23 Ks and 1 BB in 25.1 innings so far.
Bump. Last seven games:
3-1; 49.2 IP; 1.99 ERA; 0.77 WHIP; 53/7 K/BB (inc. 1 IBB)
... plus, he works quickly, and he's batting .261 for an OWAR of 0.2, better than Castro and Ross.
So far, not bad for $9MM.
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
I think it's fair to wonder if there may be something to it with Arrieta as well? But I agree it's been overrated to some extent, just like all pitching gurus tend to be overrated. No one mentions Dave Duncan failing with guys like Kip Wells, and for some reason no one ever holds Bosio responsible for Edwin Jackson having his worst numbers of his career under Bosio's tutelage. I do think he has fixed some of these guys, though.
Quote from: SKO on June 02, 2015, 08:33:19 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
I think it's fair to wonder if there may be something to it with Arrieta as well? But I agree it's been overrated to some extent, just like all pitching gurus tend to be overrated. No one mentions Dave Duncan failing with guys like Kip Wells, and for some reason no one ever holds Bosio responsible for Edwin Jackson having his worst numbers of his career under Bosio's tutelage. I do think he has fixed some of these guys, though.
Or Dave Duncan, for that matter.
Quote from: ChuckD on June 02, 2015, 09:42:55 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 02, 2015, 08:33:19 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
I think it's fair to wonder if there may be something to it with Arrieta as well? But I agree it's been overrated to some extent, just like all pitching gurus tend to be overrated. No one mentions Dave Duncan failing with guys like Kip Wells, and for some reason no one ever holds Bosio responsible for Edwin Jackson having his worst numbers of his career under Bosio's tutelage. I do think he has fixed some of these guys, though.
Or Dave Duncan, for that matter.
I seem to remember Jackson being not-terrible as a Cardinal because life is a cruel joke.
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
That's about as well as you could put it.
As the Jackson and Kip Wells "outliers" illustrate (I'm sure Mazzone had some duds too but it was long ago and I'm old), there's no 1 way to coax an optimal performance out any 1 individual pitcher, but the successful ones have the right "combination".
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 09:58:01 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
That's about as well as you could put it.
As the Jackson and Kip Wells "outliers" illustrate (I'm sure Mazzone had some duds too but it was long ago and I'm old), there's no 1 way to coax an optimal performance out any 1 individual pitcher, but the successful ones have the right "combination".
Just off of the top of my head Jason Marquis was a guy Mazzone failed to get much out of who had his best year with Duncan. I think Bosio is a fantastic pitching coach and his methods have obviously helped guys like Arrieta and Strop and Hammel. I just agreed with Eli that people tend to give him credit for every good thing Cubs pitchers do and yet guys like Edwin and Travis Wood aren't counted against him.
Quote from: SKO on June 02, 2015, 10:01:34 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 09:58:01 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
That's about as well as you could put it.
As the Jackson and Kip Wells "outliers" illustrate (I'm sure Mazzone had some duds too but it was long ago and I'm old), there's no 1 way to coax an optimal performance out any 1 individual pitcher, but the successful ones have the right "combination".
Just off of the top of my head Jason Marquis was a guy Mazzone failed to get much out of who had his best year with Duncan. I think Bosio is a fantastic pitching coach and his methods have obviously helped guys like Arrieta and Strop and Hammel. I just agreed with Eli that people tend to give him credit for every good thing Cubs pitchers do and yet guys like Edwin and Travis Wood aren't counted against him.
Yep. That's why we're all a little reticent to put too much emphasis on it either way*
*Except Larry Rothschild. Hate him. So. Much.
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 10:04:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 02, 2015, 10:01:34 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 09:58:01 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
That's about as well as you could put it.
As the Jackson and Kip Wells "outliers" illustrate (I'm sure Mazzone had some duds too but it was long ago and I'm old), there's no 1 way to coax an optimal performance out any 1 individual pitcher, but the successful ones have the right "combination".
Just off of the top of my head Jason Marquis was a guy Mazzone failed to get much out of who had his best year with Duncan. I think Bosio is a fantastic pitching coach and his methods have obviously helped guys like Arrieta and Strop and Hammel. I just agreed with Eli that people tend to give him credit for every good thing Cubs pitchers do and yet guys like Edwin and Travis Wood aren't counted against him.
Yep. That's why we're all a little reticent to put too much emphasis on it either way*
*Except Larry Rothschild. Hate him. So. Much.
Hating Larry Rothschild is so incredibly stupid.
Quote from: PenFoe on June 02, 2015, 11:25:26 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 10:04:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 02, 2015, 10:01:34 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 09:58:01 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
That's about as well as you could put it.
As the Jackson and Kip Wells "outliers" illustrate (I'm sure Mazzone had some duds too but it was long ago and I'm old), there's no 1 way to coax an optimal performance out any 1 individual pitcher, but the successful ones have the right "combination".
Just off of the top of my head Jason Marquis was a guy Mazzone failed to get much out of who had his best year with Duncan. I think Bosio is a fantastic pitching coach and his methods have obviously helped guys like Arrieta and Strop and Hammel. I just agreed with Eli that people tend to give him credit for every good thing Cubs pitchers do and yet guys like Edwin and Travis Wood aren't counted against him.
Yep. That's why we're all a little reticent to put too much emphasis on it either way*
*Except Larry Rothschild. Hate him. So. Much.
Hating Larry Rothschild is so incredibly stupid.
If you can't tell that I'm self-parodying at this point then let me inform you that I'm self-parodying at this point and I have absolutely zero interest in discussing Rothschild.
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 11:43:03 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 02, 2015, 11:25:26 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 10:04:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 02, 2015, 10:01:34 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 09:58:01 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
That's about as well as you could put it.
As the Jackson and Kip Wells "outliers" illustrate (I'm sure Mazzone had some duds too but it was long ago and I'm old), there's no 1 way to coax an optimal performance out any 1 individual pitcher, but the successful ones have the right "combination".
Just off of the top of my head Jason Marquis was a guy Mazzone failed to get much out of who had his best year with Duncan. I think Bosio is a fantastic pitching coach and his methods have obviously helped guys like Arrieta and Strop and Hammel. I just agreed with Eli that people tend to give him credit for every good thing Cubs pitchers do and yet guys like Edwin and Travis Wood aren't counted against him.
Yep. That's why we're all a little reticent to put too much emphasis on it either way*
*Except Larry Rothschild. Hate him. So. Much.
Hating Larry Rothschild is so incredibly stupid.
If you can't tell that I'm self-parodying at this point then let me inform you that I'm self-parodying at this point and I have absolutely zero interest in discussing Rothschild.
I couldn't tell.
Quote from: PenFoe on June 02, 2015, 11:45:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 11:43:03 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on June 02, 2015, 11:25:26 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 10:04:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 02, 2015, 10:01:34 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 09:58:01 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
That's about as well as you could put it.
As the Jackson and Kip Wells "outliers" illustrate (I'm sure Mazzone had some duds too but it was long ago and I'm old), there's no 1 way to coax an optimal performance out any 1 individual pitcher, but the successful ones have the right "combination".
Just off of the top of my head Jason Marquis was a guy Mazzone failed to get much out of who had his best year with Duncan. I think Bosio is a fantastic pitching coach and his methods have obviously helped guys like Arrieta and Strop and Hammel. I just agreed with Eli that people tend to give him credit for every good thing Cubs pitchers do and yet guys like Edwin and Travis Wood aren't counted against him.
Yep. That's why we're all a little reticent to put too much emphasis on it either way*
*Except Larry Rothschild. Hate him. So. Much.
Hating Larry Rothschild is so incredibly stupid.
If you can't tell that I'm self-parodying at this point then let me inform you that I'm self-parodying at this point and I have absolutely zero interest in discussing Rothschild.
I couldn't tell.
Touché
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
Maybe we should put Snork on the list of guys Bosio wizard'd
Quote from: SKO on June 03, 2015, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
Maybe we should put Snork on the list of guys Bosio wizard'd
Don't. It might lead people, including Snork, to think it's a good idea to welcome him back. And we can't let the terrorists win.
Quote from: InternetApex on June 03, 2015, 11:43:57 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 03, 2015, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
Maybe we should put Snork on the list of guys Bosio wizard'd
Don't. It might lead people, including Snork, to think it's a good idea to welcome him back. And we can't let the terrorists win.
I can put it to rest for you: Bosio was here in 2013 when Snork sucked balls. Let's just be grateful for that sub-3 ERA Snork put up the first half of last year which netted us Barry Damn Larkin Jr. in return.
Whatever Rondon does with this lead, bump for a hell of an effort by Hammel.
Quote from: InternetApex on June 03, 2015, 11:43:57 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 03, 2015, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: Eli on June 02, 2015, 08:24:15 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 02, 2015, 05:47:46 AM
I'll hop on this trolley.
In some ways Hammel's success has been pivotal to the Cubs' early-season nominal contention, as that rotation has hinged on the expected positivity of Lester & Arrieta (though neither has been consistently dominant and Hammel may well have better #'s right now) and the giant sucking sound that had been emanating from Hendricks and Wood shitting the tub in slots #4 & #5. Now that we're into June and Hendricks seems to have righted the ship and Wada has been a solid improvement on Wood (still holding my breath on both of those developments) it'd sure be something if Hammel could keep this up. But even if he couldn't, this team can stand a little of his regression anyway. It's the least they could do to pick him up after he's done more than his part until now.
The exercise of throwing Chris Bosio's name around for any pitcher attached to the Cubs is a bit tired by now, but there may be something to it with Hammel. He was fantastic before the trade, mediocre with the A's, and now he's back to being fantastic. I wonder if his repertoire just happens to fit perfectly with Bosio's approach.
Maybe we should put Snork on the list of guys Bosio wizard'd
Don't. It might lead people, including Snork, to think it's a good idea to welcome him back. And we can't let the terrorists win.
Jon Wolter likes this.
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Huey mentioned to the people in his section that it would be great if Hammel could just give the boys down in the pen the day off with a CG, so now Hammel has to ride with Wood on Huard's Tandem Troncycle of Disappointment.
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Was planning on bumping it last night (too tired) and again this morning (too run-around-y); surprised it hadn't been bumped to be honest.
He was absolutely nails through 6. Ran out of gas quickly but that was such a needed performance after they used so much bullpen Monday.
Funny, in the last week 2 different people had asked me who the Cubs' ace was (or who would start in a 1-game playoff, rest being equal)-- Arrieta or Lester? And then Hammel comes around to remind us that he's very nearly enjoying an ace-like season thus far himself. When Lester currently ranks third, these are heady times.
I don't know if wearing a Cubs uniform gives Hammel superpowers or what but my god he's downright excellent as a Cub. I'm glad he wanted to come back.
Quote from: PANK! on June 24, 2015, 07:49:50 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Was planning on bumping it last night (too tired) and again this morning (too run-around-y); surprised it hadn't been bumped to be honest.
He was absolutely nails through 6. Ran out of gas quickly but that was such a needed performance after they used so much bullpen Monday that fucking pussy Travis Wood only pitched 3.1 innings of 1-hit, scoreless ball, picking up the win, to well and truly leave his teammates twisting in the wind.
Funny, in the last week 2 different people had asked me who the Cubs' ace was (or who would start in a 1-game playoff, rest being equal)-- Arrieta or Lester? And then Hammel comes around to remind us that he's very nearly enjoying an ace-like season thus far himself. When Lester currently ranks third, these are heady times.
Huebited
Quote from: Tonker on June 24, 2015, 08:57:07 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 24, 2015, 07:49:50 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Was planning on bumping it last night (too tired) and again this morning (too run-around-y); surprised it hadn't been bumped to be honest.
He was absolutely nails through 6. Ran out of gas quickly but that was such a needed performance after they used so much bullpen Monday that fucking pussy Travis Wood only pitched 3.1 innings of 1-hit, scoreless ball, picking up the win, to well and truly leave his teammates twisting in the wind.
Funny, in the last week 2 different people had asked me who the Cubs' ace was (or who would start in a 1-game playoff, rest being equal)-- Arrieta or Lester? And then Hammel comes around to remind us that he's very nearly enjoying an ace-like season thus far himself. When Lester currently ranks third, these are heady times.
Huebited
I thought about doing that but I've been struck with too much ennui as it pertains to the matter to keep stick-poking that bear. I also didn't want to distract from the awesomeness that has been Hammel. Thanks, Tonk. Thanks a lot.
Quote from: PANK! on June 24, 2015, 09:03:39 AM
Quote from: Tonker on June 24, 2015, 08:57:07 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 24, 2015, 07:49:50 AM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Was planning on bumping it last night (too tired) and again this morning (too run-around-y); surprised it hadn't been bumped to be honest.
He was absolutely nails through 6. Ran out of gas quickly but that was such a needed performance after they used so much bullpen Monday that fucking pussy Travis Wood only pitched 3.1 innings of 1-hit, scoreless ball, picking up the win, to well and truly leave his teammates twisting in the wind.
Funny, in the last week 2 different people had asked me who the Cubs' ace was (or who would start in a 1-game playoff, rest being equal)-- Arrieta or Lester? And then Hammel comes around to remind us that he's very nearly enjoying an ace-like season thus far himself. When Lester currently ranks third, these are heady times.
Huebited
I thought about doing that but I've been struck with too much ennui as it pertains to the matter to keep stick-poking that bear. I also didn't want to distract from the awesomeness that has been Hammel. Thanks, Tonk. Thanks a lot.
Ha. Any time, old chum.
Quote from: Slaky on June 24, 2015, 08:54:56 AM
I don't know if wearing a Cubs uniform gives Hammel superpowers or what but my god he's downright excellent as a Cub. I'm glad he wanted to come back.
My sons are A's fans and were really happy to see him leave. They are convinced it is the uniform.
Quote from: ChuckD on June 23, 2015, 11:03:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Huey mentioned to the people in his section that it would be great if Hammel could just give the boys down in the pen the day off with a CG, so now Hammel has to ride with Wood on Huard's Tandem Troncycle of Disappointment.
I just wanted to validate this.
Quote from: Bort on June 24, 2015, 11:56:52 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on June 23, 2015, 11:03:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Huey mentioned to the people in his section that it would be great if Hammel could just give the boys down in the pen the day off with a CG, so now Hammel has to ride with Wood on Huard's Tandem Troncycle of Disappointment.
I just wanted to validate this.
Double stamped
I just feel so much pity for the poor people in Huey's section. When he's not yelling at them for standing up or not paying the fuck attention he's loudly informing them that Travis Wood's solid showing in long relief doesn't merit their worthless adoration.
Quote from: Slaky on June 24, 2015, 11:57:58 AM
Quote from: Bort on June 24, 2015, 11:56:52 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on June 23, 2015, 11:03:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Huey mentioned to the people in his section that it would be great if Hammel could just give the boys down in the pen the day off with a CG, so now Hammel has to ride with Wood on Huard's Tandem Troncycle of Disappointment.
I just wanted to validate this.
Double stamped
Make it three.
Quote from: InternetApex on June 24, 2015, 12:03:42 PM
Quote from: Slaky on June 24, 2015, 11:57:58 AM
Quote from: Bort on June 24, 2015, 11:56:52 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on June 23, 2015, 11:03:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Huey mentioned to the people in his section that it would be great if Hammel could just give the boys down in the pen the day off with a CG, so now Hammel has to ride with Wood on Huard's Tandem Troncycle of Disappointment.
I just wanted to validate this.
Double stamped
Make it three.
four
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on June 24, 2015, 12:43:18 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on June 24, 2015, 12:03:42 PM
Quote from: Slaky on June 24, 2015, 11:57:58 AM
Quote from: Bort on June 24, 2015, 11:56:52 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on June 23, 2015, 11:03:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on June 23, 2015, 10:42:43 PM
Can I get Huey to rule if outlasting Zack Greinke is bump worthy ?
Huey mentioned to the people in his section that it would be great if Hammel could just give the boys down in the pen the day off with a CG, so now Hammel has to ride with Wood on Huard's Tandem Troncycle of Disappointment.
I just wanted to validate this.
Double stamped
Make it three.
four
five
Getting a little concerned his injury wasn't minor. Hasn't made 6 innings since.
Quote from: SKO on August 06, 2015, 08:52:28 PM
Getting a little concerned his injury wasn't minor. Hasn't made 6 innings since.
It could still be minor but a tight hamstring can really fuck up a guy's pitching motion. And that could lead to worse shit.
Quote from: InternetApex on August 07, 2015, 08:58:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 06, 2015, 08:52:28 PM
Getting a little concerned his injury wasn't minor. Hasn't made 6 innings since.
It could still be minor but a tight hamstring can really fuck up a guy's pitching motion. And that could lead to worse shit.
Yeah, I guess I don't think he's like permanently fucked or that he tore it. I just think it's possible it's still affecting him. Or maybe he just doesn't work well with Schwarber? I dunno. He had pinpoint control for most of the first half and now he can't seem to locate worth a damn.
Quote from: SKO on August 07, 2015, 09:01:14 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on August 07, 2015, 08:58:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 06, 2015, 08:52:28 PM
Getting a little concerned his injury wasn't minor. Hasn't made 6 innings since.
It could still be minor but a tight hamstring can really fuck up a guy's pitching motion. And that could lead to worse shit.
Yeah, I guess I don't think he's like permanently fucked or that he tore it. I just think it's possible it's still affecting him. Or maybe he just doesn't work well with Schwarber? I dunno. He had pinpoint control for most of the first half and now he can't seem to locate worth a damn.
If his hamstring is tight, or was and he's still thinking about it, the feet can plant wrong and it throws off everything. I'm of the mind that Bosio will wizard him up in a few weeks time.
Quote from: InternetApex on August 07, 2015, 10:03:12 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 07, 2015, 09:01:14 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on August 07, 2015, 08:58:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 06, 2015, 08:52:28 PM
Getting a little concerned his injury wasn't minor. Hasn't made 6 innings since.
It could still be minor but a tight hamstring can really fuck up a guy's pitching motion. And that could lead to worse shit.
Yeah, I guess I don't think he's like permanently fucked or that he tore it. I just think it's possible it's still affecting him. Or maybe he just doesn't work well with Schwarber? I dunno. He had pinpoint control for most of the first half and now he can't seem to locate worth a damn.
If his hamstring is tight, or was and he's still thinking about it, the feet can plant wrong and it throws off everything. I'm of the mind that Bosio will wizard him up in a few weeks time.
Or maybe he's just a first-half pitcher (for whatever reason). His career second-half ERA is more than a run higher than his first-half ERA, so this could just be his typical fading out as the year goes on.
Quote from: Eli on August 07, 2015, 10:15:09 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on August 07, 2015, 10:03:12 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 07, 2015, 09:01:14 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on August 07, 2015, 08:58:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 06, 2015, 08:52:28 PM
Getting a little concerned his injury wasn't minor. Hasn't made 6 innings since.
It could still be minor but a tight hamstring can really fuck up a guy's pitching motion. And that could lead to worse shit.
Yeah, I guess I don't think he's like permanently fucked or that he tore it. I just think it's possible it's still affecting him. Or maybe he just doesn't work well with Schwarber? I dunno. He had pinpoint control for most of the first half and now he can't seem to locate worth a damn.
If his hamstring is tight, or was and he's still thinking about it, the feet can plant wrong and it throws off everything. I'm of the mind that Bosio will wizard him up in a few weeks time.
Or maybe he's just a first-half pitcher (for whatever reason). His career second-half ERA is more than a run higher than his first-half ERA, so this could just be his typical fading out as the year goes on.
Potentially. He had a rough July last year for Oakland and then settled down nicely in August/September.
/thread.
Thanks for the first 3 months of the season, I guess.
Last 3 years coming into 2015:
101 ERA+
4.07 FIP
1.26 WHIP
7.6 K/9
2.8 BB/9
This year coming into today:
114 ERA+
3.62 FIP
1.11 WHIP
9.1 K/9
2.0 BB/9
Yes it's frustrating that his bad performances have been clustered since the hamstring injury, but if you take a step back and look at his season as a whole, he's been a damn good #3 starter. I know that Bosio has the magic touch but can you really expect a 32 year old pitcher to be THAT much better than his career #s over the course of a season?
Quote from: R-V on September 02, 2015, 04:08:31 PM
Last 3 years coming into 2015:
101 ERA+
4.07 FIP
1.26 WHIP
7.6 K/9
2.8 BB/9
This year coming into today:
114 ERA+
3.62 FIP
1.11 WHIP
9.1 K/9
2.0 BB/9
Yes it's frustrating that his bad performances have been clustered since the hamstring injury, but if you take a step back and look at his season as a whole, he's been a damn good #3 starter. I know that Bosio has the magic touch but can you really expect a 32 year old pitcher to be THAT much better than his career #s over the course of a season?
Yup. Hammel's had a row of dodgy starts now, and although I am worried, I'm not firebarning him just yet and when he pitches his tits off down the stretch, I'll remind you of what a bunch of gheylhords you all are.
Quote from: Tonker on September 03, 2015, 01:01:05 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 02, 2015, 04:08:31 PM
Last 3 years coming into 2015:
101 ERA+
4.07 FIP
1.26 WHIP
7.6 K/9
2.8 BB/9
This year coming into today:
114 ERA+
3.62 FIP
1.11 WHIP
9.1 K/9
2.0 BB/9
Yes it's frustrating that his bad performances have been clustered since the hamstring injury, but if you take a step back and look at his season as a whole, he's been a damn good #3 starter. I know that Bosio has the magic touch but can you really expect a 32 year old pitcher to be THAT much better than his career #s over the course of a season?
Yup. Hammel's had a row of dodgy starts now, and although I am worried, I'm not firebarning him just yet and when he pitches his tits off down the stretch, I'll remind you of what a bunch of gheylhords you all are.
Woah, there's a reason I didn't open a firebarn thread. I just put a halt to the splooging. No splooges shall be had over this man till he manages more than one quality start in the entire second half.
For whatever reason, Hammel's day/night splits are really significant and in favor of day games, which is what made yesterday more disappointing to me. He's had almost exclusively night starts since the ASB (his one good start was a day game).
It'd be nice to have a third starter that has a reasonable chance of winning a playoff game. Hope he gets his shit together.
That was beautiful.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on April 19, 2016, 08:30:33 PM
That was beautiful.
Tejada spitting toward the mound while he walks back to the dugout is such class.
I appreciated both Jason's stellar effort tonight and Joe's decision not to push it with a seventh inning even though his pitch count would have warranted it. Hammel was leaving the ball up a lot those last couple of innings. Nice to have a manager who is proactive rather than waiting for the shit to hit the fan.
Quote from: SKO on April 19, 2016, 10:55:14 PM
I appreciated both Jason's stellar effort tonight and Joe's decision not to push it with a seventh inning even though his pitch count would have warranted it. Hammel was leaving the ball up a lot those last couple of innings. Nice to have a manager who is proactive rather than waiting for the shit to hit the fan.
Also nice to have enough reliable arms in the bullpen so the Cubs never need to have to coax an extra inning out of Hammel or the Quality Start Machine
tm.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on April 20, 2016, 08:33:59 AM
Quote from: SKO on April 19, 2016, 10:55:14 PM
I appreciated both Jason's stellar effort tonight and Joe's decision not to push it with a seventh inning even though his pitch count would have warranted it. Hammel was leaving the ball up a lot those last couple of innings. Nice to have a manager who is proactive rather than waiting for the shit to hit the fan.
Also nice to have enough reliable arms in the bullpen so the Cubs never need to have to coax an extra inning out of Hammel or the Quality Start Machinetm.
Yeah, I hope Kyle's on a short leash today, the sweep (and putting the Cardinals a pretty solid 5 games back already) would be very nice, I'd play this one a little tighter than your usual April getaway game. Then you can afford to dick around a bit more against Cincinnati and the Brewers.
Quote from: SKO on April 19, 2016, 10:55:14 PM
I appreciated both Jason's stellar effort tonight and Joe's decision not to push it with a seventh inning even though his pitch count would have warranted Warrented it. Hammel was leaving the ball up a lot those last couple of innings. Nice to have a manager who is proactive rather than waiting for the shit to hit the fan.
*ducks from rasberries*
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on April 20, 2016, 08:33:59 AM
Quote from: SKO on April 19, 2016, 10:55:14 PM
I appreciated both Jason's stellar effort tonight and Joe's decision not to push it with a seventh inning even though his pitch count would have warranted it. Hammel was leaving the ball up a lot those last couple of innings. Nice to have a manager who is proactive rather than waiting for the shit to hit the fan.
Also nice to have enough reliable arms in the bullpen so the Cubs never need to have to coax an extra inning out of Hammel or the Quality Start Machinetm.
You should update your handle to Quality Start Machine (with the trademark). Just a suggestion.
Quote from: SKO on April 20, 2016, 08:34:57 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on April 20, 2016, 08:33:59 AM
Quote from: SKO on April 19, 2016, 10:55:14 PM
I appreciated both Jason's stellar effort tonight and Joe's decision not to push it with a seventh inning even though his pitch count would have warranted it. Hammel was leaving the ball up a lot those last couple of innings. Nice to have a manager who is proactive rather than waiting for the shit to hit the fan.
Also nice to have enough reliable arms in the bullpen so the Cubs never need to have to coax an extra inning out of Hammel or the Quality Start Machinetm.
Yeah, I hope Kyle's on a short leash today, the sweep (and putting the Cardinals a pretty solid 5 games back already) would be very nice, I'd play this one a little tighter than your usual April getaway game. Then you can afford to dick around a bit more against Cincinnati and the Brewers.
Not to mention, you can pretty much chisel 7 or 8 innings from Jake in stone for tomorrow.
Twice against the Cardinals now (last night and in the NLDS) he's come up with a big hit as well.
Quote from: PANK! on April 20, 2016, 08:35:29 AM
Quote from: SKO on April 19, 2016, 10:55:14 PM
I appreciated both Jason's stellar effort tonight and Joe's decision not to push it with a seventh inning even though his pitch count would have warranted Warrented it. Hammel was leaving the ball up a lot those last couple of innings. Nice to have a manager who is proactive rather than waiting for the shit to hit the fan.
*ducks from rasberries*
Is this a terrible Adam Warren joke? I'm legitimately unsure.
Goddamn it.
Quote from: Slaky on May 19, 2016, 02:22:54 PM
Goddamn it.
They only started one of the three major league hitters in the entire org and this still happened.
Nice to see this wasn't a repeat of last year after another leg injury. I'll take those #'s any day.
Jason Hammel has a higher offensive WAR than Miguel Montero.
But that framing and handling ability...this sounds just like last yr with Ross. Never thought I'd rather see Grandpa start over Montero after last yr, but I don't think anyone on this site would disagree with me at this time.
How about a little love for this guy? 4-0 since the break. He's pitched 24 IP and prob would've gone a bit more had there not been "NL Moments" as Joe likes to say. He's given up 4 ER's on only 16 H's/7 BB's with 21 K's. That's WAY better after the break than the last 2 years.
Quote from: WTB...A RING FFS!! on August 03, 2016, 01:50:48 AM
How about a little love for this guy? 4-0 since the break. He's pitched 24 IP and prob would've gone a bit more had there not been "NL Moments" as Joe likes to say. He's given up 4 ER's on only 16 H's/7 BB's with 21 K's. That's WAY better after the break than the last 2 years.
Anyone else think the low inning count correlates to his continued success?
Well, that and potato chips.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on August 03, 2016, 08:03:47 AM
Quote from: WTB...A RING FFS!! on August 03, 2016, 01:50:48 AM
How about a little love for this guy? 4-0 since the break. He's pitched 24 IP and prob would've gone a bit more had there not been "NL Moments" as Joe likes to say. He's given up 4 ER's on only 16 H's/7 BB's with 21 K's. That's WAY better after the break than the last 2 years.
Anyone else think the low inning count correlates to his continued success?
Well, that and potato chips.
Yes I do. I was kinda baffled Cubs fans were mad that Joe pulled him in favor of Strop, because a third time through the order of Hammel vs Strop/Rondon/Shithead McThrowshard is not even up for debate. Of course Strop had to nearly cough up the lead on some bad luck grounders so the meatballs felt justified in their bitching.
Quote from: PenFoe on August 03, 2016, 10:14:24 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 03, 2016, 08:21:54 AM
Shithead McThrowshard
I was thinking Cuban Hull or Ebony Jet, but this one doesn't require nuance.
Another great start. 2 in a row with no runs and only 1 ER in his last 20. Fuck me has this starting staff gone into full-on kill mode.
Quote from: WTB...A RING FFS!! on August 10, 2016, 09:13:44 PM
Another great start. 2 in a row with no runs and only 1 ER in his last 20. Fuck me has this starting staff gone into full-on kill mode.
Last non-quality start was Matusz.
All y'all can kiss my ass. Except Tonk. And I think Huey. I'm too lazy to re-read this thread.
Quote from: R-V on August 11, 2016, 09:22:38 AM
All y'all can kiss my ass. Except Tonk. And I think Huey. I'm too lazy to re-read this thread.
Huey was the one that literally tweeted at Jason Hammel that he wouldn't even be a Cub this year, so I think you're mistaken there.
Quote from: SKO on August 11, 2016, 09:26:51 AM
Quote from: R-V on August 11, 2016, 09:22:38 AM
All y'all can kiss my ass. Except Tonk. And I think Huey. I'm too lazy to re-read this thread.
Huey was the one that literally tweeted at Jason Hammel that he wouldn't even Eddie Vedder--like many of us--would be sad if he were to still be a Cub this year, so I think you're mistaken there.
Just the facts'd.
Quote from: SKO on August 11, 2016, 09:26:51 AM
Quote from: R-V on August 11, 2016, 09:22:38 AM
All y'all can kiss my ass. Except Tonk. And I think Huey. I'm too lazy to re-read this thread.
Huey was the one that literally tweeted at Jason Hammel that he wouldn't even be a Cub this year, so I think you're mistaken there.
DPD
I'm actually surprised RV forgot this since he was so squealingly excited that Hammel's "roasting" of me marked his most favoritest day on teh Twitters.
Quote from: PANK! on August 11, 2016, 09:58:00 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 11, 2016, 09:26:51 AM
Quote from: R-V on August 11, 2016, 09:22:38 AM
All y'all can kiss my ass. Except Tonk. And I think Huey. I'm too lazy to re-read this thread.
Huey was the one that literally tweeted at Jason Hammel that he wouldn't even be a Cub this year, so I think you're mistaken there.
DPD
I'm actually surprised RV forgot this since he was so squealingly excited that Hammel's "roasting" of me marked his most favoritest day on teh Twitters.
I had already forgotten about this whole back and forth, but it is now clear to me that it still chaps your ass which kind of *does* make me squealingly excited.
Quote from: R-V on August 11, 2016, 01:49:27 PM
Quote from: PANK! on August 11, 2016, 09:58:00 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 11, 2016, 09:26:51 AM
Quote from: R-V on August 11, 2016, 09:22:38 AM
All y'all can kiss my ass. Except Tonk. And I think Huey. I'm too lazy to re-read this thread.
Huey was the one that literally tweeted at Jason Hammel that he wouldn't even be a Cub this year, so I think you're mistaken there.
DPD
I'm actually surprised RV forgot this since he was so squealingly excited that Hammel's "roasting" of me marked his most favoritest day on teh Twitters.
I had already forgotten about this whole back and forth, but it is now clear to me that it still chaps your ass which kind of *does* make me squealingly excited.
To be fair, Huey's kinda permachapped.
Nice to see good Hammel again. He got a little pretty with his pitches which led to the only run he gave up, but was very good the other 5.
It was nice seeing him in "Fuck You" mode.
God damn it, dude. Eat some more potato chips.
Joe was certainly in no hurry to rescue his ass.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 06, 2016, 10:34:52 PM
Joe was certainly in no hurry to rescue his ass.
Joe has never hesitated to embarrass Jason whenever he needs to. Bitch publicly about Joe saving you from embarrassment by pulling you after 39 pitches and you can bet he'll leave your ass to drown in it next time.
Anywho, the real question at this point since Hammel is definitely not in the playoff rotation unless Lackey is just garbage this month, is whether or not Hammel should even make the roster over an actual reliever.
Quote from: SKO on September 07, 2016, 07:43:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 06, 2016, 10:34:52 PM
Joe was certainly in no hurry to rescue his ass.
Joe has never hesitated to embarrass Jason whenever he needs to. Bitch publicly about Joe saving you from embarrassment by pulling you after 39 pitches and you can bet he'll leave your ass to drown in it next time.
Anywho, the real question at this point since Hammel is definitely not in the playoff rotation unless Lackey is just garbage this month, is whether or not Hammel should even make the roster over an actual reliever.
I don't see the value that Hammel would bring to the bullpen. He's had a nice season, on balance, but god damn their bullpen is so solid and deep I don't see where he has room...unless it comes down to him and Cahill for a long man, in whih case--fine put him on--hopefully that pitcher is just insurance anyway and won't be needed. But the back-end of that bullpen, with Chapman, Rondon, Strop, Edwards, and Grimm...I just don't see where Hammel fits (unless Strop is not ready for the LDS I suppose)
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on September 07, 2016, 09:45:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 07, 2016, 07:43:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 06, 2016, 10:34:52 PM
Joe was certainly in no hurry to rescue his ass.
Joe has never hesitated to embarrass Jason whenever he needs to. Bitch publicly about Joe saving you from embarrassment by pulling you after 39 pitches and you can bet he'll leave your ass to drown in it next time.
Anywho, the real question at this point since Hammel is definitely not in the playoff rotation unless Lackey is just garbage this month, is whether or not Hammel should even make the roster over an actual reliever.
I don't see the value that Hammel would bring to the bullpen. He's had a nice season, on balance, but god damn their bullpen is so solid and deep I don't see where he has room...unless it comes down to him and Cahill for a long man, in whih case--fine put him on--hopefully that pitcher is just insurance anyway and won't be needed. But the back-end of that bullpen, with Chapman, Rondon, Strop, Edwards, and Grimm...I just don't see where Hammel fits (unless Strop is not ready for the LDS I suppose)
Yep. I'd rather have Cahill or Zastryzny as the long man, too. The problem with Hammel in the pen is that if he's going to be awful he tends to be awful right from the start. Maybe he could be slightly better if he knows he can unleash max effort fastballs from the beginning but it's easier to just go with someone who has already been successful as a reliever.
Quote from: SKO on September 07, 2016, 09:52:35 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on September 07, 2016, 09:45:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 07, 2016, 07:43:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 06, 2016, 10:34:52 PM
Joe was certainly in no hurry to rescue his ass.
Joe has never hesitated to embarrass Jason whenever he needs to. Bitch publicly about Joe saving you from embarrassment by pulling you after 39 pitches and you can bet he'll leave your ass to drown in it next time.
Anywho, the real question at this point since Hammel is definitely not in the playoff rotation unless Lackey is just garbage this month, is whether or not Hammel should even make the roster over an actual reliever.
I don't see the value that Hammel would bring to the bullpen. He's had a nice season, on balance, but god damn their bullpen is so solid and deep I don't see where he has room...unless it comes down to him and Cahill for a long man, in whih case--fine put him on--hopefully that pitcher is just insurance anyway and won't be needed. But the back-end of that bullpen, with Chapman, Rondon, Strop, Edwards, and Grimm...I just don't see where Hammel fits (unless Strop is not ready for the LDS I suppose)
Yep. I'd rather have Cahill or Zastryzny as the long man, too. The problem with Hammel in the pen is that if he's going to be awful he tends to be awful right from the start. Maybe he could be slightly better if he knows he can unleash max effort fastballs from the beginning but it's easier to just go with someone who has already been successful as a reliever.
Given that Hammel makes his living with his sinker and breaking stuff, I don't think he'd really benefit from throwing max effort.
Quote from: SKO on September 07, 2016, 09:52:35 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on September 07, 2016, 09:45:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 07, 2016, 07:43:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 06, 2016, 10:34:52 PM
Joe was certainly in no hurry to rescue his ass.
Joe has never hesitated to embarrass Jason whenever he needs to. Bitch publicly about Joe saving you from embarrassment by pulling you after 39 pitches and you can bet he'll leave your ass to drown in it next time.
Anywho, the real question at this point since Hammel is definitely not in the playoff rotation unless Lackey is just garbage this month, is whether or not Hammel should even make the roster over an actual reliever.
I don't see the value that Hammel would bring to the bullpen. He's had a nice season, on balance, but god damn their bullpen is so solid and deep I don't see where he has room...unless it comes down to him and Cahill for a long man, in whih case--fine put him on--hopefully that pitcher is just insurance anyway and won't be needed. But the back-end of that bullpen, with Chapman, Rondon, Strop, Edwards, and Grimm...I just don't see where Hammel fits (unless Strop is not ready for the LDS I suppose)
Yep. I'd rather have Cahill or Zastryzny as the long man, too. The problem with Hammel in the pen is that if he's going to be awful he tends to be awful right from the start. Maybe he could be slightly better if he knows he can unleash max effort fastballs from the beginning but it's easier to just go with someone who has already been successful as a reliever.
I think Hammel sits in the NLDS for sure. Joe knows what he's getting out of Cahill.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 07, 2016, 01:24:05 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 07, 2016, 09:52:35 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on September 07, 2016, 09:45:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 07, 2016, 07:43:14 AM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 06, 2016, 10:34:52 PM
Joe was certainly in no hurry to rescue his ass.
Joe has never hesitated to embarrass Jason whenever he needs to. Bitch publicly about Joe saving you from embarrassment by pulling you after 39 pitches and you can bet he'll leave your ass to drown in it next time.
Anywho, the real question at this point since Hammel is definitely not in the playoff rotation unless Lackey is just garbage this month, is whether or not Hammel should even make the roster over an actual reliever.
I don't see the value that Hammel would bring to the bullpen. He's had a nice season, on balance, but god damn their bullpen is so solid and deep I don't see where he has room...unless it comes down to him and Cahill for a long man, in whih case--fine put him on--hopefully that pitcher is just insurance anyway and won't be needed. But the back-end of that bullpen, with Chapman, Rondon, Strop, Edwards, and Grimm...I just don't see where Hammel fits (unless Strop is not ready for the LDS I suppose)
Yep. I'd rather have Cahill or Zastryzny as the long man, too. The problem with Hammel in the pen is that if he's going to be awful he tends to be awful right from the start. Maybe he could be slightly better if he knows he can unleash max effort fastballs from the beginning but it's easier to just go with someone who has already been successful as a reliever.
I think Hammel sits in the NLDS for sure. Joe knows what he's getting out of Cahill.
Two pitches. Two home runs. VERY LONG home runs.
(muttering)
Thank god the playoffs are coming soon so his ass isn't pitching and us wondering which guy's going to show up. He's been absolute shite 4 of his last 5 starts.
Quote from: WTB...A RING FFS!! on September 13, 2016, 09:37:27 PM
Thank god the playoffs are coming soon so his ass isn't pitching and us wondering which guy's going to show up. He's been absolute shite 4 of his last 5 starts.
He can console himself with having a front row seat for history.
Enjoy the bench in October, Jason
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
He was a perfectly acceptable fifth starter. Hell I'll go so far as to rank him above Jason Marquis, Shawn Estes, Mark Clark, and Dan Haren as far as "5th Starters for Cubs Playoff teams" go.
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2016, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
He was a perfectly acceptable fifth starter. Hell I'll go so far as to rank him above Jason Marquis, Shawn Estes, Mark Clark, and Dan Haren as far as "5th Starters for Cubs Playoff teams" go.
I would be very happy if "5th starter on World Champions" enhances his trade value.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 24, 2016, 02:41:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2016, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
He was a perfectly acceptable fifth starter. Hell I'll go so far as to rank him above Jason Marquis, Shawn Estes, Mark Clark, and Dan Haren as far as "5th Starters for Cubs Playoff teams" go.
I would be very happy if "5th starter on World Champions" enhances his trade value.
Given the absolute dearth of pitching on the market and the fact that he has just one year left on his deal I'd bet "working on his third straight year of 150+ innings of league average ball" will be enough to get some calls
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2016, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
He was a perfectly acceptable fifth starter. Hell I'll go so far as to rank him above Jason Marquis, Shawn Estes, Mark Clark, and Dan Haren as far as "5th Starters for Cubs Playoff teams" go.
How does he compare to Paul Kilgus, Dick Ruthven, and Rick Reuschel?
Quote from: Brownie on September 24, 2016, 06:31:10 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2016, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
He was a perfectly acceptable fifth starter. Hell I'll go so far as to rank him above Jason Marquis, Shawn Estes, Mark Clark, and Dan Haren as far as "5th Starters for Cubs Playoff teams" go.
How does he compare to Paul Kilgus, Dick Ruthven, and Rick Reuschel?
I'm far too young and beautiful to remember any of them and thus I rely on you and Pank for such reminiscing
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 24, 2016, 02:41:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2016, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
He was a perfectly acceptable fifth starter. Hell I'll go so far as to rank him above Jason Marquis, Shawn Estes, Mark Clark, and Dan Haren as far as "5th Starters for Cubs Playoff teams" go.
I would be very happy if "5th starter on World Champions" enhances his trade value.
Trader Fork strikes again! Who is the fifth starter with Hammel gone? Montgomery?
If you need me I'll be over here holding my breath for Jose Fernandez.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on September 24, 2016, 08:36:29 PM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 24, 2016, 02:41:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2016, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
He was a perfectly acceptable fifth starter. Hell I'll go so far as to rank him above Jason Marquis, Shawn Estes, Mark Clark, and Dan Haren as far as "5th Starters for Cubs Playoff teams" go.
I would be very happy if "5th starter on World Champions" enhances his trade value.
Trader Fork strikes again! Who is the fifth starter with Hammel gone? Montgomery?
If you need me I'll be over here holding my breath for Jose Fernandez.
Egad
Quote from: Saul Goodman on September 24, 2016, 08:36:29 PM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 24, 2016, 02:41:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2016, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
He was a perfectly acceptable fifth starter. Hell I'll go so far as to rank him above Jason Marquis, Shawn Estes, Mark Clark, and Dan Haren as far as "5th Starters for Cubs Playoff teams" go.
I would be very happy if "5th starter on World Champions" enhances his trade value.
Trader Fork strikes again! Who is the fifth starter with Hammel gone? Montgomery?
If you need me I'll be over here holding my breath for Jose Fernandez.
Heh.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 25, 2016, 11:20:39 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on September 24, 2016, 08:36:29 PM
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on September 24, 2016, 02:41:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on September 24, 2016, 02:39:16 PM
Quote from: Yeti on September 24, 2016, 01:21:14 PM
I sincerely thank him for being more good than bad this year. He can enjoy the ring just like everyone else
He was a perfectly acceptable fifth starter. Hell I'll go so far as to rank him above Jason Marquis, Shawn Estes, Mark Clark, and Dan Haren as far as "5th Starters for Cubs Playoff teams" go.
I would be very happy if "5th starter on World Champions" enhances his trade value.
Trader Fork strikes again! Who is the fifth starter with Hammel gone? Montgomery?
If you need me I'll be over here holding my breath for Jose Fernandez.
Heh.
Gonna be holding it for a while. He touched a lot of people.
CONFIRMED: He wanted off the World Series champion due to acute butthurt.
Quote
As Rogers notes, Mills was only designated for assignment when the Royals signed Jason Hammel, whose option the Cubs declined earlier in the offseason. The team's pursuit of starting depth now raises the question of whether the team would have been better off had it simply exercised the option. But Rogers says a key reason the two sides parted ways was that Hammel had a conflicted relationship with manager Joe Maddon, who Hammel felt didn't have appropriate faith in him and who frustrated him by pulling him out of games before he would have liked to depart. Though the option on Hammel's contract was a team option, the Cubs allowed him to decide whether he wanted to leave, and Hammel made the call. Rogers' sources tell him that was due primarily to his relationship with Maddon.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 11, 2017, 03:53:43 PM
CONFIRMED: He wanted off the World Series champion due to acute butthurt.
Quote
As Rogers notes, Mills was only designated for assignment when the Royals signed Jason Hammel, whose option the Cubs declined earlier in the offseason. The team's pursuit of starting depth now raises the question of whether the team would have been better off had it simply exercised the option. But Rogers says a key reason the two sides parted ways was that Hammel had a conflicted relationship with manager Joe Maddon, who Hammel felt didn't have appropriate faith in him and who frustrated him by pulling him out of games before he would have liked to depart. Though the option on Hammel's contract was a team option, the Cubs allowed him to decide whether he wanted to leave, and Hammel made the call. Rogers' sources tell him that was due primarily to his relationship with Maddon.
Although the lesson has been learned by me to not @ pro athletes, no matter how much you loathe them (because it's really stupid, guilty as charged etc.). But I feel at least somewhat validated now for having shown my ass for Hammel to PWN. Somewhat.
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on February 12, 2017, 11:05:44 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 11, 2017, 03:53:43 PM
CONFIRMED: He wanted off the World Series champion due to acute butthurt.
Quote
As Rogers notes, Mills was only designated for assignment when the Royals signed Jason Hammel, whose option the Cubs declined earlier in the offseason. The team's pursuit of starting depth now raises the question of whether the team would have been better off had it simply exercised the option. But Rogers says a key reason the two sides parted ways was that Hammel had a conflicted relationship with manager Joe Maddon, who Hammel felt didn't have appropriate faith in him and who frustrated him by pulling him out of games before he would have liked to depart. Though the option on Hammel's contract was a team option, the Cubs allowed him to decide whether he wanted to leave, and Hammel made the call. Rogers' sources tell him that was due primarily to his relationship with Maddon.
Although the lesson has been learned by me to not @ pro athletes, no matter how much you loathe them (because it's really stupid, guilty as charged etc.). But I feel at least somewhat validated now for having shown my ass for Hammel to PWN. Somewhat.
Apparently Joe is supposed to leave him in when he gives up runs, so he can give up some more runs. That Joe Maddon, always trying to win. What a dick.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 12, 2017, 11:13:41 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on February 12, 2017, 11:05:44 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 11, 2017, 03:53:43 PM
CONFIRMED: He wanted off the World Series champion due to acute butthurt.
Quote
As Rogers notes, Mills was only designated for assignment when the Royals signed Jason Hammel, whose option the Cubs declined earlier in the offseason. The team's pursuit of starting depth now raises the question of whether the team would have been better off had it simply exercised the option. But Rogers says a key reason the two sides parted ways was that Hammel had a conflicted relationship with manager Joe Maddon, who Hammel felt didn't have appropriate faith in him and who frustrated him by pulling him out of games before he would have liked to depart. Though the option on Hammel's contract was a team option, the Cubs allowed him to decide whether he wanted to leave, and Hammel made the call. Rogers' sources tell him that was due primarily to his relationship with Maddon.
Although the lesson has been learned by me to not @ pro athletes, no matter how much you loathe them (because it's really stupid, guilty as charged etc.). But I feel at least somewhat validated now for having shown my ass for Hammel to PWN. Somewhat.
Apparently Joe is supposed to leave him in when he gives up runs, so he can give up some more runs. That Joe Maddon, always trying to win. What a dick.
I like to think the meeting ended with Hammel shouting "FINE, then I'll just go somewhere that they WILL let me continue to pitch past the point of effectiveness!" then stomping out of the room and slamming the door.
Quote from: CT III on February 12, 2017, 05:51:09 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 12, 2017, 11:13:41 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on February 12, 2017, 11:05:44 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 11, 2017, 03:53:43 PM
CONFIRMED: He wanted off the World Series champion due to acute butthurt.
Quote
As Rogers notes, Mills was only designated for assignment when the Royals signed Jason Hammel, whose option the Cubs declined earlier in the offseason. The team's pursuit of starting depth now raises the question of whether the team would have been better off had it simply exercised the option. But Rogers says a key reason the two sides parted ways was that Hammel had a conflicted relationship with manager Joe Maddon, who Hammel felt didn't have appropriate faith in him and who frustrated him by pulling him out of games before he would have liked to depart. Though the option on Hammel's contract was a team option, the Cubs allowed him to decide whether he wanted to leave, and Hammel made the call. Rogers' sources tell him that was due primarily to his relationship with Maddon.
Although the lesson has been learned by me to not @ pro athletes, no matter how much you loathe them (because it's really stupid, guilty as charged etc.). But I feel at least somewhat validated now for having shown my ass for Hammel to PWN. Somewhat.
Apparently Joe is supposed to leave him in when he gives up runs, so he can give up some more runs. That Joe Maddon, always trying to win. What a dick.
I like to think the meeting ended with Hammel shouting "FINE, then I'll just go somewhere that they WILL let me continue to pitch past the point of effectiveness!" then stomping out of the room and slamming the door.
Ned Yost must have promised him six innings no matter what. Unless he literally dies on the mound, then there's a very slight chance he might get taken out before then.
Quote from: CT III on February 12, 2017, 05:51:09 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 12, 2017, 11:13:41 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on February 12, 2017, 11:05:44 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 11, 2017, 03:53:43 PM
CONFIRMED: He wanted off the World Series champion due to acute butthurt.
Quote
As Rogers notes, Mills was only designated for assignment when the Royals signed Jason Hammel, whose option the Cubs declined earlier in the offseason. The team's pursuit of starting depth now raises the question of whether the team would have been better off had it simply exercised the option. But Rogers says a key reason the two sides parted ways was that Hammel had a conflicted relationship with manager Joe Maddon, who Hammel felt didn't have appropriate faith in him and who frustrated him by pulling him out of games before he would have liked to depart. Though the option on Hammel's contract was a team option, the Cubs allowed him to decide whether he wanted to leave, and Hammel made the call. Rogers' sources tell him that was due primarily to his relationship with Maddon.
Although the lesson has been learned by me to not @ pro athletes, no matter how much you loathe them (because it's really stupid, guilty as charged etc.). But I feel at least somewhat validated now for having shown my ass for Hammel to PWN. Somewhat.
Apparently Joe is supposed to leave him in when he gives up runs, so he can give up some more runs. That Joe Maddon, always trying to win. What a dick.
I like to think the meeting ended with Hammel shouting "FINE, then I'll just go somewhere that they WILL let me continue to pitch past the point of effectiveness!" then stomping out of the room and slamming the door.
Literally everyone watching can tell within like, four pitches whether Hammel has a working slider that day and if he's going to get roasted, but sure, Jason, blame Joe.
Quote from: SKO on February 13, 2017, 08:33:25 AM
Quote from: CT III on February 12, 2017, 05:51:09 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 12, 2017, 11:13:41 AM
Quote from: Cannonball Titcomb on February 12, 2017, 11:05:44 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on February 11, 2017, 03:53:43 PM
CONFIRMED: He wanted off the World Series champion due to acute butthurt.
Quote
As Rogers notes, Mills was only designated for assignment when the Royals signed Jason Hammel, whose option the Cubs declined earlier in the offseason. The team's pursuit of starting depth now raises the question of whether the team would have been better off had it simply exercised the option. But Rogers says a key reason the two sides parted ways was that Hammel had a conflicted relationship with manager Joe Maddon, who Hammel felt didn't have appropriate faith in him and who frustrated him by pulling him out of games before he would have liked to depart. Though the option on Hammel's contract was a team option, the Cubs allowed him to decide whether he wanted to leave, and Hammel made the call. Rogers' sources tell him that was due primarily to his relationship with Maddon.
Although the lesson has been learned by me to not @ pro athletes, no matter how much you loathe them (because it's really stupid, guilty as charged etc.). But I feel at least somewhat validated now for having shown my ass for Hammel to PWN. Somewhat.
Apparently Joe is supposed to leave him in when he gives up runs, so he can give up some more runs. That Joe Maddon, always trying to win. What a dick.
I like to think the meeting ended with Hammel shouting "FINE, then I'll just go somewhere that they WILL let me continue to pitch past the point of effectiveness!" then stomping out of the room and slamming the door.
Literally everyone watching can tell within like, four pitches whether Hammel has a working slider that day and if he's going to get roasted, but sure, Jason, blame Joe.
I can't remember thinking "Oh no, what is Joe doing" a single time he's come out of the dugout to get him.
Quote
Righty Jason Hammel discussed his transition from the Cubs to the Royals with reporters including Patrick Mooney of CSNChicago.com. The veteran starter says he wasn't ready to give up starting at this stage, which may have been in the plans had he remained in Chicago. "I felt like I had proven myself over and over and over again for three years there," he said.
You know the second half of the season counts too, right Jason?
Quote from: Saul Goodman on March 04, 2017, 03:44:50 AM
Quote
Righty Jason Hammel discussed his transition from the Cubs to the Royals with reporters including Patrick Mooney of CSNChicago.com. The veteran starter says he wasn't ready to give up starting at this stage, which may have been in the plans had he remained in Chicago. "I felt like I had proven myself over and over and over again for three years there," he said.
You know the second half of the season counts too, right Jason?
I think it's pretty obvious that he does...
Quote"I felt like I had proven myself over and over and over again for three years there"
Quote from: ChuckD on March 04, 2017, 07:26:24 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on March 04, 2017, 03:44:50 AM
Quote
Righty Jason Hammel discussed his transition from the Cubs to the Royals with reporters including Patrick Mooney of CSNChicago.com. The veteran starter says he wasn't ready to give up starting at this stage, which may have been in the plans had he remained in Chicago. "I felt like I had proven myself over and over and over again for three years there," he said.
You know the second half of the season counts too, right Jason?
I think it's pretty obvious that he does...
Quote"I felt like I had proven myself over and over and over again for three years there"
He had absolutely proven himself...to be a guy that a team that needs someone who can deliver into October/November should pass on.