Cubs Trade Rob Bowen and Jerry Blevins for Jason Kendall

[E.J.]

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we have to make another roster move to make room for Kendall?

 

We'll probably send either Gallagher or Petrick back down. :lol:

[RynoRules]

Lou:

 

"He's experienced. He's a tough kid and he likes to play," Piniella said. "He gives you a good professional at-bat and he'll take a walk."

 

Sure hope so.

 

Huston Street said nice things about him - that the picthers all trust him and its a huge loss for them. Whoever said earlier that teammates don't like him must have been mistaken.

[OleMissCub]

Frankly, I think Soto is probably capable of producing more offensively and defensively than Kendall -- an nice, cheap, in-house option.

 

My feelings exactly.

 

I'm wondering in what capacity Lou is going to use Kendall. I still would like to see Soto get a shot at earning the starting spot.

 

With Kendall here and Blanco due back soon, I just don't see any scenario where Soto actually gets a shot at earning the starting spot.

 

He's trade bait.

 

Soto, Gallagher, Murton and Jones for Griffey and a bit of cash? Probably a bit much for many here to swallow.

 

I dunno, that's alot, but I MIGHT do that. I've got a good feeling about this team and it's rare enough that these seasons happen with the Cubs that adding someone hitting .286 with 24 hr and 63 RBI with a .391 obp for the cost of a few excess players would be a good idea, regardless of his age and long term strength.

[hankp101]

USSoccer wrote:

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we have to make another roster move to make room for Kendall?

 

I would guess Soto will be going back down to play every day in Iowa.

[nilodnayr]

Hendry on Comcast - Deal was a "no brainer," "Kendall is outstanding defensively." "On base percentage is off the charts." "His reputation = 10"

 

Lou will bat Kendall in the 7 spot.

 

I don't even think Hendry looks at stats.

 

To be completely honest, I'm not even that concerned with his offense. Our catchers right now suck. I expect Kendall to suck as well.

 

It's the defense behind the plate that has me concerned. All things being equal, if we have crappy offensive catchers, I'd at least want the best defensive catcher out there so at least he's bringing something to the table.

 

I thought he has worn down into a poor defensive catcher, from reports.

 

cheapseats, can you take your sarcasm hat off for a post and enlighten us with some of his advanced defensive metrics to verify.

[brinoch]

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we have to make another roster move to make room for Kendall?

 

Yes. The right move is to DFA Hill. He has no future with the club in any event, and this is going to have to happen sooner or later. When Blanco comes back, provided he does come back, then you send Soto down to AAA.

 

Even if you trade Jones or Izturis, one of the three catchers needs to go.

[brinoch]

The purpose of any trade is to help your team, either by clearing space for a young player, reducing salary for the long-term, or by acquiring an upgrade at a position of need. You don't deal just to deal. Jim Hendry's responsibility is to improve the Cubs, and he can do it by getting rid of roster-fillers who are inept and sucktastic -- Bowen, Hill, Jones, Eyre and Izturis and promoting from within. Alternatively, you can trade for an upgrade.

 

I don't think this deal particularly helps the Cubs. It might, but then again, it might not. Kendall does have a solid history with the bat. These days, though, he's more of a singles hitter with a decent eye. He has no power, and he's slow. It does clear out a roster-filler in Bowen (and might clear Hill's spot, as well), but blocks Soto, who would probably be a decent upgrade over Hill and Bowen.

 

The Cubs' offensive black holes, as I've said for a while, are going to catch up to them. You can't carry a team for too long on the thin offense of the 2007 Cubs. An injury, or a slump, and this team is done. Frankly, I think Soto is probably capable of producing more offensively and defensively than Kendall -- an nice, cheap, in-house option. Likewise, Theriot seems to have improved, and Cedeno is ready, so I think SS has the potential to be covered. As well, unless A-Rod is magically available, there aren't any SS or C's of quality out there to be had.

 

An OF with some pop, on the other hand, is a lot easier to find. Upgrading in RF or CF was the way to go, to my mind.

 

Look, Kendall might help this team. But he's not enough of an upgrade to fill in the oh-so-obvious holes of this offense.

 

Correction Kendall USED to be a sinlges hitter. These days hes an out maker.

 

Now, I know his FB% has skyrocketed this year and is having an adverse impact on his BABIP, he still has an 18.7 LD% and only a 243 BABIP. Hes definitely hurting himself by hitting pop ups and not walking, but hes also getting unlucky. I don't think hes an upgrade, but hes not as bad as hes hitting now.

 

:) Fair enough -- how about his ceiling today is as a singles hitter.

[Balsa]

What a pointless series of trades.

 

I'd rather have just kept Barrett. He's MUCH more likely to have a better second half than Singles McKendall.

 

This was a deal to make a deal.

[Buford T Justice]

What a pointless series of trades.

 

I'd rather have just kept Barrett. He's MUCH more likely to have a better second half than Singles McKendall.

 

This was a deal to make a deal.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion Barrett was our biggest problem the past 2 years. Notice our record since Barrett departed and notice the Padres record when Barrett starts. It's not good for the Padres.

[Sarcastic]

What a pointless series of trades.

 

I'd rather have just kept Barrett. He's MUCH more likely to have a better second half than Singles McKendall.

 

This was a deal to make a deal.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion Barrett was our biggest problem the past 2 years. Notice our record since Barrett departed and notice the Padres record when Barrett starts. It's not good for the Padres.

 

I can't tell if you are kidding. Are people still thinking that the reason we couldn't win early in the season was because the catcher didn't hit badly enough? The Cubs winning has more to do with the team playing better and finally catching breaks. The team is winning in spite of the catchers, not because of them.

[UMFan83]

Does it worry anyone that for the first time in 10000 years that the Cubs are getting cash considerations from the A's? The BIG market Cubs are getting cash from the TINY market A's.... Despite all the crap about the Cubs being able to take on payroll, for the first time in my (short term) memory, the Cubs are taking on money in a trade. My guess is that in order to get the cash strapped A's to fork over cash, the Cubs had to throw in Blevins....

[Buford T Justice]

What a pointless series of trades.

 

I'd rather have just kept Barrett. He's MUCH more likely to have a better second half than Singles McKendall.

 

This was a deal to make a deal.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion Barrett was our biggest problem the past 2 years. Notice our record since Barrett departed and notice the Padres record when Barrett starts. It's not good for the Padres.

 

I can't tell if you are kidding. Are people still thinking that the reason we couldn't win early in the season was because the catcher didn't hit badly enough? The Cubs winning has more to do with the team playing better and finally catching breaks. The team is winning in spite of the catchers, not because of them.

 

Maybe I over spoke when I said biggest problem. I just think yesterday, when Wuertz was pitching the balls Soto blocked are passed balls if Barrett was catching.

[Sarcastic]

Does it worry anyone that for the first time in 10000 years that the Cubs are getting cash considerations from the A's? The BIG market Cubs are getting cash from the TINY market A's.... Despite all the crap about the Cubs being able to take on payroll, for the first time in my (short term) memory, the Cubs are taking on money in a trade. My guess is that in order to get the cash strapped A's to fork over cash, the Cubs had to throw in Blevins....

 

Or maybe they know they want to make other moves and want to get as much of Kendall's contract paid to allow fleixibility? People complain about the Cubs sacrificing payroll flexibility for Kendall, and then if it turns out they got some cash, say that it means they never had any flexibility to begin with.

 

This was at most a lateral move from having Barrett, but I will be happier if the Cubs convinced the A's to send cash.

[Sarcastic]

What a pointless series of trades.

 

I'd rather have just kept Barrett. He's MUCH more likely to have a better second half than Singles McKendall.

 

This was a deal to make a deal.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion Barrett was our biggest problem the past 2 years. Notice our record since Barrett departed and notice the Padres record when Barrett starts. It's not good for the Padres.

 

I can't tell if you are kidding. Are people still thinking that the reason we couldn't win early in the season was because the catcher didn't hit badly enough? The Cubs winning has more to do with the team playing better and finally catching breaks. The team is winning in spite of the catchers, not because of them.

 

Maybe I over spoke when I said biggest problem. I just think yesterday, when Wuertz was pitching the balls Soto blocked are passed balls if Barrett was catching.

 

Maybe. There is a slightly higher chance that Barrett would have allowed a PB. Or maybe he would have had another hit or two, and made the situation less important to begin with. These things don't happen in a vacuum.

[TruffleShuffle]

OMG SOTO HAS A 1.000 OPS AND KENDALL HAS .550 OPS YOUR CRAZY JIM

[Chocolate Milk]

Sunnydoo is Jim Hendry.

[Chocolate Milk]

I;d also like to add that Hendry didn't sell low on Barrett. That's hindsight.

[ChiCubsFan]

What a pointless series of trades.

 

I'd rather have just kept Barrett. He's MUCH more likely to have a better second half than Singles McKendall.

 

This was a deal to make a deal.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion Barrett was our biggest problem the past 2 years. Notice our record since Barrett departed and notice the Padres record when Barrett starts. It's not good for the Padres.

 

I can't tell if you are kidding. Are people still thinking that the reason we couldn't win early in the season was because the catcher didn't hit badly enough? The Cubs winning has more to do with the team playing better and finally catching breaks. The team is winning in spite of the catchers, not because of them.

 

Maybe I over spoke when I said biggest problem. I just think yesterday, when Wuertz was pitching the balls Soto blocked are passed balls if Barrett was catching.

 

Maybe. There is a slightly higher chance that Barrett would have allowed a PB. Or maybe he would have had another hit or two, and made the situation less important to begin with. These things don't happen in a vacuum.

 

Well if all the talk about Barrett not truly being the person that he is often portrayed in the media is true, then that could have something to do with the Cubs success. Obviously it's not the only thing, but better clubhouse chemistry helps. Most of the time clubhouse chemistry is created by winning, but sometimes if there's a lot of tension in your clubhouse, it can cause players to underperform. Mental mistakes are also demoralizing to a team and momentum does play a part in a baseball game. Barrett had his fair share of stupid mental mistakes.

 

All that said, I'd rather have Barrett than any of the catchers we have (including Kendall). I don't really believe all that stuff I typed in the first paragraph, but it makes me feel better about the situation.

 

Anyways, hopefully Kendall can ride out a hot streak and help us make the playoffs.

[Balsa]

What a pointless series of trades.

 

I'd rather have just kept Barrett. He's MUCH more likely to have a better second half than Singles McKendall.

 

This was a deal to make a deal.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion Barrett was our biggest problem the past 2 years. Notice our record since Barrett departed and notice the Padres record when Barrett starts. It's not good for the Padres.

I assume your stance is based on the fact that Barrett is a worse catcher, and hurts his pitchers.

 

In which case, can we get Fred to compare pitching stats before and after the trade of Barrett?

[RonnieWooWooSanto]

Sunnydoo is Jim Hendry.

 

I was thinking that too.

 

By, the way who was Sunnydoo debating in that infamous "let's acquire Kendall" thread?

[A New Era]

 

I'm willing to give our scout and our excellent hitting coach a month to see if they made a good choice on Kendall.

 

Me, too.

 

Look at the job the team has done with Marquis.

 

I trust the Cubs with reclamation projects.

 

Hey it worked for the first few months, didn't it? :wink:

 

Jason Marquis' ERA is only 9 points higher than Matsuzaka's. And we didn't pay $100 million for him. Our scouts are good.

Two curves heading in opposite directions have to converge somewhere.

 

Right, and maybe Kendall is curving too? :wink:

Edited July 17, 2007 by A New Era

[abuck1220]

What a pointless series of trades.

 

I'd rather have just kept Barrett. He's MUCH more likely to have a better second half than Singles McKendall.

 

This was a deal to make a deal.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion Barrett was our biggest problem the past 2 years. Notice our record since Barrett departed and notice the Padres record when Barrett starts. It's not good for the Padres.

 

my goodness, this is driving me nuts here lately. since barrett left the era has been the same. the catchers have obviously hit worse. how in the holy hell do you figure that barrett's mere presence alone was the difference between a team that was five games under .500 and a team that's playing like .700 ball? you have got to be freaking kidding me to even believe for one second such an idiotic notion.

 

i mean, really, the fact that the cubs have improved so much has nothing to do with zambrano having like a 1 era over the last two months or marmol pitching like mariano rivera or soriano hitting like 15 homers in the past six weeks or theriot and fontenot taking turns being impossible outs or rameriz jacking game winning hits left and right or lee having like a .800 babip or bob howry deciding to stop pitching like total crap or ted lilly pitching awesome or kaz matsui bobbling that grounder or angel pagan playing out of his rear. no...it's all because the devil curse of michael barrett has been magically lifted by the swoop of harry potter's wizard wand and presto suddenly the team is better. he was such a terrible influence on the team that if he had been on the team yesterday instead of hitting a 3 run homer derrek lee would have been like, "you know what...i could hit a homer here, but michael barrett has been really mean to me lately, so i'm going to pop out instead." and just tonight, i heard ramirez say that koyie hill brought him a cup of chicken noodle soup when he had a tummy ache, so he felt strong enough to pelt one off the wall (barrett, of course, was known to kick ramirez in the face whenever he got tummy aches).

 

the fact that there has been such a dramatic improvement goes even further to disprove such a stupid idea. i mean, seriously, is he such a destructive force that the day he left the team immediately improved from a .450 team to a .700 team? can you even wrap your head around how completely ridiculous that is? you'd have a better argument if they improved two games.

 

as if the catcher's era crap we had to endure wasn't stupid enough, now we get catcher's winning percentage?

[nilodnayr]

What a pointless series of trades.

 

I'd rather have just kept Barrett. He's MUCH more likely to have a better second half than Singles McKendall.

 

This was a deal to make a deal.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion Barrett was our biggest problem the past 2 years. Notice our record since Barrett departed and notice the Padres record when Barrett starts. It's not good for the Padres.

 

my goodness, this is driving me nuts here lately. since barrett left the era has been the same. the catchers have obviously hit worse. how in the holy hell do you figure that barrett's mere presence alone was the difference between a team that was five games under .500 and a team that's playing like .700 ball? you have got to be freaking kidding me to even believe for one second such an idiotic notion.

 

i mean, really, the fact that the cubs have improved so much has nothing to do with zambrano having like a 1 era over the last two months or marmol pitching like mariano rivera or soriano hitting like 15 homers in the past six weeks or theriot and fontenot taking turns being impossible outs or rameriz jacking game winning hits left and right or lee having like a .800 babip or bob howry deciding to stop pitching like total crap or ted lilly pitching awesome or kaz matsui bobbling that grounder or angel pagan playing out of his rear. no...it's all because the devil curse of michael barrett has been magically lifted by the swoop of harry potter's wizard wand and presto suddenly the team is better. he was such a terrible influence on the team that if he had been on the team yesterday instead of hitting a 3 run homer derrek lee would have been like, "you know what...i could hit a homer here, but michael barrett has been really mean to me lately, so i'm going to pop out instead." and just tonight, i heard ramirez say that koyie hill brought him a cup of chicken noodle soup when he had a tummy ache, so he felt strong enough to pelt one off the wall (barrett, of course, was known to kick ramirez in the face whenever he got tummy aches).

 

the fact that there has been such a dramatic improvement goes even further to disprove such a stupid idea. i mean, seriously, is he such a destructive force that the day he left the team immediately improved from a .450 team to a .700 team? can you even wrap your head around how completely ridiculous that is? you'd have a better argument if they improved two games.

 

as if the catcher's era crap we had to endure wasn't stupid enough, now we get catcher's winning percentage?

 

Before yesterday lee's last HR was June 4th. We have absolutely been on fire in that time period. I sure hope Lee doesnt hit homers.

[Guest]

meh

[rocket]

Before yesterday lee's last HR was June 4th. We have absolutely been on fire in that time period. I sure hope Lee doesnt hit homers.

 

the cubs are 5-2 when derrek lee hits a homerun. that's a .714 winning percentage. that equals 115 wins in the season.

 

i hope derrek lee hits home runs every game.