I work on Good Friday, John Patterson though…
If you were busy watching basketball all day long, John Patterson got the ol’ axe yesterday. Yes, the presumptive favorite to be the (in-name) #1 starter. The guy pencilled in for the 2nd game of the year is no longer with the team.
WP stories here. And then here.
Plenty of quotes and stories there, but the whole thing seems to boil down to one singular issue. This is Bowden saying it but Acta said virtually the same thing:
We made the judgment we don’t think he’s coming back [to his old form] this year.
That’s it. They don’t say they think he’ll never get the veolcity back, instead making pains to say they don’t think he’ll get it back this season. And that matters to the Nats. Their focus for the Nats isn’t today, it’s tomorrow. They want to know who is going to help down the road when they’re competitive. For John Patterson he was on his last chance and the idea of letting him work back into shape during the course of a full season to find out where he stood wasn’t appealing to the management. They wanted an answer now on Patterson and when the response came back yet again “We need more time” they decided to cut him.
Some questions I’ve asked myself.
Wasn’t this the same situation the Nats had with Patterson last year? Well yes and no. Yes, they wanted to get a feel for John’s progress but the situation around him was different. Last year John was the only established pitcher the Nats had going into the season. He was going to be with the team all year long - no question. This year with Odalis Perez sitting in place for the “established major league innings eater” role, and Tim Redding looking like he can at least give a season of average ball, John didn’t have that status.
Isn’t this the same situation that exists with Shawn Hill? Why isn’t he cut? I know I’ve talked about their similarities and I do think that injury-wise there is no reason for the Hill-Love Patterson-Hate I see but there is a big difference between the two. Hill is 27 this season, John is 30. John had one more shot in him. Shawn has 2. I expect if his injuries hold him back this year, we’ll see Shawn Hill again in training camp next year. The difference in the situation is not in the pitchers or their abilites, as far as I’m concerned, but simply in the fact if Shawn does come back he theoretically has 3 more seasons of play to give.
Didn’t the Lerner’s do this just to save a few bucks? If you read the Post journal entries I linked you’ll see that the Nats saved about 600K by cutting Patterson before the season. Surely they couldn’t care ab…..Ohhh I can’t lie to you. YES. SAVING 600K WAS PART OF IT. (and that’s pretty damn sad) They team didn’t want to go into season #3, find out John Patterson needed to rehab and pay him a full major league salary, so they asked Bowden, Acta et al if this was a possibility. Anyone watching the games so far would have to say yes. Down went the axe. (My conjecture sure, but I feel pretty strongly about this)
Please don’t pretend this didn’t matter because it did. No major league operation repeat NO MAJOR LEAGUE OPERATION, wants to make a final judgement on a supposed starter for their team in Spring Training. Spring is for the fringes. Does this minor league player look ready, who’s going to be our last bench player, 3rd catcher, etc etc. The situations, what you are asking them to do, they are so different that you need to see them “under fire” to make a final confirmation. I’m sure that’s what Acta and the rest of them thought. “Patterson doesn’t look great again. We’ll give him some starts to get it together but sadly we may have to let him go.” That’ s why everyone had him pencilled in as a starter. It was GOING to happen. But the management obviously decided that the potential scenario of paying 600K for 3-4 starts AGAIN was too damn much.
You ask why I don’t have faith that the money is coming when it needs to and this is why. If Patterson was cut after a poor April, it’s business as usual. Patterson being cut in the Spring reeks of cheapness. (Ahh, I’m just angry - we’ll really see if they are cheap if they continue to low-ball Zimmerman after this year)
I’m not happy with the move. I can see the logic of cutting an underperforming Patterson during the season. Even giving him a very short leash if you want I can accept. I think his potential and the slow return from injury deserved at least a half-season evaluation, but they know better than me. But cutting him in Spring to save a few bucks? That’s not only classless, it’s a bad baseball move.
This entry was posted
on Friday, March 21st, 2008 at 8:19 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
THE AUTHOR
RECENT ARTICLES BY DIVISION RIVALS
ARCHIVE
SPONSORS
Online Seats
Washington Nationals Tickets Baltimore Orioles Tickets
Ticket Specialists
Nationals Tickets Wizards tickets
Tickets4U
Washington Nationals Tickets MLB World Series Washington Redskins Tickets
Coast to Coast Tickets
Washington Nationals Tickets Washington Redskins Tickets Baltimore Orioles Tickets Baltimore Ravens Tickets Washington Wizards Tickets
Great Seats
Washington Nationals Tickets Washington Wizards Tickets Tickets to the Redskins Baltimore Orioles Tickets Baltimore Ravens Tickets
13 Responses to “I work on Good Friday, John Patterson though…”
March 21st, 2008 at 9:18 am
You are missing an important point. His replacement, either Chico or Lannan, has to be paid a minimum salary of $390K as a major leaguer. Ignoring the pittance either one of them would make in AAA, you would have to accuse the Lerners of cutting Patterson so they could save about $200K, not $600K.
For that relatively low difference (to a billionaire), I really think this is so much more a baseball move.
March 21st, 2008 at 9:44 am
If it is a baseball move - it’s about something other than what they are telling us. You just don’t see something like this happening in baseball, a presumed starter cut two weeks before the season starts with no one beating down the door behind him because of a mediocre spring. It just doesn’t happen.
As for saving $200k - the Nats went to aribtration in the past with guys for only a little more than this. (5.2 mill vs 4.9 mill last year on Felipe Lopez). Pennies become dollars and the like…
March 21st, 2008 at 9:49 am
I also don’t think its about the money. I’ve seen notes that they will offer him a minor league contract if he’s available; how would such a deal affect your view of the ownership?
March 21st, 2008 at 10:11 am
While I think that money was a factor, I don’t think that it was the deciding factor. I think that it was baseball-related - they just don’t see an effective pitcher, and based on everything that we have seen for 2 years, they are right. The big difference between Hill and Patterson is that over the last two years, when Hill is healthy enough to pitch, he has been above average. When Patterson is healthy enough to pitch, he has been below average. So with Hill, we are waiting for him to get healthy. With Patterson, we are waiting for him to get healthy and good again.
When you add in that they have younger guys who might become average MLB pitchers that Patterson is blocking, I think that they just chose to cut their losses while saving a few hundred k. I actually give them credit for this (surprising) move - there is much more downside than upside for them. If Patterson rebounds for another team this year, they will look horrible.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:11 am
It is hard - very hard - the fathom this move as a baseball move rather than a money move. But I also find it hard to believe the team cut a player to save $200,000 (and positively is correct, you have to consider that his replacement would take up some of the savings in cutting JP, so $200,000 is what they are saving). If you are going to pinch $200,000 pennies, why buy the team at all? Hard to believe that people afraid to spend $200,000 on a pitcher would have the guts to spend billions to buy and operate a team. Still, a hard move to get my head around.
I guess they were just fed up with JP. I wish him the best though and hope he resigns a minor league deal wiht us and shines in 09.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:13 am
But let’s look at why he’s a presumptive starter…because he had one good season in 2005. Prior to that, he was considered a failed prospect. Since then he’s been injured. And when he was good, it was his electric stuff (not his craftiness) that got hitters out. It’s always nice to talk about how pitcher’s mature with age and perhaps John will. But it seems to me that the crafty pitchers who have long careers are the younger pitchers who lack electric stuff and dont excite people, but get by on guile for their entire career. There are only so many Trevor Hoffman’s in major league baseball.
Also, Patterson signed a non-guaranteed contract. To me, that reeks of management telling John that he either could risk not performing and getting cut OR he could sign a guaranteed contract at a discount (from the non-guaranteed contract). I’ve always thought it was ridiculous to pay pitchers top dollar when they’ve done nothing for the past couple of seasons. I mean, when Bartolo Colon (a former Cy Young winner) is signing minor league deals because his velocity is down, it tells me that the Nats treated him more than fairly by giving him a non-guaranteed deal.
Finally, if the Lerner’s were “cheap,” why would they pay someone $200,000+ to throw few innings at Spring training? At some point, you have to cut losses on an oft-injured investment.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:20 am
If it is a sign of cheapness to cut a pitcher who can’t pitch in the major leagues, then I’m happy with the Lerners being cheap.
Patterson’s skills have deteriorated over the past two years, and he will have been paid about $1.9 million ($800K, $850K, and $212K) for that period of time. I think the Nats have seen all they need to, and paid for the privilege.
I’ll be happy for John Patterson if he returns to the major leagues some day. I don’t think it will happen, but I’ll be happy for him if it does.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:22 am
I think the offer for a minor league deal actually emphasizes that money was a part of it. It says you’re really willing to see it through - just not at a salary approaching 1 million dollars.
Like I parenthesised - the question of the Lerner’s financial commitment is going to be around for me until they make a big deal and spend a lot of money (we all hope smartly). Up to now, they’ve made some minor concessions like signing Smoker, but mostly seem a bit nitpicky with the dollars. Overall though we still just don’t know. These are all little things and don’t really mean anything other than providing a tiny bit of support to the theories of the “Stay the Plan” and “CHEEEAP” crowds. (I of course am a card-carrying member of the latter group)
March 21st, 2008 at 10:30 am
Harper - I guess I’m a member of the former. I just think you don’t waste/spend any money you don’t have to right now. Let the minors grow, see what you have. I’ve hypothozed this before, but say Chico, Redding, Lannan and Smoker become 4 viable pitcher, or even just 3. And Dukes, Millege Kearns hold down the outfield. With Ryan at first and Flores at Catcher, we have a roster than can probably compete and we only need a handful to really compete. THAT’S when you go out and spend money on the player or two that will get you over the top.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:32 am
Ryans at third, obviously.
I’d rather be the Braves who can constantly bring guys up from the minors but have a lesser salary structure than the Phils, who are Top 5 in payroll but have NO minor league. For all the money the Phils spend, the Braves aren’t that far off of the pace.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:37 am
Bryan - Actually you’re probably in group #3, the “Pass no judgement” people. I characterize the “Stay the Plan” group as the ones that ignore the…frugality the team has shown in certain aspects and act like every decision they’ve made is the right one.
Whatever group you’re in though I think 98% of us agree though there isn’t any rush to make that big signing. Your group will hold off judgement till then, I’ll look at what I see and scream CHEEAP, and the Stay the Plan guys will wave their foam fingers at any move.
March 22nd, 2008 at 11:15 am
As with most conspiracy theories, the cool thing about screaming “CHEEAP!” is that you can always find “evidence.”
A bonus is that you might shame the Lerners into Angeloseque idiocies so that the Nats can be a seven-figure Love Boat for past years’ stars. (We’re already risking that with Lo Duca, but at least not for more than a year.)
By 2010 that payroll rates to be nice and high, thanks to arbitration and the beginnings of long-term deals. Even at that I suspect the Nats won’t be outspending the Yankees, so the CHEEAPists won’t have to worry about being put out of business any time soon.
March 22nd, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Wremo said :” The big difference between Hill and Patterson is that over the last two years, when Hill is healthy enough to pitch, he has been above average. When Patterson is healthy enough to pitch, he has been below average”
.I have to take exception to this as
it is a misconception to think that Patterson has been healthy enough to pitch in any regular season game in 2006 or 2007. He was fine at the beginning of ST 2006 and pitched extremely well, allowing no runs until his next to last start when a run scored on an error. Then in his last ST start, his arm “tightened up” and from then on his arm hurt almost constantly. Even so, he struck out 13 Marlins in his only win, and pitched a very good no-decision game against the Braves before going on the DL. No tests were done to determine the cause of his arm problems. Finally, tendonitis was (mis) diagnosed and after a cortisone shot, he started rehabbing. He pitched 2 games he should have won- but received no-decisions- 2 others in which he struggled, and then was again placed on the DL. Past the middle of July, when his arm had been hurting since March, they finally ordered the tests which determined he had a compressed median nerve and he had season ending surgery. At the beginning of ST 2007, he thought his arm was all right, but after his second start, it starting hurting worse than ever. It progressed to the point that it throbbed even when he took a deep breath or yawned, and his hand became so numb that it was difficult to hold his computer mouse or wash his hair. Even in this condition, he out pitched Jake Peavy for his only win of the season. When he finally had surgery again in September, it was found that 8 very large blood vessels were wrapped around the radial nerve causing intense pain. He came into ST 2008 feeling happy and relaxed because his arm was pain-free for the first time in 2 years and he was sure that he was finally going to have a full, healthy season and regain his 2005 form. Unfortunately, it takes time to rebuild arm strength and Bowden - though at first espousing patience- decided to give up on Patterson in favor of giving younger pitchers a try. I believe Bowden gave up too soon and will regret it - unless by some miracle he can convince Patterson to sign a minor league contract with the organization.
But you see that it is extremely untrue and unfair to say that Patterson has not pitched well when healthy the last 2 years, because he has not been healthy the last 2 years, but has- at times - pitched well even with a throbbing arm. In 2007 he did not say that his arm was hurting until he went on the DL on May 5 but it had in reality been hurting since March 8, the day after his 2nd start in ST. You owe John Patterson an apology!
Leave a comment