Assesment on Hill, so far?

[SouthSideRyan]

The question is, were you saying Barrett called a great game Hill's last time out when he was a stud?

 

It doesn't seem fair if Barrett's going to be questioned every time a pitcher throws a stinker and given no credit when a pitcher throws a gem.

[tkenm356]

Well with the exception of Zambrano's no-hit bid heatbreaker yesterday, the only game the Cubs have lost with Hill starting behind the plate was because Will Ohman is a piece of trash who can't keep opponents off the bases. With a little run support yesterday and Ohman not sucking, Hill would have an unblemished 7-0 record with pitchers he has caught when he starts. Starters have yet to give up more than 3ER in a game with Hill behind the plate, and the only person to give up 3ER in a game was Marquis. He's also caught Hill (1ER in 1G), Marshall (3ER in 2G), and Zambrano (3ER in 3G). Yeah, it's a small sample size, but it makes Barrett's ability somewhat suspect in my opinion.

 

Of course Barrett catching Hill makes sense now that I think about it because in Barrett's radio interview the other day he said that of all the pitchers on the staff he only knows of Rich Hill looking over tape looking for hitter tendancies, he says all otherp itchers rely on him to look at the tape. So if both of them look at the tape then they should have a good idea of what to expect.

 

I admit you guys are right and Hill probably just had a bad outing, and sure Barrett should probably deserve some credit when pitchers throw a gem, but it's just seems a bit more than a coincidence that when Koyie Hill catches, the Cubs pitchers tend to throw better than they would with Barrett behind the plate.

[Keener98]

The fact that our pitchers have pitched well lately is more towards themselves not the cather. Barret was the one earlier in the year who was catching Marquis, Hill,and Lilly. But I guess its just easier to blame the catcher than blame the pitcher.

[Guest]

I admit you guys are right and Hill probably just had a bad outing, and sure Barrett should probably deserve some credit when pitchers throw a gem, but it's just seems a bit more than a coincidence that when Koyie Hill catches, the Cubs pitchers tend to throw better than they would with Barrett behind the plate.

 

That doesn't make sense. We don't know how the pitchers would do if Barrett caught them instead of Koyie Hill. It's not fair to even compare one pitcher from one start to the next because they have different stuff from start to start, they face different offenses, etc.

[tkenm356]

I get what you're saying, but I did say that it's a small sample size. If the pitchers he catches make a couple more starts and dominate with him behind the plate then my conspiracy theory brain is going to continue make these asanine assumptions (not joking, I know my opinions are weird)

[jjgman21]

Could it have been because Barrett is an awful defensive catcher and sucks at setting up pitches?

 

Oh, come on. I'm getting tired of defending Barrett but this stuff is getting ridiculous.

 

Agreed. I find it hilarious that Hill had a terrible outing and almost everybody is wanting to make excuses for him. If Brenly hadnt brought up the fact of him thinking Hill was tipping his pitches I doubt anyone else here would have said a word about it. Rich sucked today, nobody elses fault, he just sucked. Lets hope he doesnt have many more of these.

 

I speculated he was tipping his pitches the last time he faced the Padres, and thought about it again after the second batter today.

 

not sure what he is doing, but his 'stuff' was not all that different today than it was in his outtings against the Braves, yet the Padres hitters were never fooled even the slightest bit. they waited back on every single curve. it's pretty obvious when that is happening that a team has picked up on something that indicates what pitch is coming.

[fromthestretch]

Of course Barrett catching Hill makes sense now that I think about it because in Barrett's radio interview the other day he said that of all the pitchers on the staff he only knows of Rich Hill looking over tape looking for hitter tendancies, he says all otherp itchers rely on him to look at the tape. So if both of them look at the tape then they should have a good idea of what to expect.

 

If this is true, this bothers me. A starting pitcher has four freaking days between starts to view tape of his upcoming opponent. Why the hell should that fall on the catcher? I'm not saying the catcher shouldn't be looking at video, but this should be a primary responsibility of a starting pitcher.

[abuck1220]

it's too bad this pathetic offense is going to cost hill a spot on the all-star team.

 

i'm mad that i wasn't around during the game so i could make a "if rich hill keeps pitching like this, he's going to get ozzie guillen fired" joke. i hope someone picked up the slack for me.

[TruffleShuffle]

he was doing just fine until the umpire forgot how to call a strike.

 

I feel good about my prediciton that he'd finish top 5 in Cy Young voting... only thing I didn't take into account was how incompetent the Cubs' offense would be during his starts.

[RichHillIsABeast]

Some genius was calling Hill a "#4 starter" in the game thread. Moran.

[Sarcastic]

I get what you're saying, but I did say that it's a small sample size. If the pitchers he catches make a couple more starts and dominate with him behind the plate then my conspiracy theory brain is going to continue make these asanine assumptions (not joking, I know my opinions are weird)

 

This whole catcher's game calling thing is getting out of hand. The catcher matters, but is a fairly small overall part of a pitcher's performance when you consider the other factors: the pitcher, his opposition, the overall fielding of the team, and, of course, luck.

 

Once again, CERA stats during the Barrett era (courtesy of Warren Brusstar):

 

Barrett: 4.26

Backups: 4.32

 

If this doesn't convince you that it is a myth that Barrett's game calling killed the Cubs, I don't know what will. Maybe he was a worse game caller than the other catchers, but it clearly didn't make much of an impact.

 

At the same time, I highly doubt that Koyie Hill magically makes Rich Hill Cy Young, for these same reasons.

[TruffleShuffle]

Some genius was calling Hill a "#4 starter" in the game thread. Moran.

 

to be fair, a lot of #4 starters have the ninth-best WHIP among major league starters.

 

by the way, of the 118 pitchers who have thrown 60 innings or more this year, 110 of them have gotten better run support than rich hill. And the Cubs have scored 29 runs in his last 13 starts. Great job losers.

[Brian]

Am I crazy or did it seem like Rich didn't have near his best stuff today? He never really seemed in control except that stretch in the middle where he was K'ing everybody.

[Lockes Eye Scar]

Yeah, he was shaky at the beginning and end, very good in the middle.

[RichHillIsABeast]

Some genius was calling Hill a "#4 starter" in the game thread. Moran.

 

to be fair, a lot of #4 starters have the ninth-best WHIP among major league starters.

 

by the way, of the 118 pitchers who have thrown 60 innings or more this year, 110 of them have gotten better run support than rich hill. And the Cubs have scored 29 runs in his last 13 starts. Great job losers.

 

viewtopic.php?t=41729&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=240

 

Rich Hill is nothing more than a #4 starter I fear...

 

He is very predictable at times.

 

3.22 ERA, 79 K, 29 BB, 1.04 WHIP in 89.1 IP

 

Yeah, #4 starter.

 

lmfao

[soccer10k]

Some genius was calling Hill a "#4 starter" in the game thread. Moran.

 

to be fair, a lot of #4 starters have the ninth-best WHIP among major league starters.

 

by the way, of the 118 pitchers who have thrown 60 innings or more this year, 110 of them have gotten better run support than rich hill. And the Cubs have scored 29 runs in his last 13 starts. Great job losers.

 

I wrote a column on this same thing for the paper last week except it was on Matt Cain. Obviously his stats aren't as good as Rich Hill's but he has pitched better than his 2-8 record suggests. He's received no run support from the Giants though IIRC it was more than Hill has received from the Cubs.

[NCCubFan]

First inning today--bad, bad, bad. Beyond that, I was impressed with the way he got it together and prevented any more damage and kept the Cubs close enough to get back in the game.

[Mephistopheles]

rich hill is a quadruple a pitcher. two pitches and nothing else.

[CubmanPi]

Even when he didn't have his best stuff, Rich Hill still ate up some innings and gave his offense a chance to come back and win the game.

 

Or maybe he stunk today. I don't know, I'm still euphoric right now, so I could be a little off here.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Rich was bad today. While he didn't allow any more damage after the first, he never really settled down. His second inning didn't yield any runs, but he threw a ton of pitches then and still allowed baserunners.

 

Hopefully, this will just be a bump in the road for Hill and he'll right the ship. I think he will.

[Sammy Sofa]

Even when he didn't have his best stuff, Rich Hill still ate up some innings and gave his offense a chance to come back and win the game.

 

Or maybe he stunk today. I don't know, I'm still euphoric right now, so I could be a little off here.

 

Nah, I agree. The 2nd and 3rd weren't pretty, but he didn't allow any more runs and still ended up striking out 5. He kept the team in the game for the next two innings.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Even when he didn't have his best stuff, Rich Hill still ate up some innings and gave his offense a chance to come back and win the game.

 

Or maybe he stunk today. I don't know, I'm still euphoric right now, so I could be a little off here.

 

Nah, I agree. The 2nd and 3rd weren't pretty, but he didn't allow any more runs and still ended up striking out 5. He kept the team in the game for the next two innings.

 

I like Hill, but when a starter only goes three innings, there's nothing positive about that. I'm not going to go off on a Rich Hill sucks tangent, because that's ridiculous, nor will I question his desire or any overreaction like that.

 

But, to try to put any positive spin on his start today is pretty silly. He was bad. Did he confine the damage to one inning? Yes. But he still pitched so poorly that he left trailing by a huge amount and forced the bullpen to be perfect. Had he given up five and then held the Brewers scoreless into the fifth or sixth, then more props could be given. But he got lit up, had another bad inning, and had to be lifted after only three innings. In no metric, no book, no where is that a good outing.

 

Will he rebound? I surely hope so. But just because many of us like Hill, I think it's a bit ludicrous to try to say anything positive about this start. If Marquis lasted three innings while allowing five runs, I doubt anyone here would try to give him credit for throwing two scoreless innings after giving up five in the first.

 

The simple truth: Hill sucked today. It happens to a lot of pitchers. Hopefully, Hill gets his act together over the next four days. I know he can do it, but he definitely wasn't a good pitcher today.

[abuck1220]

the walks and the hit batter were the worst of what he did today. the homer to mench was really the only ball that was hit super hard.

 

the foul balls are just a mystery. it doesn't tell me that he had bad stuff, as he wasn't really getting hit hard...he did have a bunch of k's and three of the hits he gave up were infield hits/pop-ups. plus, he was around the zone enough to give up 39 foul balls, so it wasn't like he was extremely wild. he never looked awful (walking people/giving up bombs), but he never really looked comfortable either. just a weird day all around for him.

[CubmanPi]

Even when he didn't have his best stuff, Rich Hill still ate up some innings and gave his offense a chance to come back and win the game.

 

Or maybe he stunk today. I don't know, I'm still euphoric right now, so I could be a little off here.

 

Nah, I agree. The 2nd and 3rd weren't pretty, but he didn't allow any more runs and still ended up striking out 5. He kept the team in the game for the next two innings.

 

I like Hill, but when a starter only goes three innings, there's nothing positive about that. I'm not going to go off on a Rich Hill sucks tangent, because that's ridiculous, nor will I question his desire or any overreaction like that.

 

But, to try to put any positive spin on his start today is pretty silly. He was bad. Did he confine the damage to one inning? Yes. But he still pitched so poorly that he left trailing by a huge amount and forced the bullpen to be perfect. Had he given up five and then held the Brewers scoreless into the fifth or sixth, then more props could be given. But he got lit up, had another bad inning, and had to be lifted after only three innings. In no metric, no book, no where is that a good outing.

 

Will he rebound? I surely hope so. But just because many of us like Hill, I think it's a bit ludicrous to try to say anything positive about this start. If Marquis lasted three innings while allowing five runs, I doubt anyone here would try to give him credit for throwing two scoreless innings after giving up five in the first.

 

The simple truth: Hill sucked today. It happens to a lot of pitchers. Hopefully, Hill gets his act together over the next four days. I know he can do it, but he definitely wasn't a good pitcher today.

Well put.

[soccer10k]

rich hill is a quadruple a pitcher. two pitches and nothing else.

 

You're being generous there.