Originally Posted by dougdirt
You probably won't get a Verlander. But what if you get a Cueto? Or a Latos? Each of those guys are also quite a bit more valuable than a Kimbrel. I don't know, I see it as not taking a risk to be great simply because you are content with being good. That isn't really on the player, but on management.
Latos 2012 fWAR- 3.1
Latos 2011 fWAR- 3.3
Kimbrel 2012 fWAR- 3.6
Kimbrel 2011 fWAR- 3.2
Chapman 2012 fWAR- 3.3
Chapman 2011 fWAR- let's not talk about it.
Fangraphs also has written articles that I had sourced in previous Chapman-to-the-bullpen discussions that say that fWAR for SP and RP aren't interchangeable, and that WPA is a better predictor of wins added by a RP than WAR is.
My view is that right now, we have a sure-fire top 3 closer in MLB. If he is converted to SP, then a new closer needs to be identified and implemented, the back end of the bullpen should be reworked, and a new home needs to be found for one (or both) of Bailey and Leake. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that he either thrives as a starter and becomes Latos, Bumgarner, or Samardzjia (let alone Verlander), and there is no guarantee that if he fails as a starter that he can just put his Kimbrel mask back on and return to being a dominant closer.
I truly feel that the Chapman to starter ship has sailed in the eyes of the management (like it or not)in terms of his role with the Reds for now; the team is competitive and it doesn't make sense, no matter how much Lance McAllister or Mo Egger want you to believe, to fundamentally change the current squad. I would rather use time and energy getting more of a sure thing, such as a Garza or Haren, and keep Chapman as insurance that games only last eight innings.