PDA

View Full Version : Chapman could be in the 2012 rotation...



corkedbat
09-08-2011, 03:06 PM
...according to Bryan Price, Says at the least, Aroldis will be looked at as a starter at some point.

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110907&content_id=24368228&notebook_id=24368230&vkey=notebook_cin&c_id=cin

Will M
09-08-2011, 03:14 PM
How many innings could he be expected to give us in 2012? I believe his high is ~109 IP. Would 140 innings be reasonable for 2012? then maybe 165-170 in 2013 and 190-200 by 2014.

BuckeyeRedleg
09-08-2011, 05:38 PM
Chapman had a wasted year with this organization.

He threw less innings than last year and they still don't know what they are going to do with him.

mdccclxix
09-08-2011, 05:40 PM
Chapman had a wasted year with this organization.

He threw less innings than last year and they still don't know what they are going to do with him.

Yeah, I'd like to see him get some 2-3 innings at a time work nearing the end of this year.

dougdirt
09-08-2011, 05:43 PM
How many innings could he be expected to give us in 2012? I believe his high is ~109 IP. Would 140 innings be reasonable for 2012? then maybe 165-170 in 2013 and 190-200 by 2014.

Chapman threw 125 in a season while in Cuba. That would mean he should be ideally safe to throw about 155 in a season.

HokieRed
09-08-2011, 06:11 PM
I'd start the stretching out process right now. This is, IMO, about the best news for 2012 we could hear; the only thing comparable would be that Votto had decided to move to LF.

dougdirt
09-08-2011, 06:12 PM
I'd start the stretching out process right now. This is, IMO, about the best news for 2012 we could hear; the only thing comparable would be that Votto had decided to move to LF.

What about Votto signing an extension for about 18M per for 3 additional years to what he has now? I think that would be better than either. Though I do really like both of the other ideas too.

Blitz Dorsey
09-08-2011, 08:26 PM
I would sure as heck hope so. Pitching him out of the 'pen is a complete waste of his talents. Also, his control problems won't be as magnified as a starter compared to pitching to just a few batters in relief when every walk (or hit or out) is crucial.

edabbs44
09-08-2011, 08:50 PM
I would sure as heck hope so. Pitching him out of the 'pen is a complete waste of his talents. Also, his control problems won't be as magnified as a starter compared to pitching to just a few batters in relief when every walk (or hit or out) is crucial.

Not sure how we can believe this after watching Volquez in 2011.

Will M
09-08-2011, 10:41 PM
Chapman threw 125 in a season while in Cuba. That would mean he should be ideally safe to throw about 155 in a season.

thanks. thats better than i thought. 155 in 2012. then add ~25-30 for 2013 & by 2014 he'll be able to throw a full workload.

Chapman to the rotation.
Votto signs an extension and moves to LF.
Grandal, Sappelt & change get traded for a #2 starter.
I win the lottery.

Blitz Dorsey
09-09-2011, 01:09 AM
Not sure how we can believe this after watching Volquez in 2011.

I see what you're saying, but Volquez would have been even worse in a relief/closer's role this year. The bottom line is that if anyone pitches as bad as Volquez did this season for the Reds, they'll be bad whether they're a starter or reliever. Chapman needs to acquire more command -- he's probably always going to be wild to some extent -- but if he can get just a little bit sharper he's going to be a very-effective starter IMO. And as a starter spread out over several innings, he can afford a few walks/hit batters. He'll be missing so many bats that it will be tough to get many runs on him. He can't completely lose it like Volquez did at times this year, but I personally think he's going to be a very good MLB starter. Maybe not right away in 2012, but he can at least be a decent No. 4 or No. 5 starter for the Reds.

Ahhh, imagine the possibilities for the rotation if Walt trades for a top-of-rotation starter to go along with Cueto, Leake, Chapman and Arroyo. (To get a TOR starter in a trade, the Reds might have to include both Bailey and Volquez in the deal.)

gilpdawg
09-09-2011, 01:29 AM
Ahhh, imagine the possibilities for the rotation if Walt trades for a top-of-rotation starter to go along with Cueto, Leake, Chapman and Arroyo. (To get a TOR starter in a trade, the Reds might have to include both Bailey and Volquez in the deal.)
Sign me up for that!


Sent from my SGH-I897 using Tapatalk

Bumstead
09-09-2011, 11:25 AM
Good news!

Chip R
09-09-2011, 12:22 PM
Chapman threw 125 in a season while in Cuba. That would mean he should be ideally safe to throw about 155 in a season.

Yes, but those are Cuban innings. ;)

CarolinaRedleg
09-09-2011, 12:45 PM
Yes, but those are Cuban innings. ;)

Aren't those embargoed here? :laugh:

cumberlandreds
09-09-2011, 01:48 PM
Aren't those embargoed here? :laugh:

Just like Castro's government,they aren't recognized in this country. ;)

I hope they give Chapman a good chance at starting next year. He's certainly has the potential to be a really good starter.

RedsManRick
09-09-2011, 06:04 PM
Just curious, but hasn't the Verducci rule been more or less debunked as a useful standard? That's not to say a guy should shift from 60 innings to 220, but what's the real source of the 30 per year rule of thumb?

Why not just use some basic biometrics to monitor the guy? If/when he shows that he's weakening, taking longer to recover, etc., or if it's showing in his execution, then shut him down. But it just strikes me as odd that teams would be so reigmented and beholden to a number like that.

I'm all for being cautious with young arms. But I'd have my starters on a long toss program over the winter to maintain arm strength and would have a thorough monitoring system in place to protect my investments.

Will M
09-09-2011, 06:41 PM
Just curious, but hasn't the Verducci rule been more or less debunked as a useful standard? That's not to say a guy should shift from 60 innings to 220, but what's the real source of the 30 per year rule of thumb?

Why not just use some basic biometrics to monitor the guy? If/when he shows that he's weakening, taking longer to recover, etc., or if it's showing in his execution, then shut him down. But it just strikes me as odd that teams would be so reigmented and beholden to a number like that.

I'm all for being cautious with young arms. But I'd have my starters on a long toss program over the winter to maintain arm strength and would have a thorough monitoring system in place to protect my investments.

i agree that a strict innings limit may not be needed. however, as you point out a pitcher shouldn't ramp up his innings unreasonably. i suspect that if Chapman has thrown 125 innings max in his career (and that would have been ~2009) that asking him to throw 200+ next year isn't a good idea. maybe they could pencil him in for so many starts then start watching him closely about 75% of the way through the season. if/when he starts to look tired they can shut him down if the team is out of contention or maybe rest him a bit then move him to the pen if the team is in contention.

gilpdawg
09-10-2011, 01:41 AM
There's no magic number. It's not like someone hits that 31st inning and their arm falls off. Dusty kind of touched on that with Leake earlier in the year when he said they were monitoring how he was throwing more than just counting innings.

Sent from my SGH-I897 using Tapatalk

mth123
09-10-2011, 09:37 AM
Long term, moving chapman into the rotation is the best thing. Unfortunately, the team is in a short term situation with Phillips and Votto and should be doing what is necessary to win now. I'd keep Chapman in the pen as the closer (or top reliever if you will) for 2012 and go get a proven starter or two who are upgrades over Willis/Wood/Volquez/Arroyo/Bailey/Leake. Some one better than all those guys is what this team needs. For all of Chapman's potential, he's just another question mark when it comes to starting and I'd like to see the team stop frittering away its best window by tinkering with guys in roles we have no idea about. Along those lines, I'd deal Alonso since we really don't think he can play anywhere but 1B, in order to acquire the starter we need. Once the rotation is set-up with more certainty, some excess arms can be dealt for a bat.

mdccclxix
09-14-2011, 04:38 PM
I guess I'll toss this in this thread. The Reds pitchers OPS against in high leverage situations, per BBref:



Rk G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR BB SO SO/BB BA OBP SLG OPS BAbip tOPS+ sOPS+
1 Jared Burton 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1.000 1.000 2.000 3.000 1.000 250 718
2 Daryl Thompson 1 3 2 2 2 1 0 0 1 0 0.00 1.000 1.000 1.500 2.500 1.000 382 590
3 Chad Reineke 1 3 3 4 2 0 0 1 0 0 .667 .667 1.667 2.333 .500 416 530
4 Homer Bailey 18 78 69 30 22 3 0 6 5 14 2.80 .319 .351 .623 .974 .308 166 167
5 Edinson Volquez 16 74 57 27 15 3 1 4 13 13 1.00 .263 .403 .561 .964 .268 127 167
6 Nick Masset 33 99 85 19 31 6 0 2 12 14 1.17 .365 .443 .506 .949 .420 154 165
7 Jordan Smith 6 12 11 3 4 2 0 0 0 2 .364 .333 .545 .879 .400 62 142
8 Mike Leake 23 107 91 34 27 4 1 5 5 13 2.60 .297 .333 .527 .861 .278 138 137
9 Travis Wood 13 59 46 14 15 3 0 0 10 5 0.50 .326 .448 .391 .840 .357 112 138
10 Logan Ondrusek 31 86 68 15 19 1 0 3 13 11 0.85 .279 .398 .426 .824 .291 146 131
11 Jose Arredondo 17 57 45 6 11 2 0 2 11 11 1.00 .244 .393 .422 .815 .281 130 129
12 Sam LeCure 15 48 39 10 10 1 0 2 5 10 2.00 .256 .370 .436 .805 .296 140 125
13 Bronson Arroyo 24 110 104 30 29 3 2 5 4 14 3.50 .279 .309 .490 .799 .279 84 120
14 Bill Bray 31 52 43 11 9 3 0 2 6 12 2.00 .209 .294 .419 .713 .226 141 97
15 Carlos Fisher 3 30 23 3 7 0 0 0 4 4 1.00 .304 .393 .304 .697 .350 100 98
16 Dontrelle Willis 12 77 66 20 18 2 0 1 7 10 1.43 .273 .347 .348 .695 .304 83 96
17 Francisco Cordero 34 121 107 11 26 3 1 3 10 20 2.00 .243 .317 .374 .690 .271 150 93
18 Johnny Cueto 22 147 125 31 34 5 0 2 10 21 2.10 .272 .324 .360 .684 .305 130 92
19 Aroldis Chapman 22 63 52 10 11 2 0 1 9 19 2.11 .212 .339 .308 .646 .313 139 83
20 Matt Maloney 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 -100 -100
21 Jeremy Horst 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 -100 -100
Team Total 139 1231 1040 290 293 45 5 39 125 194 1.55 .282 .359 .447 .807 .306 118 125


With one of the leagues best defenses, you can take some of the blame away from luck and just call it like we see it here, which will definitely confirm what we watched: Bailey, Volquez, and Masset struggled in bigger spots. Chapman was among the best. It certainly tantalizes me more for him to get a spot in the rotation. Even if he walks his way into trouble, who better to get himself out of it?

Scrap Irony
09-14-2011, 08:23 PM
Looking at that list, two things jump out:

1) If Volquez could throw strikes, he'd be a Cy Young candidate every year. His stuff is amazing.
2) A lot of young Red pitching needs to learn how to pitch in high leverage situations. Leake, Arredondo, Ondrusek, Bailey, and Masset-- all need to buck up, Harry S. Truman- style.

edabbs44
09-20-2011, 10:33 PM
"We're discussing the possibility of Chapman playing some place to get him extended out to possibly start," Reds manager Dusty Baker said. "There are a lot of things in question now."

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110920&content_id=24965124&notebook_id=24965322&vkey=notebook_cin&c_id=cin

Redhook
09-21-2011, 08:13 AM
Good to see the Reds have it all figured out.

traderumor
09-21-2011, 10:21 AM
Good to see the Reds have it all figured out.If fans run their businesses the way they think the Reds should, there must be a lot of millionaires on this board. I'm guessing that in their world, folks have the same struggles to be perfect in their planning and best use of resources, often having to change course based on a multitude of factors.

Will M
10-06-2011, 07:53 PM
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2011/10/06/chapman-to-begin-transition-to-starter/

RedsManRick
10-06-2011, 07:55 PM
My question is what happens if he's stretched out and then doesn't amaze in ST? To Louisville? To the pen again?

cinreds21
10-06-2011, 08:12 PM
I'd guess the latter.

Tom Servo
10-06-2011, 08:28 PM
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2011/10/06/chapman-to-begin-transition-to-starter/http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lrv6mbb5mp1r2ljlfo1_500.jpg

traderumor
10-06-2011, 09:00 PM
My question is what happens if he's stretched out and then doesn't amaze in ST? To Louisville? To the pen again?I'd hope that they make very little of ST at this stage. They've had him in the system for two full years and should allow his opportunity to play out in the regular season.

reds44
10-07-2011, 08:15 PM
Cueto
Chapman
Leake
Bailey
Arroyo

_Sir_Charles_
10-07-2011, 09:20 PM
Cueto
Chapman
Leake
Bailey
Arroyo

That's certainly what I'd go with. I'd consider Chapman further down the list until he shows what he can do there. But yep, those are my 5.

Tommyjohn25
10-08-2011, 12:33 AM
Cueto
Chapman
Leake
Bailey
Arroyo

Shields
Cueto
Chapman
Leake
Bailey


Please?

Redhook
10-08-2011, 08:00 AM
Shields
Cueto
Chapman
Leake
Bailey


Please?

That's what it'll take to compete with the Cards and Brewers next year.

_Sir_Charles_
10-08-2011, 08:58 AM
That's what it'll take to compete with the Cards and Brewers next year.

And if he reverts to the 13-15, 5.18 era and 34 hr allowed that we saw just last year? Then what?

Banking on James Shields to replicate what he did this year is FOLLY!!! Career era over 4 but people see an era under 3 for this season and start drooling. 11 complete games and 4 shutouts but people ignore that previously he's had 5 complete games and 2 shutouts...in 5 years total. He's a flyball pitcher who's always allowed a fairly high number of dingers...and we want to put him in GABP? Plus overpay for a guy who just had a career year? Plus go with a rotation without a lefty in it...again? (I'd like to see Chappy in there, but I think he starts in AAA for a while)

Sorry, I'm just not seeing why the lovefest for James Shields.

mth123
10-08-2011, 09:56 AM
And if he reverts to the 13-15, 5.18 era and 34 hr allowed that we saw just last year? Then what?

Banking on James Shields to replicate what he did this year is FOLLY!!! Career era over 4 but people see an era under 3 for this season and start drooling. 11 complete games and 4 shutouts but people ignore that previously he's had 5 complete games and 2 shutouts...in 5 years total. He's a flyball pitcher who's always allowed a fairly high number of dingers...and we want to put him in GABP? Plus overpay for a guy who just had a career year? Plus go with a rotation without a lefty in it...again? (I'd like to see Chappy in there, but I think he starts in AAA for a while)

Sorry, I'm just not seeing why the lovefest for James Shields.

Saying he's had one good year isn't really correct. Since 2007 Shields has had ERA+ numbers of 117, 124, 105, 75 and 132. He's had one bad year and one year where he was slightly above average. His K to BB ratio has consistently been above 3 to 1 with a high of 5.11 to 1 and an average of 3.64 to 1. I agree that he's not an ace, but he is a pitcher with a track recond, throws a lot of innings and goes deep into games. I agree that he could be a home run guy, but adding a pitcher like Shields is exactly what this team needs. The current members of this rotation are viewed as a positive if they have 3 or 4 good games. The Reds need some guys who have had three or four good seasons.

The reason many are focusing on Shields is the situation. He'll be affordable in 2012 at $7 Million and while he's under control for 2 more seasons after that, its on consecutive club options so the team could cut bait at any time if he's injured or completely miserable without worrying about any guaranteed money in 2013 or 2014. He plays on a cost conscious, pitching rich team that has three up and coming rookies (one of whom has ace potential) three other very good starters who are in pre-arb years and another solid mid-rotation guy who is first time arb eligible. The Rays have needs that match well with the Reds excesses and Shields seems like the logical guy for them to move given his relative cost to the others they have on hand and needs they have in the line-up. In the Reds rotation, a typical season would make him at at worst the number 2. If he has a poor season, he'd be a decent number four comparable to what we've gotten from Arroyo in his typical season. Mostly, he's much less a question mark than the guys the Reds have on hand and unless some team pulls off a surprise approach seems one of the more likely likely combinations of affordability, limited risk, strong performance and inning reliability that may be obtainable given what the Reds have to oiffer.

mth123
10-08-2011, 10:03 AM
Shields
Cueto
Chapman
Leake
Bailey


Please?

I get the love for moving Chapman into the rotation and it is probably the best thing for his career, but in 2012 I don't see how it improves the Reds much. In spite of your plea above, Arroyo is going to be in the rotation. That means a move of Chapman into the rotation will either preclude the Reds from obtaining some one more reliable from outside the organization (Shields in your example) or it will bump Bailey out of the rotation. I don't see Chapman as an improvement over Bailey in 2012 or maybe even 2013. Meanwhile, Chapman in the rotation leaves a fairly large hole in the bullpen. If the Reds are going to trade some kids to acquire somebody, I'd rather they acquire a starter with Chapman filling the primary role in the pen than hoping Chapman can be the starter they need and wasting our resources on a reliever to fill his spot.

traderumor
10-08-2011, 10:18 AM
That's what it'll take to compete with the Cards and Brewers next year.
Don't forget that both teams have contract issues with their first basemen.

_Sir_Charles_
10-08-2011, 02:07 PM
Saying he's had one good year isn't really correct. Since 2007 Shields has had ERA+ numbers of 117, 124, 105, 75 and 132. He's had one bad year and one year where he was slightly above average. His K to BB ratio has consistently been above 3 to 1 with a high of 5.11 to 1 and an average of 3.64 to 1. I agree that he's not an ace, but he is a pitcher with a track recond, throws a lot of innings and goes deep into games. I agree that he could be a home run guy, but adding a pitcher like Shields is exactly what this team needs. The current members of this rotation are viewed as a positive if they have 3 or 4 good games. The Reds need some guys who have had three or four good seasons.

The reason many are focusing on Shields is the situation. He'll be affordable in 2012 at $7 Million and while he's under control for 2 more seasons after that, its on consecutive club options so the team could cut bait at any time if he's injured or completely miserable without worrying about any guaranteed money in 2013 or 2014. He plays on a cost conscious, pitching rich team that has three up and coming rookies (one of whom has ace potential) three other very good starters who are in pre-arb years and another solid mid-rotation guy who is first time arb eligible. The Rays have needs that match well with the Reds excesses and Shields seems like the logical guy for them to move given his relative cost to the others they have on hand and needs they have in the line-up. In the Reds rotation, a typical season would make him at at worst the number 2. If he has a poor season, he'd be a decent number four comparable to what we've gotten from Arroyo in his typical season. Mostly, he's much less a question mark than the guys the Reds have on hand and unless some team pulls off a surprise approach seems one of the more likely likely combinations of affordability, limited risk, strong performance and inning reliability that may be obtainable given what the Reds have to oiffer.

I wasn't saying he's only had one good year. I'm saying it was a career year and that we shouldn't expect THAT kind of production going forward. I also pointed out that he's another righty in an all righty rotation AND that he's got serious flyball and home run tendencies that don't play well in GABP. Those things aren't one year abberations. Simply put, he's not an "ace" but he'll command "ace-like" returns and he's not suited very well for the Reds home park.

I've got no problems with the Reds going after him...but to overpay for him and expect him to duplicate this year...not so much. People here seem to look at him as a sure-fire ace it seems to me and focus on him instead of opening up the wide angle lens to see other options.

cincinnati chili
10-08-2011, 02:20 PM
My question is what happens if he's stretched out and then doesn't amaze in ST? To Louisville? To the pen again?

I'm of the opinion that all of the Reds pitchers should be on a much shorter leash next year, including him. One of the biggest mistakes this year was letting the rotation guys take their lumps for too long. The organization managed its pitchers like it was in rebuilding mode - NOT like an organization that had won the division in the previous year and which had everyone coming back. 90+ wins was perfectly attainable this year, and that's all it took to make the playoffs.

Superdude
10-08-2011, 06:28 PM
I've got no problems with the Reds going after him...but to overpay for him and expect him to duplicate this year...not so much. People here seem to look at him as a sure-fire ace it seems to me and focus on him instead of opening up the wide angle lens to see other options.

His xFIP backs up the ace title. Sure it was his best year, but 250 innings is a big enough sample that I'm willing to bet on improvement over random variation. You can never be sure about anyone "duplicating" a season, especially a pitcher, but I'll be pretty disappointed if we enter the season with Leake as our #2 because of the fear that Shields may regress. We saw where conservatism brought us.

Redhook
10-09-2011, 09:38 AM
Don't forget that both teams have contract issues with their first basemen.

True, but even if they both lose those guys, they'll still have pitching. The Cardinals will get huge boost if Wainright comes back and pitches similar to how he has in the past.

I predict Prince is gone, but Albert finds his way back to St. Louis. If that does happen, I think it's good news for the Reds. No more Prince and Albert is declining, slightly, while taking up a huge chunk of their payroll.