RichHillIsABeast

Hill's second inning: Hall walks on 7 pitches. Mabry couldn't get to the pop foul in the bullpen area. Hill strikes out Hart looking (5 pitches) on a curveball low in the zone. Bell flies to RF and Jones and Theriot can't get to it (windy). Theriot gets the force at second though. (3 pitches) Rivera flies out to shallow left center (Cedeno). (4 pitches) Rich Hill so far: 2.0 IP, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 H, 1 BB, 2 K, 36 pitches, 24 strikes

Pierre grounds out to 1st on the second pitch he sees. :roll: Theriot strikes out on 5 pitches (check swing called). Jones grounds out to short (5 pitches). 0-0 after 1.

Hill's 1st inning: 1.0 IP, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 H, 0 BB, 1 K, 17 pitches w/ 14 strikes

How is Crawford going to improve his OBP? He's going to magically start drawing more walks? He's going to do this as a Cub? The only way Crawford is going to boost his OBP is by hitting over .300, which, hey, he could do. But he's not going to consistently put up OBPs over .350 from year to year.

I'm not so sure about that. I don't think Juan really wants to stay. Espically since Baker is gone. That may prompt Hendry to overbid though and that worries me. C'mon! When was the last time the Cubs out-bidded anyone! Neifi, Rusch, Jones, Howry, Eyre, Dempster...the list is long and lamentable. Outbid means other teams also made a bid. No, it means our bids were so far over the top no one even tried. All of those guys would have had jobs in the bigs. Someone would have paid them.

I'm not so sure about that. I don't think Juan really wants to stay. Espically since Baker is gone. That may prompt Hendry to overbid though and that worries me. C'mon! When was the last time the Cubs out-bidded anyone! Neifi, Rusch, Jones, Howry, Eyre, Dempster...the list is long and lamentable.

B/C it's far easier to fill in 3 holes than 4. Everyone needs starting pitching. If you can't make the playoffs with a rotation of Z/Hill/?/?/?, then you're definitely not making it with a rotation of Z/?/?/?/?, especially when the bulk of those unknowns are going to be filled in with Free Agents. Our rotation is barren, especially if Prior and Miller don't make their starts. Why make the problem worse by trading away a potential #2 making the league minimum? Crawford doesn't win you more games in CF than Hill does in the rotation (over their expected replacements). Rotation depth gets you to the playoffs in the absence of a great offense (Crawford doesn't give us that). We need more SP, not less. You also aren't going to to make the playoffs without getting more offensive production either. We've put ourself in a position where we have to trade pitching because that's what we draft and develop. Crawford is a pretty elite young talent, so it's going to cost us the best of our young pitching. It's also being lost that trading for Crawford can make Pie expendable. What happens if we trade Hill for Crawford then ship Pie and, say Atkins to Florida for Anibal Sanchez? Oh, I agree. We're in a bad way. We need both offense and pitching to legitimately contend next season. We do have pitching in the pipeline, especially quality lefties. We need to trade some of that surplus. Pie is the position player we need more of, not less. It's not being lost that getting Crawford makes Pie expendable. It's one of the reasons to avoid Crawford. We have cheap talent coming up in CF. All this org needs to do is show some patience and not try to save anyone's job (i.e. Hendry). Crawford just doesn't play the right position for us. I don't think Pie and Atkins nets us Sanchez. Florida has no reason to move him and can get a decent CF prospect for less. Pie will be a better player than Crawford, if minor league stats mean anything. Pie has posted better OPS at just about every level (at similar ages too) than Crawford. Pie has the better arm, is a better fielder, and has the better bat. Crawford does have the edge in basestealing, but Pie is improving markedly there and has plus-plus speed. I'll wait for Pie and keep my elite pitching prospect (who is more likely Veal than Hill). All we have to do is show some patience. I really don't think we're that close to contending next season anyway.

B/C it's far easier to fill in 3 holes than 4. Everyone needs starting pitching. If you can't make the playoffs with a rotation of Z/Hill/?/?/?, then you're definitely not making it with a rotation of Z/?/?/?/?, especially when the bulk of those unknowns are going to be filled in with Free Agents. Our rotation is barren, especially if Prior and Miller don't make their starts. Why make the problem worse by trading away a potential #2 making the league minimum? Crawford doesn't win you more games in CF than Hill does in the rotation (over their expected replacements). Rotation depth gets you to the playoffs in the absence of a great offense (Crawford doesn't give us that). We need more SP, not less. Next to abuck I've been one of Hill's biggest supporters here. However, counting on him to be a top of the rotation starter next year is courting disaster. I don't know if I'd trade Hill for Crawford, but I think it would be a fair trade. Next year Hill will be 27 and making his first full season in the majors. He's probably got about 4 or 5 years of career prime. Crawford is almost a year and a half younger that Hill and will likely be a top outfielder for 7 to 10 years. Plus he is cheap. Getting him fills one hole and affords the Cubs any number of options including, Packaging Pie for young top of the rotation starter or spend big bucks on a top free agent starter. Not all holes are the same size. A hole in the rotation (I wouldn't pencil in Hill at #2 either, but that's how barren our rotation is at this point) is much bigger than a hole in the OF, especially with Murton's improvement this season and Pie's impending arrival. A hole in our OF isn't that hard to fill with decent and/or cheap production. A hole in our rotation is hard to fill, both in terms of available decent arms and $. I do like Crawford. I can't stress that enough, but the current state of our team will prevent us from acquiring him. I'd do any of our young prospect SP except Hill/Veal for Crawford, but I doubt that is acceptable to TB. Crawford has a ton of value right now, especially with his contract status as it is. I do agree with you that Hill for Crawford would be a fair trade, just looking at the two players. But when you consider how the rest of our team fills out, it's a move we should pass on given the opportunity. I think it's far more likely to see a Veal for Crawford swap instead of Hill for Crawford for the reasons you just talked about.

B/C it's far easier to fill in 3 holes than 4. Everyone needs starting pitching. If you can't make the playoffs with a rotation of Z/Hill/?/?/?, then you're definitely not making it with a rotation of Z/?/?/?/?, especially when the bulk of those unknowns are going to be filled in with Free Agents. Our rotation is barren, especially if Prior and Miller don't make their starts. Why make the problem worse by trading away a potential #2 making the league minimum? Crawford doesn't win you more games in CF than Hill does in the rotation (over their expected replacements). Rotation depth gets you to the playoffs in the absence of a great offense (Crawford doesn't give us that). We need more SP, not less.

But here's the thing - adding Crawford adds only 4 million for 2007, a cost made up by pursuing a couple 1 million dollar bench players (or cheaper) instead of some higher profile 2.5 million bench guys. In other words, you can almost wash the salary of Crawford while adding an .850 OPS CF to your roster. So adding Crawford could allow the team to also add Soriano and Schmidt, while retaining Ramirez. The opportunity cost of losing Hill is worth it, IMO. What if you can't sign Schmidt or Zito? There are other teams out there with deep pockets, you know. I've never heard either of those players express interest in Chicago. Then you're looking at a rotation of Zambrano and who else? Prior and Miller shouldn't be counted on at all. Our young uns need more time in the minors and shouldn't be viewed as anything other than #5 starters. Crawford doesn't make your offense so overwelming that you can get away with one ace and a bunch of rookies. You don't make the playoffs with a rotation that barren.

But you're still not trading a proven #2 starter. You're trading a prospect (i.e. a player that may or may not pan out and become a good/great player) and not a proven player. Crawford is a proven player. It's not that simple. You evaluate a certain player's potential for reaching his potential and what that potential ceiling is. How much the Cubs value the likes of Veal and Pawalek is unknown by us, but if Hill is any indication, they are untouchable unless someone of Miguel Cabrera's calibre is available. Hill was widely rumored to be untouchable this last offseason. Veal is a better prospect than Hill ever was and he's younger.

It's not about Pie vs. Crawford. It's about trading an elite pitching prospect (or Hill) for Crawford. What do you gain? Crawford's production less whoever is in CF (Pie, stopgap, Pierre, etc) What do you lose? An elite pitching prospect (i.e. good chance of reaching #2+ potential). Crawford's excess production over whoever is in CF isn't worth a front of the rotation starter. It's not even close.

True, but you still don't see top tier SP prospects traded often. Crawford isn't good enough to take the risk. Miguel Cabrera? Yes. Carl Crawford? No. The D-Rays aren't getting Veal or Hill for Crawford. No way, no how. Baseball history is pretty conclusive on how much elite pitching prospects are valued by the people who actually make the decisions. If anything, prospects have become even more valuable in recent years. Beane wasn't able to deal Zito, was he? The Angels wouldn't move their prospects for that crucial bat for a playoff push this season...and their system is stacked with upper echelon talent. They who can most afford to part with prospects didn't. What does that tell you about the likelihood of the Cubs dealing the cream of our crop?

Are you kidding? Crawford would be fixture for the better part of decade. At 25 he's already one of the top outfielders in the game. There is no guarentee that Pie will make it. And he'd have to go a long way to make to the level that Crawford is at already. Crawford is the proverbeal 5-tool player. If Pie does make it the Cubs can move Crawford to either corner position. They want a top of the rotation starter. That means a #1 or #2 starter. Which give you more wins? Not the position player, that's for sure. We don't have someone who can step in and fill that #2 spot if Hill or whoever is dealt. There are CF options out there that only cost us money and don't unplug one hole in the damn to fill another. Are they as good as Crawford now or in the long term? No, but the net effect on the team is more wins w/o Crawford (as the team stands today). I like Crawford, no doubt. His obp is a little low, but he has other skills that make up for it. His CS% is very acceptable as is his defense. He has affordable club options through 2010 i believe. I wouldn't cry too much if we swapped the likes of Hill (and some other middle prospects) for Crawford b/c that's ok for the long term future as Gallagher, Veal, and Pawalek are on the way. OK long term move for a 100 million team. Poor move for 2007 and Hendry's clock is ticking. I doubt Hendry gets Crawford for the current asking price. Pie will make it. Whether or not he reaches is ceiling is debateable, but barring some freak injury (same could happen to Crawford) he'll be in the bigs soon enough. You don't see top pitching prospects moved much. Remember Kazmir? That went real well. I threw Hill's name out there, but more likely it's Veal who gets moved (Younger, probably higher ceiling). Veal for Delmon Young? Done.

Does anyone want to trade a pitcher with top of the rotation stuff for a CFer? Are you serious? We have a CF option coming up in Pie. He is not a RFer. What a waste. Our rotation is problematic enough without tearing another hole in it.

This team is always handy with the excuses.

I don't think the Marlins job is attractive for one major reason - the Marlins' Front Office has been ripping Girardi through the media. Would you want to come in and manage there after they were all over Girardi in the offseason and less than a year later they can't even talk? Somehow I doubt this is all Girardi's fault and I'd be suspicious about taking that job. When you interview for a job you are as much determining if a company is good enough for you as they are trying to figure out if you're what they want.

It depends on what you want from your #2 hitter. Do you want him to get on base? Do you want him to advance the runner? Sac bunts are the order of the day in Wrigley, sorry to say. We all know OBP isn't on the Cubs' radar. It won't be until MacPhail and Hendry are gone, and maybe not even then depending on who the fools in Trib Tower hire next.

right. loss of a step in speed = going from hitting .290 in the majors to not being able to hit in college with an aluminum bat. that statement makes a whole lot of sense. How many infield hits does the guy get? He loses that step and he loses a lot of hits. Seems sensible to me.

Wow. I just watched the game on Tivo (the Bears take priority at this point). Dempster is really struggling. If he isn't injured, he needs to be gone in the offseason, not merely removed from the closer's role. We have a ton of good arms ready to fill the pen. Time for a bonafide closer and not another Hendry special. Meh. Bears Win!! Bears Win!!

His 20+ errors are going to be a big help with a rotation that issues walks to anyone with a pulse. The only problem with Soriano in LF is it displaces Murton, which sucks. I'd rather trade Jones and stick Murton in RF. At least he doesn't spike throws into the grass instead of hitting the cutoff man.

His SLG% is higher than Cedeno's. :lol:

Especially not if ppl want to keep Ramirez and extend Z.

I'm resigned to the fact that we're stuck with Izturis. He should bat no higher than eighth. When Zambrano pitches...he might should hit ninth. Izzy is going to spend so much time on the DL we'd better go get a quality backup. Ronny C definitely isn't it.

What happened? I missed some of the action. :cry: