PDA

View Full Version : Chapman and the Second Nasty



LeDoux
05-21-2010, 03:25 PM
Why couldn't Chapman be used this season a closer? With the way Cordero has been pitching, I would think it was worth a try. The Reds have hedged a little lately, but they have been publicly reluctant about considering a bullpen move. I am sure there is a good reason; I just don't know what it is. Does it work in the opposite direction of building stamina? Is there a greater possibility of injury? I am hoping the reason is not that they are already paying Coco do it.

Nasty Boys II: Chapman-Rhodes-Massett?

Iíd like to see it a go of it.

Vottomatic
05-21-2010, 03:35 PM
I was against this earlier. But I've been pushing for upgrading the bullpen. The bullpen has been very shaky for awhile now. Masset, Cordero and Herrera are unpredictable anymore. Rhodes is about the only one I trust. And Owings for a few innings too.

I might be for giving Chapman a relief role. Not sure he would do any worse, other than Dusty leaving him in to get drilled when he doesn't have it.

mroby85
05-21-2010, 03:38 PM
In this scenario would you be trading Cordero? If not he's been better than Massett. I would prefer to keep the pen the way it is, and use Chapman out of the starting rotation myself, I think the bullpen will work itself out, and would've been fine even yesterday if Lincoln didn't start his 3rd inning of work. The pen hasn't been that bad in my opinion, outside of yesterday. Cordero has been shaky, but he always has been, and was 13/15 before yesterday when he came into a bases loaded situation and gave up a HR on a ball that possibly couldve been caught, hopefully he'll get back on track soon. If you look at the location of that pitch that was hit out, it was out of the strike zone, the guy just hit a tough pitch to hit.

bounty37h
05-21-2010, 03:42 PM
I agree, the Reds think his future is in the rotation, got to get his innings up so we can see if he can hack it, if not, then bullpen.

NorrisHopper30
05-21-2010, 04:02 PM
Cordero will be fine. You just can't bring him in with the bases loaded and one out..that's not how he operates.

sivman17
05-21-2010, 04:58 PM
Chapman is a starter. It would make no sense to throw him into the bullpen, especially the closer role. Sometimes moving back and forth like that can screw up a pitcher mentally and physically.

Not every one is Derek Lowe and John Schmoltz.

1990REDS
05-21-2010, 05:01 PM
Cordero will be fine. You just can't bring him in with the bases loaded and one out..that's not how he operates.

ya hes definatly a "white knuckle" closer but he does get the job done for the most part. Im not to the point yet were im worried about our closer situation.

LeDoux
05-21-2010, 05:13 PM
Cordero will be fine. You just can't bring him in with the bases loaded and one out..that's not how he operates.

I certainly hope you are right. I love watching anyone in a Reds uniform mow down hitters. But I come to put Cordero and Harang in the same boat. Both rely heavily on their fastballs; which, for whatever reason, seems to be very hittable. Without a change in their approach I canít see a reason to change my expectations for their outings. I donít share the same degree of skepticism for Masset. I think he still has some ceiling left to find.

I hope I am wrong about Coco, but I just donít see any reason to hope for better at the moment.

Griffey012
05-21-2010, 05:40 PM
Why couldn't Chapman be used this season a closer? With the way Cordero has been pitching, I would think it was worth a try. The Reds have hedged a little lately, but they have been publicly reluctant about considering a bullpen move. I am sure there is a good reason; I just don't know what it is. Does it work in the opposite direction of building stamina? Is there a greater possibility of injury? I am hoping the reason is not that they are already paying Coco do it.

Nasty Boys II: Chapman-Rhodes-Massett?

Iíd like to see it a go of it.

Cause Chapman has a 3.98 ERA and a 1.549 WHIP in AAA.
Cause Cordero has a 3.60 ERA and a 1.55 WHIP in the MLB.
Cause Cordero has saved 13 of 16 opportunities for an 81.25% rate.
Cause Cordero has saved 86 of 99 opportunities for the Reds, thats an 86.87% rate.
Cause Cordero has come in many times this year and cleaned up the mess everyone not named Rhodes has left.
Cause Cordero is the least of most our worries.

Oh and the #1 reason, because Cordero is better than Champman. Masset, Herrera, and Lincoln are the bigger issues. Rhodes and Owings have been great, and Coco has been mediocre at best, but still not bad.

Mutaman
05-21-2010, 06:24 PM
Chapman is a starter. It would make no sense to throw him into the bullpen, especially the closer role. Sometimes moving back and forth like that can screw up a pitcher mentally and physically.

Not every one is Derek Lowe and John Schmoltz.

Great point. Exhibit A: Joba Chamberlain

LeDoux
05-21-2010, 07:04 PM
Chapman is a starter. It would make no sense to throw him into the bullpen, especially the closer role. Sometimes moving back and forth like that can screw up a pitcher mentally and physically.

Not every one is Derek Lowe and John Schmoltz.

This is what I was asking about. What kind of risks come with moving from starter to bullpen and vice versa? I am not being cheeky, I really don't know what could harm a pitcher's arm (or head) with the change.

redlegs2370
05-22-2010, 10:30 AM
Great question being posed. I have often wondered this myself too. I go back to a small market team (Rays) two years ago and a young left handed pitcher (David Price). He helped them out of the bullpen down the stretch and the last two seasons he went back to starting. Now I don't believe he appeared in too many games as a reliever and were talking about bringing Chapman up in the bullpen now. Just a thought though, two hard throwing young left handers.

The Voice of IH
05-22-2010, 11:22 AM
send Fisher down, Bring Chapman up...when he is ready of course.

Griffey012
05-22-2010, 01:08 PM
Great question being posed. I have often wondered this myself too. I go back to a small market team (Rays) two years ago and a young left handed pitcher (David Price). He helped them out of the bullpen down the stretch and the last two seasons he went back to starting. Now I don't believe he appeared in too many games as a reliever and were talking about bringing Chapman up in the bullpen now. Just a thought though, two hard throwing young left handers.

The difference is, the OP was talking about replacing Cordero with Chapman, which is a much different idea than bringing up Chapman to help out in the pen.

Brownsburg Red
05-22-2010, 02:01 PM
A major key to bullpen success is throwing strikes.

Massett lost Gm 1 in Atlanta because he couldn't throw strikes and took the count full, giving the runner a head start.

Cordero has also had problems throwing strikes at times, but it seems like Chapman has the most trouble throwing strikes of these three.

I can't see bringing Chapman up to close, unless and until his strike ratio improves.

LeDoux
05-22-2010, 02:03 PM
The difference is, the OP was talking about replacing Cordero with Chapman, which is a much different idea than bringing up Chapman to help out in the pen.

This is true. I am looking beyond Cordero. I am also assuming the Reds are looking for ways to remove Coco's 12 million from the payroll. I don't what his market value would be, but I think most would agree he is a more than a trifle overpaid. If it were me I would put Cordero in on save opportunities vs. weak hitters to elevate his stats, but make other arrangements for stronger offensive lineups. Who knows, maybe he could move in a package deal.

Griffey012
05-22-2010, 02:58 PM
This is true. I am looking beyond Cordero. I am also assuming the Reds are looking for ways to remove Coco's 12 million from the payroll. I don't what his market value would be, but I think most would agree he is a more than a trifle overpaid. If it were me I would put Cordero in on save opportunities vs. weak hitters to elevate his stats, but make other arrangements for stronger offensive lineups. Who knows, maybe he could move in a package deal.

As long as we stay in contention we are going to need Cordero though. With Rhodes being our only sure fire reliever, CoCo is our next best, and albeit doing an ugly job sometimes, he more times than not is getting the job done.

Now if we fall out of contention, then Cordero has to be on the block, and we could probably find a suitor with so many teams having bullpen issues in the mlb. And we probably see Chapman hit the rotation towards the end of the season regardless of his AAA numbers.

I think post all-star break we see Volquez in the pen before Chapman.

webbbj
05-22-2010, 11:48 PM
As long as we stay in contention we are going to need Cordero though. With Rhodes being our only sure fire reliever, CoCo is our next best, and albeit doing an ugly job sometimes, he more times than not is getting the job done.

Now if we fall out of contention, then Cordero has to be on the block, and we could probably find a suitor with so many teams having bullpen issues in the mlb. And we probably see Chapman hit the rotation towards the end of the season regardless of his AAA numbers.

I think post all-star break we see Volquez in the pen before Chapman.


thats what i see as well. I dont know how long it will take for volquez to be fully conditioned to throw 6+ innings again but it usually takes about a month or so. in that case he would be more valuable in the pen where he can be a more immediate impact in the MLB instead of getting tuneup starts in the minors.

as long as harang doesnt become a liability i doubt chapman even comes up. it looked like he would be earlier in the year but he has been efficient, nothing great nothing horrible just good enough for the 5th best starter.

LeDoux
05-23-2010, 12:10 AM
[/B]


thats what i see as well. I dont know how long it will take for volquez to be fully conditioned to throw 6+ innings again but it usually takes about a month or so. in that case he would be more valuable in the pen where he can be a more immediate impact in the MLB instead of getting tuneup starts in the minors.

as long as harang doesnt become a liability i doubt chapman even comes up. it looked like he would be earlier in the year but he has been efficient, nothing great nothing horrible just good enough for the 5th best starter.

How about both? I wouldn't want either of their progression to be hurried. But if they are both ready- why not? After all if Chapman isn't going to be used as a starter, why not use some of his inning in a closer role?

webbbj
05-23-2010, 12:19 AM
How about both? I wouldn't want either of their progression to be hurried. But if they are both ready- why not? After all if Chapman isn't going to be used as a starter, why not use some of his inning in a closer role?


i wouldnt put him as closer but definitly set up man in the 8th. they want to use him as a starter for the future maybe they see what happened to Joba chamberlain who was supposed to be a starter but hasnt been able to make the transition from minor league starter to major league releiver to major league starter.

LeDoux
08-07-2010, 05:10 PM
I would like to re-open this thread because I think there is wide consensus that a) Coco has not been effective, and b) Chapman will be ready to join the 25- man soon. Anyone else like to see him given a try as the closer?

Krawhitham
08-07-2010, 05:20 PM
only if the put CoCo on the DL

Vottomatic
08-07-2010, 05:21 PM
I would like to re-open this thread because I think there is wide consensus that a) Coco has not been effective, and b) Chapman will be ready to join the 25- man soon. Anyone else like to see him given a try as the closer?

What makes you think CoCo hasn't been effective?

:p: :D ;)

sivman17
08-07-2010, 05:22 PM
I would not bring Chapman up and put him in the closer role. I know he's been pitching well lately, but do we really want to replace Cordero with another guy that has had control issues this year?

Why not use Rhodes or Masset in the 9th? They have been lights out. I would have used Rhodes in the 9th today, considering two of the first three batters were lefties.

LeDoux
08-07-2010, 05:25 PM
I would not bring Chapman up and put him in the closer role. I know he's been pitching well lately, but do we really want to replace Cordero with another guy that has had control issues this year?

Why not use Rhodes or Masset in the 9th? They have been lights out. I would have used Rhodes in the 9th today, considering two of the first three batters were lefties.

I would actually prefer that there be no single closer. I would be fine with 3-4 guys sharing the duties. Rhodes, Masset, Chapman, Ondrusek could all be amoung the "closers."

Krawhitham
08-07-2010, 05:28 PM
I would not bring Chapman up and put him in the closer role. I know he's been pitching well lately, but do we really want to replace Cordero with another guy that has had control issues this year?



I would rather have a guy throwing 103 with control issues vs a gas can throwing 93 with control issues

Krawhitham
08-07-2010, 05:29 PM
I would actually prefer that there be no single closer. I would be fine with 3-4 guys sharing the duties. Rhodes, Masset, Chapman, Ondrusek could all be amoung the "closers."

Closer by committee never works

malcontent
08-07-2010, 05:29 PM
I would actually prefer that there be no single closer. I would be fine with 3-4 guys sharing the duties. Rhodes, Masset, Chapman, Ondrusek could all be amoung the "closers."

That makes the most sense to me. Closing by match-ups and availability would remove part of the mental BS of what it takes to finish a game.

Griffey012
08-07-2010, 05:37 PM
Masset looked pretty unhittable in his stint today. If they do make a change it should be Masset given first shot.

LeDoux
08-07-2010, 05:38 PM
Closer by committee never works

I will need some convincing before I could accept this. After all I titled the thread after a famous closer committee (which I asumed to be effective.)

sivman17
08-07-2010, 05:40 PM
I will need some convincing before I could accept this.

I was going to say the same thing. Just because hardly any teams try it doesn't mean it can't work. It would definitely work better than the current situation we have with Choco.

sivman17
08-07-2010, 05:48 PM
Closer by committee never works

The 1999 Cincinnati Reds
Danny Graves: 27 saves
Scott Williamson: 19
Scott Sullivan: 3
Dennys Reyes: 2
Stan Belinda: 2

The 1990 Cincinnati Reds
Randy Myers: 31 saves
Rob Dibble: 11
Rick Mahley: 4
Norm Charlton: 2
Tim Layana: 2

There's no reason one guy has to save every game.

Krawhitham
08-07-2010, 05:52 PM
I will need some convincing before I could accept this. After all I titled the thread after a famous closer committee (which I asumed to be effective.)


The nasty boys were not a closer committee situation

1990

Randy Myers had 31
Norm Charlton had 2
Rob Dibble had 11

8 of Dibble saves were 2+ innings

1991
Randy Myers had 6
Norm Charlton had 1
Rob Dibble had 31

Myers lost his closers job on May 8th after he had saved 3 and blew 3, his other 3 saves came on days Dibble was not available

Krawhitham
08-07-2010, 05:58 PM
The 1999 Cincinnati Reds
Danny Graves: 27 saves
Scott Williamson: 19
Scott Sullivan: 3
Dennys Reyes: 2
Stan Belinda: 2

There's no reason one guy has to save every game.

Williamson was the closer for most of the 1st half and and Graves for the 2nd half, when they did go back and forth it was because they kept blowing saves and the manager was looking for the right fit. By the end of the season Graves was the only closer with 9 saves in Sept VS 1 for Williamson

Williamson had 6 blown saves
Graves had 9 blown saves

Vottomatic
08-07-2010, 05:59 PM
Closer by committee is a no-brainer. The closer is one of the most overrated situational things ever created in mlb. Stupid.

Krawhitham
08-07-2010, 06:14 PM
The last time the Reds went with a true Closer by committee was 2006

36 Saves
24 Blown Saves

a success rate of 60%

Vottomatic
08-07-2010, 06:16 PM
The last time the Reds went with a true Closer by committee was 2006

36 Saves
24 Blown Saves

a success rate of 60%

Nice selective stat. Our bullpen sucked then. Gee, like it has nothing to do with quality of your bullpen pitchers to begin with.

That is a comical stat you just posted. Stunned that you used that for your argument.

LeDoux
08-07-2010, 06:31 PM
The last time the Reds went with a true Closer by committee was 2006

36 Saves
24 Blown Saves

a success rate of 60%

I think a fundamental question that needs to be answered is the motivation for trying the committee. If you are trying a commitee because you have a weak pen and are looking for anyone who could fill the role, you can expect poor results. Not because there is a "commitee" per se, but because you have weaking pitching in general. The 2010 Red's pen is not in that bad of shape. In their situation they could use a variety of pitchers in closer situations that best matches the situation and rest status of the arms. This would be a commitee brought by abundance, not by desperation. I would argue this is a rare situation to be in for a MLB team. I also believe it would give them an advantage.

Vottomatic
08-07-2010, 06:44 PM
2006 Bullpen.

1. 26 pitchers were actually used at one time or another out of the Reds bullpen in 2006.
2. Here's the list: Belisle, Bray, Mike Burns, Coffey, Rheal Cormier, Ryan Franklin, Germano, Mike Gosling, Guardado, Hammond, Harang (made a relief appearance), Jason Johnson, Sun-Woo Kim, Lohse, Majewski, Joe Mays, Mercker, Michalak, Eric Milton, Elizardo Ramirez, Schoeneweis, Shackelford, Standridge, Weathers, Rick White, Estaban Yan.

3. Of that list, here's who is actually still on a mlb roster in 2010: Belisle, Bray, Coffey, Franklin, Harang. 5 pitchers still on mlb rosters this year. WHAT IN THE HECK DOES THAT SAY??????

4. Harang is a starter on the DL who has declined rapidly. Bray is the only bullpen pitcher from 2006 still on the Reds roster. Speaks volumes about how far our bullpen has come, doesn't it?

Please don't use the Reds 2006 bullpen to make your argument against the closer by committee. That is just laughable.

Krawhitham
08-07-2010, 06:44 PM
Nice selective stat. Our bullpen sucked then. Gee, like it has nothing to do with quality of your bullpen pitchers to begin with.

That is a comical stat you just posted. Stunned that you used that for your argument.

Well it is the last time they tried something that stupid, the following year 2007 Weathers was the closer and was very good (Yes Weathers was part of the Closer by committee in 2006) so don't tell me it was lack of talent Weathers was their both seasons (2007 33 Saves on a bad team)

Vottomatic
08-07-2010, 06:46 PM
Well it is the last time they tried something that stupid, the following year 2007 Weathers was the closer and was very good (Yes Weather was part of the Closer by committee in 2006) so don't tell me it was lack of talent Weathers was their both seasons (2007 33 Saves on a bad team)

I just rested my case in the post above yours.

The overall talent of the bullpen was atrocious in 2006. Only 5 pitchers who pitched in the Reds bullpen in 2006 are even still on a 2010 mlb roster.

That bullpen was filled with retreads, guys at the end of the careers, minor leaguers who were not major league caliber.........you name it. It was a pathetic display that the Reds put out there.

Here is my stat reference: http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/2006-pitching.shtml

Yes, I used facts to back up my argument.

Krawhitham
08-07-2010, 06:53 PM
I just rested my case in the post above yours.

The overall talent of the bullpen was atrocious in 2006. Only 5 pitchers who pitched in the Reds bullpen in 2006 are even still on a 2010 mlb roster.

That bullpen was filled with retreads, guys at the end of the careers, minor leaguers who were not major league caliber.........you name it. It was a pathetic display that the Reds put out there.

Here is my stat reference: http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/2006-pitching.shtml

Yes, I used facts to back up my argument.

Was Weathers on both teams?

Was Weathers a good Closer in 2007?

Franklin has had 75 saves since 2007

It was not a talent issue, it was pitchers not having a defined role on the team

GIDP
08-07-2010, 06:54 PM
The last time the Reds went with a true Closer by committee was 2006

36 Saves
24 Blown Saves

a success rate of 60%

That counts all the terrible middle relief that team had.

Krawhitham
08-07-2010, 06:56 PM
Almost anyone can close if they throw strikes, Weathers proved that, but players need a defined role or it spins out of control

sivman17
08-07-2010, 06:59 PM
2010 Reds Relief Pitching:
3.96 ERA, .250 BAA, .332 opp OBP, 1.39 WHIP

2006 Reds Relief Pitching:
4.44 ERA, .285 BAA, .352 opp OBP, 1.50 WHIP

The 2006 rotation was much worse.

Hondo
08-07-2010, 07:50 PM
Cordero will be fine. You just can't bring him in with the bases loaded and one out..that's not how he operates.


you also cant bring him in when the score is tied. He is strictly a Closer.

Vottomatic
08-07-2010, 07:58 PM
You also can't bring him in with a 3 or 4 run lead. Or 7 run lead. Or......

LeDoux
08-07-2010, 09:27 PM
players need a defined role or it spins out of control

This is what I don't understand. Maybe you are right, but I see the reason for it right now. Every pitcher's core role is to get batters out. That is true no matter the inning or score. Beyond that, I don't know why a clear secondary role is important. If your would be facing a R-R-R-L-R-L due up in the 8th and 9th innings, wouldn't it make more sense to put a RHP in the 8th followed by a LHP in the 9th? Wouldn't that trump the "setup" and "closer" role designation?