In light of today's game, I felt the need to quote myself. He's absolutely brutal there, he needs to play 1B or PH, nothing else.
I think he's functional in LF as well for limited stretches. Not ideal, but there are fewer opportunities to screw up there.
On the flipside, who was most likely to improve? The guy entering his 5th or 6th season, or the guy who had 9 career starts and was entering his second? Also important to consider is cost beyond this year. Hirsh was cheap. Jennings (if he pans out) will be $10MM+ if we are even able to sign him.
I liked him so far this year, but maybe the David Wells diet isn't working for Rick White. Now that White is on the DL, will he spend some time working with Blue Collar TV?
Limited like shagging balls in BP limited? Don't think you'll be seeing him out there. After he played there for a handful of games in '05, the consensus from him & the staff was that he has no business in the OF.
Hirsh, absolutely. But improvement from his ERA in the 6s doesn't necessarily mean he's going to be this ace that everyone seems to want him to be. He'll be a solid pitcher, imo, but not the type to make it one of the worst deals in franchise history, even if Jennings were to leave (which I don't think happens).
Road Dog lost 20 lbs in the offseason. ""My newfound six-pack isn't working out right now. I guess it was nice having the extra 20 pounds on my stomach."
Solid pitcher, not the ace everyone seems to want him to be. That pretty much describes Jennings too.
Who in the world described Jennings as an ace? Can you please quote a single person who said that? He's a solid pitcher with a probable ERA in the high 3s with a history of durability. Good enough to be the 2/3 on a quality team. Who's talking about Jennings as an ace?
Whenever search comes back, I'll be happy to show you a number of folks who had penciled in Hirsh as an absolute stud for years to come.
On the flopside, what did the Astros need: another young unproven back of the rotation starter, or an inning eating #2? The Rockies weren't going to give him away. The ChiSox weren't going to give Garland away. They didn't give Garcia away. You gotta pay to play. Hirsh will be good. Like Aaron Harang good. They're very, very similar pitchers.
Well Stephen Randolph finally brings a black man back to the stros. 0.84 era in AAA in lil over 10 ip. Great numbers granted the small sample size, hopefully he will do well.
Ideally, a proven #2. But was Jennings really proven? He'd had one really good season, which followed 3 seasons with an ERA over 5. Certainly true. But one thing that has made the Astros very successful over the last decade is not making many desperation moves. This seemed like one of those. I could see that. But Harang the last two years was about as good as Jennings last year.
Are those numbers reliable, given where he was pitching? Does the evidence of sinkerballer/groundball pitchers having success once leaving Colorado mean anything? Do the 200 innings pitched every year mean anything? I think the classification of this as a "desperation" move is getting a little extreme. In the end, the Freddy Garcia-Guillen-Halama trade will always play out to be worse because of what ultimately happened... and that's still a trade I make every time. But Hirsh for Jennings (especially when Jennings is re-signable) doesn't scream desperation to me.
They didn't have a couple of years to wait for Hirsh to grow into that role. They saw things in Jennings last year that they liked. We'll see how it works out. The Harang comparison wasn't a slight. He's a very solid #2 type guy. Hirsh can become that. Jennings *is* that, in their estimation.
Anyways, I guess you could always find SOMEONE to say something. Point is- Hirsh, Jennings- both solid guys, not aces.
But the difference is that Jennings is proven to be that, whereas with Hirsh you're taking a bit of a gamble. Yes, Jennings is more expensive in terms of salary, but imo, you pay that additional expense for the security of someone more proven when you're trying to compete for a title.
