What Happens to Hill if Everyone Is Healthy?

[Jehrico]

i don't really think hendry has had a thing for hill.

You keep saying that and you keep failing to provide anything other than your opinion. Do you have anything concrete or even anecdotal to back that up? If not, fire away, be my guest, but don't expect anyone with even half a head on their shoulders to agree with you.

 

umm...my argument that hendry doesn't have a thing for hill is based on a lack of him saying or doing things to indicate support of hill. therefore, it's kinda hard for me to point to his non-existent quotes of support.

 

since your claim is that he does support/like hill, you should be able to point to quotes or actions indicating such. but as you said, you're not a librarian.

Didn't Hendry state last year that he wouldn't trade Hill for Dunn straight up?

 

Nope.

 

Who was it then that he said he wouldn't trade Hill for straight up? It was someone of that caliber.

 

this is one of my pet peeves on this board.

 

JIM HENDRY NEVER SAID HE WOULD NOT TRADE RICH HILL STRAIGHT UP FOR ADAM DUNN.

 

this was a statement made by bruce miles, i believe, to demonstrate to everyone how highly hendry valued hill in 2005. it was never a quote directly from hendry.

Crimeny...get off of the soap box. Bruce Miles has enough credibility that if he reports someone said something, they probably did. Who cares if Hendry conveyed to him that he wouldn't make that deal or if he said it verbatim in front of a camera.

 

I didn't state he said that...I asked if he had said as my recollection was a little hazy. I don't care if it is a pet peeve of yours...there's no need to get an attitude. Whether he said it, or Bruce Miles said it, it supports the argument earlier that Hendry does value Hill, as it was claimed there is a lack of evidence to support that he does.

[Ivy Walls]

If and this is big IF, all the pitchers you mentioned are healthy and effective the least effective goes to the bullpen unless it is Hill who has options and is better served in AAA, which I doubt is going to be the case.

 

Zambrano remains on the Cubs if they are contending even though he is unsigned unless the Cubs get a Randy Johnson return like Seattle got, but that is in July.

 

If Prior is healthy he is the #2 and he stays, because he has years left, and his value on the market is diminished because of his injury history.

 

Lilly and Marquis are in the rotation for at least the next two years.

 

Miller is the tradeable one but is probably the Rusch spot as the long reliever spot starter because injury and spot starting is inevitable.

[abuck1220]

Crimeny...get off of the soap box. Bruce Miles has enough credibility that if he reports someone said something, they probably did. Who cares if Hendry conveyed to him that he wouldn't make that deal or if he said it verbatim in front of a camera.

 

I didn't state he said that...I asked if he had said as my recollection was a little hazy. I don't care if it is a pet peeve of yours...there's no need to get an attitude. Whether he said it, or Bruce Miles said it, it supports the argument earlier that Hendry does value Hill, as it was claimed there is a lack of evidence to support that he does.

 

i disagree. if hendry really wouldn't trade hill for dunn, i think it speaks more of hendry's dislike of dunn than it does his like for hill. remember, this was during hendry's, i've decided i like guys who catch the ball phase (during which he also, of course, didn't like strikeouts and didn't see the value of a walk).

 

hendry has never said anything to indicate support of hill. the most the organization has spoke about hill was when they trashed him after the white sox game. that, coupled with the reluctance to give him a prolonged shot in the rotation, lead me to believe that hendry does not have a "thing" for hill.

[Sammy Sofa]

Crimeny...get off of the soap box. Bruce Miles has enough credibility that if he reports someone said something, they probably did. Who cares if Hendry conveyed to him that he wouldn't make that deal or if he said it verbatim in front of a camera.

 

I didn't state he said that...I asked if he had said as my recollection was a little hazy. I don't care if it is a pet peeve of yours...there's no need to get an attitude. Whether he said it, or Bruce Miles said it, it supports the argument earlier that Hendry does value Hill, as it was claimed there is a lack of evidence to support that he does.

 

i disagree. if hendry really wouldn't trade hill for dunn, i think it speaks more of hendry's dislike of dunn than it does his like for hill. remember, this was during hendry's, i've decided i like guys who catch the ball phase (during which he also, of course, didn't like strikeouts and didn't see the value of a walk).

 

hendry has never said anything to indicate support of hill. the most the organization has spoke about hill was when they trashed him after the white sox game. that, coupled with the reluctance to give him a prolonged shot in the rotation, lead me to believe that hendry does not have a "thing" for hill.

 

Hill was talking out of his ass after that game. "Rookie rules" debate aside, he should have just said "no comment" and moved on. It was a mistake on his part since after the game both sides were generally keeping quiet and not trying to blow the whole situation up. Let Ozzie be the jerk in that situation...we don't our rookie pitcher who just got blown out of the park sounding even remotely like that guy.

 

And I'm not saying Hill was necessarily treated "roght" after what he said, but I also don't think he was "trashed."

 

Beyond that, not falling over themselves to praise him doesn't mean they're not "for" Hill or somehow "against" him. That's a purely subjective assumption on your part.

[ltb]

i don't really think hendry has had a thing for hill.

You keep saying that and you keep failing to provide anything other than your opinion. Do you have anything concrete or even anecdotal to back that up? If not, fire away, be my guest, but don't expect anyone with even half a head on their shoulders to agree with you.

 

umm...my argument that hendry doesn't have a thing for hill is based on a lack of him saying or doing things to indicate support of hill. therefore, it's kinda hard for me to point to his non-existent quotes of support.

 

since your claim is that he does support/like hill, you should be able to point to quotes or actions indicating such. but as you said, you're not a librarian.

Didn't Hendry state last year that he wouldn't trade Hill for Dunn straight up?

 

Nope.

 

Who was it then that he said he wouldn't trade Hill for straight up? It was someone of that caliber.

 

this is one of my pet peeves on this board.

 

JIM HENDRY NEVER SAID HE WOULD NOT TRADE RICH HILL STRAIGHT UP FOR ADAM DUNN.

 

this was a statement made by bruce miles, i believe, to demonstrate to everyone how highly hendry valued hill in 2005. it was never a quote directly from hendry.

Crimeny...get off of the soap box. Bruce Miles has enough credibility that if he reports someone said something, they probably did.

 

soap box? excuse me? perhaps you need to take your time while reading posts a little better, because bruce miles himself posted that hendry never made such a quote. that's what i'm trying to tell you. he used adam dunn as an example to show how highly hendry valued hill. nothing more. quit trying to start a fight with me.

[CubsWin]

i don't really think hendry has had a thing for hill.

You keep saying that and you keep failing to provide anything other than your opinion. Do you have anything concrete or even anecdotal to back that up? If not, fire away, be my guest, but don't expect anyone with even half a head on their shoulders to agree with you.

 

umm...my argument that hendry doesn't have a thing for hill is based on a lack of him saying or doing things to indicate support of hill. therefore, it's kinda hard for me to point to his non-existent quotes of support.

 

since your claim is that he does support/like hill, you should be able to point to quotes or actions indicating such. but as you said, you're not a librarian.

I have provided examples of Hendry valuing Hill but all you saw was Hendry taking credit for Hill's success. Your mind appears closed on the subject. Whatever evidence gets provided to you, since you seem unwilling to find any of it yourself, you will probably justify it away as something that makes Hendry look even worse to you.

 

As I've said several times already in this thread, be my guest. Have at it. But it doesn't mean that your opinion on this issue is based on anything factual.

[NorthsideAvenger]

Now to get back on topic that was started by vance, I think the solution is simple.........Hill is kept and in the rotation. Here is the guarantee rotation to start 2007:

 

Zambrano

Lilly

Hill

 

The final two spots will be battled by Guzman/Marshall/Mateo/Marmol/Miller/Prior/Marquis

 

My guess is...Guzman/Marshall/Mateo and Marmol will be the foundation of the Iowa pitching staff, which leaves Miller/Marquis/ and Prior for the final two spot. In Miller, I believe there is a gentleman's handshake that that if there is not a spot in the rotation for Miller, Hendry would trade Wade to a team that has a spot (and Hendry is good at keeping his word). So the final two spots in the rotation will be Marquis and whoever is healthier Miller or Prior.

 

So, IMO, Hill with the way he pitched when he was called up the last time in 2006, all but gurantee a spot in the rotation. It's up to Miller/Prior and Marquis to settle the final two spots in the rotation.

[Yeti]

In Miller, I believe there is a gentleman's handshake that that if there is not a spot in the rotation for Miller, Hendry would trade Wade to a team that has a spot (and Hendry is good at keeping his word)

problem there is, wasnt he just signed as a FA? in which case he cannot be traded till what June(?)

[CP_414]

I don't see what the big debate is here. Hill will start the season in the rotation. If he pitches well he'll stay there. If he sucks he might lose his spot. That's a good thing.

[abuck1220]

i don't really think hendry has had a thing for hill.

You keep saying that and you keep failing to provide anything other than your opinion. Do you have anything concrete or even anecdotal to back that up? If not, fire away, be my guest, but don't expect anyone with even half a head on their shoulders to agree with you.

 

umm...my argument that hendry doesn't have a thing for hill is based on a lack of him saying or doing things to indicate support of hill. therefore, it's kinda hard for me to point to his non-existent quotes of support.

 

since your claim is that he does support/like hill, you should be able to point to quotes or actions indicating such. but as you said, you're not a librarian.

I have provided examples of Hendry valuing Hill but all you saw was Hendry taking credit for Hill's success. Your mind appears closed on the subject. Whatever evidence gets provided to you, since you seem unwilling to find any of it yourself, you will probably justify it away as something that makes Hendry look even worse to you.

 

As I've said several times already in this thread, be my guest. Have at it. But it doesn't mean that your opinion on this issue is based on anything factual.

 

you're essentially saying that i can't prove the non-existence of something. it's like me saying santa clause doesn't exist, and you saying that since i can't come up with evidence that he doesn't, he must exist. but anyway...

 

1) hendry let hill stay in AAA while rusch was getting pounded and the cubs were out of it.

2) the whole organization bad mouthed hill on his way out after the white sox game

3) after a fantastic relief outing against the brewers in '05, hill was virtually unheard from for a month

4) despite posting great AAA numbers in '05 hill was passed over for the '06 rotation by marshall based on 10 spring training innings.

 

there, i offered four items that would lead one to believe that hendry isn't huge on hill. and before you try to justify any of those decisions/moves, remember my argument isn't that hill got treated unfairly, it's simply that hendry doesn't have a "thing" for hill.

 

I have provided examples of Hendry valuing Hill

 

no, you haven't. please point me to those examples.

[RichHillIsABeast]

1) hendry let hill stay in AAA while rusch was getting pounded and the cubs were out of it.

2) the whole organization bad mouthed hill on his way out after the white sox game

3) after a fantastic relief outing against the brewers in '05, hill was virtually unheard from for a month

4) despite posting great AAA numbers in '05 hill was passed over for the '06 rotation by marshall based on 10 spring training innings.

 

1) agree with you there

2) The whole organization didn't badmouth him. Maybe Dusty and some of his cronies. Hill was in the wrong, but definitely didn't deserve to be thrown under the bus like that.

3) Hill went from A ball to the bigs that year. Maybe '05 isn't the best example of how much Hendry and the org don't love him. So what if he didn't get more PT after one decent relief outting.

4) That rotation spot was there for Hill to lose and he lost it by bouncing curveballs into the dirt consistently in ST. Hendry and company have been pretty consistent on rewarding ST performances. You have to earn your spot when the chance comes. Pagan and Marshall did. Hill picked the wrong time to struggle.

[CubsWin]

1) hendry let hill stay in AAA while rusch was getting pounded and the cubs were out of it.

2) the whole organization bad mouthed hill on his way out after the white sox game

3) after a fantastic relief outing against the brewers in '05, hill was virtually unheard from for a month

4) despite posting great AAA numbers in '05 hill was passed over for the '06 rotation by marshall based on 10 spring training innings.

 

1) agree with you there

2) The whole organization didn't badmouth him. Maybe Dusty and some of his cronies. Hill was in the wrong, but definitely didn't deserve to be thrown under the bus like that.

3) Hill went from A ball to the bigs that year. Maybe '05 isn't the best example of how much Hendry and the org don't love him. So what if he didn't get more PT after one decent relief outting.

4) That rotation spot was there for Hill to lose and he lost it by bouncing curveballs into the dirt consistently in ST. Hendry and company have been pretty consistent on rewarding ST performances. You have to earn your spot when the chance comes. Pagan and Marshall did. Hill picked the wrong time to struggle.

I don't even agree with him on that one. I've already posted earlier in this thread an explanation for why Hill was kept in the minors as long as he was last season and he just ignored it. The threads only 5 pages long.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

1) agree with you there

2) The whole organization didn't badmouth him. Maybe Dusty and some of his cronies. Hill was in the wrong, but definitely didn't deserve to be thrown under the bus like that.

3) Hill went from A ball to the bigs that year. Maybe '05 isn't the best example of how much Hendry and the org don't love him. So what if he didn't get more PT after one decent relief outting.

4) That rotation spot was there for Hill to lose and he lost it by bouncing curveballs into the dirt consistently in ST. Hendry and company have been pretty consistent on rewarding ST performances. You have to earn your spot when the chance comes. Pagan and Marshall did. Hill picked the wrong time to struggle.

I don't even agree with him on that one. I've already posted earlier in this thread an explanation for why Hill was kept in the minors as long as he was last season and he just ignored it. The threads only 5 pages long.

 

I just skimmed the thread and didn't see anything resembling that.

[CubsWin]

1) agree with you there

2) The whole organization didn't badmouth him. Maybe Dusty and some of his cronies. Hill was in the wrong, but definitely didn't deserve to be thrown under the bus like that.

3) Hill went from A ball to the bigs that year. Maybe '05 isn't the best example of how much Hendry and the org don't love him. So what if he didn't get more PT after one decent relief outting.

4) That rotation spot was there for Hill to lose and he lost it by bouncing curveballs into the dirt consistently in ST. Hendry and company have been pretty consistent on rewarding ST performances. You have to earn your spot when the chance comes. Pagan and Marshall did. Hill picked the wrong time to struggle.

I don't even agree with him on that one. I've already posted earlier in this thread an explanation for why Hill was kept in the minors as long as he was last season and he just ignored it. The threads only 5 pages long.

 

I just skimmed the thread and didn't see anything resembling that.

Oops, you're right. abuck and I were having this discussion in another thread. Its on page 3 of the "A Look at our Current Rotation" thread.

 

Perhaps you missed it, but I remember an article about the work they were doing with Hill down at AAA. Hill failed pretty miserably in his first stint up with the Cubs last season, certainly worse than what Rusch was expected to do at the time. Remember, Rusch hadn't sucked that way the previous two seasons, so the expectation was that even if he struggled, he wouldn't struggle all year, and he would likely be better than what Hill did his first time up.

 

When Rusch continued to suck and when Hill accomplished what his pitching coach wanted him to accomplish, I think it was spotting the fastball with consistency or something like that, then he was brought up. It is a perfectly logical time line.

 

When you know the facts and have a fair view of what was reasonable to expect Rusch to do, what Hendry did makes perfect sense.

Here are the facts of the matter. Rusch started the season in the rotation along with Marshall because Hill was not inspiring a lot of confidence in spring training and Rusch was coming off of two pretty solid years of service for the Cubs. Rusch was terrible to start the season going 1-4, 8.46 in 5 April starts. Hill was doing great in AAA so he was called up and replaced Rusch in the rotation on May 4th. He went 0-4 with a 9.31 ERA in 4 starts in May while Rusch was moved to the pen where he settles down a bit. He still gets hit, giving up 16 safties in 14 innings but he strikes out 17 while walking only 6 and has an ERA of 4.91 for the month in 7 relief appearances. Rusch is tried three more times in the rotation in June and sucks. He spends the rest of the season in the bullpen except for one spot start due to injury before basically being shut down for the rest of the year. Hill is brought back up about a month later presumably because he was still working on overcoming the things that had him fail so miserably in May. The rest is history.

 

There was an article somewhere about what Hill was working on with his pitching coach while in the minors which I referenced in the quote from the other thread. I'm not certain if this is the same one I remember reading, but this one from Cubs.com is written by Hill himself and talks a lot about him working on attacking hitters, staying aggressive and the key to his recent success being his ability to spot his fastball with consistency. We all wondered what it was that had him succeed so greatly in AAA but not translate that over to the bigs. It sounds like, according to Hill, those were the reasons.

[JonnyRed]

Trading Prior might be the dumbest move of the bunch, even worse than signing Marquis and Lilly in the first place.

 

If Prior is healthy, and yes big if, he is likely the second best starter on the team and has the potential to be the best.

 

That's the first positive statement I've heard about Prior is quite some time. Everyone has written him off, but what if he bounces back and regains his dominant form? Then we have two ace pitchers, Lilly in his rightful #3 spot, Hill at four and Miller/Marshall/Marquis battling it out for the last spot. Sure, we can't count on Prior right now, but I can see it happening.

[Guest]

Trading Prior might be the dumbest move of the bunch, even worse than signing Marquis and Lilly in the first place.

 

If Prior is healthy, and yes big if, he is likely the second best starter on the team and has the potential to be the best.

 

That's the first positive statement I've heard about Prior is quite some time. Everyone has written him off, but what if he bounces back and regains his dominant form? Then we have two ace pitchers, Lilly in his rightful #3 spot, Hill at four and Miller/Marshall/Marquis battling it out for the last spot. Sure, we can't count on Prior right now, but I can see it happening.

You have not been reading very carefully, then. Most of the comments on the pitching staff the past couple days have been about what happens if everyone is healthy.

 

Heck, I've had a front page article up about it for two days now! :D

[Soul]

Trading Prior might be the dumbest move of the bunch, even worse than signing Marquis and Lilly in the first place.

 

If Prior is healthy, and yes big if, he is likely the second best starter on the team and has the potential to be the best.

 

That's the first positive statement I've heard about Prior is quite some time. Everyone has written him off, but what if he bounces back and regains his dominant form? Then we have two ace pitchers, Lilly in his rightful #3 spot, Hill at four and Miller/Marshall/Marquis battling it out for the last spot. Sure, we can't count on Prior right now, but I can see it happening.

You have not been reading very carefully, then. Most of the comments on the pitching staff the past couple days have been about what happens if everyone is healthy.

 

Heck, I've had a front page article up about it for two days now! :D

 

Is there any we can, you know, force Mark to stop being fragile and sucking?

 

I want my 2003 Marky Mark back, darn it all!

[Careless]

In Miller, I believe there is a gentleman's handshake that that if there is not a spot in the rotation for Miller, Hendry would trade Wade to a team that has a spot (and Hendry is good at keeping his word)

problem there is, wasnt he just signed as a FA? in which case he cannot be traded till what June(?)

Isn't that something the player can waive?

[Yeti]

In Miller, I believe there is a gentleman's handshake that that if there is not a spot in the rotation for Miller, Hendry would trade Wade to a team that has a spot (and Hendry is good at keeping his word)

problem there is, wasnt he just signed as a FA? in which case he cannot be traded till what June(?)

Isn't that something the player can waive?

im not perfectly clear on the rule, hence the question mark behind june...im not even clear on the date

[abuck1220]

Perhaps you missed it, but I remember an article about the work they were doing with Hill down at AAA. Hill failed pretty miserably in his first stint up with the Cubs last season, certainly worse than what Rusch was expected to do at the time. Remember, Rusch hadn't sucked that way the previous two seasons, so the expectation was that even if he struggled, he wouldn't struggle all year, and he would likely be better than what Hill did his first time up.

 

When Rusch continued to suck and when Hill accomplished what his pitching coach wanted him to accomplish, I think it was spotting the fastball with consistency or something like that, then he was brought up. It is a perfectly logical time line.

 

When you know the facts and have a fair view of what was reasonable to expect Rusch to do, what Hendry did makes perfect sense.

Here are the facts of the matter. Rusch started the season in the rotation along with Marshall because Hill was not inspiring a lot of confidence in spring training and Rusch was coming off of two pretty solid years of service for the Cubs. Rusch was terrible to start the season going 1-4, 8.46 in 5 April starts. Hill was doing great in AAA so he was called up and replaced Rusch in the rotation on May 4th. He went 0-4 with a 9.31 ERA in 4 starts in May while Rusch was moved to the pen where he settles down a bit. He still gets hit, giving up 16 safties in 14 innings but he strikes out 17 while walking only 6 and has an ERA of 4.91 for the month in 7 relief appearances. Rusch is tried three more times in the rotation in June and sucks. He spends the rest of the season in the bullpen except for one spot start due to injury before basically being shut down for the rest of the year. Hill is brought back up about a month later presumably because he was still working on overcoming the things that had him fail so miserably in May. The rest is history.

 

There was an article somewhere about what Hill was working on with his pitching coach while in the minors which I referenced in the quote from the other thread. I'm not certain if this is the same one I remember reading, but this one from Cubs.com is written by Hill himself and talks a lot about him working on attacking hitters, staying aggressive and the key to his recent success being his ability to spot his fastball with consistency. We all wondered what it was that had him succeed so greatly in AAA but not translate that over to the bigs. It sounds like, according to Hill, those were the reasons.

 

fine. but none of that indicates that hill is hendry's pet or that he favors him or that he has a "thing" for him.

[Sammy Sofa]

Perhaps you missed it, but I remember an article about the work they were doing with Hill down at AAA. Hill failed pretty miserably in his first stint up with the Cubs last season, certainly worse than what Rusch was expected to do at the time. Remember, Rusch hadn't sucked that way the previous two seasons, so the expectation was that even if he struggled, he wouldn't struggle all year, and he would likely be better than what Hill did his first time up.

 

When Rusch continued to suck and when Hill accomplished what his pitching coach wanted him to accomplish, I think it was spotting the fastball with consistency or something like that, then he was brought up. It is a perfectly logical time line.

 

When you know the facts and have a fair view of what was reasonable to expect Rusch to do, what Hendry did makes perfect sense.

Here are the facts of the matter. Rusch started the season in the rotation along with Marshall because Hill was not inspiring a lot of confidence in spring training and Rusch was coming off of two pretty solid years of service for the Cubs. Rusch was terrible to start the season going 1-4, 8.46 in 5 April starts. Hill was doing great in AAA so he was called up and replaced Rusch in the rotation on May 4th. He went 0-4 with a 9.31 ERA in 4 starts in May while Rusch was moved to the pen where he settles down a bit. He still gets hit, giving up 16 safties in 14 innings but he strikes out 17 while walking only 6 and has an ERA of 4.91 for the month in 7 relief appearances. Rusch is tried three more times in the rotation in June and sucks. He spends the rest of the season in the bullpen except for one spot start due to injury before basically being shut down for the rest of the year. Hill is brought back up about a month later presumably because he was still working on overcoming the things that had him fail so miserably in May. The rest is history.

 

There was an article somewhere about what Hill was working on with his pitching coach while in the minors which I referenced in the quote from the other thread. I'm not certain if this is the same one I remember reading, but this one from Cubs.com is written by Hill himself and talks a lot about him working on attacking hitters, staying aggressive and the key to his recent success being his ability to spot his fastball with consistency. We all wondered what it was that had him succeed so greatly in AAA but not translate that over to the bigs. It sounds like, according to Hill, those were the reasons.

 

fine. but none of that indicates that hill is hendry's pet or that he favors him or that he has a "thing" for him.

 

t also doesn't indicate he's out to get him or in the doghouse or Lord knows what other conspiracy theory of the week is being tossed out in the great "Cubs vs. Rich Hill" battle. I highly doubt there wasn't anyone who wasn't high on Hill when his minor league numbers were blazing...but that was inevitably going to be cooled when he repeatedly came to the bigs and sucked big time. We simply witnessed the timeline that, in my opinion, should be expected with the way things played out. Hill got multiple shots...maybe not for as long as he should have, maybe mercifully short since he hadn't "figured it out" yet...and he tanked them hideously until the second half of last year. He got his chances and they finally paid off. I don't understand the big deal as to whether or not he's a "favorite" or whatever.

[abuck1220]

Perhaps you missed it, but I remember an article about the work they were doing with Hill down at AAA. Hill failed pretty miserably in his first stint up with the Cubs last season, certainly worse than what Rusch was expected to do at the time. Remember, Rusch hadn't sucked that way the previous two seasons, so the expectation was that even if he struggled, he wouldn't struggle all year, and he would likely be better than what Hill did his first time up.

 

When Rusch continued to suck and when Hill accomplished what his pitching coach wanted him to accomplish, I think it was spotting the fastball with consistency or something like that, then he was brought up. It is a perfectly logical time line.

 

When you know the facts and have a fair view of what was reasonable to expect Rusch to do, what Hendry did makes perfect sense.

Here are the facts of the matter. Rusch started the season in the rotation along with Marshall because Hill was not inspiring a lot of confidence in spring training and Rusch was coming off of two pretty solid years of service for the Cubs. Rusch was terrible to start the season going 1-4, 8.46 in 5 April starts. Hill was doing great in AAA so he was called up and replaced Rusch in the rotation on May 4th. He went 0-4 with a 9.31 ERA in 4 starts in May while Rusch was moved to the pen where he settles down a bit. He still gets hit, giving up 16 safties in 14 innings but he strikes out 17 while walking only 6 and has an ERA of 4.91 for the month in 7 relief appearances. Rusch is tried three more times in the rotation in June and sucks. He spends the rest of the season in the bullpen except for one spot start due to injury before basically being shut down for the rest of the year. Hill is brought back up about a month later presumably because he was still working on overcoming the things that had him fail so miserably in May. The rest is history.

 

There was an article somewhere about what Hill was working on with his pitching coach while in the minors which I referenced in the quote from the other thread. I'm not certain if this is the same one I remember reading, but this one from Cubs.com is written by Hill himself and talks a lot about him working on attacking hitters, staying aggressive and the key to his recent success being his ability to spot his fastball with consistency. We all wondered what it was that had him succeed so greatly in AAA but not translate that over to the bigs. It sounds like, according to Hill, those were the reasons.

 

fine. but none of that indicates that hill is hendry's pet or that he favors him or that he has a "thing" for him.

 

t also doesn't indicate he's out to get him or in the doghouse or Lord knows what other conspiracy theory of the week is being tossed out in the great "Cubs vs. Rich Hill" battle.

 

i never said the cubs hate him or are out to get him. nothing like that at all. someone said that hendry has a "thing" for hill, and i said i didn't think he did. that's all i've said about it. my original contention was that if everybody was healthy, hill could get pushed out of the rotation.

[Radar3454]

Can someone clue me in on what happenned w/ Hill after the Barrett/AJ game? What did he do and what did Dusty and others say?

[Sammy Sofa]

Perhaps you missed it, but I remember an article about the work they were doing with Hill down at AAA. Hill failed pretty miserably in his first stint up with the Cubs last season, certainly worse than what Rusch was expected to do at the time. Remember, Rusch hadn't sucked that way the previous two seasons, so the expectation was that even if he struggled, he wouldn't struggle all year, and he would likely be better than what Hill did his first time up.

 

When Rusch continued to suck and when Hill accomplished what his pitching coach wanted him to accomplish, I think it was spotting the fastball with consistency or something like that, then he was brought up. It is a perfectly logical time line.

 

When you know the facts and have a fair view of what was reasonable to expect Rusch to do, what Hendry did makes perfect sense.

Here are the facts of the matter. Rusch started the season in the rotation along with Marshall because Hill was not inspiring a lot of confidence in spring training and Rusch was coming off of two pretty solid years of service for the Cubs. Rusch was terrible to start the season going 1-4, 8.46 in 5 April starts. Hill was doing great in AAA so he was called up and replaced Rusch in the rotation on May 4th. He went 0-4 with a 9.31 ERA in 4 starts in May while Rusch was moved to the pen where he settles down a bit. He still gets hit, giving up 16 safties in 14 innings but he strikes out 17 while walking only 6 and has an ERA of 4.91 for the month in 7 relief appearances. Rusch is tried three more times in the rotation in June and sucks. He spends the rest of the season in the bullpen except for one spot start due to injury before basically being shut down for the rest of the year. Hill is brought back up about a month later presumably because he was still working on overcoming the things that had him fail so miserably in May. The rest is history.

 

There was an article somewhere about what Hill was working on with his pitching coach while in the minors which I referenced in the quote from the other thread. I'm not certain if this is the same one I remember reading, but this one from Cubs.com is written by Hill himself and talks a lot about him working on attacking hitters, staying aggressive and the key to his recent success being his ability to spot his fastball with consistency. We all wondered what it was that had him succeed so greatly in AAA but not translate that over to the bigs. It sounds like, according to Hill, those were the reasons.

 

fine. but none of that indicates that hill is hendry's pet or that he favors him or that he has a "thing" for him.

 

t also doesn't indicate he's out to get him or in the doghouse or Lord knows what other conspiracy theory of the week is being tossed out in the great "Cubs vs. Rich Hill" battle.

 

i never said the cubs hate him or are out to get him. nothing like that at all. someone said that hendry has a "thing" for hill, and i said i didn't think he did. that's all i've said about it. my original contention was that if everybody was healthy, hill could get pushed out of the rotation.

 

I think the only way that happens is if he pitches bad to worse. If anyone is on the short end of the rotation no matter what, it's Miller. If he's pitching well enough and there's no starting room, it's likely he's moved for maximum impact. If Hill pitches anything like he did at the end of last year, they're finding room for him. They can't possibly be THAT dumb.

[CubsWin]

Perhaps you missed it, but I remember an article about the work they were doing with Hill down at AAA. Hill failed pretty miserably in his first stint up with the Cubs last season, certainly worse than what Rusch was expected to do at the time. Remember, Rusch hadn't sucked that way the previous two seasons, so the expectation was that even if he struggled, he wouldn't struggle all year, and he would likely be better than what Hill did his first time up.

 

When Rusch continued to suck and when Hill accomplished what his pitching coach wanted him to accomplish, I think it was spotting the fastball with consistency or something like that, then he was brought up. It is a perfectly logical time line.

 

When you know the facts and have a fair view of what was reasonable to expect Rusch to do, what Hendry did makes perfect sense.

Here are the facts of the matter. Rusch started the season in the rotation along with Marshall because Hill was not inspiring a lot of confidence in spring training and Rusch was coming off of two pretty solid years of service for the Cubs. Rusch was terrible to start the season going 1-4, 8.46 in 5 April starts. Hill was doing great in AAA so he was called up and replaced Rusch in the rotation on May 4th. He went 0-4 with a 9.31 ERA in 4 starts in May while Rusch was moved to the pen where he settles down a bit. He still gets hit, giving up 16 safties in 14 innings but he strikes out 17 while walking only 6 and has an ERA of 4.91 for the month in 7 relief appearances. Rusch is tried three more times in the rotation in June and sucks. He spends the rest of the season in the bullpen except for one spot start due to injury before basically being shut down for the rest of the year. Hill is brought back up about a month later presumably because he was still working on overcoming the things that had him fail so miserably in May. The rest is history.

 

There was an article somewhere about what Hill was working on with his pitching coach while in the minors which I referenced in the quote from the other thread. I'm not certain if this is the same one I remember reading, but this one from Cubs.com is written by Hill himself and talks a lot about him working on attacking hitters, staying aggressive and the key to his recent success being his ability to spot his fastball with consistency. We all wondered what it was that had him succeed so greatly in AAA but not translate that over to the bigs. It sounds like, according to Hill, those were the reasons.

 

fine. but none of that indicates that hill is hendry's pet or that he favors him or that he has a "thing" for him.

But it does successfully disprove your whole "Hendry refused to bring up Hill and favored Rusch over Hill" thing.

 

As far as Hendry liking Hill enough to not want to trade him for just anybody, you don't have to look far.

ChicagoSprots.com[/url]"]The Rockies have had some talks with the Cubs about Jennings but want Rich Hill, whom scouts believe has the same skill set as a young Zito. He's an untouchable.