Originally Posted by reds44
I want to know how the Reds came to the conclusion Leake was a better option to start than Chapman. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Leake sucks or he should go to AAA yet, but lord.
I'm not certain that's what happened. I think it was a combination of the fact that Chapman wanted to stay where he was and the braintrust of the Reds concurred that he was a greater asset as a closer. Anyone who thinks Leake is a better option in a rotation than an admittedly untested Chapman has no business being in a decision-making role for a professional baseball club.