Cubs Trade Rob Bowen and Jerry Blevins for Jason Kendall

[shnsajax]

FINALLY. WE HAVE A CORRECTION!!!

[Prior4CyYoung]

Yeah ravech finally corrected himself.

[Carlos Zambrano]

Jesus, that took forever.

[illiniguy]

If we were giving them Marshall we should have been getting Buck back.

[cheapseats]

now go get Griffey and lets win this race.

 

We won't be able to take on additional salary now that we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

Not that we'd need to take on additional salary, because now we've got JASON KENDALL!

[Keener98]

Why didn't we just stick with Barrett? I know Barrett had his problems but Kendall is a shell of his former self and we gave away Jerry Blevins to get him. How is this supposed to be an upgrade from Barrett?

 

Most of the players disliked Barrett. Barrett was a bad defensive catcher, couldn't hit well, and Z nearly killed him. The Cubs have been great since he left. It was a good move.

 

Everything I've ever heard suggests that Kendall is a tool that nobody likes. He also is a bad defensive catcher, and has on OPS over 150 points lower than Barrett. Seriously, Kendall has hurt his team more than any other player in the league outside of Dioner Navarro.

 

Kendall quite simply is an offensive and defensive liability, and there have been rumors of him being an clubhouse cancer. So how on earth can you defend the Barrett trade, and think this is a good one for us? It's ridiculous.

 

Edit:

This hasn't been brought up yet, but Kendall has a FULL NO-TRADE CLAUSE.

 

You putting that in there just made whatever you said in that post irrelevant. Who gives a crap about a full No Trade Clasue? HIs contract is up at the end of the year.

[RonnieWooWooSanto]

The only place that is saying Marshall is Karl Ravech's mouth. I trust printed source long before I trust Ravech's mouth.

 

yeah, but that begs the question, how does ravech even know to mention marshall?

I hope he is just guessing, but I fear that Hendry would give Sean away to Beane. Jim shouldn't be allowed in the same room as Billy.

 

Hey, we got Freddie Bynum from Beane last year! Jimbo got the man he wanted in Boom Boom Bynum.

[Sarcastic]

We'll have to see how much money the Cubs lost in trading away a catcher that had a better chance of being productive than Kendall and a decent trade chip in a relief pitcher who any team would like to have considering even if he turns out to be good at the major league level, he'll never make much money.

 

I know Blevins was putting up good numbers this year, but what level was he putting them up in and how old is he? I was under the impression that he was a non prospect until this year.

 

Also, what in Bowen's numbers make him look more likely to put up decent numbers than Kendall. Kendall won't be good, but his second half numbers are consistently better than his first half numbers and he has been hitting better than Bowen lately.

Edited July 17, 2007 by Sarcastic

[cheapseats]

PHEW! Ravech made the correction.

 

So we didn't trade for Kendall after all?

[dew1679666265]

now go get Griffey and lets win this race.

 

We won't be able to take on additional salary now that we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

Not that we'd need to take on additional salary, because now we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

The most I've heard we're taking on is around $3.5 million. The A's and Pirates are paying the rest. Judging from McDonough's comments, I don't think that will hamstring us.

[KingCubsFan]

Z punching Barrett=causation not correlation

So you're regularly in the clubhouse then?

 

I don't get it. I said players don't like Barrett for a number of reasons. A few people said I am just correlating the matter. I said this is not in my mind because Z and Barrett got in a fight. Z's dislike for Barrett caused the fight. This isn't hard.

I replied to the wrong person. I meant to reply to whoever definitively concluded that Barrett leaving the team had nothing to do with the recent winning streak

[Guest]

 

Then I like the deal...maybe alot...even if he only puts up the awful putrid numbers he has so far its better offensively than what we've got from Hill/Bowen/Soto...if he can put up a solid OBP in the 2nd half I could really care less what his OPS or Slugging or ISODPDICRI is....if he gets on at a .340 pace it improves us about .100 points over what we were getting....and we gave up basically nothing....and are only spending a few more million, and thats only for this year....I think Hendry did a good job.

 

People need to look at who is being given up rather than the position.

 

People would've called Marmol nothing a year ago if he was included in a trade.

 

Young relievers have potential value espec. in an era of overspending and inconsistent FA relievers.

 

Look at the LH'ers out of the pen this year... Eyre, Ohman, and Cotts.

 

There's no guarantee he would provide production, which you can say for Kendall as well at this point,

 

Preach it, UK.

[Keener98]

now go get Griffey and lets win this race.

 

We won't be able to take on additional salary now that we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

Not that we'd need to take on additional salary, because now we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

And you know this how?

[Skyballer]

PHEW! Ravech made the correction.

 

So we didn't trade for Kendall after all?

No it's just Blevins, not Marshall we still got Kendall.

[RonnieWooWooSanto]

now go get Griffey and lets win this race.

 

We won't be able to take on additional salary now that we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

Not that we'd need to take on additional salary, because now we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

The most I've heard we're taking on is around $3.5 million. The A's and Pirates are paying the rest. Judging from McDonough's comments, I don't think that will hamstring us.

 

 

Why did the Pirates trade Kendall to the A's and in particular why did the Pirates take on so much of Kendall's salary for so many years?

[PackLandVA]

 

People need to look at who is being given up rather than the position.

 

People would've called Marmol nothing a year ago if he was included in a trade.

 

Kinda like Wellmeyer a few years ago. Or "can't miss" Juan Cruz. Or a whole host of other possibilities that are "something" in the minors but never amount to anything in the majors.

 

Minor leaguers are almost always gonna be an unknown. Hopefully this works in the Cubs favor. But it's not like Blevins was one of the Cubs top prospects for crying out loud. He's had a very good first half in A and AA ball.

[Wilson A2000]

We don't know how much Oakland is paying us for Kendall (if any). But this is weird. The Cubs wouldn't pay to get rid of Jones, but they acquired a player who has a worse average and makes a good deal of money and weren't afraid of doing that? Does this mean Selig struck down that deal? Edited July 17, 2007 by Wilson A2000

[AI]

IF we owe the remaining 3.75 million on Kendall's contract, we just gave up much of our deadline payroll flexibility for a 33 year old catcher whose tired, worn out body can no longer produce at a ML level. And that's just offensively. He sucks behind the plate and opposing teams may now run at will. Making Soto the starter would very likely produced greater results offensively and defensively. Instead it appears we've spent almost 4 million dollars to get worse behind the plate. If that was possible.

 

Saying this may get me in trouble, but if you like this trade, get your head examined.

Edited July 17, 2007 by AI

[nilodnayr]

He has gotten very unlucky as I said, but right now hes another catcher who will put up a sub 700 OPS.

Newsflash... there are only 10 catchers in baseball with an OPS above 700.

 

And 16 with 200 PAs 700 OPS or above. YAY we can HOPE hes a bottom half catcher!!!!!!!!

[treebird]

now go get Griffey and lets win this race.

 

We won't be able to take on additional salary now that we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

Not that we'd need to take on additional salary, because now we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

The most I've heard we're taking on is around $3.5 million. The A's and Pirates are paying the rest. Judging from McDonough's comments, I don't think that will hamstring us.

 

 

Why did the Pirates trade Kendall to the A's and in particular why did the Pirates take on so much of Kendall's salary for so many years?

 

they've not been paying this much of his contract for all this time. pretty much all of the money pittsburgh sent oakland was this year, the final year of the deal.

[Banedon]

 

Then I like the deal...maybe alot...even if he only puts up the awful putrid numbers he has so far its better offensively than what we've got from Hill/Bowen/Soto...if he can put up a solid OBP in the 2nd half I could really care less what his OPS or Slugging or ISODPDICRI is....if he gets on at a .340 pace it improves us about .100 points over what we were getting....and we gave up basically nothing....and are only spending a few more million, and thats only for this year....I think Hendry did a good job.

 

People need to look at who is being given up rather than the position.

 

People would've called Marmol nothing a year ago if he was included in a trade.

 

Young relievers have potential value espec. in an era of overspending and inconsistent FA relievers.

 

Look at the LH'ers out of the pen this year... Eyre, Ohman, and Cotts.

 

There's no guarantee he would provide production, which you can say for Kendall as well at this point,

 

Preach it, UK.

 

The other side of that argument is that we have gotten on Hendry for not selling high and buying low...now he does that, and we're on him about it.

[PackLandVA]

now go get Griffey and lets win this race.

 

We won't be able to take on additional salary now that we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

Not that we'd need to take on additional salary, because now we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

The most I've heard we're taking on is around $3.5 million. The A's and Pirates are paying the rest. Judging from McDonough's comments, I don't think that will hamstring us.

 

 

Why did the Pirates trade Kendall to the A's and in particular why did the Pirates take on so much of Kendall's salary for so many years?

 

 

Because they are constantly making CRAPPY trades!!!!!!

[Wilson A2000]

 

People need to look at who is being given up rather than the position.

 

People would've called Marmol nothing a year ago if he was included in a trade.

 

Kinda like Wellmeyer a few years ago. Or "can't miss" Juan Cruz. Or a whole host of other possibilities that are "something" in the minors but never amount to anything in the majors.

 

Minor leaguers are almost always gonna be an unknown. Hopefully this works in the Cubs favor. But it's not like Blevins was one of the Cubs top prospects for crying out loud. He's had a very good first half in A and AA ball.

 

Juan Cruz had a decent ERA with the Cubs. To bad he never got run support. His stuff was good.

 

3.18 ERA out of the pen this year for AZ.

Edited July 17, 2007 by Wilson A2000

[Keener98]

IF we owe the remaining 3.75 million on Kendall's contract, we just gave up much of our deadline payroll flexibility for a 33 year old catcher whose tired, worn out body can no longer produce at a ML level. And that's just offensively. He sucks behind the plate and opposing teams may now run at will. Making Soto the starter would very likely produced greater offensively and defensively. Instead it appears we've spent almost 4 million dollars to get worse behind the plate. If that was possible.

 

Saying this may get me in trouble, but if you like this trade, get your head examined.

 

Yea because there was so much talent at the Catcher postion on this team already.

[dew1679666265]

now go get Griffey and lets win this race.

 

We won't be able to take on additional salary now that we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

Not that we'd need to take on additional salary, because now we've got JASON KENDALL!

 

The most I've heard we're taking on is around $3.5 million. The A's and Pirates are paying the rest. Judging from McDonough's comments, I don't think that will hamstring us.

 

 

Why did the Pirates trade Kendall to the A's and in particular why did the Pirates take on so much of Kendall's salary for so many years?

 

They traded him during one of their many firesales. I'm sure part of the reason they footed much of the bill is that the A's couldn't take on his full salary - not sure who the Pirates got in the deal though.

 

EDIT: Pirates got Mark Redman and Arthur Rhodes for Kendall in 2004. Both were at least fairly cheap vets with short contracts.

Edited July 17, 2007 by dew