Chapman to Arizona Fall League

[klw]

I missed this yesterday.
http://marksheldon.mlblogs.com/2011/...hapman-to-afl/

The Reds revealed on Thursday that LHP Aroldis Chapman would begin his transition to starting by working games in the Arizona Fall League on Oct. 24, 27 and 31. He will start the games and work a couple of innings as he stretches himself out.

[Slyder]

I missed this yesterday.
http://marksheldon.mlblogs.com/2011/...hapman-to-afl/

About Flippin Time! This year was such a waste with him in the pen.

[Superdude]

About Flippin Time! This year was such a waste with him in the pen.

Seriously. Now he goes into spring training as a complete question mark with a tight innings cap. This process should have started a long time ago.

[mth123]

Seriously. Now he goes into spring training as a complete question mark with a tight innings cap. This process should have started a long time ago.

This is why its not so clear for me. Ideally, I want to see Chapman starting like everyone else does, but this is not the best thing for winning in 2012. In the bullpen, Chapman is an answer. In the rotation he's just another question added to a group already overflowing with questions.

The Reds could have something special at the back end of the pen with Chapman/Boxberger being the Reds version of Ventors/Kimbrel at the end of the game. I'd prefer somebody more proven to address this team's rotation woes.

[Superdude]

This is why its not so clear for me. Ideally, I want to see Chapman starting like everyone else does, but this is not the best thing for winning in 2012. In the bullpen, Chapman is an answer. In the rotation he's just another question added to a group already overflowing with questions.

The Reds could have something special at the back end of the pen with Chapman/Boxberger being the Reds version of Ventors/Kimbrel at the end of the game. I'd prefer somebody more proven to address this team's rotation woes.

I still think you've gotta pursue the starting route at some point with Chapman. The potential payoff is just too big to settle for a late inning reliever. I agree with you though. You have to go into the season assuming Chapman is going to be nothing more than a project.

[mth123]

I still think you've gotta pursue the starting route at some point with Chapman. The potential payoff is just too big to settle for a late inning reliever. I agree with you though. You have to go into the season assuming Chapman is going to be nothing more than a project.

The problem is that Arroyo, Cueto and Leake are going to be in. The team needs a stabilizer from outside to take up one spot, so putting Chapman in the rotation means giving up on Homer Bailey. I'm not really sure that is that much of an upgrade down the road and its a downgrade in 2012 while weakening the bullpen. Worse, the team may just pass on bringing somebody in. If so, kiss any 2012 play-off dreams goodbye.

[Will M]

This is why its not so clear for me. Ideally, I want to see Chapman starting like everyone else does, but this is not the best thing for winning in 2012. In the bullpen, Chapman is an answer. In the rotation he's just another question added to a group already overflowing with questions.

The Reds could have something special at the back end of the pen with Chapman/Boxberger being the Reds version of Ventors/Kimbrel at the end of the game. I'd prefer somebody more proven to address this team's rotation woes.

i agree here. let Chapman close in 2012. then go get the best starter we can. likely Shields or Wandy. the other 4 starters are Cueto, Leake, Bailey & Arroyo. the Reds are not going to eat the money owed to Arroyo so he is in as the 5th starter. so moving Chapman to the rotation doesn't give us a strong starter that we need. it just gives us a question mark. it also means that the Reds go spend money on a 'closer'.
would you rather have:
a) Chapman in the rotation & Cordero as closer
b) Wandy/Shields in the rotation and Chapman as closer

thats an easy decision for me. the 2nd choice gives us a clear rotation upgrade over the 2011 Volquez/Willis slot and gives us a strong closer.

[Slyder]

i agree here. let Chapman close in 2012. then go get the best starter we can. likely Shields or Wandy. the other 4 starters are Cueto, Leake, Bailey & Arroyo. the Reds are not going to eat the money owed to Arroyo so he is in as the 5th starter. so moving Chapman to the rotation doesn't give us a strong starter that we need. it just gives us a question mark. it also means that the Reds go spend money on a 'closer'.
would you rather have:
a) Chapman in the rotation & Cordero as closer
b) Wandy/Shields in the rotation and Chapman as closer

thats an easy decision for me. the 2nd choice gives us a clear rotation upgrade over the 2011 Volquez/Willis slot and gives us a strong closer.

Use some package including one or two of any starters not named Cueto and Chapman and see what you can get in terms of upgrading the team or just trading chips in general for a Shields type trade, its not like 90% of the league doesn't need more pitching.

Shields
Cueto
Leake/whoever isn't dealt
Chapman
Arroyo

[_Sir_Charles_]

i agree here. let Chapman close in 2012. then go get the best starter we can. likely Shields or Wandy. the other 4 starters are Cueto, Leake, Bailey & Arroyo. the Reds are not going to eat the money owed to Arroyo so he is in as the 5th starter. so moving Chapman to the rotation doesn't give us a strong starter that we need. it just gives us a question mark. it also means that the Reds go spend money on a 'closer'.
would you rather have:
a) Chapman in the rotation & Cordero as closer
b) Wandy/Shields in the rotation and Chapman as closer

thats an easy decision for me. the 2nd choice gives us a clear rotation upgrade over the 2011 Volquez/Willis slot and gives us a strong closer.

option c) some joe schmoe bargain bin starter in the rotation and Chapman as closer.

Or even worse, option d) Some joe schmoe bargain bin starter in the rotation, Cordero as closer and Chapman still as a middle reliever.

At the end of the day, I still think it'll end up being option A. But the rest of the rotation is NOT a lock. Trades change that up possibly.

[nate]

About Flippin Time! This year was such a waste with him in the pen.

To me, it seems like it was part of the plan (as is playing in the AFL) to get him used to starting. In that case, it hardly seems like a waste. Given how poor his control was this year, I could see the move to the rotation as premature.

[I(heart)Freel]

The Reds won with Leake on an innings cap last year. Worth remembering that.

[mth123]

The Reds won with Leake on an innings cap last year. Worth remembering that.

Because when he went south in early June, Travis Wood came up and pitched like a TOR starter. Counting on something like that again?

[I(heart)Freel]

Because when he went south in early June, Travis Wood came up and pitched like a TOR starter. Counting on something like that again?

Leake had an ERA under 3.5 until early August and under 4 til last few starts in mid to late August.

http://redsnetlive.wordpress.com/201...ke-leake-2010/

But to your point, if the Reds are in it and Chapman is hitting a wall, then that's when the trade deadline could net you a playoff arm too.

The timing isn't bad for this strategy.

[757690]

If Chapman is a gigantic question mark as a starter, then is also is a gigantic question mark as a closer. He hasn't done either in his MLB career, and his results as a reliever were surely mixed at best.

If he's going to be a question mark, then why not have him be a question mark at a much more valuable position, in case he succeeds? And if he fails as a starter, it will be easy to move him back to the pen. Stretching him out to start is about as easy a no brainer as possible.

[mth123]

If Chapman is a gigantic question mark as a starter, then is also is a gigantic question mark as a closer. He hasn't done either in his MLB career, and his results as a reliever were surely mixed at best.

If he's going to be a question mark, then why not have him be a question mark at a much more valuable position, in case he succeeds? And if he fails as a starter, it will be easy to move him back to the pen. Stretching him out to start is about as easy a no brainer as possible.

I don't get that thinking. I want more certainty pitching the larger number of innings. He likely pushes Bailey or Leake out of the rotation or causes the Reds to pass on help from the outside. Each of those options is likely to be a better starter than Chapman in 2012.

Why would I want to replace those guys with a question mark. I'd be all for upgrading to a more proven guy, but I'd prefer the Reds be less dependent on question marks. He's been decent as a reliever. I don't really think he's a question mark in the bullpen. He may not prove to be a closer, but flip flop him with another reliever and move on. If he flops in the rotation, who replaces him? Traviis Wood? Matt Maloney? I don't see the Reds keeping Bailey around as a long reliever.