Jason Hammel Return Postage Paid, Spiral-Sliced Splooge Thread

[PenFoe]

23 Ks and 1 BB in 25.1 innings so far. 

[Tonker]

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.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

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.

[Eli]

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.

[SKO]

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.

[ChuckD]

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.

[SKO]

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.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

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".

[SKO]

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.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

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.

[PenFoe]

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.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

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.

[PenFoe]

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. 

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

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

[SKO]

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