Originally Posted by MikeS21
You missed my point. My point is that the level of upgrade from Hancock to Milton is not as wide as some would have us believe. I agree that Hancock has an extremely low ceiling. And he does have junk pitches, I'll grant you that. But I'm not conviced you can pawn him off as lifetime AAA material just yet. He may have had a good month, but he also pitched four pretty good games - two against the Cubs and two against the Cards.
All I'm saying is that I think Hancock could pitch 150 innings and post an ERA around 4.80. While that's not great numbers, it also not that much worse than Milton's 200 innings and 4.75 ERA.
No, I got your point - and I don't think he is AAA material per se. I do think that he is AAA Starter material. Hancock might have a place on a major league roster, but its in the pen. If hitters get too many looks at him, watch out.
So I understood what you were saying, I just disagree with your conclusion. If Hancock got 33 starts, then I think his ERA will be higher than the 4.80 you suggest. I think it would be solidly in the 5's. And I also doubt he would get to 200 innings - the whiplash alone would cause him to miss a start or three
Seriously, he would never average the 6 innings to get to 200 innings.
But I do hear what your saying - 8 million is a lot to spend on 4.75, 200 innings, and you could get those numbers from someone for less. Like Luke Hudson. I just disagree with you that Hancock would be the one to get those numbers.
Sorry if I sounded rude or anything - I was mainly joking. I just want no part of Hancock in any rotation