Corey Patterson traded to Balt. (per Levine)

[Transmogrified Tiger]

How long do we have to give Corey to "raise" his trade value then?

 

If we don't have upgrade the OF, then people complain (and rightfully so) that adjustments weren't made to better the miserable oh five team. I don't see the improvements coming while he's in Chicago, so he's a semi expensive unproductive everyday player, or he's an expensive bench player who can't raise his value anyway. And if Corey has a bad April and the fans are just riding his ass, what do you do?

 

Let him be a backup OF. He's security if Pierre gets hurt, then if he gets hot you can spin him at the deadline. Like USS brought up, we hardly got anything for him, so it's not a huge deal if that deal isn't there next offseason, and there's a decent likelihood it will be.

 

Keeping Corey would have been an inhuman, not to mention a media fiasco.

 

As a backup OF? That's really overstating it, not to mention the fact that you can't/shouldn't let media reaction determine your course of action.

[CUBZ99]

How long do we have to give Corey to "raise" his trade value then?

 

If we don't have upgrade the OF, then people complain (and rightfully so) that adjustments weren't made to better the miserable oh five team. I don't see the improvements coming while he's in Chicago, so he's a semi expensive unproductive everyday player, or he's an expensive bench player who can't raise his value anyway. And if Corey has a bad April and the fans are just riding his ass, what do you do?

 

Let him be a backup OF. He's security if Pierre gets hurt, then if he gets hot you can spin him at the deadline. Like USS brought up, we hardly got anything for him, so it's not a huge deal if that deal isn't there next offseason, and there's a decent likelihood it will be.

 

They already got Hairston.

[JC]

 

I think the word you were trying to say was "obstinate" and you have still competely failed to back up your contention that Patterson would have somehow gotten better over night, or after 6 seasons in the Major Leagues would have improved his trade value. You seem to be unwilling to deal with the facts or the reality of the situation. Sure Patterson could have a career year next year, but judging by his past performance, it was not likely to happen.

 

You just don't get it.

 

At all.

 

But, you can spell.

Edited January 10, 2006 by JC

[Tim]

To be fair, it is possible that Von Joshua reported to Hendry that it was hopeless and that he was regressing even further. There is much we just don't know.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

How long do we have to give Corey to "raise" his trade value then?

 

If we don't have upgrade the OF, then people complain (and rightfully so) that adjustments weren't made to better the miserable oh five team. I don't see the improvements coming while he's in Chicago, so he's a semi expensive unproductive everyday player, or he's an expensive bench player who can't raise his value anyway. And if Corey has a bad April and the fans are just riding his ass, what do you do?

 

Let him be a backup OF. He's security if Pierre gets hurt, then if he gets hot you can spin him at the deadline. Like USS brought up, we hardly got anything for him, so it's not a huge deal if that deal isn't there next offseason, and there's a decent likelihood it will be.

 

Keeping Corey would have been an inhuman, not to mention a media fiasco.

 

As a backup OF? That's really overstating it, not to mention the fact that you can't/shouldn't let media reaction determine your course of action.

 

Yes, as a backup OFer it would have been a mess. Did you go to any of the games in the 2nd half last year when Corey played? The guy isn't just an asset, he's a human being.

[oldcubsfan]

I haven't read the 8 pages of this thread. I just want to exress my disappointment in the Cubs once again settling on making a deal with no leverage whatsoever. There is just no sense in the manner in which this management team negotiates' date=' evaluates or makes transactions in general.[/quote']

 

Leverage, what leverage? As Bruce Miles stated on this forum just a few days ago Corey was not a hot name at all throughout the baseball world.

 

Well, you've made the point for me. He had no leverage. At all. Thus, it makes more sense to gamble into creating some leverage through 1) better play at the ML level; 2) better play at AAA; or 3) need created though injury in ST or the first part of the season.

 

Negotiating is all about leverage. Trading players without any is just stupid when you know a player has talent (e.g. Corey). If it were some clown like Macias, when you are unlikely to get anything more than you've seen over his stay with the Cubs, then the likelihood of gaining leverage is low if not non-existent. But, that isn't the case with Corey.

 

It is bad negotiating, pure and simple.

 

It is always easier to make comments like this after the fact.

 

Why, pray tell, is that the case? I have been anticipating this lackluster move (as have many) since October. Hendry moved Sammy at his lowest value (and, in fact, contributed to lowering his value). Hendry is more interested in a clean clubhouse rather than addressing messes that he had his hand in manufacturing.

 

Don't try to diminish my point by making me appear as if I am only preying on hindsight. It doesn't take a clariavoyant or baseball executive to derive the opinion that this was a trade in which Hendry would be hard pressed to get less value at a later date. I am 100% certain that Hendry at some level decided to move Patterson prior to the Convention so as not to repeat the 05 Sosa debacle. His moves regularly have a tinge of panic to them as of late.

When should we have moved Corey then?

 

Didn't I already address this?

 

Hendry was between a rock and a hard place here. Now if I hear we're paying some of his salary for next season, I'll be miffed.

 

No, he wasn't. He made a poor trade because he is shortsighted.

Well, since the season ended there has be NO demand for Corey, he got what he could. Why do you think demand would have increased for a completely undiscipled ball player? You feel there was value to get, but I'm not sure why.

I'm sure this conversation will happen again when Walker is launched for nothing. There is NO demand for these players. Please show me where there is any demand for either player other than just assumptions.

[CUBZ99]

 

I think the word you were trying to say was "obstinate" and you have still competely failed to back up your contention that Patterson would have somehow gotten better over night, or after 6 seasons in the Major Leagues would have improved his trade value. You seem to be unwilling to deal with the facts or the reality of the situation. Sure Patterson could have a career year next year, but judging by his past performance, it was not likely to happen.

 

You just don't get it.

 

At all.

 

If you can't support your argument with any facts, you can always try to attack the poster?

[CUBZ99]

To be fair, it is possible that Von Joshua reported to Hendry that it was hopeless and that he was regressing even further. There is much we just don't know.

 

I noticed Von Joshua was promoted to AAA, is he the resident expert hitting coach?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Face it guys. We got a pretty decent return on Oddibie McDowell.

[JC]

To be fair, it is possible that Von Joshua reported to Hendry that it was hopeless and that he was regressing even further. There is much we just don't know.

 

That might be the case. Then again, there may have been absolutely no such report.

 

Nobody is saying they have any special insight guaranteeing that Corey will improve. The point is that it is nearly impossible for Corey to be any worse than he was during his 2005 tailspin. If one admits that point, then it is equally reasonable to conclude that Corey would garner a higher bounty on the trade market. Of course, there is a chance Corey gets worse. It comes down to how big of a payoff you are looking for and resources. If Corey couldn't be traded and completely failed early in 06, there are other options (Hairston if Pie isn't ready or Pie himself). Now, Pie is in limbo with the acquisition of Pierre.

 

The entire scenerio is just a mess.

[stitchface]

I haven't read the 8 pages of this thread. I just want to exress my disappointment in the Cubs once again settling on making a deal with no leverage whatsoever. There is just no sense in the manner in which this management team negotiates' date=' evaluates or makes transactions in general.[/quote']

 

Leverage, what leverage? As Bruce Miles stated on this forum just a few days ago Corey was not a hot name at all throughout the baseball world.

 

Well, you've made the point for me. He had no leverage. At all. Thus, it makes more sense to gamble into creating some leverage through 1) better play at the ML level; 2) better play at AAA; or 3) need created though injury in ST or the first part of the season.

 

Negotiating is all about leverage. Trading players without any is just stupid when you know a player has talent (e.g. Corey). If it were some clown like Macias, when you are unlikely to get anything more than you've seen over his stay with the Cubs, then the likelihood of gaining leverage is low if not non-existent. But, that isn't the case with Corey.

 

It is bad negotiating, pure and simple.

 

It is always easier to make comments like this after the fact.

 

Why, pray tell, is that the case? I have been anticipating this lackluster move (as have many) since October. Hendry moved Sammy at his lowest value (and, in fact, contributed to lowering his value). Hendry is more interested in a clean clubhouse rather than addressing messes that he had his hand in manufacturing.

 

Don't try to diminish my point by making me appear as if I am only preying on hindsight. It doesn't take a clariavoyant or baseball executive to derive the opinion that this was a trade in which Hendry would be hard pressed to get less value at a later date. I am 100% certain that Hendry at some level decided to move Patterson prior to the Convention so as not to repeat the 05 Sosa debacle. His moves regularly have a tinge of panic to them as of late.

When should we have moved Corey then?

 

Didn't I already address this?

 

Hendry was between a rock and a hard place here. Now if I hear we're paying some of his salary for next season, I'll be miffed.

 

No, he wasn't. He made a poor trade because he is shortsighted.

Well, since the season ended there has be NO demand for Corey, he got what he could. Why do you think demand would have increased for a completely undiscipled ball player? You feel there was value to get, but I'm not sure why.

I'm sure this conversation will happen again when Walker is launched for nothing. There is NO demand for these players. Please show me where there is any demand for either player other than just assumptions.

 

Walker clearly has more value to the Cubs than Patterson would have. Therefore, any trade of Walker for nothing is completely indefensible. There really is no comparison between the two.

[Laura]

apologies if this has already been posted.

 

Cubs.com[/url]"]"For the good of the ballclub and for his best interest, I think it's good for him," Cubs general manager Jim Hendry said Monday in announcing the deal. "He and I had a nice chat, and I think the world of him. It's unfortunate it went down this path, but it's something we had to do." ...

 

Despite his ability to make Gold Glove-caliber plays in center, Patterson's struggles at the plate -- and his high strikeouts -- made him a target of the fans at Wrigley Field. The Cubs had talked about possibly keeping Patterson, but Hendry said he didn't think the center fielder would benefit in a limited role.

 

"I don't think it would be a good fit for him to be a bench player here after what happened last year," Hendry said. ...

 

"I think it was a case that he got off to a bad start last year and it snowballed, and he lost confidence for awhile and it happens," Hendry said. "The bigger the stakes and the bigger the market, the higher the stakes are for the player to succeed, and when they don't, sometimes it's hard to stop."

 

In a conference call with reporters Monday, Patterson was asked to sum up his Cubs career.

 

"I thought I played well with the Cubs, other than 2005," he said. "I just got in a little rut, and before I knew it, I couldn't get out of it. One day, try this, and try that, and I never really could put anything together, and I didn't stick with it on a consistent basis. The years prior to '05 I thought I played well. Last year, I had a bump in the road and couldn't overcome it.

 

"The [Cubs] had to make changes," Patterson said. "I have no hard feelings toward Chicago. They did what they had to do. At the same time, I'm very excited to come over to Baltimore -- and am happy they showed interest in me -- and come in with a new attitude, a new approach, and be consistent."

 

Hendry has known Patterson since he was 17 years old.

 

"We have a good, honest relationship," Hendry said. "He knows I have to do what's best for the Cubs. He felt [the Orioles were] a club that would give him a chance to get a fresh start and give him a chance to succeed. We had a nice chat. I'm sure we'll stay in touch. I'll be rooting for him to do well."

 

"We have outstanding reports on Spears as a quality everyday player down the road, and Carlos Perez was converted from a reliever to a starter, and we had him from 92- to 95-[mph]," Hendry said. "[Perez] has to learn to pitch better and his other pitches have to come. We felt like we got two good players and obviously, it's a situation where Baltimore gets a chance to take a gamble on a kid who has a lot of upside if it works."

[Illini Iceman]

 

I think the word you were trying to say was "obstinate" and you have still competely failed to back up your contention that Patterson would have somehow gotten better over night, or after 6 seasons in the Major Leagues would have improved his trade value. You seem to be unwilling to deal with the facts or the reality of the situation. Sure Patterson could have a career year next year, but judging by his past performance, it was not likely to happen.

 

You just don't get it.

 

At all.

 

But, you can spell.

 

I think he gets it, but like many other of us does not believe in the magical transformation CPatt would have while sitting on the bench that would suddenly give Hendry "leverage" to trade him for more talent.

 

If CPatt was brought back and Dusty decided to platoon him in LF with Murton to showcase him for other teams I can just imagine the outrage about playing a guy with such a low OBP and taking away playing time from Murton.

[CUBZ99]

Walker clearly has more value to the Cubs than Patterson would have. Therefore, any trade of Walker for nothing is completely indefensible. There really is no comparison between the two.

 

I don't understand the lack of a market for Walker (So far). You would think that some small market team would love to have a good hitting 2B for a fairly cheap price.

[JC]

 

I think the word you were trying to say was "obstinate" and you have still competely failed to back up your contention that Patterson would have somehow gotten better over night, or after 6 seasons in the Major Leagues would have improved his trade value. You seem to be unwilling to deal with the facts or the reality of the situation. Sure Patterson could have a career year next year, but judging by his past performance, it was not likely to happen.

 

You just don't get it.

 

At all.

 

If you can't support your argument with any facts, you can always try to attack the poster?

 

LOL! If you feel attacked, get some new skin.

 

My entire argument is about how you approach negotiations. Its about one's philosophy. What "facts" are you necessarily looking for? Like I said, you just don't get it. That isn't an attack, that is a fact.

[Cubzfan64]

I think I'm more upset about the Cubs organization completely missing on their evaluation of Corey. Wasn't he another untouchable "five-tool player"? Their development, or lack thereof, of position players is scary.

 

I'm happy the Cubs got anything for Patterson. And if he succeeds in Baltimore, more power to him, cause it sure wasn't going to happen with the Cubs.

 

If that happens, you can be assured that many people who regularly post here will have some serious questions about the organizations ability to "coach" young position players, and I'll be near the front of that line!

 

We've had such a glaring lack of success in producing even an everyday position player (not to mention anyone with star quality) it seriously makes me wonder if it's extremely poor drafting (and evaluation of draftable talent), extremely poor coaching in the minor leagues or extremely poor handling of the kids when they get to the big club.

 

I'm sure it's a combination of all of the above, but whatever way you slice it, if you can't draft/train/coach/develop ballplayers, the only resource you have left to be competitive is a large payroll and luck. And when you have to go the free agency route to build a contender, you can be guaranteed that you will end up overpaying more often than not.

 

I'm not thrilled with the direction this organization has been taking, but alas, I'm a Cub fan and I'll be going into 2006 with as much optimism as possible - tempered with a little realism that comes from watching 30+ years of mostly futility.

[JC]

Well, since the season ended there has be NO demand for Corey, he got what he could. Why do you think demand would have increased for a completely undiscipled ball player? You feel there was value to get, but I'm not sure why.

I'm sure this conversation will happen again when Walker is launched for nothing. There is NO demand for these players. Please show me where there is any demand for either player other than just assumptions.

 

It is sorely evident that you, along with others, are choosing not to comprehend certain components of this discussion.

[CUBZ99]

Well, since the season ended there has be NO demand for Corey, he got what he could. Why do you think demand would have increased for a completely undiscipled ball player? You feel there was value to get, but I'm not sure why.

I'm sure this conversation will happen again when Walker is launched for nothing. There is NO demand for these players. Please show me where there is any demand for either player other than just assumptions.

 

It is sorely evident that you, along with others, are choosing not to comprehend certain components of this discussion.

 

Or it is possible that you are choosing to ignore reality, which seems like the more likely choice. You are clearly in the minority by believing that Corey was somehow going to magically increase his trade value, by doing the same thing he has done for the last 6 years.

[oldcubsfan]

Well, since the season ended there has be NO demand for Corey, he got what he could. Why do you think demand would have increased for a completely undiscipled ball player? You feel there was value to get, but I'm not sure why.

I'm sure this conversation will happen again when Walker is launched for nothing. There is NO demand for these players. Please show me where there is any demand for either player other than just assumptions.

 

It is sorely evident that you, along with others, are choosing not to comprehend certain components of this discussion.

I think we comprehend the matter just fine. Please try to show us slow learners where all this demand for Patterson and Walker is coming from.

[Cubzfan64]

apologies if this has already been posted.

 

Cubs.com[/url]"]"For the good of the ballclub and for his best interest, I think it's good for him," Cubs general manager Jim Hendry said Monday in announcing the deal. "He and I had a nice chat, and I think the world of him. It's unfortunate it went down this path, but it's something we had to do." ...

 

Despite his ability to make Gold Glove-caliber plays in center, Patterson's struggles at the plate -- and his high strikeouts -- made him a target of the fans at Wrigley Field. The Cubs had talked about possibly keeping Patterson, but Hendry said he didn't think the center fielder would benefit in a limited role.

 

"I don't think it would be a good fit for him to be a bench player here after what happened last year," Hendry said. ...

 

"I think it was a case that he got off to a bad start last year and it snowballed, and he lost confidence for awhile and it happens," Hendry said. "The bigger the stakes and the bigger the market, the higher the stakes are for the player to succeed, and when they don't, sometimes it's hard to stop."

 

In a conference call with reporters Monday, Patterson was asked to sum up his Cubs career.

 

"I thought I played well with the Cubs, other than 2005," he said. "I just got in a little rut, and before I knew it, I couldn't get out of it. One day, try this, and try that, and I never really could put anything together, and I didn't stick with it on a consistent basis. The years prior to '05 I thought I played well. Last year, I had a bump in the road and couldn't overcome it.

 

"The [Cubs] had to make changes," Patterson said. "I have no hard feelings toward Chicago. They did what they had to do. At the same time, I'm very excited to come over to Baltimore -- and am happy they showed interest in me -- and come in with a new attitude, a new approach, and be consistent."

 

Hendry has known Patterson since he was 17 years old.

 

"We have a good, honest relationship," Hendry said. "He knows I have to do what's best for the Cubs. He felt [the Orioles were] a club that would give him a chance to get a fresh start and give him a chance to succeed. We had a nice chat. I'm sure we'll stay in touch. I'll be rooting for him to do well."

 

"We have outstanding reports on Spears as a quality everyday player down the road, and Carlos Perez was converted from a reliever to a starter, and we had him from 92- to 95-[mph]," Hendry said. "[Perez] has to learn to pitch better and his other pitches have to come. We felt like we got two good players and obviously, it's a situation where Baltimore gets a chance to take a gamble on a kid who has a lot of upside if it works."

 

Thanks for posting those Serena - I know most of the time in sports it's "politically correct" to make comments like both Hendry and Corey made, but since I generally think the best of human beings unless proven differently, I like to believe that part of the move is Hendry really giving Corey a chance somewhere in a lower profile market where he can try to turn his career around. Corey on the other hand may now be able to relax going into a new environment and a new season and become what all of us have seen glimpses of.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

It is sorely evident that you, along with others, are choosing not to comprehend certain components of this discussion.

 

I understand your "let's wait and see if he can get more" argument. I guess my question is how much more do you think Hendry could have gotten?

[Mark_R]

It is sorely evident that you, along with others, are choosing not to comprehend certain components of this discussion.

 

I understand your "let's wait and see if he can get more" argument. I guess my question is how much do you think Hendry could have gotten?

 

I think part of his argument is that the Cubs paint themselves into the corner where everybody knows they HAVE to deal certain players and brings down their value even more. I agree that this is a problem and the Sosa deal was pretty much a sham.

 

Regardless, even without that knowledge, I don't think they could have gotten much more than they did. He's not making 350 K anymore.

[E.J.]

 

In a conference call with reporters Monday, Patterson was asked to sum up his Cubs career.

 

"I thought I played well with the Cubs, other than 2005," he said. "I just got in a little rut, and before I knew it, I couldn't get out of it. One day, try this, and try that, and I never really could put anything together, and I didn't stick with it on a consistent basis. The years prior to '05 I thought I played well. Last year, I had a bump in the road and couldn't overcome it.

 

"The [Cubs] had to make changes," Patterson said. "I have no hard feelings toward Chicago. They did what they had to do. At the same time, I'm very excited to come over to Baltimore -- and am happy they showed interest in me -- and come in with a new attitude, a new approach, and be consistent."

 

Hendry has known Patterson since he was 17 years old.

 

"We have a good, honest relationship," Hendry said. "He knows I have to do what's best for the Cubs. He felt [the Orioles were] a club that would give him a chance to get a fresh start and give him a chance to succeed. We had a nice chat. I'm sure we'll stay in touch. I'll be rooting for him to do well."

 

It's good to read that from Corey. Classy guy. Hope he does well in Baltimore.

[CUBZ99]

 

I think the word you were trying to say was "obstinate" and you have still competely failed to back up your contention that Patterson would have somehow gotten better over night, or after 6 seasons in the Major Leagues would have improved his trade value. You seem to be unwilling to deal with the facts or the reality of the situation. Sure Patterson could have a career year next year, but judging by his past performance, it was not likely to happen.

 

You just don't get it.

 

At all.

 

If you can't support your argument with any facts, you can always try to attack the poster?

 

LOL! If you feel attacked, get some new skin.

 

My entire argument is about how you approach negotiations. Its about one's philosophy. What "facts" are you necessarily looking for? Like I said, you just don't get it. That isn't an attack, that is a fact.

 

As an expert negotiator, i'm sure you are aware that making statements such as yours, indicates your lack of any basis for your opinion. Instead you try to play the game of belittling people that disagree with your viewpoint.

[Tim]

For all those people who think that Corey has no chance of recovering value, the team has very little blame in his development and the onus for his bad play rests entirely with Corey I pose this question:

 

What will you say if he has a decent season in Baltimore?