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

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.     

 

Year

Head-to-Head Record (Cubs-Cardinals)

Cubs Season Winning %

Cardinals Season Winning %

2014

9-10 (.474)

.451

.556

2013

7-12 (.368)

.407

.599

2012

7-10 (.412)

.377

.543

2011

5-10 (.333)

.438

.556

2010

9-6   (.600)

.463

.531

2009

6-10 (.375)

.516

.562

2008

9-6   (.600)

.602

.531

2007

11-5 (.688)

.525

.481

2006

11-8 (.579)

.407

.516

2005

10-6 (.625)

.488

.617

2004

8-11 (.421)

.549

.648

2003

8-9   (.471)

.543

.525

2002

6-12 (.333)

.414

.599

2001

9-8   (.529)

.543

.574

2000

3-10 (.231)

.401

.586

1999

7-5   (.583)

.414

.466

1998

4-7   (.364)

.552

.512

1997

4-8   (.333)

.420

.451

1996

5-8   (.385)

.469

.543

1995

9-4   (.692)

.507

.434

Comments

For me there's no real emotional power involved in this "rivalry" other than a minor annoyance at how good the Cards always are. It's St. Louis, though. Not much happening in that town other than their great baseball team. I find that preferable to a rivalry like the Dodgers and Giants, where people die, which is infantile.

I'm kind of surprised that this is really being debated. I think it's one of the great rivalries for years now. Sure the last 5 years and beyond lacked intensity for obvious reasons. But the rivalry was pretty intense when the Cubs were winning division titles 1998-2003 etc. I just think we lost touch with the competitive nature of baseball in recent years period. There were some vicious battles in the 80's 90's 00's. Jim Edmonds Matt Morris Renteria Pujols Rolen. Those stadiums were rocking as recently is 2004. And of course late 60's. When I said the Cardinals whoop our asses I was talking specifically about this year. Pure kryptonite ... and of course in organizational championships etc. but head to head its a battle.

[ ]

In reply to by Carlito

I think it could become a good rivalry, but the Cubs will have to do their part. As excited as I am about the long term prospects, they're still basically a .500 team, pretty much as I expected at the beginning of the season. Until that changes, there's no real rivalry here.

[ ]

In reply to by Carlito

"one of the great rivalries" This is pure '80s nostalgia, Carlito. I can guess your age by it. The Cubs have had a few very good players, including half a dozen hall-of-famers, but the Cardinal greats have been transcendent: Hornsby, Dizzy Dean, Musial, Gibson, Ozzie Smith, Pujols. Cardinal managers in my own experience as a baseball fan: Schoendienst, Herzog, Torre, LaRussa. Three are in the hall of fame as managers, and the other one (Schoendienst) made it as a player and managed a thousand wins. What Cub manager belongs in the same sentence? Great Cardinal catchers that I remember: Torre, McCarver, Ted Simmons, Yadier. Any Cub catchers in the running there? How important is the catcher, anyway? I don't know, ask the Cardinals.

Nice snapshot. It just feels skewed right now because new Busch Stadium has only hosted two fewer World Series games than Wrigley Field. But it's nothing a little success wouldn't wash away.

Have to agree and my post from the other day prompted WISC to write this piece (just kidding. but maybe not after all). I have a couple interesting Cubs books on various historical elements. One is on the last pennant winner. From these, and I don't recall exactly the numbers, the first 50 years of the last Century belonged to the Cubs somewhat. After WWII, the Cardinals have pretty much been amazingly fominant with their organization, and overall talent machine. These are much larger sample sizes, and if you think about the pre--1950 Cubs teams, there were some great teams and players by percentage. While the Cards had the Gas House Gang in 1936 and then Musial won them another Title in 1942, they started kiicking the Cubs ass, and the National League post-war. Since 1946 they have finished 1st 17 times. Since the Divisions started, they have made the Playoffs 22 times (including this year). Almost 50% in 47 years. But we had Hack Wilson and Gabby Hartnett. The only "rivaly" now is that they are within driving distance. Just like the folks in Green Bay.

[ ]

In reply to by Carlito

"don't remember much else about the 60's" You're lucky. You can forget the day they traded Lou Brock for Rich Harden--I mean, Ernie Broglio. I would have guessed a tad younger, but it still makes sense. The 70's were your formative years as a young fan, and that was kind of an off-decade for the Cards. Then the 80's were a half-decent decade for the Cubs (though the Cards captured a Series and also lost two game-sevens). But let's not dwell on the past (please!). The Cubs have two rookies this year who could become transcendent players (that would be amazing); they seem to have a young catcher they like long-term; and the manager just needs to do one thing to punch his ticket to Cooperstown. So there is hope.

I hadn't realized how these last 7 years of losing had sort of dulled my Cub senses.
Until this sweep.
(Insert the "what about the last 107 years?" joke here)
It's thrilling to be back in the real world of baseball competition.
And now I remember how painful it is, too.

The Cardinals-Cubs are still Hammer and Nail right now. WiscGrad's article shows it isn't always that way. Big picture history says it hasn't always been that way. The Cubs having losing teams for long stretches since 1945 says it trends that way but not prior to that inflection point. Theo says sustained success is what he is working on. Maddon's influence should be worth paying attention to in the month of July. Inflection points. These are hard to see on a day by day, game by game basis. I can only hope it's coming. I certainly felt the inflection point in regard to the franchise turnaround from the Hendry leftovers as some point last year. Probably about the time Alcantara was brought up. At least they have our attention again. It was hard to say that in 2010-14. Turning around an aircraft carrier takes time. I sense the course/direction change is near completion but the new route will take more time to pick up speed and of course there are patches of choppy weather. (Knot analogy, not mph)

outside of southern IL and surrounding areas i'm not sure the CHC/STL rivalry has touched the last few generations of fans. even the mcgwire/sosa chase in 98 didn't have much heat to it...it did have a lot of hugs and mutual respect talk, though. the rivalry is like some relic that keeps getting passed down that we're supposed to believe in, but the heart of the rivalry doesn't exist in many fans anymore. that said, the notion that the cards seem to luck into skillful players out of nowhere and pull wins out of thin air in the face of injury or bad contracts is strong. that goes for more teams than the cubs, though...and we're all getting sick of their insanely good "luck."

Recent comments

  • 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.

  • 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.