PDA

View Full Version : Patterson Poll



Spring~Fields
06-06-2008, 01:41 PM
Patterson Stays
Patterson Goes

Why ?

Degenerate39
06-06-2008, 01:48 PM
Goes.

Waste of space. Waste of money. Batting 200.

Joseph
06-06-2008, 01:53 PM
I think this poll will generate results like one that asks "Do you want a million dollars?"

In other words, exceptionally one sided.

Spring~Fields
06-06-2008, 01:57 PM
I think this poll will generate results like one that asks "Do you want a million dollars?"

In other words, exceptionally one sided.


I think that the poll will clarify the opinion of many clearly and concisely one way or the other. The player in question either merits staying with the Reds or the player does not.

Key word merits
mer·it
n (plural mer·its)
1. value: value that deserves respect and acknowledgment

2. good quality: a good or praiseworthy characteristic that somebody or something has (often used in the plural)

3. ability: proven ability or accomplishment

reds44
06-06-2008, 02:03 PM
Goes.

Call up Dickerson.

nate
06-06-2008, 02:03 PM
A twist: if he stays, he bats no higher than 8th (preferably, 9th), starts only once a week and otherwise never sniffs the field or batter box before the 7th inning unless one 2 of our outfielders spontaneously combust.

GAC
06-06-2008, 02:03 PM
Patterson Stays
Patterson Goes

Why ? What? We have to explain WHY? :lol:

It's not longer debatable to say he'd be OK, due to his defensive skills, if he was batting 7th or 8th.

Has that come close to being a reality?

It's not ever going to happen with Baker. Nada, zip, nil

Walt needs to to do some aggressive surgery and remove this tumor.

westofyou
06-06-2008, 02:06 PM
This a team with no true CF, two OF's on the DL and two statues in the corner positions and all we can talk about with Patterson is his bat.

Seems silly to me... it's not like the Reds are flush with options at this exact moment.

This is a Stone Soup moment.... eat your soup with a smile and dream of steak.

PuffyPig
06-06-2008, 02:09 PM
No one better to repalce him with right now. You can't manage in a vacuum.

When Freel or Hopper comes back, then sure.

Red in Chicago
06-06-2008, 02:09 PM
Go! In fact, he never should have been here in the first place.

It's only a matter of time before Hairston and Bako's names appear in a similar poll.

cumberlandreds
06-06-2008, 02:10 PM
Easiest to answer poll yet for RZ. So far it's a perfect 18 for 18 for him to go. I think we should send this Jocketty and Cast.

NJReds
06-06-2008, 02:12 PM
Goes. He's fine as a 5th OF, defensive replacement or pinch runner, but Dusty will never use him correctly.

fearofpopvol1
06-06-2008, 02:20 PM
I don't like the poll options. Dusty is the wildcard in the whole equation. If he uses Patterson as a bench player/spot starter/bats him later in the lineups, I'm for keeping him. Particularly with an unhealthy Hopper and an injurred Freel.

If he's miscast (which he often is), he's not of much use.

Degenerate39
06-06-2008, 02:26 PM
Dusty and Patterson are the ones that voted stay, I assume.

*BaseClogger*
06-06-2008, 02:31 PM
This a team with no true CF, two OF's on the DL and two statues in the corner positions and all we can talk about with Patterson is his bat.

Seems silly to me... it's not like the Reds are flush with options at this exact moment.

This is a Stone Soup moment.... eat your soup with a smile and dream of steak.


No one better to repalce him with right now. You can't manage in a vacuum.

When Freel or Hopper comes back, then sure.

Dickerson?

CrackerJack
06-06-2008, 02:38 PM
Dead horse beat. No bat, all glove, over-paid, liked by manager for this year, deal with it.

RedsManRick
06-06-2008, 02:48 PM
Good defense and speed. No bat.

Dickerson can play that role and Dusty won't be so inclined to start him every day and bat him at the top of the order.

I agree he's probably no better than CPat, but in this case it would be addition by subtraction.

Hap
06-06-2008, 02:50 PM
let us not forget he is the best defensive CF on the team

westofyou
06-06-2008, 02:56 PM
Dickerson can play that role and Dusty won't be so inclined to start him every day and bat him at the top of the order.

And all that time on the bench will do wonders for his future worth to the franchise?

And they can just pay Patterson to hang in Falls City?

membengal
06-06-2008, 03:00 PM
Stays.

I'm not thrilled about it, but the Reds do need the option of a guy who can reliably catch a ball in the OF and cover some ground.

CaiGuy
06-06-2008, 03:06 PM
I would love a Dunn, Patterson, Bruce OF (with Patt batting 7th or lower, of course).

Play Janish at short, and you would have some serious up the middle defense.

RedsManRick
06-06-2008, 03:14 PM
And all that time on the bench will do wonders for his future worth to the franchise?

And they can just pay Patterson to hang in Falls City?

Dickerson likely has no future in the franchise other than in that role. Leaving him in AAA hardly benefits the franchise either, especially if his development has peaked/stalled. It's that very issue that has guided Patterson's career; a refusal to appreciate his limitations and use him in a way as such to provide some value to the team without doing the team harm by over-relying on him.

Patterson is a sunk cost. Where he should hang out has nothing to do with his salary. If Dickerson on the 25 man and Patterson twiddling him thumbs is the best setup for winning games, that's what we should go with.

flyer85
06-06-2008, 03:14 PM
let us not forget he is the best defensive CF on the teamcould get or same or maybe even better from Dickerson.

flyer85
06-06-2008, 03:15 PM
And all that time on the bench will do wonders for his future worth to the franchise?a bench/role player is about as good as Dickerson can hope for.

GAC
06-06-2008, 03:18 PM
This a team with no true CF, two OF's on the DL and two statues in the corner positions and all we can talk about with Patterson is his bat.

Seems silly to me... it's not like the Reds are flush with options at this exact moment.

This is a Stone Soup moment.... eat your soup with a smile and dream of steak.

You're absolutely right woy. We all may have to "bite our lower lip" for the remainder of the '08 season when it comes to Patterson; but I hope Walt is doing some serious research right now.

Because if he doesn't resign Dunn, and Jr is gone at season's end, then he needs more then one OFer come '09. And since we just called up the only viable option we have in the system, Walt has his work to do.

westofyou
06-06-2008, 03:19 PM
a bench/role player is about as good as Dickerson can hope for.

That's what Patterson is now... a proven MLB payer one who has some pop, can steal a bag and fields well.

He can't be that guy right now?

Chip R
06-06-2008, 03:20 PM
That's what Patterson is now... a proven MLB payer one who has some pop, can steal a bag and fields well.

He can't be that guy right now?


He's got to make contact to do those first two things which he doesn't seem to be doing very well now.

*BaseClogger*
06-06-2008, 03:21 PM
That's what Patterson is now... a proven MLB payer one who has some pop, can steal a bag and fields well.

He can't be that guy right now?

No, because many of us are assuming Dusty Baker will continue to bat him leadoff. He won't do that with Dickerson (hopefully)...

westofyou
06-06-2008, 03:22 PM
No, because many of us are assuming Dusty Baker will continue to bat him leadoff. He won't do that with Dickerson (hopefully)...

But he's not a starter is he?

We're talking role player?

Jay Bruce is still here correct?

*BaseClogger*
06-06-2008, 03:24 PM
But he's not a starter is he?

We're talking role player?

Jay Bruce is still here correct?

And role players start sometimes, don't they?

And when Patterson starts, he will hit #1 or #2, right?

GAC
06-06-2008, 03:24 PM
That's what Patterson is now... a proven MLB payer one who has some pop, can steal a bag and fields well.

He can't be that guy right now?

He sure can! I think the only problem the fans are having is that's not the role Dusty has been utilizing him in. It would be far more palatable if Dusty would begin to utilize him as such for the remainder of the year.

But with one OFer DL'd (Freel), and another already, after two months, showing soreness and wear n tear (Jr), we're going to see a lot more of Patterson.

And it bothers me that we don't have any other alternatives in the system.

westofyou
06-06-2008, 03:26 PM
And role players start sometimes, don't they?

And when Patterson starts, he will hit #1 or #2, right?

Wheres big Chris going to swing his stick then?

*BaseClogger*
06-06-2008, 03:27 PM
Wheres big Chris going to swing his stick then?


No, because many of us are assuming Dusty Baker will continue to bat him [Patterson] leadoff. He won't do that with Dickerson (hopefully)...

REDREAD
06-06-2008, 03:28 PM
This a team with no true CF, two OF's on the DL and two statues in the corner positions and all we can talk about with Patterson is his bat.

Seems silly to me... it's not like the Reds are flush with options at this exact moment.

This is a Stone Soup moment.... eat your soup with a smile and dream of steak.

Exactly right. What happens if Patterson is released and then Dickerson comes up and proves to be even worse? Or if we get another OF injury?

No point in releasing Patteson at this point. Dusty is not going to play him everyday as long as Dunn/Jr/Bruce are healthy anyhow.

The idea that we should throw away depth just to remove temptation from Dusty is ludicrous..

REDREAD
06-06-2008, 03:31 PM
He's got to make contact to do those first two things which he doesn't seem to be doing very well now.

Dickerson isn't going to be any better.

It just amazes me that people assume Dickerson will be a better player. He's more likely to be the second coming of Anderson Machado offensively, which is worse than Patterson.

RedsManRick
06-06-2008, 03:33 PM
That's what Patterson is now... a proven MLB payer one who has some pop, can steal a bag and fields well.

He can't be that guy right now?

Unfortunately not. Dusty refuses to use him in a way that doesn't overexpose his weaknesses. In a perfect world, that shouldn't fall on CPatt. But at a practical level, if Dusty can't use him without doing damage, and Dusty isn't going anywhere, then CPat needs to. If I'm Jocketty, I put Corey in AAA, bring Dickerson up, and strongly recommend that use Hairston as his 4th OF and Dickerson his 5th.

*BaseClogger*
06-06-2008, 03:35 PM
Dickerson isn't going to be any better.

It just amazes me that people assume Dickerson will be a better player. He's more likely to be the second coming of Anderson Machado offensively, which is worse than Patterson.

Anderson Machado was a career .221/.333/.324 hitter. Corey Patterson is hitting .193/.233/.340 right now. Seriously, you can't get much worse than Corey Patterson at the plate right now--it is like pitchers batting bad...

westofyou
06-06-2008, 03:36 PM
Unfortunately not. Dusty refuses to use him in a way that doesn't overexpose his weaknesses. In a perfect world, that shouldn't fall on CPatt. But at a practical level, if Dusty can't use him without doing damage, and Dusty isn't going anywhere, then CPat needs to. If I'm Jocketty, I put Corey in AAA, bring Dickerson up, and strongly recommend that use Hairston as his 4th OF and Dickerson his 5th.

In a perfect world good teams don't dump depth based on assumptions about what his lineup spot will be if he does garner a start.

The guy was brought up because someone tore a muscle in their leg, the fear that he might get 50 ab's is hilarious

Spring~Fields
06-06-2008, 03:37 PM
Good defense and speed. No bat.

Dickerson can play that role and Dusty won't be so inclined to start him every day and bat him at the top of the order.

I agree he's probably no better than CPat, but in this case it would be addition by subtraction.

If it is truly about defense, then Dickerson could be the fourth or fifth backup outfielder to take care of defense.

Then again if Patteson is about leading off or batting second and his speed is to steal bases in the event that he ever gets on and starting, Phillips has the speed to bat first or second and can actually hit the ball where Patterson struggles, and Phillips can steal bases.

Come to think of it I am not sure by Bakers words and actions what Patterson is really on the team for, is it defense, or is it speed and to leadoff ? Hairston can leadoff, and Phillips can bat second, there is no need for Patterson on the offense, there are better options.

I agree that Dickerson can play that role, backup outfielder, like Valentin is to the catching backup.

But let's not forget that Jay Bruce can play centerfield and has the ability to actually hit the ball, and Hairston can play right field, Hairston can play CF, there is not need for Patterson on this team.

RedsManRick
06-06-2008, 03:37 PM
In a perfect world good teams don't dump depth based on assumptions about what his lineup spot will be if he does garner a start.

The guy was brought up because someone tore a muscle in their leg, the fear that he might get 50 ab's is hilarious

Win, lose... who cares?!

There's no assumption involved here. Dusty has stated outright his intention to leadoff Patterson any time he plays and to play him liberally. Patterson has proven himself unable of providing above replacement value. The math isn't that hard -- or funny.

*BaseClogger*
06-06-2008, 03:37 PM
The Reds are playing Hairston at SS right now, and he isn't a true SS. Maybe some posters miss Juan Castro? He could probably outhit Corey Patterson right now...

westofyou
06-06-2008, 03:38 PM
Win, lose... who cares?!

I do, just because I don't subscribe to your theory doesn't mean I don't.

westofyou
06-06-2008, 03:39 PM
The Reds are playing Hairston at SS right now, and he isn't a true SS. Maybe some posters miss Juan Castro? He could probably outhit Corey Patterson right now...

Yes.. exactly, that's a great summation of the debate.

Brilliant.

Chip R
06-06-2008, 03:46 PM
Dickerson isn't going to be any better.

It just amazes me that people assume Dickerson will be a better player. He's more likely to be the second coming of Anderson Machado offensively, which is worse than Patterson.


We won't know until he comes up here, will we?

LoganBuck
06-06-2008, 03:51 PM
You know there are these things called trades. One team sends something another team needs in exchange for something they need. Teams swap extra parts all the time.

I fail to see the legitimacy of the "he is all we have" argument.

Spring~Fields
06-06-2008, 03:52 PM
He sure can! I think the only problem the fans are having is that's not the role Dusty has been utilizing him in. It would be far more palatable if Dusty would begin to utilize him as such for the remainder of the year.

But with one OFer DL'd (Freel), and another already, after two months, showing soreness and wear n tear (Jr), we're going to see a lot more of Patterson.

And it bothers me that we don't have any other alternatives in the system.


Phillips has plenty of pop and can steal plenty of bases.

Griffey, Dunn, Votto and Bruce are paid for their pop.

Griffey plays right and Bruce will play center

WVRedsFan
06-06-2008, 03:52 PM
Why?

Because Dusty will start him. Near the front of the lineup. And he'll go 0-4 and hit at the first four pitches he sees.

Spring~Fields
06-06-2008, 03:57 PM
We won't know until he comes up here, will we?

Remember all the anti-arguments to Bruce throughout the first two months?
Where did those go? ;)

Chip R
06-06-2008, 03:58 PM
Why?

Because Dusty will start him. Near the front of the lineup. And he'll go 0-4 and hit at the first four pitches he sees.


The voice of reason. If Patterson batted 8th and played CF, it would be much better. But Dusty can't help himself.

Spring~Fields
06-06-2008, 03:58 PM
Why?

Because Dusty will start him. Near the front of the lineup. And he'll go 0-4 and hit at the first four pitches he sees.

Or be used as a pinch hitter :thumbup:

Spring~Fields
06-06-2008, 04:03 PM
The voice of reason. If Patterson batted 8th and played CF, it would be much better. But Dusty can't help himself.

Is it Bakers fault that Patterson just does not hit well and has a career of a low on base percentage? Is it Bakers fault that Patterson can't hit or work a walk?

RedsManRick
06-06-2008, 04:15 PM
I do, just because I don't subscribe to your theory doesn't mean I don't.

My theory is that I'd rather have Chris Dickerson getting at bats in the 8th spot than Corey Patterson getting them in the 1st or 2nd. I just want to be clear, you disagree with that premise?

And to be even more clear, I'd rather have Patterson in the 7th or 8th spot over either of those options, but Dusty has made it perfectly clear that that isn't going to happen.

westofyou
06-06-2008, 04:26 PM
My theory is that I'd rather have Chris Dickerson getting at bats in the 8th spot than Corey Patterson getting them in the 1st or 2nd. I just want to be clear, you disagree with that premise?

And to be even more clear, I'd rather have Patterson in the 7th or 8th spot over either of those options, but Dusty has made it perfectly clear that that isn't going to happen.

I see a lot of assumptions driving that premise myself, if Patterson is playing below his mean average you're assuming that he won't correct that pattern, there's an assumption that Dickerson will transition perfectly in MLB replacement level quality, plus HE will get ab's in the 7th and 8th spot and Patterson won't.

That's IF they get a start.

Then there is the assumption that the Reds want to eat Cory's salary, use an option on Dickerson and everything will work out just fine in the end.

Nah... too many what ifs for me, Patterson's bad but so was Heity Cruz, and he managed to contribute some.

RedsManRick
06-06-2008, 05:03 PM
I see a lot of assumptions driving that premise myself, if Patterson is playing below his mean average you're assuming that he won't correct that pattern, there's an assumption that Dickerson will transition perfectly in MLB replacement level quality, plus HE will get ab's in the 7th and 8th spot and Patterson won't.

That's IF they get a start.

Then there is the assumption that the Reds want to eat Cory's salary, use an option on Dickerson and everything will work out just fine in the end.

Nah... too many what ifs for me, Patterson's bad but so was Heity Cruz, and he managed to contribute some.

I won't deny the assumptions, but we should note than ANY projection/prediction is based on a set of assumptions. That assumptions are in play is not an issue -- let's look at the assumptions I am making and assess them on their merits.

Assumption 1: Patterson won't regress to the mean
In fact, I have every faith he will regress to the mean -- a sub .300 OBP and a SLG around .400. That is replacement level offense from a CF. Used at the top of the lineup where the value of OBP is magnified and SLG minimized (http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/story/2006/2/12/133645/296), it's sub-replacement. Dusty has said explicitly that if/when Patterson plays, he will bat at the top of the lineup. Conclusion, Patterson is likely to continue to give sub-replacement production, even if he rebounds his to his mean level of performance, in part due to his misuse.

Assumption 2: Dickerson will be replacement level or better
PECOTA, the most accurate projection system I am aware of, has a weighted mean performance from Dickerson at .241 /.321/.409. It has Patterson at .271/.313/.423. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that Dickerson has a decent shot at equaling Patterson's likely level of production. 2008 performances do not come in to play for either player in my book.

Assumption 3: Dickerson will hit 7th 8th, Corey Won't
Well, I guess we cannot be absolutely certain, but if we take Dusty at his word, Patterson will stay up top. With Dickerson, you're right, we don't know. But at least there's the possibility. We certainly don't have to worry about the "respect card" which Dusty is keen on playing. In the event Dickerson comes up and leads off, he's still more of an OBP threat than the BA-driven, yet contact challenged Patterson.

Assumption 4: The Reds want to eat Cory's salary
I don't think the Reds want to eat anybody's salary, but have shown a willingness to do it in the past. Furthemore, the salary is going to be paid regardless of where Patterson hangs his jersey, so it's really not relevant to the conversation. I have no problem keeping him on the 40 man in AAA.

Assumption 5: The Reds want to use an option on Dickerson
2008 is Dickerson's 5th year in the organization and he has never used an option -- 3 option years remaining. After the 6th year, he can become a minor league FA. He is 26 years old. His options status is irrelevant.

Assumption 6: Everything will work out just fine in the end
Will work out fine? Of course not. I'm not assuming that this will work out fine. I am concluding that based on the above assumptions, this course of action is most likely to result in the greatest production from that roster spot. Would I bet on it? Probably not. But I hardly think there's much to lose by exposing ourselves to the possibility of a better option. I know tone is something that is difficult to convey in a message board setting. I don't think it's fair to suggest that anybody is claiming absolutely certainty on the right course of action. It's all educated guesswork.

Let's not confuse merely being out there and doing something good on occasion with actual positive contribution. While OPSing .592 is certainly better than OPSing .000, that doesn't mean we should be happy that he positive contributes once every five trips to the plate. The ironic thing to me in your citing of Heity Cruz is that his value, his contributions, were almost a direct result of his ability to take a walk, the one advantage Dickerson has over Patterson.

westofyou
06-06-2008, 05:16 PM
Assumption 2: Dickerson will be replacement level or better
PECOTA, the most accurate projection system I am aware of, has a weighted mean performance from Dickerson at .241 /.321/.409. It has Patterson at .271/.313/.423. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that Dickerson has a decent shot at equaling Patterson's likely level of production. 2008 performances do not come in to play for either player in my book.



Current Davenport translations for Dickerson

.229/.316/.343

That's my main worry. I still see Patterson providing more than that at this moment.

RedsManRick
06-06-2008, 05:23 PM
Current Davenport translations for Dickerson

.229/.316/.343

That's my main worry. I still see Patterson providing more than that at this moment.

Well, if you want to count the 2008 data, let's compare that .229/.316/.343 projection to Patterson's actual .193/.233/.340. What's the difference? When Dickerson struggles, he can still find his way on base.

I think it's a coin flip between them projecting forward, but I'd rather have the guy who can take a walk when he's not hitting and who I think Dusty is more likely to use in a manner commensurate to his accurate skills.

I'm certainly not passionate about it -- neither guy is an asset. Just given the choice, that's where I'd go.

Chip R
06-06-2008, 05:25 PM
My theory is that I'd rather have Chris Dickerson getting at bats in the 8th spot than Corey Patterson getting them in the 1st or 2nd.


I'm no Patterson supporter but what makes you think Dusty won't use Dickerson in the leadoff spot just like he did with Patterson?

This isn't really Dickerson v. Patterson. It's Dusty v. common sense.

reds44
06-06-2008, 05:33 PM
Current Davenport translations for Dickerson

.229/.316/.343

That's my main worry. I still see Patterson providing more than that at this moment.
.229/.316/.343 is still better in every way than .193/.233/.340. Patterson probably has more "pop" in his bat than Dickerson does and Dickerson will strike out more, but Dickerson will walk a lot more and I would say their speed and defense is a wash.

Dickerson's career minor league line is:
.254/.356/.400

If he came up and hit .235 with a .335 OBP he is still bringing you more to the table than Patterson does.

If I had to choose between Patterson or Dickerson leading off, it would no doubt be Dickerson because at least he will put some long ABs together.

RedsManRick
06-06-2008, 05:36 PM
I'm no Patterson supporter but what makes you think Dusty won't use Dickerson in the leadoff spot just like he did with Patterson?

This isn't really Dickerson v. Patterson. It's Dusty v. common sense.

The more I think about it, the more I'm thinking this is probably right. I figure there are 3 basic factors that go in to it for Dusty:

1. Position
2. Role (sort of like ability/talent, but only in Dusty's fixed shape "RBI guy" type definitions)
3. Age/Experience/Ego

Dickerson would be the same as CPat on 1 & 2, but I'd be holding out hope that Dusty wouldn't want to "pressure" him by batting him up top.

Spring~Fields
06-06-2008, 05:53 PM
It's Dusty v. common sense.

Don't go messing up my poll now by confusing us with the facts. ;)

GAC
06-06-2008, 06:15 PM
Is it Bakers fault that Patterson just does not hit well and has a career of a low on base percentage? Is it Bakers fault that Patterson can't hit or work a walk?

No, it's Baker's fault for not recognizing those glaring truths.


It's Dusty v. common sense.


The voice of reason. If Patterson batted 8th and played CF, it would be much better. But Dusty can't help himself.

I needed to highlight those because it points to the real problem.

The problem is not Corey "I am what I am" Patterson.

The problem, IMHO, is a manager's philosophy on how to construct/run an offense.

Kick Patterson off this team.

Dusty will find some other way to fill that "void". ;)

Reds1
06-06-2008, 06:34 PM
Bring up any youngster in place of him. The good news when Kepp, Hopper, gonz, anyone comes back he is gone - oh Freel.

mth123
06-06-2008, 09:41 PM
This a team with no true CF, two OF's on the DL and two statues in the corner positions and all we can talk about with Patterson is his bat.

Seems silly to me... it's not like the Reds are flush with options at this exact moment.

This is a Stone Soup moment.... eat your soup with a smile and dream of steak.

Yep. The Reds are short of guys who can catch a fly ball.

Always Red
06-06-2008, 09:53 PM
This a team with no true CF, two OF's on the DL and two statues in the corner positions and all we can talk about with Patterson is his bat.



No one on this team can run in the OF like Patterson- and Jay Bruce (though I love him) is not even close. Bruce is not getting good jumps on balls at all right now, and on balls hit directly to CF, he invariably takes 2 steps in (or back) before he correctly judges the ball.

As long as Dunn and Griffey are on the corners, there is need for a guy like CP to play CF, at least in the late innings. NO, I do not want him on the team next year, unless in a 4th or 5th OF role, but he is valuable for his defense.

This team needs more defenders like him.

AmarilloRed
06-06-2008, 10:32 PM
From all I have heard, Dickerson is the best defensive outfielder in the minor leagues(although it is probably close between him and Stubbs).

Rounding Third
06-06-2008, 11:59 PM
No, it's Baker's fault for not recognizing those glaring truths.





I needed to highlight those because it points to the real problem.

The problem is not Corey "I am what I am" Patterson.

The problem, IMHO, is a manager's philosophy on how to construct/run an offense.

Kick Patterson off this team.

Dusty will find some other way to fill that "void". ;)

You can't trust Dusty with Patterson on the team. If he could put him in the 8 hole it would be fine, but he just can't help himself.

Let him go now. And maybe we should also release Patterson

Blitz Dorsey
06-07-2008, 12:18 AM
Has the worst swing outside of any co-ed softball beer league that I have ever seen. Hey Corey, can you loop your swing any more than you already do? No? Didn't think so.

cincinnati chili
06-07-2008, 03:32 AM
This a team with no true CF, two OF's on the DL and two statues in the corner positions and all we can talk about with Patterson is his bat.

Seems silly to me... it's not like the Reds are flush with options at this exact moment.

This is a Stone Soup moment.... eat your soup with a smile and dream of steak.

Yes. And he has value as a fifth or sixth outfielder even when the club is healthy. Even Earl Weaver believed in defensive replacements. He just didn't advocate paying them 3.5 million per year.

redsrule2500
06-07-2008, 04:06 AM
This a team with no true CF, two OF's on the DL and two statues in the corner positions and all we can talk about with Patterson is his bat.

Seems silly to me... it's not like the Reds are flush with options at this exact moment.

This is a Stone Soup moment.... eat your soup with a smile and dream of steak.

No amount of puns can rationalize your justification of Patterson.

westofyou
06-07-2008, 11:18 AM
No amount of puns can rationalize your justification of Patterson.

Gee... coming from you that's gold.

Spring~Fields
06-07-2008, 07:58 PM
Baseball Musings Lineup Analysis
Based on work by Cyril Morong, Ken Arneson and Ryan Armbrust
http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/LineupAnalysis.py?Player0=Hairston&OBA0=.370&Slug0=.470&Player1=Bruce&OBA1=+.569&Slug1=+.756&Player2=Griffey&OBA2=+0.356&Slug2=+0.408&Player3=Phillips&OBA3=+0.330&Slug3=+0.506&Player4=Dunn&OBA4=+0.409&Slug4=+0.530&Player5=Encanrcion&OBA5=+0.318&Slug5=+0.439&Player6=Votto&OBA6=+0.358&Slug6=+0.505&Player7=Ross&OBA7=+.369&Slug7=.333&Player8=Cueto&OBA8=+0.174&Slug8=+0.050&Model=0

Baker Lineup: Using Season Stat -
runs per game for below lineup: 4.402. x 162 = 713.124 runs for the season
Patterson .231 .338
Keppinger .373 .446
Griffey .356 .408
Phillips .330 .506
Dunn .409 .530
Encarncion .318 .439
Votto .358 .505
Bako .314 .385
Cuteo .174 .050

Baker Lineup: Using Season Stats -
runs per game for below lineup: 5.797. x 162 = 939.114 runs for the season
Hairston .370 .470
Bruce .569 .756
Griffey .356 .408
Phillips .330 .506
Dunn .409 .530
Encarcion .318 .439
Votto .358 .505
Ross .369 .333
Cueto .174 .050

RedsManRick
06-07-2008, 08:30 PM
SF, try that 2nd lineup with more realistic figures from Bruce, even if generous, say .380/.560.

Spring~Fields
06-07-2008, 08:59 PM
SF, try that 2nd lineup with more realistic figures from Bruce, even if generous, say .380/.560.

Using Season Stats with outlier adjustment for Bruce
Hairston .370 .470
Bruce .380 .560 * reduced to more realistic data for outlier from .569 .756
Griffey .356 .408
Phillips .330 .506
Dunn .409 .530
Encarcion .318 .439
Votto .358 .505
Ross .369 .333
Cueto .174 .050

* outlier - a statistical value that is outside other values in a set of data

Using Bruce at .380/.560.

Comparison Old Baker Lineup: Using Season Stat -
runs per game for below lineup: 4.402. x 162 = 713.124 runs for the season
Patterson .231 .338
Keppinger .373 .446
Griffey .356 .408
Phillips .330 .506
Dunn .409 .530
Encarncion .318 .439
Votto .358 .505
Bako .314 .385
Cuteo .174 .050

Old Baker Lineup Example:
Runs per game for below lineup: 4.402. x 162 = 713.124 runs for the season

Newer Baker Lineup:
Runs per game for above lineup: 5.124. x 162 = 830.088

Analysis By Baseball Musings
Runs per game using 5.331 lineup 5.331 x 162 = 863.622


Top 5 lineups per analysis by Baseball Musings

5.331 Dunn Votto Griffey Bruce Hairston Phillips Ecarncion Cueto Ross
5.331 Dunn Bruce Griffey Votto Hairston Phillips Ecarncion Cueto Ross
5.328 Dunn Votto Griffey Bruce Hairston Ecarncion Phillips Cueto Ross
5.328 Dunn Bruce Griffey Votto Hairston Ecarncion Phillips Cueto Ross
5.327 Dunn Hairston Griffey Bruce Votto Phillips Ecarncion Cueto Ross

OnBaseMachine
06-08-2008, 02:12 AM
For those patting Corey Patterson on the back because you heard he volunteered to be sent to the minors, it ain’t so.

It was reported that way (not by me), but it just ain’t so. He never volunteered. When he was asked if he volunteered, he said, “No, I never volunteered. I was in Dusty Baker’s office and he told me I was going back. I expected it, but I didn’t ask for it.”

Actually, I applaud Patterson even more than if he had volunteered. He could have let the story ride and said, “Yep, I said, ‘Send my miserable butt back to Louisville, or maybe even Chattanooga,’” and made himself look good.

But he told the truth. He didn’t volunteer. He was told he was Louisvill-bound.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/cincinnatireds/

RedsManRick
06-08-2008, 02:26 AM
Thanks SF. Obviously it makes quite the difference. If Bruce is able to maintain a .900+ OPS, it's hard to overstate the boost it gives the offense over Patterson.

Spring~Fields
06-08-2008, 03:06 AM
For those patting Corey Patterson on the back because you heard he volunteered to be sent to the minors, it ain’t so.

It was reported that way (not by me), but it just ain’t so. He never volunteered. When he was asked if he volunteered, he said, “No, I never volunteered. I was in Dusty Baker’s office and he told me I was going back. I expected it, but I didn’t ask for it.”

Actually, I applaud Patterson even more than if he had volunteered. He could have let the story ride and said, “Yep, I said, ‘Send my miserable butt back to Louisville, or maybe even Chattanooga,’” and made himself look good.

But he told the truth. He didn’t volunteer. He was told he was Louisvill-bound.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/cincinnatireds/

I respect Patterson more now. That took courage to be honest and to contradict "the powers that be" with the Reds, either that or he wants out. Probably wants out of leading off, the stories out of Chicago when he was there indicated that Patterson never did like leading off, that is was Bakers dream for him to leadoff, Patterson was sent down to AAA there also, afterward he, had a change of heart about leading off according to the Chicago journalist.

I didn’t think that he had volunteered anyway, I thought that Jocketty had seen enough.

This isn't the first case of a player indicating that Baker "possibly" embellishes (to be polite) on the truth about a player.

Bruce disputed Bakers comments in spring training over a history of leg injuries.
Ross disputed Baker on his need for rehab over a back problem.
Freel disputed Baker on alleged playing time comments.
Now Patterson - When he was asked if he volunteered, he said, “No, I never volunteered. I was in Dusty Baker’s office and he told me I was going back.

I am still wondering what the truth is when Soto was called back and commented on Cueto pitching different, if someone was tinkering with his mechanics or making some changes etc.

With Baker, track his words, watch his actions to match those words, see if it fits common sense or the norms, and wait for time to tell you the truth.
For some reason he "doesn't seem" comfortable with the actual facts, or "maybe" he lacks confidence.

Embellishes - add false details to something: to make an account or description more interesting by inventing or exaggerating details

reds44
06-08-2008, 03:21 AM
Patterson volunteering came from Fay's blog.

http://beta.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog07&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ae57bcc87-152a-4f72-96fb-cc08b1f396efPost%3ab193e41e-dd9b-4943-bee9-3f812add8beb&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com



Dusty Baker said Corey Patterson came to him yesterday and volunteered to go Triple-A.

"It was a mutual decision," Baker said. "I was going to call Corey in and talk to him. He came in before I called him in. He said, 'I got to get my act together. I've got to change some things.' He knows he's better than he played. He's still got the skill, the talent. He's still only 28 years old. It's a good move to go down, stay a while and get his stuff together."

It sounds like there's mechanical problems with Patterson's swing. "No. 1, he's got to get on that fastball and eliminate some steps. Basically, hitting is like a two-step process. He had a third and fourth step in there."

Spring~Fields
06-08-2008, 03:39 AM
Patterson volunteering came from Fay's blog.

http://beta.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog07&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ae57bcc87-152a-4f72-96fb-cc08b1f396efPost%3ab193e41e-dd9b-4943-bee9-3f812add8beb&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

Baker was Fay's source, "Baker Gait" Where are those Washington Post boys when you need them.
Either Fay or Baker, "possibly" may have a short term memory problem. ;)

Highlifeman21
06-08-2008, 10:02 AM
I would love a Dunn, Patterson, Bruce OF (with Patt batting 7th or lower, of course).

Play Janish at short, and you would have some serious up the middle defense.

While Keppinger is hurt, I agree I'd rather see Janish be our everyday SS than Hairston, but once Keppinger comes back Janish should go to the bench and Hairston should go back to Louisville.

Patterson should be our everyday CF, and Bruce should be the everyday RF, which only means that KGJ needs to find his way out of town yesterday.

Unfortunately KGJ won't be leaving until after this season.

RedsManRick
06-08-2008, 01:09 PM
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Baker was putting words in his player's mouths as an attempt to ingratiate himself. He so desperately wants to be the 26th player, it seemingly affects everything he does.

*BaseClogger*
06-08-2008, 01:18 PM
For those that have now seen Bruce pay some ML CF, is it that much worse than Patterson's defense?

wheels
06-08-2008, 01:28 PM
For those that have now seen Bruce pay some ML CF, is it that much worse than Patterson's defense?

He certainly doesn't seem as rangy.

No one does. That's my conundrum. I really like Patterson as a defender, but I find his offensive capabilities to be deplorable.

If I were the manager, I'd have Bruce split time between Right and Center Fields. Two games in Right, three games in Center per week.

When Patterson plays, he bats in the eight hole.

*BaseClogger*
06-08-2008, 01:37 PM
Can I do this?

2008 Patterson and 2007 Hamilton have nearly identical range factors...

mth123
06-08-2008, 04:31 PM
Can I do this?

2008 Patterson and 2007 Hamilton have nearly identical range factors...

I never understood the knocks on Hamilton's defense in CF. Maybe all these years of watching Griffey's stationary approach have made me lose my perspective, but Hamilton seemed plenty rangy to me.

RedsManRick
06-08-2008, 04:40 PM
D'oh... wrong thread.