Bruce Levine reports: Eric Patterson will be recalled

[Banedon]

And I'll only "settle for mediocrity" if/when the alternative is worse.

 

But you don't know that's the case. So you're settling for mediocrity rather than taking a chance on the unknown with potential.

[gflore34]

The decision to pick Patterson over Felix Pie was based on Patterson's offense at Iowa.

 

"If we needed someone for pure defense, then it would be Felix," general manager Jim Hendry said. "But [Patterson hits] from the left-side, swinging the bat right now and stealing bases, and he's playing very solid in the outfield. We kicked it around a lot of different ways but in the end, you listen to your [minor league] people."

 

Hendry's idiocy knows no bounds.

 

I guess the facts that Pagan doesn't know the number of outs which end an inning nor does he take good paths to ball or Jones losing several balls in sun/night don't suggest a need for a defensive upgrade in CF.

[nilodnayr]

The alternatives of Floyd, Pagan, Jones, Kendall, and Fontenot are looking like decent likelihoods for that .600 OPS too. And the Cubs haven't earned any type of benefit of the doubt when it comes to their decision making, especially when it comes to building an offense.

OPS 2007/career

Floyd: .749/.843

Pagan: .750/.724

Jones: .664/.781

Kendall: .729/.770

Fontenot: .820/.821

 

And you missed DeRosa, .783/.743.

 

Not a lot of support for your theory that the group will combine for a .600 OPS from here on out.

 

This group seems much more likely:

Pie: .617/.617

Cedeno: .446/.614

Soto: .393/.441

Patterson: n/a

Murton: .674/.803

 

I'm all for Murton in LF. But beyond that, I think there's a whole ton of wishful thinking going on with those other guys.

 

I'm sure you know that TT was using hyperbole in regards to the 600 OPS from the vets. I'm also sure you know that using the OPS from the rookies from like 60 ABs of playing time this year might have some sample size issues.

[Brendan]

I just enjoy the fact that we keep trying to fix our outfield problem by bringing up 2b.

 

You know he's been playing some outfield (and I remember an article about 2+ months back about him spending time after games practicing center and left) and by all accounts has played good there, so it's not like he's a outfield virgin.

 

I understand that, but he's still a 2b and has much more value at 2b than he does in LF. It's just sad that we don't just play Murton, and that for some reason the Cubs feel Epatt is the best option from the minors to play LF.

 

the question i have is does epatt really have any value as a corner outfielder at all?

[E.J.]

I just enjoy the fact that we keep trying to fix our outfield problem by bringing up 2b.

 

You know he's been playing some outfield (and I remember an article about 2+ months back about him spending time after games practicing center and left) and by all accounts has played good there, so it's not like he's a outfield virgin.

 

I understand that, but he's still a 2b and has much more value at 2b than he does in LF. It's just sad that we don't just play Murton, and that for some reason the Cubs feel Epatt is the best option from the minors to play LF.

 

the question i have is does epatt really have any value as a corner outfielder at all?

 

Um...

 

NO

[davearm]

And I'll only "settle for mediocrity" if/when the alternative is worse.

 

But you don't know that's the case. So you're settling for mediocrity rather than taking a chance on the unknown with potential.

Of course I don't know that's the case. Nobody can see the future.

 

Certainly there's the potential for the unknown to outperform the mediocrity.

 

But there's even greater potential for the unknown to underperform the mediocrity, or for the mediocrity to return to career norms.

 

The sort of "taking a chance" you're talking about here is the same kind that built Las Vegas. The odds are in the house's favor, but people "take a chance" anyway because it's exciting. The promise of a big payoff leads folks to ignore the negative EV.

[jersey cubs fan]

And I'll only "settle for mediocrity" if/when the alternative is worse.

 

But you don't know that's the case. So you're settling for mediocrity rather than taking a chance on the unknown with potential.

Of course I don't know that's the case. Nobody can see the future.

 

Certainly there's the potential for the unknown to outperform the mediocrity.

 

But there's even greater potential for the unknown to underperform the mediocrity, or for the mediocrity to return to career norms.

 

The sort of "taking a chance" you're talking about here is the same kind that built Las Vegas. The odds are in the house's favor, but people "take a chance" anyway because it's exciting. The promise of a big payoff leads folks to ignore the negative EV.

 

That's a pretty ridiculous mindset if you ask me. You do a really poor job of theorizing about career norms. Post-30 players playing like crap don't just return to their averages. Their averages were built up when they were better. They aren't the same player. Furthermore, there is no house here. There is no law of averages saying the odds are that crappy veterans will outperform hot hitting prospects. This is the exact same mindset that has led to the Cubs sucking so bad for so long. It's mind boggling why people still believe this nonsense.

[davearm]

And I'll only "settle for mediocrity" if/when the alternative is worse.

 

But you don't know that's the case. So you're settling for mediocrity rather than taking a chance on the unknown with potential.

Of course I don't know that's the case. Nobody can see the future.

 

Certainly there's the potential for the unknown to outperform the mediocrity.

 

But there's even greater potential for the unknown to underperform the mediocrity, or for the mediocrity to return to career norms.

 

The sort of "taking a chance" you're talking about here is the same kind that built Las Vegas. The odds are in the house's favor, but people "take a chance" anyway because it's exciting. The promise of a big payoff leads folks to ignore the negative EV.

 

That's a pretty ridiculous mindset if you ask me. You do a really poor job of theorizing about career norms. Post-30 players playing like crap don't just return to their averages. Their averages were built up when they were better. They aren't the same player. Furthermore, there is no house here. There is no law of averages saying the odds are that crappy veterans will outperform hot hitting prospects. This is the exact same mindset that has led to the Cubs sucking so bad for so long. It's mind boggling why people still believe this nonsense.

People like Lou Piniella, you mean?

 

You're living in some sort of fantasyland if you think the Cubs would've been saved from a century of losing if only they would've simply played the cleats off of every "hot-hitting" prospect they've ever had, and ditched every proven veteran standing in that prospect's way. Now *that's* some nonsense for you.

 

My goodness, imagine a bigleague team of:

 

Kline C

Choi/Dopirak 1B

Hill 2B

Montanez SS

Kelton/Orie 3B

Jackson/Kieshnick LF

Patterson CF

Harvey RF

 

You'd lose 130 games with that lineup.

[soapy]

What I'm hoping for is that people get their expectations for the young players under control. Those AAA numbers aren't automatically going to translate in the bigleagues, like too many seem to be assuming. We've seen this proven time after time.

 

I haven't seen anyone say they think this. You're just making stuff up.

 

My goodness, imagine a bigleague team of:

 

Kline C

Choi/Dopirak 1B

Hill 2B

Montanez SS

Kelton/Orie 3B

Jackson/Kieshnick LF

Patterson CF

Harvey RF

 

You'd lose 130 games with that lineup.

 

Except that nobody here has or would suggest such a lineup.

 

But please, continue with you obscene rantings and ignore the real discussion happening here.

[davearm]

My goodness, imagine a bigleague team of:

 

Kline C

Choi/Dopirak 1B

Hill 2B

Montanez SS

Kelton/Orie 3B

Jackson/Kieshnick LF

Patterson CF

Harvey RF

 

You'd lose 130 games with that lineup.

 

Except that nobody here has or would suggest such a lineup.

 

But please, continue with you obscene rantings and ignore the real discussion happening here.

Are you kidding me?

 

I'm dead serious: you're questioning the fact that many folks here are openly and loudly lobbying for Soto, Murton, Cedeno, Pie, etc. etc. to be starters on the Cubs?

 

Where the heck have you been if you've missed this development?

 

If everyone in the "just play the kids" crowd had their wish, we'd trot out a lineup very much like the one I showed above. The only difference is that DLee and ARam would be in the middle of it, surrounded by 5 rookies and Murton. Here's how it would look:

 

Patterson LF

Theriot SS

Lee 1B

Ramirez 3B

Murton RF

Soto C

Pie CF

Cedeno 2B

 

We'd get smoked with that team, in all likelihood.

Edited August 7, 2007 by davearm

[USSoccer]

My goodness, imagine a bigleague team of:

 

Kline C

Choi/Dopirak 1B

Hill 2B

Montanez SS

Kelton/Orie 3B

Jackson/Kieshnick LF

Patterson CF

Harvey RF

 

You'd lose 130 games with that lineup.

 

I'll play this game. Imagine a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Murton

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

DeRosa

Soto

Pie

 

vs a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Cedeno

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

Jones

Pagan

Kendall

 

Which one consists of 4 players that are completely useless, with no upside, and which one has 4 players in their place that at least have the potential to be better, and can't possibly be worse.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Are you kidding me?

 

I'm dead serious: you're questioning the fact that many folks here are openly and loudly lobbying for Soto, Murton, Cedeno, Pie, etc. etc. to be starters on the Cubs?

 

Where the heck have you been if you've missed this development?

 

If everyone in the "just play the kids" crowd had their wish, we'd trot out a lineup very much like the one I showed above. The only difference is that DLee and ARam would be in the middle of it, surrounded by 5 rookies and Murton. And we'd get smoked with that team, in all likelihood.

 

This is an enormous pet peeve of mine. Just because you hear calls for all of those players at one point does not mean it is the same people calling for him. Some people may think Pie and Murton should be starting while they think Kendall and Fontenot/Floyd is better than putting Soto and EPatt or Cedeno out there. Others only would like to see Murton out there. Others still Murton + Soto. People having varying opinions on which prospects they think should be up does NOT equal a unified demand for a lineup consisting of Lee+Ramirez+kiddies galore. Stop stereotyping a large group of people to fit the opposite of your argument.

Edited August 7, 2007 by Transmogrified Tiger

[davearm]

My goodness, imagine a bigleague team of:

 

Kline C

Choi/Dopirak 1B

Hill 2B

Montanez SS

Kelton/Orie 3B

Jackson/Kieshnick LF

Patterson CF

Harvey RF

 

You'd lose 130 games with that lineup.

 

I'll play this game. Imagine a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Murton

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

DeRosa

Soto

Pie

 

vs a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Cedeno

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

Jones

Pagan

Kendall

 

Which one consists of 4 players that are completely useless, with no upside, and which one has 4 players in their place that at least have the potential to be better, and can't possibly be worse.

Try again.

 

Both of those lineups have a mix of young and old.

 

Put a lineup together using Lee and ARam as the only vets, and I'll be happy to show you an older and much better one.

[nilodnayr]

My goodness, imagine a bigleague team of:

 

Kline C

Choi/Dopirak 1B

Hill 2B

Montanez SS

Kelton/Orie 3B

Jackson/Kieshnick LF

Patterson CF

Harvey RF

 

You'd lose 130 games with that lineup.

 

I'll play this game. Imagine a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Murton

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

DeRosa

Soto

Pie

 

vs a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Cedeno

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

Jones

Pagan

Kendall

 

Which one consists of 4 players that are completely useless, with no upside, and which one has 4 players in their place that at least have the potential to be better, and can't possibly be worse.

Try again.

 

Both of those lineups have a mix of young and old.

 

Put a lineup together using Lee and ARam as the only vets, and I'll be happy to show you an older and much better one.

 

See TT's post above...you've gone off the deep end.

[USSoccer]

My goodness, imagine a bigleague team of:

 

Kline C

Choi/Dopirak 1B

Hill 2B

Montanez SS

Kelton/Orie 3B

Jackson/Kieshnick LF

Patterson CF

Harvey RF

 

You'd lose 130 games with that lineup.

 

I'll play this game. Imagine a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Murton

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

DeRosa

Soto

Pie

 

vs a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Cedeno

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

Jones

Pagan

Kendall

 

Which one consists of 4 players that are completely useless, with no upside, and which one has 4 players in their place that at least have the potential to be better, and can't possibly be worse.

Try again.

 

Both of those lineups have a mix of young and old.

 

Put a lineup together using Lee and ARam as the only vets, and I'll be happy to show you an older and much better one.

 

But the point is that no one is calling for lineups made of propsects plus Lee and Ramirez. You're lumping people who'd like to see the dead weight in our everyday lineup replaced by players in our system with more potential with people who'd like to trot out a Marlins-esque lineup.

 

No one wants that. No one here has EVER wanted to see something like:

 

Theriot

Patterson

Lee

Ramirez

Pie

Harvey

Soto

Fontenot.

 

That team would suck, to say nothing of the list of failed Cubs prospects you threw out there. That's why no one wants it.

 

To say, however, that Kendall, Floyd, Pagan and Jones are just fine and will somehow attain their career norms despite 2 of them being clearly old and washed up is silly and wrong. Goonsey said it right: this isn't Vegas. There's no house, and to think that Cliff Floyd or Kendall are going to equal numbers put up in their prime is wishful thinking.

[Derwood]

while I too get annoyed at the constant clamoring for all things youthy and prospecty, I don't really think anyone wants this:

 

Fontenot

Murton

Lee

Ramirez

Pie

Fox

Soto

Theriot

[CubColtPacer]

My goodness, imagine a bigleague team of:

 

Kline C

Choi/Dopirak 1B

Hill 2B

Montanez SS

Kelton/Orie 3B

Jackson/Kieshnick LF

Patterson CF

Harvey RF

 

You'd lose 130 games with that lineup.

 

I'll play this game. Imagine a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Murton

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

DeRosa

Soto

Pie

 

vs a lineup of:

 

Theriot

Cedeno

Lee

Ramirez

Floyd

Jones

Pagan

Kendall

 

Which one consists of 4 players that are completely useless, with no upside, and which one has 4 players in their place that at least have the potential to be better, and can't possibly be worse.

 

I don't know why you put Cedeno in the second lineup and DeRosa in the first one-it would seem to be the other way around (all the other veterans per se are in the second lineup).

 

As for can't possibly be worse, yes they most certainly can. Jones was having his worst year at the plate before the last month, and Pie was still worse than him. He could be better, but there is a chance that you see that .270 OBP which would kill the Cubs at this point. Soto can definitely be worse than Kendall because Soto has no guarantee of getting on base (and his very limited major league time has been lousy). There is significant chance of upside for both of those players, but both of those players could also be considerably worse than the people they are replacing.

As for Murton-Pagan, I would agree with that completely, but the Cubs don't usually put Pagan anywhere but center. The same with Cedeno and DeRosa-DeRosa's the much better option.

[davearm]

Are you kidding me?

 

I'm dead serious: you're questioning the fact that many folks here are openly and loudly lobbying for Soto, Murton, Cedeno, Pie, etc. etc. to be starters on the Cubs?

 

Where the heck have you been if you've missed this development?

 

If everyone in the "just play the kids" crowd had their wish, we'd trot out a lineup very much like the one I showed above. The only difference is that DLee and ARam would be in the middle of it, surrounded by 5 rookies and Murton. And we'd get smoked with that team, in all likelihood.

 

This is an enormous pet peeve of mine. Just because you hear calls for all of those players at one point does not mean it is the same people calling for him. Some people may think Pie and Murton should be starting while they think Kendall and Fontenot/Floyd is better than putting EPatt or Cedeno out there. Others only would like to see Murton out there. Others still Murton + Soto. People having varying opinions on which prospects they think should be up does NOT equal a unified demand for a lineup consisting of Lee+Ramirez+kiddies galore. Stop stereotyping a large group of people to fit the opposite of your argument.

Oh please.

 

You honestly expect me to believe that somebody is going to stand up and say "Pie should not be starting in CF, it should be Jones instead?" Or "Soto really does belong at AAA, stick with Kendall back there?"

 

The fact is that there will be folks complaining so long as Jones, Floyd, Pagan, Kendall, K Hill, and now, seemingly, Fontenot, are in the lineup. DeRosa's got one foot in the doghouse these days too.

 

But you'd hear hardly a peep of complaining or second-guessing if every last one of those guys was benched in favor of the lineup I showed above. Plenty of people would be thrilled, though -- for the first week at least.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Oh please.

 

You honestly expect me to believe that somebody is going to stand up and say "Pie should not be starting in CF, it should be Jones instead?" Or "Soto really does belong at AAA, stick with Kendall back there?"

 

The fact is that there will be folks complaining so long as Jones, Floyd, Pagan, Kendall, K Hill, and now, seemingly, Fontenot, are in the lineup. DeRosa's got one foot in the doghouse these days too.

 

But you'd hear hardly a peep of complaining or second-guessing if every last one of those guys was benched in favor of the lineup I showed above. Plenty of people would be thrilled, though -- for the first week at least.

 

You've apparently made up your mind about what other people think, so I can't convince you. You're completely wrong though.

Edited August 7, 2007 by Transmogrified Tiger

[USSoccer]

 

I don't know why you put Cedeno in the second lineup and DeRosa in the first one-it would seem to be the other way around (all the other veterans per se are in the second lineup).

 

As for can't possibly be worse, yes they most certainly can. Jones was having his worst year at the plate before the last month, and Pie was still worse than him. He could be better, but there is a chance that you see that .270 OBP which would kill the Cubs at this point. Soto can definitely be worse than Kendall because Soto has no guarantee of getting on base (and his very limited major league time has been lousy).

As for Murton-Pagan, I would agree with that completely, but the Cubs don't usually put Pagan anywhere but center. The same with Cedeno and DeRosa-DeRosa's the much better option.

 

I was literally just tossing two lineups together. I didn't much think about who played where.

 

A couple points: It's hard to accept people diminishing Soto's ability to at least be equal to Kendall offensively based on major league performances. He doesn't have a big enough sample to draw conclusions. What he does have are stellar PCL numbers that seem to indicate that though he's in a hitters league, he's performing at a high clip even accounting for that. Given that he's also likely much better than Kendall defensively, I see no reason not to give him an extended look. It would be tricky for him to underperform Kendall's 2007 numbers to date.

 

As far as Pie/Jones+Pagan, it's a matter of if you believe Pie simply needs time to adjust to ML hitting. I do believe this. I think what he brings to the table defensively and his potential offensive output are enough for me to not care about the "security" Jones and Pagan bring with their abysmal 2007 numbers.

 

DeRosa is the better option, but he needs some rest soon. He seems to be wearing down.

 

If it were up to me, while Soriano's out we would run Murton in LF and Pie in CF, with Jones in RF. Floyd looks completely awful and Pagan is no everyday player. I'd at the least replace Hill with Soto, although I'd like to replace Kendall with Soto. I'd have Cedeno and Fontenot split time at 2B for a week or so for DeRosa to get a breather.

 

I'd line up like:

 

Theriot

Murton

Lee

Ramirez

Jones

Fontenot

Pie

Soto

 

It's not ideal. It's not particularly good. However, I do think it's better that what's being tossed out there right now, because what's being put out there right now is being put out there based on career numbers that peaked 6 years ago.

[davearm]

Which one consists of 4 players that are completely useless, with no upside, and which one has 4 players in their place that at least have the potential to be better, and can't possibly be worse.

I can't believe I missed the "can't possibly be worse" quip. How perfectly symptomatic of the completely unrealistic expectations some folks have for these young players.

 

It's much more than just possible. In some cases, it's probable.

[Banedon]

Are you kidding me?

 

I'm dead serious: you're questioning the fact that many folks here are openly and loudly lobbying for Soto, Murton, Cedeno, Pie, etc. etc. to be starters on the Cubs?

 

Where the heck have you been if you've missed this development?

 

If everyone in the "just play the kids" crowd had their wish, we'd trot out a lineup very much like the one I showed above. The only difference is that DLee and ARam would be in the middle of it, surrounded by 5 rookies and Murton. And we'd get smoked with that team, in all likelihood.

 

This is an enormous pet peeve of mine. Just because you hear calls for all of those players at one point does not mean it is the same people calling for him. Some people may think Pie and Murton should be starting while they think Kendall and Fontenot/Floyd is better than putting EPatt or Cedeno out there. Others only would like to see Murton out there. Others still Murton + Soto. People having varying opinions on which prospects they think should be up does NOT equal a unified demand for a lineup consisting of Lee+Ramirez+kiddies galore. Stop stereotyping a large group of people to fit the opposite of your argument.

Oh please.

 

You honestly expect me to believe that somebody is going to stand up and say "Pie should not be starting in CF, it should be Jones instead?" Or "Soto really does belong at AAA, stick with Kendall back there?"

 

The fact is that there will be folks complaining so long as Jones, Floyd, Pagan, Kendall, K Hill, and now, seemingly, Fontenot, are in the lineup. DeRosa's got one foot in the doghouse these days too.

 

But you'd hear hardly a peep of complaining or second-guessing if every last one of those guys was benched in favor of the lineup I showed above. Plenty of people would be thrilled, though -- for the first week at least.

 

You like to complain about others point of view...what's yours? That the lineup that Lou puts out there every day is the right decision every time? Because he's a baseball guy and therefore knows what he's doing? If we get to the end of the season and we don't make the playoffs, does that mean he still knew what he was doing? You're ok with Floyd swinging and flailing at 3 pitches in a clutch situation? Calling up Patterson instead of Pie doesn't bother you? Rather than pointing out what's wrong, why don't you tell us what's right?

[USSoccer]

I can't believe I missed the "can't possibly be worse" quip. How perfectly symptomatic of the completely unrealistic expectations some folks have for these young players.

 

It's much more than just possible. In some cases, it's probable.

 

Based on what? That's what people are waiting for. It's not enough to assume that rookies will automatically suck when comapred to "proven, older players". You have to actually have a basis for your argument.

 

So what do you base it on? Limited ML sample sizes, or large minor league samples and skillsets, when comapred to the players they'd be replacing?

[davearm]

Oh please.

 

You honestly expect me to believe that somebody is going to stand up and say "Pie should not be starting in CF, it should be Jones instead?" Or "Soto really does belong at AAA, stick with Kendall back there?"

 

The fact is that there will be folks complaining so long as Jones, Floyd, Pagan, Kendall, K Hill, and now, seemingly, Fontenot, are in the lineup. DeRosa's got one foot in the doghouse these days too.

 

But you'd hear hardly a peep of complaining or second-guessing if every last one of those guys was benched in favor of the lineup I showed above. Plenty of people would be thrilled, though -- for the first week at least.

 

You've apparently made up your mind about what other people think, so I can't convince you. You're completely wrong though.

You didn't answer my question.

 

Do you see it as realistic to expect any meaningful segment of this board to lobby for Jones over Pie in CF, or Kendall over Soto at C (to name just two)?

 

Are those plausible scenarios to you?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Oh please.

 

You honestly expect me to believe that somebody is going to stand up and say "Pie should not be starting in CF, it should be Jones instead?" Or "Soto really does belong at AAA, stick with Kendall back there?"

 

The fact is that there will be folks complaining so long as Jones, Floyd, Pagan, Kendall, K Hill, and now, seemingly, Fontenot, are in the lineup. DeRosa's got one foot in the doghouse these days too.

 

But you'd hear hardly a peep of complaining or second-guessing if every last one of those guys was benched in favor of the lineup I showed above. Plenty of people would be thrilled, though -- for the first week at least.

 

You've apparently made up your mind about what other people think, so I can't convince you. You're completely wrong though.

You didn't answer my question.

 

Do you see it as realistic to expect any meaningful segment of this board to lobby for Jones over Pie in CF, or Kendall over Soto at C (to name just two)?

 

Are those plausible scenarios to you?

 

Of course. Have you read the threads about them? There's plenty of people who think Kendall's OBP over the rest of the season will outweigh his power and defense disadvantage v. Soto, and there's people who think that Pie still needs to work on his plate discipline in AAA. For example, Truffle is the biggest proponent of Soto around and he wants Pie to stay in AAA.