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

Mmmm...Secret Sauce

Submitted by Rob G. on

One of the many toys at Baseball Prospectus is something they call "Secret Sauce". BP has successfully cracked the code to playoff success and nailed the last 45 World Series winners. What? How have you never heard of this amazing prediction system? Because I made that last part up, but nevertheless a fun tool to look at as we await our playoff opponent.

I looked back through 2000 and BP did predict three World Series winners and six of the 16 participants in the World Series correct. You scoff, but what's your playoff prediction success rate?

The formula is simple enough and rather intuitive to what is commonly believed among baseball folks that power pitching, a good closer and good defense wins in the playoffs. In this case, BP uses FRAA (Fielding Runs Above Average), EqK9 (Equivalent Strikeout Rates per 9 innings) and WXRL (Win above Replacement Pitcher for the team's closer) and comes up with a score.

Their predictions and the 2008 rankings after the jump.

The following list is the top AL and NL team and the first team listed had the better "Secret Sauce" score, thus the team supposed to win the World Series according to this BP metric.

2007: Red Sox vs Diamondbacks (Cubs were 3rd among playoff teams)

2006: Twins vs. Mets (Cardinals were 8th among playoff teams)

2005: Angels vs. Houston (White Sox were 3rd among playoff teams. Amusingly the Cubs were 1st overall that year)

2004: Red Sox vs. Dodgers

2003: Athletics vs. Cubs (Marlins were 8th among playoff teams)

2002: Diamondbacks vs. Angels

2001: Diamondbacks vs. Yankees (the 116-win Mariners were 3rd among AL playoff teams and 5th among all playoff teams, thanks to low strikeout rates and an average-rated bullpen).

2000: White Sox vs. Cardinals (Yankees were 2nd among playoff teams)

They nailed 2001 and got both Red Sox years correct. The two teams they were the most off on were the 2006 Cardinals and 2003 Marlins, which could arguably be the two biggest surprise World Series winners of this decade.

As for 2008, the potential playoff teams are below with their overall rank in parenthesis (of course, non-playoff teams could score well in this metric but they don't get to play in the playoffs)

Team
FRAA
FRAA Rank
EqK9
EqK9 Rank
WXRL
WXRL Rank
Score
Boston (1st)
 38  4th  7.5 1st
2.97
11th
16
Angels (3rd)
28
6th
 6.8 9th
5.31
3rd
18
Cubs (4th)
 54
2nd
7.4
3rd
1.98
16th
21
White Sox(5th)
-17
21st
7.2
4th
4.62
5th
30
Rays(6th)
58
1st
6.7
11th
1.62
20th
32
Phillies (12th)
-3
 17th
 6.1
22nd
7.45
1st
40
Twins (16th)
11
11th
5.8
27th
4.58
6th
44
Brewers (17th)
 15  10th 6.1
20th
2.79
14th
44
Dodgers (19th)
-2
15th
6.6
12th
1.72
19th
46
Mets (20th)
16
9th
6.2
15th
1.46
23rd
47

There's a big drop-off there after the first three teams and I should note that they use Billy Wagner as the Mets closer, so it's even more bleak for the Metropolitans.The Cubs have a large advantage over any other NL team, as they do in just about every statistical  category.

The weak link, as expected, is the bullpen and particularly Kerry Wood, who hasn't been quite as lights out as we all would have liked. Some of that WXRL score though is attributed to him missing time as it is a cumulative stat. And for what it's worth, Carlos Marmol has been the 2nd best reliever in the NL this year by WXRL with a 4.95 behind the Phillies Brad Lidge. The Cubs of course aren't going to mess with the formula of Marmol setting up Wood, and there will likely be times in the playoffs where that will actually be beneficial for the Cubs as Marmol will end up facing the opposing teams better hitters. I also hold the belief that Lou should strongly consider using Marmol for two innings on the games before any scheduled off days.

It might not be a sports almanac from the future, but it'll have to do for this year.

P.S. - You can play "All the Way" to your heart's content on the lower right sidebar.
Tags
Sabermetrics
Cubs playoff chances

Comments

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 09/24/2008 - 09:30 pm

If you put $100 a year on whomever the BP "Secret Sauce"  predicted as the World Series winner before the playoffs, would you come out ahead over the last 8 years?

I guess that means knowing the odds of each winner going into the postseason that year.

Submitted by Dr. aaron b on Wed, 09/24/2008 - 09:41 pm

I put some down on the cubs before the season. They were 10:1 at that point. I just wish i had put more than 10 bucks at this point.

Submitted by blockhead25 on Wed, 09/24/2008 - 09:47 pm

Cubs had a 97% chance of winning game six in 2003. Cubs didn't lose 2 in a row with Wood and Prior on the mound in 2003. When it comes to the playoffs, I go out of my way to ignore stats. The series are just too short to be able to accurately predict with any confidence based on stats. 1 great starting pitcher can be all a team needs in a short series, and a couple unlucky breaks in a 7 game series is all that's needed to turn it around on it's head. For the record, I was a fantastic 0-7 in predicting playoff series outcomes in 2006. I think I'll refrain this year...and just wait for the games to be played.

[ ]

Submitted by blockhead25 on Wed, 09/24/2008 - 09:35 pm

yes, it was with 1 out in the 8th. (Although I think BP showed something like 93% cubs would win the series when they went up 3-1 in games) My point is, over the course of a 162 game season, the fluke's will balance each other out and looking at stats and predicting a certain outcome has some merit. In a playoff series, a fluke turns the series on it's head and wipes out any meaningful predictive stats. All it took was Prior and Wood losing back-to-back once to make that stat entirely meaningless.

[ ]

Submitted by The Joe on Wed, 09/24/2008 - 09:34 pm

I didn't say it was cut and dry. I'm saying that a better record for a team in the East, in one particular year, than a team in the Central doesn't prove them to be a better team. Nor does beating them head to head in the playoffs...though I'd say the Cubs 'beat themselves', if that's possible. 'Better' is entirely subjective, thus it'll always be uncut and wet.

[ ]

Submitted by The Joe on Wed, 09/24/2008 - 09:03 pm

Well then you need to reinvest yourself in the study of the English language. Does that 'make' them a better team? No. I didn't say that they were or were not a better team. I said that the record doesn't prove (nor disprove) whether a team was better than another team.

Submitted by The Joe on Wed, 09/24/2008 - 09:25 pm

I like the Cubs to win because their goodness outweighs the goodness of other teams. Also, they've got more heart, guts, grit, fire and desire. Those are all the stats I need.

Submitted by Rob G. on Wed, 09/24/2008 - 09:18 pm

out of the WS participants predicted by this metric (16 total)...5 were ousted in the first round.

Submitted by Cubster on Thu, 09/25/2008 - 09:51 am

Also, they've got more heart, guts, grit, fire and desire. Those are all the stats I need. -------------- don't forget to include SCRAPPINESS. That's the key ingredient. one of the scrappy three as quoted as saying they refer to themselves as "the little fighters"...so we got that going for us as well.

Recent comments

  • crunch (view)

    happ, right hamstring tightness, day-to-day (hopefully 0 days).

    he will be reevaluated tomorrow.

  • Childersb3 (view)

    I guess I'm not looking for that type of AB 

    Just a difference of opinion

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    I don’t see Tauchman as a weak link in any position. He simply adds his value in a different way.

    I don’t know that we gain much by putting him in the outfield - Happ, Bellinger and Suzuki and Tauchman all field their positions well. If you’re looking for Taucnman’s kind of AB in a particular game I don’t see why it can’t come from DH.

  • Childersb3 (view)

    Tauchman gets a pinch hit RBI single with a liner to RF. This is his spot. He's a solid 4th OF. But he isn't a DH. 

    He takes pitches. Useful. I still believe in having good hitters.

    You don't want your DH to be your weak link (other than your C maybe)

  • crunch (view)

    bit of a hot take here, but i'm gonna say it.

    the 2024 marlins don't seem to be good at doing baseballs.

  • Dolorous Jon Lester (view)

    Phil, will the call up for a double header restart that 15 days on assignment for a pitcher? Like will wesneski’s 15 days start yesterday, or if he’s the 27th man, will that mean 15 days from tomorrow?

    I hope that makes sense. It sounds clearer in my head.

  • Charlie (view)

    Tauchman obviously brings value to the roster as a 4th outfielder who can and should play frequently. Him appearing frequently at DH indicated that the team lacks a valuable DH. 

  • TarzanJoeWallis (view)

    Totally onboard with your thoughts concerning today’s lineup. Not sure about your take on Tauchman though.

    The guy typically doesn’t pound the ball out out of the park, and his BA is quite unimpressive. But he brings something unique to the table that the undisciplined batters of the past didn’t. He always provides a quality at bat and he makes the opposing pitcher work because he has a great eye for the zone and protects the plate with two strikes exceptionally well. In addition to making him a base runner more often than it seems through his walks, that kind of at bat wears a pitcher down both mentally and physically so that the other guys who may hit the ball harder are more apt to take advantage of subsequent mistakes and do their damage.

    I can’t remember a time when the Cubs valued this kind of contribution but this year they have a couple of guys doing it, with Happ being the other. It doesn’t make for gaudy stats but it definitely contributes to winning ball games. I do believe that’s why Tauchman has garnered so much playing time.

  • 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.

Click HERE for the last 50 comments