Trade John Patterson?

[Nat of the Living Dead]

This isn't exactly a trade rumor or anything, just a continuation of what was being discussed in last night's game thread so I didn't post it in trades, etc.

For those of you who don't know, the suggestion of trading John Patterson came up last night because some consider him "unreliable" due to his injuries.

This is a ridiculous notion in itself.  Right now what this team needs more than anything is pitching, starting pitching and injured or not, Patterson is starting pitching.  We need pitching more than we need powerhitting left fielders.  If anyone should(have been) be traded at this juncture....but that is another thread.

You do not throw away a young pitcher, injured or no, who can strike out 13 Marlins in one game (April 15th I believe) and don't say the Marlins are small fish because they certainly have had our number all year and are still in the WC race while we wallow in the cellar.  Has Patterson been given chances before?  Yes and he has been injury prone.  Has he ever been truly groomed to be ace of this staff?  In my opinion, no.  Livan was always here as a safety net.  Now that he is gone, there are new responsiblilities that we should let him get the chance to shoulder.  He is top dog now and our most impressive yet mysterious pitcher considering we still don't know what he can do when he is healthy and hot.  With his knowledge and his potential, you have to give him this chance.  Its not like his injuries are faked or small.  When he gets injured, he gets injured.

However, this is my opinion.  I'm sure the logic of some is to get rid of him due to his health history.  I can see where they would think that.  But if we are going to do that I guess we should also unload Nick Johnson.  Brian Schneider says he isn't "f'n hurt" but oh well.  Ayala just had Tommy John I believe so I guess we should never let him back in a uniform.  Guillen, Vidro, Day, Lawerence, Escobar, and even some say Church is soft too.  Zimmerman is looking a little tired too lately and sat out part of the game last night.....maybe we should dump them all so we can pay Soriano.

We are paying peanuts for potential on top of all this.  Right now it is a cheap risk that can payoff and it is a risk that should be taken since our pitching can't do anything else.  But again, if Patterson is so completely unreliable and worthless who could you get for him?  What team would want that unreliability?  What bonafide MLB ready player could you get for an apparent cripple (which he is not).

I guarntee if Patterson ever hit the trade block, several teams would try to swipe him because they would see the potential and would take the same risk we are right now because it is worth it.  With what we are paying him currently and if he can get healthy, we could get away with highway robbery and have a killer on the mound to boot.

[Senators2005]

You're not going to get market value anyways until he's healthy.  Right now he's the Mark Prior of the NL East.  Nobody wants the headache of being frustrated all the time - (see Chicago Cubs season).  It's a damn shame because John Patterson has the stuff...I don't know if his mechanics are agitating the situation or what.  But if he can ever get his health in order he would be an anchor to this rotation.

[spidernat]

As of now Patterson is a lot like Wood or Prior except that the two Cubs have more on their resume to be impressed about. Personally, I don't like either of the Cub pitchers because of their inability to stay healthy. A player is useless if he can't actually play, unrealized potential is worthless. This may anger some posters because JP happens to be one of those players that some people get enamored with and they refuse to accept anything that does not glorify their 'stud'. Having said that, I must say that I like JP and it would be foolish to give up on him at this stage. In my opinion, the history of Wood and Prior suggests that they really unreliable. The same cannot be said about JP just yet. The Nationals and their fanbase would be best served to allow JP time to get completely healed and then surround him with a competent medical staff, as well as top notch facilities that will afford him, and the club, the best opportunity to determine whether he can go to the next level. I love what he brings to the table as far as 'stuff' but I cannot annoint him staff ace until he puts together a long stretch of success at the Major League level. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that he can get healthy, and remain so for years to come, and that he can combine his physical tools with the right mental attitude, which I believe at times (more than anything else) has plagued him on the mound. So my answer would be to hold on to him for at least another year to see if our fortunes take a turn for the best.

[rileyn]

I would not trade him at this point, but the notion of trading him should not be discounted.  The only way you deal him is if you get a frontline starter in return.  Don't become enamored with potential.  As spidernat said, unrealized potential is worthless.  I have no doubt that Patterson's injuries are true injuries, but that doesn't matter.  How many starts did he make this year?  Less than 10?  That doesn't go a long way.  Yes, he struck out 13 Marlins in April, but Tony Armas also 2-hit the Mets for 7+ innings on Sunday.  

I agree with many of your ideas NOTLD, but you got carried away when you start suggesting that we trade Zimmerman for being tired.  That was a little much.  As far as trading Johnson, Schnieder, et al.....I would do it in a heart beat if we got value in return.  There is NOBODY on this team so good that if we could make a trade that would help the team in the future, that we shouldn't do...even Zimmerman.

[Nat of the Living Dead]

I agree with many of your ideas NOTLD, but you got carried away when you start suggesting that we trade Zimmerman for being tired.  That was a little much.  As far as trading Johnson, Schnieder, et al.....I would do it in a heart beat if we got value in return.  There is NOBODY on this team so good that if we could make a trade that would help the team in the future, that we shouldn't do...even Zimmerman.

That was meant to be exaggerated.  I mean if we are going to ding John Patterson and put him on the chopping block for reasons stated then we have to ding every other player that has ever had a sign of physical distress.  Those players mentioned are not worthless and comprise a good portion of this team.  A lot of those guys I actually see staying on this team for a long run.

Your right, no one is THAT GOOD.  Patterson isn't a Nolan Ryan.  But to trade John Patterson at this juncture is like shooting the starting rotation lame.  They already are lame.  But to just give up a starting pitcher like that at this time?  Worst possible move.  Period.

As for "potential being worthless" I have to think on that one.  I mean, what are prospects?  What are draft picks?  Youngsters with potential to be MLB players.  A lot of the system rides off of "potential", we take risks, trades, and make moves all on "potential" since there is no guarnteed forumula.  So it being called worthless...I don't know.  "Potential" is used an awful lot on these boards and others to describe players and make arguements for them so I don't really know how worthless it really is.

[rileyn]

I knew you were exagerrating but it was quite a stretch to compare somebody making 8 starts this year versus somebody getting tired, or even going on the 15 day DL.

It's all good.  We can still dream about JP22 coming back healthy and going 21-6 next year.  It could happen.

[nats2playoffs]

With 8 starts, we are paying Patterson the equivalent of $2 million.  If we got a good starting pitcher who actually plays all year that's worth that much, I'd take him in a minute.  With MLB's budget, Bowden hunted for injured pitchers and other castoffs, because he could get them cheap.  I would not, under any circumstances, plan a 2007 rotation with Patterson in it, as we did in 2006.  If we could afford to keep him, to replace someone who got hurt, I'd keep him.  If he turns out to be healthy, I'd consider that a surprising luxury to enjoy.  But I'd now operate on the assumption that Patterson will be out half of next year.  So what rotation do I want under those conditions?  He's undependable.

[Nat of the Living Dead]

With 8 starts, we are paying Patterson the equivalent of $2 million.  If we got a good starting pitcher who actually plays all year that's worth that much, I'd take him in a minute.  With MLB's budget, Bowden hunted for injured pitchers and other castoffs, because he could get them cheap.  I would not, under any circumstances, plan a 2007 rotation with Patterson in it, as we did in 2006.  If we could afford to keep him, to replace someone who got hurt, I'd keep him.  If he turns out to be healthy, I'd consider that a surprising luxury to enjoy.  But I'd now operate on the assumption that Patterson will be out half of next year.  So what rotation do I want under those conditions?  He's undependable.
(Image removed from quote.)

Again, WHO is out there to get?  If Patterson can't be reliable (as you say) then what team is going to give us anything but crap in return?

The odds are better in this gamble if we keep him and try and get him healthy rather than play the trade game where possibly we would get crap for him.  But out of all honesty, I don't think Patterson is crap and I think Kasten as well as other teams know that as well.  That is why he is still here and that is why he will be here next year in the rotation in Livan's place.

Thats another good question:  Who would you put up as the ace then?  Ramon "Give it back" Ortiz?  Tony Arm-Out of Gas Jr.?  Zach "Pitch us into night" Day?

[Ali the Baseball Cat]

With 8 starts, we are paying Patterson the equivalent of $2 million.  If we got a good starting pitcher who actually plays all year that's worth that much, I'd take him in a minute.  With MLB's budget, Bowden hunted for injured pitchers and other castoffs, because he could get them cheap.  I would not, under any circumstances, plan a 2007 rotation with Patterson in it, as we did in 2006.  If we could afford to keep him, to replace someone who got hurt, I'd keep him.  If he turns out to be healthy, I'd consider that a surprising luxury to enjoy.  But I'd now operate on the assumption that Patterson will be out half of next year.  So what rotation do I want under those conditions?  He's undependable.
(Image removed from quote.)

But even looking it his salary per start, it's not a lot of cash - Rocket probably gets paid 2 million per start (obviously not an apples-to-apples comparison, but my point is really that a few hundred thousand--while a lot to the likes of me--is petty cash to a major league ballclub).  And his trade value is effectively zero while injured or in rehab.

[Ericas Nats]

the nats would be smokin some crack if they traded big nasty

[Nat of the Living Dead]

the nats would be smokin some crack if they traded big nasty

In some seedy hotel room with Marion Barry?  

[nats2playoffs]

Patterson hasn't played a full season one time in the last five years, (and he was in the minors before that.)  2005 was the only year he even came close.  I would love for him to be the ace, but I would PLAN for him to be unavailable.  If he is injured, I don't want another repeat of 2006, where we patched the rotation with minor league pitchers - and lost and lost and lost.  I'd rather assume Patterson is not available, and convert the 5th starter to long relief, if we are pleasantly surprised with good health for John.  

And I would trade him, if a more reliable starter with decent abilities was on the table, for the right price.  You don't think there is anyone available?  As of now, there about 110 pitchers, of varying abilities, who have 100 innings pitched in 2006.   Patterson has 40.  He does have a former beauty queen for a girlfriend though.

[UMDNats]

Eh, let's just go sign Barry Zito. Let him be our ace.

[The Chief]

I think we have to keep him just because we won't get anything decent for him until he's played a good full season, with no time or at least very little time spent on the DL.  Even then, he's going to have to really dazzle folks in order to bring in the good trades.  It sucks to the max that we can't get more starts out of him, but there's really nothing we can do about it.

[soxfan59]

The other issue is if some of you are right -- Patterson IS the real thing, he just needs to get healthy -- and you trade him for a prospect and a bag of batting practice balls, and then he'll wind up staying healthy, hitting on all cylinders, and having his break out year for someone else.  

I agree that the only viable solution for Patterson for now is to get him healthy and see how he fits into the rotation next year.  

The only other option is to package him with a more valuable assett and get  a decent return.

[2k6nats]

I am shocked someone would suggest this, or even go so far as to compare him to Kerry Wood or Mark Prior.  Just because he gets injured for a season, people are jumping the gun and propose trading him?

[expos96]

Everybode is tradeble, no doubt.
But I doubt whether it is wise to even try to trade him now.

2005 has been a very good year for him and the Nats.
2007 can be likewise as 2005...

Just get him healthy and see what's happening.
I can stand the thought that we trade him and another team goes away with his stuff.