PDA

View Full Version : Rich Hill


Bobapples1993
04-21-2007, 12:58 AM
You guys need to see this guy. He is an absolute beast! He is dominating every team he faces, but because of ESPN's east coast bias, no one knows.

WhiteSox5187
04-21-2007, 01:03 AM
You guys need to see this guy. He is an absolute beast! He is dominating every team he faces, but because of ESPN's east coast bias, no one knows.
You are aware that this is a Sox fan board, right??

Having said that, Rich Hill is a good young pitcher and probably the best on the Cubs staff. He will probably win several Cy Young Awards once he leaves the Cubs much like Greg Maddux.

Bobapples1993
04-21-2007, 01:04 AM
[quote=WhiteSox5187;1545940]You are aware that this is a Sox fan board, right??
quote]


What can I say? I like to talk to the enemy.:smile:

FarWestChicago
04-21-2007, 08:02 AM
You guys need to see this guy. He is an absolute beast! He is dominating every team he faces, but because of ESPN's east coast bias, no one knows.He may be the best player in professional sports. Leave it to The Tabloid to blow it.

UserNameBlank
04-21-2007, 11:08 AM
Aardsma is pretty sick right now too. Thanks, Flubs.

Bobapples1993
04-21-2007, 11:11 AM
Aardsma and Cotts are doing good right now so that trade is a wash.

cws05champ
04-21-2007, 11:19 AM
[quote=WhiteSox5187;1545940]You are aware that this is a Sox fan board, right??
quote]


What can I say? I like to talk to the enemy.:smile:


Is this mshake under another name?:wink:

Bobapples1993
04-21-2007, 11:20 AM
[quote=Bobapples1993;1545944]


Is this mshake under another name?:wink:



no

The Critic
04-21-2007, 11:24 AM
Hill's made great strides since he came back from Iowa last year.
He's someone I sure wouldn't mind seeing on the Sox.

HotelWhiteSox
04-21-2007, 11:26 AM
Has he thanked Ozzie yet

Bobapples1993
04-21-2007, 11:27 AM
I forget what Ozzie said about him, can you remind me? ( As you know last year was something I want to forget)

WizardsofOzzie
04-21-2007, 12:13 PM
[quote=Bobapples1993;1545944]


Is this mshake under another name?:wink:
That was my first thought when i looked at WTS today

WizardsofOzzie
04-21-2007, 12:14 PM
I forget what Ozzie said about him, can you remind me? ( As you know last year was something I want to forget)
"I think it was pretty gutless on their part—him hitting Michael when he didn't even have the ball," Hill said. "That's not how you play the game.But you don't go around just running over catchers. That's not the way you play the game. … It was pathetic."- Rich Hill

Ozzie Guillen's response:
"Tell that Triple-A [bleep] to shut the [bleep] up. Tell him to start throwing some strikes or he's going to get Dusty fired."

(I'm not evading the language filter mods, thats just the only quote i could find!)

santo=dorf
04-21-2007, 04:24 PM
I forget what Ozzie said about him, can you remind me? ( As you know last year was something I want to forget)
"Tell that AAA piece of **** to shut the **** up, and throw some strikes before he gets Dusty fired."

Ironically Hill throwing strikes couldn't prevent Dusty from losing his job.

oeo
04-21-2007, 04:43 PM
You guys need to see this guy. He is an absolute beast! He is dominating every team he faces, but because of ESPN's east coast bias, no one knows.

Uhm...they were raving about him on BBTN when he pitched the other night.

He looks real good...let's see if the Flubs can keep him healthy.

TDog
04-21-2007, 04:48 PM
Aardsma and Cotts are doing good right now so that trade is a wash.

Did you forget the teal or are you posting while intoxicated?

WizardsofOzzie
04-21-2007, 04:58 PM
Did you forget the teal or are you posting while intoxicated?
He's a cubs fan...did you expect a rational thought?

cws05champ
04-21-2007, 06:02 PM
Inevitably Cubs fans will comparing Rich Hill and Danks, and saying" Ohh Hill is soo much better, Danks couldn't carry his jock". What everyone forgets is Hill is already 27, Danks 22. I'm just waiting to hear it around the cubs series....

JB98
04-21-2007, 06:25 PM
Hill is a triple-A *****. We will rock his ass during the crosstown series.

oeo
04-21-2007, 06:58 PM
Inevitably Cubs fans will comparing Rich Hill and Danks, and saying" Ohh Hill is soo much better, Danks couldn't carry his jock". What everyone forgets is Hill is already 27, Danks 22. I'm just waiting to hear it around the cubs series....

Wow, I didn't realize he was 27. I thought he was 23 or 24.

After now knowing his age, I say whoop-dee-doo about his success this year.

DrCrawdad
04-21-2007, 08:15 PM
Wow, I didn't realize he was 27. I thought he was 23 or 24.

After now knowing his age, I say whoop-dee-doo about his success this year.

According to many Cubbie kool-aid drinkers (this encompasses quite a large number of them) Rich Hill is Barry Zito. Check the age difference between Zito and Hill then check the difference in career accomplishments in MLB between the two.

Three starts this season facing the lame NL. To the original Cubbie fan, get back to me Cubbie fan after dozen or so starts this season.

Johnnydogs
04-21-2007, 08:15 PM
Seriously, why does the guy's age matter? Some guys are late bloomers and others are blocked on the ML level. Ryan Howard is also 27. It's not his fault that Thome was blocking him. Rich Hill has been dominant in the MiLs for a while; it was a matter of time before he was able to translate that success in the MLs.

DrCrawdad
04-21-2007, 08:29 PM
Seriously, why does the guys age matter? Some guys are late bloomers and others are blocked on the ML level. Ryan Howard is also 27. It's not his fault that Thome was blocking him. Rich Hill has been dominant in the MiLs for a while; it was a matter of time before he was able to translate that success in the MLs.

Who was blocking Rich Hill in the 5 years since he was drafted? Carlos Marmol? Juan Mateo? Jerome Williams? Sergio Mitre? Glendone Rusch?

As I said, get back to me after 12 starts to boast about the Rich "Barry Zito" Hill.

EMachine10
04-21-2007, 08:39 PM
who cares about his stats...he still doesn't understand how to play the game of baseball (ya know, you can't run over catchers, etc...). :cool:

Frontman
04-21-2007, 09:39 PM
Seriously, why does the guy's age matter? Some guys are late bloomers and others are blocked on the ML level. Ryan Howard is also 27. It's not his fault that Thome was blocking him. Rich Hill has been dominant in the MiLs for a while; it was a matter of time before he was able to translate that success in the MLs.

Age matters in the length of a career, as well as the maturity and skill-set shown. Very few players are lights out in their early 20's, especially pitchers. To compare Rich Hill who had a taste of major league play last year, and this being his first year to start in the majors; compared to Danks who is starting his first year in the majors six years younger than Hill.

You can't compare them off of their 3 starts. Right now? Yes, Hill has been better. But I'd rather see what happens down the road before I hand someone a plaque and "Welcome to the Hall, kid;" comment. Neither one is HOF bound at this point. Hopefully both will have great long careers in the majors, and we can rule which one is better at that time.

And Howard might be 27, but much like Juan Pierre, can someone buy him a hat and a jersey that fits? He looks like he's twelve when in uniform. :D:

spiffie
04-21-2007, 11:34 PM
Who was blocking Rich Hill in the 5 years since he was drafted? Carlos Marmol? Juan Mateo? Jerome Williams? Sergio Mitre? Glendone Rusch?

As I said, get back to me after 12 starts to boast about the Rich "Barry Zito" Hill.
Anyone who compares Hill to Zito at this point is a moron.

That said...Hill's last 12 starts:
79 IP 13 ER 79K 45H 20BB
1.48 ERA, 9K/9IP, 0.82 WHIP

I know as a Cub he obviously must not be good, and what he said about Barrett was just stupid, but this kid can pitch, and he can pitch damn well.

white-rox1985
04-25-2007, 05:10 PM
Rich Hill is gonna suck, I am absolutely certain he is at least 30.

white-rox1985
04-25-2007, 05:15 PM
Did you forget the teal or are you posting while intoxicated?


As much as I hate to say it, he is right.


Neal Cotts
8.2IP, 0 ER, and 4 H

David Aardsma

12.2 IP, 3 ER, 7 H

TDog
04-25-2007, 05:27 PM
As much as I hate to say it, he is right.


Neal Cotts
8.2IP, 0 ER, and 4 H

David Aardsma

12.2 IP, 3 ER, 7 H

Stats for relief pitchers are incredibly misleading. Boone Logan is 1-0 and has given up no runs in four outings this year. He has no blown saves. He has no losses. And every time he comes into a game, a bunch of White Sox fans want to have Ozzie Guillen fired.


Anyone who believes Cotts-for-Aardsma was a wash isn't to be trusted with baseball analysis.

WhiteSox5187
04-25-2007, 05:32 PM
I had no idea Hill was that old...having said that though, he looks good and like he could be a good pitcher in the years to come.

Frontman
04-25-2007, 05:52 PM
Stats for relief pitchers are incredibly misleading. Boone Logan is 1-0 and has given up no runs in four outings this year. He has no blown saves. He has no losses. And every time he comes into a game, a bunch of White Sox fans want to have Ozzie Guillen fired.


Anyone who believes Cotts-for-Aardsma was a wash isn't to be trusted with baseball analysis.

At the end of the day, I care about W/L

Aardsma 3 W 0 L

Cotts 0 W 0 L

To me, combined with the other stats, I'd take Aardsma any day and twice on days Jose Contreras is pitching.

TDog
04-25-2007, 05:57 PM
I had no idea Hill was that old...having said that though, he looks good and like he could be a good pitcher in the years to come.

For most of the 1979 season, 23-year-old Silvio Martinez was unhittable for the Cardinals, although he had been hittable when he came up with the White Sox in 1977. He won 15 games that year. For his career he won 31.

Pitchers can "find it" and "lose it" in a hurry, and it's really a mystery. Of course now, have a great couple of months and you'll never have to work another day in your life because someone will sign you to an obscene contract.

WizardsofOzzie
04-25-2007, 06:02 PM
As much as I hate to say it, he is right.


Neal Cotts
8.2IP, 0 ER, and 4 H

David Aardsma

12.2 IP, 3 ER, 7 H
While pitching in the mighty NL Central

PatK
04-26-2007, 11:34 AM
2006 called and wants its Sean Marshall back.

FedEx227
04-26-2007, 01:33 PM
2006 called and wants its Sean Marshall back.

Hey you leave Ryan O'Malley's legacy alone!

maurice
04-26-2007, 03:45 PM
If/when Zambrano leaves, Hill will be their best starting pitcher.

PennStater98r
04-26-2007, 05:07 PM
If/when Zambrano leaves, Hill will be their best starting pitcher.

What does that say about the Cubs pitching staff?

Hill sucks.

ilsox7
04-26-2007, 05:14 PM
If/when Zambrano leaves, Hill will be their best starting pitcher.

He's looking damn good thus far. I am curious if he can keep it up. But from what I've seen, he has some good stuff.

goon
04-26-2007, 08:49 PM
He's looking damn good thus far. I am curious if he can keep it up. But from what I've seen, he has some good stuff.


He has a good curveball.

That's all I've seen from the guy and I've watched him pitch a few times. His fastball tops out at about 92 and while he is a strikeout guy, it's tough to tell if it's the league's unfamiliarity with him or if he actually has what it takes to stay on a ML roster (I think it's the former).He has certainly had a great start so far and last September he pitched well, too.

That said, I think behind Zambrano, Lilly will be the one to excel in that rotation. I could be wrong, but Hill doesn't look all that special... just ask Tadahito.

goon
04-26-2007, 09:05 PM
As much as I hate to say it, he is right.


Neal Cotts
8.2IP, 0 ER, and 4 H

David Aardsma

12.2 IP, 3 ER, 7 H


I don't know why I'm responding to this because we'll never see you again.. but for others who might want to know. Cotts has been pitching great for the Cubs, undoubtedly, but Aardsma right now is posting a 14.21 K/9, Cotts is posting a 7.27 K/9 rate.

While they are both pitching exceptional with their new teams, Aardsma, besides his failed attempt at closing the Detroit game with only one out left, is clearly more dominating right now.

DrCrawdad
04-26-2007, 10:18 PM
I don't know why I'm responding to this because we'll never see you again.. but for others who might want to know. Cotts has been pitching great for the Cubs, undoubtedly, but Aardsma right now is posting a 14.21 K/9, Cotts is posting a 7.27 K/9 rate.

While they are both pitching exceptional with their new teams, Aardsma, besides his failed attempt at closing the Detroit game with only one out left, is clearly more dominating right now.

Aardsma went from the Pony League to the Majors. Cotts is doing well (so far) in the Pony League.

Lots of mediocre pitchers are doing well the Pony League...I mean the National League.

PeteWard
04-27-2007, 12:06 AM
You can't argue with the fact that right now both Hill and Cotts are pitching well. I wish Neal the best because without him the Sox may not have won it all in 05 (see WS Game 1 & 2). Maybe they would have.

He stunk last year and if he turns out to be back to 05 form, that's baseball. I'd never blame KW for it. Hill I just don't care about. Time will tell.

FedEx227
04-27-2007, 12:11 AM
He has a good curveball.

That's all I've seen from the guy and I've watched him pitch a few times. His fastball tops out at about 92 and while he is a strikeout guy, it's tough to tell if it's the league's unfamiliarity with him or if he actually has what it takes to stay on a ML roster (I think it's the former).He has certainly had a great start so far and last September he pitched well, too.

That said, I think behind Zambrano, Lilly will be the one to excel in that rotation. I could be wrong, but Hill doesn't look all that special... just ask Tadahito.

I see him as an on and off type of guy. Like Zito. When Zito first brought that curve to people they were absolutely baffled. Now as he's had more time in the league, people have learned to lay off the looping curve and make him throw it for strikes. When he does, he's on, when he doesn't he has to rely on a medium speed straight fastball.

That's where I see Hill, I think he's got great stuff, but it won't dominate consistently day in and day out unless he can get pinpoint control of the curve.

mshake10
04-27-2007, 12:36 PM
[quote=cws05champ;1546070]



no
Ha! As I read these posts, I was thinking the same thing.

Although I stand by my Buehrle comment that apparently got me banned. :D:

mshake10
04-27-2007, 12:45 PM
At the end of the day, I care about W/L

Aardsma 3 W 0 L

Cotts 0 W 0 L

To me, combined with the other stats, I'd take Aardsma any day and twice on days Jose Contreras is pitching.
For a reliever, all a Win means is that you were the last one on the mound when your team took the lead for good. It doesn't say whether or not the reliever actually gave up the lead, blowing a save. A reliever can blow a save and get a victory, although that's not the case for Aardsma thus far. That's why at the end of the day, wins are meaningless for relivers, and to an extent, meaningless in general.

AuroraSoxFan
04-27-2007, 12:46 PM
For a reliever, all a Win means is that you were the last one on the mound when your team took the lead for good. It doesn't say whether or not the reliever actually gave up the lead, blowing a save. A reliever can blow a save and get a victory, although that's not the case for Aardsma thus far. That's why at the end of the day, wins are meaningless for relivers, and to an extent, meaningless in general.


wins are meaningless????? I don't even post here much, but to say such a thing has shows beyond any doubt that you are definitely a cubs fan. No fan of any other franchise would ever consider W's meaningless.

mshake10
04-27-2007, 12:54 PM
Pitcher wins have too much emphasis on team stats. I've never liked them. Just ask Roger Clemens the last few years what he thinks about pitcher wins.

AuroraSoxFan
04-27-2007, 12:59 PM
Pitcher wins have too much emphasis on team stats. I've never liked them. Just ask Roger Clemens the last few years what he thinks about pitcher wins.


Ahhh you never liked them. But if your Brokearm Mountain boys or Z ever hit anywhere near 20 wins they'd be guaranteed their own wing in Cooperstown right?? What planet do you live on??? Get a clue.

spiffie
04-27-2007, 01:43 PM
wins are meaningless????? I don't even post here much, but to say such a thing has shows beyond any doubt that you are definitely a cubs fan. No fan of any other franchise would ever consider W's meaningless.
Wins for a relief pitcher really have very little to do with him. For a starter they can be useful, but for a reliver they don't tell much. I'd rather have a solid reliever with a 2-0 record than a guy with a 8-6 record. Now if someone is 10-0 as a reliever with a low ERA to boot, then it might tell you something. But considering last year McCarthy and Politte had more wins than MacDougal, I'd say they don't tell much of the story.

Mshake is still a Cub :dtroll: though.

Risk
04-27-2007, 01:45 PM
That's why at the end of the day, wins are meaningless for relivers, and to an extent, meaningless in general.

:rolleyes:

Wins are meaningless in general? Oh, I forgot, that has been the Cubs philosophy for almost a hundred years.

Risk

Chez
04-27-2007, 02:42 PM
Rumor has it that as a precaution (and because the Cubs have expiring frequent patient points), Rich Hill is flying to Birmingham Monday to have exploratory surgery on his left shoulder performed by Dr. James Andrews. :smile:
It's inevitable, isn't it?

Hitmen77
04-27-2007, 03:14 PM
:rolleyes:

Wins are meaningless in general? Oh, I forgot, that has been the Cubs philosophy for almost a hundred years.

Risk

Zing!

mshake10
04-27-2007, 03:33 PM
You're right. Wins are the most important thing there is.

And now time, for no paticular reason, to look at a random Sox pitcher. Hmmm, I see that John Danks is 0-3. You traded McCarthy for him? Weak.

UserNameBlank
04-27-2007, 03:44 PM
You're right. Wins are the most important thing there is.

And now time, for no paticular reason, to look at a random Sox pitcher. Hmmm, I see that John Danks is 0-3. You traded McCarthy for him? Weak.

Have fun and enjoy those Flubbie losses while you can, because the life expectancy of :dtroll: are very short.

AuroraSoxFan
04-27-2007, 03:48 PM
You're right. Wins are the most important thing there is.

And now time, for no paticular reason, to look at a random Sox pitcher. Hmmm, I see that John Danks is 0-3. You traded McCarthy for him? Weak.

So what brings you to this site anyway?? did you strike out with yet another mail order bride?? Ahh well, maybe next time! We'll keep our fingers crossed for ya. Anyway, you wanna talk weak.........take a look at your "lovable losers" losing record after they went and spent $300 mill. Danks may be 0-3, but at least he is able to throw the damn ball from the mound to home plate. More than you can say about Prior/Wood/Miller at the moment.

mshake10
04-28-2007, 01:13 PM
So what brings you to this site anyway?? did you strike out with yet another mail order bride?? Ahh well, maybe next time! We'll keep our fingers crossed for ya. Anyway, you wanna talk weak.........take a look at your "lovable losers" losing record after they went and spent $300 mill. Danks may be 0-3, but at least he is able to throw the damn ball from the mound to home plate. More than you can say about Prior/Wood/Miller at the moment.
:rolling: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

I love White Sox fans. When they get on the defensive, they quickly turn the discussion to Prior and Wood.

:moonwalk: :moonwalk: :moonwalk:

But seriously, thanks for your comment on the issue of pitcher wins. What exactly was it again?

DrCrawdad
04-28-2007, 02:13 PM
I love White Sox fans. When they get on the defensive, they quickly turn the discussion to Prior and Wood.

I love Cubbie fans. When they get on the defensive, they quickly turn the discussion to attendance and ...

... oh the myth of how Cubbie fans don't care or talk about the Sox.

:dtroll:

vegyrex
04-28-2007, 03:24 PM
For a reliever, all a Win means is that you were the last one on the mound when your team took the lead for good. It doesn't say whether or not the reliever actually gave up the lead, blowing a save. A reliever can blow a save and get a victory, although that's not the case for Aardsma thus far. That's why at the end of the day, wins are meaningless for relivers, and to an extent, meaningless in general.

LOL!!! I guess for a flubbie fan wins are meaningless, I mean your sorry excuse of a baseball team does it so rarely. :smile:

TDog
04-29-2007, 12:51 AM
It is true that a relief pitcher can get a win by blowing the lead and being fortunate enough for his team to storm back and win for him. It's also true that a pitcher can be in the right place at the right time. Kelly Wunsch got a win by throwing one pitch to end an inning before the Sox took the lead. Dean Stone won an All-Star Game without throwing any pitch. He came in and picked off a runner to end the inning before his team scored for him and he was replaced. Then there was an appearance of Todd Fischer for the California Angels in 1986 in Fenway Park. He came in with the score tied and the winning run on third base. Before he could throw a pitch, the game ended in a balk. He never lost a major league game, though. Not officially.

Wins aren't the only stat that can be deceptive when it comes to relief pitchers. But one thing wins shows is that the team won when you were on the mound. The bottom line is what the team does, not individual players. If Carlos Zambrano is a great pitcher who is .500 on a team well below .500, it doesn't matter that he's a great pitcher because it's more important that my team is well below .500. If my team loses 3-2, I don't ask if Konerko or Thome hit home runs, as if that would make me feel better. How many Yankees fans are jazzed about their team this year because Alex Rodriguez is so awesome?

This thread began with praise for Rich Hill because he was 3-0. It kept going through his first loss and has ended up with an argument from a Rich Hill fan that pitchers' wins are meaningless.

How meaningful is insight from Cubs fans?

Frontman
04-29-2007, 08:09 AM
That's why at the end of the day, wins are meaningless for relivers, and to an extent, meaningless in general.

Spoken as a true Cubs fan would. Nothing more needs to be said.

WizardsofOzzie
04-30-2007, 01:25 PM
Ha! As I read these posts, I was thinking the same thing.

Although I stand by my Buehrle comment that apparently got me banned. :D:
Sighhhh, maybe one day they will can your trolling ass for good

voodoochile
04-30-2007, 01:34 PM
You're right. Wins are the most important thing there is.

And now time, for no paticular reason, to look at a random Sox pitcher. Hmmm, I see that John Danks is 0-3. You traded McCarthy for him? Weak.

One of these things is not like the others.
One of these things does not belong...

Later flubs troll...

102605
04-30-2007, 01:45 PM
And now time, for no paticular reason, to look at a random Sox pitcher. Hmmm, I see that John Danks is 0-3. You traded McCarthy for him? Weak.

Somebody failed to look at McCarhy's stats before posting that.

WizardsofOzzie
04-30-2007, 02:08 PM
Somebody failed to look at McCarhy's stats before posting that.
You're wrong, stats don't matter. Just accept that Cubs fans know much more about baseball than us