Perry Hill Not Returning
by Thunder on Oct 17, 2009 1:16 PM EDT
59 comments
Colin Dunlap reports that Perry Hill is not going to be coaching with the Pirates in 2010. It sounds like he will not be coaching at all during the 2010 season. The Pirates have reportedly left the door open for him to return to the team at some point if he so chooses. In addition, Indianapolis pitching coach Ray Searage has been promoted to the Pirates. It sounds like he will be a pitching coach-in-waiting for when Joe Kerrigan departs.
UPDATE by Charlie: You'll recall that Hill was upset at the Pirates for trading so many players this season. Via Pat, John Perrotto tweets that by exercising Hill's option, the Pirates have effectively denied Hill the opportunity to catch on somewhere else in 2010. Which seems like hardball on the Bucs' part, but then Hill is the one who seems to be refusing to honor his contract by coming back to Pittsburgh to coach. I wonder if the Pirates might actually get a (marginal) prospect out of this--if some team could "trade" for Hill and take on the Pirates' option, similar to the 2002 "trade" that brought Lou Piniella to Tampa Bay in exchange for Randy Winn. It's also still possible that Hill might eventually capitulate and come back for another year. Or he could just stay at home. I have a feeling we haven't heard the end of this story yet.
0 recs |
59 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I just read this, came over here to see if it was up here yet
This is not good, Hill was quite a force for the infield IMO. It sounds like they did everything they could to get him back, too.
I agree with your reading that it sounds like he’s not going to be coaching anywhere next year.
Jason
The Hanging Curve
by poorboywilly on Oct 17, 2009 2:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Ah, shoot.
I predict that Delwyn Young’s defensive development will completely stall now. Hill also would have been great to have to try to mold Alvarez and Clement into more adequate fielders.
by Suffering Buc on Oct 17, 2009 2:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Damn.
That stinks. On the other hand, if they could get Hill for a year, then how hard could it be to get someone else to effectively instruct the infield on defense?
by IAPiratesFan on Oct 17, 2009 4:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting...I didn't even know they had an option on him
This is the first time I’ve heard of an infield coach effectively demanding a trade…there must be some pretty hard feelings on Hill’s part. Not sure if I buy the explanation of him being upset they traded Jack & Freddy. It sounds like there’s something more personal going on.
by maguro on Oct 17, 2009 5:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I predict
The sky will indeed fall on the PBC Blog after this announcement.
by Slizeezyc on Oct 17, 2009 6:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That is assuming...
that any of them even know who Perry Hill is. Maybe they could sign Jack Wilson to be the fielding instructor. I mean he IS the best defensive short stop to ever play the game!
"So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded?! Yea. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets so a sample. There are 4 of us an you're retarded. Thats 25 percent." Southpark; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce
by gorillakilla34 on Oct 17, 2009 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Perrotto’s twitter is correct, I’d guess that negotiations didn’t end on the best note. I’m not sure about this, but I think Hill’s failure to honor his option might mean the Pirates can keep him from coaching elsewhere indefinitely. He still owes them a year.
by WTM on Oct 17, 2009 7:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm almost positive . . .
they could only prevent him from working his option year. They’d have to seek an injunction if he attempted to work, and the question there is irreparable harm to the Pirates, not fairness to the Pirates. It’s a tough argument to make that the Pirates would be irreparably harmed if Hill worked as a coach any time after the option runs because he could have done so if he abided by the terms of the agreement. Plus, Courts look to avoid enjoining people from working.
by Scranton on Oct 19, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh Come On!
A frickin infeild coach/first base coach ruins the future??? If LaRoche and Young can’t remember what the hell was told them for an entire year then let’s cut them now! For craps sake! If there isn’t another infield coach close to Hill’s caliber…. Let’s be realisitic, the Bucco;s are a LOT more away from being the big dogs than an infield coach.
If Hill refused the extra hundred grand or so to work in Pittsburgh…it’s his decision. It’s not like we are hiring a GM. Here’s a clue, if a player in the Majors needs the difference between Hill and Instructor “x”…maybe he needs to go back to the Minors to learn his position. Or better yet, if we are counting on Hill to make Young a Hall of Famer…Good luck! Won’t happen.
Like a Hollywood Starlet..Bring us the NEXT Perry Hill!
by GeneClines on Oct 17, 2009 8:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
You said it better than I did.
by IAPiratesFan on Oct 17, 2009 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know if I agree...
I dont know if Mr. Hill is considered an “elite” fielding instructor or not but a top position coach could be enough to push a team over the edge year in and year out. Take Dave Duncan for example. He takes relief pitchers and project starters and turns them into above average to top notch starters. Keeping Perry won’t make the Pirates contenders next year but his instruction might be enough to push them over the edge when/if they are on the cusp of contention.
"So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded?! Yea. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets so a sample. There are 4 of us an you're retarded. Thats 25 percent." Southpark; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce
by gorillakilla34 on Oct 19, 2009 12:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Perry Hill is as good as his reputation,
then some other team should be willing to deal a little with the Pirates as Charlie says.
Carlos Garcia was on the bench late in the year with the big league club. Was it just a reward for his hard work in the minors for the Bucs in 2009, or did the club already have an idea that he could replace Hill in 2010?
by patthatt on Oct 17, 2009 11:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If we can get a prospect for any of our coaches...
let’s shop them all!
I want to see NH at the GM meetings on the stage saying “Next up, we have a monotonous manager, shows no emotion, has never had a winning team, and can’t get ejected if he tried. Shall we start the bidding at a C+ prospect?”
by H2O on Oct 18, 2009 10:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because showing emotion and getting ejected...
…are the most important things a manager can do.
It’s why Larry Bowa was such a barn-burning success.
by Vlad on Oct 18, 2009 5:04 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Yep...
and also why Joe Torre’s been such a flop.
by maguro on Oct 18, 2009 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't get it
John Russell is monotonous and emotionless. Joe Torre is stoic. HUGE difference.
by biggyv on Oct 18, 2009 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure....
anyone should be crowning Joe Torre as a great manager. He has 14 years of sub-.500 baseball as a non-Yankee manager.
by dtoddwin on Oct 19, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Screw you Perry Hill
If you don’t want to be here to help us build a contending team then I say don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out of Pittsburgh.
by curvefan on Oct 18, 2009 5:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
piniella for winn
was preceded by a pirate transaction – tanner for sanguillen
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/sanguma01.shtml#trans
by mocasdad on Oct 18, 2009 10:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And...
Sanguillen came right back to Pittsburgh a year later.
by IAPiratesFan on Oct 18, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And he's still there
making sandwiches.
by patthatt on Oct 20, 2009 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does it really matter?
To me, this seems like the odds-on favorite to be the offseason story that will be blown waaaaaaay out of proportion relative to its actual bearing on the team, similar to last year’s “Will they re-sign Dougie M?” firestorm. I mean, a great infield coach is not going to make the difference between 65 wins and 80 wins. Look at the Rockies… did Jim Tracy suddenly become Connie Mack or something? Or maaaaybe it’s the players. But of course, the PBC blog is going to be on fire over this, and suddenly this will be the equivalent of losing Bonds.
by Jeffasaurus on Oct 18, 2009 11:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Pirates had the best defense in baseball last year, at least statistically.
Last year under Hill, their error count dropped by 34…and that’s with Jack and Freddy missing considerable time and then being traded. Delwyn Young was working his ass off with him every day, as was Andy LaRoche for a while.
LaRoche, Young, Doumit, Milledge, and Moss all benefited from having Hill around. To the naked eye, all of them improved noticeably over the course of the season.
Losing him is not the same as losing a 40 year old journeyman utility player.
by Suffering Buc on Oct 18, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Statistically perhaps
But the Pirates weren’t even close to tops in the league defensively if you go beyond the fielding percentage.
by Slizeezyc on Oct 18, 2009 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even if you just look at errors, it’s hard to say it was all Hill. The infield committed 26 fewer errors, but a lot of that was the result of personnel changes. In 2008, the Pirates had 17 errors at short from Bixler, Gomez and Rivas, none of whom should have been playing there. In 2009, Gomez and Rivas were gone, and Bixler started only ten games there as opposed to over 30. Outside of Vazquez, the playing time at short went to actual shortstops, and Vazquez had only one error probably because he rarely got to anything. The 2008 team also had seven errors at third from Mientkiewicz, who didn’t belong there, either. Also, Wilson played only six more games at short for the Bucs in 2009 than in 2008, when he missed half the season, and Sanchez was playing hurt much of 2008.
The improvement in the OF was much larger than in the IF. Outfield errors went from 27 to 7. That’s a reduction of 74%, compared to 38% in the infield. Those are both great improvements, but it’s hard to say the Pirates led the NL in fielding pct. because of Hill when the biggest improvement was in the OF.
by WTM on Oct 18, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Best defense in baseball" - statistically?
Bull.
Defensive Efficiency Rating (the percentage of balls in play that turn into outs – about as basic a defensive stat as you can have) ranks us 22nd.
The defense was improved in 2009, and Hill probably deserves some credit for that improvement, but on the whole we were not some kind of elite fielding squad. We started the year that way, but benched or traded many of our best gloves along the way (Jack, Nyjer, Moss, Jaramillo, etc.), and gave starting jobs to several extremely poor fielders (particularly Jones and Young). As such, barring further peronnel changes before 2010, our team D is due for further dropoff next year.
by Vlad on Oct 18, 2009 5:27 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Didn’t Hill coach for the Marlins for several years until a couple years ago? Their IF defense has been notoriously bad for a long time. Hill couldn’t turn Miguel Cabrera into an acceptable thirdbaseman.
by WTM on Oct 19, 2009 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hill's coaching record:
Texas, 1992-1995
Detroit: 1997-1998
Montreal: 2000-2001
Florida: 2002-2006
Us: 2009
He was in semi-retirement after leaving the Marlins, and it’s possible that he’ll just hang ’em up. We had to lobby him pretty hard (for more than a year) to get him to come back with us in the first place.
by Vlad on Oct 19, 2009 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
2006 Marlins:
1B Mike Jacobs — 7 errors
2B Dan Uggla — 15
3B Miguel Cabrera — 17
SS Hanley Ramirez — 26
As a team, the Marlins had the third most errors and third lowest fldg. pct. They were 11th in defensive efficiency.
That’s not to say Hill isn’t a good coach, only that you can’t simply look at one year’s error total and conclude all that much about one coach.
by WTM on Oct 19, 2009 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seems like a chicken salad/chicken shit kind of situation.
Even with the best coaching in the world, I’m not sure that any of those guys are ever going to be Gold Glovers.
by Vlad on Oct 20, 2009 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perry Hill
must have so much trouble with his joints the way he hobbles around the field that it makes you wonder if he would need motorized support to get on and off the field in the near future anyway.
Hey, Perry, call the Scooter Store!
by patthatt on Oct 20, 2009 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He helped Doumit, Milledge, and Moss? Was he the outfield instructor as well?
The Bucs were 8th in team UZR, which isn’t the best. That’s as bad as claiming that Bay, Nady, and McLouth were the best outfield in the baseball.
by Adam Reynolds on Oct 19, 2009 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They all benefited, but it’s not like this would have been only a 40 win team without him.
by Jeffasaurus on Oct 18, 2009 1:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think that the identity of the infield coach is of great pressing concern…
what does worry me a bit is how often we hear stories about how management has given assurances that it didn’t keep… perry hill is told he’s going to be coaching one group of infielders, then he’s not… eric hinske thinks he’s getting regular playing time, then he’s not… nate mclouth thinks he’s going to be here for three years, then he’s not…
it’s not that any of these choices were wrong or that NH is alone in baseball when it comes to acting out of pure unabashed self-interest, but these types of stories are starting to accumulate and in conjunction with the messy feuds with agents (boras, plummer), it makes me wonder if whatever bridges are burned won’t come back to hurt the pirates…
by Captain Easychord on Oct 18, 2009 3:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The examples you cite...
…simply seemlike cases of the team changing its plans when circumstances change around them. Which is, IMO, exactly what they should be doing- looking for new opportunities to improve and taking advantage of them when they present themselves.
What’s the alternative here? Them saying, “Yeah, an Atlanta offer of Heyward and Freeman for Maholm is a metric buttload of value, but we can’t trade Paul because we described him as a ‘building block’ and it might hurt some fans’ feelings if we changed the plan.”?
by Vlad on Oct 18, 2009 5:36 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Hinkse?
PT?
pfffft.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Oct 18, 2009 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
was there a problem with Boras this year? Who was he representing?
by BlindSquirrel on Oct 18, 2009 9:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't there always a problem with Boras? BTW, he was reppin the east side holmes...
"So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded?! Yea. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets so a sample. There are 4 of us an you're retarded. Thats 25 percent." Southpark; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce
by gorillakilla34 on Oct 19, 2009 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plans are fluid. What the organization stated about McLouth or whatever isn’t a lie. Its what they felt or believed…at the time. But things change-they felt they could turn McLouth a decent player but no building block, into 2 young pitchers and a good young outfielder. Do the math…that would give them more good players, which is something they need.
As far as feuds with agents, well…all teams hate Boras. But they have to deal with him since he represents most of the best players. Frankly, I like this front office cause their not afraid to hurt feelings or make tough decisions.
by NastyNate82 on Oct 19, 2009 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perry Hill
Here’s the way I see it…
When he came on (or after that) Perry was told something that later proved to be a lie. I don’t doubt it a bit. Though I like what FC and NH have done, they have not always told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. For example, the Pedro Alvarez 2 minute late signing thing. After denying that the signing was late for some time, FC & NH came out and admitted it was a few minutes after the deadline. I noticed a few other similar kind of things in the last year or so (can’t remember other examples but noticed at the time), . Small lies or convenient lies are lies, which indicate a basis character flaw.
Same thing with the Sano deal. I don’t believe NH’s side entirely. If Sano’s agent had actually believed we would beat MIN offer, it would be dereliction of duty for the agent not to have listened.
Saying that, we all do this same type of thing, just not in as public a forum. It would be better just to admit our mistakes (hold ourselves accountable) rather than to lay the blame on someone or something else when things go wrong.
I’m sure this is what happened with Perry Hill. After he was lied to he lost all credibility for the upper management of the Pirates.
Ever been lied to by your boss or co-worker? Still feel the same about them after that? Perry Hill had the option to tell them to take a hike for what they did to him and exercised that option…
by God Loves on Oct 19, 2009 10:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Plummer has publicly stated he would not have signed with the Pirates, even if they beat the Twins’ offer.
Huntington has admitted mistakes on several occasions. He called the Snell contract a mistake, and he talked at length about his regrets on the Torres trade.
I think Huntington has been extremely candid with the fan base, almost to a fault.
Pittsburgh Lumber Co.
http://mvn.com/pittsburghlumberco
by MBandi on Oct 19, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hi Matt
I’m not talking about being candid, I’m talking about being lied to…
I don’t doubt that Hill was lied to. I don’t know to what extent or if he was told something he shouldn’t have been told, but it was bad enough that I think Hill does not trust FC and/or NH anymore. Considering what was probably offered by them it’s obvious that he doesn’t want anything to do with the Pirates as a result of what happened.
In spring training when I was there, Hill was as happy as anyone, a joy to be around and to talk to. That was not the case at the end of the year, I’d think.
by God Loves on Oct 19, 2009 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I don't know
how you can be so sure that Hill was lied to. The only things Hill has publicly complained about are trades of Freddy and Jack, and he never said that management lied, just that he was unhappy and surprised that those guys were traded.
I personally find it very hard to believe that management promised Perry Hill that they wouldn’t trade a couple of veteran infielders who were nearing the end of their contracts. Would a GM really make a promise like that to an infield coach? Doesn’t sound right to me.
by maguro on Oct 19, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If NH “guaranteed” Hill that Sanchez and Wilson would be traded, and Hill believed him, Hill is a fool. Which is another way of saying it didn’t happen. There were rumors last winter that the Pirates would like to trade Wilson and that he didn’t get traded only because there was no interest. I also recall it being discussed many times that Wilson and Sanchez might be candidates to go at the deadline. And everybody expected Adam LaRoche to go by the deadline. Somewhere during all that, Hill signed with the Pirates. All that time, I don’t remember anybody saying they wouldn’t be traded because Perry Hill had been guaranteed they wouldn’t.
by WTM on Oct 19, 2009 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was referring to your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs. It sounded like you thought NH was being dishonest about the Sano situation, and you wanted him to admit his mistakes. My apologies if I misunderstood.
I don’t know what was told to Hill when he joined the staff. But like others have said, it’s bad business to stick to a poor plan, regardless of what’s been “promised” to different coaches and players.
Pittsburgh Lumber Co.
http://mvn.com/pittsburghlumberco
by MBandi on Oct 19, 2009 3:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Sounds like
a lotta sour grapes to me.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Oct 19, 2009 5:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Paraphrasing Mike Tomlin...
All this fuss about Hill is nonsense! Paraphrasing Mike Tomlin as something NH could state; “Every time that I walk into my office I pass 5 World Championship Trophies not 5 Infield Coach Of The Year Awards!”
by tjc on Oct 19, 2009 5:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Something Peed Hill Off
To the extent that an extended contract and a probable raise was not enough to get him to stay.
He has been nothing but professional, working his tail off with DY and the others to the last minute of the season.
Hill did not publicly state why he left, maintaining his professionalism.
I am not advocating that he is or would be a great difference in the team next year, that he is a savior or anything like that. I’m just saying that something ticked him off, and I believe it was that he was lied to by upper management in some way.
by God Loves on Oct 19, 2009 9:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It's fine.....
that you believe that. But, there is NO evidence that that is the case. So, let’s just be clear about that. You are just hypothesizing.
by dtoddwin on Oct 19, 2009 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since he didn’t coach in 2007 or 2008, I guess the Marlins must have told him an incredible whopper.
by WTM on Oct 20, 2009 1:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only evidence...
is an insinuation from DK that the front office (Coonelly IIRRC) told Hill that we would not be going through a “major” rebuild. This was before the 08 season. In fact, at that time that was pretty much the line the front office was taking publicly. DK strongly insinuated that Hill was upset when both Sanchez and Wilson were dealt because he had been assured there would be no major overhaul of the roster. Tons of conjecture there and nothing I would consider to be concrete evedince but DK reportedly talked to Hill many times and lot of what was said was “off the record”. From those articles you get the impression that DK knows more than he is reporting. Howevr, the fact of the matter is, since the McClouth trade DK has added more fuel to the fire than he has objective reporting IMO. The final straw for me was when he implied that Russell pulled Duke to prevent him from getting a complete game to keep his arbitration cost down.
If the front office is guilty of anything it’s having Coonelly making too many public statements. Wasn’t Coonelly the one that called McClouth a core player? I think it would benefit the organization for him to become a silent President. You hear more about Coonelly than any other President in baseball.
by Slick1 on Oct 20, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Part of the reason we hear more from him...
…is that we pay more attention to the Pirates than to other teams. There are other franchises whose Presidents take similarly vocal roles.
by Vlad on Oct 20, 2009 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
