You are ignoring the very bad games from before he was hurt. He actually got some wins in bad games, which probably caused people to overlook his performance. Marshall was not good. He had good games, but the Cubs don't need pitchers who have occasional good games. The results were not good before or after the injury. And the injury was no fluke, it's a recurring theme in his career. I'd put him ahead of those guys as well, probably, but none of them should be considered anything close to a lock for the 2007 rotation. Is Hill a lock in your book? He started the year with some awful outings. He and Marshall seem to be opposites. Hill started out poorly but made some adjustments and ended the year strong. Marshall started out better than Hill and finished poorly. If you're looking at the body of work, both had some good and bad outings. I suppose it's possible that I'm putting too much emphasis on the good and too little on the bad. Maybe "lock" was too strong, but Marshall should get a good chance to see if he can build on his limited success at this level. Assume 1 FA's this offseason goony, who fills the other slot?