Are we using Kendall to much?

[Hate those Rodents]

It seems to me catcher is the wrong position to have the same guy playing basically every single day. I'd wager he has more starts than anyone on the team, save Fielder. At his age and given his position, should Rivera not be playing at LEAST every fourth game or am I wrong here?

[Gopher74]

It seems to me catcher is the wrong position to have the same guy playing basically every single day. I'd wager he has more starts than anyone on the team, save Fielder. At his age and given his position, should Rivera not be playing at LEAST every fourth game or am I wrong here?

Actually, Weeks, Prince, Hardy,Braun, Hart, Hall all have more starts than him.

 

And this is kinda how he's always been.

[logan82]

I agree that any catcher should get every third or 4th day off, normally. In this case I want him starting as much as possible so his option kicks in because I don't want Rivera as our starter next year.

[JoeHova]

I agree that any catcher should get every third or 4th day off, normally. In this case I want him starting as much as possible so his option kicks in because I don't want Rivera as our starter next year.

 

 

even if you want Kendall next year, I think he only has to play 110 games to trigger the option, so it's not like it would be hard for him to get there even if Rivera played a little more often.

 

I personally like Rivera, so I have no problem with him being around next year.

[logan82]

JoeHova wrote:

even if you want Kendall next year, I think he only has to play 110 games to trigger the option, so it's not like it would be hard for him to get there even if Rivera played a little more often.

I thought it was 130.

[Gopher74]

JoeHova wrote:

even if you want Kendall next year, I think he only has to play 110 games to trigger the option, so it's not like it would be hard for him to get there even if Rivera played a little more often.

I thought it was 130.

I believe that's an incentive, not to pick up his option.

 

I also believe the Brewers have the choice to pick up that option either way. Even if he plays just 45 games, if they want, they can choose to keep him.

[logan82]

Vesting option after 110 games. Performance bonuses at 110, 120, and 130 games. 110 is the vesting so I guess I would go along with them playing him to much. I wouldn't mind Rivera being around next year, just not as our starter. He doesn't have a good bat and isn't a really good defensive catcher.

 

http://www.mlb4u.com/profile.php?id=246

[uwisfan]

yeah, the starting catchers have been limping off the field from overuse for a few years now

[Gopher74]

yeah, the starting catchers have been limping off the field from overuse for a few years now

Yea, but Kendall's been fine through it all. He's of slender build, a huge plus I'm guessing for his longevity.

 

But he's never caught fewer than 130 games in a season in which he's been healthy, and the only one he didn't is when he suffered that grotesque ankle injury.

He's been over 140 Nine times.

He's been over 150 4 times(With a 149 tossed in).

 

I'd be more surprised if he only started 120 games than if he starts 145 this year.

[DrWood]

Isn't Rivera Parra's catcher? That would be every 5th game, so Kendall would get about 130 starts. I suspect they might bring up a catcher in September that gets a few starts, or at least mop up the end of blowouts.

[JoeHova]

The problem with starting Kendall as much as he wants is that the team is the Milwaukee Brewers, not the Milwaukee Kendalls. Kendall is old and has had several bad years in a row. It makes sense that an old guy would need more time off than a young guy if he's going to stay effective. I just fear that Kendall will spend most of the summer hitting .220/.300/.280 and we'll all be saying "oh, how did this happen?"

[TooLiveBrew]

Jason's track record indicates that it's very unlikely that he'd hit that poorly for any extended period of time. He certainly prides himself on being in the lineup as much as he can physically muster, and to be honest I've been nothing short of shocked with how good he's been defensively.

 

For the first time, I see some evidence in real life to support a claim that a C 'calls a good game' with Jason. He's athletic, quick, and his arm has been very solid. Oh yea, and he's been hitting well too!

 

http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[RightFieldCoder]

Kendall's replacement would be Rivera. Do you expect Rivera to put up a better line than that? I think Kendall has the bigger chance to outproduce given his career performance. And pitchers seem to like Kendall back there.

[bjkrautk]

Isn't Rivera Parra's catcher? That would be every 5th game, so Kendall would get about 130 starts. I suspect they might bring up a catcher in September that gets a few starts, or at least mop up the end of blowouts.

 

Kendall caught Parra on 4/11 (Loss to the Mets at Shea) and 4/22 (12th inning Win hosting St. Louis). Rivera has caught 3 of Manny's 5 starts this year. While Ned Yost likes the familiarity between the two, based on their time in AAA together, it's not an exclusive "personal catcher" scenario.

[JoeHova]

In the last 7 years, Kendall has been above average offensively for a catcher twice.

 

He's 34 and has caught 14,000+ innings in his career so far, which is as many as Johnny Bench caught before the Reds moved him to save his legs. It's more than Mike Piazza, Bill Freehan, Elston Howard, or Del Crandall caught in their careers. Ted Simmons was done catching by the time he was as old as Kendall. Gary Carter was totally washed up offensively at 33.

 

Even great catchers tend to decline in their mid-30s.

 

I just think it would be smart to try to save Kendall's legs as much as possible. I don't think having Rivera start 3 times every 2 weeks would be a bad thing at all.

[Gopher74]

In the last 7 years, Kendall has been above average offensively for a catcher twice.

Kendall's BA and OBP the last 7 years'

.242/.301-clearly below average

.295/.367-

.271/.345-

.319/.399

.325/.399

.283/.350

.266/.335

 

And the three seasons before that, he was over a .400 OBP each year, and well over .325 each year.

 

Not sure which of those seasons I'd call below average, especially for a catcher. I'd take any of those seasons from him this year, and since the issue is what he's likely to do for us this year and what we need him to do for us this year, the SLG is secondary.

 

[Gopher74]

The problem with starting Kendall as much as he wants is that the team is the Milwaukee Brewers, not the Milwaukee Kendalls. Kendall is old and has had several bad years in a row.

He has had one bad year, certainly not "several".

 

And Mike Rivera's not a good player.

 

[JoeHova]

The problem with starting Kendall as much as he wants is that the team is the Milwaukee Brewers, not the Milwaukee Kendalls. Kendall is old and has had several bad years in a row.

He has had one bad year, certainly not "several".

 

 

 

5 of his last 7 years have been average or worse but I don't want to go over the argument of whether he's good or not again. My point is that he is old and declining, no matter how much we want to debate what "average" means. Old and declining catchers would seem to benefit from a day off now and then, imo.

 

I don't see what good can come from Kendall playing 145 games. The odds of him playing well all year are low to begin with, so a rest day to keep his legs fresh now and then would seem to be smart. If JJ, a 25 year old shortstop, needs a day off per week, why wouldn't a 34 year old catcher?

 

[shelmark]

I also fear that if Kendall doesn't get some more rest that he will be laboring around .220 by the end of July. I think Rivera is perfectly capable of handling the day after night games and I believe both the Brewers and Kendall will be better off in August and September. If you were going to start him today why not take him out last night? I also agree that it should not matter if Kendall wants to play every day. Of course he does, so does Hart, Hardy, Hall....Chad Moeller....

[Gopher74]

5 of his last 7 years have been average or worse but I don't want to go over the argument of whether he's good or not again.

But they haven't been. And I didn't think we'd gone of this in the first place, but if the entire argument is based on the premise that he's been bad in his career when he's played that many games, it's probably a good idea to establish if that's true or not. I've given his BA and OBP for those years. I don't see how you can objectively label any of them bad other than last year. So that's one year in which he was below average, not 5.

I don't see what good can come from Kendall playing 145 games.

 

He's better than Rivera. The good that can come from it comes from winning more games by having Kendall on the field over Rivera who I don't think will ever be a good big league catcher.

If JJ, a 25 year old shortstop, needs a day off per week, why wouldn't a 34 year old catcher?

 

Who ever said that JJ "needed" a day off per week?

[tristarscoop]

I read somewhere that Kendall's caught more games than any other pitcher over the past 5 years and that durability was a huge reason we signed him.