Sammy Sofa

Well its not an optimal situation for Ramirez sans he gets to be paid major league money. And the potential young player we care about will be in AAA. Ramirez being the backup catcher isn't some sure-fire option, but it would be an easy choice for me. Its not like Hill is a defensive whiz, which would cause me to not take the chance of a possible offensive upgrade so callously. I'm more inclined to go TT's route and look at Ramirez as an all-around bench guy as opposed to just the backup catcher. It would seem that would be more appealing to you as well since it get Ramirez more PA than if he was banished to the backup catcher role. And it's hardly the end of the world if the cared about young player is in AAA where he can get regular playing time.

Not sure how you're expecting Ramirez to get all that better if he's only getting like 90 PA at best if things go as they should.

I have no idea what Ramirez would likely do. Yes he has a small sample size but he also has more potential. He could be serviceable with the bat and get on base at a good clip, Hill already proved he can't. I don't have any reason to believe he can't call a game or get to know the pitchers well. This just sounds like Lou speak to me, perceived value > value. Basically I'm more than willing to choose the question mark over the known crap. Yes fine, it is tiring. But its because Hill is so monumentally bad even a small change could be impactful if Ramirez hits. If he proved himself to be that monumentally bad I would want him out too because he does bring less intangibles than the savvy 3 fingered vet. But we would have given ourselves the chance to see if he can be better than that. If he blows it let Hill come back and be the CERA king. And conversely, I won't lose any sleep if Hill retains his job and is used properly. The constant black hole being played day after day still resonates so perhaps I am overstating. How much of a chance are you really giving Ramirez if he's actually relegated to the backup role as he and Hill should be? If you want to get a better idea of what an unknown can do then they they need to be playing regularly, and Ramirez still has a lot to prove. The only way he's going to have a chance to have a serious impact on the Cubs' offense is if the backup catcher is getting way, way, way too much playing time, otherwise the backup catcher is going to be ideally relegated to too few PA for Ramirez over Hill to really make that much of a difference over the course of the season. If you've got a young player who has potential then why dump them in a role where you're ideally going to do your damndest to get as little regular playing time as possible?

Again, you're mixing up Hill's misuse last year with how a backup catcher is supposed to be used. If Soto ends up getting 140 starts as planned then Hill would get, what, 70-75 PA? 80? I agree, Hill stinks. I agree, Hill getting 150+ PA is hideous. Neither Ramirez nor Hill should be getting 150+ PA. Only 2 catchers in baseball managed to play 140 games last year. Only 6 managed even 130. And that's games played, not games started. It was a down year for catchers last year but it's still not an easy thing to do to play that much. That assumes perfect health and playing a lot of day after night games. Hey, I'm not assuming Soto is going to play 140. I'm assuming that 130 is more along the lines of his optimum season. Even with those extra 10-12 games I'm still not going to flip out over Hill being the backup unless those 10-12 extra games come in a row because Soto is injured, in which case he needs to be on the DL and Castillo needs to be called up. Bottom line, if the backup catcher is getting as much time as Hill did last year and in 2009, it's going to suck. It'll probably suck less with Ramirez, but it'll still suck. If they're not going with Castillo if Soto is missing that much time then THAT'S the actual problem. Koyie Hill sucking as a typical backup catcher is not that big a problem. It's an annoyance.

Again, you're mixing up Hill's misuse last year with how a backup catcher is supposed to be used. If Soto ends up getting 140 starts as planned then Hill would get, what, 70-75 PA? 80? I agree, Hill stinks. I agree, Hill getting 150+ PA is hideous. Neither Ramirez nor Hill should be getting 150+ PA.

Might want to re-check that math. No, I got it. Sure you can ramble on about the importance of backup catcher, like none us already knew it. Fact is Ramirez is already better in the time he has played (.340+ OBP) compared to Hill's .200 something. Win. It doesn't matter if its not a guarantee, its the move that should be made. You can keep marginalizing it, it's just the backup catcher spot, sure. But its also the position where backups are used the most, and history suggests the Cubs backup catcher will get a significant amount of at bats, due to days off and injury. If Castillo comes up for the injuries I'm fine with that too. The less Hill the better, no matter how much Old Gummy rationalizes it. You're working with a much, much smaller sample size with Ramirez; 140 PA in just two seasons over the last 3 years. Hill really, really, really sucks, but Ramirez likely would really suck himself the more playing time he gets in the majors. Again, your logic of "somewhat better = win" doesn't hold up when you're talking about the variance between two crappy backup catchers. If you're choosing between two crappy backup catchers I'd ultimately rather go with the one who knows most of the staff and apparently works well with them since, like you said, this the position where backups are typically used the most and they have a role that's arguably more important than what they do with the bat. I'm usually not a fan of those type of intangibles, but when it comes down to picking a backup catcher I'm going to lean towards the vet that knows and works well with the staff. Look, if Ramirez got the job I wouldn't lose any sleep over it at all; it's not like I'm a fan of Hill's. I just think the continual bemoaning of Hill's existence as already a tired, tired meme this season and we're not even to April, and it's translated now to people wanting Castillo rotting on the bench as the backup because it looks like he might actually be decent with the bat. Again, what needs to be separated is what the backup catcher is supposed to be and how Hill was misused last year. Hill or Ramirez for 20-30 games this season isn't likely to be that much of a difference offensively. Hill or Ramirez getting more starts because of a misguided platoon or Soto being injured is bad news either way. All we can do is hope that the Cubs call up Castillo if Soto goes down, because relegating him to the backup role in the meantime is not a smart move.

Because if Castillo is actually good enough offensively to start he needs to be starting regularly and not riding the pine as the backup catcher. If Soto does down for a prolonged period of time he should definitely be called up to start, but in the meantime you're effectively wasting him if the goal is for Soto to start 140 games. Remember, backup catcher is typically a dumping ground position. Castillo needs to start regularly so the Cubs can get a better idea down the line as to whether or not they can move Soto while he still has significant value or to up Castillo's trade value.

Might want to re-check that math. And the histrionics is the never ending bitching over the idea of Hill being the backup catcher. Hill actually being a backup catcher = really not that unusual. Hill effectively platooning for Soto or becoming the regular starter if Soto goes down = no good. That said, how many teams have a backup catcher where if the latter scenarios (and I'm talking unnecessary platoons, obviously) occur it wouldn't be a crappy, crappy situation?

Some people have been overreacting, but given the choice between Hill and Max Ramirez for backup catcher, it's blatantly obvious who the better choice is. Yeah. And if Hill only starts 20-25 games, it's no biggie. Castillo is better off starting in Iowa than riding the pine. But it's a leap of faith to think they'd call up Castillo to start if Soto gets hurt. And it's a leap of faith to think that Ramirez starting in place of an injured Soto would be that much better than Hill (and no, I'm not advocating Hill starting regularly for an injured Soto).

Some people have been overreacting, but given the choice between Hill and Max Ramirez for backup catcher, it's blatantly obvious who the better choice is. Yeah. And if Hill only starts 20-25 games, it's no biggie. Castillo is better off starting in Iowa than riding the pine. But it's a leap of faith to think they'd call up Castillo to start if Soto gets hurt. In my eyes, if you are choosing to start the inferior player, it's a biggie even if it's only 20-25 games. They're both likely inferior players. Backup catcher is a position where you can afford to go with the veteran that the pitchers like because it's going to be a [expletive] player. People are dramatically inflating the position because of their hatred of Hill because of his misuse by Piniella. If Quade doesn't make the same mistakes it's really not that huge a deal if it's Hill over Ramirez.

Some people have been overreacting, but given the choice between Hill and Max Ramirez for backup catcher, it's blatantly obvious who the better choice is. It's still not that big a deal. Again, backup catcher...they're going to be varying degrees of garbage offensively most of the time, and Ramirez would almost certainly be the same if he got significant playing time. If we're talking about backup catchers actually being used as backup catchers typically are then it's largely a moot point. Ramirez might be "blatantly better" than Hill (and that's by no means a sure thing), but only in the context of talking about the backup catcher. They key here isn't who the backup catcher is. The key is whether or not Quade plays Soto as much as he should and needs to. If he doesn't and the backup catcher is getting 40+ starts then the Cubs have much, much bigger problems than whether or not it's Ramirez or Hill. If Soto goes down for a significant period of time it needs to be Castillo being called up to get the bulk of the starts, not Hill OR Ramirez. If we're just talking the context of a backup catcher getting 20-30 starts then ultimately it's really not going to make much of difference if it's Hill or Ramirez.

If by, let's say, the middle of May Quade shows that he's not going to be sorta platooning Soto with Hill like Lou did, did can we stop all of the histrionics and hyperbole over the [expletive] backup catcher?

Or hiring Jeff Gillooly to take out Hill. Even WSR realizes that Castillo being the backup is a waste if he's actually any good. Is he comparable to Hill defensively? I'm assuming Max Ramirez is NOT. It's pretty much moot how Castillo's defense compares to Hill's (unless he's just wretched behind the plate, and he's not) if he can actually produce enough offensive output to be a starter. You'll want him starting regularly in the minors instead of just sitting on the bench spelling Soto.

Or hiring Jeff Gillooly to take out Hill. Even WSR realizes that Castillo being the backup is a waste if he's actually any good.

given soto's injury history he's unlikely to get 140 starts, so if you have the backup playing 50 games or so and it's koyie hill, you probably should give a [expletive]. Why? If he's seriously injured then put him on the DL and call up Castillo. If he's not then Hill gets an extra 5-10 starts. Whoopty-[expletive]. Max Ramirez likely wouldn't make a whole hell of a lot of difference in such a small window.

Sure, I'd hope they'd bring up Castillo if Soto was injured, too. In a perfect world I'd rather have Ramirez instead of Hill, but hey, maybe Hill IS really well liked and has a great rapport with the pitchers. I don't place too much stock into that stuff, but backup catcher is where you can get away with effectively having a team mascot, so I'm not going to lose any sleep if they have Hill there instead of Ramirez.

And again, if he's only getting something like 20 starts it's really not that big a deal.

Right. If Castillo is actually any good I want him getting regular starts, not being the back up.

If they actually follow through with the stated plan of Soto getting 140 starts then who gives a [expletive]? The backup catcher not being awful with the bat only matters if they're going to be stupid and inexplicably "platoon" Soto, in which case they're fucked to begin with.

Just spitballing... Perhaps the Bulls feel confident enough with the way the team has been playing and the position they're in that they WANT Rose to take these 3's in the hope that he gets better at them, or at least more comfortable/confident at taking them when he really has to? I mean, you already know what he can do inside the line, but the lack of a true #2-guard threat is going to be glaring in the playoffs, so maybe they're using the luxury of the position they're in to try and shore up his 3's as much as possible during the season. I don't know, but it sure as [expletive] makes more sense than assuming that Thibs and co. are just letting him do it just because, or are ignoring his numbers or are clueless about it.

Rose is done.

It's official... Rose has forgotten how to shoot the basketball. There is no cure.

DOUBLE-DOUBLE FOR ASIK. [expletive] YEAH. Rose didn't want to rain on the big man's parade.

One is never enough for erik.

You argue like a nerdy 3rd grader.