Randy Wells

[jersey cubs fan]

So did Rich Hill

 

Putting the likelihood of Wells also contracting Rick Ankiel disease aside...

 

Hill 2006: 26 years old, 99.1 IP, 4.17 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 90 K, 39 BB

Hill 2007: 27 years old, 195 IP, 3.92 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 183 K, 63 BB

 

Wells 2009: 26 years old, 95 IP, 2.84 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 60 K, 21 BB

 

At the same point in their careers, Hill never pitched as well for as extended a period of time.

 

Are you kidding me?

[champaignchris]

So did Rich Hill

 

Putting the likelihood of Wells also contracting Rick Ankiel disease aside...

 

Hill 2006: 26 years old, 99.1 IP, 4.17 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 90 K, 39 BB

Hill 2007: 27 years old, 195 IP, 3.92 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 183 K, 63 BB

 

Wells 2009: 26 years old, 95 IP, 2.84 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 60 K, 21 BB

 

At the same point in their careers, Hill never pitched as well for as extended a period of time.

 

Are you kidding me?

 

O.K. In which 15 start stretch did Hill post a 2.84 ERA? I suppose if you sandwich his last 6 or 7 starts in '06 with his first 5 or 6 starts in '07, ignore the playoff start and the six months in between, you could argue Hill outperformed Wells over a similar number of starts.

[NCCubFan]

So did Rich Hill

 

Putting the likelihood of Wells also contracting Rick Ankiel disease aside...

 

Hill 2006: 26 years old, 99.1 IP, 4.17 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 90 K, 39 BB

Hill 2007: 27 years old, 195 IP, 3.92 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 183 K, 63 BB

 

Wells 2009: 26 years old, 95 IP, 2.84 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 60 K, 21 BB

 

At the same point in their careers, Hill never pitched as well for as extended a period of time.

The 4.17 ERA in 2006 was inflated because he struggled in an earlier call-up. He was lights out after returning for good over the last month or so of the season.

[NCCubFan]

So did Rich Hill

 

Putting the likelihood of Wells also contracting Rick Ankiel disease aside...

 

Hill 2006: 26 years old, 99.1 IP, 4.17 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 90 K, 39 BB

Hill 2007: 27 years old, 195 IP, 3.92 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 183 K, 63 BB

 

Wells 2009: 26 years old, 95 IP, 2.84 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 60 K, 21 BB

 

At the same point in their careers, Hill never pitched as well for as extended a period of time.

 

Are you kidding me?

 

O.K. In which 15 start stretch did Hill post a 2.84 ERA? I suppose if you sandwich his last 6 or 7 starts in '06 with his first 5 or 6 starts in '07, ignore the playoff start and the six months in between, you could argue Hill outperformed Wells over a similar number of starts.

Um, which playoff start? The Cubs didn't even sniff the playoffs in 2006, and 2007 isn't in the time frame you're talking about.

[jersey cubs fan]

So did Rich Hill

 

Putting the likelihood of Wells also contracting Rick Ankiel disease aside...

 

Hill 2006: 26 years old, 99.1 IP, 4.17 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 90 K, 39 BB

Hill 2007: 27 years old, 195 IP, 3.92 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 183 K, 63 BB

 

Wells 2009: 26 years old, 95 IP, 2.84 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 60 K, 21 BB

 

At the same point in their careers, Hill never pitched as well for as extended a period of time.

 

Are you kidding me?

 

O.K. In which 15 start stretch did Hill post a 2.84 ERA? I suppose if you sandwich his last 6 or 7 starts in '06 with his first 5 or 6 starts in '07, ignore the playoff start and the six months in between, you could argue Hill outperformed Wells over a similar number of starts.

 

Aside from the overall ridiculousness of your timeframe breakdown, since when is ERA the only way to rate a pitcher?

[JonJayCutler]

I think Hill was definitely as good, if not better than Wells for a stretch there in late 2006, early 2007. But if this discussion is about whether or not Wells could go the route of Hill, I wouldn't worry about it. How often do pitchers completely lose the ability to pitch from one year to the next? Sure it happens, and no Wells isn't going to be a sub-3.00 ERA guy throughout his career, but I don't see a reason why he couldn't be a 3.75-4.25 ERA type of guy for the next few years. That would be excellent for a #4 or #5 starter.

[SouthSideRyan]

Rich had a stretch of 15 appearances from '06-'07 with an ERA under 2.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think Hill was definitely as good, if not better than Wells for a stretch there in late 2006, early 2007. But if this discussion is about whether or not Wells could go the route of Hill, I wouldn't worry about it. How often do pitchers completely lose the ability to pitch from one year to the next? Sure it happens, and no Wells isn't going to be a sub-3.00 ERA guy throughout his career, but I don't see a reason why he couldn't be a 3.75-4.25 ERA type of guy for the next few years. That would be excellent for a #4 or #5 starter.

 

The problem with Wells is he pitches to a lot of contact and much of it is in the air. If he keeps most of that on the ground and has a k rate between 6-7, with minimal walks, he should maintain solid numbers.

[sneakypower]

"selling high" on every young pitcher that has a prolonged stretch of great performance in fears of a Rich Hill redux is a sure-fire way to have a pretty gross rotation. i don't really understand the motivation of giving up Wells. i mean, if we had Tim Lincecum right now would you advocate getting rid of him because Prior's value blew up in an instant?

[Keener98]

Rich had a stretch of 15 appearances from '06-'07 with an ERA under 2.

[sneakypower]

I think Hill was definitely as good, if not better than Wells for a stretch there in late 2006, early 2007. But if this discussion is about whether or not Wells could go the route of Hill, I wouldn't worry about it. How often do pitchers completely lose the ability to pitch from one year to the next? Sure it happens, and no Wells isn't going to be a sub-3.00 ERA guy throughout his career, but I don't see a reason why he couldn't be a 3.75-4.25 ERA type of guy for the next few years. That would be excellent for a #4 or #5 starter.

 

The problem with Wells is he pitches to a lot of contact and much of it is in the air. If he keeps most of that on the ground and has a k rate between 6-7, with minimal walks, he should maintain solid numbers.

huh? his GB/FB rate is well above average.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think Hill was definitely as good, if not better than Wells for a stretch there in late 2006, early 2007. But if this discussion is about whether or not Wells could go the route of Hill, I wouldn't worry about it. How often do pitchers completely lose the ability to pitch from one year to the next? Sure it happens, and no Wells isn't going to be a sub-3.00 ERA guy throughout his career, but I don't see a reason why he couldn't be a 3.75-4.25 ERA type of guy for the next few years. That would be excellent for a #4 or #5 starter.

 

The problem with Wells is he pitches to a lot of contact and much of it is in the air. If he keeps most of that on the ground and has a k rate between 6-7, with minimal walks, he should maintain solid numbers.

huh? his GB/FB rate is well above average.

 

0.91 GB/FB is well above average? It seems a little low for a guy who strikes out less than 6 per 9. I've seen a lot of warning track shots off the guy and plenty of line drive outs. The point is he pitches to a lot of contact and it can be tough to maintain solid numbers when you rely on your defense getting the job done, unless you are a groundball fiend.

[sneakypower]

i'm seeing 1.39

 

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/stats/individual_stats_player.jsp?c_id=chc&playerID=448694&section1=1&statSet1=1&section2=1&section3=1&statSet3=1&statSet2=2

[jersey cubs fan]

i'm seeing 1.39

 

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/stats/individual_stats_player.jsp?c_id=chc&playerID=448694&section1=1&statSet1=1&section2=1&section3=1&statSet3=1&statSet2=2

 

I saw .91 on ESPN. Is this the difference between ground outs and air outs and all balls hit on the ground and all balls hit in the air?

[CubColtPacer]

I think Hill was definitely as good, if not better than Wells for a stretch there in late 2006, early 2007. But if this discussion is about whether or not Wells could go the route of Hill, I wouldn't worry about it. How often do pitchers completely lose the ability to pitch from one year to the next? Sure it happens, and no Wells isn't going to be a sub-3.00 ERA guy throughout his career, but I don't see a reason why he couldn't be a 3.75-4.25 ERA type of guy for the next few years. That would be excellent for a #4 or #5 starter.

 

The problem with Wells is he pitches to a lot of contact and much of it is in the air. If he keeps most of that on the ground and has a k rate between 6-7, with minimal walks, he should maintain solid numbers.

huh? his GB/FB rate is well above average.

 

0.91 GB/FB is well above average? It seems a little low for a guy who strikes out less than 6 per 9. I've seen a lot of warning track shots off the guy and plenty of line drive outs. The point is he pitches to a lot of contact and it can be tough to maintain solid numbers when you rely on your defense getting the job done, unless you are a groundball fiend.

 

As Cro Magnon said, ESPN is messed up with Wells and his stats. His GB/FB numbers on his game log don't match up with the box scores for those games. His actual GB/FB ratio is 1.38/1.39 (I've seen it rounded both ways).

[fromthestretch]

So did Rich Hill

 

Putting the likelihood of Wells also contracting Rick Ankiel disease aside...

 

Hill 2006: 26 years old, 99.1 IP, 4.17 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 90 K, 39 BB

Hill 2007: 27 years old, 195 IP, 3.92 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 183 K, 63 BB

 

Wells 2009: 26 years old, 95 IP, 2.84 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 60 K, 21 BB

 

At the same point in their careers, Hill never pitched as well for as extended a period of time.

 

Are you kidding me?

 

O.K. In which 15 start stretch did Hill post a 2.84 ERA? I suppose if you sandwich his last 6 or 7 starts in '06 with his first 5 or 6 starts in '07, ignore the playoff start and the six months in between, you could argue Hill outperformed Wells over a similar number of starts.

 

From 8/1/2006 - 5/5/2007, Hill pitched in 18 games, 17 of them starts. In those games, he posted the following stats:

 

10-4 record, 118.33 IP, 2.28 ERA, 0.95 WHIP, 8.4 K/9, 2.5 BB/9, 6.1 H/9

 

As others have mentioned, there was no poor playoff start in between.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

"Selling high" is such a nebulous concept. Everybody in the league has pretty much the same evaluation of Wells: Cautious optimism. Unless there's some team out there who is absolutely convinced he's going to be awesome, or we are absolutely convinced he's not, it's not really selling high.

 

I consider myself to be extremely Wells-skeptical. He never posted anything like a .278 BABIP in the minors, and I suspect when the hits stop falling, his lack of K ability will be bring him back down to below-average. But I doubt we'd get enough value in a trade to pass on the chance that he's legit.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

According to fangraphs, he has allowed 138 groundballs and 100 fly balls. I'm not sure why anyone would round that to 1.39.

[inari]

Something Wells has always done is get groundballs and keep his walks down. I don't think he's going to be outstanding, but what he's doing now is what he had done in the minors, he's just been luckier with it.

[champaignchris]

So did Rich Hill

 

Putting the likelihood of Wells also contracting Rick Ankiel disease aside...

 

Hill 2006: 26 years old, 99.1 IP, 4.17 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 90 K, 39 BB

Hill 2007: 27 years old, 195 IP, 3.92 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 183 K, 63 BB

 

Wells 2009: 26 years old, 95 IP, 2.84 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 60 K, 21 BB

 

At the same point in their careers, Hill never pitched as well for as extended a period of time.

 

Are you kidding me?

 

O.K. In which 15 start stretch did Hill post a 2.84 ERA? I suppose if you sandwich his last 6 or 7 starts in '06 with his first 5 or 6 starts in '07, ignore the playoff start and the six months in between, you could argue Hill outperformed Wells over a similar number of starts.

Um, which playoff start? The Cubs didn't even sniff the playoffs in 2006, and 2007 isn't in the time frame you're talking about.

How embarrassing. I'm glad I'm not the guy that said that. Oh wait.... :oops:

[Transmogrified Tiger]

"selling high" on every young pitcher that has a prolonged stretch of great performance in fears of a Rich Hill redux is a sure-fire way to have a pretty gross rotation. i don't really understand the motivation of giving up Wells. i mean, if we had Tim Lincecum right now would you advocate getting rid of him because Prior's value blew up in an instant?

 

I don't think most of the people who would want to sell high on Wells is thinking so because they fear Rich Hill redux. If you think Wells is likely to regress, then you can capitalize on his value since you have several options who are decent options to be as good as future Wells(Marshall, Gorzelanny, even Samardzija/Cashner/Jackson). Problem is there's not many places on the roster to upgrade, so unless Wells goes in some package for Utley or something, there's not much risk of him getting dealt.

[A-Cal]

"selling high" on every young pitcher that has a prolonged stretch of great performance in fears of a Rich Hill redux is a sure-fire way to have a pretty gross rotation. i don't really understand the motivation of giving up Wells. i mean, if we had Tim Lincecum right now would you advocate getting rid of him because Prior's value blew up in an instant?

 

I don't think most of the people who would want to sell high on Wells is thinking so because they fear Rich Hill redux. If you think Wells is likely to regress, then you can capitalize on his value since you have several options who are decent options to be as good as future Wells(Marshall, Gorzelanny, even Samardzija/Cashner/Jackson). Problem is there's not many places on the roster to upgrade, so unless Wells goes in some package for Utley or something, there's not much risk of him getting dealt.

 

utley?

 

=P~

[Gingerballs Lives]

He still be doin' it.

 

I like his confidence/borderline-cockiness out there.

 

Oh, and he is good at getting people out. Not bad for a guy who I'm sure grew up a Cardinal fan.

[Shilzzz]

it's getting very hard to not be optimistic about the kid. This is his second time around, now, and he's still shutting hitters down.

[Coach C]

Honestly, I couldn't give two fucks what other people say about Wells. He'd make a solid #4 or #5 guy behind Zambrano, Lilly, and Harden.

 

He just gets the job done.