Hill a long reliever?

[David]

You state your disbelief that the Cubs could ever choose to demote Hill over a lousy veteran. I and others are pointing out that there's ample precedent.

 

Had you taken the time to read MY posts, you would see that I never said that. I've only said that I am not going to get all worried about the possibility forwarded by some uninformed writer that Hill won't be in the rotation until some quote or action by the Cubs organization itself leads me to believe that will be the case.

 

Unfounded? I've read nothing that says that Hill will be in the rotation for the Chicago Cubs.

 

All I've read is that he will be competing for a job.

 

It speaks volumes about Jim Hendry and the Cubs. Volumes. Hill has been the best pitching propspect in the Cubs organization for going on three years now. Instead he's been brought up, used sparingly, demoted to the bullpen, sent down, brought up, used sparingly, sent down, brought up, in trouble with Dusty and Larry, sent down, and brought up again.

 

In my opinion Marquis is supposed to be an insurance policy on Prior. Instad it seems as if he has an inside track in the rotation.

 

Z

Lilly

Marquis

Prior

 

That leaves Miller, Guzman, and Hill fighting it out for the last spot, when perhaps all three of them will be better than Marquis.

 

And yet, you've yet to read any quotes from anyone associated with the Chicago Cubs (AFAIK) to suggest such a thing. You only get conjecture from several beat writers whom we have had no problem deeming clueless several times in the past.

[CubColtPacer]

You state your disbelief that the Cubs could ever choose to demote Hill over a lousy veteran. I and others are pointing out that there's ample precedent.

 

Had you taken the time to read MY posts, you would see that I never said that. I've only said that I am not going to get all worried about the possibility forwarded by some uninformed writer that Hill won't be in the rotation until some quote or action by the Cubs organization itself leads me to believe that will be the case.

 

Unfounded? I've read nothing that says that Hill will be in the rotation for the Chicago Cubs.

 

All I've read is that he will be competing for a job.

 

It speaks volumes about Jim Hendry and the Cubs. Volumes. Hill has been the best pitching propspect in the Cubs organization for going on three years now. Instead he's been brought up, used sparingly, demoted to the bullpen, sent down, brought up, used sparingly, sent down, brought up, in trouble with Dusty and Larry, sent down, and brought up again.

 

In my opinion Marquis is supposed to be an insurance policy on Prior. Instad it seems as if he has an inside track in the rotation.

 

Z

Lilly

Marquis

Prior

 

That leaves Miller, Guzman, and Hill fighting it out for the last spot, when perhaps all three of them will be better than Marquis.

 

I haven't found any quotes that say Hill will be in the rotation or not. I have seen other articles like this one though that say he will be in the rotation, so it seems like the opinion is split on if his spot is guaranteed or not.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/238918,CST-SPT-cub01.article

[David]

I tend to think that a lot of writers are just lazy, don't really follow the game as closely as they should, and just assume that the "young" guy who pitched in AAA last year will have to compete for a rotation spot.

 

I'm pretty confident that Hill's role on this team is more or less secure.

 

I don't care what a couple of morons writing for the local papers/Cubs website imagine to be the case. And if they have something concrete, they should say so.

[Jehrico]

Hope I'm not regressing the thread, but I don't think it's fair to say they don't like Hill based on passing him over for Gooz (or for any other time they sent him down/kept him down). He clearly had confidence problems. Even if he's tearing it up in AAA, if they don't think he's mentally ready yet, maybe they felt he needed to dominate a little while longer in order to get that confidence up to where they wanted to see it. Personally, I thought at the time they weren't showing him enough patience, and maybe that was affecting his confidence. It's hard to say. What is easy to say though was their strategy worked. He finally did gain his confidence, and tore it up once he did. I hope he shows the same confidence and attacks hitters like he did at the end of last year during ST, and I hope they realize it and they give him the support you would think he deserves. I'm reserving judgement until Lou gives me something to judge on.

[Bull]

 

And I think in the case of Grudz over Hill, the decision was most obviously the right one.

 

I'm not so sure of that.

Didn't Grudz get a vote or two for the NL MVP that year?

 

So did Russ Ortiz (complete with 3.81 ERA), what's your point?

 

I think he's just saying that if he got a vote for the MVP, he at least must have played well enough to justify the team playing him over a prospect who is waiting also, even if he didn't really completely deserve that MVP vote (I don't think anybody would really argue that he did. :D)

 

It wasn't a first place vote. I think it was on the ballot where the guy voted all Cubs.

[Jehrico]

 

And I think in the case of Grudz over Hill, the decision was most obviously the right one.

 

I'm not so sure of that.

Didn't Grudz get a vote or two for the NL MVP that year?

 

So did Russ Ortiz (complete with 3.81 ERA), what's your point?

 

I think he's just saying that if he got a vote for the MVP, he at least must have played well enough to justify the team playing him over a prospect who is waiting also, even if he didn't really completely deserve that MVP vote (I don't think anybody would really argue that he did. :D)

 

It wasn't a first place vote. I think it was on the ballot where the guy voted all Cubs.

Didn't he get 3 third place votes?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

So far it's only the Sun-Times talking about a "best-case scenario" with Hill in the pen, right? That's good.

 

Hill didn't get a fair shake from the team last season. He sure earned a starting spot with his second half last season - it better not come down to how he performs in a few spring training performances as opposed to his body of work last season.

[Danny82]

Hill didn't get a fair shake from the team last season.

 

Why do people keep saying this?

 

Why didn't he get a fair shot with the Cubs last year? Because they sent him back down after four starts where he had a 9.00+ ERA? It certainly looks like him going back down ended up being the right move considering how much differently he pitched when he came back up.

[Drew Doughty]

Hill didn't get a fair shake from the team last season.

 

Why do people keep saying this?

 

Why didn't he get a fair shot with the Cubs last year? Because they sent him back down after four starts where he had a 9.00+ ERA? It certainly looks like him going back down ended up being the right move considering how much differently he pitched when he came back up.

 

"Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock."

 

It could just as easily be argued that he was shaky because his first few starts were going to decide his immediate future with the team and he was nervous. I don't have any notes on it, but his stats don't look much different in his stint with the ICubs after being sent back down than they were when he pitched for the ICubs in April.

 

I think posters on this board have had this discussion before and it went nowhere.

[Soriano12]

WTF! $*$*$*$*#@)#(@)(#@)(#@)!

 

HOW DOES HILL NOT HAVE A GUARANTEED SPOT IN THE ROTATION!

 

THIS ORGANIZATION IS ON DRUGS!

 

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

[CubColtPacer]

Hill didn't get a fair shake from the team last season.

 

Why do people keep saying this?

 

Why didn't he get a fair shot with the Cubs last year? Because they sent him back down after four starts where he had a 9.00+ ERA? It certainly looks like him going back down ended up being the right move considering how much differently he pitched when he came back up.

 

"Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock."

 

It could just as easily be argued that he was shaky because his first few starts were going to decide his immediate future with the team and he was nervous. I don't have any notes on it, but his stats don't look much different in his stint with the ICubs after being sent back down than they were when he pitched for the ICubs in April.

 

I think posters on this board have had this discussion before and it went nowhere.

 

Yeah, it's hard for it to go anywhere because it's impossible to run it again the other way and see the results. The Cubs sending him down might have been the best thing for Hill re-gaining his confidence, and the Cubs sending him down might have delayed Hill getting his confidence in the major leagues-it's really impossible to know which one it is. It's all just a matter of perspective I guess.

[Magnetic Curses]

Hill didn't get a fair shake from the team last season.

 

Why do people keep saying this?

 

Why didn't he get a fair shot with the Cubs last year? Because they sent him back down after four starts where he had a 9.00+ ERA? It certainly looks like him going back down ended up being the right move considering how much differently he pitched when he came back up.

 

"Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock."

 

It could just as easily be argued that he was shaky because his first few starts were going to decide his immediate future with the team and he was nervous. I don't have any notes on it, but his stats don't look much different in his stint with the ICubs after being sent back down than they were when he pitched for the ICubs in April.

 

I think posters on this board have had this discussion before and it went nowhere.

 

Yeah, it's hard for it to go anywhere because it's impossible to run it again the other way and see the results. The Cubs sending him down might have been the best thing for Hill re-gaining his confidence, and the Cubs sending him down might have delayed Hill getting his confidence in the major leagues-it's really impossible to know which one it is. It's all just a matter of perspective I guess.

 

when hill came back from Iowa in the second half, his curve was tighter and his location was excellent, iirc. i'd say he either used his time in the minors that last time to work on his control and to fine tune his curveball--either that or he got over his anxiety.

[98navigator]

Lou just said on Comcast SportsNite that he likes the idea of having two lefties in the rotation. Then he reiterated that Hill had a "leg up" on securing a spot. I think it's his.

[Amazing_Grace]

About the only thing we have other than rampant sportswriter speculation on this subject is the comments made by Piniella that Hill will have a "leg up" on Prior and Miller when it comes to deciding the starting rotation, as opposed to him saying something like "come hell or high water Rich Hill will be in the rotation".

 

I'd like to point out that very few managers, if any, ever publicly "guarantee" that a young player will start. They all pay lip service to the old MLB cliche of "earning your way" onto the team, even when they don't even halfway mean it. Remember they said all those times about CPatt that CF was "his job to lose." CPatt started in CF almost every one of those times no matter how terrible he was. How is that different from saying Hill has a "leg up" for a rotation spot?

 

I don't know why MLB managers do things this way, but we ought to know by now that this is how things operate. We shouldn't wring our hands over Hill being out of the rotation until Hill is actually out of the rotation. An awful lot of things have to happen for this to even be an issue, and some of them are rather improbable. Allow me to list them.

 

1.) All 6 possible rotation candidates must be healthy, including everyone, Hill, Prior, Miller, Marquis, Lilly, and Zambrano. Everyone has to get through ST injury free. Is that likely to happen? With Prior and Miller in the list, I think not.

 

2.) Miller and Prior must BOTH pitch better than Hill in ST. I have no reason not to take Lou at his word that Hill has a "leg up" and one of these other players will have to actually outperform him in ST to displace him.

 

3.) Assuming that both 1. and 2. occur, the Cubs organization must then decide that it is better to use Miller and Prior in the rotation this season and let Hill pitch in AAA, rather than trading Miller or Prior to improve the team in some other area of need.

 

4.) Assuming that 1. 2. and 3. occur, and Hill is pitching better than Marquis, the Cubs and Piniella must make a tough choice on whether to stick to their word that they are dedicated to winning first, or allow the logic of 21 million dollars invested to decide for them.

 

I don't think the odds of all of the above happening are very good. The Cubs are among the most incompetent organizations in sports, but they still will place a high value on a young, left-handed, starting pitcher. None of us really knows what Lou or Jim is thinking. They may be thinking that if everyone is healthy, they'll trade someone. They may be more than willing to make Marquis the long man. We don't know that, and until the decisions are actually made, we won't know. Honestly, I think everyone is getting really worked up prematurely. If this actually happens, then I'll be as pissed as all of you guys are.

Edited February 19, 2007 by Amazing_Grace

[RichHillIsABeast]

Lou just said on Comcast SportsNite that he likes the idea of having two lefties in the rotation. Then he reiterated that Hill had a "leg up" on securing a spot. I think it's his.

 

Thank god. Freaking Muskat and new-suntimes-dude. Let's try a little thing called journalism in the near future.

[Amazing_Grace]

Lou just said on Comcast SportsNite that he likes the idea of having two lefties in the rotation. Then he reiterated that Hill had a "leg up" on securing a spot. I think it's his.

 

That's great. Of all the reasons to put Hill in the rotation, will the stupidest one end up carrying the most weight? It certainly does seem like an awfully "Cub" thing to happen.

[Guest]

Meh. I'm not going to get worked up about this in February.

[UK1679666180]

I don't see this being a major issue at this stage either or in the future.

 

I believe there's a greater possibility of Murton playing the small role of RH'ed platoon partner moreso than Hill being pushed out of the rotation.

[Guest]

I don't see this being a major issue at this stage either or in the future.

 

I believe there's a greater possibility of Murton playing the small role of RH'ed platoon partner moreso than Hill being pushed out of the rotation.

Yep, I'm more worried about that one.

[98navigator]

While we're all speculating, I thought it was interesting that Piniella may be contemplating putting Jacque in the 2-hole when Floyd plays. Cliff would bat 5th in this scenario. Link

 

Expect to see some interesting lineups this spring. The only spots set are Alfonso Soriano first, Derrek Lee third and Aramis Ramirez fourth. Cubs manager Lou Piniella said Jacque Jones could bat second or fifth, depending on what outfield combination he comes up with.

 

"Look, what's going to determine all these things is what happens in center field," Piniella said.

 

If Jones is in center, Cliff Floyd in left and Soriano in right, Jones could bat second and Floyd fifth. If Soriano is the starting center fielder, then the Cubs have to figure out who's starting in the corners.

 

"We'll have a much better idea in the middle of Spring Training," Piniella said. "I have some ideas, but they're just ideas."

[cheapseats]

I don't see this being a major issue at this stage either or in the future.

 

I believe there's a greater possibility of Murton playing the small role of RH'ed platoon partner moreso than Hill being pushed out of the rotation.

Yep, I'm more worried about that one.

 

Hill being pushed to middle relief would be the far greater loss.

 

I like Murton, and I'd be happy to have him in LF, but I wouldn't be surprised in the least if Floyd outproduces him this year.

 

The odds of Marquis outproducing Hill? Not so good.

 

The Marquis signing might be worse than Neifi's.

[UK1679666180]

Greater loss? Sure.

 

Greater possibility? No.

[Mark Priors Calves]

while i don't much stock into this new beat writer for the sun-times, its stilsl disappointing to hear speculation that hill might not be in the rotation. i just hope this writer isn't getting his info from somebody in the organization, rather he's writing based upon how he sees things shaking out.

[Mephistopheles]

I know he won't break camp as a starter but continuing our world of loving Angel, what if it's May 1st and he's sitting 5-0 with a 2.something or lower ERA in Iowa with impressive command, K's, and stuff and Jason Marquis is sitting at 1-3 with a 5 plus ERA.

 

I guess my scenario is at what point does Angel Guzman get a chance if {Prior, Hill, Marquis, Lilly, Zambrano} are healthy and Marquis is not performing? At some point JH is going to have to give Angel a chance provided he's healthy and performing, of course.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I know he won't break camp as a starter but continuing our world of loving Angel, what if it's May 1st and he's sitting 5-0 with a 2.something or lower ERA in Iowa with impressive command, K's, and stuff and Jason Marquis is sitting at 1-3 with a 5 plus ERA.

 

I guess my scenario is at what point does Angel Guzman get a chance if {Prior, Hill, Marquis, Lilly, Zambrano} are healthy and Marquis is not performing? At some point JH is going to have to give Angel a chance provided he's healthy and performing, of course.

 

What if it's Prior at 1-3 with a 5+ ERA? Or Lilly?