RockRaines Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 03:38 PM) Exactly. He has no interest in rookies. He would much rather sit and watch the veterans pay, vs actually doing some managing and coaching. A raw guy like Patterson really suffers with a guy like that. I don't know if Patterson is coachable or not, but it would be interesting to have him spend a year somewhere like here, Minnesota, or Florida for example that stresses the fundimentals and see what happened. Cubs fans routinely see their hyped rookies fail, yet continue to believe that they will perform when called up. According to their message boards, Murton and Cedeno are already all-stars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 03:03 PM) So why are you "closet cub fans" defending him? Because Sox fans with blinders on piss me off. Patterson does have amazing talent...he has shown flashes of power, he has showed off his speed many times, he has shown that he can be a solid hitter at times...being under Dusty has not helped him one iota. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 03:47 PM) Because Sox fans with blinders on piss me off. Patterson does have amazing talent...he has shown flashes of power, he has showed off his speed many times, he has shown that he can be a solid hitter at times...being under Dusty has not helped him one iota. Is it too unrealistic to have thought that patterson could have produced as well as, or even a little better than Jaque Jones next year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 01:56 PM) Is it too unrealistic to have thought that patterson could have produced as well as, or even a little better than Jaque Jones next year? On the North side, yeah I think that's unrealistic. He may perform that well some year down the road, or even next year, but not where he was playing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 04:02 PM) On the North side, yeah I think that's unrealistic. He may perform that well some year down the road, or even next year, but not where he was playing. See, im not sure about that. If patterson started in RF all season long, I would expect something between 250 and 290 BA around 20 hr's 60-70 RBI's, and good defense. Maybe 15-25 Sb's too. I would expect about the same or worse out of Jones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 02:21 PM) See, im not sure about that. If patterson started in RF all season long, I would expect something between 250 and 290 BA around 20 hr's 60-70 RBI's, and good defense. Maybe 15-25 Sb's too. I would expect about the same or worse out of Jones. Those sound like the number one might expect from Jones, but for Patterson, well, he basically wound up last year in the minors because he wasn't performing anywhere close to that. Wound up the year hittint .215 in the big leagues, in like 450 at bats. The Patterson from 3 years ago would put up those numbers sure, but not hte one who played last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 I think they need to stop using "5 Tool Players" and start using "6 Tool Players." Because 5 Tools is what, Speed, Power, Average, Defense, Arm. It should be: speed, power, average, defense, arm and SMARTS, hence 6 Tools. In fact, we should call it the Patterson Chart, just as a little kick-in-the-ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 04:27 PM) Those sound like the number one might expect from Jones, but for Patterson, well, he basically wound up last year in the minors because he wasn't performing anywhere close to that. Wound up the year hittint .215 in the big leagues, in like 450 at bats. The Patterson from 3 years ago would put up those numbers sure, but not hte one who played last year. Fair enough. I dont know all that much about him. In my mind Patterson=Borchard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 Fair enough. I dont know all that much about him. In my mind Patterson=Borchard. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The difference is that Patterson was actually fairly good for a season and a half. Borchard has never put up any good numbers. We would probably only get a PTBNL for Borchard so we are better off trying him as a fourth or fifth outfielder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 A couple of cub fan quotes responding to the trade of CPAT. LOL I actually see this as a solid trade this lefty has some great stuff, I've seen him pitch and he has some great stuff.....This might be a Dontrelle Willis type of move. Like Dontrelle very underrated and will be a dominate force by 07 or 08' at the latest. Spears reminds me of David Kelton unless he hits for more power he will never make the jump to the Majors. He has to improve with his BB-K ratio and OBP before he gets a shot. As an avg. Defensive 2B he will have to have huge numbers on offense to make a jump. Good Luck CP!!!! A bad bad trade Hendry is now a idiot in my book, I used to back him. Baker and Hendry will both be fired after this year. I am not looking forward to this year. Hendry sat around last year waiting for a Sosa offer that never came, then waited on Furcal, then waited on Tejada. What does Jockety do? Get Mulder for nothing, get Rolen for nothing, give me a break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 I officially hope Corey Patterson becomes a multiple time all star and great player. I enjoy watching these Cubs go elsewhere as "bums" and turn into gold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 05:00 PM) I officially hope Corey Patterson becomes a multiple time all star and great player. I enjoy watching these Cubs go elsewhere as "bums" and turn into gold. I second that. I still think he will put up some good numbers eventually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted January 9, 2006 Share Posted January 9, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 05:21 PM) I second that. I still think he will put up some good numbers eventually. I honestly think he may have irreversable mental baggage, but Lord knows how many Cubs that looked dead have went elsewhere and turned out good, so what do I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 05:49 PM) The difference is that Patterson was actually fairly good for a season and a half. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Really? I only remember one good month. His 2003 season (Cub fans call it a "breakout," but call Garland's 2005 a "fluke." :rolly ) April: .277/.310/.479/.789 May: .333/.345 (he drew 2 walks)/.565/.910 June: .269/.319/.452/.771 July: .235/.278/.294/.572 The guy has always f***ing sucked. Stupid Cub fans have claimed Patterson is better than Rowand, and guys like 2005 Garland, 2005 Cotts, 2005 Buehrle, 2005 Politte all have fluke years whereas Patterson was gettting ready to "break out." :rolly Good riddance to this overrated bum. I never want to hear about his overrated ass again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 (edited) Really? I only remember one good month. His 2003 season (Cub fans call it a "breakout," but call Garland's 2005 a "fluke." :rolly ) April: .277/.310/.479/.789 May: .333/.345 (he drew 2 walks)/.565/.910 June: .269/.319/.452/.771 July: .235/.278/.294/.572 The guy has always f***ing sucked. Stupid Cub fans have claimed Patterson is better than Rowand, and guys like 2005 Garland, 2005 Cotts, 2005 Buehrle, 2005 Politte all have fluke years whereas Patterson was gettting ready to "break out." :rolly Good riddance to this overrated bum. I never want to hear about his overrated ass again. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think that Patterson is really overrated and probably won't ever pan out but even though his good 2003 was only half a season, his full 2004 season was pretty good... Corey Patterson (2004 stats) .266 AVG .320 OBP .452 SLG .772 OPS 24 HR 72 RBI 32 SB He also plays good defense. I would have taken that offensive production over Rowand's 2005 production. I also would hope that Anderson could produce like that offensively in 2006. Edited January 10, 2006 by SSH2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 07:39 PM) I think that Patterson is really overrated and probably won't ever pan out but even though his good 2003 was only half a season, his full 2004 season was pretty good... Corey Patterson (2004 stats) .266 AVG .320 OBP .452 SLG .772 OPS 24 HR 72 RBI 32 SB He also plays good defense. I would have taken that offensive production over Rowand's 2005 production. I also would hope that Anderson could produce like that offensively in 2006. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A .266 AVG and .320 OBP is "pretty good?" Especially for a leadoff hitter??? I don't know about that. Patterson was atrocious as a lead off man (he didn't get on base and struck out a ton, thus not being able to use his speed) and Rowand was very dissapointing in 2005, but I still don't see that big of a difference in numbers. I'd be thrilled if Anderson put up those numbers too because he is a rookie and doesn't have the hype like Patterson did (3 pick of the draft, future Lou Brock, yadda yadda yadda.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 KW should have picked up Patterson and turned him over to Don Cooper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 (edited) A .266 AVG and .320 OBP is "pretty good?" Especially for a leadoff hitter??? I don't know about that. Patterson was atrocious as a lead off man (he didn't get on base and struck out a ton, thus not being able to use his speed) and Rowand was very dissapointing in 2005, but I still don't see that big of a difference in numbers. I'd be thrilled if Anderson put up those numbers too because he is a rookie and doesn't have the hype like Patterson did (3 pick of the draft, future Lou Brock, yadda yadda yadda.) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I wouldn't be stupid enough to use Patterson as a leadoff hitter. I'm not Dusty Baker. And yes, I would have rather had Patterson's .772 OPS and 32 SB than Rowand's .736 OPS and 16 SB. Of course, Rowand's 2004 season was much better than Patterson's 2004 season. Edited January 10, 2006 by SSH2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 03:56 PM) Is it too unrealistic to have thought that patterson could have produced as well as, or even a little better than Jaque Jones next year? In a Cubs uniform I truly think there was no chance of him doing much...not only because I don't think he likes playing for them, due to being uncomfortable, and poorly coached, and in Dusty's doghouse, but I don't think he was going to be on the MLB team, even at his salary...perhaps as a 4th OFer, but nothing more. The Grissom signing pretty much sealed that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baines3 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Originally I thought the Baltimore was getting the better of the deal, but the more I think of it, it's probably about all Patterson was worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 10, 2006 -> 12:45 AM) A .266 AVG and .320 OBP is "pretty good?" Especially for a leadoff hitter??? I don't know about that. Patterson was atrocious as a lead off man (he didn't get on base and struck out a ton, thus not being able to use his speed) and Rowand was very dissapointing in 2005, but I still don't see that big of a difference in numbers. That's the Cubs' problem though -- they can't get over the fact that he isn't (or wasn't) a leadoff hitter. They couldn't just take him for what he was, a very good defender, a very good baserunner, low OBP, high slugging guy. I do, however, agree with the other things you've said in the thread. Nice move by Baltimore, taking a flier on CP. Even if he puts up a line of .260/.300/.425, he's still a pretty valuable player because of defense alone. He's especially valuable if a team could hide his offensive deficincies (like the Sox do with Uribe -- sort of). Actually, a team like Boston could've used CP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 (edited) That's the Cubs' problem though -- they can't get over the fact that he isn't (or wasn't) a leadoff hitter. They couldn't just take him for what he was, a very good defender, a very good baserunner, low OBP, high slugging guy. I do, however, agree with the other things you've said in the thread. Nice move by Baltimore, taking a flier on CP. Even if he puts up a line of .260/.300/.425, he's still a pretty valuable player because of defense alone. He's especially valuable if a team could hide his offensive deficincies (like the Sox do with Uribe -- sort of). Actually, a team like Boston could've used CP. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Agreed, his defense is his main asset right now. Afterall, Rowand put up a .736 OPS last year but many people think he was great because of his defense alone. Patterson could do the same next season. His plate patience is absolutely brutal though. This quote by Patterson is hilarious though... http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2285777 "I'm a guy who can get on base, and if I can steal bases and get into scoring position, that would really help the team," Patterson said. Ummm, no you're not. Edited January 10, 2006 by SSH2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 The Nationals failed to land Corey Patterson because they didn't want to part with 2004 first-round pick Bill Bray, according to the Baltimore Sun. GM Jim Bowden was handed a bad farm system and he's only made it worse since taking over (Jerry Owens for Alex Escobar?). The Nationals still could have put together something for Patterson if they really wanted to, but they're probably better off with what they have now. Source: Baltimore Sun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Already Orioles manager Sam Perlozzo is talking about perhaps batting Corey Patterson second this season. One step forward, two steps back. Isn't that the way it always is in Baltimore? Fortunately, Perlozzo didn't assure him of the spot. Maybe the Orioles just want Patterson to approach the game as if he's a No. 2 hitter, with the idea of batting him seventh or eighth anyway. Or maybe Perlozzo really has the same glitch that Lee Mazzilli did in thinking he needed some sort of buffer between Brian Roberts and Melvin Mora in the lineup. "We need a No. 2 guy to move the ball around, hit and run and steal, and he seems like he has some of those qualities," Perlozzo said. "But we'll have to see in the spring. If he's not a good guy for that, he'll hit lower in the order." If only there were some sort of past evidence that could guide Perlozzo now. A statistical record maybe. Something that says Patterson is a career .241/.294/.360 hitter in 519 AB as a No. 2 hitter. Source: Baltimore Sun You are pretty stupid, Mr. Perlozzo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.