Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted.
All the dishes rattle in the cupboards when the elephants arrive
Walt Jocketty's quote on Chapman. I wish he had included Dusty Baker in the quote too.
http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/...k_cin&c_id=cinGOODYEAR, Ariz. -- By Sunday afternoon, Reds general manager Walt Jocketty had heard all about pitcher Aroldis Chapman's public wishes to remain as the team's closer. Jocketty did not want to discuss the issue in depth.
It's not a lock that Chapman will get what he wants, however.
"It would certainly be considered, but we don't let every player tell us how they want to be used," Jocketty told MLB.com.
He actually said that "at some point" it becomes more difficult to switch from reliever to starter. Remember, Chapaman started as a starter, switched to the pen (not the closer) on opening day, because Bray was hurt, and was going to go back to starting when Bray was healthy. Obviously, that plan didn't work out, but that was the original plan last season.
Last edited by JayStubbs; 03-18-2013 at 01:41 PM.
I agree that it's worth trying Chapman as a starter. I think if they do, he will be mediocre this year.. it will be a learning year for him. The payoff would likely be in 2014 or 2015.
That said.. if Chapman stays in the pen, and ends up having a career like Billy Wagner, that would not be tragic, IMO.
[Phil ] Castellini celebrated the team's farm system and noted the team had promising prospects who would one day be great Reds -- and then joke then they'd be ex-Reds, saying "of course we're going to lose them". #SellTheTeamBob
Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!
Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted.
All the dishes rattle in the cupboards when the elephants arrive
I hear ya man. I'm kinda on the fence on this one. I love the idea of Chapman being there at the end of a game. He was almost automatic. Then I think, man what if he could do that as a starter. I just wonder if he could do it for more than a couple months. You never know if you don't try tho, also if you try it and it fails you kinda waste that time. Glad I'm not in charge of this one!!!
Yet his save percentage was middle of the pack. He blew 5 saves in 43 chances (4 in 42 after becoming closer). His overall numbers were staggering, but he was not what I would call automatic.
I'm torn on the decision myself. I always wanted to see what Chapman could become as a starter. Depending on the match up, having a dominant lefty in the rotation could easily be the difference between wining an losing a playoff series. Of course so could having a strong bullpen and we know he is a force there. So I will leave it up to the experts and have faith that their decision will be in the best interests of all involved.
That's looking at the whole and not really accurate. He had a hiccup as the closer when the Reds started interleague play. could have been a bit of a dead arm period for him but prior to that, and after he was pretty automatic.
That said, I want him to start. I think once he adjusts, he can be Justin Verlander, And I loves me some Verlander.
Dubito Ergo Cogito Ergo Sum.
Chapman as a starter may not work, but do you want to be saying "what if" years down the road? He may think he wants to be in the pen now, but does he want to be saying that when he's 37 and broke down? I think they owe it to the franchise and to Chapman himself to try it. If it goes bad you have a spot ready for him next year, and yes, I think you give it the whole season no matter what unless it's a complete disaster. Don't move him after 2 bad starts in May.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Barry On Baseball Also blogging at Banished to the Pen.
CySeymour (03-18-2013),dougdirt (03-18-2013),The Operator (03-19-2013)
@Kc61 - I actually didn't mean to accuse you of being short-sighted or frustrating -- that comment was directed at the decision makers and not at any RZ individual poster.
FWIW, I agree -- it has been a long time for those of us who sat through the Lost Decade. I get that. And that's why I want to make sure the team maximizes the resources they have. IMO, that means giving Chapman a chance to start.
Last edited by RedEye; 03-18-2013 at 05:56 PM.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
I know, not personal, no offense taken.
But look, there are many different kinds of fans with different perspectives.
Me, I appreciate the long term thinking that got the Reds this far. But enough is enough. I want a serious run for a World Series now.
I look at Chappy as a starter as a longer term proposition. I fear 2013 becomes a developmental year for him. Willing to endure it if the Reds are very confident he will be an Ace. But if they aren't sure, then let's keep the powerhouse pen, include Hoover, Brox, Marshall, Lecure and Aroldis.
This is not a no brainer and I defer to Walt and his guys. Some of the posts on here (not yours) make it sound obvious and I strongly believe it is not.
I won't get into the reasons why Chappy as a reliever might be a better course, but there are a lot of pros and cons both ways.
Last edited by Kc61; 03-18-2013 at 06:18 PM.
RedEye (03-19-2013)
Jeff Sullivan/Fangraphs take:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index...pman-solution/
It seems so simple to me. People want to know if Chapman can start, and the longer he remains in the bullpen, the more difficult it would be to stretch him out. The Reds could start Chapman on a trial basis, and then they could re-evaluate things in some weeks, since they don’t have to make long-term commitments with these things. The Chapman situation would be unlikely to sink the Reds’ season, since Broxton can close and starter Chapman probably wouldn’t be a disaster. Whatever preference Chapman might have for closing could reverse if he started and pitched well for six or seven or eight innings at a time.
RedEye (03-19-2013)
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |