Corey Patterson traded to Balt. (per Levine)

[JC]

Can someone tell me if either of the guys from Baltimore are required to be on the 40 man? Apologies if this was covered early on.

[Mark_R]

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?

 

Good for him. I'd be glad he's doing well.

That's not what I meant and you know it! If you are now saying that he has no chance of regaining his skills, what will you say if he has a decent season?

 

What are we qualifying as a decent season? League average for a CF? Under those circumstances, I'd say that he may have been emotionally drained in Chicago and a fresh start in Baltimore was good for him. I don't know enough about Perlozzo or their hitting coach to make an accurate gauge right now on him. If there's an adjustment he makes while being there, so be it, good for him.

 

Reverse the question to you, Tim: If Corey has an equally bad season, what will you say, then?

 

My mistake on the Von Joshua comment.

[CubfaninCA]

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?

 

I would say he has a chance to be decent in Baltimore but not in Chicago.

And why is that?

 

Isn't it possible that Patterson, could benefit from a change of scenery in the similar fashion Barrett did? With Barrett, did the Cubs hitting instructors get the credit for turning him into one of the better offensive catchers? Same could be said about Derrek Lee and Ramirez.

 

Getting the boo birds off his rearend will help a lot. It's one thing to be booed by the opposition's fans... Another when it's your own.

[ThePenguin11]

The way this offseason has gone so far, I'm starting to think we have to start acting like the Twins and A's have in the past. I realize that the Cubs are a major market team - so the comparison is weak. But unless the Cubs make a big splash for an impact hitter or starting pitcher, I'd rather have guys like Guzman, Hill, Pie, Cedeno and Murton play a major role on this year's team. There have teams that have been successful by playing with their top prospects and though there aren't many, I think that's where we have to go. And if Hendry and Baker aren't willing to do that, a handful ofthese guys need to be traded ASAP. I don't want Pie to be the next Patterson. I'd rather flip him and Hill for someone that Dusty can't screw up. Does this make sense?

[Tim]

Can someone tell me if either of the guys from Baltimore are required to be on the 40 man? Apologies if this was covered early on.

Definitely not Spears. It hasn't been 4 years since he left HS yet.

 

Gomez was eligible for the Rule 5, but not selected. I don't believe the Orioles had him on their roster.

[Blueheart05]

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?

 

I guess it depends on what you mean by decent...

 

If Corey has a good year in 2006 it might not have anything to do with coaching. He might perform best when the pressure is off (both in terms of team expectations and team market. Afterall, there will be no high expectations from the majority of Baltimore's fandom). That's not to say that Orioles management doesn't want to field a playoff caliber team but they don't have the same pressures to win that exist in Chicago. Plus, being given a fresh start in an environment where he doesn't have to live up to first round pick expectations will be a load off his mind.

 

Similarly, one could argue that if the Cubs didn't have the pressures of trying to satisfy a rabid fanbase in a large market it would be acceptable to allow Patterson to work out his problems at the bottom of the lineup. The truth is Patterson would have remained the Wrigley Field whipping boy (thereby continuing to diminish his confidence). I think the move was best for both he and the team.

[JeffH]

Can someone tell me if either of the guys from Baltimore are required to be on the 40 man? Apologies if this was covered early on.

 

Neither one will be placed on the 40-man roster.

[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?

 

Good for him. I'd be glad he's doing well.

That's not what I meant and you know it! If you are now saying that he has no chance of regaining his skills, what will you say if he has a decent season?

 

What are we qualifying as a decent season? League average for a CF? Under those circumstances, I'd say that he may have been emotionally drained in Chicago and a fresh start in Baltimore was good for him. I don't know enough about Perlozzo or their hitting coach to make an accurate gauge right now on him. If there's an adjustment he makes while being there, so be it, good for him.

 

Reverse the question to you, Tim: If Corey has an equally bad season, what will you say, then?

 

My mistake on the Von Joshua comment.

I'd say that we had little to lose by keeping him and giving him occasional starts in LF versus right handers. Given the current state of the 40 man roster, I don't see anyone else on the team that is likely to provide much better value off the bench than Corey. If he still wasn't working out well at mid-season, dump him. Losing out on these prospects wouldn't have been a big deal.

[JC]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

[Tim]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

Gone. Someone already mentioned that Aramis is the one with the most tenure of all position players now.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

 

I think every positional player period from '03 is gone.

[Tim]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

 

I think every positional player period from '03 is gone.

Aramis came mid-2003 from Pitt.

[Laura]

I'd say that we had little to lose by keeping him and giving him occasional starts in LF versus right handers. Given the current state of the 40 man roster, I don't see anyone else on the team that is likely to provide much better value off the bench than Corey. If he still wasn't working out well at mid-season, dump him. Losing out on these prospects wouldn't have been a big deal.

 

In the Trib/AP article, Hendry indicates that the lack of playing time that Corey would get as a bench player here would hamper his re-development.

 

"If he is not going to have a chance to be a full-time player, he is not going to be able to correct the things that led him to have a bad year last year," Cubs general manager Jim Hendry said. "It was not a good fit for him to be a bench player here at this point, after what happened last year."

[USSoccer]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

Gone. Someone already mentioned that Aramis is the one with the most tenure of all position players now.

 

Wow.

 

That sort of turnover doesn't exactly breed success...

[A New Era]

Well it looks like we actually got SOMETHING for corey patterson. And alot of people thought we had to literally give him away. .

 

Well atleast we got a decent prospect. This spears kid looks pretty good. If he makes it with us great, otherwise he is another nice bargaining chip to someone who might be looking for a SS.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

 

I think every positional player period from '03 is gone.

Aramis came mid-2003 from Pitt.

 

Naturally, I was continuing JC's opening day point.

[Tim]

I'd say that we had little to lose by keeping him and giving him occasional starts in LF versus right handers. Given the current state of the 40 man roster, I don't see anyone else on the team that is likely to provide much better value off the bench than Corey. If he still wasn't working out well at mid-season, dump him. Losing out on these prospects wouldn't have been a big deal.

 

In the Trib/AP article, Hendry indicates that the lack of playing time that Corey would get as a bench player here would hamper his re-development.

 

"If he is not going to have a chance to be a full-time player, he is not going to be able to correct the things that led him to have a bad year last year," Cubs general manager Jim Hendry said. "It was not a good fit for him to be a bench player here at this point, after what happened last year."

Yeah, but I'd make him a semi-platoon player. Rotate him through the three OF spots to get him a sufficient number of starts against pitchers where he has good matchups and have him work the cages like crazy on the other days. Heck, wait until the end of ST when everyone has rosters set and see if you can pass him through waivers down to Iowa. As has been pointed out ad infinitum, there isn't a whole lot of demand for him out there at $3M.

[CubfaninCA]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

Gone. Someone already mentioned that Aramis is the one with the most tenure of all position players now.

 

Wow.

 

That sort of turnover doesn't exactly breed success...

 

Thank you Ed Lynch.

[samhainn77]

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.

 

Excellent point. Fans are not supposed to know any better....but Hendry and his bunch get paid well to know legitmate talent when they see it.

 

Patterson was going to be a superstar....5 tools....on and on......you never heard a "maybe" out of any Cubs people with regards to Corey. Choi, Hill, Patterson,......were going to be the future of this team. Not only are they NOT the future....they are barely major leaguers.

 

Prior is the latest "can't miss".....and he's not exactly rock solid at this point. Will he be next?

 

This team has proven that it cannot develop its own position players. It can't do it!

 

Egads it's painful to be a Cub fan.

 

 

I was pro-Choi, very pro-Corey, not sold on Hill...but I have no idea how you can even begin to put Prior in the same bunch as these 3. Other than after the horror show line drive last year he's been nothing but dominant in his very brief career. It hasn't been like Juan cruz where the stuff is there but the brain is not. He comes into the game and has a great approach and takes control of the game. Other than Z, Prior has shown this team that he has the makeup that most other major leaguers can only dream about. To date the only question about Prior is can he stay out of fluke accidents.

[USSoccer]

Well it looks like we actually got SOMETHING for corey patterson. And alot of people thought we had to literally give him away. .

 

Well atleast we got a decent prospect. This spears kid looks pretty good. If he makes it with us great, otherwise he is another nice bargaining chip to someone who might be looking for a SS.

 

Let's not all wet ourselves over Spears. He's a middle of the road AA guy. It's not like we got some top 100 prospect. His ceiling is probably Jerry Hairston's current production.

[Tim]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

 

I think every positional player period from '03 is gone.

Aramis came mid-2003 from Pitt.

 

Naturally, I was continuing JC's opening day point.

Hmm. I guess I don't understand the difference between your post and his, then. Oh well, doesn't really matter!

[USSoccer]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

Gone. Someone already mentioned that Aramis is the one with the most tenure of all position players now.

 

Wow.

 

That sort of turnover doesn't exactly breed success...

 

Thank you Ed Lynch.

 

Well, do you think continuity helps? Obviously, if you have a team of scrubs, it doesn't, but don't you think it's a little odd that the longest tenured everyday player on a major market team with a top 10 farm system has been here for 2.5 years?

[JC]

I'd say that we had little to lose by keeping him and giving him occasional starts in LF versus right handers. Given the current state of the 40 man roster, I don't see anyone else on the team that is likely to provide much better value off the bench than Corey. If he still wasn't working out well at mid-season, dump him. Losing out on these prospects wouldn't have been a big deal.

 

In the Trib/AP article, Hendry indicates that the lack of playing time that Corey would get as a bench player here would hamper his re-development.

 

"If he is not going to have a chance to be a full-time player, he is not going to be able to correct the things that led him to have a bad year last year," Cubs general manager Jim Hendry said. "It was not a good fit for him to be a bench player here at this point, after what happened last year."

Yeah, but I'd make him a semi-platoon player. Rotate him through the three OF spots to get him a sufficient number of starts against pitchers where he has good matchups and have him work the cages like crazy on the other days. Heck, wait until the end of ST when everyone has rosters set and see if you can pass him through waivers down to Iowa. As has been pointed out ad infinitum, there isn't a whole lot of demand for him out there at $3M.

 

He could also see ABs in AL parks where those that think Murton is a liability can use him as a DH. Coupled with rotation in the OF, those ABs aren't insignificant.

[JeffH]

It seems to me that Cubs fans are odd. Maybe it's not just us; maybe it's all baseball fans.

 

If we had had a left handed hitting middle infielder who had put up a .294/.349/.429/.778 line at High-A at age 20 and a LHP who works routinely in the low 90s and can touch 95 and we had traded them for the right to pay Corey Patterson $2.8 million to be our 4th outfielder, don't you think we'd have gone ballistic?

[CubfaninCA]

Is the entire opening day 2003 positional roster now gone or am I missing someone obvious?

Gone. Someone already mentioned that Aramis is the one with the most tenure of all position players now.

 

Wow.

 

That sort of turnover doesn't exactly breed success...

 

Thank you Ed Lynch.

 

Well, do you think continuity helps? Obviously, if you have a team of scrubs, it doesn't, but don't you think it's a little odd that the longest tenured everyday player on a major market team with a top 10 farm system has been here for 2.5 years?

 

I'm a big believer in continuity. Hendry's far from great, but he acquired Lee, ARam, Barrett and Murton, who are all guys who could be everyday players in Chicago for another 5 years. Lynch makes Hendry look pretty good in comparison.