Cubs thinking about moving Barrett??

[E.J.]

Toronto Globe[/url]"]my sources are telling me that the Blue Jays and Cubs could figure in a deal after the All-Star break. The Cubs are going to dump infielder Todd Walker and might also look at moving Michael Barrett — whose omission from the NL All-Star team, even though it owes much to the justifiable presence of pitcher Carlos Zambrano as the Cubs representative, is one of the injustices of the All-Star rosters. Surprising, considering his knockdown of A.J. Pierzynski was universally cheered in most clubhouses. Barrett has his fans in the Blue Jays front office ….

[JWCUB]

Unless the Jays offer the farm for Barrett, he stays. IMO

[StMarksCubs]

Unless the Jays offer the farm for Barrett, he stays. IMO

 

Moving anyone is fine, but Hendry has proven to be totally inept when it comes to receiving valuable prospects in return for ML players. It seems that I'm a rare Hendry fan, but this is an area where he is clearly clueless.

[Mizzou]

Our offense is pathetic... so let's trade away one of our best hitters who is signed to a very cheap contract! Brilliant!

[Tracer Bullet]

Our offense is pathetic... so let's trade away one of our best hitters who is signed to a very cheap contract! Brilliant!

 

Not to mention he's one of the best offensive Cs in the league. It's not like we'd be trading a great offensive first basemen, of which there are many.

[TheDude]

Unless the Jays offer the farm for Barrett, he stays. IMO

 

Moving anyone is fine, but Hendry has proven to be totally inept when it comes to receiving valuable prospects in return for ML players. It seems that I'm a rare Hendry fan, but this is an area where he is clearly clueless.

 

How is that a fair evaluation? Has Hendry ever traded for a top prospect? Has he ever had an outgoing player worthy of a top prospect?

[E.J.]

It would be the first time Hendry sold high.

[Tracer Bullet]

It would be the first time Hendry sold high.

 

Not sure giving up Barrett now is truly selling high. Yes, he'd be trading him when his value is high. But the point of sellin high is getting more value than a player is really worth.

 

Barrett's only 29. So he may have a few more years of production at this level. And it's not like the market for Cs is really fantastic, so it's not like a bunch of teams are going to be in hot pursuit of him to boost his value. I wouldn't trade Barrett unless it was a GREAT offer.

 

Trading Jones now would be the definition of selling high.

[daske17]

Anyone notice how newspapers for contending teams usually think that other teams are willing to trade them key pieces that will send them to the playoffs? I mean, the New York papers always assume that the Yankees and Mets will get the best player they currently don't have.

 

Is this just a by-product of success? That you automatically think you can do anything simply because you're winning?

 

I can't imagine that Hendry would trade Barrett. Hendry has had a jones (no pun intended) for this guy for years. To trade him now would be going against everything Hendry believed in.

[Balsa]

Why? So we can watch Blanco struggle all year or the rookie catchers come up before we're ready?

 

No way this happens.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Unless the Jays offer the farm for Barrett, he stays. IMO

 

I was just getting ready to completely trash this post. Then I realized you were not advocating us getting "The Farns" from Toronto. :lol:

[WindyCity]

Unless the Jays offer the farm for Barrett, he stays. IMO

 

Moving anyone is fine, but Hendry has proven to be totally inept when it comes to receiving valuable prospects in return for ML players. It seems that I'm a rare Hendry fan, but this is an area where he is clearly clueless.

 

I would hope that Wilken would participate in the evaluation of prospects in any deal with Toronto --- I'm sure he knows exactly who to ask for from that system.

 

 

 

Barrett's only 29. So he may have a few more years of production at this level. And it's not like the market for Cs is really fantastic, so it's not like a bunch of teams are going to be in hot pursuit of him to boost his value. I wouldn't trade Barrett unless it was a GREAT offer.

 

I believe the track record for catchers after age 30 is not the greatest (though Barret's late switch to catcher may mean a more delayed decline).

 

That said, trading a productive Barrett at age 29 is a great idea if the Cubs can get 2-3 good prospects out of a farm system that has emphasized plate discipline and OBP (qualites that to date have been completely foreign to the Cubs). I highly doubt they would move Barrett just to shake things up -- but he does represent one of the more valuable pieces that they could deal and get real good value in back in terms of prospects.

[SouthSideRyan]

The real question is if Barrett's dealt, does Blanco have to play every inning of every game? Obviously Soto can't.

[Neuby]

I saw in an article recently by Phil Rogers where he asked the question"Is it time for him to be a utility man, not a primary catcher?" I can't think of any upgrades out for the Cubs to make at this postion considering how many other holes they have going into next season. I don't understand why we would turn Barrett in Brandon Inge.

[CuseCubFan69]

IMO Hendry might not be thrilled with Barrett because he couldn't throw me out if I was attempting to steal second. I like Barrett but if it makes the Cubs a better team if he is moved than I'm for it as I am on any player on the Cubs roster.

[Tracer Bullet]

Barrett's only 29. So he may have a few more years of production at this level. And it's not like the market for Cs is really fantastic, so it's not like a bunch of teams are going to be in hot pursuit of him to boost his value. I wouldn't trade Barrett unless it was a GREAT offer.

 

I believe the track record for catchers after age 30 is not the greatest (though Barret's late switch to catcher may mean a more delayed decline).

 

That said, trading a productive Barrett at age 29 is a great idea if the Cubs can get 2-3 good prospects out of a farm system that has emphasized plate discipline and OBP (qualites that to date have been completely foreign to the Cubs). I highly doubt they would move Barrett just to shake things up -- but he does represent one of the more valuable pieces that they could deal and get real good value in back in terms of prospects.

 

I'm not arguing that Barrett isn't a valuable trade chip, I was arguing that trading him wouldn't be selling high. I think he'll continue to produce around an .850 OPS for another couple years. That'll likely keep him toward the top of the list of offensive Cs. And I don't think his D is costing us as many games as losing 150 points of OPS (and one of the few .350+ OBP guys in the lineup) would.

 

So we agree - trading Barrett may net us 2-3 good prospects. But I don't think Barrett is the biggest problem w/ the team and I think he could be a good piece of a quality team for 2-3 years. So why not sell high on other pieces that may currently be overvalued by the market (JJ, Dempster, maybe Maddux) for prospects?

[goonys evil twin]

I'm not arguing that Barrett isn't a valuable trade chip, I was arguing that trading him wouldn't be selling high. I think he'll continue to produce around an .850 OPS for another couple years. That'll likely keep him toward the top of the list of offensive Cs. And I don't think his D is costing us as many games as losing 150 points of OPS (and one of the few .350+ OBP guys in the lineup) would.

 

So we agree - trading Barrett may net us 2-3 good prospects. But I don't think Barrett is the biggest problem w/ the team and I think he could be a good piece of a quality team for 2-3 years. So why not sell high on other pieces that may currently be overvalued by the market (JJ, Dempster, maybe Maddux) for prospects?

 

The fact that he might have 2-3 years left as a solid hitting C is exactly why it would be selling high.

 

Barrett isn't the biggest problem with the team, but neither is Jones, and I'd be happy as heck if Jacque was dealt. Not being the biggest problem isn't a good enough reason to not trade a guy. When you trade your big problems you are trading low and getting very little back in return.

[CuseCubFan69]

I'm not arguing that Barrett isn't a valuable trade chip, I was arguing that trading him wouldn't be selling high. I think he'll continue to produce around an .850 OPS for another couple years. That'll likely keep him toward the top of the list of offensive Cs. And I don't think his D is costing us as many games as losing 150 points of OPS (and one of the few .350+ OBP guys in the lineup) would.

 

So we agree - trading Barrett may net us 2-3 good prospects. But I don't think Barrett is the biggest problem w/ the team and I think he could be a good piece of a quality team for 2-3 years. So why not sell high on other pieces that may currently be overvalued by the market (JJ, Dempster, maybe Maddux) for prospects?

 

The fact that he might have 2-3 years left as a solid hitting C is exactly why it would be selling high.

 

Barrett isn't the biggest problem with the team, but neither is Jones, and I'd be happy as heck if Jacque was dealt. Not being the biggest problem isn't a good enough reason to not trade a guy. When you trade your big problems you are trading low and getting very little back in return.

 

What if the Cubs could aquire a very good young catcher along with another top prospect? Would you still make the deal?

[goonys evil twin]

What if the Cubs could aquire a very good young catcher along with another top prospect? Would you still make the deal?

 

Would I? I'm up for trading just about anybody from this organization, and Barrett is not free from that list. If they could get a good young catcher, and they had a manager who could deal with having a young catcher, I'd be all for it.

[Warpticon]

Molina?

[CuseCubFan69]

What if the Cubs could aquire a very good young catcher along with another top prospect? Would you still make the deal?

 

Would I? I'm up for trading just about anybody from this organization, and Barrett is not free from that list. If they could get a good young catcher, and they had a manager who could deal with having a young catcher, I'd be all for it.

 

Who do you want for manager? Is there a place to look and see what types of guys are available and what they believe/theories are?

 

I want a catcher that get it to second in 1.5 and hit 330/440. Is that too much to ask?

[E.J.]

What if the Cubs could aquire a very good young catcher along with another top prospect? Would you still make the deal?

 

Would I? I'm up for trading just about anybody from this organization, and Barrett is not free from that list. If they could get a good young catcher, and they had a manager who could deal with having a young catcher, I'd be all for it.

 

Who do you want for manager? Is there a place to look and see what types of guys are available and what they believe/theories are?

 

I want a catcher that get it to second in 1.5 and hit 330/440. Is that too much to ask?

 

:lol:

 

No problem. Let me see what I got in back.

[WindyCity]

What if the Cubs could aquire a very good young catcher along with another top prospect? Would you still make the deal?

 

Would I? I'm up for trading just about anybody from this organization, and Barrett is not free from that list. If they could get a good young catcher, and they had a manager who could deal with having a young catcher, I'd be all for it.

 

Who do you want for manager? Is there a place to look and see what types of guys are available and what they believe/theories are?

 

I want a catcher that get it to second in 1.5 and hit 330/440. Is that too much to ask?

 

:lol:

 

No problem. Let me see what I got in back.

 

Miguel Cabrera for catcher! :D

[Tracer Bullet]

I'm not arguing that Barrett isn't a valuable trade chip, I was arguing that trading him wouldn't be selling high. I think he'll continue to produce around an .850 OPS for another couple years. That'll likely keep him toward the top of the list of offensive Cs. And I don't think his D is costing us as many games as losing 150 points of OPS (and one of the few .350+ OBP guys in the lineup) would.

 

So we agree - trading Barrett may net us 2-3 good prospects. But I don't think Barrett is the biggest problem w/ the team and I think he could be a good piece of a quality team for 2-3 years. So why not sell high on other pieces that may currently be overvalued by the market (JJ, Dempster, maybe Maddux) for prospects?

 

The fact that he might have 2-3 years left as a solid hitting C is exactly why it would be selling high.

 

Barrett isn't the biggest problem with the team, but neither is Jones, and I'd be happy as heck if Jacque was dealt. Not being the biggest problem isn't a good enough reason to not trade a guy. When you trade your big problems you are trading low and getting very little back in return.

 

You and I have different definitions of selling high. If we're going on the assumption that Barrett puts up roughly the same numbers for 2-3 years, it's not selling high. It's getting roughly equal value.

 

Selling high is trading JJ for what you would typically get for an .850 OF b/c Jones is not really an .850 OF, despite what his numbers say right now. So you trade him now (sell high) before he cools off. If you trade him for his actual value, you're not selling high. That's my point.

 

As for dealing Barrett, I'm not opposed to it. But if you do, I think we have a decent sized hole at C for a couple years. So unless we got a good C back, what's the point of creating another hole? JH isn't that good at filling the ones we have.

 

And I haven't suggested dealing our problems (other than JJ - who I think is a big problem, given we have him for 2.5 more years and I don't think he'll put up .850 OPS for that entire time). I think JJ has more value right now than he normally would. I think teams in need of some pop (esp LH pop) from a corner OF might deal for JJ. And I'd prefer it if he weren't in our long term plans.

 

I also think some teams would be interested in Dempster. He's been pretty good, but I think he's more valuable to a contender than to us right now. I'd also trade Maddux, Howry, Eyre or anyone else with value who is relatively easily replaceable. I just don't think you'd get that much for Barrett right now (don't think teams see a C as the guy that gets them over the top) and I don't think we can afford to give away a .350 OBP from the C position (we don't have enough as it is - let alone one that plays C) if we intend to contend any time soon.

[snoodmonger]

What if the Cubs could aquire a very good young catcher along with another top prospect? Would you still make the deal?

 

Would I? I'm up for trading just about anybody from this organization, and Barrett is not free from that list. If they could get a good young catcher, and they had a manager who could deal with having a young catcher, I'd be all for it.

 

Who do you want for manager? Is there a place to look and see what types of guys are available and what they believe/theories are?

 

I want a catcher that get it to second in 1.5 and hit 330/440. Is that too much to ask?

 

:lol:

 

No problem. Let me see what I got in back.

 

Miguel Cabrera for catcher! :D

I assume he meant OBP/SLG?