Jason Kendall Trade

[NCCubFan]

What's your opinion of the trade?

 

Note: Edited--I forgot to click the Add Option button for Bad the first time.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

I don't think there will ever be a day when I'm excited about trading for a guy that's hitting .226. I hope he can turn it around, and he's better offensively than Bowen. But I think Bowen's defense was better, and I think Blevins was not the right guy to throw into the deal.

[Mephistopheles]

it is fine

[CubmanPi]

This trade was way better for Hendry than it was for the team. Odds are, in terms of the product on the field, this trade was of little to no impact at all, but it was a higher-profile player for not a lot of money or return talent, so Hendry comes out looking better to people who like to hear about crap like clutch and career numbers over someone being washed up.

[TruffleShuffle]

terrible... blevins is the next koufax

[Derwood]

much ado about nothing

[E.J.]

We got ourselves a gritty gamer.

[ctcf]

much ado about nothing

 

Isn't it always that way here?

[frostwyrm]

Essentially we traded Barrett and Blevins for Kendall. Seems like a bad deal to me. Barrett at least has a chance of bouncing back this year and Blevins has been very good in the minors lately. Kendall is just plain washed up.

[NCCubFan]

Essentially we traded Barrett and Blevins for Kendall.

Actually it was for Kendall and Burke, who seems to be coming on lately in the minors.

[Sarcastic]

Add a fourth option for "should have just kept Barrett."

 

If you pretend that the Cubs never had Barrett, this deal is OK. Considering that we once had a catcher that didn't suck, it isn't. This deal is better than the Barrett trade, but probably won't make up for it.

[Derwood]

Add a fourth option for "should have just kept Barrett."

 

If you pretend that the Cubs never had Barrett, this deal is OK. Considering that we once had a catcher that didn't suck, it isn't. This deal is better than the Barrett trade, but probably won't make up for it.

 

barrett hasn't exactly set the world on fire in san diego:

 

16 games, 57 AB, 0 HR, 8 RBI, .298/.298/.351, 77 OPS+

[ctcf]

I think this also heavily depends on what else Hendry does with the offense. If he gets an impact bat, this is probably just him trying to do something with the catcher and not lose much money. If he does nothing its just him being dumb.

[CubinNY]

it is fine

[Mizzou]

There's a poll up on chicagosports.com that asks if the Kendall trade was a good one for the Cubs. 90.9% of the 14,000+ people that voted said yes.

 

I agree.

[Careless]

I want to go with "stupid but not bad"

[Sarcastic]

Add a fourth option for "should have just kept Barrett."

 

If you pretend that the Cubs never had Barrett, this deal is OK. Considering that we once had a catcher that didn't suck, it isn't. This deal is better than the Barrett trade, but probably won't make up for it.

 

barrett hasn't exactly set the world on fire in san diego:

 

16 games, 57 AB, 0 HR, 8 RBI, .298/.298/.351, 77 OPS+

 

And yet he is still much more likely to rebound in the second half than any of the catchers we have had since.

[Roast]

Indifferent.

 

I dont like the fact that Kendall sucks now. But, he's probably still got a better chance of helping us than did Bowen. So, Meh.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

good's a strong word, but I had to go with it because it's not "bad" and I'm a little more than indifferent

[Omar]

This is another one of the "Time Will Tell" trades.

[SaorsaDaonnan]

This is another one of the "Time Will Tell" trades.

 

 

Exactly. It's like buying lottery tickets. If you win, buying the ticket was a stroke of genius. If you lose, buying the ticket was stupid. :roll:

[Drew Doughty]

This is another one of the "Time Will Tell" trades.

 

if this trade is a "time will tell" trade, then every one of them is and we have to reserve judgement until every player is out of baseball.

[soccer10k]

I'm indifferent. Yes, the Cubs picked up a guy who is having an abysmal season. But on the other hand, the catchers the team had up were doing less than nothing anyway and they're only paying $900K the rest of the year for Kendall.

[Electron Blue]

Indifferent.

 

I dont like the fact that Kendall sucks now. But, he's probably still got a better chance of helping us than did Bowen. So, Meh.

 

huh?

 

Doesn't the "probably got a better chance of helping us than did Bowen" line mean it's a good trade? Unless you either

 

a) think we're paying too much of his salary (i.e. enough to overcome the statement above), or

b) think the value of the loss of Blevins is enough to overcome the statement above.

 

If either of those are true, then fine. :)