Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Royals-Sox: Kendall in the Wind

Well, I see the Chicago Cubs just traded for Jason Kendall. I have a lot of respect for Kendall. This is a guy who has squeezed everything out of his body and has had a very good Major League career. He’s a catcher who never could throw. He could not hit with power. He grounded into a lot of double plays. He didn’t walk particularly often. He never really developed a reputation (as far as I know) as a great receiver who handled pitchers well.

And yet he has played catcher in the big leagues for 12 years, he has more than 1,800 hits, he’s a three-time All-Star and so on. How did he do it? Well, he did it about as unconventionally as anyone in recent memory. He was a catcher who could steal bases (from 1997 to 2002, he stole double digit bases every year – since the Deadball era, no other catcher has that long a streak). He got on base a lot, mostly because he put the ball in play (he twice led the league in fewest strikeouts per at-bat) and he got hit by a lot of pitches (he’s been hit by 212 pitches, seventh all-time). And he developed a reputation as a guy who played to win.

I cannot tell you how much I admire that – the man just invented a whole new category of player, the scrappy and speedy catcher who gets plunked. I’ve always been amazed by those people who have the imagination to create a whole new identity – the 6-foot-9 point guard (Magic), the unblockable blitzing linebacker (Lawrence Taylor), the bulldog sportswriter (Dick Young), the vicious sports talk show host (Pete Franklin), the annoying political hack who appears on television (take your pick), the comedian whose only talent is playing a drunk (Foster Brooks) and so on.

But, sadly, the magic is gone for Jason Kendall. He is in the midst of, quite possibly, the worst season in baseball history. I don’t mean this to be overdramatic – the man has a 46 OPS+. He’s hitting .226, his OBP is .262, his slugging percentage is .281. Even when you judge him by Kendall standards, he has only stolen three bases and hit by three pitches. It’s an absolutely abysmal year – and then you look at his catching and see that he has caught just 15 of 74 base runners. It’s hard to imagine anyone being worse than that, isn’t it?

Then again Cubs fans had grown used to watching Michael Barrett, who couldn’t hit, couldn’t throw and got into two fights in the dugout.

Editor's note: Are you guys going to give me credit for these headlines or what? I began my career as a copy editor in Charlotte and was well-known then for being the worst headline writer in the history of the world. But look at me now! Kendall in the Wind? Kason Point? Come on! Chris Berman eat your heart out.

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Michael Barrett is guilty of two of the three things you mentioned, no question about it. But he can definitely hit. He had an OPS of .824 in 2005 (third among catchers with 350+ ABs, behind Varitek and Victor Martinez) and .885 in 2006 (third among catchers with 350+ ABs, behind McCann and Mauer).

He also won a Silver Slugger in 2005.

Anonymous said...

If the A's can get anything for Kendall that puts the Royals in a good position for dealing Dotel.

TC said...

ESPN or someplace reported this story by saying that the A's have begun "selling". I can't help but believe this is actually "buying". I mean, the only way for the A's to get worse by trading Kendall would be to not replace him at all. Force the pitchers to throw to the air. Right?

Anonymous said...

I love the headlines! Keep them coming and we'll keep groaning about them!

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with my wife for once. You can say a lot of a negative things about Mike but not being able to hit isn't one of them. OPS the last 3 years of 824, 817 and 880 aren't too shabby for a catcher. 16 HR's each year and on pace to improve upon that if given the AB's in San Diego. I was really enjoying the entry up until that last paragraph.

p.s. Honey, it is my birthday next week and despite Joe dissing our boy I would really enjoy his book as a present.

Ryan said...

Dear Michael Barrett's Parents,

I'm really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really happy that your son decked A.J. Pierzynski last summer.

It made my year.

Sincerely,
Baseball Fans Everywhere

Cookierojas73 said...

Joe,

By all means, keep those cheesy headlines coming...today's were some classics!

Chris

Tim Lacy said...

Joe,

I've been reading your columns for quite some time. I really like your work and respect your take on things.

But, in this case you've got it wrong. Since I live in Chicago I'm privy to bit more exposure and analysis of the Cubs moves.

First, the Cubs need a catcher who can hit. With apologies to all the Michael Barrett apologists following your blog, he wasn't cutting it in Chicago this year: his bat was silent, he was arguing with pitchers, he was letting an unusually high number of balls "pass," and he was generally putting a lot of pressure on himself in a contract year. Plus, our very competent manager, Lou Piniella, values defensive catchers. The Cubs are 16-4 since the Barrett trade.

On Kendall, well, the Cubs scouts say he's been better in his last 20 games, and is generally a 2nd half player (not good, obviously, for teams needing high performances in the 1st half!). Kendall also received high marks from his pitchers, the A's staff. They liked him, hands down.

In sum, if Kendall continues his upward trend, the Cubs have a solid rent-a-player for the rest of the year. The Cubs have power and speed, so they don't need those. It's not like he's expected to a be a savior: the Cubs are going to bat him 7th. If he continues his career .375 on-base percentage, that'll mean RBIs for Soriano in the lead-off spot.

The trade is a good one for all involved.

All the best,

Tim

Anonymous said...

Pierzynski is a douche anyway.

Anonymous said...

Jason Kendall was a top five draft pick for my roto team this year and thus it is no surprise that I'm last in my league. Kendall has been horrid!

In terms of a fast, scrappy catcher that gets plunked? Well, Craig Biggio invented that role well before Kendall did. Look at Biggio's years in 1989-1991 before he was moved to 2b and the OF.

Also, I love the headlines Joe. Keep them coming. They're better than the ice cold cans of Busch that I chucked into the stands after we won the '86 NL West!

Ryan said...

If you had seen Bowen's at-bats this week, you'd have seen why they traded for Kendall. Harry Carray's statue has a better chance at hitting a major league fastball than Bowen does. He wasn't even close.

I haven't seen anything that pathetic since Neifi Perez played for the Royals...oh and there's that time I saw Angel Berroa play last year...

Forget it. Just forget I brought it up.

Anonymous said...

I think Pink Floyd was much better once Syd Barret left.

Anonymous said...

In sum, if Kendall continues his upward trend, the Cubs have a solid rent-a-player for the rest of the year.

Did you know that disco record sales were up 400 percent for the year ending 1976? If these trends continue... ayyyyyy!

Anonymous said...

Did someone mention Marty Barrett, the Red Sox star of the '86 World Series?

No? Well, um, could you please watch my show? The ratings need some help and ole crazy Dan Rather wants me fired because I'm a "crazy hen eating the jello from the fridge before Granny gets home with the bag full of cookies and cream on a hot Texas day with the shoe flies a swarmin' the house."

Anonymous said...

Speaking of a Sid and Marty. Sid & Marty Kroft made some mighty fine shows. Love that Electra Woman and Dyna Girl. Whoa!

Also, don't forget Land of the Lost. That Sleestaks always freaked Walter and I out! Had to visit my friend Panama Red before firing that show up.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and don't forget the crazy drug inspired theme park called "The World of Sid and Marty Kroft." It's now the CNN HQ in Atlanta and every once in a while (if you look closely) you'll see H.R. Pufnstuf walking around in their newsroom. I think he works for their entertainment desk.

Paul White said...

The scouts are right, Kendall HAS been better in his last 20 games.

First 60 Games: .224/.264/.269 (.533 OPS)
Last 20 Games: .232/.254/.319 (.573 OPS)

Gosh, 40 whole OPS points. What a find...

Anonymous said...

My dad is married to my wife? WTF?

Anonymous said...

Tommy Herr's wife was married (in the Biblical sense) to Tito Landrum at one point.

Anonymous said...


First 60 Games: .224/.264/.269 (.533 OPS)
Last 20 Games: .232/.254/.319 (.573 OPS)

Gosh, 40 whole OPS points. What a find...


Here is what Cubs catchers are hitting so far this season:

.208/.265/.338

That includes 57 games by Barrett, who was a half decent hitter. The Cubs don't have Barrett any more.

Anonymous said...

Tito, what's the frequency?!?

And yes, that Tito Landrum rumor is all too real. I'd stake my credibility on it.

Paul White said...

Here is what Cubs catchers are hitting so far this season:

.208/.265/.338

That includes 57 games by Barrett, who was a half decent hitter. The Cubs don't have Barrett any more.


So, the Cubs dn't have any cathcers who can hit, so they, of course, went and got another catcher who can't hit. Seems reasonable.

d a l t o n i c said...

i think the cubs were just excited to have a decent enough catcher who wouldn't fight his own team but would give 100% to beating the other team.

they don't need his bat, they just want his heart.

seems like an okay deal if you get past the numbers (which is a tough sell, i know)

Anonymous said...

You can go ahead and take Kendall's "heart", "grit" and "leadership" and I'll take my dead grandmother. We'll see who puts up better numbers. Don't count out Grandma.

t.a.m.s.y. said...

I thought I read somewhere that Kendall's handling of the pitching staff was supposedly the reason the A's were still playing him at all.

In response to Tim Lacy, above, who wrote:

"But, in this case you've got it wrong. Since I live in Chicago I'm privy to bit more exposure and analysis of the Cubs moves. First, the Cubs need a catcher who can hit."

That is a very humorous sequence of sentences.

Given how privy you are to the Cubs' moves, though, could you please explain why Jim Hendry is still employed? I would appreciate it very much.