3/16 ST Cubs (Hill) vs Angels (Weaver) 2 PM

[abuck1220]

sorry i'm not giving more frequent updates from my xm, but i'm getting packed to head down to mesa. :D

[goonys evil twin]

I like Hill, but at this point he's not taking advantage of the opportunity in front of him.

 

I don't know how to judge that. Pitching results in the Cactus League are pretty pointless.

 

The last thing he needs is to be pushed too aggressively. Which, unfortunately, may happen with our glass rotation. IMO a couple months in Iowa would help his confidence but the big league club may need him to come out of the pen at least until Wood/Prior/Miller are ready. I would rather see Guzman at this point as that is the lesser of two evils to me.

 

Putting Hill into the rotation would not be pushing aggressively. If you are worried about pushing then Guzman is the guy you don't want getting the job. You give the job to Hill because he has to get his feet wet now, and the alternatives are garbage pitchers like Rusch.

[goonys evil twin]

lots of guys have sucked until they reached 26 only to turn it around. the difference between hill and those guys is that they sucked in the bigs while hill took his lumps in the minors.

 

Depends on how you define "lots", I guess. I think most are either out of baseball completely by 26 or going on to have absolutely meaningless careers. Those that turn it around after 26 would have to be a rather small number compared to the hole, and that's one of the many reasons I am not a Hill fan.

 

No, it actually is lots. Many pitchers struggle through their mid 20s, and struggle big time.

[TheDude]

Anybody interested in updating the game instead of arguing about Hill?

[C.C.]

I like Hill, but at this point he's not taking advantage of the opportunity in front of him.

 

I don't know how to judge that. Pitching results in the Cactus League are pretty pointless.

 

The last thing he needs is to be pushed too aggressively. Which, unfortunately, may happen with our glass rotation. IMO a couple months in Iowa would help his confidence but the big league club may need him to come out of the pen at least until Wood/Prior/Miller are ready. I would rather see Guzman at this point as that is the lesser of two evils to me.

 

Putting Hill into the rotation would not be pushing aggressively. If you are worried about pushing then Guzman is the guy you don't want getting the job. You give the job to Hill because he has to get his feet wet now, and the alternatives are garbage pitchers like Rusch.

 

Well I wouldn't call Rusch garbage. At least Rusch has shown he can be effective in the majors. I'd rather give the job the Rusch who has had success then too Hill how has proven nothing in 20 innings or so. We aren' t in the position to throw rookie pitchers out there to learn their craft for a couple of years.

[abuck1220]

dope struck out as a ph last inning.

[LuckyPup]

Anybody interested in updating the game instead of arguing about Hill?

yeah....what he said.

[goonys evil twin]

Well I wouldn't call Rusch garbage. At least Rusch has shown he can be effective in the majors. I'd rather give the job the Rusch who has had success then too Hill how has proven nothing in 20 innings or so. We aren' t in the position to throw rookie pitchers out there to learn their craft for a couple of years.

 

Why, because they're 1 Rusch win from the World Series?

[Fred Hornkohl]

Anybody interested in updating the game instead of arguing about Hill?

yeah....what he said.

 

There's a game ????

[jjgman21]

Not that they are in the same class - but Sandy Koufax was a late bloomer that had a fantastic record once he got his control down. You wanted one. I don't recall when he experienced his turn around, but I know it was later than the average player.

 

Jamie Moyer is another one. As I recall, he was about 30 when he had his first really good season.

 

Dave Duncan comes to mind when thinking about pitchers that didn't come around until later in their careers. Welch, Moore, Stewart, Woody Williams, etc. a certain 6'10" lefty I know never had an ERA+ above 108 until he was 29.

[LuckyPup]

Anybody interested in updating the game instead of arguing about Hill?

yeah....what he said.

 

There's a game ????

apparently-although it may be a farce and we are the punchline-

[C.C.]

Well I wouldn't call Rusch garbage. At least Rusch has shown he can be effective in the majors. I'd rather give the job the Rusch who has had success then too Hill how has proven nothing in 20 innings or so. We aren' t in the position to throw rookie pitchers out there to learn their craft for a couple of years.

 

Why, because they're 1 Rusch win from the World Series?

 

Well of course not but I would think Rusch is a better option then Hill is...No?

[Fred Hornkohl]

It's still 5-5 in the middle of the 6th inning.

[goonys evil twin]

Well I wouldn't call Rusch garbage. At least Rusch has shown he can be effective in the majors. I'd rather give the job the Rusch who has had success then too Hill how has proven nothing in 20 innings or so. We aren' t in the position to throw rookie pitchers out there to learn their craft for a couple of years.

 

Why, because they're 1 Rusch win from the World Series?

 

Well of course not but I would think Rusch is a better option then Hill is...No?

 

I wouldn't think that myself. Rusch is proven, but all that he's proven is he's going to stink most of the time. Hill is unproven, but he brings the chance that he'll be good.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Well I wouldn't call Rusch garbage. At least Rusch has shown he can be effective in the majors. I'd rather give the job the Rusch who has had success then too Hill how has proven nothing in 20 innings or so. We aren' t in the position to throw rookie pitchers out there to learn their craft for a couple of years.

 

Why, because they're 1 Rusch win from the World Series?

 

Well of course not but I would think Rusch is a better option then Hill is...No?

 

Definitely not for certain. Rusch has had 2 years that weren't garbage in his entire career. Fortunately for us in 2004(maybe not so much now), one of them came with the Cubs. I think Rusch is just as likely to give you a 1.50 WHIP and 4.50+ ERA as Hill, and Hill is going to strike out more hitters.

[abuck1220]

 

Well I wouldn't call Rusch garbage. At least Rusch has shown he can be effective in the majors. I'd rather give the job the Rusch who has had success then too Hill how has proven nothing in 20 innings or so.

 

hilarious!

 

you do realize that the the only reason that rusch has had any success in the bigs is because people kept giving him chances. even after he was -- gasp! -- 26. and even after he pitched 20 innings of absolutely terrible baseball...actually well more than 20 innings of absolutely terrible baseball...more like, hmm...1000.

 

age 22: 5.50 era

age 23: 5.89

age 24: 12.60

age 25: 4.02

age 26: 4.62 (geez, is this rusch guy ever going to amount to anything...he's 26!)

age 27: 4.71

age 28: 6.43

age 29 (finally!): 3.48

age 30 (oops, nevermind): 4.52

 

 

great post!

[goonys evil twin]

Wuertz pitching to Hendrick? Guy on first, 1-1 count, 5-5 in the 6th with 2 outs.

[goonys evil twin]

Kendrick is out (grounder maybe, I wasn't paying attention, it was a fastball though after they were raving about Wuertz slider).

[Jehrico]

Well I wouldn't call Rusch garbage. At least Rusch has shown he can be effective in the majors. I'd rather give the job the Rusch who has had success then too Hill how has proven nothing in 20 innings or so. We aren' t in the position to throw rookie pitchers out there to learn their craft for a couple of years.

 

Why, because they're 1 Rusch win from the World Series?

 

Well of course not but I would think Rusch is a better option then Hill is...No?

 

I wouldn't think that myself. Rusch is proven, but all that he's proven is he's going to stink most of the time. Hill is unproven, but he brings the chance that he'll be good.

I think we're arguing over the worst of two evils. Neither has much value, if we make it to the post season, it most likely won't be due to either of their contributions, and either of them would be considered a weak link in our rotation. Hill, Rusch, doesn't matter to me. Both are equally worthless.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Well I wouldn't call Rusch garbage. At least Rusch has shown he can be effective in the majors. I'd rather give the job the Rusch who has had success then too Hill how has proven nothing in 20 innings or so. We aren' t in the position to throw rookie pitchers out there to learn their craft for a couple of years.

 

Why, because they're 1 Rusch win from the World Series?

 

Well of course not but I would think Rusch is a better option then Hill is...No?

 

I wouldn't think that myself. Rusch is proven, but all that he's proven is he's going to stink most of the time. Hill is unproven, but he brings the chance that he'll be good.

I think we're arguing over the worst of two evils. Neither has much value, if we make it to the post season, it most likely won't be due to either of their contributions, and either of them would be considered a weak link in our rotation. Hill, Rusch, doesn't matter to me. Both are equally worthless.

 

Which one has the better shot of putting up a better than worthless season? Also, if we make the postseason, I doubt either player will be doing much pitching, especially as a starter.

[C.C.]

Well I wouldn't call Rusch garbage. At least Rusch has shown he can be effective in the majors. I'd rather give the job the Rusch who has had success then too Hill how has proven nothing in 20 innings or so. We aren' t in the position to throw rookie pitchers out there to learn their craft for a couple of years.

 

Why, because they're 1 Rusch win from the World Series?

 

Well of course not but I would think Rusch is a better option then Hill is...No?

 

I wouldn't think that myself. Rusch is proven, but all that he's proven is he's going to stink most of the time. Hill is unproven, but he brings the chance that he'll be good.

I think we're arguing over the worst of two evils. Neither has much value, if we make it to the post season, it most likely won't be due to either of their contributions, and either of them would be considered a weak link in our rotation. Hill, Rusch, doesn't matter to me. Both are equally worthless.

 

Now that was a good post and with that we should end the arguements of which medicore pitcher is better.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Damn baseball happening with a potential 15-2 upset going on...

[goonys evil twin]

Neifi singles, Augie pinch runs

[Fred Hornkohl]

                       1  2  3   4  5  6   7  8  9   R  H  E
                      -  -  -   -  -  -   -  -  -   -  -  -
 CHICAGO CUBS         4  0  1   0  0  0             5  9  0
 LA ANGELS            2  3  0   0  0  0             5  9  1

[goonys evil twin]

Fox triples in Augie off the CF wall

 

6-5, with Pagan up

 

(I don't know who is pitching for Angels)

 

 

***Wait, Nellenhurst? pitching maybe.