PDA

View Full Version : Corey Patterson 1 Yr $3 Million??



Team Clark
04-02-2008, 01:34 PM
I just happened to read Fay's blog. He states that Corey Patterson is making $3 Million (Yes, one crooked number and SIX zeroes) for this season. I guess that squelches any reasonable claim that Bruce will be playing CF in May barring an injury.


Fay's blog: Biggest surprise to me: Corey Patterson is making $3 million. He came in on a minor league deal, but must have gotten a big bump for making the club.

Benihana
04-02-2008, 01:37 PM
I just happened to read Fay's blog. He states that Corey Patterson is making $3 Million (Yes, one crooked number and SIX zeroes) for this season. I guess that squelches any reasonable claim that Bruce will be playing CF in May barring an injury.

I don't think the plan was ever for Bruce to be playing CF in May. I think he will be playing RF when the appearingly out-of-shape Griffey goes down with an injury.

dabvu2498
04-02-2008, 01:38 PM
Here's the whole list:

Player Salary Position
Affeldt, Jeremy $ 3,000,000 Pitcher
Arroyo, Bronson $ 4,575,000 Pitcher
Bako, Paul $ 750,000 Catcher
Belisle, Matt $ 1,250,000 Pitcher
Burton, Jared (Levi) $ 395,000 Pitcher
Castro, Juan $ 975,000 Infielder
Coffey, Todd $ 907,500 Pitcher
Cordero, Francisco $ 8,625,000 Pitcher
Cueto, Johnny $ 390,000 Pitcher
Dunn, Adam $ 13,000,000 Outfielder
Encarnacion, Edwin $ 450,000 Third Baseman
Fogg, Josh $ 400,000 Pitcher
Freel, Ryan $ 3,000,000 Outfielder
Gonzalez, Alex Luis $ 4,625,000 Shortstop
Griffey Jr., Ken $ 8,282,695 Outfielder
Harang, Aaron $ 6,750,000 Pitcher
Hatteberg, Scott $ 1,850,000 First Baseman
Hopper, Norris $ 402,500 Outfielder
Keppinger, Jeff $ 402,500 Shortstop
Lincoln, Mike $ 550,000 Pitcher
Livingston, Bobby $ 392,500 Pitcher
Mercker, Kent $ 600,000 Pitcher
Patterson, Corey $ 3,000,000 Outfielder
Phillips, Brandon $ 2,937,500 Second Baseman
Ross , David $ 2,525,000 Catcher
Volquez, Edison $ 392,500 Pitcher
Votto, Joey $ 390,000 First Baseman
Weathers, David $ 3,300,000 Pitcher

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/teamdetail.aspx?year=2008&team=18

Team Clark
04-02-2008, 01:44 PM
I don't think the plan was ever for Bruce to be playing CF in May. I think he will be playing RF when the appearingly out-of-shape Griffey goes down with an injury.

I agree with you but I wouldn't say that is the resounding theme on Redszone. I am more interested in Patterson getting $3 Million. That's a lot of dough for a good defensive OF. Not to mention he is making MORE than Phillips.

Always Red
04-02-2008, 01:46 PM
I am more interested in Patterson getting $3 Million. That's a lot of dough for a good defensive OF.

I agree. I hope it's not a Krivsky Special (2 year deal with a player option for 2010)...:eek:

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 01:53 PM
Hatteberg + Gonzalez + Patterson + Freel + Castro + Affeldt + Stanton = roughly $20MM

If you just flat out cut those guys and added replacement level players, how much worse do you think this team would be?

Now add a $20MM player. Or two $10MM players.

And some wonder why I seem to be negative on the job Krivsky has done.

dfs
04-02-2008, 01:57 PM
Hatteberg + Gonzalez + Patterson + Freel + Castro + Affeldt = roughly $16.5MM

ouch.

RedsManRick
04-02-2008, 02:10 PM
Hatteberg + Gonzalez + Patterson + Freel + Castro + Affeldt + Stanton = roughly $20MM

If you just flat out cut those guys and added replacement level players, how much worse do you think this team would be?

Now add a $20MM player. Or two $10MM players.

And some wonder why I seem to be negative on the job Krivsky has done.

I agree completely. But the trick is finding the right $20MM or $10MM player(s). The good thing about the crappy guys is that you can afford swallow the pill if and when the don't pan out. And on occasion somebody else will give you a prospect to take the risk that they will. They also tend to carry much short contract lengths, so you can recover more quickly.

When you sign that big contact guy, he darn well better be worth the cash or you're in big trouble. A signing of Barry Zito or Gary Matthews Jr. can set you back a whole bunch, all at once, for a long, and without an escape hatch.

Caveat Emperor
04-02-2008, 02:15 PM
Now add a $20MM player. Or two $10MM players.

Not a lot of $20MM or $10MM 1 or 2 year contracts...

REDREAD
04-02-2008, 03:02 PM
I don't really think 3 million is out of line for Patterson.
Look at what Freel got 7 million/2 years, and he was never even able to claim a starting job.

The bottom line is that when Josh was traded, they were forced to get a CF. The only two FAs left were Patterson and Lofton. I'd rather have Patterson.

Patterson made an impact with his glove yesterday. So far, he's off to a good start, IMO.
I suspect he'll stablize CF in the way we hoped AGon would stabliize SS.

I think part of the reason for the animousity towards Patterson is because of the perception that he's holding back Bruce. Much like many people initially despised Aurillia because they felt he'd hold back Lopez unjustifiably.

Patterson was a very good, low risk signing, IMO, even if most of Redszone doesn't realize it.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 03:04 PM
I don't really think 3 million is out of line for Patterson.
Look at what Freel got 7 million/2 years, and he was never even able to claim a starting job.

You can't compare one Wayne signing with another of his signings. If he dropped $3MM on Mercker, would it have been ok since Stanton got paid what he got paid?

TRF
04-02-2008, 03:05 PM
Patterson's glove can and did make an impact. But he's a black hole of suck at the top of the lineup.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 03:05 PM
Not a lot of $20MM or $10MM 1 or 2 year contracts...

Doesn't really matter in the grand scheme. It is still wasted money.

fearofpopvol1
04-02-2008, 03:06 PM
I agree completely. But the trick is finding the right $20MM or $10MM player(s). The good thing about the crappy guys is that you can afford swallow the pill if and when the don't pan out. And on occasion somebody else will give you a prospect to take the risk that they will. They also tend to carry much short contract lengths, so you can recover more quickly.

When you sign that big contact guy, he darn well better be worth the cash or you're in big trouble. A signing of Barry Zito or Gary Matthews Jr. can set you back a whole bunch, all at once, for a long, and without an escape hatch.

This is an excellent point and I agree.

REDREAD
04-02-2008, 03:10 PM
You can't compare one Wayne signing with another of his signings. If he dropped $3MM on Mercker, would it have been ok since Stanton got paid what he got paid?

I guess my point is that most people liked the Freel signing at the time. Personally, I hated it. So the logic is: If you liked the Freel signing, why complain about 1 year for Patterson?

Most people seemed to like the Afedlt signing if he ended up in the pen. That's also 3 million.

Now I realize that you may not have liked either edabbs44. I can understand that. Personally, I like Patterson. Affedlt was ok to sign for depth. I didn't like the Freel contract one bit.

One thing we have to realize is that Cast is not a skinflint like Lindner. Sure, we can't spend like the big league clubs, but if we are in contention in midseason, I doubt Cast is going to say "Sorry, but you already blew your budget on Patterson and Merker" like John Allen would have.

In short, I don't have problems with rolling the dice on guys like Weathers, Affedlt and Patterson. I'd rather get impact guys, but they aren't always available. I had a huge problem with the Stanton signing, because it was a given that he'd stink up the place.

Benihana
04-02-2008, 03:24 PM
I guess my point is that most people liked the Freel signing at the time. Personally, I hated it. So the logic is: If you liked the Freel signing, why complain about 1 year for Patterson?

Most people seemed to like the Afedlt signing if he ended up in the pen. That's also 3 million.

Now I realize that you may not have liked either edabbs44. I can understand that. Personally, I like Patterson. Affedlt was ok to sign for depth. I didn't like the Freel contract one bit.

One thing we have to realize is that Cast is not a skinflint like Lindner. Sure, we can't spend like the big league clubs, but if we are in contention in midseason, I doubt Cast is going to say "Sorry, but you already blew your budget on Patterson and Merker" like John Allen would have.

In short, I don't have problems with rolling the dice on guys like Weathers, Affedlt and Patterson. I'd rather get impact guys, but they aren't always available. I had a huge problem with the Stanton signing, because it was a given that he'd stink up the place.

REDREAD, sounds like you and I are the only two guys around here that like the Patterson addition.

Nugget
04-02-2008, 03:25 PM
Hatteberg + Gonzalez + Patterson + Freel + Castro + Affeldt + Stanton = roughly $20MM

If you just flat out cut those guys and added replacement level players, how much worse do you think this team would be?

Now add a $20MM player. Or two $10MM players.

And some wonder why I seem to be negative on the job Krivsky has done.

There are three issues with that kind of thinking. While I will give you Castro and Stanton as being replacement level I really don't think you can say that the others named would not perform at better than replacement level. Also the average salary for major leaguers in accordance with that article is a little over $3 million so how much would replacement level players cost @ $3 million you'd be paying roughly $20 million anyway so where is that extra $20 million for a player. Finally, there is no guarantee that a $20 million player will perform any better than replacement level - look at Zito.

And one other thing, why is Fay surprised about what Patterson is getting, surely as a writer who is meant to be close to the team he should have some inkling as to what kind of salary Patterson would be getting if he made the team!

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 03:28 PM
I agree completely. But the trick is finding the right $20MM or $10MM player(s). The good thing about the crappy guys is that you can afford swallow the pill if and when the don't pan out. And on occasion somebody else will give you a prospect to take the risk that they will. They also tend to carry much short contract lengths, so you can recover more quickly.

When you sign that big contact guy, he darn well better be worth the cash or you're in big trouble. A signing of Barry Zito or Gary Matthews Jr. can set you back a whole bunch, all at once, for a long, and without an escape hatch.

While I agree, the bottom line is that he swung and missed a lot on his small to medium tier FA signings. $20MM is $20MM no matter how many people it is distributed to.

Zito would definitely set most teams back. But it's a sad day when we have to use comparison signings like Zito to make our GM look better.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 03:31 PM
There are three issues with that kind of thinking. While I will give you Castro and Stanton as being replacement level I really don't think you can say that the others named would not perform at better than replacement level. Also the average salary for major leaguers in accordance with that article is a little over $3 million so how much would replacement level players cost @ $3 million you'd be paying roughly $20 million anyway so where is that extra $20 million for a player. Finally, there is no guarantee that a $20 million player will perform any better than replacement level - look at Zito.

And one other thing, why is Fay surprised about what Patterson is getting, surely as a writer who is meant to be close to the team he should have some inkling as to what kind of salary Patterson would be getting if he made the team!

Cut Hatteberg and start Votto.

Start Keppinger and cut Gonzo.

Bruce over Patterson, don't sign CPatt.

Cut Freel.

Don't sign Affeldt.

Is the team that much worse off?

Stormy
04-02-2008, 03:38 PM
Hatteberg + Gonzalez + Patterson + Freel + Castro + Affeldt + Stanton = roughly $20MM

If you just flat out cut those guys and added replacement level players, how much worse do you think this team would be?

Now add a $20MM player. Or two $10MM players.

And some wonder why I seem to be negative on the job Krivsky has done.

So much being spent on players who could virtually all be replaced by player's making the league minimum (who actually have a future). We could cut everyone of those guys tomorrow and not even feel the difference, aside from bench depth and CF range. Krivsky has always been one to make multiple 'little' errors, as opposed to errors via the big splash.

I like Krivsky when he is able to focus on value for value trades, rather than his penchants in bullpen design and some aspects of roster construct.

I was much more excited in late 2007 when it appeared that this team was being constructed around it's rising young prospects, and bullpen hands, but we have again veered in the direction of trying to win now with too many veterans (without the horses to do so). How Cueto and Volquez perform will likely determine whether this season is a success or a fiasco.

Nugget
04-02-2008, 03:38 PM
In one word yes - but from an analytical point of view.

1. Hatteberg v Votto - I think it is benefit having Hatte start and Votto understudy him for a year. Votto is not a great defensive 1B and as we saw Edwin still has some issues in April. There were some balls which Hatte picked up that Votto would not have - better there already

2. Patterson v Bruce - Bruce can swing a bat, is big but does not play a great CF - Both Dunn and Junior do not cover as much ground as they once did so having Patterson in CF does help. If he can pick up his offense all the better.

3. Gonzo v Kepp - Gonzo is a better SS with both the bat and the glove. As Kepp showed yesterday he is a better bench man.

4. Its good to have Freel off the bench - could we do it with Hopper probably could but what teams when they have IF and OF could call on a Freel.

5. Affeldt - presumably the replacement is Bray or Cout - but really I think having a long relieving left hander is a good option to have out of the bullpen.

bucksfan
04-02-2008, 03:49 PM
3. Gonzo v Kepp - Gonzo is a better SS with both the bat and the glove. As Kepp showed yesterday he is a better bench man.


I'm not arguing that Kepp may be better suited in more of a utility role, but how does just one game prove out that Gonzo is better with the bat?

Caveat Emperor
04-02-2008, 03:50 PM
Doesn't really matter in the grand scheme. It is still wasted money.

Sure it does. They weren't great signings, but they're not going to have that lingering stench for season after season the way Barry Zito seems like he might.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 04:02 PM
Sure it does. They weren't great signings, but they're not going to have that lingering stench for season after season the way Barry Zito seems like he might.

Again, you can always mitigate a failure by pointing to a bigger failure.

WK: "Bob, I know we sucked last year but at least we weren't 1962 Mets-like."

WK: "Bob, I know it hurt eating Stanton's contract. But I have 2 words for you: Jay Gibbons."

WK: "Bob, I know Stubbs isn't killing it in the minors. But just think about Brien Taylor and all your pain will go away."


If this is what it has come to, then start looking for a new GM. Oh wait, Bob already hired one.

Benihana
04-02-2008, 04:09 PM
Freel was a bad signing in hindsight (and maybe even in foresight), and I think Wayne is doing everything he can to trade him- and rightfully so. Patterson, Hopper and Bruce make him completely expendable.

Hatteberg's option was simply too cheap not to pick up. I believe that Wayne exercised Hatte's option in order to trade him, however when the offers were underwhelming and Votto struggled miserably this spring, they decided to keep him until Votto puts it together. I think he should and will be traded as soon as Votto can demonstrate he's ready to play, which hopefully should be sometime in the next month or two.

Keppinger is not an everyday player as far as I'm concerned. He's just not. He looks overmatched at the plate and his glove is certainly nothing to write home about- particularly for a starting shortstop. At this point, Gonzalez's injury makes him impossible to move anyway.

Everyone on the board (myself included) applauded the Affeldt signing, so long as it was for the bullpen. Now he's in the pen, so let's see what happens before rushing to judegement on that one.

Castro sucks, and I think enough has been said on that topic.

Bottom line- Hatteberg and Freel are VERY expendable, and I think everyone including Wayne realizes this. That is why they should (and hopefully will) be traded in the next month or two. Cutting them does nothing to save money. Castro might be dead weight, but let's not beat a dead horse.

REDREAD
04-02-2008, 04:23 PM
Cut Hatteberg and start Votto.

Start Keppinger and cut Gonzo.

Bruce over Patterson, don't sign CPatt.

Cut Freel.

Don't sign Affeldt.

Is the team that much worse off?

I agree with you that Wayne has wasted a lot of money.
I wasn't a fan of Gonzo or Freel signings.

The main reason I was ok with Affedlt is that we really did need the pitching depth. He may actually pitch ok out of the pen. If he wasn't signed, then who takes his place? The injured Bray (or did he make the team, I forget).. or Maj.

We already have 2 nonroster invitee players on the team (Mercker and Lincoln).. the reality is that going into this season, we had zero pitching depth. Sure, we had kids, but it was smart to pick up Affedlt and Fogg. Even from a pure economic point, it makes more sense to leave Homer in AAA and only have him use service time when he's actually productive.

Same with Bruce. If you can get a stopgap like Patterson, why rush Bruce? Bruce is only 20. He's not ready. It's silly to rush him, just as it was silly to rush up Homer last year.

This team is going nowhere anyhow this year. Even if Bruce could play as well as Patterson, why waste a year of his service time, when he could clearly benefit from another year of AAA?
At AAA, he's playing every day and working on stuff.. Even without Patterson, he gets fewer AB up here.

As far as SS goes, I didn't like the Gonzo signing, but I don't like the idea of Keppinger being the full time SS either. Not that Lopez was a superstar, but Wayne clearly had no plan (or at least not a good one) since Lopez was jettisoned. Keppinger's defense is not very good, IMO. His bat is questionable as well..

BuckeyeRedleg
04-02-2008, 04:30 PM
REDREAD, sounds like you and I are the only two guys around here that like the Patterson addition.

Count me in as well. Just not digging him leading off, but it's not too big a deal.

His glove makes him worth it. I loved the Cesar Geronimo comparison someone put out there the day we picked him up.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-02-2008, 04:33 PM
Freel was a bad signing in hindsight (and maybe even in foresight), and I think Wayne is doing everything he can to trade him- and rightfully so. Patterson, Hopper and Bruce make him completely expendable.

Hatteberg's option was simply too cheap not to pick up. I believe that Wayne exercised Hatte's option in order to trade him, however when the offers were underwhelming and Votto struggled miserably this spring, they decided to keep him until Votto puts it together. I think he should and will be traded as soon as Votto can demonstrate he's ready to play, which hopefully should be sometime in the next month or two.

Keppinger is not an everyday player as far as I'm concerned. He's just not. He looks overmatched at the plate and his glove is certainly nothing to write home about- particularly for a starting shortstop. At this point, Gonzalez's injury makes him impossible to move anyway.

Everyone on the board (myself included) applauded the Affeldt signing, so long as it was for the bullpen. Now he's in the pen, so let's see what happens before rushing to judegement on that one.

Castro sucks, and I think enough has been said on that topic.

Bottom line- Hatteberg and Freel are VERY expendable, and I think everyone including Wayne realizes this. That is why they should (and hopefully will) be traded in the next month or two. Cutting them does nothing to save money. Castro might be dead weight, but let's not beat a dead horse.

I'm in total agreement with everything here.

Blitz Dorsey
04-02-2008, 05:19 PM
$400K might be Fogg's base salary, but he can make up to $1.5 mil with incentives. Either way, that was a very nice bargain.

The C-Patt news is interesting to me. I don't think I've ever heard of a player signing a minor league deal with a stipulation he would get paid $3 mil if he made the MLB club. That must be a new one or I don't follow the game nearly as close as I thought.

Raisor
04-02-2008, 05:27 PM
The C-Patt news is interesting to me. I don't think I've ever heard of a player signing a minor league deal with a stipulation he would get paid $3 mil if he made the MLB club. That must be a new one or I don't follow the game nearly as close as I thought.

I've heard of it before (don't ask who though), but I don't think I've heard of it happening with a player who wasn't signed until the middle spring training.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 05:28 PM
The C-Patt news is interesting to me. I don't think I've ever heard of a player signing a minor league deal with a stipulation he would get paid $3 mil if he made the MLB club. That must be a new one or I don't follow the game nearly as close as I thought.

Agreed, you would have thought that Wayne had all the leverage in the world during those negotiations.

Patterson probably started the negotiations at $6MM and WK thought he low balled him.

pedro
04-02-2008, 05:31 PM
Agreed, you would have thought that Wayne had all the leverage in the world during those negotiations.

Patterson probably started the negotiations at $6MM and WK thought he low balled him.

What's with the "Just say no to recycling"?

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 05:35 PM
What's with the "Just say no to recycling"?

Did you just notice?

*BaseClogger*
04-02-2008, 05:36 PM
What's with the "Just say no to recycling"?


It's amazing how old farts like Dusty want to recycle old parts like Bako over and over again when their are brand spanking new products that were/are available in the minors (Perez/Tatum/Hannigan anyone?)...


Here's how to stop the Dusty recycling experiment.

Just say no to recyclables.

This is why some people (like me) hate it when vets like Bako and Mercker get signed for "depth".

...and so it began...

pedro
04-02-2008, 05:39 PM
thanks.

reds44
04-02-2008, 05:40 PM
Agreed, you would have thought that Wayne had all the leverage in the world during those negotiations.

Patterson probably started the negotiations at $6MM and WK thought he low balled him.
It's a one year deal. The Patterson contract really has no effect on anything.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 05:40 PM
...and so it began...

What a visionary I was on February 19th.

flyer85
04-02-2008, 05:42 PM
if there is anything that worries about the near future of this team, it's not paying Patterson $3M of the Hatty/Votto 1b issue.

It is the fact that a good way to kill an offense and to send 3 sub 300 OBPs out there on a daily basis and if Keppinger doesn't get off to hot start and seize SS that is exactly what the Reds are likley to be looking at ... the Cincy version of the 2007 Astros.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 05:42 PM
It's a one year deal. The Patterson contract really has no effect on anything.

Yeah, it never affects anything.

It's just money.

Bob's rich.

Blah blah blah.

It's just another acquisition and salary that doesn't help this team get to where it wants to be. That is, of course, if they actually want to win.

$3MM here and $2MM there starts to add up when those guys are replaceable and/or useless.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 05:45 PM
if there is anything that worries about the near future of this team, it's not paying Patterson $3M of the Hatty/Votto 1b issue.

It is the fact that a good way to kill an offense and to send 3 sub 300 OBPs out there on a daily basis and if Keppinger doesn't get off to hot start and seize SS that is exactly what the Reds are likley to be looking at ... the Cincy version of the 2007 Astros.

They are related.

Patterson's $3MM salary will continue to be sent out there. Same with Gonzo's salary.

If Wayne doesn't acquire them, Dusty can't play them.

reds44
04-02-2008, 05:45 PM
Yeah, it never affects anything.

It's just money.

Bob's rich.

Blah blah blah.

It's just another acquisition and salary that doesn't help this team get to where it wants to be. That is, of course, if they actually want to win.

$3MM here and $2MM there starts to add up when those guys are replaceable and/or useless.
Not on one year contracts it doesn't.

Now when you give multi year deals to guys like Castro, Freel, and Stanton is when you start running into issues.

1 years, 3 mil? This is absolutely nothing.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 05:52 PM
Not on one year contracts it doesn't.

Now when you give multi year deals to guys like Castro, Freel, and Stanton is when you start running into issues.

1 years, 3 mil? This is absolutely nothing.

Just throw another stack of cash into the fire. Couldn't have been used elsewhere in the organization.

reds44
04-02-2008, 05:54 PM
Just throw another stack of cash into the fire. Couldn't have been used elsewhere in the organization.
This signing isn't going to stop doing the Reds from doing ANYTHING.

fearofpopvol1
04-02-2008, 06:01 PM
If Patterson puts up the same numbers as last year (I think you'll see an increase in his HR total), $3 million is completely fair for his production.

Don't hate on Patterson because of where he's batting. It's not his decision.

Highlifeman21
04-02-2008, 06:04 PM
REDREAD, sounds like you and I are the only two guys around here that like the Patterson addition.


:wave:


Not that it matters, but count me in as a guy who likes the Patterson addition.

It gives Bruce more time in AAA, it doesn't feed him to the MLB wolves, it gives us (gasp) above average in CF (haven't seen that around these parts since Denorfia, and before that Cameron), and @ $3,000,000 Patterson is probably what we'd expect to pay for his brand of defense, and we won't get drastically better offense unless we're looking to pay at least double his price. Maybe even triple.

Do I like the fact that Patterson will most likely get a lot of PAs at the top of the lineup? Absolutely not.

But given The Dusty's options of guys to bat leadoff vs RHP, unfortunately Patterson really is no worse than some of the other guys. We lack a true leadoff man, and while there might be some better OBP guys vs RHP to plug in up there, any one of them would be out of their comfortable batting order position.

flyer85
04-02-2008, 06:14 PM
Do I like the fact that Patterson will most likely get a lot of PAs at the top of the lineup? Absolutely not.

But given The Dusty's options of guys to bat leadoff vs RHP, unfortunately Patterson really is no worse than some of the other guys. which just points out the fact that this team really isn't built to compete for the playoffs ... too many glaring holes.

Patterson's OBP at the top of the lineup is a luxury the team can't really afford.

BTW, Votto is likely an excellent option as a leadoff hitter

pedro
04-02-2008, 06:20 PM
Career splits notwithstanding I think it's important to understand that Patterson isn't likely to face anything but RHP and as such the chances of getting a boost in his OBP are much greater than if he was playing every day.

In 2006 his OBP against RHP was .341 over 342 AB's.

If he can replicate that then it won't be so bad. If not, then he needs to be moved down in the lineup, if not out completely once Jay Bruce comes up.

Highlifeman21
04-02-2008, 06:21 PM
which just points out the fact that this team really isn't built to compete for the playoffs ... too many glaring holes.

Patterson's OBP at the top of the lineup is a luxury the team can't really afford.

BTW, Votto is likely an excellent option as a leadoff hitter

I agree about Votto. I wish he had seen some time there last year, and during ST this year.

We knew the team isn't, wasn't, and will never be built to compete for the playoffs this year. 2008 is an audition year for 2009. I'm very convinced The Dusty doesn't know what he has, what he doesn't have, and what he needs to win. 2008 is all about The Dusty figuring that out, and letting Jocketty know so he can go get it for 2009.

flyer85
04-02-2008, 06:22 PM
In 2006 his OBP against RHP was .341 over 342 AB's.

If he can replicate that then it won't be so bad. I would agree but I think the odds of it happening just aren't very good. The team could even live with it everyday(although not at leadoff) if catcher and SS(soon likely to be) weren't OBP black holes.

flyer85
04-02-2008, 06:25 PM
We knew the team isn't, wasn't, and will never be built to compete for the playoffs this year. 2008 is an audition year for 2009. with Dunn and Jr likely not around in 2009 it's hard to see how 2009 would profile to be more successful than 2008. If this year is an audition then play the young guys and figure out what you might have while giving them experience instead of wasting time on a set of known poor options.

Raisor
04-02-2008, 06:37 PM
Career splits notwithstanding I think it's important to understand that Patterson isn't likely to face anything but RHP and as such the chances of getting a boost in his OBP are much greater than if he was playing every day.

In 2006 his OBP against RHP was .341 over 342 AB's.

If he can replicate that then it won't be so bad. If not, then he needs to be moved down in the lineup, if not out completely once Jay Bruce comes up.

2005-2007

300 OBP in 994 AB's vs RHP

I'd be more then happy with Patterson if he can OBP .340ish vsRHP, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Highlifeman21
04-02-2008, 06:42 PM
with Dunn and Jr likely not around in 2009 it's hard to see how 2009 would profile to be more successful than 2008. If this year is an audition then play the young guys and figure out what you might have while giving them experience instead of wasting time on a set of known poor options.

If Dunn's not around in 2009, then there was no need to hire The Dusty and even less of a need to throw a huge pile 'o cash at Cordero.

If Dunn's not around in 2009, then we'll need at least 1 OF, assuming Patterson is still manning CF and Bruce replaces Griffey in RF.

pedro
04-02-2008, 06:43 PM
2005-2007

300 OBP in 994 AB's vs RHP

I'd be more then happy with Patterson if he can OBP .340ish vsRHP, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

It gets really sticky if you look at his splits for last year as they are almost a mirror image of his 2006 numbers. Hard to tell what's going on.

Doc. Scott
04-02-2008, 07:14 PM
Patterson made $2.8MM in 2005 and 2006 and $4.3MM last year. While a .269/.304/.386 line (way better than 2005, not as good as 2004 or 2006) isn't great or even good, that was fairly close to his career line of .258/.297/.413.

Believe it or not, $3MM isn't that bad given the current conditions of the market. He got a $1.3MM pay cut.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/patteco01.shtml

RedsManRick
04-02-2008, 07:37 PM
It gets really sticky if you look at his splits for last year as they are almost a mirror image of his 2006 numbers. Hard to tell what's going on.

Platoon splits are notoriously fickle in small samples. You really need to get a few hundred ABs before they start to stabilize. I tend to use career splits for that reason, though last 3 years would be better if you can get it.

pedro
04-02-2008, 07:40 PM
Platoon splits are notoriously fickle in small samples. You really need to get a few hundred ABs before they start to stabilize. I tend to use career splits for that reason, though last 3 years would be better if you can get it.

That's the thing though, Patterson's year to year splits are a study in bi-polarism

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 07:40 PM
I have no issue with adding Patterson.

But he just isn't worth $3MM, especially when he was in the position he was in. Curious to know what the world record is for salary (not incentives) after getting a minor league deal.

edabbs44
04-02-2008, 07:42 PM
This signing isn't going to stop doing the Reds from doing ANYTHING.

Except maybe winning? ;)

Just add them up. Looking at each one by itself and maybe it doesn't mean anything. But looking at all the money pissed away by this regime for this season alone and it makes you shake your head.

RedsManRick
04-02-2008, 07:53 PM
That's the thing though, Patterson's year to year splits are a study in bi-polarism

That's my point. You really need to get a larger aggregate sample. By stabilize, I mean that new data is not likely to sway the aggregate much. For some variables, the spread of the data is pretty tight, so once you get 100 observations, the next 25 are likely to be pretty similar. For others, the spread is so wide, that the next 25 could be completely different.

So if you're trying to get a sense of Corey's real platoon skill, you need to look at a bigger sample. Any given year isn't real likely to be representative of his actual ability. We saw this with Patterson's "reverse" split last year. It's not likely that he actually turned in to a better hitter vL than vR from a skill point of view (and thus likely future performance). Rather, he just so happened to perform better against lefties, despite an actual skill deficiency. Such is life with small samples. A three year sample is better than a 1 year sample and helps to address concern about the player actually improving over time, but it is still subject to random variance within that 3 year period.

His career split shows a platoon split that is typical, thought smaller than the average lefty (per PECOTA card).



Platoon AVG OBP SLG
vs LHP .242 .275 .382
vs RHP .264 .306 .425
Split -.022 -.031 -.043
LgAvg -.035 -.040 -.079

The logic that he'll see some boost by platoon isn't really accurate, because the numbers we've seen so far are already very heavily weighted towards him facing right handed pitchers. Assuming his skill level hasn't changed, we shouldn't expect a bounce up to an acceptable OBP range simply by omitting lefties.

I'll accept that he might actually develop a better OBP skill, but any observed OBP is just as likely to come from random variation. It certainly won't come from mere platooning.

Given that he's a 28 year old with 3000+ major league at bats, I think expecting a significant change in his OBP ability is more wishful thinking than anything else. We're much more likely to see significant ability increases from Phillips, EE, or Votto.

pedro
04-02-2008, 08:09 PM
I get that Rick. Really I do. My point is just that there are a range of possible outcomes as is evidenced by his past performance. He's a wildly inconsistent offensive player. He's also only 28 and he has had seasons in which he has done fairly well against RHP. We'll just have to see how it turns out.

TMBS, I'm not terribly thrilled with the idea of Corey Patterson as the lead off hitter.

Ok, now I'm going to go back to watching the game b/c while I yapping the dude just went yard.

RedsManRick
04-02-2008, 08:42 PM
I'm not so sure that Patterson is any more inconsistent than most players. It's that his fluctuations take him between useless and useful, whereas most guys stay within the useful range -- because they're varying around a higher average level of performance.

flyer85
04-02-2008, 09:09 PM
tonight is great example. He hits a hanger for a HR and the other two times gets himself out swinging at pitches out of the strike zone.

Chip R
04-02-2008, 10:31 PM
tonight is great example. He hits a hanger for a HR and the other two times gets himself out swinging at pitches out of the strike zone.


I've said it before, he is going to play a lot of home games in a park that you can hit a lot of HRs in. Once he gets (got) his first HR, I'm afraid that just trying to get on base is out the door and he's going to be swinging for the fences more often than not. And you can't blame him either. The more HRs he hits the more money he'll get.

buckeyenut
04-03-2008, 05:49 AM
Patterson is a nice defensive CFer (which we need). Patterson has a lot of potential at the plate (which is always good). Patterson is not a leadoff hitter (too bad, we need one). Patterson has never reached his potential (he wouldn't be available for us to pick up if he had).

Bottom line for me is, he is hitting in the wrong spot in the lineup, but other than that, I have no problems with him. I like having him and Affedlt and Gonzalez and Freel and Hatteburg, those guys you mention are big $$ fodder we should cut. They add depth to the team. While we might be able to swap in a replacement for about equal results, we would also be swapping in someone from minors for thier replacement who is not equal, and the team overall would suffer. This is a 162 game season, not a 10 game season. You have to have depth and role players on a team to make it through and contend.

membengal
04-03-2008, 06:49 AM
Money aside, plate disicipline issues aside, I gotta say, it's nice to finally again watch a game on TV, see a seed hit to the gaps, and not flinch in painful anticipation of something bad happening.

blumj
04-03-2008, 07:21 AM
Money aside, plate disicipline issues aside, I gotta say, it's nice to finally again watch a game on TV, see a seed hit to the gaps, and not flinch in painful anticipation of something bad happening.
That was quick. No residual flinching, already?

membengal
04-03-2008, 07:28 AM
Already. Defensive competence can be soothing.

redsmetz
04-03-2008, 07:29 AM
I wondered where Patterson batted last season with the O's particularly late in the season which is when folks have indicated he improved some. At the start of season, he was batting 8th or 9th, but about the middle of July, he was almost exclusively in the #2 hole. I don't know how to break out what his average was from 7/15, but just glancing at the hits for each day, it looks like he turned it on right after the All Star break. I don't know that it proves anything, but it's interesting to see.

edabbs44
04-03-2008, 08:03 AM
I wondered where Patterson batted last season with the O's particularly late in the season which is when folks have indicated he improved some. At the start of season, he was batting 8th or 9th, but about the middle of July, he was almost exclusively in the #2 hole. I don't know how to break out what his average was from 7/15, but just glancing at the hits for each day, it looks like he turned it on right after the All Star break. I don't know that it proves anything, but it's interesting to see.

After the ASB he hit .313/.333/.458 in 49 games.

redsmetz
04-03-2008, 08:16 AM
After the ASB he hit .313/.333/.458 in 49 games.

Just out of curiousity, where do you go to isolate that data? Thanks for the info.

Blitz Dorsey
04-04-2008, 08:57 PM
Yeah, count me in the camp that is glad C-Patt is on the team. I was just surprised to hear he was making $3 mil after signing a minor league deal in the middle of spring training. I figured he would be making half that at best since he probably didn't have much leverage. But even knowing the contract, I wouldn't throw him back in the water. $3 mil isn't bad at all for a player like that. He has his faults for sure, but that's why he's not making $10 mil or more like most expected he would be by now.

RedsManRick
04-04-2008, 09:07 PM
Just out of curiousity, where do you go to isolate that data? Thanks for the info.

www.baseball-reference.com

Pretty much one stop shopping. If you want batted ball data, check out www.fangraphs.com

edabbs44
04-04-2008, 09:09 PM
www.baseball-reference.com

Pretty much one stop shopping. If you want batted ball data, check out www.fangraphs.com

That's where I usually go, but many other sites (espn.com, cbssportsline.com) have the same.

savafan
04-05-2008, 04:01 PM
Some guys just tend to put it all together and figure it out after several years in the league. Patterson could very well be one of those guys. I like what I see from him in the field so far, and he hasn't been a slouch at the plate either, though I'll admit it's early.

$3 mill for 1 year doesn't bother me.

VR
04-05-2008, 04:10 PM
Some guys just tend to put it all together and figure it out after several years in the league. Patterson could very well be one of those guys. I like what I see from him in the field so far, and he hasn't been a slouch at the plate either, though I'll admit it's early.

$3 mill for 1 year doesn't bother me.

It's early...but it he could be another Kriv miracle to go along w/ Phillips and Hammy.

savafan
04-05-2008, 04:11 PM
It's early...but it he could be another Kriv miracle to go along w/ Phillips and Hammy.

That's my hope.

membengal
04-05-2008, 04:13 PM
Still feeling pretty good about this...

Jpup
04-05-2008, 05:01 PM
Patterson is a very, very good defensive player. I have been very impressed. I know that nearly every ball hit out there will be caught. His bat hasn't hurt the Reds either. You can tell he's trying to take more pitches, well, sometimes. ;)

SMcGavin
04-05-2008, 05:34 PM
Patterson is a very, very good defensive player. I have been very impressed. I know that nearly every ball hit out there will be caught. His bat hasn't hurt the Reds either. You can tell he's trying to take more pitches, well, sometimes. ;)

Yeah. I still don't want him hitting leadoff but he is nice to have running around in CF.

pedro
04-05-2008, 09:22 PM
I'm pretty impressed with Cory Patterson so far. I can see why scouts have always liked him.

As for him leading off, I'm not a big fan of the idea although I think it's ok to try it for a while. Dumber things have worked out.

Maybe he can be this years Mariano Duncan.

Reds1
04-05-2008, 09:51 PM
Power, speed, defense. What's not to like. He's prob a better leadoff then Freel over the course of a year, but IMO hopper is the best leadoff hitter on the team.

pedro
04-05-2008, 10:11 PM
Here's an honest question I don't have an answer to.

If Patterson is destined to get 500 AB's at lead off at what point would his slugging % compensate for his lack of OBP prowess?

reds44
04-05-2008, 10:14 PM
Here's an honest question I don't have an answer to.

If Patterson is destined to get 500 AB's at lead off at what point would his slugging % compensate for his lack of OBP prowess?
.750 OPS.

If he can put up a .750 OPS with his speed and defense in CF, I won't be worried about his OBP.

KronoRed
04-05-2008, 10:16 PM
.460

But I'm picky :D

edabbs44
04-05-2008, 11:22 PM
Here's an honest question I don't have an answer to.

If Patterson is destined to get 500 AB's at lead off at what point would his slugging % compensate for his lack of OBP prowess?

Here's another honest question: Even if he had a .600 SLG, wouldn't that just provide more reason to move him down in the order?

Reds1
04-05-2008, 11:22 PM
Here's an honest question I don't have an answer to.

If Patterson is destined to get 500 AB's at lead off at what point would his slugging % compensate for his lack of OBP prowess?

I'd say the only number that truly matters. His defense is fantastic and add that to what he can do with his bat and I think we'll be fine with him there. Oh sorry. The Reds will be fine! :)

What would our record be without in in the 1st few games. I know he's won one for us. I mean for the Reds. Sorry! I say us even though I know it bothers folks.

To be continued...., but so far Patterson is no bust. Fogg is - so far!!!

pedro
04-05-2008, 11:47 PM
Here's another honest question: Even if he had a .600 SLG, wouldn't that just provide more reason to move him down in the order?

Certainly.

But even before considering Patterson's defense, given his slugging advantage over Freel and Hopper, I think I'd rather give him the CF AB's, regardless of whether it's in the 1st or 7/8th hole. It's an odd train of thought but if Freel or Hopper are in the lineup they're going to be batting first and I think Patterson is a better use of AB's than they are, regardless of OBP or batting order position.

WVRedsFan
04-06-2008, 12:44 AM
Certainly.

But even before considering Patterson's defense, given his slugging advantage over Freel and Hopper, I think I'd rather give him the CF AB's, regardless of whether it's in the 1st or 7/8th hole. It's an odd train of thought but if Freel or Hopper are in the lineup they're going to be batting first and I think Patterson is a better use of AB's than they are, regardless of OBP or batting order position.

I totally agree that Patterson's worth is in his fielding and my only gripe is that he leads off. Patterson seems to be an intelligent fielder and base runner while Freel could never be accused of that and Hopper is a great utility man (not that Freel is not). Move him down in the lineup (ala Geronimo) and I'm Ok with him. At least until they come to their senses and bring Jay Bruce up to play the position. Or any position for that matter.

Raisor
04-06-2008, 01:51 AM
Even with Patterson's "good week", dude still only has an OBP of .235

I love small sample sizes :)

SteelSD
04-06-2008, 03:16 AM
Certainly.

But even before considering Patterson's defense, given his slugging advantage over Freel and Hopper, I think I'd rather give him the CF AB's, regardless of whether it's in the 1st or 7/8th hole. It's an odd train of thought but if Freel or Hopper are in the lineup they're going to be batting first and I think Patterson is a better use of AB's than they are, regardless of OBP or batting order position.

It's an odd train of thought because here's recent history:

3-Year Splits:

Ryan Freel: .353 OBP/.376 SLG
Corey Patterson: .291 OBP/.393 SLG

Hopper's low sample (386 PA) in 2007 shows him with an OBP of .371 and a SLG of .388.

If you must have a Corey Patterson on the roster and think he's going to have a career year (and he is that age), he's still exactly the type of guy you hit 7th or 8th in the lineup and make him earn his way forward. Considering Patterson's history, what you don't do is write his name in the leadoff slot from day one and then hope he proves you right after you've already failed by going that route more than once.

But Dusty Baker does what Dusty Baker does.

GAC
04-06-2008, 04:18 AM
Certainly.

But even before considering Patterson's defense, given his slugging advantage over Freel and Hopper, I think I'd rather give him the CF AB's, regardless of whether it's in the 1st or 7/8th hole. It's an odd train of thought but if Freel or Hopper are in the lineup they're going to be batting first and I think Patterson is a better use of AB's than they are, regardless of OBP or batting order position.

And batting in the 7/8 hole - Patterson probably wouldn't see the pitches he's seeing leading off.

I'm not "sold" by any means with him leading off; but I'm not sold on Freel and Hopper either. They are utility players, not everyday. Leadoff is a "weakness" for this current team IMO.

cincinnati chili
04-06-2008, 04:37 AM
Here's the whole list:

Player Salary Position
Affeldt, Jeremy $ 3,000,000 Pitcher
Arroyo, Bronson $ 4,575,000 Pitcher
Bako, Paul $ 750,000 Catcher
Belisle, Matt $ 1,250,000 Pitcher
Burton, Jared (Levi) $ 395,000 Pitcher
Castro, Juan $ 975,000 Infielder
Coffey, Todd $ 907,500 Pitcher
Cordero, Francisco $ 8,625,000 Pitcher
Cueto, Johnny $ 390,000 Pitcher
Dunn, Adam $ 13,000,000 Outfielder
Encarnacion, Edwin $ 450,000 Third Baseman
Fogg, Josh $ 400,000 Pitcher
Freel, Ryan $ 3,000,000 Outfielder
Gonzalez, Alex Luis $ 4,625,000 Shortstop
Griffey Jr., Ken $ 8,282,695 Outfielder
Harang, Aaron $ 6,750,000 Pitcher
Hatteberg, Scott $ 1,850,000 First Baseman
Hopper, Norris $ 402,500 Outfielder
Keppinger, Jeff $ 402,500 Shortstop
Lincoln, Mike $ 550,000 Pitcher
Livingston, Bobby $ 392,500 Pitcher
Mercker, Kent $ 600,000 Pitcher
Patterson, Corey $ 3,000,000 Outfielder
Phillips, Brandon $ 2,937,500 Second Baseman
Ross , David $ 2,525,000 Catcher
Volquez, Edison $ 392,500 Pitcher
Votto, Joey $ 390,000 First Baseman
Weathers, David $ 3,300,000 Pitcher

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/teamdetail.aspx?year=2008&team=18

I haven't read the whole thread, but has anybody questioned the accuracy of this list. The Fogg deal was widely reported as $1 million and that's what rotowire lists him at too.

Also, Arroyo looks wrong. He signed a 2-year $25 million extension covering 2008 and 2009. I find it hard to believe that $20 million of it is coming due next year.

I am a bit surprised that Patterson got $3 million, considering his contract was initially a minor league deal.

blumj
04-06-2008, 08:22 AM
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/cincinnati-reds_24.html


It looks like Arroyo's extension covers '09-'10('11 option/buyout), with just the $2.5M signing bonus added to his '08 salary of $3.95M. Which looks like $6.45M to me, not $4.575M, unless some of that bonus was paid out already.

They have Fogg at $1M, with only $400K guaranteed, but usually that just means until the end of ST.

KronoRed
04-06-2008, 11:39 AM
I'm not "sold" by any means with him leading off; but I'm not sold on Freel and Hopper either. They are utility players, not everyday. Leadoff is a "weakness" for this current team IMO.

Keppinger is the perfect guy on this team to leadoff.

I am just troubled by the though process that leadoff is the spot for the guy who doesn't fit anywhere else, that should be the 8th spot.

Tom Servo
04-06-2008, 11:44 AM
I am a bit surprised that Patterson got $3 million, considering his contract was initially a minor league deal.
A good number of minor league deals for big name guys are in the millions.

edabbs44
04-06-2008, 01:21 PM
A good number of minor league deals for big name guys are in the millions.

Really? Like who?

Not doubting you, but curious as to who you are referring to. Many "big" name guys don't get minor league deals unless they are coming off major injury.

I can see it with incentives (i.e. minor league deal, incentives to $4MM if you hit certain milestones). But not guaranteed just b/c you make the roster.

Benihana
04-06-2008, 03:57 PM
Really? Like who?

Not doubting you, but curious as to who you are referring to. Many "big" name guys don't get minor league deals unless they are coming off major injury.

I can see it with incentives (i.e. minor league deal, incentives to $4MM if you hit certain milestones). But not guaranteed just b/c you make the roster.

You have a problem with the job CP has done so far? You don't think he's earned his paycheck so far in the first week of the season? You're such a malcontent it's unbelievable.

edabbs44
04-06-2008, 05:17 PM
You have a problem with the job CP has done so far?

Zero problem so far. I actually think he has had a pretty damn good week. Let me know where (in my post) you could have inferred that from. Or if you just jumped to conclusions, as many people on here do when I post something.


You don't think he's earned his paycheck so far in the first week of the season?

I don't care if he's "earned" it or not. I was saying that you don't usually see players getting a minor league deal (which typically go to players who have limited interest shown in them) and then getting that much guaranteed money. I'm curious as to if he also has incentives tied to his contract.

Bottom line is that I think that CP has earned his first week's check no problem. But I think his $3MM deal should be questioned even if he does have a good year. Here's an example:

Say gold is selling at $915 per oz. You decide to buy one ounce at $950. Next month it increases in value to $1000. Would you have still made a good buy? Sure. But you would have done better if you bought it at $915.

Now if you couldn't have bought it $915 at the time (i.e. Patterson refusing to sign unless he gets that $3MM clause) then it is on you if the price per oz falls to $850 (or Patterson fails) because you risked more to get it.


You're such a malcontent it's unbelievable.

Thanks. I think you are out of your tree. Chill out.

wheels
04-06-2008, 07:27 PM
Keppinger is the perfect guy on this team to leadoff.

I am just troubled by the though process that leadoff is the spot for the guy who doesn't fit anywhere else, that should be the 8th spot.

I couldn't agree more.

Keppinger's the guy until he proves he isn't if I'm at the helm.

Patterson's a gem in the field, and he'd be terrific in the seventh slot (that catcher situation is so bad, there's no way I'd move any of them higher than eight).

Always Red
04-06-2008, 07:45 PM
I couldn't agree more.

Keppinger's the guy until he proves he isn't if I'm at the helm.

Patterson's a gem in the field, and he'd be terrific in the seventh slot (that catcher situation is so bad, there's no way I'd move any of them higher than eight).

Amen, brother/sister, I totally agree. :beerme:

savafan
04-06-2008, 09:08 PM
I'm loving me some CoPatt right about now.

REDREAD
04-06-2008, 10:28 PM
Really? Like who?

Not doubting you, but curious as to who you are referring to. Many "big" name guys don't get minor league deals unless they are coming off major injury.

I can see it with incentives (i.e. minor league deal, incentives to $4MM if you hit certain milestones). But not guaranteed just b/c you make the roster.

Often times, a team will bring a guy like Patterson in on a minor league contract with the "wink wink" that he will get a ML roster spot.
This allows them to do things such as hold on to Coutlangous just a bit longer and have more time to make a decision.

Or perhaps there were other stipulations on Patterson making the team, and that's why they brought him in on a minor league deal. In any event, I doubt the plan was to actually start Patterson at AAA.

Team Clark
04-07-2008, 12:03 AM
Patterson is looking more like the re-vitalized version after the '07 All Star Break. $3 Million... what a bargain!:D It's only been a week, I know. I like the way most of the team has performed so far.

Ltlabner
04-07-2008, 08:27 AM
Now if you couldn't have bought it $915 at the time (i.e. Patterson refusing to sign unless he gets that $3MM clause) then it is on you if the price per oz falls to $850 (or Patterson fails) because you risked more to get it.

Wait a sec. There is risk involved with player deals in MLB? When did this start?

WMR
04-07-2008, 08:45 AM
I would be awesome with Patterson's low-obp, decent pop in the 7 spot in the line-up, especially taking into consideration his excellent defense. Lead-off, however, is still blah. Not his fault, however.

membengal
04-09-2008, 12:49 PM
Still feeling ok about this.

Always Red
04-09-2008, 01:10 PM
Still feeling ok about this.

Patterson has pretty much played as expected. He's done well, and it really is a pleasure to watch a professional center fielder roaming the gaps out there, and actually getting to balls hit over his head.

Everyone but Dusty knows he is hitting out of position; maybe he'll figure it out soon?

edabbs44
04-09-2008, 04:10 PM
Wait a sec. There is risk involved with player deals in MLB? When did this start?

Would you buy a share of IBM for $100 if it was trading at $85?

reds44
04-09-2008, 04:43 PM
I don't think I've seen wall ball land close to Patterson in CF. If he can get near it, he's going to catch it.

He's been "clutch" with the bat as well.

Stormy
04-09-2008, 11:27 PM
The Reds desperately, desperately, desperately needed an elite CF glove, great instincts and range, between Dunn and Griffey. Patterson provides that type of defense in spades, and so far his bat has been a nice early surprise. I wasn't thrilled at the prospect of Dusty giving 600 ABs to Patterson's career 298OBP at the leadoff portion of the order, nor did I like the idea of waiting until 2009 to see meaningful playing time for Jay Bruce.

However, the fact is, Corey Patterson's defense was exactly what this defensively challenged OF needed, and his pop with the bat has just been a bonus. It was a very good signing, even if sub .300OBP leadoff hitters normally make me cringe.

VR
04-09-2008, 11:33 PM
It was a very good signing, even if sub .300OBP leadoff hitters normally make me cringe.

He's no Neifi or Pierre....but he'll do

fearofpopvol1
04-10-2008, 01:28 AM
Patterson is tied for 2nd in the majors in homers (4).

redsrule2500
04-10-2008, 01:55 AM
You have a problem with the job CP has done so far? You don't think he's earned his paycheck so far in the first week of the season? You're such a malcontent it's unbelievable.

Salaries aren't given out based on what they do LATER, they are given based on current market value of past results! I think he was overpaid for, regardless of what he does this season.

This is just like the people claiming that THE TRADE will be fine if all the players are a wash. I completely disagree, because the Reds could have gotten much more talent for what they had at the time.

buckeyenut
04-10-2008, 05:33 AM
Everyone but Dusty knows he is hitting out of position; maybe he'll figure it out soon?Chris Welsh sure seemed OK with him leading off on the broadcast last night.

membengal
04-10-2008, 08:22 AM
Still feeling ok about this.

(and, well said, stormy)

lollipopcurve
04-10-2008, 08:27 AM
Salaries aren't given out based on what they do LATER, they are given based on current market value of past results!

Not for free agents.

REDREAD
04-10-2008, 08:41 AM
Salaries aren't given out based on what they do LATER, they are given based on current market value of past results! I think he was overpaid for, regardless of what he does this season.
.

I see your line of thinking. Players should be paid on expected production.

IMO, Patterson was expected to be a gold glove CF with some pop and speed, but a low OBP. That's worth 3 million in the open market today, easily.

Freel recently got 2 years at 7 million to be a bench player. While Freel is potentially a plus OBP guy, his dumb baserunning negates a lot of his speed, he is poor defensively in the infield, and he's not near the defender Patterson is in CF.

Do some other comps as well, and Patterson at 3 million is very reasonable. Heck, consider what Lohse was paid last year. Patterson is not a superstar, but he has several plus skills. He's easily worth 3 million. In fact, when I first saw this thread, I thought he was a bargain. Look at what the market gave Pierre, Gary Matthews, etc. Look at what Reggie Sanders got with KC in the twilight of his career. That is what the market is being set at. We can't just say that 95% of all FA signings are just idiotic.. That's the market. The owners have tons of money now, so giving 3 million to a starting position player (or even a bench guy like Freel) is no big deal.

edabbs44
04-10-2008, 08:54 AM
I see your line of thinking. Players should be paid on expected production.

IMO, Patterson was expected to be a gold glove CF with some pop and speed, but a low OBP. That's worth 3 million in the open market today, easily.

Based on the current market, Patterson was without a job. If he was "easily worth $3MM", then he wouldn't have signed for a minor league contract. He would have gotten more than a $3MM, one year guaranteed contract.

I also don't think he was expected (or is expected) to play GG caliber defense. That is starting to become a bit of a Paul Bunyan type tale. He has speed and ability. Let's see him play a bit more out there. If he is truly a GG CFer, then he would have had more job offers.

blumj
04-10-2008, 09:11 AM
Based on the current market, Patterson was without a job. If he was "easily worth $3MM", then he wouldn't have signed for a minor league contract. He would have gotten more than a $3MM, one year guaranteed contract.

Too many CFers on the market this offseason, but all of them were more expensive, not less. Besides, the logical extension of that argument is that you should never be willing to pay a free agent more than other teams are willing to pay him. Good luck ever signing a free agent that way.

RedlegJake
04-10-2008, 09:15 AM
Based on the current market, Patterson was without a job. If he was "easily worth $3MM", then he wouldn't have signed for a minor league contract. He would have gotten more than a $3MM, one year guaranteed contract.

I also don't think he was expected (or is expected) to play GG caliber defense. That is starting to become a bit of a Paul Bunyan type tale. He has speed and ability. Let's see him play a bit more out there. If he is truly a GG CFer, then he would have had more job offers.

I just disagree with your thinking. It's not that simple. CP would not be in Cincy without Dusty, I believe that. He was told he'd get a real shot at CF and YES -I believe he was expected to play GG caliber defense since he always has. The 3 million if he made the team was an inducement to sign a minor league deal that let the Reds off the hook if he did a belly flop, that's all. It was necessary to get him in Cincinnati or he would have signed a minor league deal with a team a lot more assured to win. When players fall into Patterson's category there is a lot of stuff behind the scene, teams waiting to see what their needs really are, waiting out the players to lower an offer IF they believe the player won't be pursued, etc. It's not just "Oh well, he isn't signed yet so lets just offer him minimum and he'll beg to come to camp".

I've never seen so much griping about a guy who has turned out to be a bargain at his price but then I expect that from you. I don't mean offense, or mean that as a shot, edabbs, although it probably sounds like one. You remind me of the guy in a company whose job is to find every flaw or inefficiency and point out how it could have been done better or cheaper even if it works well.

edabbs44
04-10-2008, 09:32 AM
I've never seen so much griping about a guy who has turned out to be a bargain at his price but then I expect that from you. I don't mean offense, or mean that as a shot, edabbs, although it probably sounds like one. You remind me of the guy in a company whose job is to find every flaw or inefficiency and point out how it could have been done better or cheaper even if it works well.

Turned out to be a bargain? Nice assessment after 9 games.

I haven't griped about Patterson's play. He's been a huge part of the team so far. I've only mentioned that the contract was surprising, and I think that is a very fair statement.

But it has only been 9 games. I'll obviously give you that he has looked good for 9 games. He's looked awesome. I will also say that, if he keeps it up, he will be a huge bargain and that he has looked great so far. But the season is 1.5 weeks old. Let's be real.

Did you know that Patterson's career OPS is .827 in April? Then his next best month is .740 in August? I won't even mention his .643 in July and .614 in Sept/Oct.

Maybe I seem to be very negative, but I try and temper expectations and be as balanced in my assessments as possible. Saying that Patterson has turned out to be a bargain is fairly unbalanced and short-sighted. He has the potential, but it is a long season. Those types of statements should be saved for when we are months into the season, not days.

edabbs44
04-10-2008, 09:35 AM
Too many CFers on the market this offseason, but all of them were more expensive, not less. Besides, the logical extension of that argument is that you should never be willing to pay a free agent more than other teams are willing to pay him. Good luck ever signing a free agent that way.

I think that you have a good point. Lofton is still unemployed. And I guess that maybe Patterson was willing to sit out the entire season rather than signing a bargain basement contract. This could be true.

If so and CPatt continues his renaissance, then Wayne will have made a very smart acquisition.

Benihana
04-10-2008, 09:39 AM
I loved the signing then and I love it now. It's the same as I've always said- if you have an opportunity to take a flier on a former top prospect while he's still young without giving up anything significant- do it. It's classic no risk huge reward. Wayne embraces this concept, and that's why I embrace Wayne.

Brandon Phillips, Josh Hamilton, Corey Patterson...how much more evidence do you need?

Spring~Fields
04-10-2008, 10:00 AM
Keppinger is the perfect guy on this team to leadoff.
I am just troubled by the though process that leadoff is the spot for the guy who doesn't fit anywhere else, that should be the 8th spot.

Seems right to me, so why can't Patterson at least hit second even though he is still to high in the order there for my comfort zone.

Chip R
04-10-2008, 10:01 AM
Seems right to me, so why can't Patterson at least hit second even though he is still to high in the order there for my comfort zone.


Because CFers hit leadoff.

Spring~Fields
04-10-2008, 10:03 AM
Because CFers hit leadoff.

Nobody told Griffey all those years. :D

edabbs44
04-10-2008, 10:06 AM
I loved it the signing then and I love it now. It's the same as I've always said- if you have an opportunity to take a flier on a former top prospect while he's still young without giving up anything significant- do it. It's classic no risk huge reward. Wayne embraces this concept, and that's why I embrace Wayne.

Brandon Phillips, Josh Hamilton, Corey Patterson...how much more evidence do you need?

I think there is a lot of value in this post...sometimes it takes people longer to figure it out. As long as you aren't giving up something that might hurt you down the road.

I'm a big fan of these fliers as long as expectations are tempered. Sometimes you also have to look at it in the reverse...for example, I hate it when people want to deal Homer for 50 cents on the dollar.

Chip R
04-10-2008, 10:09 AM
Nobody told Griffey all those years. :D


That's cause Dusty didn't manage him until this year. ;)

blumj
04-10-2008, 10:10 AM
I think that you have a good point. Lofton is still unemployed. And I guess that maybe Patterson was willing to sit out the entire season rather than signing a bargain basement contract. This could be true.

If so and CPatt continues his renaissance, then Wayne will have made a very smart acquisition.

I don't even consider Lofton an option as a regular CFer anymore, and it's probably unlikely that Patterson, at this stage of his career, would have been willing to do what Lofton is doing, but it's also possible that Patterson had other offers we never heard about. It's sometimes good to remember that stuff happens that the media doesn't always find out or tell us about. But I would certainly rather give Patterson $3M after an extended spring tryout than most of the other alternatives that were available, once the Reds had already decided they needed outside help at that position.

Team Clark
04-10-2008, 10:13 AM
I don't even consider Lofton an option as a regular CFer anymore, and it's probably unlikely that Patterson, at this stage of his career, would have been willing to do what Lofton is doing, but it's also possible that Patterson had other offers we never heard about. It's sometimes good to remember that stuff happens that the media doesn't always find out or tell us about. But I would certainly rather give Patterson $3M after an extended spring tryout than most of the other alternatives that were available, once the Reds had already decided they needed outside help at that position.

Excellent points and quite honestly very true.

backbencher
04-10-2008, 10:27 AM
I think that I read that Boras was looking for a 3-year, $24 million contract for Patterson in the offseason.

Benihana
04-10-2008, 10:50 AM
I think that I read that Boras was looking for a 3-year, $24 million contract for Patterson in the offseason.

If he keeps this up, he'll be getting at least that after this season. Think Gary Matthews Jr. circa 2006, minus the juice.

Benihana
04-10-2008, 10:51 AM
I think there is a lot of value in this post...sometimes it takes people longer to figure it out. As long as you aren't giving up something that might hurt you down the road.

I'm a big fan of these fliers as long as expectations are tempered. Sometimes you also have to look at it in the reverse...for example, I hate it when people want to deal Homer for 50 cents on the dollar.

Thanks...finally we agree on something. :)

As far as tempering expectations, I think Wayne is very good at doing just that, as each of these three acquisitions were NOT handed starting jobs at the time of their pickups. It turns out each one of them happened to earn a starting job within their first few weeks on the team, but it was hardly unjustified.

Andy Marte and Brian Anderson were two other targets with similar qualifications that I would have liked to see us acquire in Spring Training, although it seems as if we get one of these guys per season. (Phillips in '06, Hamilton in '07, Patterson in '08.) Either way, I'll take it.

M2
04-10-2008, 10:56 AM
I think we can all agree that if Corey Patterson goes .323/.353/.839 with 68 D, 68 HR, 136 R and 136 RBI while winning a GG, then he'll be well worth the $3M he's being paid.

Chip R
04-10-2008, 11:06 AM
I think we can all agree that if Corey Patterson goes .323/.353/.839 with 68 D, 68 HR, 136 R and 136 RBI while winning a GG, then he'll be well worth the $3M he's being paid.


Has Andruw Jones retired?

westofyou
04-10-2008, 11:07 AM
I think we can all agree that if Corey Patterson goes .323/.353/.839 with 68 D, 68 HR, 136 R and 136 RBI while winning a GG, then he'll be well worth the $3M he's being paid.

Only if he declares his love of Cincinnati Chili, moves his family there and buys some UC gear.

Then maybe the locals will welcome him.

Always Red
04-10-2008, 11:20 AM
Only if he declares his love of Cincinnati Chili, moves his family there and buys some UC gear.

Then maybe the locals will welcome him.

Well, we are a friendly bunch. ;)

Chip R
04-10-2008, 11:23 AM
Only if he declares his love of Cincinnati Chili, moves his family there and buys some UC gear.

Then maybe the locals will welcome him.


Naw, he just needs to smile a lot and sign lots of autographs. He'll be in like Flynn.

KronoRed
04-10-2008, 01:28 PM
If he keeps this up, he'll be getting at least that after this season. Think Gary Matthews Jr. circa 2006, minus the juice.

Lets just hope it's not from this team.

M2
04-10-2008, 02:17 PM
Has Andruw Jones retired?

Yes, though he continues to play baseball.

Chip R
04-10-2008, 02:19 PM
Yes, though he continues to play baseball.


Then he's going to win the Gold Glove no matter what Patterson does.

REDREAD
04-10-2008, 02:25 PM
Based on the current market, Patterson was without a job. If he was "easily worth $3MM", then he wouldn't have signed for a minor league contract. He would have gotten more than a $3MM, one year guaranteed contract..

Just because he signed a minor league deal doesn't mean he didn't have other offers. He also had the leverage to retire as Lofton did. Wayne wanted him to take a minor league deal so that he could have more time to evaluate all the pitchers he had on the 40 man roster. I'm pretty sure that Corey was all but guaranteed a 25 man roster spot. Let's turn it around.. if his market value was not 3 million, why did the Reds give him that much during a season where the owners were apparently colluding on the marginal FAs?




I also don't think he was expected (or is expected) to play GG caliber defense. That is starting to become a bit of a Paul Bunyan type tale. He has speed and ability. Let's see him play a bit more out there. If he is truly a GG CFer, then he would have had more job offers.

Patterson has always been an excellent defender.. Didn't you see him in Chicago.. Now "gold glove" is subjective, but it's not as if he's suddenly stepped up his defense this year, it's always been excellent. Do you not agree he's an excellent defender, certainly above average?

Why is Patterson not worth 3 million, when comparing him to other FAs?
How much do you think Patterson is worth to a team like the Reds who had no CF? How much is it worth to not have to endure Freel/Hopper in CF?

Patrick Bateman
04-10-2008, 05:11 PM
I'm guessing Patterson only got a minor league deal for roster flexibility at the time. It was pretty obvious from the moment he signed that he was designed to be the starting CF. It was likely well known he would make the team. It wasn't really a normal minor league deal IMO, and that's why it shouldn't be odd that he's getting 3M.

Kc61
04-11-2008, 12:11 PM
I think Patterson is a huge acquisition because of his defense in centerfield. One of the reasons Hamilton was expendable was because the Reds have pretty slow corner outfielders and need a defensive oriented centerfielder. Patterson fits the bill and I hope the Reds sign him up for a few years.

While not a true lead off hitter, hopefully Patterson has turned the corner offensively. He certainly has good power for a speedy centerfielder. Watching him for these first ten games, you have to think this was a worthwhile acquisition for $3 million.

TRF
04-11-2008, 12:28 PM
Just because he signed a minor league deal doesn't mean he didn't have other offers. He also had the leverage to retire as Lofton did. Wayne wanted him to take a minor league deal so that he could have more time to evaluate all the pitchers he had on the 40 man roster. I'm pretty sure that Corey was all but guaranteed a 25 man roster spot. Let's turn it around.. if his market value was not 3 million, why did the Reds give him that much during a season where the owners were apparently colluding on the marginal FAs?




Patterson has always been an excellent defender.. Didn't you see him in Chicago.. Now "gold glove" is subjective, but it's not as if he's suddenly stepped up his defense this year, it's always been excellent. Do you not agree he's an excellent defender, certainly above average?

Why is Patterson not worth 3 million, when comparing him to other FAs?
How much do you think Patterson is worth to a team like the Reds who had no CF? How much is it worth to not have to endure Freel/Hopper in CF?

Retire? at 28? that isn't leverage, it would be a bluff.

WMR
04-11-2008, 12:46 PM
Patterson is expendable, b/c Stubbs will be ready for his September call-up and ready for the job full-time next season. :all_cohol

BRM
04-11-2008, 12:46 PM
Patterson is expendable, b/c Stubbs will be ready for his September call-up and ready for the job full-time next season. :all_cohol

Pass me whatever that is you're drinking. It must be good stuff. ;)

REDREAD
04-11-2008, 12:56 PM
Retire? at 28? that isn't leverage, it would be a bluff.

Many guys leave the game at that age when their only true option is a minor league contract with no guarantees. In other words, that's a pretty good indication one's career is over. Some guys will be journeyman minor leaguers before they realize it.

That's my entire point. Patterson had value and we weren't going to get him without a decent contract. To be honest, I'm surprised we got him for as little as 3 million. If he continues to play well this year, he's going to get a lot more than that next year from someone.

In other words, it's not as if Patterson had no options, and crawled to the Reds begging for a job at whatever rate they'd give him. Some posters (not you) seemed to be under the impression that we could've lowballed Patterson a lot more.

blumj
04-11-2008, 01:13 PM
Then he's going to win the Gold Glove no matter what Patterson does.
Three OFers still get one, in each league.

edabbs44
04-19-2008, 03:44 PM
Umm....how we feeling now?

Reds1
04-19-2008, 04:31 PM
Hopper getting screwed IMO

mth123
04-19-2008, 04:37 PM
The offense needs an big infusion. Its Bruce time. Patterson provides a LH bench bat with Power and Speed, two things that Hatte lacks and would really improve the defense coming in late for Griffey or Dunn (with Bruce moving over).

Hairston and Bruce up, Hopper down with Castro DFA.

Anyone think its telling that Dusty chose Freel to lead-off the 8th of a tie game rather than try the Hopper bunt for a hit tactic? I think its clear that Hopper and Castro are not Dusty's chosen options.

Reds1
04-19-2008, 05:11 PM
The offense needs an big infusion. Its Bruce time. Patterson provides a LH bench bat with Power and Speed, two things that Hatte lacks and would really improve the defense coming in late for Griffey or Dunn (with Bruce moving over).

Hairston and Bruce up, Hopper down with Castro DFA.

Anyone think its telling that Dusty chose Freel to lead-off the 8th of a tie game rather than try the Hopper bunt for a hit tactic? I think its clear that Hopper and Castro are not Dusty's chosen options.

Just curious who hopper down. YOu just saying he's not a Dusty guy? I Hope we are working on some trade. Just need to tweak the make up of the bench and CF.

reds44
04-19-2008, 05:15 PM
Hopper really does nothing well but bunt. Sure, he'll hit .300, but it will be the most empty .300 ever. He doesn't play defense, he's not very smart, he'll hit for zero power, and he's not fast.

Reds1
04-19-2008, 05:19 PM
Hopper really does nothing well but bunt. Sure, he'll hit .300, but it will be the most empty .300 ever. He doesn't play defense, he's not very smart, he'll hit for zero power, and he's not fast.

Who said he can't play defense or run! He's better defensively then 2 of our starters and a better leadoff hitter then Freel or Patterson. He's also better defensively then Freel IMO. He had the highest ave for what a 2 mo stretch in baseball last year. How do we really know what he can do. It's not like he gets any playing time. Let's just keep running Patterson out there every day! I just don't get it.

WMR
04-19-2008, 05:35 PM
I would not say that Hopper is any better in LF than Dunn, and I don't say that lightly. The routes he takes to the ball are just horrific.

Matt700wlw
04-19-2008, 05:36 PM
I think Dunn's done pretty good out there in the field so far. He's not a gold glover by any stretch of the imagination, but he's not hurting the team out there.

WMR
04-19-2008, 05:38 PM
I think Dunn's done pretty good out there in the field so far. He's not a gold glover by any stretch of the imagination, but he's not hurting the team out there.

Agreed.

mth123
04-19-2008, 05:53 PM
Hopper really does nothing well but bunt. Sure, he'll hit .300, but it will be the most empty .300 ever. He doesn't play defense, he's not very smart, he'll hit for zero power, and he's not fast.

Hopper is probably deserving of a major league job somewhere as a specialist who bunts, runs, and fills in in the OF, but he is very flawed as a player. Your description is pretty accurate IMO but I do think he is fast. His defense is pretty good for a corner OF spot, but he doesn't have the offensive ability to play there. He could survive as a back-up CF type who bats 8th and uses his bunting and speed to eek some offensive value out of his game, but his defense in CF is only adequate at best and usually worse than that. There are plenty of teams that have guys like that occupying the 25th man spot, but the Reds have the overwhelming majority of his skillsets already on hand with Patterson (who also can bunt and run, but also adds some power and much, much, much better defense) and Freel who also can run and play OF with the added ability to fill-in at 2B and 3B. Historically Freel is also a much better on base guy with a little more power than Hopper. On the Reds roster, it is simply a numbers game. There are only so many spots available and using one on Hopper while still having glaring needs that aren't filled (like RH bench Bat with pop who may be a threat to drive in a run once in a while) is poor roster construction. Last night and in at least two of the losses in Pitt there were situations where our missing Hypothetical RH bat may have made a difference.

Reds1
04-19-2008, 06:11 PM
I think Dunn's done pretty good out there in the field so far. He's not a gold glover by any stretch of the imagination, but he's not hurting the team out there.

I agree. Still think Hopper better :)

Caveat Emperor
04-19-2008, 06:18 PM
I think Dunn's done pretty good out there in the field so far. He's not a gold glover by any stretch of the imagination, but he's not hurting the team out there.

As I said to a drunk fan at the game last night -- "OK, name me the last great defensive left fielder."

He babbled incoherently for another 20 seconds then shut up, allowing me to return to my sunflower seeds.

BTW -- Patterson's OBP is now approaching .250. Baker continues to be ignorant that he is undermining the team by continuing to put an out-machine in the leadoff spot.

reds44
04-19-2008, 06:21 PM
As I said to a drunk fan at the game last night -- "OK, name me the last great defensive left fielder."

He babbled incoherently for another 20 seconds then shut up, allowing me to return to my sunflower seeds.

BTW -- Patterson's OBP is now approaching .250. Baker continues to be ignorant that he is undermining the team by continuing to put an out-machine in the leadoff spot.
Carl Crawford?

(Hey, he's fast)

flyer85
04-19-2008, 06:23 PM
Kepp is the best suited for leadoff at the moment.

Caveat Emperor
04-19-2008, 06:26 PM
Kepp is the best suited for leadoff at the moment.

Kepp
Votto
Dunn
Phillips
Griffey
Encarnacion
Patterson
Bako
P

It seems so easy, even a caveman could do it.

RedsManRick
04-19-2008, 06:27 PM
Kepp
Votto
Dunn
Phillips
Griffey
Encarnacion
Patterson
Bako
P

It seems so easy, even a caveman could do it.

:beerme::beerme:

*BaseClogger*
04-19-2008, 06:30 PM
As I said to a drunk fan at the game last night -- "OK, name me the last great defensive left fielder."

He babbled incoherently for another 20 seconds then shut up, allowing me to return to my sunflower seeds.

Barry Bonds

mth123
04-19-2008, 06:33 PM
Barry Bonds

Yaz. Rickey was pretty good too.

edabbs44
04-19-2008, 06:37 PM
BTW -- Patterson's OBP is now approaching .250. Baker continues to be ignorant that he is undermining the team by continuing to put an out-machine in the leadoff spot.

You know, I give about 50% of the blame for the CPatt leadoff experiment to Baker. The other 50% should go to the entire FO for this reason:

This is Baker's MO. He pulled the same stunt in Chicago. Everyone knows it. So why doesn't the FO step in and tell him to stop? Why didn't this come up in the interview process?

This is equivalent to interviewing someone for a cashier's job, doing a background check and finding out that they stole money at previous cashier's job, still hiring them and letting the new cashier close up the registers at the end of the day without any oversight. Then, a few weeks later, finding out they were stealing from the registers. And, to top it off, not doing anything about it.

Now maybe it is a little extreme but there is definitely a correlation. You know the guy's history. Why let it continue?

*BaseClogger*
04-19-2008, 06:39 PM
You know, I give about 50% of the blame for the CPatt leadoff experiment to Baker. The other 50% should go to the entire FO for this reason:

This is Baker's MO. He pulled the same stunt in Chicago. Everyone knows it. So why doesn't the FO step in and tell him to stop? Why didn't this come up in the interview process?

This is equivalent to interviewing someone for a cashier's job, doing a background check and finding out that they stole money at previous cashier's job, still hiring them and letting the new cashier close up the registers at the end of the day without any oversight. Then, a few weeks later, finding out they were stealing from the registers. And, to top it off, not doing anything about it.

Now maybe it is a little extreme but there is definitely a correlation. You know the guy's history. Why let it continue?

I've thought the same thing, but then I realized the real reason we should blame the FO; they are the fools that hired Dusty Baker. Well, I assume Krivsky wanted Dusty... ;)

edabbs44
04-19-2008, 06:40 PM
I've thought the same thing, but then I realized the real reason we should blame the FO; they are the fools that hired Dusty Baker. Well, I assume Krivsky wanted Dusty... ;)

I actually get the feeling that Bob wanted Dusty. Wayne just smiled and went along for the ride.

*BaseClogger*
04-19-2008, 06:42 PM
I actually get the feeling that Bob wanted Dusty. Wayne just smiled and went along for the ride.

And the moment that the owner gets involved with baseball personel is the moment problems start...

Joseph
04-19-2008, 07:43 PM
And the moment that the owner gets involved with baseball personel is the moment problems start...

Then Bob's been a problem from day one, and will continue to be one.