Crasnick on the last days of the sinking ship Patterson

[fearthecubs]

Jerry,

My question is about my team, the Cubs. Corey Patterson reminds me of another top pick of the Cubs several years back, Shawon Dunston. He was supposed to be the next great one, yet he could never get a handle on his skills. He had a long career but never a great one. Do you think this is the case with Corey Patterson? -- Doug, Mountain Home, Ark.

 

Doug,

At this point, Corey Patterson probably wishes that he could have a career like Shawon Dunston's (18 seasons, two All-Star appearances, 1,597 hits). On the surface, there are definitely similarities. Dunston was supremely hyped as the No. 1 pick in the 1982 draft, while Patterson has endured the burden of great expectations as the third overall pick in 1998. Dunston finished with a .296 career on-base percentage, 1,000 strikeouts and 203 walks, while Patterson has a .293 OBP, 552 whiffs and 111 walks in his first six big-league seasons. As Jim Callis of Baseball America points out, the Cubs didn't do Patterson any favors by rushing him to the majors before he embraced subtleties like strike zone discipline or the art of laying down a bunt. As a result, Patterson appears to be on his way out the door at age 26. Dunston was 32 when he left the Cubs for San Francisco as a free agent.

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/insider/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=2236329

 

Sad...does anyone at home or in the media really have any idea where this guy is going to be in 2006?

[NorthsideAvenger]

Jerry,

My question is about my team, the Cubs. Corey Patterson reminds me of another top pick of the Cubs several years back, Shawon Dunston. He was supposed to be the next great one, yet he could never get a handle on his skills. He had a long career but never a great one. Do you think this is the case with Corey Patterson? -- Doug, Mountain Home, Ark.

 

Doug,

At this point, Corey Patterson probably wishes that he could have a career like Shawon Dunston's (18 seasons, two All-Star appearances, 1,597 hits). On the surface, there are definitely similarities. Dunston was supremely hyped as the No. 1 pick in the 1982 draft, while Patterson has endured the burden of great expectations as the third overall pick in 1998. Dunston finished with a .296 career on-base percentage, 1,000 strikeouts and 203 walks, while Patterson has a .293 OBP, 552 whiffs and 111 walks in his first six big-league seasons. As Jim Callis of Baseball America points out, the Cubs didn't do Patterson any favors by rushing him to the majors before he embraced subtleties like strike zone discipline or the art of laying down a bunt. As a result, Patterson appears to be on his way out the door at age 26. Dunston was 32 when he left the Cubs for San Francisco as a free agent.

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/insider/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=2236329

 

Sad...does anyone at home or in the media really have any idea where this guy is going to be in 2006?

 

He makes too much money for a team like KC, TB, etc, etc...But he isn't good enough (as of right now) to start for a contender. It wouldn't surprise me if Corey ends up in Minnesota or Texas.

[mg420]

i think he will be going to the nationals along with a couple of pitching prospects for wilkerson. i've heard that brooks robinson is very high on patterson's tools and the trade would make sense for both teams. i would love to see wilkerson in right if the cubs trade for pierre & dont sign giles. if they sign furcal to lead off and giels for rf, wilkerson can play center.

[CubinNY]

i think he will be going to the nationals along with a couple of pitching prospects for wilkerson. i've heard that brooks robinson is very high on patterson's tools and the trade would make sense for both teams. i would love to see wilkerson in right if the cubs trade for pierre & dont sign giles. if they sign furcal to lead off and giels for rf, wilkerson can play center.

 

I hope it is Patterson and prospect, not couple of prospects. Wilkerson is good but not that good.

 

I wouldn't mind if Wilkerson at all.

[mg420]

i think he will be going to the nationals along with a couple of pitching prospects for wilkerson. i've heard that brooks robinson is very high on patterson's tools and the trade would make sense for both teams. i would love to see wilkerson in right if the cubs trade for pierre & dont sign giles. if they sign furcal to lead off and giels for rf, wilkerson can play center.

 

I hope it is Patterson and prospect, not couple of prospects. Wilkerson is good but not that good.

 

I wouldn't mind if Wilkerson at all.

 

i was thinking of guys like welleymeyer, mitre, ryu or brownlie. i think he would well be worth cp + 2 of those type of prospects.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

i think he will be going to the nationals along with a couple of pitching prospects for wilkerson. i've heard that brooks robinson is very high on patterson's tools and the trade would make sense for both teams. i would love to see wilkerson in right if the cubs trade for pierre & dont sign giles. if they sign furcal to lead off and giels for rf, wilkerson can play center.

 

What does Brooks Robinson have to do with the Nationals?

[somechick]

i think he will be going to the nationals along with a couple of pitching prospects for wilkerson. i've heard that brooks robinson is very high on patterson's tools and the trade would make sense for both teams. i would love to see wilkerson in right if the cubs trade for pierre & dont sign giles. if they sign furcal to lead off and giels for rf, wilkerson can play center.

 

What does Brooks Robinson have to do with the Nationals?

 

I am guessing he means Frank Robinson--but that confused me as well.

 

But, part of the reason Wilkerson is rumored to be available has been said to be that the Nat's are tired of all of his K's. Um, yeah, Corey fixes that :-k .

[NCCubFan]

What does Brooks Robinson have to do with the Nationals?

Well, at least he was close. He did name a Robinson that was a star for the late 60s and early 70s Orioles. :D

[Jehrico]

i think he will be going to the nationals along with a couple of pitching prospects for wilkerson. i've heard that brooks robinson is very high on patterson's tools and the trade would make sense for both teams. i would love to see wilkerson in right if the cubs trade for pierre & dont sign giles. if they sign furcal to lead off and giels for rf, wilkerson can play center.

 

I hope it is Patterson and prospect, not couple of prospects. Wilkerson is good but not that good.

 

I wouldn't mind if Wilkerson at all.

 

Depends on who the prospects are. Nolasco and Aardsma? Count me in. Pinto and Piggy? No thanks.

[mg420]

brain fart i guess. of course i ment frank not brooks. my bad.

[CubbieRich]

What does Brooks Robinson have to do with the Nationals?

Well, at least he was close. He did name a Robinson that was a star for the late 60s and early 70s Orioles. :D

 

Mrs. Robinson, she was a star in the 60's and knows alot about small men in their 20's who have lost their direction. Just ask Ben(Dustin Hoffman).

[Diffusion]

i think he will be going to the nationals along with a couple of pitching prospects for wilkerson. i've heard that brooks robinson is very high on patterson's tools and the trade would make sense for both teams. i would love to see wilkerson in right if the cubs trade for pierre & dont sign giles. if they sign furcal to lead off and giels for rf, wilkerson can play center.

 

I hope it is Patterson and prospect, not couple of prospects. Wilkerson is good but not that good.

 

I wouldn't mind if Wilkerson at all.

 

Depends on who the prospects are. Nolasco and Aardsma? Count me in. Pinto and Piggy? No thanks.

 

What's your opinion on Nolasco, and what's your opinion on Piggy?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

i think he will be going to the nationals along with a couple of pitching prospects for wilkerson. i've heard that brooks robinson is very high on patterson's tools and the trade would make sense for both teams. i would love to see wilkerson in right if the cubs trade for pierre & dont sign giles. if they sign furcal to lead off and giels for rf, wilkerson can play center.

 

I hope it is Patterson and prospect, not couple of prospects. Wilkerson is good but not that good.

 

I wouldn't mind if Wilkerson at all.

 

Depends on who the prospects are. Nolasco and Aardsma? Count me in. Pinto and Piggy? No thanks.

 

Considering we might give Pinto and two others for Pierre, I'd gladly give up Pinto to get Wilkerson. Wilkerson is a much better player than Pierre.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

i think he will be going to the nationals along with a couple of pitching prospects for wilkerson. i've heard that brooks robinson is very high on patterson's tools and the trade would make sense for both teams. i would love to see wilkerson in right if the cubs trade for pierre & dont sign giles. if they sign furcal to lead off and giels for rf, wilkerson can play center.

 

I hope it is Patterson and prospect, not couple of prospects. Wilkerson is good but not that good.

 

I wouldn't mind if Wilkerson at all.

 

Depends on who the prospects are. Nolasco and Aardsma? Count me in. Pinto and Piggy? No thanks.

 

Considering we might give Pinto and two others for Pierre, I'd gladly give up Pinto to get Wilkerson. Wilkerson is a much better player than Pierre.

 

Yeah, I'd give up either of those packages for Wilkerson.

[fearthecubs]

Why do you guys like Wilkerson but are slamming Jacque Jones in the other thread? (Honest question)

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Why do you guys like Wilkerson but are slamming Jacque Jones in the other thread? (Honest question)

 

The massive difference in OBP for one.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

In 2005, Wilkerson had an off year and hit 248/351/405. While his BA was atrocious, he still managed to get on base at a decent clip, posting an OBP 100 points higher than his average which is quite impressive.

 

From 2002-2004, Wilkerson hit 257/368/456. Those are also good numbers and once again, he gets on base at 100 points higher than his average.

 

Jones in 2005 hit 249/319/438. While he did slug a bit better, the Metrodome is much more condusive to HR's than RFK. The averages are about identical, but Wilkerson manages to make much fewer outs than Jones as evidenced by the 50 point difference in OBP.

 

From 2002-2004, Jones hit 268/322/443. Wilkerson slugged a bit better over that span. Once again the averages are similar with a slight edge to Jones, but Wilkerson's ability to draw a walk make him an immensely more valuable player.

 

Add to the fact that Jones will turn 31 in April and Wilkerson won't be 29 until June, I think Wilkerson is the better player.

[fearthecubs]

In 2005, Wilkerson had an off year and hit 248/351/405. While his BA was atrocious, he still managed to get on base at a decent clip, posting an OBP 100 points higher than his average which is quite impressive.

 

From 2002-2004, Wilkerson hit 257/368/456. Those are also good numbers and once again, he gets on base at 100 points higher than his average.

 

Jones in 2005 hit 249/319/438. While he did slug a bit better, the Metrodome is much more condusive to HR's than RFK. The averages are about identical, but Wilkerson manages to make much fewer outs than Jones as evidenced by the 50 point difference in OBP.

 

From 2002-2004, Jones hit 268/322/443. Wilkerson slugged a bit better over that span. Once again the averages are similar with a slight edge to Jones, but Wilkerson's ability to draw a walk make him an immensely more valuable player.

 

Add to the fact that Jones will turn 31 in April and Wilkerson won't be 29 until June, I think Wilkerson is the better player.

 

.351? Big Deal. Walker clipped .355 and we're ready to ship him out of town. Jones has some intangibles that Wilkerson is lacking IMO, but thats besides the point - if either one ends up a Cub I'll be dissapointed. Neither one are qualified to play RF, so they're going to play CF, meaning we need a guy with speed to play RF? Not happening.

 

Edit: Good points, plus the added realization I just had of adapting to the NL. Something also can be said for having to trade for Wilkerson and Jones being available though.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

In 2005, Wilkerson had an off year and hit 248/351/405. While his BA was atrocious, he still managed to get on base at a decent clip, posting an OBP 100 points higher than his average which is quite impressive.

 

From 2002-2004, Wilkerson hit 257/368/456. Those are also good numbers and once again, he gets on base at 100 points higher than his average.

 

Jones in 2005 hit 249/319/438. While he did slug a bit better, the Metrodome is much more condusive to HR's than RFK. The averages are about identical, but Wilkerson manages to make much fewer outs than Jones as evidenced by the 50 point difference in OBP.

 

From 2002-2004, Jones hit 268/322/443. Wilkerson slugged a bit better over that span. Once again the averages are similar with a slight edge to Jones, but Wilkerson's ability to draw a walk make him an immensely more valuable player.

 

Add to the fact that Jones will turn 31 in April and Wilkerson won't be 29 until June, I think Wilkerson is the better player.

 

.351? Big Deal. Walker clipped .355 and we're ready to ship him out of town. Jones has some intangibles that Wilkerson is lacking IMO, but thats besides the point - if either one ends up a Cub I'll be dissapointed. Neither one are qualified to play RF, so they're going to play CF, meaning we need a guy with speed to play RF? Not happening.

 

Edit: Good points, plus the added realization I just had of adapting to the NL. Something also can be said for having to trade for Wilkerson and Jones being available though.

 

What would those intangibles be? I don't see them.

 

Secondly, I'm not ready to ship Walker out of town; unfortunately management seems to be.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I wasn't aware we were shipping Walker out b/c of his bat.

[fearthecubs]

I said in the other thread that Jones has one of the quickest bats in the AL, and he does. While that hasn't led him to have amazing BA's or anything, when he's older thats what keeps players productive. I'd also prefer his speed and defense over Wilkerson.

[fearthecubs]

I wasn't aware we were shipping Walker out b/c of his bat.

 

No, they're shipping him out in spite of it. :?

[Diffusion]

In 2005, Wilkerson had an off year and hit 248/351/405. While his BA was atrocious, he still managed to get on base at a decent clip, posting an OBP 100 points higher than his average which is quite impressive.

 

From 2002-2004, Wilkerson hit 257/368/456. Those are also good numbers and once again, he gets on base at 100 points higher than his average.

 

Jones in 2005 hit 249/319/438. While he did slug a bit better, the Metrodome is much more condusive to HR's than RFK. The averages are about identical, but Wilkerson manages to make much fewer outs than Jones as evidenced by the 50 point difference in OBP.

 

From 2002-2004, Jones hit 268/322/443. Wilkerson slugged a bit better over that span. Once again the averages are similar with a slight edge to Jones, but Wilkerson's ability to draw a walk make him an immensely more valuable player.

 

Add to the fact that Jones will turn 31 in April and Wilkerson won't be 29 until June, I think Wilkerson is the better player.

 

.351? Big Deal. Walker clipped .355 and we're ready to ship him out of town. Jones has some intangibles that Wilkerson is lacking IMO, but thats besides the point - if either one ends up a Cub I'll be dissapointed. Neither one are qualified to play RF, so they're going to play CF, meaning we need a guy with speed to play RF? Not happening.

 

Edit: Good points, plus the added realization I just had of adapting to the NL. Something also can be said for having to trade for Wilkerson and Jones being available though.

 

1) Just because the Cubs seem to want to ship Walker out of town doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. In fact, it's not. It's the wrong thing to do.

 

2) .351 in an extreme pitcher's park while playing half-injured I actually find somewhat impressive.

 

3) Which intangibles?

 

4) Why do we need a guy with speed to play RF?

 

5) Something can also be said for Wilkerson not being linked to rumoured $20m/3yr offers.

[fearthecubs]

1) Just because the Cubs seem to want to ship Walker out of town doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. In fact, it's not. It's the wrong thing to do.

 

2) .351 in an extreme pitcher's park while playing half-injured I actually find somewhat impressive.

 

3) Which intangibles?

 

4) Why do we need a guy with speed to play RF?

 

5) Something can also be said for Wilkerson not being linked to rumoured $20m/3yr offers.

 

I agree with you about Walker. His attitude gets under my skin, but oh well. Why is doing anything half-injured a positive, I could easily flip that around to being injury-prone.

 

If we have one of these players playing CF, Walker still at 2B, where is Hendry going to get speed from? Seems RF is the only open position then, and I don't know anyone with wheels to play there except Abreu.

 

I agreed 3/20 is too much for Jones. I'd look at Jermaine Dye's deal last year and go from there.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I said in the other thread that Jones has one of the quickest bats in the AL, and he does. While that hasn't led him to have amazing BA's or anything, when he's older thats what keeps players productive. I'd also prefer his speed and defense over Wilkerson.

 

I'd rather have Wilkerson's batting eye to Jones's quick bat. As players age, bat speed is one of the things they lose; batting eye isn't. Jones's quick bat hasn't helped him so far, I don't see why it would suddenly begin to be any more of a factor now. And it is quite likely, that his bat speed has helped him put up what is lack luster numbers. As that bat slows, those numbers will drop further. With his skill set, he's unable to put up a decent OBP inspite of a declining BA. Wilkerson has shown the ability to do just that. And even with Jones's speed, he's been unable to use it to effectively help out his game. He doesn't get enough triples or doubles with it and has been an ineffective base stealer.

 

Wilkerson is no slouch defensively as well. So, given all the evidence, Wilkerson is by far a better acquistion.