Let's Try to Peg The Cubs' Opening Day Roster

[Guest]

We're only 10 days out from Opening Day, and my God, nothing has really been settled, has it?

 

Ok, that's obviously an overstatement. I think Hayden Wesneski has done every possible thing to secure the fifth starting rotation spot. I also think the lack of roster friction--he's already seen the majors, Sampson has options remaining--made it easier for him to claim that job than many around the Cubs were saying in February. So we have a rotation in place:

 

Stroman

Taillon

Steele

Smyly

Wesneski

 

And I think we know that these 11 guys are all locks for the positional side of the roster:

 

Gomes

Barnhart

 

Hosmer

Hoerner

Swanson

Wisdom

Ríos

McKinstry

 

Happ

Bellinger

Mancini

 

That's 16 of the 26 for March 30. Another five guys are easy locks for the bullpen:

 

Fulmer

Boxberger

Alzolay

Hughes

Merryweather

 

That leaves five spots, though. Three pitchers and two position players still fit on this roster. The problem is that so few guys have asserted themselves as worthy of those spots. Some guys have struggled this spring. Some have been fine, but came in with such blemishes on their record that it doesn't matter as much as one might hope. Still others have earned at least a longer look--a spot, to begin the season--but have to be squeezed onto the 40-man before they can make the 26-man. That, for this team and at this moment, is an exercise akin to getting a camel through the head of a needle. Let's break it down a little bit.

 

The only exception to all three of those is Javier Assad, who is still with Team México but was drawing buzz even before he went to join them this spring, and has certainly raised his profile in the World Baseball Classic. Fitting Assad into the bullpen would be easy, and he's on the 40-man roster. The problem is that if they go that route, they're one arm shorter in terms of guys stretched out as starters in case of injury or collapse by one of their presumptive starters. Still, as I wrote the other day, I do think Assad's long-term fit could be in a multi-inning relief role, rather than as a starter, and if that's true, he might as well make the transition now. It's probably the single move that most improves the team's short-term prospects, and it wouldn't have significant long-term costs, unless you think he can really shore up his command well enough and miss enough bats the second and third time through the order to stick as a starter.

 

It's Keegan Thompson's diminished velocity that has opened the door wider for Assad, because it's Thompson's multi-inning fireman role into which Assad could slide if they elect not to stretch him out once the Classic ends. I understand the trepidation everyone is feeling about Thompson in light of the uninspiring velo numbers this spring (see below), but I think I would still stick with him. He can always be optioned to Iowa or placed on the IL if that issue lingers into the season, but he's not a guy who throws in the upper 90s even when he's fully ramped up, and his movement has been fine in the couple of looks I've had this spring.

 

 

So, count me as a vote for Thompson in one of those three remaining bullpen spots, but with Assad as an acceptable alternate.

 

Another spot in the pen probably goes to Mark Leiter, Jr., purely on the basis of his contract. When he agreed to a minor-league deal to re-join the team after electing free agency earlier this winter, he got an opt-out in the deal, coincident with Opening Day. The Cubs have risked losing him before, but he's looked good enough this spring that I suspect they won't want to do so right now. We have thin and inconsistent reporting on opt-out dates for the bevy of other NRIs in this mix, so if it turns out Tyler Duffey has the exact same arrangement, I would pick him over Leiter. So again, I'm picking Leiter, but that's tentative.

 

For my money, the last bullpen spot should go to a second lefty, and here, again, we can talk about both opt-out dates and the WBC. Does Roenis Elías have an out clause? If so, given how he looked in winter ball and even in the WBC with Cuba (a bit of a beating from the lethal, righty-heavy Team USA lineup Sunday night notwithstanding), I'd bring him north. Given his age and his track record, I don't want to bet on him having high utility all year after so much pitching during the MLB offseason, so I'd be looking to get value out of him immediately, and make him the first cut when that becomes necessary.

 

On the other hand, if Elías doesn't have an out, I'd stash him in Iowa, keep his odometer low early on, and see if he can sustain the adjustments and improvements he's made since September. In that case, I would give the roster spot to Anthony Kay. Not only has Kay pitched well this spring, but he has an option left (unlike almost any other appealing options who could be added to the roster instead), so if and when an Iowa shuttle is needed, he could be swapped out with someone but kept in the organization. The friction still exists on the front end, because he'd have to get onto the 40-man at someone's expense, but then it would resolve, whereas someone like Elías, Ryan Borucki, Duffey, Leiter, or Jordan Holloway would reintroduce the dilemma in a matter of days.

 

If we're picking Leiter or Duffey and Elías or Kay, then two spots on the 40-man have to be created. Kyle Hendricks could be placed on the 60-day IL to make one, though I'm not sure it's clear that he'll be out long enough to warrant that, and I'm sure the team will be slow to make that call for that very reason. The other is a problem, though. Do you risk losing Rowan Wick or Michael Rucker by waiving them, even though they have options remaining? The very fact that they're optionable makes it unlikely you'd be able to sneak them through. Everyone is looking for quasi-viable optionable relievers at this time of year.

 

I think the Cubs are at this point where they just aren't going to be able to carry some guys on the 40-man if they can't be on the 26-man. Too many of the non-active 40-man spots are now held for guys you could categorize as prospects. The team has already optioned Brennen Davis, Kevin Alcántara, Jeremiah Estrada, Ben Brown, Caleb Kilian, Ryan Jensen, and the injured Miguel Amaya and Alexander Canario. It's just hard to carry as many fringe guys as you might like in Triple A under that circumstance. In the medium term, that underscores the importance of converting this rebuild into a contending team ASAP, but for now, it's just a logistical reality to be dealt with.

 

Having to create those two roster spots for the pitching staff also makes it harder to justify creating yet another one for Mike Tauchman, despite his good fit as a stopgap fourth outfielder. If we assume that Christopher Morel really is headed for the minors, too, then that's another player they won't be willing to lose, and who has to stay on the 40-man roster. The spaces are hard to find.

 

Unless he just rakes for the next week, and does so against high-quality big-league pitchers, Matt Mervis isn't making the team. He'd have to bump Hosmer out of the picture altogether, because that's the only way they could feasibly find the 40-man room required to do it.

 

So who does that leave to claim the remaining spots on the 26-man squad? I think it's Nick Madrigal. He's been good enough at third base to let the team talk themselves into treating him as a versatile option off the bench. He has tactical, situational value, although his elite contact skills always seemed to fail him when it was situationally vital last season. With McKinstry, Ríos, Hosmer, Bellinger, Barnhart, and the switch-hitting Happ on hand, they can also afford not to worry about further loading up on lefties, so Madrigal has an edge on Miles Mastrobuoni.

 

The last spot needs to go to a backup center fielder, and ideally, that person would also be a credible platoon partner for Bellinger. Hence, I'm going to guess it goes to Nelson Velázquez. He looked good in the WBC. He had that big home run Sunday, in his return to the Cactus League. I thought he played a lousy center field last year, and I have deep reservations about him as a piece of any significance even this year, let alone far into the future. But he has the right skills for the spot that stands open; they don't need to prioritize playing time for him; and he's already on the 40-man roster.

 

We're going to see a trade. That's my biggest takeaway from this exercise. Sometime before Opening Day, the Cubs are going to make a trade. There's just no other way to solve this roster crunch without squandering small but real value. I hope it's a more interesting and fruitful trade than last year, when they dumped Harold Ramirez to the Rays for Esteban Quiroz, but that's probably the realistic shape of something that will happen.

 

Ok, last word: I do think the Cubs are less afraid to accept the transaction costs to put the player they evaluate best on the roster in situations like this than most teams are. Roster inertia isn't as strong for them as for some. If they really like what Tauchman is doing and Ross wants him as a semi-regular until Seiya gets healthy, they'll make one more of those aforementioned trades than you'd expect, or they'll waive someone unexpected just to make things fit. I'm not sure if that's good or bad, but I'm pretty sure it's true.

[jersey cubs fan]

Kinky

[CubinNY]

McKinstry isn't a lock for anything other than unemployment.

[Guest]

McKinstry isn't a lock for anything other than unemployment.

 

He’s such a weird player. And could be one of the guys shipped out in one of those small trades near Opening Day, making room for a Tauchman. But his defensive versatility and baseline of offensive skills is gonna give him more lives, be it here or elsewhere, than you’d think.

[Old Style]

[Brock Beauchamp]

Took me a few seconds and then I was like... Oh. Ohhhhhhhhhhh....

 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I would be a bit surprised if McKinstry doesn't make the opening day roster, but with as little as he's shown and the options surrounding him(especially given the Swanson signing and the "buzz" around Madrigal the 3B) I wouldn't quite guarantee he's on the 26 man. I would like him to be but I definitely wouldn't guarantee Merryweather on the 26 man either, maybe that's me just not reading enough of the recent quotes and news.

 

 

Right now I'd guess the bench to be Barnhart, Madrigal, McKinstry, Tauchman at the start. I'd expect that to not be a static PH pool though considering the holes in Wisdom and Rios's games that will give the non-catchers their share of starts too.

 

On the pitching side, I just really don't know, and Thompson struggling with velocity doesn't help. I'd probably go with Boxberger, Hughes, Fulmer, Alzolay, Merryweather, Wick, Sampson, Thompson, with Assad taking Thompson's place if he's not ramped up/healthy. Leiter Jr is probably the last cut, and I wouldn't be shocked if he took Thompson's place instead.

 

Tauchman requires a 40 man spot but Hendricks to the 60 day solves that, otherwise it's clean because there's no Leiter Jr/Duffey/Sanders/Deluzio making the team out of the gate.

[Bertz]

I think the position player side is pretty clear at this point. The 11 guys you mentioned as locks, plus Madrigal and Tauchman. I do think, because of the 40 man situation, there's an outside shot at Hosmer or Mckinstry getting dumped. They both have ready made replacements on the roster and have been really bad this spring. I doubt the FO cares that much about their ST results, but if there's anything concerning in their underlying data and you're afraid you'll have to dump them in a month anyway, might as well do it now.

 

The pitching is tougher. I think Assad swapping in for Thompson is going to happen, and because you don't trust Javier to close like you might trust Keegan, it removes the potential need for a more traditional garbage time longman. I don't think Assad's going to get banished to only situations outside of grand slam range, but he's not the trusted high leverage arm Thompson is.

 

It feels like the concern around Wick is more from the fanbase than the team? So I assume with the roster crunch being what it is he'll still ultimately make the roster. The nice thing about him is that usually when he's got his good velo good results follow, and from what I've seen this spring he's been living at 95/96.

 

The last spot probably goes to Leiter or Kay? Leiter's got that opt-out on opening day, so he's probably most likely. That said Kay has looked impressive this spring, including I believe a velo bump (I don't think he's pitched in front of Statcast this spring so it's based on stadium guns). As much as I like Leiter, if Kay's living at 96 from the left side he feels like the right choice?

 

A trade would be ideal. Move an arm and/or a corner outfielder for a CFer instead of Tauchman. None of the guys we'd potentially cut have zero value except Hosmer, so it'd be nice (though not imperative) to not piss any away.

[UMFan83]

McKinstry isn't a lock for anything other than unemployment.

 

Yeah I was surprised to see him as a lock with Madrigal a begrudgingly added final IF. I would have guessed the other way around.

 

I try not to pay much attention to Spring Training for whatever reason so maybe McKinstry is raking

 

Fake edit: Oh, no he's 2-29 with a .275 OPS after having a somewhat extended look last year with a .633 OPS. Versatility is nice but the dude has shown nothing with the bat. If he's a lock we're gonna have some issues with depth this year.

[mul21]

McKinstry isn't a lock for anything other than unemployment.

 

Yeah I was surprised to see him as a lock with Madrigal a begrudgingly added final IF. I would have guessed the other way around.

 

I try not to pay much attention to Spring Training for whatever reason so maybe McKinstry is raking

 

Fake edit: Oh, no he's 2-29 with a .275 OPS after having a somewhat extended look last year with a .633 OPS. Versatility is nice but the dude has shown nothing with the bat. If he's a lock we're gonna have some issues with depth this year.

 

I think the main thing here is Madrigal has options and McKinstry doesn't so you might as well see what you have for a month before you cut bait and after what we've seen in the majors from Madrigal since he got to the Cubs, I don't really have an issue with going that route.

[Guest]

McKinstry isn't a lock for anything other than unemployment.

 

Yeah I was surprised to see him as a lock with Madrigal a begrudgingly added final IF. I would have guessed the other way around.

 

I try not to pay much attention to Spring Training for whatever reason so maybe McKinstry is raking

 

Fake edit: Oh, no he's 2-29 with a .275 OPS after having a somewhat extended look last year with a .633 OPS. Versatility is nice but the dude has shown nothing with the bat. If he's a lock we're gonna have some issues with depth this year.

 

I think the main thing here is Madrigal has options and McKinstry doesn't so you might as well see what you have for a month before you cut bait and after what we've seen in the majors from Madrigal since he got to the Cubs, I don't really have an issue with going that route.

 

That’s definitely the main thing. But I do also think McKinstry is an actively good defender at the spots where Madrigal is merely playable, and ZM could even play a solid corner OF or a tenable shortstop if needed. If he makes the roster, it won’t be for his stick.

[Bertz]

Yeah, between the scouting reports and the SSS MLB data our assumption should be that Mckinstry is a very good 2B/3B and an adequate SS. Mastrobuoni or Madrigal are going to be a step down defensively at any of those spots. I see a lot of folks on Twitter being like "Mastrobuoni's a better hitter AND defender" and I don't think there's anything to back that up. Maybe it's true but I don't think there are any mainstream scouting reports or data that would agree.

 

The offense is where you can pretty easily poke holes in Mckinstry's profile. He's not really hit at any point in MLB, and he's had this rough spring as well. There's some underlying stuff to like in the offensive profile, which is why he projects quite well, but sometimes dudes are just less than the sum of their parts. It's not super common but it happens. Though our assumption off of <400 PAs and a bad spring should still be that the projections are what is right.

[Tim]

Are we sure that Tauchman is a lock or anything close to a lock? After a strong start, he's come back to earth quite a bit this spring. His numbers aren't bad, but they're also pretty much dead on his career 580 MLB at bats. RF can be covered by a bunch of guys on the roster until Seiya comes off the IL. Leaving Tauchman off the roster would make it much easier to add one of the relievers to the 40 man to cover things there.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Are we sure that Tauchman is a lock or anything close to a lock? After a strong start, he's come back to earth quite a bit this spring. His numbers aren't bad, but they're also pretty much dead on his career 580 MLB at bats. RF can be covered by a bunch of guys on the roster until Seiya comes off the IL. Leaving Tauchman off the roster would make it much easier to add one of the relievers to the 40 man to cover things there.

 

It's got to be someone and they're short on true outfielders. Given how strongly they've signaled they want Davis, Morel, and Velazquez playing every day for development, that means you're left with Tauchman, Deluzio(different profile but same complaints you're making above apply), Mastrobuoni (not much of an OF), or Hill(also not on 40 man). An NRI like Tauchman that you can easily DFA when Seiya gets back(since after that point you're likely to be willing to bring up one of the 3 prospects) seems reasonable to me, and the beat writers seem to think Tauchman has an inside track on that spot.

[Tim]

Are we sure that Tauchman is a lock or anything close to a lock? After a strong start, he's come back to earth quite a bit this spring. His numbers aren't bad, but they're also pretty much dead on his career 580 MLB at bats. RF can be covered by a bunch of guys on the roster until Seiya comes off the IL. Leaving Tauchman off the roster would make it much easier to add one of the relievers to the 40 man to cover things there.

 

It's got to be someone and they're short on true outfielders. Given how strongly they've signaled they want Davis, Morel, and Velazquez playing every day for development, that means you're left with Tauchman, Deluzio(different profile but same complaints you're making above apply), Mastrobuoni (not much of an OF), or Hill(also not on 40 man). An NRI like Tauchman that you can easily DFA when Seiya gets back(since after that point you're likely to be willing to bring up one of the 3 prospects) seems reasonable to me, and the beat writers seem to think Tauchman has an inside track on that spot.

They've got an excess of guys on the 40 man for 3B/1B/DH, though. Wisdom and/or Mancini could man RF for a few weeks without needing to drop someone from the roster to add a guy like Tauchman. The defense is likely not as good with Wisdom out there (and definitely not as good with Mancini), but they're both going to give you more offense and it allows AB's to someone like Rios who is a much more likely long-term contributor.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Are we sure that Tauchman is a lock or anything close to a lock? After a strong start, he's come back to earth quite a bit this spring. His numbers aren't bad, but they're also pretty much dead on his career 580 MLB at bats. RF can be covered by a bunch of guys on the roster until Seiya comes off the IL. Leaving Tauchman off the roster would make it much easier to add one of the relievers to the 40 man to cover things there.

 

It's got to be someone and they're short on true outfielders. Given how strongly they've signaled they want Davis, Morel, and Velazquez playing every day for development, that means you're left with Tauchman, Deluzio(different profile but same complaints you're making above apply), Mastrobuoni (not much of an OF), or Hill(also not on 40 man). An NRI like Tauchman that you can easily DFA when Seiya gets back(since after that point you're likely to be willing to bring up one of the 3 prospects) seems reasonable to me, and the beat writers seem to think Tauchman has an inside track on that spot.

They've got an excess of guys on the 40 man for 3B/1B/DH, though. Wisdom and/or Mancini could man RF for a few weeks without needing to drop someone from the roster to add a guy like Tauchman. The defense is likely not as good with Wisdom out there (and definitely not as good with Mancini), but they're both going to give you more offense and it allows AB's to someone like Rios who is a much more likely long-term contributor.

 

With the assumption above about Morel/Davis/Velazquez(plus the obvious exclusion of Alcantara, Amaya, and Canario), the position player options that are already on the 40 man for that spot are...Mastrobuoni. Yes, you could get away with not including Tauchman/Deluzio/Hill for a few weeks, especially if Suzuki is making good progress like he seems he is. But on the other hand, you have 1 free 40 man spot already via Hendricks, and you can probably get another one if you really really wanted to via Rucker. There's multiple guys who might be DFA candidates by May(McKinstry, Hosmer, maybe Wick) so if you do need to make future room for Sanders, Mervis, etc you aren't super limited. Plus it's even easier to get to a full pen with guys already on the 40 man so there isn't an urgent decision you have to make on opening day. There's maybe the potential opportunity cost of keeping Leiter Jr, but he's already seen what the market had to offer him once this winter and came back on an NRI deal, so nothing too significant.

[imb]

i call patrick wisdom, hubba hubba

[Tim]

I guess what it comes down to is that I really don't see any particular benefit to having Tauchman on the roster. I'd rather give the at bats to Rios, Mastro, etc. For that matter, I'd rather just commit to playing Velazquez, Morel, Davis, etc. in the field every day for a few weeks than give the time to Tauchman. The 40 man implications are just a cherry on top of the primary motivation for me.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I guess what it comes down to is that I really don't see any particular benefit to having Tauchman on the roster. I'd rather give the at bats to Rios, Mastro, etc. For that matter, I'd rather just commit to playing Velazquez, Morel, Davis, etc. in the field every day for a few weeks than give the time to Tauchman. The 40 man implications are just a cherry on top of the primary motivation for me.

 

I'm not particularly attached to Tauchman either, I'm following the thread title which is more about guessing the outcome than our personal preference. In that vein, I think the message coming from camp largely excludes Velazquez/Morel/Davis, and my assumption is Tauchman isn't gonna be starting very many games with Wisdom, Rios, Madrigal, and McKinstry giving a lot of balance across 3B/RF (L/R, power/contact, etc) plus Mancini could steal some PT in RF.

 

One way or another though, this is a decision with a clear expiration date. This is Seiya's roster spot, and even if he has a setback, in this permutation you've got upwards of 5 different guys(Davis, Velazquez, Morel, Mervis, Mastrobuoni) who can play their way into it unless Tauchman lights the world ablaze in limited time.

[Bertz]

I think Tauchman's expiration date is actually Davis or Morel getting called up rather than Seiya's return. The roster needs someone who can play CF when Bellinger's got the day off. Ross was very reticent to throw Happ or Seiya out there last year, and I can't imagine that's going to be any different with each being a year older.

 

But yeah Tauchman's clearly making the roster unless the org has changed its mind about Morel needing to open at Iowa or they make a trade. The list of in-house guys who can play a reasonable CF and step in immediately is just Tauchman and Deluzio, and the org is making it obvious that between those two Tauchman's the guy based on ST playing time.