So you admit: you were wrong.
I am neither right nor wrong, because I had no strong opinion on the move to begin with. I just think it's funny to see a lot of you celebrating as if you won something. Or as if it really matters.
It wouldn't have mattered either way. Hill lasted only 5.0 innings in his first two starts and then 2.1 innings in his third b/c of the injury. That means we would have still had to have had to rely on our bullpen for 4+ innings, that is if Hill even made it that far with our defense. Hill even had 6+ days of rest between each of his starts, a luxury he wouldn't have had with our 4 man rotation.
I'm not saying D-Crab is better, just that having Hill in the rotation for 3 games and then DL'ing him wouldn't have changed anything.
You're absolutely right, it DOESN'T matter, but that's kind of my point... we'd be no better or worse off if we'd kept him, but IF we had kept him and NOT signed Cabrera, it would have cost 2 million less for the same crappy results. Insert cheap Lerner joke here, but when it comes down to it, you never know what else could've been done with that money.
I think I'd rather see what's behind curtain number 3. Why should we have to settle for a bum or someone who can't be relied on to be around for more than a spot start or two without going on the DL? What law is there that says we're not allowed to expect decent MLB caliber pitching on a regular basis? That's like asking a kid if he would prefer a drunkard for a dad or just not have a father at all.
In a perfect world, I agree. But we all know there was never a curtain 3