Turn Off Ads?
Page 9 of 46 FirstFirst ... 567891011121319 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 684

Thread: Chapman

  1. #121
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,606

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Then why all the gnashing of teeth here if his performance matters so little?
    I think because its interesting. My position isn't that it doesn't matter, but that you are overstating this result as making or breaking the season. Quite honestly, that's ridiculous.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #122
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Then I repeat my position that the "chance" people are clamoring for isn't really a chance at all. Two months isn't enough to reach any conclusions.
    If he is so bad that he makes Mike Leake look like Cy Young, then yes, 2 months is enough of a chance. We are not talking about him going out and putting up a 4.5 ERA (which would not be good, but not bad enough to be pulled out of the rotation in 2 months). We are talking about being so god awful he is a massive detriment to the team in 2 months. In that case, yes, 2 months is enough to say "well, that didn't work."

  4. #123
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor View Post
    I think because its interesting. My position isn't that it doesn't matter, but that you are overstating this result as making or breaking the season. Quite honestly, that's ridiculous.
    I think it matters. It's just not a season crushing or a season making type of thing like some people here are making it out to be.

  5. #124
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,730

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by scott91575 View Post
    If he is so bad that he makes Mike Leake look like Cy Young, then yes, 2 months is enough of a chance. We are not talking about him going out and putting up a 4.5 ERA (which would not be good, but not bad enough to be pulled out of the rotation in 2 months). We are talking about being so god awful he is a massive detriment to the team in 2 months. In that case, yes, 2 months is enough to say "well, that didn't work."
    Nobody is bad enough to make Mike Leake look like Cy Young and he doesn't have to be that bad to disrupt the order of things for the rest of the staff. Volquez wasn't an 8 ERA in 2011, but he absolutely had an adverse effect on the pen and others in the rotation with his 5 inning starts.

    So if he gets pulled after a couple of months after struggling, will people still be asking for him to get another shot in 2014? I don't think 2 months of pitching like Volquez is enough for me to conclude that he still can't be a plus starter eventually.

    This thread seemed to take a turn from "it's a no brainer, we have to find out" to "give him a short leash unless he's good."
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

    Having better players makes "the right time" or "the big hit" happen a lot more often. PLUS PLUS

  6. #125
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Nobody is bad enough to make Mike Leake look like Cy Young and he doesn't have to be that bad to disrupt the order of things for the rest of the staff. Volquez wasn't an 8 ERA in 2011, but he absolutely had an adverse effect on the pen and others in the rotation with his 5 inning starts.

    So if he gets pulled after a couple of minths after struggling, will people still be asking for him to get another shot in 2014? I don't think 2 months of pitching like Volquez is enough for me to conclude that he still can't be a plus starter eventually.

    This thread seemd to take a turn from "it's a no brainer, we have to find out" to "give him a short leash unless he's good."
    If he is Edinson Volquez bad (2011 Edinson), his value in the bullpen as a dominant bullpen arm then becomes equal to him as a guy who will most likely be a below average starter at best. So no, people won't clamor for him to be back starting. If he didn't have the dominant bullpen history you would just send him to the minors to work on his game. Yet he does have value in the bullpen, and two months of absolutely terrible starting pitching is enough to say "I don't think this guy is going to turn into a plus starter we had hoped, let's put him in a role where we know he is dominant."

    It's also not a short leash "unless he is good." No one is saying that. You are making that up. You keep talking about him being one of if not the worst starters in history. That is what I am dealing with here, and you keep twisting the answers to make up some argument that does not exist. Let's see if I can spell it out...

    1) Chapman is good to great, yay, everyone happy
    2) Chapman is average (not good), starts the whole year to see how much he can improve
    3) Chapman is Leaks level (which is actually fairly bad), but still starts the whole season to see improvement
    4) Chapman is so awful he is the worst starter in baseball (which is pretty much around Volquez 2011 levels). Yeah, then pull his butt and put him in the bullpen where we know he can dominate. If we didn't know he could be a dominant bullpen arm I would say send him to AAA. Yet at that point you have a quantity you know can add value, and it's time to use it. This is not some kid with no MLB experience getting his first taste of the majors.

    Make sense?

    On top of all of that you are acting like Edinson Volquez was the cause of all the Reds ills in 2011. We will never know, but I would have bet you every dollar I have that if you replaced Leake with Volquez last year, the Reds still win the division by a fair amount.
    Last edited by scott91575; 03-14-2013 at 10:46 PM.

  7. #126
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,730

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by scott91575 View Post
    If he is Edinson Volquez bad (2011 Edinson), his value in the bullpen as a dominant bullpen arm then becomes equal to him as a guy who will most likely be a below average starter at best. So no, people won't clamor for him to be back starting. If he didn't have the dominant bullpen history you would just send him to the minors to work on his game. Yet he does have value in the bullpen, and two months of absolutely terrible starting pitching is enough to say "I don't think this guy is going to turn into a plus starter we had hoped, let's put him in a role where we know he is dominant."

    It's also not a short leash "unless he is good." No one is saying that. You are making that up. You keep talking about him being one of if not the worst starters in history. That is what I am dealing with here, and you keep twisting the answers to make up some argument that does not exist. Let's see if I can spell it out...

    1) Chapman is good to great, yay, everyone happy
    2) Chapman is average (not good), starts the whole year to see how much he can improve
    3) Chapman is Leaks level (which is actually fairly bad), but still starts the whole season to see improvement
    4) Chapman is so awful he is the worst starter in baseball (which is pretty much around Volquez 2011 levels). Yeah, then pull his butt and put him in the bullpen where we know he can dominate. If we didn't know he could be a dominant bullpen arm I would say send him to AAA. Yet at that point you have a quantity you know can add value, and it's time to use it. This is not some kid with no MLB experience getting his first taste of the majors.

    Make sense?
    Sure, but I don't get the railing against those who question the move then (which is really my point in all of this). The stance most are taking is that's it's a no brainer and he has to start and be given a chance. IMO, even two months of being Volquez isn't enough to conclude that he couldn't be a top starter in time. I keep reading that the team "has to find out" with the implication that anyone who thinks otherwise and weighs his value in the pen is an idiot. But two months of being Edinson Volquez isn't really finding out. It is a short leash IMO.

    FYI, Volquez ERA+ in 2011 was 69 - far from one of the worst starters in history. John Smoltz had an ERA+ of 67 in 12 starts in his first year. Greg Maddux had an ERA+ of 74 as a rookie.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

    Having better players makes "the right time" or "the big hit" happen a lot more often. PLUS PLUS

  8. #127
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Sure, but I don't get the railing against those who question the move then (which is really my point in all of this). The stance most are taking is that's it's a no brainer and he has to start and be given a chance. IMO, even two months of being Volquez isn't enough to conclude that he couldn't be a top starter in time. I keep reading that the team "has to find out" with the implication that anyone who thinks otherwise and weighs his value in the pen is an idiot. But two months of being Edinson Volquez isn't really finding out. It is a short leash IMO.

    FYI, Volquez ERA+ in 2011 was 69 - far from one of the worst starters in history. John Smoltz had an ERA+ of 67 in 12 starts in his first year. Greg Maddux had an ERA+ of 74 as a rookie.
    Chapman is not a rookie, hence the reason I stated that in my response. He has already improved greatly over his rookie year, and has faced plenty of major league hitters. This is not a rookie we are dealing with.

    This is also a guy who has known value as a reliever. If not for that I would say send him to AAA. It makes zero sense to keep trotting him out with an era around 6 when you have Leake. So no, you don't keep starting Chapman 2 months in with those numbers unless you are a garbage team.

    Of course I never would have put Chapman in the bullpen 2 seasons ago and he would have much more starting experience to go on by now. Yet that is just me.
    Last edited by scott91575; 03-14-2013 at 11:42 PM.

  9. #128
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,730

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by scott91575 View Post
    Chapman is not a rookie, hence the reason I stated that in my response. He has already improved greatly over his rookie year, and has faced plenty of major league hitters. This is not a rookie we are dealing with.

    This is also a guy who has known value as a reliever. If not for that I would say send him to AAA. It makes zero sense to keep trotting him out with an era around 6 when you have Leake. So no, you don't keep starting Chapman 2 months in with those numbers unless you are a garbage team.

    Of course I never would have put Chapman in the bullpen 2 seasons ago and he would have much more starting experience to go on by now. Yet that is just me.
    Well, I think the move to put Chapman in the pen in 2010 was a move to win and I was all in favor of it, but I do think the 2011 season went up in smoke early enough to move Chapman into the rotation for 10 starts or so and was advocating it at the time. Small sample, but it would be more to go on than what we've seen and it would have probably made the innings limit situation less daunting.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

    Having better players makes "the right time" or "the big hit" happen a lot more often. PLUS PLUS

  10. #129
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    913

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Well, I think the move to put Chapman in the pen in 2010 was a move to win and I was all in favor of it, but I do think the 2011 season went up in smoke early enough to move Chapman into the rotation for 10 starts or so and was advocating it at the time. Small sample, but it would be more to go on than what we've seen and it would have probably made the innings limit situation less daunting.
    I am fine with 2010. He had no business at all being a setup man in 2011. He should have started the year in AAA starting.

  11. #130
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    297

    Re: Chapman

    It seems as though not a single so called "baseball person" likes the move to starter at all

  12. #131
    My clutch is broken RichRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    3,869

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by coachpipe View Post
    It seems as though not a single so called "baseball person" likes the move to starter at all
    You know, just the fact that you're so dead set against this makes me think I'm on to something.
    -Jerry Seinfeld to George Costanza
    "I can make all the stadiums rock."
    -Air Supply

  13. #132
    RZ Chamber of Commerce Unassisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    13,440

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by Raisor View Post
    Downside is he winds up back in the bullpen. As in, there isn't much of a downside.
    Price says a mid-season move to the pen won't happen, according a Jim Bowden ESPN Insider article referenced here. The gist of the Insider article is that Price and Jocketty are insistent that if Chapman starts the season in the rotation, he will finish it in the rotation.

    Whether we trust a Jim Bowden article is another issue.
    /r/reds

  14. #133
    always ask questions bigredmechanism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,229

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by Unassisted View Post
    Price says a mid-season move to the pen won't happen, according a Jim Bowden ESPN Insider article referenced here. The gist of the Insider article is that Price and Jocketty are insistent that if Chapman starts the season in the rotation, he will finish it in the rotation.

    Whether we trust a Jim Bowden article is another issue.
    Maybe I am misunderstanding, but is that implying there will be no innings limit? The only other way I see it working is if they a an innings limit per game, which could also have some negative effects on the rest of the pen.
    Award Winning Baseball Player

  15. #134
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    297

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by bigredmechanism View Post
    Maybe I am misunderstanding, but is that implying there will be no innings limit? The only other way I see it working is if they a an innings limit per game, which could also have some negative effects on the rest of the pen.
    Hmm..Well if they do that would it be a possibility to have a 6 man rotation with Leake and Chapman but at the same time not take starts away from Cueto, Latos, Bailey and Arroyo.

  16. #135
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    4,062

    Re: Chapman

    Quote Originally Posted by coachpipe View Post
    It seems as though not a single so called "baseball person" likes the move to starter at all
    I think it only seems like this because the loudest people in the room are the ones saying he should stay in the bullpen (I don't literally mean in redszone).

    It's so easy to say he should stay in the bullpen because you have facts to back you up that he is a great closer. But in reality, those saying he shouldn't be a starter is because they are afraid of the risk, not seeing the reward.

    The reward of him becoming a #2 or #3 starter far outweigh him being a great closer. This team has already won the division two of the last three years, it's time to win a World Series.

    You win a World Series with a dominant front of the rotation staff. If Chapman works, there is little doubt in my mind the Reds are World Series contenders, and that is what this move is all about.

    If he doesn't pan out, or stays in the bullpen, the Reds are division contenders. There is a big difference.

    The Reds are done playing for the division, time to play for the World Series.

  17. Likes:

    Roy Tucker (03-15-2013), Screwball (03-16-2013)


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

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.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25