El Dusto at it - Corey Patterson wins Reds CF/leadoff job!

[windycityfan]

"The race tightened once center fielder Corey Patterson was signed to a Minor League contract and invited to camp at the urging of Baker..."

 

"When they signed Patterson, I knew the writing was on the wall," Bruce said.

 

"I have a plan," Baker said. "Everybody wants to know the plan. Everybody is guessing the plan. We'll just let the plan work itself out."

 

I'll tell you what the plan was Dusto. Your master plan was to get Josh Hamilton away from the picture so you could bring in your own .250 OBP lead-off man to camp.

 

Jay Bruce doesn't know it, but that's the best thing that happened to his career.

 

Link below. Enjoy.

 

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080320&content_id=2446821&vkey=spt2008news&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin

[daske17]

I know what it's like to go back and forth. I went back and forth. It's a tough thing. You reach your goal and go backwards, reach it again and go backwards.

 

Here are Dusty's "back and forth years"

 

1968: 6 games/5 AB (19 yrs.)

1969: 3 games/7 AB (20 yrs.)

1970: 13 games/24 AB (21 yrs.)

1971: 29 games/62 AB (22 yrs.)

 

From 1972 on, here was a regular in Atlanta.

 

That doesn't seem that out of the ordinary to me, as he at least got a fair number of AB each time he was up. But I guess this is Dusty's justification and we should just do a one of these: :shock:

[CuseCubFan69]

We also stopped using lead paint in 1978, I wonder if Dusty thinks we should go back to using it?

[Clem Fandango]

I like lead paint. It's traditional and it's old school. Like me. And it tastes great.

[CuseCubFan69]

I like lead paint. It's traditional and it's old school. Like me. And it tastes great.

 

"Did you eat paint chips when you were a kid?"

 

Honestly, Dusty just amazes me. I truly think he is one of the laziest managers in history, work wise and thinking wise.

[David]

I know what it's like to go back and forth. I went back and forth. It's a tough thing. You reach your goal and go backwards, reach it again and go backwards.

 

Here are Dusty's "back and forth years"

 

1968: 6 games/5 AB (19 yrs.)

1969: 3 games/7 AB (20 yrs.)

1970: 13 games/24 AB (21 yrs.)

1971: 29 games/62 AB (22 yrs.)

 

From 1972 on, here was a regular in Atlanta.

 

That doesn't seem that out of the ordinary to me, as he at least got a fair number of AB each time he was up. But I guess this is Dusty's justification and we should just do a one of these: :shock:

 

Huh?

[windycityfan]

I like lead paint. It's traditional and it's old school. Like me. And it tastes great.

 

"Did you eat paint chips when you were a kid?"

 

Honestly, Dusty just amazes me. I truly think he is one of the laziest managers in history, work wise and thinking wise.

 

You misspelled dumbest.

[CuseCubFan69]

I like lead paint. It's traditional and it's old school. Like me. And it tastes great.

 

"Did you eat paint chips when you were a kid?"

 

Honestly, Dusty just amazes me. I truly think he is one of the laziest managers in history, work wise and thinking wise.

 

You misspelled dumbest.

 

Honestly, I don't think he is dumb but I get what you're saying.

 

Now watch the Reds win the division.

[BeerHere]

Maybe Dusty feels guilty for what he put Patterson through with the Cubs, and this is his way of paying back saying "See, I told you that if you follow my plan you'll be a great ballplayer."

[Tracer Bullet]

Did I miss the part where it says CPatt will be leading off?

[CuseCubFan69]

Maybe Dusty feels guilty for what he put Patterson through with the Cubs, and this is his way of paying back saying "See, I told you that if you follow my plan you'll be a great ballplayer."

 

As he does it to another kid! I suppose Ben Franklin was right about insanity.

[CuseCubFan69]

Maybe Dusty feels guilty for what he put Patterson through with the Cubs, and this is his way of paying back saying "See, I told you that if you follow my plan you'll be a great ballplayer."

 

As he does it to another kid! I suppose Ben Franklin was right about insanity.

 

I think Dusty might be giving Patterson a chance to get back on track and if he does struggle, the Reds will release him and call up the Bruce.

[ctcf]

I thought this was a joke until I saw the link. Seriously.

[17 Seconds]

Umm, are you guys even reading the article? Nowhere does it say Patterson will leadoff or start in center field.

 

Obnoxious.

[Tracer Bullet]

Umm, are you guys even reading the article? Nowhere does it say Patterson will leadoff or start in center field.

 

Obnoxious.

 

I agree on the leadoff thing. But it's pretty clear that CPatt beat Bruce out to start in CF.

[daske17]

I know what it's like to go back and forth. I went back and forth. It's a tough thing. You reach your goal and go backwards, reach it again and go backwards.

 

Here are Dusty's "back and forth years"

 

1968: 6 games/5 AB (19 yrs.)

1969: 3 games/7 AB (20 yrs.)

1970: 13 games/24 AB (21 yrs.)

1971: 29 games/62 AB (22 yrs.)

 

From 1972 on, here was a regular in Atlanta.

 

That doesn't seem that out of the ordinary to me, as he at least got a fair number of AB each time he was up. But I guess this is Dusty's justification and we should just do a one of these: :shock:

 

Huh?

 

He's supposedly saying that he bounced around when he first started out. Based on the number of games that he played in when he first started out, and the number of ABs he received, it doesn't look like he was bounced around.

 

Furthermore, compared to his treatment of young players on the Cubs who did nothing but sit on the bench, his comparison isn't accurate.

 

From my take, he's saying that the way he was was played early in his career = his treatment of rookies now. I don't believe that's accurate.

 

I have a flow chart if necessary. :)

[17 Seconds]

Umm, are you guys even reading the article? Nowhere does it say Patterson will leadoff or start in center field.

 

Obnoxious.

 

I agree on the leadoff thing. But it's pretty clear that CPatt beat Bruce out to start in CF.

 

How is it "pretty clear"? Either way, the thread title is a lie.

[SouthSideRyan]

Did I miss the part where it says CPatt will be leading off?

 

He's a black CF.

[Tracer Bullet]

Umm, are you guys even reading the article? Nowhere does it say Patterson will leadoff or start in center field.

 

Obnoxious.

 

I agree on the leadoff thing. But it's pretty clear that CPatt beat Bruce out to start in CF.

 

How is it "pretty clear"? Either way, the thread title is a lie.

 

Are you serious? The Reds have Freel and Bruce. They sign CPatt, a CF, to a minor league deal. CPatt hits 400+ in the spring. Bruce gets sent down and Freel is being rumored to be traded. You don't think it's pretty clear that Patterson won the CF job?

 

Also, I know everyone assumes CPatt is going to lead off, and I think that's probably true. But while I can fairly easy understand by the article that CPatt is starting in CF, there isn't even a hint about him leading off in the article. But I hate Dusty to, so go on bashing him, I don't really care.

[inari]

I think Freel is still the leading candidate to start in center, guys.

[inari]

I think Freel is still the leading candidate to start in center, guys.

[17 Seconds]

Umm, are you guys even reading the article? Nowhere does it say Patterson will leadoff or start in center field.

 

Obnoxious.

 

I agree on the leadoff thing. But it's pretty clear that CPatt beat Bruce out to start in CF.

 

How is it "pretty clear"? Either way, the thread title is a lie.

 

Are you serious? The Reds have Freel and Bruce. They sign CPatt, a CF, to a minor league deal. CPatt hits 400+ in the spring. Bruce gets sent down and Freel is being rumored to be traded. You don't think it's pretty clear that Patterson won the CF job?

 

That's all speculation and just you guessing. Patterson might start, but that's far from "pretty clear" right now.

[Tracer Bullet]

Umm, are you guys even reading the article? Nowhere does it say Patterson will leadoff or start in center field.

 

Obnoxious.

 

I agree on the leadoff thing. But it's pretty clear that CPatt beat Bruce out to start in CF.

 

How is it "pretty clear"? Either way, the thread title is a lie.

 

Are you serious? The Reds have Freel and Bruce. They sign CPatt, a CF, to a minor league deal. CPatt hits 400+ in the spring. Bruce gets sent down and Freel is being rumored to be traded. You don't think it's pretty clear that Patterson won the CF job?

 

That's all speculation and just you guessing. Patterson might start, but that's far from "pretty clear" right now.

 

Actually, it's called logic. But whatever.

[SouthSideRyan]

The only way Corey Patterson isn't the Reds's starting CF is if Norris Hopper gets the job instead.

[Tracer Bullet]

The only way Corey Patterson isn't the Reds's starting CF is if Norris Hopper gets the job instead.

 

I'd say the only way CPatt isn't the starting CF is if Dusty gets fired before opening day. Hopper probably starts against LHP, but I don't see Patterson not starting in CF for Dusty. One of the reports about Bruce being sent down mentioned that Dusty pressured Krivsky to sign CPatt. Once he hit so well in spring, there's no way Dusty isn't going to start him.