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

TCR Friday Notes

A little under the weather and mourning the end of the Bears season, so some brief notes to hold you over for the weekend.

-  To add fuel to my "they better offer Rich Harden arbitration" fire, the Seattle Times suggest the Mariners have some interest in Rich Harden as I imagine a few teams will.

- Our pal Alex Eisenberg at Baseball Intellect has a new premium article scouting left-handed pitcher James Paxton (drafted by the Blue Jays in the supplemental round in the 2009 draft). The video in the game is against LSU and there's three at-bats of D.J. LeMaheiu which he does a little breakdown of. 

- Congrats to Carlos Zambrano on his third Silver Slugger award. I know Z gets a lot of heat for his Babe Ruth like swings and not worrying enough about his pitching, but I suggest if you have a problem with that you should go follow an AL team. Players like Carlos Zambrano is what makes the National League more fun.

- On the Curtis Granderson rumor front, MLBTR has a link up saying the Angels and Tigers have been talking...Granderson would presumably patrol left field.

- And now the greatest 4:30 minutes you'll watch this weekend, hat tip to Big League Stew for the find.

Enjoy the weekend!

Comments

watched this when you first linked to it, Rob.... Absolutely hilarious, love it

damn...eric gagne ready to come back as a SP for 2010 via Yahoo Sports, Tim Brown.

the M's just gave jack wilson a 2yr/10m contract. why exactly did they feel the need to replace GMs if they're going to do crap like this?

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Hell, Jim Hendry will be paying almost twice that for Grabow(a loogy) and Aaron Miles. If Jack Wilson was a lefty who knows what we would be offering him right now. (NTC?Player options?personal hitting coaches?)

[ ]

In reply to by big_lowitzki

Is $8 per year his Fangraphs number? Those are absolutely off the wall. It's like they do massive amounts of narcotics and make up numbers. Fangraphs claims Mark Teixera was worth $421 million last season. The only guy who believes that is Scott Boros.

Curtis Granderson is exactly the type of speed/power combo player Jim Hendry and Gary Hughes love. If he is available, I believe Hendry will go after him, even if it costs the Cubs Starlin Castro, Andrew Cashner or Jay Jackson, and a third pre-arb auto-renewal guy (like maybe U. of Michigan alum Jake Fox?).

Granderson is signed through 2012 with a 2013 club option, but he only gets $5.5M next season, which would probably be a million or two less than what Marlon Byrd or Mike Cameron would want per year. Then when Granderson's salary increases to $8.25M in 2011 and to $10M in 2012, the Cubs will have contracts coming off the books that would offset the Granderson salary increases at that time.

Also, with Mike Fontenot having been designated as an arbitration-eligible "Super Two" (thanks to the Twins optioning Glen Perkins to AAA on September 2nd), I think it's now fairly likely that Fontenot will get non-tendered on 12/12, and as a result, I believe it's also more likely now that Matt Camp (who is presently tied for 2nd in doubles and tied for 4th in SB in the Mexican Pacific League) will be added to the Cubs 40-man roster at the end of next week. Camp is primarily a 2B-CF, but he has the IF-OF versatility and pinch-running/base-stealing skills that Fontenot lacks, although Camp does not have Fontenot's occasional power.

And as I mentioned on a previous thread a couple of days ago, Milton Bradley to TB for Pat Burrell (with the Cubs & Rays splitting Bradley's 2011 $12M salary) and then Burrell to the Mets for Luis Castillo would be a three-way deal that would help all three teams jettison unwanted flotsam, while adding a player who would (at least marginally) help fill a perceived need and/or (in the case of the Mets) open up 2B for Orlando Hudson.

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

Dr. Phil, If you were running things, would you offer Castro in a Granderson swap? Would you offer arbitration to Harden and Grabow? Would you pick up comp draft picks if they happened to be easily available? Thanks in advace Aaron B

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

Matt Camp--ugh. He's a .271 minor-league hitter with zero power and Fontenot-type speed. He's doing a nice job hitting leadoff for Mexicali, but last night he stole his 9th base and was caught stealing for the 5th time. A guy like that will be discouraged from running in the majors. Piniella doesn't like guys who lack pop and don't steal bases, even if they have so-called speed. See Felix Pie. I much prefer Robinson Chirinos, who seems to have figured it out, hitting-wise, at the age of 25. Chirinos is playing in Venezuela, where he is out-hitting his teammate Dopirak, who was just added to Toronto's 40-man. (Chirinos: .365/.423/.730/1.153. Dopirak: .283/.381/.496/.876.) Chirinos is turning into a power hitter: 6 HRs in 63 at bats. He's the guy who hit two grand slams in a game last year. Historically, he's a middle infielder, although they turned him into a catcher in 2008, probably because he doesn't have middle-infielder speed and he wasn't hitting the ball with authority. He is now. A guy who can catch and play second and third and hit could be more useful than Matt Camp.

[ ]

In reply to by VirginiaPhil

I'd be interested to hear what AZ Phil has to say about Chirinos. His A-ball and winter league number pops, but he has yet to impress at AA and hasn't sniffed AAA. Seems like the main difference between him and Camp is that Camp has put in a little time at AAA (without impressing offensively), can play CF, and has a little speed. Chirinos hasn't played any AAA but has similar numbers at AA to what Camp does (in fewer PAs), has more recent pop, less speed, and plays C but not outfield. According to AZ Phil's Rule V list, Matt Camp appears to be Rule V eligible and Chirinos does not, which means Chirinos has a little more time to season in the minors and become a more complete bench player (meaning probably experiencing some offensive success at at least the AA level, perhaps some at the AAA level as well).

Submitted by Dr. aaron b on Fri, 11/13/2009 - 11:19pm.
Dr. Phil,

If you were running things, would you offer Castro in a Granderson swap?

Would you offer arbitration to Harden and Grabow?

Would you pick up comp draft picks if they happened to be easily available?

Thanks in advace

Aaron B

=================================

AARON B: I would offer Castro in a deal for Granderson, and I would offer arb to both Harden and Grabow.

The Cubs have other SS prospects besides Castro (although Castro is the best one), and I doubt VERY much that Harden would accept arbitration if it was offered, and offering arb to Harden would not keep another club from signing him.

With Grabow, offering him arb would probably keep other clubs from wanting to sign him (because signing him isn't worth losing a 1st or 2nd round pick), so he would probably accept the arbitration offer, and then (if necessary) I would gladly go to arbitration with Grabow, because a one-year deal (even slightly inflated) is better than a two or three year deal with easily attained performance incentives.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

the only issue grabes has vs. righties is building to changeup out pitch vs. righties before throwing too much wild stuff. fastball, slider, change...fastball is 93+mph, slider is lights-out vs. lefties, and the change is good at fooling righties. he's got the pitches when his control is there. he's not a loog...

From Mike Silva's blog, via Rotoworld: Carl Crawford is reportedly "livid" the Rays picked up his $10 million option on his original four-year deal signed in 2005 and wants out of Tampa Bay. The report is from Mike Silva's NY Baseball Digest, which is a fine New York baseball blog, but take it with a grain of salt. Says Silva's source: "He had a handshake agreement with management that they would renegotiate the contract instead of picking up the option and they went ahead and did it anyway. He’s pissed beyond belief." It's highly unlikely Crawford is moved during the offseason, but he'd be prime trade bait if the Rays fall out of the race early. We have trouble believing this report, because Crawford agreed to the option. Why include the option if there was an agreement to rip it up? Additionally, he didn't seem to have a problem with the 2009 option being picked up. Crawford is widely expected to command at last $15 million annually once he hits the open market. I agree it sounds a little fishy, but hey Tampa, if there is trouble, we'd love to help....

I'm all for Hendry making moves to better this team, but why get excited with the first girl to ask you to prom, when your trying to get lucky! If Hendry is willing to give up a boat load of really good prospect why not try to get the most value you can. Don't just settle for the ugly girl. This team needs so tweaking and I think Wilkins has done a good job in making the minor league system better than the previous regimes.

[ ]

In reply to by John Beasley

100 PA cutoff is lame, the qualified leaders were...

2009 & 2005: Lee

2008-2006 & 2004: Ramirez

2003-1998 & 1996-1994: Sosa

1997 & 1995: Mark Grace

1992-1990  & 1985-1984: Sandberg

1989: D. Smith

1988: Dawson

1987: Mumphrey

1986: Matthews

1983-1982: Durham

1981-1980: Buckner

I would have still missed Mumphrey, but gotten the rest. Otherwise I missed Servais, Hansen, Villanueva, Lopes and Bosley

Submitted by Charlie on Sat, 11/14/2009 - 6:03pm.
According to AZ Phil's Rule V list, Matt Camp appears to be Rule V eligible and Chirinos does not, which means Chirinos has a little more time to season in the minors and become a more complete bench player (meaning probably experiencing some offensive success at at least the AA level, perhaps some at the AAA level as well).

=========================================

CHARLIE: Robinson Chirinos is a Rule 55 minor league FA (AKA "Six-Year Minor League FA"). The 13 Cubs minor leaguers eligible to be Rule 55 minor league free-agents can be found on the right sidebar and in my "40-MAN" file (see "AZ PHIL'S CORNER"), but any of the 13 could theoreticaly re-sign minor league contracts with the Cubs for 2010, and if any of them do re-sign with the Cubs prior to next month's  Rule 5 Draft, they immediately become eligible for selection in the Rule 5 Draft.

Chirinos has been a Rule 55 minor League previously (the first time post-2007, and then again post-2008), so it's possible he might re-sign with the Cubs again, or he might decide to try his luck with a new organization, since he has already spent nine seasons in the Cubs organization without ever playing above AA, and it's unlikely he would get promoted to AAA Iowa next year, either, because Welington Castillo, Chris Robinson, and Steve Clevenger will likely all be vying for playing time behind the plate with the I-Cubs in 2010. 

Chirinos was converted to catcher last year because Oneri Fleita (who was a catcher in his playing days at Creighton and in the Orioles organization) can spot a catcher a mile away, and Chirinos understood that being able to catch as well as play other positions would give him a better chance to continue his playing career past 2008 (the year he was converted to catcher). The Cubs like Chirinos because he is a mentor to the younger Latin players (he's a Venezuelan version of "Crash" Davis) and a loyal "organizational player" who does whatever the Cubs ask him to do without complaining, bitching, or whining, and I believe he will probably eventually end up a coach or a manager in the Cubs organization.

As for Matt Camp, I know for a fact that he is very highly regarded by the Cubs Player Development people. They like his versatility, speed, and athleticism, and hitting 333/390/447 (so far) in the Mexican Pacific League with nine stolen bases and a league-leading ten doubles certainly won't make them like him less.

Whether Camp will be added to the Cubs 40-man roster on 11/20 or just get an NRI to Spring Training (presuming he doesn't get selected in the Rule 5 Draft) is still TBD, but if the Cubs plan to non-tender Mike Fontenot (now that they know he is eligible for arbitration as a "Super Two"), Camp's chances of getting added to the 40 increase. That doesn't mean Camp has a good chance to be on the Cubs 2010 Opening Day 25-man roster, though. That is unlikely. But the Cubs absolutely, positively want Camp at Iowa in 2010 as roster insurance, and if they believe he will get selected in the Rule 5 Draft (and there is a fairly good chance that he will get picked if he isn't added to the Cubs 40-man roster), the Cubs might decide to add him to the 40 just for that reason.

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

Phil--the interesting thing about Tim Wilken is that even his less-than-inspired draft picks have a shot, because they are versatile two-way players, even if their hitting is not quite major league. So people like Matt Camp, Ty Wright, Marquez Smith and Tony Thomas are able to hang around, hang around, hang around, waiting for a break. Reed Johnson is another example of a middling Wilken draftee, and he's done okay. If rosters had four or five twenty-fifth spots, they would all be major leaguers. Camp, by the way, ran into his 6th caught stealing last night, versus 9 steals. His Mexicali teammate Brad Snyder, meanwhile--a Shoeless Joe Hardy type we never talk about--has 11 steals out of 13. He also stole 10 in a very abbreviated season at Iowa.

[ ]

In reply to by VirginiaPhil

Well..I agree...but it's not like these are all 28-29 year old guys hanging around for a shot. Thomas and Wright have 2 full seasons, Smith has 2 full seasons.. Brad Snyder...nice! Maybe worth a look in ST as an extra OF...had a solid season going in AAA until the injury.

Charlie, Exactly, I think Hendry could get a better deal for Castro, Lee or Vitters. Giving up those type of prospects with high ceilings I think Hendry could do better than Granderson. Though contracts will play the main part in any deal with the Cubs.

[ ]

In reply to by Southpaw

Just out of curiosity, Southpaw, which player, Lee, Castro or Vitters are you sure is going to hit 30 HR's in the majors while playing, at least, average defense? I don't see the Tigers wanting any of those players as a centerpiece of a Granderson trade, because they're going to need someone they can show to their fans from day one, but you're either vastly overrating prospects or underrating Granderson here.

I agree with Dr. Aaron and Southpaw. If we trade one of our top three prospects-Castro, Cashner or Vitters, it better be for Adrian Gonzales, Hanley Ramirez or Roy Halliday. We don't want Juan Pierre part deux... That said, I'd like to think a package of Tyler Colvin, Jake Fox and a pitcher would get it done. How about Jeff Samardzija straight up for Curtis Granderson? If I'm Detroit that deal makes more sense. The economics have finally tilted in our favor. Detroit and Michigan's overall economy is in the crapper. There is no way they'll increase attendence in 2010. The Cubs, however, should be back at 3Million. And by paying the money to sign their prospects, they have plenty of chips to work with. The Cubs are in a position to re-tool and compete at the same time. Which is why they should set their sights on Adrian Gonzales. He's lefthanded and entering his prime. Make a subsequent deal of DLee and this team could be re-built for the next 3-4 years. I'm confident the Red Sox would love to have Derrek Lee.

[ ]

In reply to by carmenfanzone

Let me give you guys some idea of what Adrian Gonzales would cost: Vitters Cashner Carpenter Gaub Hanley Ramirez? Throw Jackson and Marquez Smith on that list. It's great that you guys are excited about Cubs prospects, and to some extent you're right if you think that pre-arbitration players are going to be in demand - but what is going to be in demand right now is Major League players who are pre-arbitration. Teams are having payroll problems in 2010 not in 2014, at which point it's assumed the economy will be recovering. Guys who just finished seasons in A and AA aren't going to be hot commodities, because they can't play in MLB in April.

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

I would absolutely deal Vitters in an Adrian Gonzalez deal. I just think that Granderson is wildly overrated. Not enough contact/on base, who really should be a platoon player. I say you let this year play out. Get the comp picks for DLee after this offseason, then trade Vitters and Co. for Adrian Gonzalez next offseason.

[ ]

In reply to by Dr. aaron b

Here's a list of Center fielders who hit more HR's than Granderson: Here's a list of Center fielders who walked more than Granderson: Mike Cameron Fukudone You're getting all worked up over a bad BABIP season... is it that you don't understand the concept?

[ ]

In reply to by The Real Neal

Yeah. If you check out his fangraphs page, you can see that the only other drastic difference was that his GB% dropped and his FB% went up, but he hit the same percentage of homeruns per fly ball. His line drive percentage was actually higher in 2009 than in 2008. He had significantly fewer infield hits, probably in part due to hitting fewer ground balls, and it looks like more of those fly balls got caught than in years past. Probably bad luck more than anything else. The Ks and BBs are right on what he did in 2008. And in 07 and 08 his OBP was just fine. Not impressive, but .360+ which is fine. Can't imagine Wrigley would have a negative effect on any of those numbers, nor would seeing the Pirates and other NL Central competition.

I'm glad that people are acknowledging that the Cubs have good prospects. That's step one. Step two is letting them grow up a little bit to increase their value--have them at least do well in AA (as Colvin and Castro have done), in line with what Neal said. Step three is looking for redundancy at positions (like shortstop) and KEEPING THE ONE YOU LIKE BEST.

Submitted by VirginiaPhil on Sun, 11/15/2009 - 11:01am.
Phil--the interesting thing about Tim Wilken is that even his less-than-inspired draft picks have a shot, because they are versatile two-way players, even if their hitting is not quite major league. So people like Matt Camp, Ty Wright, Marquez Smith and Tony Thomas are able to hang around, hang around, hang around, waiting for a break. Reed Johnson is another example of a middling Wilken draftee, and he's done okay. If rosters had four or five twenty-fifth spots, they would all be major leaguers.

Camp, by the way, ran into his 6th caught stealing last night, versus 9 steals. His Mexicali teammate Brad Snyder, meanwhile--a Shoeless Joe Hardy type we never talk about--has 11 steals out of 13. He also stole 10 in a very abbreviated season at Iowa

=========================================

VA PHIL: Brad Snyder should get some major attention starting next Friday, when he is free to sign with another MLB club (after the end of MLB Free-Agency Filing Period). Snyder could be next year's Garrett Jones (a Rule 55 minor league FA out of the Twins organization who was signed by the Pirates last off-season, and then became a contender for the 2009 N, L. Rookie of the Year Award after finally getting a chance to play regularly at the big league level).

I think the reason the Cubs Player Development people like Matt Camp so much is that he has continued to show improvement every year. He doesn't strike out much, he hit .282 and went 18-21 in SB attempts at AAA Iowa in 2009, and he has the versatility to play several different positions (2B-3B-SS-LF-CF-RF) so that he could replace two players on a 25-man roster. That's not true with Tony Thomas (strictly a 2B) and Ty Wright (strictly a LF).

Marquez Smith is an interesting player (I had him "just missing the cut" at #19 in my Cubs 2010 Top 15 Prospects), because (like Casey McGehee before him) he has been "hidden in plain view" while moving steadily through the Cubs system. He hit 278/337/457 with 15 HR and 35 doubles (ccmbined) between Daytona and Tennessee in 2009, after going 278/354/475 with 17 HR and 27 doubles (combined) between Peoria and Daytona in 2008. He will very likely be the starting 3B at Iowa in 2010. I believe he is a legitimate MLB prospect, although he will have to prove he can hit at AAA. While he is primarily a 3B, M. Smith can also play 2B. He was a college teammate of Tyler Colvin at Clemson.

Marquez Smith, Kyler Burke, Darwin Barney, Chris Archer, Brandon Guyer, Tony Thomas, Ty Wright, and Chris Huseby are the biggest names (right now, anyway) who become eligible for the Rule 5 Draft for the first time a year from now, so the Cubs will be evaluating them even more-closely in 2010 than they did previously. Look for M. Smith, Guyer, Thomas, and/or Wright to get slots in the AFL next year to help the Cubs decide whether to add them to the 40-man roster. (Barney is a virtual lock to get added, and will probably get brought up to Chicago before the end of the 2010 season). Whether Burke and Huseby get consideration depends on whether they can do at Daytona in 2010 what they did at Peoria in 2009, and Archer getting added to the 40 post-2010 will depend a lot on how he throws at Daytona, with his chances to get added increasing if he can improve his command without losing velocity (something he was unable to do at Instructs last month). 

[ ]

In reply to by Arizona Phil

Archer seems like a guy who, if he can't make marked improvements in his control, might get traded at the deadline in 2010 when the Cubs try to pick somebody up from a team like the Pirates. A non-contender would have an easier time making room for him on the 40-man than would a contender, and he's got enough upside to be worth taking a chance on.

obviously we have little idea what the Tigers want at this point or like in our system, but Dombrowski has an affection for hard-throwers.... A shame we don't have Felix Pie anymore, he'd make a good piece to move... I would guess maybe Barney, Cashner or Jackson, Guzman and Wells would be decent starting point... Samardzija could be of interest, but I have this feeling the Cubs are just going to see that one through and not ask him to waive his NTC. and that's of course if they even have any interest in Wells. Maybe they like Fuld or Colvin....

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

I do Barney, Cashner, and Guzman, but I hesitate to send them an MLB ready starting pitcher because the Cubs have a shortage of them now that Lilly will be on the DL. I'd also gladly make Fuld, Colvin, Hoffpauir, and Fox available. Then again, selling high on Wells might be a good idea. I really like the guy, though.

[ ]

In reply to by Rob G.

I'd be okay with selling high now on a guy like Wells in order to pick up a talent like Granderson (who also fits a big roster hole). I just don't know where else they are going to pick up starting pitching without spending money that they don't seem to have. If they can free up the money, I'm okay with it. (Even though I really like Wells.) I'm not attached to Guzman anymore. He seemed to be fairly lucky this year and his injury history really worries me. I would absolutely not sell low on either Marmol or Soto right now. A year ago we would've been talking about Marmol + a middling prospect, or Soto straight up for Granderson (I think), and in another year they might be just that valuable again.

from CCO, reporting on the Bruce Levine taling baseball show from Saturday... Bruce Levine mentioned the "personal problems" Aaron Miles had to deal with again last season ... and the fact he could not shake them, Levine did not go into specifics and has hinted in the past that is was a difficult divorce. Levine said the personal problem was not a death in Miles' family or a health issue. Levine said the Cubs must move Aaron Miles and his $2.7 million contract this winter. --- http://chicagocubsonline.com/archives/2009/11/cubsrumors11159.php

[ ]

In reply to by Cubster

I thought a more interesting quote from that link was: "Jeff Joyce asked about Milton Bradley. Wells said, "Milton is Milton." He mentioned the fact he cannot speak for Bradley and described him as a great guy and a really good teammate. That thing Levine said about Miles makes 0 sense. I hope he had some sort of context that they didn't relay, otherwise it's just mouthbreather stupid.

[ ]

In reply to by Cubster

Thought there was a Sullivan (or some other Tribster) piece at the end of the season that finally confirmed that it was a difficult divorce. ...but moving Miles, that's a new angle to me. I thought the consensus was that the Cubs were stuck with him. Now that would be a difficult divorce.

Call me a pessimist, but I don't really feel that we have the combination of players and budget room to win more than 85 games next year. Regardless of what moves we make. How many spots do you comfortable with next year? Even with Soto and Soriano bouncing back, which I do believe they will, we still have way too many holes to make a playoff run. I say you hold on to these prospects right now and rebuild a bit. I'm a huge Lee fan, but if we can move him now I think it'd be a smart move. His production will start to decline soon if not now.

[ ]

In reply to by crunch

Assuming Soriano is your third "legit" slugger, that's a bold label in my eyes. I'm sure I'll eat some stats, but he's too streaky to be counted on for production. And I agree with the SP for sure...but even that looks a lot different when it probably has no Harden and maybe has no Lilly for a little while. Does that leave Wells at 3? ... ... We've definitely done more with less, but I think I can more assuredly say we've done less with more. (see: 2009)

[ ]

In reply to by kmokeefe

yeah, soriano...the guy who hits 30+ homers and 30+ doubles a year who for some reason has been wasted as a low-ob% leadoff guy for a few years while he tries to get more RBIs than extra base hits. now that he's no longer being wasted in the leadoff spot he needs to quit missing 30+ games a year.

[ ]

In reply to by kmokeefe

Pessimist. Seriously though, you want to re-build on the fly, like you're suggesting. The model should be the Red Sox, where the system provides enough pre-arb talent to afford the occasional elite free agent signing. Unfortunately, the model has been the Yankees -$65 million in payroll.

Recent comments

  • 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.

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Of course, McKinstry runs circles around $25 million man Javier Baez on that Tigers team. Guess who gets more playing time?

    But I digress…

  • Sonicwind75 (view)

    Seems like Jed was trying to corner the market on mediocre infielders with last names starting with "M" in acquiring Madrigal, Mastroboney and Zach McKinstry.  

     

    At least he hasn't given any of them a Bote-esque extension.  

  • Childersb3 (view)

    AZ Phil:
    Rookie ball (ACL) starts on May 4th. Do yo think Ramon and Rosario (maybe Delgado) stay in Mesa for the month of May, then go to MB if all goes "solid"?
     

  • crunch (view)

    masterboney is a luxury on a team that has multiple, capable options for 2nd, SS, and 3rd without him around.  i don't hate the guy, but if madrigal is sticking around then masterboney is expendable.

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    I THINK I agree with that decision. They committed to Wicks as a starter and, while he hasn’t been stellar I don’t think he’s been bad enough to undo that commitment.

    That said, Wesneski’s performance last night dictates he be the next righty up.

    Quite the dilemma. They have many good options, particularly in relief, but not many great ones. And complicating the situation is that the pitchers being paid the most are by and large performing the worst - or in Taillon’s case, at least to this point, not at all.