I guess you have to get Wilson's bat in there so DH is the place.
If you don't like Sosa's steroid situation, you can put Andre Dawson in RF. He was an All-Star his years in Chicago.
Definitely Sutter as closer.
I'd pick Cap Anson (if we're using a time machine) or Anthony Rizzo at first base. But Chance could run,
First base is also difficult. Chance was considered "great" and got most of the votes after the first HOF class was inducted in all the polls, you could go with Rizzo, Anson, or even Mark Grace.
I'm going to quote Bill James, the baseball guru, at length here because he covers it so well.
===================
The Chicago Cubs in 1906 won 116 games. This remains the record for wins in one season.
The Cubs also won 223 games in two years (1906–1907), which is the record for wins in a two-season span, and 322 games over three years (1906–1908), which is the record for wins over a three-season span.
They won 426 games over a four-season span (1906–1909), which is the record for wins over a four-year span, and they won 530 games over a five-season span (1906–1910), which is the record for wins over a period of five years.
The Cubs won 622 games over a six-year period (1905–1910), which is a record, by far.
The only other team to win 600 games in a six-year span was the Cardinals of the 1940s, although many teams have lost 600 games in six years, proving that it is easier to stay in last place than it is to stay in first.
The Cubs won 715 games in seven years (1904–1910); this also is a record. They won 807 games in an eight-year period (1904–1911), which, again, is a record; the Yankees won 799 between 1936 and 1943. They won 898 games between 1904 and 1912, which is a record for wins over a nine-year period, and they won 986 between 1904 and 1913, which is a record for wins over a ten-year period.
It has become common to bash the selection of Tinker, Evers, and Chance to the Hall of Fame, saying that Franklin P. Adams’ famous poem put them in. It is easy to quote their batting statistics, which are but marginally impressive, to show that the trio does not belong—and, indeed, they may not. But at the same time, this is perilously near an absurd argument, to wit:
Tinker, Evers, and Chance were not really great ballplayers, they merely happened to win a huge number of games. The definition of a great ballplayer is a ballplayer who helps his team to win a lot of games.
I go back and forth on this issue; sometimes I think they were great players, sometimes I think not. But if you’re going to say that these guys don’t belong in the Hall of Fame, it seems to me, you have to deal somehow with the phenomenal success of their team.
This team won more games, over any period of years, than the Yankees with Ruth and Gehrig, more games than the Dodgers with Robinson, Reese, Snider, and Campy, more games than the Reds with Bench, Morgan, Rose, and Concepcion—more games than anybody. When you start explaining their wins, as Ricky Ricardo would say, you’ve got a lot of ‘splaining to do.
Is the rest of the team so great that no weight need be carried by these three players?
It is not. The catcher, Johnny Kling, was good, but probably not as good as any of the three. Third baseman Harry Steinfeldt was in the same range. No outfielder on the team was Ty Cobb or Babe Ruth or Mickey Mantle; none was even Tris Speaker or Al Simmons or Duke Snider.
When you look carefully at the Cubs of those years, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that this team won more games with infield defense than any other team in the history of baseball. First of all, they won more games than any other team in the history of baseball. And they didn’t do it with .350 hitters, and they didn’t do it with 40 homer men.
Their pitching was good. Three Finger Brown was great; the rest of the staff was good. But it is also apparent that the Cubs’ defense was so good that anybody they put on the mound was effective. Nineteen pitchers pitched 150 or more innings for the Cubs in their ten best years, 1904–1913. Seventeen of those 19 pitchers posted ERAs below 3.00, including guys like Chick Fraser, Buttons Briggs, and Orval Overall who had never had comparable success with other teams. Even Three Finger Brown had been acquired by the Cubs after posting a 9–13 record for the Cardinals as a rookie in 1903.
The essential question is this:
If Tinker, Evers, and Chance were not great players, how do you explain the success of this team? The Yankees of 1936–1945 had DiMaggio, Dickey, Gehrig for a couple of years, Red Ruffing, Lefty Gomez, Lazzeri, and Joe Gordon at second, Red Rolfe, Tommy Henrich, Johnny Murphy, George Selkirk, Frankie Crosetti, and numerous other stars. The Yankees had enough success to justify the brilliant reputations those men still enjoy—but they couldn’t match the win totals of the Cubs.