Neyer on E Patt

by JB 23 on Mar 1, 2008 6:29 PM CST Comment 23 comments

ESPN's Rob Neyer has an interesting take on Eric Patterson's future or lack of one with the Cubs.

* As the Cubs continue to covet Brian Roberts, Eric Patterson might reasonably wonder about his future in the organization. As MLB Trade Rumors notes in a new series called "Blocked Prospects," Patterson is one of the young players "who seem to be buried on their current team's depth chart." The problem is that he's not good enough defensively to play second base and not quite good enough offensively to play center field. At least not for the Cubs, who already have Felix Pie. And at (almost) 25 he's not so young that we should expect him to improve significantly. Baseball America ranks him as the No. 12 prospect in the organization (not good for a player his age). If he's blocked, it's mostly by his own talents.

Shouldn't have been late last September Eric...that might have been your shot. Discuss

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 23 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

i believe...

ive read somewhere that e. pat has had some off field issues and a hard time controlling his attitude. i dont view e. pat as blocked right now. epat needs to continue working hard and maybe in a couple years we can rehash this.

GO CUBS GO!!!!!

by cubsluver22 on Mar 1, 2008 6:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

'Superstar Syndrome' strikes early

it never ceases to amaze me how many of these 'phenoms' let their own talent go to their head. Patterson appears to have completely missed what a lack of work ethic did to his older brother : talent only gets you so far.. and he seems unwilling to put in the needed effort to make up for what talents he wasn't born with. He's got prima donna written all over him and I say the sooner we trade him, the better.

by petrie on Mar 1, 2008 6:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

i agree with this

trade him while he has value. keep 2b warm until hopefully, tony thomas arives. i realize how premature that is, but its more fun to be optimistic.

Bill James Felix Pie 2008 Projection: .283/.333/.456 16 HR 21 SB

by kylejo on Mar 1, 2008 9:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Completely agreed...

... with both of you.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Mar 2, 2008 4:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What value?

The post above says it all. He's the 12th best prospect on the Cubs who are a middle of the pack team in terms of farm system. I'm sure someone would take him but I wouldn't expect much in return.

by rlpete on Mar 2, 2008 12:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly.

He's not out of options; if nothing else he can start the season back at AAA again. There's no rush to trade him.

Now, if you come across a deal that makes the Cubs a better team, and Patterson is involved, you take it under serious consideration. He's not "untouchable" or anything. But Billy Beane said something that really sticks with me: the second you convince yourself you have to make a deal, you're going to make a bad deal. Trading E-Pat just to trade him is pointless.

I has a blog.

by cwyers on Mar 2, 2008 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And this is...

... exactly the reason to NOT trade for Brian Roberts. Do the Cubs HAVE to make that deal? No, they don't.

Case closed, as far as I'm concerned.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Mar 2, 2008 4:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Opine

I don't want to see the Brian Roberts trade happen either. That being said Eric Patterson is no longer a 2nd baseman, at least in the eyes of the Cub organization. Patterson is precariously close to no longer being a prospect for the simple reason he doesn't have a position on the field and doesn't seem inclined to want to learn a handful of positions in order to add versatility to his resume.

I'd assume that right now the Triple A team will have Sam Fuld in center field and Mike Fontenot at 2nd. So where does that leave Eric Patterson?

by MDBNIU on Mar 2, 2008 5:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think something is getting confused somewhere

cwyers said, "Don't make a trade when you feel like you have to."
Al said, "Because the Cubs don't have to make a trade for Roberts, they shouldn't."

When is it ok to make a trade, then?

Seriously, cwyers makes a great point, or at least repeats Beane's great point. Patterson's value shouldn't go down any more than it is right now, but if someone's 2B goes down, like Cinci's SS just did, Patterson picks up trade value. Or what if he gets tried out in CF and really takes to it? Or what if something finally clicks?

I think this is relevant with Matt Murton, too. Murton's value is not going to go down if he spends a month or three raking in AAA and learning to play RF.

Soriano must leadoff... to provide adequate protection for Big Z!

by DGU on Mar 2, 2008 7:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed...

if anything, the Roberts situation is the perfect situation to try to make a trade (according to Beane): we don't need to trade for him, so we have a better bargaining position.

Contrast that with the Juan Pierre situation. In that case, we NEEDED to trade for him. So, we made potentially a bad trade (though it may turn out okay). With Roberts, the team is in the position to make a good trade for themselves, because they know that if they don't make a deal they still have a good option at 2B.

by SouthernCub on Mar 2, 2008 7:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I do agree with this concept...

... in that, yes, the Cubs CAN make a better deal, potentially, for Roberts BECAUSE they don't "have" to.

That does, however, imply that you have to have a willing trading partner who's going to accept what you are offering. My guess is that MacPhail's asking price is still too high, and for the very reason that they don't "have" to, the Cubs won't do this deal.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Mar 2, 2008 8:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I just wish it would go away... n/t

An open invitation to visit Des Moines and watch the Iowa Cubs...

by IowaCubs- on Mar 3, 2008 2:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You & me both.

n/t

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Mar 3, 2008 2:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And what if...

MacPhail/Angelos stop posturing and realize that keeping Roberts makes litte to no sense for them, and that getting some prospects is better than just wasting Roberts' prime on a last-place team and eventually losing him?

I didn't say Hendry should absolutely force a deal. That would be the opposite scenario (the Juan Pierre scenario). It's just that this is the perfect position to TRY to make a deal. Hendry is in the position to walk away if MacPhail doesn't eventually get to a reasonable price. And if MacPhail does get to a reasonable price, we get an all-star caliber, switch-hitting, top-of-the-order 2B with great speed. That's a good reason not to walk away from discussions, in my opinion.

by SouthernCub on Mar 3, 2008 4:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

HOW ON EARTH

Can the Juan Pierre situation "turn out to be okay"???????

That was a BAD DEAL. It had BAD DEAL written all over it.

I'll tell you how BAD that was.... my ridiculous opinion about getting Rondell White was probably a better option for this ball club over the long run. We would have been FAR better off with a 50 year old Kenny Lofton.

Those players that were traded were highly regarded. They could have been traded for a potential ace or for a long term position player. Instead we got NOTHING.

I'm still bitter about that.

by nickler on Mar 2, 2008 8:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Because they all flamed out utterly...

...and meanwhile, we got a better prospect than any of them from the compensatory pick we got when Pierre left.

I has a blog.

by cwyers on Mar 2, 2008 8:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That was Josh Donaldson, right?

m/t

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Mar 3, 2008 3:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly...

Pierre was traded for three guys who haven't done much of anything. In return, we got a year of Juan Pierre in CF and eventually Josh Donaldson as a compensatory pick for losing Pierre. It could very well turn out that Donaldson outperforms all of those pitchers. Of course, that wouldn't make the Pierre deal a GOOD deal, but it would it more okay.

by SouthernCub on Mar 3, 2008 4:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Methinks it a bit............

..........premature to claim all three arms surrendered by Hendry for Pierre have "flamed out".

All three pitched for the Marlins last season, and while I would agree they might not have been doing the same with the Cubs, they are still hurling at the ML level.

When Mitre, Pinto and Nolasco are officially retired, then we can take a look at the results. Right now, however, I'd say the Cubs paid too much for renting Juan Pierre for the 2006 season.

by tville on Mar 3, 2008 7:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Eric Patterson

Patterson needed to work 24/7 to become an adequate enough defensive 2nd baseman. Maybe he has done that, but I'm guessing not. His problem now is that he literally is a man without a position on the field. A change of scenery might help him to a degree but he's still going to suffer from the same dilemma of where do you play him in the field.

by MDBNIU on Mar 2, 2008 12:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Patterson's offseason

I was a fan of Patterson until this last offseason. By that point, he knew that the Cubs didn't view him as a starter at 2nd base in the majors and that his best bet at making it was to embrace the switch to the OF. But what did he do during the offseason? Maybe he worked out on his own (I haven't seen any info to say what he did with his own time), but why didn't he opt to play winter ball somewhere? Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he did do his own workouts in the outfield, that's a far cry from playing CF in organized ball. This is certainly an opinion based on circumstantial evidence, but it seems to me that he's gonna be happy to put forth token effort while he stays with the Cubs' organization before being traded to another team. I like his tools, and I hope he proves me wrong, but I've soured on him as of right now.

by kranskie on Mar 3, 2008 11:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The lazy and disinterested gene runs in the family

Apparently, Corey has been giving lil' brother Eric advice on how to become a quality major league contributor.

by MDBNIU on Mar 3, 2008 2:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Winter ball is limited to foreign countries...

So perhaps he's not excited about going to Latin America for the winter(?). I wouldn't be that thrilled at the idea And the team chooses who goes to the Arizona Fall League, so he didn't have a choice in that regard.

I don't think Patterson's failure to play in Fall/Winter Leagues is evidence of laziness on his part. Since we don't know what he did instead of playing in Winter League, I think it's a bit unfair to say he didn't put forth effort this offseason.

by SouthernCub on Mar 3, 2008 4:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs