Why have people been so down on Luke Hudson as a pitcher for us next season? I feel like almost every other thread about pithcing has us sucking next yeare bc we have Luke and Hancock throwing some innings.

Hudson I feel like had a greta year for us and cxould be a solid #3 starter in our rotation. He is just entering what is considered a pitchers prime (27) and is one of the least of our problems in 2005 I think.

Hancock I think is a very good swing man. He can give us the spot start and not kill us (ie van popple, etc) and i think he will be effective in middle relief. at ebst he is a 4-5 starter, at worst a decent reliever to eay innings.

Right now I see our rotation as below average but leaps and bounds above the villone, bere, parris days.

1) Try to sign a pavano/clement/millwood type
2) Harang
3) Hudson
4) Claussen
5) Mosely/Hancock/Mattox/etc

1) Wagner
2) Valentine
3) Acevedo
4) Hancock
6) Coffey