allure. Yet there is no denying that the number still means something and the list of those with 3,000 hits is a who’s-who of baseball’s greatest and all eligible players expect Palmeiro are in the Hall of Fame. Derek Jeter, who just retired with 3,465 hits, will certainly gain entry on the first ballot when he becomes eligible.

Looking forward, who might be next in line for 3,000 hits?

Recent comments

  • crunch 09/24/2023 - 09:52 pm (view)

    cubs win...so do MIA and CIN,.  ARZ is close to winning (up by 6 in the 8th).  total wash of a day.

    off day tomorrow then it's the last week of baseball...not an easy one vs MIL and ATL.  last-week drama...

  • crunch 09/24/2023 - 09:47 pm (view)

    merryweather puts the first couple guys on with 0 outs...and smyly is up in the pen.  back end of the pen situation is a mess.

  • crunch 09/24/2023 - 09:31 pm (view)

    "Coming into the game, they were 0-819 when trailing by nine runs or more."  damn.

  • Charlie 09/24/2023 - 09:48 am (view)

    I wonder how many pitchers have missed this much time in a relatively short span with recurring forearm issues and not had it lead to surgery.

  • Cubster 09/24/2023 - 09:34 am (view)

    Historic win for Pirates...

    https://www.mlb.com/news/pirates-mount-historic-rally-to-beat-reds?part…

  • 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 09/24/2023 - 09:41 am (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).

    https://www.thecubreporter.com/why-player-designated-assignment-and-the…

    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 (cannot be withdrawn) once requested.  

    With the new five option limit whereby a player can 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 return him to the 40 and option him to the minors 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 return him to the 40 and 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 what I believe is the most logical reason 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 they recalled Trevor Larnach to replace Correa, but then they probably decided they should keep Luplow on the 40-man roster, too (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). Clearly the Twins felt they might need Luplow's RH bat after losing Correa and with Royce Lewis having left a game with a hamstring injury that led to an IL assignment. And that meant that Paddack would remain on his minor league rehab assignment a few extra days, but the Twins will need him in the post-season, not now. 

    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 both Larnach and Luplow were recalled within a couple of days of each other, replacing Correa and Lewis on the Twins MLB 28-man roster).  

    So that's 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). Also, with the injuries to Correa and Lewis, the Twins wanted Luplow to remain automatically post-season eligible, which would not be the case if he was outrighted.  

    Again, the Twins were able to return Luplow to the 40 and option him to AAA because he hadn't been replaced on the 40 by another player after he was Designated for Assignment. 

  • 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.