Cubs, O's 'closing in' on Patterson deal

 

Dumping Patterson is basically a must for the Cubs. You get the feeling that if he has any chance of succeeding in the big leagues, it won't be in the north side.

Edited January 6, 200620 yr by KevHead0881

So who would patrol CF for the Cubs if Patterson is delt? Are the Cubs seriously considering promoting Pie now?

 

Far as this deal is concerned, it certaintly shows how far Patterson's stock has fallen. A prospect not within the top-5 of the Orioles organization for Patterson? That's a risk I'd take.

PIERRE

PIERRE

 

God damn! I completely forgot.

Do you guys remember all the Patterson vs. Rowand arguments around Chicago? Rowand gets us Thome and Patterson gets the Cubs a minor leaguer. Feel free to throw this in Cubs fans faces when they start talking their inane crap again.

The Orioles are always taking the Cubs' garbage.

 

Man.

Patterson, 26, was once considered the jewel of the Cubs' farm system—combining speed, power and strong defense in center field. But last season he batted .215 with a dismal .254 on-base percentage and only 13 homers.

 

Ouch, this quote puts the Cubs evaluation and developmental skills in perspective.

Ouch, this quote puts the Cubs evaluation and developmental skills in perspective.

The cubs routinely overrate players who are average at best, and underrate and trade good players.

This should speed up the Tejada talks with the Sox since now the O's are going to need a real major league outfielder after acquiring Patterson.

This should speed up the Tejada talks with the Sox since now the O's are going to need a real major league outfielder after acquiring Patterson.

So you're telling me they're in the market for Borchard?

So you're telling me they're in the market for Borchard?

 

Borchard for Jorge Julio, Tim Byrdak and John Parrish. straight up.

 

Come on! You know they would do this deal for Hendry.(notice the lack of green)

At least they won't be rushing Nick Markakis to the majors in 2006. And if the minor leaguer ain't a really good prospect, well it's really not that bad of a deal for the O's.

 

But of course Patterson has to turn into Corey instead of K-orey again.

After reading about the proposed trade on chicagosports.com, Patterson would be traded for a minor leaguer. The Cubs obivously aren't losing much in Patterson, sounds to me like Baltimore would be getting the better of the deal.

Edited January 7, 200620 yr by whitesox1976

After reading about the proposed trade on chicagosports.com, Patterson would be traded for a minor leaguer.  The Cubs obivously aren't losing much in Patterson, sounds to me like Baltimore would be getting the better of the deal.

Anything the Cubs can get for Patterson at this point is an improvement.

According to the Baltimore Sun, the Orioles are no longer the favorites to acquire Corey Patterson from the Cubs.

Following the reports that the Orioles were close to acquiring Patterson, several teams contacted the Cubs and got into the mix, says the Sun. The Rangers, Mariners and Red Sox are among the teams that were previously reported to have interest in Patterson. If the Mariners acquired him, it would free up Jeremy Reed to be traded, probably to Boston.

Source:  Baltimore Sun

This site could just be another MLBtraderumors.com so take it for what it's worth...

 

http://mlbgminsider.blogspot.com/

Cubs Close To Trading Former Top Prospect

O's had deal done till Nationals entered into talks

 

GM Jim Hendry has had discussions with numerous teams this offseason regarding Corey Patterson but not till now has it gotten serious. Apparently the O's are interested in Cubs CF Corey Paterson despite his struggles from last season. The O's front office is high on Patterson and feel that with good coaching he can be a 30-30 player which he was close to being a few season ago. The Cubs who were ready to send their CF to Baltimore earlier this week in return for 2 minor leaguers INF-Bryan Bass and P-Chris Britton have now entered into talks with the Nationals.

 

MLB GM INSIDER has learned the Nationals may be offering a more lucrative tandem including a pitcher with MLB experience in Ryan Drese and prospect Brandon Watson. The Cubs are holding out hoping to land a potential #4 or 5 starter and some Cubs scouts feel Drese is that player.

How can they get an offer that is even that good?

How can they get an offer that is even that good?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ryan Drese really isn't good.

Ryan Drese really isn't good.

 

He was ok for awhile with the Rangers than all of a sudden went down the s***hole.

He was ok for awhile with the Rangers than all of a sudden went down the s***hole.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Drese had one good season with the Rangers in 2004 (14-10, 4.20 ERA). Other than that, he's been trash. He doesn't strike anyone out and gives up way too many hits. The reason he's with the Nationals right now is because the Rangers waived him.

Edited January 9, 200620 yr by SSH2005

Ryan Drese really isn't good.

 

I realize that, but they shouldn't be able to get a starting pitcher of any kind for Patterson. The guy should have zero trade value. The fact that that article says the Cubs are holding out to possibly get a #4 or 5 starter just blows my mind. The guy is worth a long-shot prospect or two, and that's it.

I realize that, but they shouldn't be able to get a starting pitcher of any kind for Patterson.  The guy should have zero trade value.  The fact that that article says the Cubs are holding out to possibly get a #4 or 5 starter just blows my mind.  The guy is worth a long-shot prospect or two, and that's it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Drese is basically a step above Danny Wright. He's like a #6 starter. Giving up a crappy starting pitcher like Drese really isn't losing much at all. I agree that Patterson is a bum but just the fact that he's still fairly young (26 years old), has speed, and plays good defense in center field makes him have some trade value. The teams that are interested in Patterson are hoping he can turn it around with a change of scenery. He had a good half season in 2003 and a pretty good season in 2004. I guess teams feel that it's worth a shot to trade crap for a chance at a 30-30 center fielder. I think Patterson is a bust though.

Edited January 9, 200620 yr by SSH2005

If the cubs want to dump patterson for a fringe prospect, I would pick him up for sure.

If the cubs want to dump patterson for a fringe prospect, I would pick him up for sure.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well Rock, I think you and I and quickman are the only three guys who feel this way. Thing is, as you know I doubt the Cubs will want to trade him to the Sox and in addition it is probably best for Patterson that he gets traded out of the city.

 

On another matter I also recall hearing the Sox had some interest in Todd Walker at the trade deadline last year. He can hit. I doubt the Sox have any room or interest at this point though.

Well Rock, I think you and I and quickman are the only three guys who feel this way.  Thing is, as you know I doubt the Cubs will want to trade him to the Sox and in addition it is probably best for Patterson that he gets traded out of the city. 

 

On another matter I also recall hearing the Sox had some interest in Todd Walker at the trade deadline last year.  He can hit.  I doubt the Sox have any room or interest at this point though.

 

You can add me to that list. For the record, I think Patterson sucks. But thats not to say that he doesn't have the talent to figure it out. For a fringe prospect, I'd have no problem giving him a shot.

 

Worst case scenario, he continues his sucky ways and rots away in Charlotte. Best case (while highly unlikely), he figures some things out and competes for a starting job sometime in the next few years (and of course there is the "sticking it to the Cubs factor").

 

To be completely honest, while Patterson is pretty bad at the moment, I'd take him over Borchard as our 5th outfielder. They are quite similar with the bat (Lots of K's, an occasional HR...Borchard just hits the ball further), but Patterson's speed and defense are clearly better than Borchard.

 

This is probably all moot, cause I seriously doubt we'd take the gamble. But at the right price, I wouldn't be against it.

Edited January 9, 200620 yr by KevHead0881