Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Orioles - Acquired Patterson

Baltimore Orioles - Acquired OF Corey Patterson from the Chicago Cubs for P Carlos Perez and SS Nate Spears.

Wow!  The Orioles actually make a move that’s consistent with one of the things this franchise has to do to eventually be a contender again.  It’s not signing Jeromy Burnitz or Jeff Conine, it’s picking up no-risk, good-upside, young players, essentially for free.  More likely than not, Patterson won’t ever be a great player, but when your team’s goal is to finish ahead of the Devil Rays (at least, the realistic goal - this team isn’t contending), you have to roll the dice on a player like Patterson, especially when he’s not blocking someone of value.  There’s little chance that Spears is ever anything but an organizational utility infielder and Perez, while he does have a good fastball at times, is a thrower than a pitcher, not young, and will likely get eaten alive by higher level minor leaguers.

2006 ZiPS Projections
———————————————————————————————————
Player     AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
———————————————————————————————————
Patterson   564 73 141 22 4 20 73 37 144 23 .250 .297 .410
Spears     400 52   99 15 4   4 36 27 80   5 .248 .300 .335

Dan Szymborski Posted: January 10, 2006 at 03:44 PM | 31 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. OlePerfesser Posted: January 10, 2006 at 04:12 PM (#1814108)
Amen, Esteemed Oracle.

One interesting question is how OP@CY's short RF porch will affect Patterson's mind. If he starts trying to pull everything, achieving that ZiPS line could be tough. But if he realizes flyballs to LF ain't such a bad thing in that park, either, it could get interesting. Also, he'll be working with Crowley, which might help, and Matos will bat against all lefties, which should improve the rate stats.
   2. Tim Wallach was my Hero Posted: January 10, 2006 at 04:18 PM (#1814117)
Wow, can you imagine this Carlos Perez is actually worst than the Carlos Perez that pitched in Montréal and LA in the mid-1990s. Why did the Cubs picked him up anyway? It seems to me he has no upside whatsoever. He's a (very) long shot, I guess. I bet he plays independant baseball in a year or two.
   3. Slinger Francisco Barrios (Dr. Memory) Posted: January 10, 2006 at 04:20 PM (#1814121)
DCW3, I like a challenge.

There once was a guy named Otsuka
Who liked to smoke hash from a hookah
He said, "You would too
If you wanted to screw
But never could get you some nookah."
   4. Dan Szymborski Posted: January 10, 2006 at 04:29 PM (#1814135)
Guh?
   5. Dingbat_Charlie Posted: January 10, 2006 at 04:50 PM (#1814180)
I like it. I don't really know what to make of Flanaquette yet. The Burnitz fiasco was horrible but I liked the Hernandez signing (I'd like it more if they'd flip Javy for prospects), and I'm neutral on Conine.
   6. Hendry's Wad of Cash (UCCF) Posted: January 10, 2006 at 04:55 PM (#1814187)
It's really too bad Cleveland invited Hollandsworth to camp, or the Orioles could reunite the entire Cub OF from 2005.
   7. Nuclear Dish Posted: January 10, 2006 at 05:00 PM (#1814207)
There are a few ways this trade could turn sour for Baltimore:
1. Perlozzo follows through on his idea to bat Patterson 2nd;
2. The Orioles give Patterson 600 AB;
3. The Orioles assume their OF depth issues are now solved, and they use Patterson in LF with Matos in CF.

I would rather they consider putting Mora in LF with Patterson in CF and go get a 3B. Instead, they'll likely sign Hidalgo to play LF or get Branyan to play 1B.

I swear, between Gibbons, Patterson, and Branyan, they'd never have anyone on base.
   8. We don't have dahlians at the Palace of Wisdom Posted: January 10, 2006 at 07:10 PM (#1814482)
Wait, wait. So the Orioles have a bench/hitting coach named Crowley? That makes so much sense. Every time up until now that I've read that Patterson would be helped by Crowley I thought it was somebody trying to make a joke about Corey Patterson having to make a deal with the Devil. Except not the actual Devil, obviously. But I'm pretty sure that the Great beast 666 and the self proclaimed Great Beast 666 use the same lawyers to draw up their contracts so it would effectively be like dealing with the same evil being.
   9. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 10, 2006 at 07:42 PM (#1814554)
I like it. I don't really know what to make of Flanaquette yet. The Burnitz fiasco was horrible but I liked the Hernandez signing (I'd like it more if they'd flip Javy for prospects),
Why on god's green earth do you like the Hernandez deal? Sure, if they flip Javy, then it's reasonable -- but they've shown no sign that they plan to do so, and you imply that you'd like it even if they didn't. Otherwise, all it does is turn a strength -- an excellent catcher -- into a less excellent catcher and a mediocre DH.
and I'm neutral on Conine.
Neutral? All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. He's a 40 year old guy, better than Burnitz but of no real value, likely to take playing time from Walter Young, Gibbons, and/or one of the young outfielders. What's the upside of this?

Between Hernandez and Conine, all they're doing is collecting DHs. This is not a strategy; it's a way of keeping busy at the office when they're tired of playing Windows Solitaire.
   10. The Keith Law Blog Blah Blah (battlekow) Posted: January 10, 2006 at 08:01 PM (#1814583)
I swear, between Gibbons, Patterson, and Branyan, they'd never have anyone on base.

Branyan put up a .378 OBP last year.
   11. DCW3 Posted: January 10, 2006 at 08:53 PM (#1814706)
DCW3, I like a challenge.

I think Dr. Memory must have forgotten what thread he was in. How ironic.
   12. Dingbat_Charlie Posted: January 10, 2006 at 08:53 PM (#1814707)
All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing

who said I was good?


I agree with you, actually. But I've accepted the fact that they are not going to operate efficiently, so I will settle for less stupid. I'd like to see them trade Javy but I'm not too dissatisfied with Conine/Majewski/Young/Javy to cover LF/DH/1B and backup C. I would never expect them to hand starting jobs to Majewski and Young in spring training, but hopefully they will get some good exposure after the departure of Sosa, Surhoff and Byrnes. I also feel that Markakis would benefit from at least a half-season of AAA, and Reimold and Snyder are a year or more away.

The part that terrifies me is the Burnitz deal, which shows a willingness to lock up an outfield position (not to mention the wasted money) and makes me feel that my guarded optimism is completely unwarranted. Which, I'm pretty sure, it is.
   13. DFA Posted: January 10, 2006 at 09:02 PM (#1814728)
and Matos will bat against all lefties, which should improve the rate stats.

In theory, a platoon of the left handed hitting Patterson and the right handed hitting of Matos wouldn't be awful, but Matos actually hits righties better than lefties. Over the last 3 years, Matos has posted these OPS lines:

v. Righties (827 ABs) 746
v. Lefties (331 ABs) 655

Re: Conine...well, I'm pretty against him. I am not a fan of Walter Young either. I still maintain that the Orioles need to deal Javy Lopez and Rodrigo Lopez for a young power hitter. I'd also advocate for acquiring Branyan.

Re: Ramon Hernandez...I like this signing too. The Orioles only catching prospect is currently 18 playing in Bluefield (Snyder). It's a total f'in joke, but it is what is. While Ramon is 30, his contract is reasonable, and he is more appealing than whatever retreads I'm sure Flanny has been eyeing (at best) or Geronimo! (at worst).
   14. rlc Posted: January 10, 2006 at 09:11 PM (#1814755)
Conine's [...] likely to take playing time from Walter Young [...] What's the upside of this?

Occasionally scoring a run? David, you don't seriously believe that playing Walter Young is going to help the O's develop a winning team at some point, do you?
   15. Mike Emeigh Posted: January 10, 2006 at 09:12 PM (#1814759)
The Orioles only catching prospect is currently 18 playing in Bluefield (Snyder).


...and may not stay at the position.

-- MWE
   16. Mike Emeigh Posted: January 10, 2006 at 09:14 PM (#1814765)
Walter Young = Calvin Pickering Lite. Or "heavy", if you prefer :)

-- MWE
   17. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 10, 2006 at 10:46 PM (#1815002)
Occasionally scoring a run? David, you don't seriously believe that playing Walter Young is going to help the O's develop a winning team at some point, do you?
I seriously believe that playing Jeff Conine won't. I don't think Walter Young is The Answer to the Orioles' offensive woes, but he is 26 rather than, say, 36. At least there's a chance that he, unlike Conine or Lopez, has an upside.
   18. j.q. higgins Posted: January 10, 2006 at 10:46 PM (#1815003)
actually, beyond the size, i don't really see the comparison.

i don't know if young is an answer, but i think he would be an upgrade...i dunno, i see something closer to ryan howard than cal pickering.
   19. Andere Richtingen Posted: January 11, 2006 at 12:15 AM (#1815194)
One interesting question is how OP@CY's short RF porch will affect Patterson's mind. If he starts trying to pull everything, achieving that ZiPS line could be tough

Starts trying to pull everything?
   20. rlc Posted: January 11, 2006 at 12:38 AM (#1815238)
At least there's a chance that [Young], unlike Conine or Lopez, has an upside.
About as large as the chance he'll pass up that last cupcake on the postgame spread.

Don't get me wrong - I would prefer that Conine spend 2006 riding his Harley in Tupanga Canyon, but that's no reason to mistake Big Wally for a real prospect.

And you're wrong about Lopez having an upside - he could be traded for a good young firstbaseman.
   21. Slinger Francisco Barrios (Dr. Memory) Posted: January 11, 2006 at 04:57 AM (#1815524)
I think Dr. Memory must have forgotten what thread he was in. How ironic.

No; if I'd put it in the original thread, you'd've missed my genius rhyming.

I'm satisfied now. Shutting up in three...two...one...
   22. mr. man Posted: January 11, 2006 at 07:58 AM (#1815621)
Well everyone deserves one.

There once was a man named Patterson
Who pitchers had no trouble masterin'.
On every pitch he'd swing for the big clout;
One, two, three strikes again he's out.
The cleanup man will never have batters on!
   23. Nuclear Dish Posted: January 11, 2006 at 09:19 PM (#1816599)
Branyan put up a .378 OBP last year.


Branyan OBP
2000 .327
2001 .316
2002 .320
2003 .322
2004 .324
2005 .378

10 of his 39 walks in 2005 were intentional. That came almost exclusively from hitting ahead of the pitcher, something that wouldn't happen in the AL with the Orioles. Take away those 10 IBBs and you are left with an OBP of .351, not .378. Still better than his typical year, but not as spectacular.

And his career OBP even with those 10 IBB is only .327. I tend to trust his career numbers over last season, especially if the Orioles were to play him every day and not as a platoon player as the Brewers did last year.
   24. David C. Jones Posted: January 12, 2006 at 06:38 AM (#1817568)
Reading these Orioles transactions threads is always fun. The big question posed in these threads is always: Will Player X contribute to the next good Orioles team? Or, failing that, Will Player X block another player who could contribute to the next good Orioles team?

It's funny because we've been having these debates for, like, six years or something.

Here's the bottom line: there is no next good Orioles team. They will always be terrible. And it's ####### depressing to be told that getting player X is a bad deal because he blocks some D+ prospect who doesn't have a chance in hell of ever being anything more than the ordinary player who is currently blocking him. I like Walter Young, and I hope he gets some ABs this coming year, but that's it. Looking at his minor league numbers, I don't see much there, certainly not Ryan Howard.

The Orioles minor league system is a ####### joke. There are no great prospects who can be blocked. So everybody just chill out and enjoy the 73 wins next year.

Oh, and I like the Hernandez deal. The critic who said that we were going from having an excellent catcher to having a slightly worse catcher and a mediocre DH was basically right, but he was missing a lot of context, which is that the Orioles' DHs last year were ####### terrible. If the Orioles could have only found a mediocre DH and a couple mediocre corner OFers they would have won a few more games last year. Instead, they had awful DHs and awful corner outfielders. So if we can attain mediocrity at those positions in 2006, that will be a significant upgrade.
   25. Rick Vaughn Posted: January 12, 2006 at 03:27 PM (#1817835)
Branyan walks plenty. He just hits at a .232 clip.
   26. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 12, 2006 at 04:22 PM (#1817906)
Don't get me wrong - I would prefer that Conine spend 2006 riding his Harley in Tupanga Canyon, but that's no reason to mistake Big Wally for a real prospect.
There's something -- a slim reed, since it's basically his A-ball performance, but something -- in Young's past to suggest he's one. And he's 26. Which is right when you want to try to catch lightning in a bottle from a player.
And you're wrong about Lopez having an upside - he could be traded for a good young firstbaseman.
That's not an upside to Lopez. That's hoping he's gone. And the Orioles have shown no sign that they want to do this, intend to do this, or would know what a good young firstbaseman looked like if John Sickels strapped dynamite to himself and threatened to blow up Camden Yards unless Angelos gave him an audience.

I'd be perfectly fine with signing Hernandez and trading Lopez for prospects. The Orioles just want more DHs.

The critic who said that we were going from having an excellent catcher to having a slightly worse catcher and a mediocre DH was basically right, but he was missing a lot of context, which is that the Orioles' DHs last year were ####### terrible.
Yes, but collecting six bad DHs does not make one good DH.

Nor is it really all that useful, come to think of it, for actually filling out a lineup card and fielding a team.
   27. Dingbat_Charlie Posted: January 12, 2006 at 06:37 PM (#1818140)
I think there are finally a few prospects that are worth talking about and trying to include in future plans. Young is no Ryan Howard but Markakis, Penn, Loewen, Reimold, Snyder, Olson, Ray and a few others have some degree of legitimacy as major league prospects. It's a hell of alot better than it has been.
   28. David C. Jones Posted: January 12, 2006 at 09:14 PM (#1818468)
Re: Orioles prospects...I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, I'm going to go with the assumption that all Orioles prospects are, in fact, subpar major leaguers in the making. With the exception of Brian Roberts and a couple of pitchers, this has pretty much been the case for the last, oh, 20 years or so.
   29. FDR Jones Posted: January 13, 2006 at 01:13 AM (#1819012)
bye Corey
   30. Quinton McCracken's BFF Posted: January 13, 2006 at 02:10 PM (#1819512)
Can't wait for the Cowboy Up post. $2M!!!

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Vegas Watch
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.2526 seconds
47 querie(s) executed