PDA

View Full Version : Chapman, Leake, and Boxberger



bowles8
03-06-2010, 04:26 PM
Where do you guys possibly see these 3 starting the season at?????

Scrap Irony
03-06-2010, 04:29 PM
Chapman at either AAA or in Cincinnati (depending on his dominance in Spring Training), Leake in AA (then soon up to Louisville, if he dominates, someone struggles, or Chapman is sent up to Cincinnati), and Boxberger in Dayton (with a mid-season promotion to Lynchburg if he does well).

dougdirt
03-06-2010, 05:01 PM
Boxberger - Lynchburg
Leake - Carolina
Chapman - somewhere between Carolina and Cincinnati. Depends on his performance this spring.

Scrap Irony
03-06-2010, 05:20 PM
doug,

You don't think they'll throw Dayton a bone with Boxberger, especially considering how poor that team looks to be? They have in the past.

dougdirt
03-06-2010, 05:37 PM
doug,

You don't think they'll throw Dayton a bone with Boxberger, especially considering how poor that team looks to be? They have in the past.

I think its pretty telling that he wasn't in any of the Dragons previews. That tells me that they aren't expecting him there at all.

Newport Red
03-06-2010, 06:26 PM
Was Boxberger invited to spring training?

dougdirt
03-07-2010, 01:33 PM
Was Boxberger invited to spring training?

Not with the big club.

Betterread
03-07-2010, 10:41 PM
Chapman - AA or AAA depending on what he needs to work on.
Leake - high A with a easy justification for AA
Boxberger - high A

RED VAN HOT
03-08-2010, 02:47 PM
It seems to me that there is no penalty in starting a pitcher too low, but there could be one in starting him too high.

From what I have read, Leake has the command to start at AA. It seems wise to me to start Chapman at Lynchburg. There will be less pressure, he can work on the art of pitching, and he can still end up in Louisville by August. Knowing nothing about Boxberger beyond his good fastball, I would lean toward starting him at Dayton.

muddie
03-08-2010, 05:07 PM
I have read, granted it was a while back, that the organization already had Leake starting here at AA Carolina. I think that makes sense.

I could see Chapman getting a few starts here as well and then being in Louisville mid May or so. I do not want to see Chapman's timetable dictated by successes or failures by the current starters slated for the major league level now.

I'll go with Boxberger being in Lynchburg to start and in Carolina around mid season.

Redlegs Homer
03-08-2010, 06:53 PM
Who are players I am damn excited to see play in Cincy?

JKam
03-08-2010, 07:26 PM
I know it has been mentioned that Chapman has a clean arm - almost no wear and tear that we've seen other Cuban defector pitchers have - but do we know how many innings he's thrown the past couple of years? For example, we don't want him going from say 90ip to 180ip if he starts from day 1 in Cincy.

dougdirt
03-08-2010, 09:25 PM
I know it has been mentioned that Chapman has a clean arm - almost no wear and tear that we've seen other Cuban defector pitchers have - but do we know how many innings he's thrown the past couple of years? For example, we don't want him going from say 90ip to 180ip if he starts from day 1 in Cincy.

Yes. He pitched something in the range of 120 in his last season in Cuba. Which means he shouldn't be pushed past about 150 this year.

JKam
03-08-2010, 09:53 PM
Yes. He pitched something in the range of 120 in his last season in Cuba. Which means he shouldn't be pushed past about 150 this year.

So if that is the case, he really shouldn't be starting the season in Cincy unless they plan to shut him down in August or pitch him out of the bullpen at some point.

Plus Plus
03-08-2010, 11:22 PM
So if that is the case, he really shouldn't be starting the season in Cincy unless they plan to shut him down in August or pitch him out of the bullpen at some point.

Isn't 150ip about what a MLB 5th starter would throw in a season, if they weren't hurt or sent down? Looking at previous Reds seasons, 5th starters seem to throw somewhere between 80 and 120 innings (never more than 120 in the last 10 years), so even if Chapman was a monster who never got hurt and threw like Randy Johnson he probably wouldn't throw more than 120-140 innings while on a 5th starter's schedule.

paulrichjr
03-08-2010, 11:30 PM
Isn't 150ip about what a MLB 5th starter would throw in a season, if they weren't hurt or sent down? Looking at previous Reds seasons, 5th starters seem to throw somewhere between 80 and 120 innings (never more than 120 in the last 10 years), so even if Chapman was a monster who never got hurt and threw like Randy Johnson he probably wouldn't throw more than 120-140 innings while on a 5th starter's schedule.

Uhh our 5th starters in the past shouldn't be used for this...they were lucky to get out of the 4th inning most of the time.

Plus Plus
03-09-2010, 12:52 AM
Uhh our 5th starters in the past shouldn't be used for this...they were lucky to get out of the 4th inning most of the time.

Although I think this is meant as a joke, I went ahead and looked it up- the last 10 years of 5th starter production for the Reds, Cubs, Cardinals, and Yankees- just for some variation.

There were only five times where a 5th starter got more than 150 innings- 2000, 2004 and 2005 Cardinals rotations, 2001 Cubs rotation, 2003 Yankees rotation. However, this means that only 5/40 times a 5th starter got what could be called a "dangerous" workload re: Chapman. I am also not listing the large number of times (probably more than 20, but I don't want to look it up again right now) where even the 4th starter on teams didn't sniff 150 innings. I don't foresee any issues with his workload passing 150 innings if he is the Reds 5th starter all season long.

Bumstead
03-09-2010, 10:58 AM
It really depends on who your 5th starter is vs who your 1st starter is. If your 5th starter is horrible then you skip him as much as possible. Or if your #1 is Johan you get him as many starts as possible by skipping the #5 slot when off-days allow it.

Kingspoint
03-09-2010, 02:49 PM
There's no choice other than to start Chapman in the Minors no matter how well he performs in ST.

Because the REDS are going to have to medically study his arm over a period of months while he has a series of starts in regular season games.

They can't do this at the Major Leauge level as his playing time would hinge on situation and Dusty Baker, along with the fact that they'd find it hard to control what he throws.

The REDS have very little information on Chapman's "exact" past as far as innings pitched, what he threw in those starts, etc., etc..

The REDS are going to have to have him throw in the minors under "controlled conditions"; and, then they'll peform ongoing medical tests to see how his arm reacts.

Only after they have this information can they come up with a "plan for his future that includes letting him loose in the Majors".

Any plan other than this is not prudent, and they didn't invest all of that money so that he can throw one season and then have an injury.

While he's in the minors, they are also going to tweek his mechanics so that his arm lasts through the life of the contract, and so he can get to 210-220 innings on a regular basis without fear of harm to the arm.

The REDS are going to be very, very careful with this "child".

It's practically like adopting a kid from Africa. You're going to spend the first year doing all types of adjustments both medically and physically to the child.

Bumstead
03-09-2010, 03:35 PM
Plus Chapman's contract accelerates if he is in the majors before May 15th, so he won't see the majors until after that at least.

camisadelgolf
03-09-2010, 03:48 PM
Plus Chapman's contract accelerates if he is in the majors before May 15th, so he won't see the majors until after that at least.
There hasn't been any definitive proof of that. I think that was mis-reported by someone.

texasdave
03-09-2010, 04:08 PM
The REDS have very little information on Chapman's "exact" past as far as innings pitched, what he threw in those starts, etc., etc..


Couldn't they just ask Chapman himself what he threw and for how long he threw? It would seem to me that the Reds would have a very good idea as to his workload in the past.

membengal
03-09-2010, 04:23 PM
No. He's a cipher. Like the Allspark in Transformers. They stand around, staring at Chapman, unsure what to do, how to make him work for the good of all humanity, worried that if they do something wrong, all manner of electronics and machines will come to life as Deceptagons.

Frankly, we should all be terrified. Except those of us that get to hang with Megan Fox.

Kingspoint
03-09-2010, 07:10 PM
Bryan Price's comments on Chapman:

"It’s not unrealistic to see (him making the club)," said Price. "But in the same respect, there’s a lot of spring to go. There’s a lot of decisions to be made. I don’t think that decision is going to be made until we get a lot closer to the end, and there’s a lot more involved than performance. But, right now, I hope he forces our hand."

REDblooded
03-10-2010, 12:01 AM
Bryan Price's comments on Chapman:

"Itís not unrealistic to see (him making the club)," said Price. "But in the same respect, thereís a lot of spring to go. Thereís a lot of decisions to be made. I donít think that decision is going to be made until we get a lot closer to the end, and thereís a lot more involved than performance. But, right now, I hope he forces our hand."

Such as contract...

redsof72
03-10-2010, 09:42 AM
Re: Chapman on the opening day roster: The contract question is THE question right now. If the reports are true that an appearance in the big leagues before May 15 would trigger a clause in his contract that would void the final two years while keeping the monetary value the same, then there is no chance whatsoever that he sees a day in the majors before May 15. Zero chance. Zilch. The Reds would then have to pay him for those two years over and above what they are already paying him. It would cost the Reds roughly $20 million to have the use of Chapman for six weeks. Ain't happening, no matter what he does in the spring.

We have heard about this contract clause. Has anyone seen it from a credible source, such as John Fay? I would like to see Fay or someone else get to the bottom of it.

Scrap Irony
03-10-2010, 09:58 AM
Re: Chapman on the opening day roster: The contract question is THE question right now. If the reports are true that an appearance in the big leagues before May 15 would trigger a clause in his contract that would void the final two years while keeping the monetary value the same, then there is no chance whatsoever that he sees a day in the majors before May 15. Zero chance. Zilch. The Reds would then have to pay him for those two years over and above what they are already paying him. It would cost the Reds roughly $20 million to have the use of Chapman for six weeks. Ain't happening, no matter what he does in the spring.

We have heard about this contract clause. Has anyone seen it from a credible source, such as John Fay? I would like to see Fay or someone else get to the bottom of it.

It's not true. If it were, every news source in America would run it. You cannot trust one-source news "agencies" like AOL and FanHouse. Almost anyone can "report" the news by simply making crap up.

(EDIT: After reading the above, I realize it sounds harsher than it should. I should say that I will believe it when I see a reputable news agency cover it as fact. With quotes, preferrably, from Jocketty and the Reds.)

The Chapman contract is at Cot's.

Does Chapman get more money if he's successful? Sure. (And deservedly so.) Will he somehow be able to void years of service and become a free agent early?

Not a chance.

dougdirt
03-10-2010, 01:36 PM
Scrap, the clause was reported by Jeff Passan at Yahoo sports. However it was fairly unclear about whether he was talking about Super 2 status or not, but it seems he was. The Reds know that they run a big risk of Chapman becoming a Super 2 if they call him up in April, and potentially only controlling him for 2010-2014 instead of waiting until June 1st and controlling him from June 1st 2010-2016. That is a giant difference that two months is going to make.

Scrap Irony
03-10-2010, 06:38 PM
Reasons to doubt Passan's "report":

Yahoo has a one source news policy and has made numerous mistakes in the past.
No reputable news agency has picked up on Chapman's contract, other than what has been reported through Cot's.
The collective bargaining agreement gives teams six years for players.
No team has ever "given away" free agency years before.
If the Reds indeed have given up years, at least one news agency would have interviewed Selig and MLB on the originality (and their opinion of) the contract. None has.

I just cannot believe all of this would be ignored if the contract is indeed as Passan states. Common sense dictates it to be false.

GIDP
03-10-2010, 07:03 PM
Leake is looking good so far this spring.

dougdirt
03-10-2010, 07:09 PM
Reasons to doubt Passan's "report":

Yahoo has a one source news policy and has made numerous mistakes in the past.
No reputable news agency has picked up on Chapman's contract, other than what has been reported through Cot's.
The collective bargaining agreement gives teams six years for players.
No team has ever "given away" free agency years before.
If the Reds indeed have given up years, at least one news agency would have interviewed Selig and MLB on the originality (and their opinion of) the contract. None has.

I just cannot believe all of this would be ignored if the contract is indeed as Passan states. Common sense dictates it to be false.
Every 'news' source has made numerous mistakes in the past. Does this mean you believe nothing unless you saw it with your own eyes?

And its never been giving away those years, just paying more for the first 3 years. Teams do indeed do that.

Scrap Irony
03-10-2010, 07:52 PM
Every 'news' source has made numerous mistakes in the past. Does this mean you believe nothing unless you saw it with your own eyes?

Let me rephrase and simplify, then:

Yahoo "news" has made so many mistakes in the past decade so as not to be trusted. They are (once again) a "single source" news agency, much like TMZ and The National Enquirer. Does that mean they get everything wrong? No. Does it mean they get more stuff wrong than almost any other agency?

Yep.

dougdirt
03-10-2010, 07:56 PM
Let me rephrase and simplify, then:

Yahoo "news" has made so many mistakes in the past decade so as not to be trusted. They are (once again) a "single source" news agency, much like TMZ and The National Enquirer. Does that mean they get everything wrong? No. Does it mean they get more stuff wrong than almost any other agency?

Yep.

I have to ask what you are basing this on? Where has Passan been wrong so much more in the past than others?

Regardless of it all, the point still remains, if you keep Chapman down until June 1 you get him from June 1 2010 until the end of the 2016 season. If you bring Chapman up in April, he could qualify as a Super 2, costing you more money up front (because the entire contract gets pushed forward and then he becomes arbitration eligible) and you would only then get him from 2010-2014 before he reaches free agency.

BLEEDS
03-10-2010, 08:18 PM
I have to ask what you are basing this on? Where has Passan been wrong so much more in the past than others?

Regardless of it all, the point still remains, if you keep Chapman down until June 1 you get him from June 1 2010 until the end of the 2016 season. If you bring Chapman up in April, he could qualify as a Super 2, costing you more money up front (because the entire contract gets pushed forward and then he becomes arbitration eligible) and you would only then get him from 2010-2014 before he reaches free agency.

Well it's pretty reasonable to assume that he'll become Arbitration eligible before his option year of 2015, likely after the 2013 season. So his $3M 2014 salary becomes a bonus, then he goes to Arbitration.

Effectively that makes his contract a 4 year $25M deal.
Then he is arbitration eligible for years 2014 and 2015, and then would become FA eligible for 2016 (I think?).
I would imagine at that point they would offer him some sort of long-term contract when he first becomes arbitration eligible.

PEACE

membengal
03-10-2010, 08:33 PM
Whhheeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Mooooooorrrreeeee connnnntttrrrraaaaaccccctttt tttttaaaalllllkkkkkkkkkk!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Scrap Irony
03-10-2010, 08:38 PM
You're looking at this bass-akwards, doug. If Passan were right, every news agency in baseball would be talking about it.

They're not.

Ergo, he's (likely) wrong.

dougdirt
03-10-2010, 08:45 PM
You're looking at this bass-akwards, doug. If Passan were right, every news agency in baseball would be talking about it.

They're not.

Ergo, he's (likely) wrong.

Or he was simply talking about the super 2 ramifications which have been talked about by everyone and line up perfectly with what Passan has said. Maybe he worded it funny, but either way, what he said is going to have the same result even if the cause isn't exactly the same (Super 2, clause in the contract).

Kc61
03-11-2010, 10:46 AM
Where do you guys possibly see these 3 starting the season at?????

Leake should start at AAA. It's a waste of time to send him to lower levels. He's a very poised and polished pitcher. He would thrive with the excellent Louisville team the Reds likely will have.

I see no reason to start Leake below the AAA level.

Chapman should also begin at AAA. Let him pitch some games at AAA, then pitch in the Reds' pen for awhile, then in the rotation later in the season.

Boxberger, him I know less about, likely High A to begin.

But mainly I think Leake is ready for one year of AAA ball then the show.

lollipopcurve
03-11-2010, 11:34 AM
Leake should start at AAA. It's a waste of time to send him to lower levels. He's a very poised and polished pitcher. He would thrive with the excellent Louisville team the Reds likely will have.

I see no reason to start Leake below the AAA level.

Chapman should also begin at AAA. Let him pitch some games at AAA, then pitch in the Reds' pen for awhile, then in the rotation later in the season.

Boxberger, him I know less about, likely High A to begin.

But mainly I think Leake is ready for one year of AAA ball then the show.

I tend to agree. But it's still too early to feel absolutely certain. We're a week into ST games.

Kingspoint
03-11-2010, 07:10 PM
Plus Chapman's contract accelerates if he is in the majors before May 15th, so he won't see the majors until after that at least.

I didn't know that. And, if that's true, and the points Doug makes about June1st, it only makes sense to have him under a microscope under conditions the REDS control until June 1st. What a perfect time to add a boost to the club.

I read where someone said he hadn't pitched in organized baseball in a year? Is that true? Was his arm dormant for that long?

I'd much rather have him under controlled circumstances in the minors until June 1st, and limit his innings this year to around 150-160 than to have him approach 190-200 innings. I'd like to have him around six years from now.

Will M
03-11-2010, 10:02 PM
I tend to agree. But it's still too early to feel absolutely certain. We're a week into ST games.

my brain: you are absolutely right.

my heart: World Series baby! Hope springs eternal.

redsof72
03-12-2010, 10:16 AM
I am not sold on Leake yet. Not saying I am necessarily a doubter, just not sold yet. I saw his outing Wednesday on TV. His stuff is average. He had a tremendous year in 09, we know that. We also know he is a first round pick, meaning he and Kip Wells are on even terms in that regard. I want to see something from Leake before I jump on the bandwagon.

I think starting him in Double-A might be a bit high and maybe a bit of a gamble. I would rather see him follow the course that Alonso took last season...first couple of months in Lynchburg. Last thing you want to see is Leake go to Double-A and get hit hard. He doesn't have to stuff to blow anyone away. No one has projected him to be more than a # 3 starter. Why do we think he is going to set the world on fire right out of the gate?

He has pitched well in two spring games. We know that means very little at this point of the spring. Hitters have no timing. Finesse pitchers usually perform well early in the spring if they can get their breaking ball over. Spring results have to be weighed carefully. Otherwise, Josias Manzanillo would have represented the Reds in the 2003 all-star game after he went the whole spring without allowing a run and made the club.

dougdirt
03-12-2010, 12:45 PM
I am not sold on Leake yet. Not saying I am necessarily a doubter, just not sold yet. I saw his outing Wednesday on TV. His stuff is average. He had a tremendous year in 09, we know that. We also know he is a first round pick, meaning he and Kip Wells are on even terms in that regard. I want to see something from Leake before I jump on the bandwagon.

I think starting him in Double-A might be a bit high and maybe a bit of a gamble. I would rather see him follow the course that Alonso took last season...first couple of months in Lynchburg. Last thing you want to see is Leake go to Double-A and get hit hard. He doesn't have to stuff to blow anyone away. No one has projected him to be more than a # 3 starter. Why do we think he is going to set the world on fire right out of the gate?

He has pitched well in two spring games. We know that means very little at this point of the spring. Hitters have no timing. Finesse pitchers usually perform well early in the spring if they can get their breaking ball over. Spring results have to be weighed carefully. Otherwise, Josias Manzanillo would have represented the Reds in the 2003 all-star game after he went the whole spring without allowing a run and made the club.

Leake is much like the Alonso of pitchers. No 'superstar' tool, but very good across the board. Leake has an above average fastball, plus slider, above average change up, average curveball and plus control. While starting him in Lynchburg wouldn't hurt, I don't think he will struggle to start in Carolina either.

As for his projection of a #3 starter.... its all based on stuff. There are plenty of #1 and #2 starters out there who don't have #1 or #2 'stuff', who get the job done as #1 and #2 pitchers.

I wouldn't exactly lump Leake in there as a finesse pitcher. Bronson Arroyo is a finesse pitcher, who gets by on a high 80's fastball. Leake threw more 92 MPH fastball's in one game last season in the AFL than Arroyo threw all season long. I think Leake's polish somehow gets his fastball underplayed. He work 88-92 and gets up to 94 MPH. Plus fastball? No. But its not a finesse pitch either. Combined with its movement, its a well above average pitch.

redsof72
03-12-2010, 01:29 PM
I want to see the plus slider. Not that I am doubting he has it. But I am looking forward to seeing it. 88-92 is a pretty big range.

BLEEDS
03-12-2010, 01:37 PM
Well put Doug. I guess that's why you do this for a semi-living (or at least hobby?).

I definitely don't see him as a "finesse" pitcher. Just because he doesn't throw 100 MPH doesn't mean he's finesse. He can get it up to 94MPH, but 90-ish with movement and control is more impressive. That'll "blow away" more hitters than guys who just throw heat by people.

I think he would dominate AA hitters. At worse he starts out there, and quickly moves to AAA.
I think only the fact that Maloney pitched in the bigs last year gives him the upper hand at this point. He did look better in his second call up, although he still gives up the gopher ball at an alarming rate. I think that is going to continue to be a problem for him.

Leake is a groundball-inducing machine.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsof72
03-12-2010, 02:13 PM
From the Baseball America Handbook: ...With a mostly average fastball, Leake has little margin for error, and a lower ceiling than his college dominance might indicate...

Again, my point is, I want to see it before I start jumping on the bandwagon. Ryan Wagner's scouting report looked pretty good coming out of college. I am not casting doubt. I just want to see it.

Baseball America also says pitches at 88-92. That is a huge range. That's everyone from Josh Ravin to Matt Fairel. Ravin was 91-92. Fairel was 88-89. How hard does he really throw?

He will dominate Double-A hitters? I spent eight years working with a Double-A team and I am trying to think of one guy who came straight out of college and dominated. I guess Mark Pryor. That's about it. Pryor was considered a once-in-a-lifetime talent at that time.

I am really looking forward to seeing what Leake does once the bell rings.

OnBaseMachine
03-12-2010, 03:13 PM
I saw Leake strikeout Erick Aybar on a nasty slider in Wednesday's game. I was very impressed with his stuff. Everything he threw was at the knees. I think we're going to see him in Cincy at some point in the 2010 season.

krm1580
03-12-2010, 04:01 PM
From the Baseball America Handbook: ...With a mostly average fastball, Leake has little margin for error, and a lower ceiling than his college dominance might indicate...

Again, my point is, I want to see it before I start jumping on the bandwagon. Ryan Wagner's scouting report looked pretty good coming out of college. I am not casting doubt. I just want to see it.

Baseball America also says pitches at 88-92. That is a huge range. That's everyone from Josh Ravin to Matt Fairel. Ravin was 91-92. Fairel was 88-89. How hard does he really throw?

He will dominate Double-A hitters? I spent eight years working with a Double-A team and I am trying to think of one guy who came straight out of college and dominated. I guess Mark Pryor. That's about it. Pryor was considered a once-in-a-lifetime talent at that time.

I am really looking forward to seeing what Leake does once the bell rings.

I think you raise a valid point and I would agree with you. I am also intrigued as to how he will do.

The excitment around a guy like Chapman is that there is plenty of room for improvement when (or if) he learns mature skills like command and changing speeds.

Leake on the other hand already has advanced command and pitchability. Barring regular usage of Barry Bonds brand flaxseed oil, he pretty close to his ceiling now. It will be interesting to see how his stuff plays

Kingspoint
03-12-2010, 06:34 PM
Leake is a groundball-inducing machine.



Which is what this team needs badly.

Too many of the REDS' starting pitchers are flyball pitchers while we have a park where you want your pitchers to be groundball pitchers. Nothing frustrates a hitter more than not being able to get the ball out of the infield. We didn't trade for Rolen because of his bat, but because of his improved Defense over Encarnacion while being able to give us an average bat, at least.

Jockety is trying really hard to upgrade the infield and outfield defense so that our pitchers can have a chance.

Spring~Fields
03-12-2010, 10:28 PM
Leake should start at AAA. It's a waste of time to send him to lower levels. He's a very poised and polished pitcher. He would thrive with the excellent Louisville team the Reds likely will have.

I see no reason to start Leake below the AAA level.

Chapman should also begin at AAA. Let him pitch some games at AAA, then pitch in the Reds' pen for awhile, then in the rotation later in the season.

Boxberger, him I know less about, likely High A to begin.

But mainly I think Leake is ready for one year of AAA ball then the show.

I agree with you until proven otherwise. I agree with the others on a delay of Chapman due to the years issue, that the would Reds would have him longer with a bit of a delay.

bellhead
03-13-2010, 06:08 PM
Chapman starts at AAA depending on his control, and his form. I think the one thing nobody has mentioned is whether he has the same release point on every pitch? Can anybody shed some light on his release point and mechanics do they need to be tightened up?

Leake starts at AAA. This is I think one level or a level and a half higher than college ball.

BoxBerger AA. This is about a half a level higher than the top 25 of college ball. He will be seeing guys that would be the 456 hitters in college at every spot at this level and it will be interesting to see how he responds.

dougdirt
03-13-2010, 06:42 PM
Chapman starts at AAA depending on his control, and his form. I think the one thing nobody has mentioned is whether he has the same release point on every pitch? Can anybody shed some light on his release point and mechanics do they need to be tightened up?

Leake starts at AAA. This is I think one level or a level and a half higher than college ball.

BoxBerger AA. This is about a half a level higher than the top 25 of college ball. He will be seeing guys that would be the 456 hitters in college at every spot at this level and it will be interesting to see how he responds.

I asked Frankie Piliere about Chapman's mechanics and release point earlier this spring after he watched him throw and he said it all looked good for the most part. Every now and again he got out of that spot, but that is going to happen with everyone.

Boxberger looks like he is going to start in Lynchburg.

As for college ball, at most, its comparable to rookie ball. There are guys on every team in college that couldn't cut it in rookie ball.

bellhead
03-13-2010, 08:12 PM
As for college ball, at most, its comparable to rookie ball. There are guys on every team in college that couldn't cut it in rookie ball.

Agree with you but the metal bats make them a much tougher out.

TheNext44
03-15-2010, 10:37 PM
Here's a slightly different question:

Who is higher on the Reds depth chart? Which one will be the first to throw a pitch in the majors?

dougdirt
03-16-2010, 03:43 AM
Agree with you but the metal bats make them a much tougher out.

Yes, but their lesser skill level makes them an easier out as well.