Red Sox sign Rich Hill
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
Ask Aaron Small.NJ_Sox_Fan said:
No really, he's an indy league pickup for the last place Boston Red Sox. Do you think other teams are seriously advance scouting him much?
Of course, his stuff is far better than the usual indy-league pickup. So there's that, too. This is what, Hill's fourth reinvention of his pitching style?
I haven't watched super closely, but it kinda looks like he changes arm angles when throwing to different batters.
I wonder if they offered him $1MM for next season, if he'd take it?
or we can wait to the off-season and watch the A's sign him for close to ML minimum.
or we can wait to the off-season and watch the A's sign him for close to ML minimum.
They should be talking to his agent right now about a contract for next year. Not saying sign him no matter what, at all, but just see what Hill is looking for-- he surely wants a chance to start, but getting a chance "to compete for a spot in the rotation" certainly isn't out of the question here. That's probably all he would get from other teams too, given his age and small sample size.
He is local and presumably likes pitching here, things are going great, maybe something can be worked out before he hits the market. A guaranteed major league contract, with incentives based on innings pitched, seems like it might work for both sides. If he is determined to get a guaranteed spot in someone's rotation, then it won't be here. But who else will guarantee him that?
The sample size is so tiny, that the stats are pretty meaningless. But how many pitchers have put up three straight starts like this, 10 or more Ks, with a 30-2 K/BB rate, and not been at least worth a roster spot the next season?
He looks great from an observation perspective, leaving the tiny statistical sample size out of the question. He is making hitters look silly with his curve, and showing great command.
Hill is old and gets hurt a lot. But he could be good for 50 or 60 really good innings next year, whether in a few starts or as a lefty reliever. That seems like it should be worth a couple million and a roster spot, especially considering some of the abysmal pitching we have seen here over the past few seasons.
He is local and presumably likes pitching here, things are going great, maybe something can be worked out before he hits the market. A guaranteed major league contract, with incentives based on innings pitched, seems like it might work for both sides. If he is determined to get a guaranteed spot in someone's rotation, then it won't be here. But who else will guarantee him that?
The sample size is so tiny, that the stats are pretty meaningless. But how many pitchers have put up three straight starts like this, 10 or more Ks, with a 30-2 K/BB rate, and not been at least worth a roster spot the next season?
He looks great from an observation perspective, leaving the tiny statistical sample size out of the question. He is making hitters look silly with his curve, and showing great command.
Hill is old and gets hurt a lot. But he could be good for 50 or 60 really good innings next year, whether in a few starts or as a lefty reliever. That seems like it should be worth a couple million and a roster spot, especially considering some of the abysmal pitching we have seen here over the past few seasons.
benhogan said:
I wouldn't, if I was him.
I'd be offering him a 1 year deal for $5 million with a second year at up to $5 million vesting based on innings pitched, $2 million guaranteed, $500K more for each "X" innings pitched, depending on the team's planned for him. And I'd be offering it now, when he doesn't have alternatives.
Hell, they threw away a whole lot more than that on "Rusty" Masterson.
Amusing stat: in three starts, Hill now has as much fWAR (1.2) as Joe Kelly or Rick Porcello.for the whole season.
After watching what I consider the Sox best start of the season, I believe the Sox should sign him to a two year deal which is what I think it will take to have him stay. To me, he is a Henry Owens but with maturity and command.
I hate to be Debbie Downer, but we're talking about three starts by a 36-year-old journeyman. Three great starts, for sure, but still just three starts during garbage time of a lost season. The suggestions of multi-year offers involving multiple millions still seem very premature to me.
Even with what he's shown, I think it would be foolish to rush into locking him up for 2016 now. This is a case where I'd be fine letting him explore the market and seeing what he can get. If it's not totally unreasonable, go ahead and offer to match it. Otherwise, let someone else risk multiple millions on the hope that Hill's King Kelly act is sustainable.
Even with what he's shown, I think it would be foolish to rush into locking him up for 2016 now. This is a case where I'd be fine letting him explore the market and seeing what he can get. If it's not totally unreasonable, go ahead and offer to match it. Otherwise, let someone else risk multiple millions on the hope that Hill's King Kelly act is sustainable.
It's not much risk to pay him like a good reliever, though. The downside is losing that money to injury, but the upside is paying reliever money to a good starter.
2 years and $6MM guatanteed, with incentives based on IP OR GS, which could add another $2MM per year, is what I'd try to get done during the exclusive negotiating period.
$6-10MM has to be pretty appealing offer for a local guy who was just signed away from the Long Island Ducks.
Meanwhile, for a $3MM/year bet, the Sox get someone who, if healthy, can at least shut down a L-R-L inning, and at most can pitch a complete game shutout.
2 years and $6MM guatanteed, with incentives based on IP OR GS, which could add another $2MM per year, is what I'd try to get done during the exclusive negotiating period.
$6-10MM has to be pretty appealing offer for a local guy who was just signed away from the Long Island Ducks.
Meanwhile, for a $3MM/year bet, the Sox get someone who, if healthy, can at least shut down a L-R-L inning, and at most can pitch a complete game shutout.
Another good article, thanks Ian.
BTW, here's another article that echoes what Ian is saying - that Hill's fastball and curveball starts out by looking the same and the hitters apparently can't tell the difference in time: http://www.gammonsdaily.com/peter-gammons-from-legion-fields-to-fenway-park-rich-hills-journey-continues-in-boston/
One other thing about his changeup. Gammo (http://www.gammonsdaily.com/peter-gammons-from-legion-fields-to-fenway-park-rich-hills-journey-continues-in-boston/) states that after the TB game, Willis showed him a new change-up grip; that's why he threw it against TOR and not TB.
Great story. Wonder how many innings he could pitch next year.
And without the health. It's a nice story that's he's pitched so well, but a team that hopes to be competitive can't rely on a guy like this. He's had, what, one season without injuries and that was a long time ago?scotian1 said:
canderson said:
Hands are different. Now jazz hands with his right this time around... the effort just isn't there. He must be in the twilight of his career.
Also be more impressive if it was actually starting his Red Sox career... Or does 2010-2012 not count anymore?wade boggs chicken dinner said:
Greg29fan said:
You know what's amazing, Strasburg's own stretch of 10k's, 1bb games just reached 4 in a row today too.
I understand what you are saying, but Clay pitched more innings this season than Hill has in the last six.Buzzkill Pauley said:
Which is why... You don't rely on him. This is exactly the kind of move that a big bad 180M payroll is for. Spend 6M short term on an arm that is likely relief, possibly more, and has enough of a chance to be less that it will scare away teams with shallower pockets.Philip Jeff Frye said:
Hill has been dominant. And Ian's analysis explains why. But a close comp, it seems, is Chris Young, the pitcher. He also had bouts of above average starting pitching interrupted by injuries and ineffectiveness. After a good season in Seattle last year, he languished all winter before signing a 1 year $1 millions deal with KC. He's had another good season there.The X Man Cometh said:
I don't think it will take that much to sign him based on that. A major league guarantee of a couple million and another couple million in possible incentives based on games started and appearances.
^ This. Hill will try to maximize his guaranteed money, but it seems unlikely that anyone will offer more than a $2-3M base contract. Given his track record, it's just a poor bet that he'll last long in the rotation. But if minor injuries were to force him back to the pen, he has shown that he can have value there as well - enough to warrant a $3M guarantee (and, along with it, a ML roster spot).
I'll agree with this. Up to 6 million for an oft-injured 36 YO, who's put together a few good/great starts? Boston has a huge payroll, but why throw away money? Given where he was playing earlier in the year and, with the current SSS of high performance, I'm doubtful other teams are going to want to throw millions his way. Since he's local, maybe you can leverage that by being able to match the highest offer (if it's reasonable) and he gets to stay close to home...Plympton91 said:
His absolute ceiling would be a lefty who struggled with control and injuries during his prime who only had a few full MLB seasons under his belt by the time he was wearing a Red Sox uniform in his early to mid 30s. After Jamie Moyer left the Red Sox, he went on to have 13 full seasons as an above average starter.
The floor is he doesn't make it out of spring training.
Hard not to give him a look if he can be signed for bullpen depth dollars.
The floor is he doesn't make it out of spring training.
Hard not to give him a look if he can be signed for bullpen depth dollars.