Shawn Hill is F.A.T.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 18, 2009 5:24 PM EDT Comment 28 comments

The Nationals just cut Shawn Hill. Let's run through some of his numbers from 2006 through 2008:

K/BB: 1.94 -- hmm, that's not bad
GB%: 50% -- that's helped lead to a .74 HR/9
FIP: 4.11 -- huh, league average has been about 4.40
tERA: 4.35 -- that's still above-average
ERA: 4.93 -- oh, er, yeah, I brought up the ERA
BABIP: .324 -- I'm starting to catch on that the Nationals haven't caught on
IP: 197 -- ok, so he's not the most durable guy

2009 salary: $775K (with a possible $130K termination fee)

So, the Nationals are not willing to pay a net of $245K for a pitcher who's at least league average, albeit in an average of 65 innings the past three years. A 4.35 ERA in a 4.40 ERA league is worth almost one win above replacement. Seems pretty cheap for one win and the chance of more, no? Some smart team will snatch him up quickly.

Oh, and while it doesn't really mean anything, this quote from Hill from yesterday (via Rotowire at Fangraphs) is amusing in light of the move. Commenting that his ~~shoulder~~ arm felt great after the game...

I have to hope that it stays this way. [There was] no discomfort at all today," Hill said. "Will it be perfectly fine tomorrow? I don't know. But right now, I'm not too concerned about it. This is the first time since early 2007 or '06 that I didn't have any significant discomfort. That's why it's kind of nice.

0 recs | Comment 28 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Did they give any reason for the cut?

by Dan Turkenkopf on Mar 18, 2009 5:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

They're worried about his health. Whatever.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 18, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There has to be more than meets the eye...

I suspect the Nats saw something in Hill that indicates that he’ll never recover from his arm injuries. While his arm might feel good right now, it’s probably not a long term fix. Otherwise, this move doesn’t make any sense, considering how patient the club has been with him over the past five years, the current state of their starting pitching options and the fact that this isn’t a typical boneheaded Jim Bowden move.

I suspect this move is very similar to their release of John Patterson last year. If you check back, he too was giving interview about how he felt great pitching and had recovered from his previous injuries.

by Willl on Mar 18, 2009 5:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm also curious if the Beimel signing has anything to do with this

by Willl on Mar 18, 2009 5:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

or strasbourg.

or just cost savings in general. having to have another guy get a major league salary while you pay another guy to sit on the DL is a cost, too. just like arm surgery and rehab aren’t costless, either. one win for the nationals is the cost of this move. whoop de doo.

by larry on Mar 18, 2009 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

but what could they see to make them say

no thanks, not now not ever

what kind of injury problem?

Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.

by knockoutking on Mar 21, 2009 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

boy, his shoulder feels great, huh.

how about his elbow and forearm since that’s kind of where his problems are.

by larry on Mar 18, 2009 5:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Next question.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 18, 2009 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you guys could link to where you get quotes, you know.

that way we could figure out what the context is.

by larry on Mar 18, 2009 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You could lay off the snark, you know.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 18, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

snark is above.

this is me asking once again for information on this site to actually have some accuracy to it. i found the quote myself. google isn’t hard to use. he was talking about his elbow, not shoulder. maybe these are minor details. but you guys seem to revel in other minor details. i don’t think it’s too much to ask you to link. i’ve read enough inaccuracy on this site (and i won’t eliminate mine from such criticism, either) to want to do some independent investigation.

by larry on Mar 18, 2009 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Typing "shoulder" was my bad. Fixed.

“Information on this site to actually have some accuracy to it”? If you’ve got anything other than honest mistakes to show, please do. We try to run an honest ship.

If you want to ask for a source, just ask for it. Implying we often don’t link to sources is lame.

Source: Rotowire, on Fangraphs’ Hill player page

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 18, 2009 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i'm well aware that you guys aren't actively trying to make things up or something

though the known rays bias on this site makes me wonder about this ballot stuffing. but it’s a heck of a lot easier to check what it is you’re talking about – or simply get more background – if things are simply linked in a story. i don’t see why i have to ask for a source. just do it yourself in the story. one would think it’s routine to cite sources and, if it’s on the internet, link to it.

by larry on Mar 18, 2009 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I cited my source. My bad for not linking. I always intend to.

Any potential Rays’ bias on BtB is irrelevant to the discussion, unless your purpose is to bash us.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 18, 2009 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh, lord. it's a joke.

because you changed a vote from epstein to friedman. see? we’re talking about baseball here, not genocide in the sudan.

by larry on Mar 18, 2009 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No, I believe the BtB bashing is reserved for Southside Sox threads only.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 18, 2009 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

evidently the integrity of this internet poll has been compromised

/Paul Thomas

(he came on the rangers site and complained about when a ranger had won the minorleagueball vote)

Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.

by knockoutking on Mar 21, 2009 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I see why some readers have complained about your constant sourpuss attitude.

Gotta keep the e-rep strong, right?

Cool.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 18, 2009 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you're a real friendly guy from what i've read, too.

by larry on Mar 18, 2009 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If you're serious about the editors taking requests and complaints seriously.

How about you do us a favor and help out. Either up your comments so people don’t complain, don’t comment, or continue accusing the staff of things until one of them bans you. Can you help us here? Because I would appreciate it.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 18, 2009 6:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

did i kill your dog or something? beat you up in a past life? you write “next question”. i reply. but i’m the one who needs to lay off the snark. one of your buddies makes a joke. haha, he’s just kidding. i make a joke, i need to up the quality of my comments. you’re something else, rj.

if one of your readers or you have a problem with my comments on your site, i’m not hard to get ahold of. i’m here, i’m on my site, and i have a prominently displayed email. i’ve got no clue what you’re referring to with readers complaining. and if we’re talking about the irrelevant, what is written on my site about yours is just that. if you have a problem with what’s said, feel free to reply. or, better, ignore it. i don’t concern myself with correcting every yahoo and their opinion on my site and you shouldn’t concern yourself with them, either. but using what posters on my site say about yours as some sort of attack on me is silly. despite your obvious distaste for me, i have no problem with you, your co-writers, or your site. if i have something to say about your site, i’m not exactly shy about doing it in your front yard.

by larry on Mar 18, 2009 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i have no problem with you, your co-writers, or your site.

The point is that we don’t interpret your comments to agree with this statement. If you’d like to discuss our attitude towards you any further, please drop me an email. Thanks.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 19, 2009 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

then i'm telling you to interpret them differently.

tone is difficult to pick up in writing and is often misinterpreted, usually based upon the preconceived notions of the reader about the writer. try giving me the same treatment as you guys give your buddies.

by larry on Mar 19, 2009 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I will, if you make an effort to share your ideas in a way that's less likely to be misinterpreted.

Deal.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 19, 2009 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll add this...

The Nationals certainly have more inside information than we do about the specifics of Hill and his injury. It’s quite likely there’s important information that led them to make this move. It’s also quite likely they’re overreacting, given the cost of the risk. We’ll have to wait and see, I suppose, but this move is quite bizarre given what we know.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 18, 2009 6:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs