I would trade the best closer in the game for the best starter in the game. But would I trade the best closer in the game for a CHANCE at the best starter in the game. That's the real question. Let's just say I'd take the gamble if I had Ryan Madson as my backup closer.
"This field, this game, is a part of our past. It reminds us of all that once was good, and what could be again." -- Terence Mann
Well, I would be surprised if Chapman started the transition without making anymore starts in the minors. So, if some minor league starts were part of the transition would you vote against it? I wouldn't.Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds
You wouldn't, but the Reds won't ask the guy who is a potetial Cy Young this year to spend time in the minors other than on a rehab assignment. Frankly, if I was Chapman, and the Reds came to me and said "we want you to go to AAA for a couple months (delaying Arb and maybe Free agency by a season and whittling service time toward the pension away) to convert to starting," after the historic season in 2012, I'd tell them to stick it and that I'd rather stay in the closer's role. If they want to convert him, it will be in the big league rotation IMO. It will be an experiment in a live environment of major league games that will have a direct impact on the team's record not "back in the the lab" at AAA.
All my posts are my opinion - just like yours are. If I forget to state it and you're too dense to see the obvious, look here!
I don't believe that's a sure thing. Gotta remember, while his agent might not want him to go down to the minors, if his agent is smart he'll realize how much more money Chapman can make if he's a starter. Giving him some minor league starts would just be a safer way to do it.
[QUOTE=redsfandan;2703805]I hadn't read all the pages of posts so I don't know who else is against the idea. I know Kc61 would like nothing to change. But, he's always placed ALOT of value on the bullpen. And that's fine. QUOTE]
Correct, I do feel that bullpens are critical and I wouldn't mind Aroldis closing. However, before this season, I favored Aroldis starting over relieving. But in the major leagues. The one thing I strongly opposed was Chapman in the minors this year.
We may be forgetting that the Reds are more focused on the team than on maximizing an individual's personal achievements. Often they are the same. Sometimes not.
I think the Reds will look at the ballclub this winter, its opportunities to acquire guys, the whole picture, the Madson situation, and will see where Chappy fits in best. If Madson had stayed healthy Aroldis would have started this year. Without Madson he closed.
The objective was the team, not Chapman as an individual.
IMO Chapman is the MVP of the ballclub. Making him closer was the key to this season. IMO the Reds bullpen is nothing special without Chapman. One high end guy, Marshall. Zero top tier late inning righties. Masset had a 1.5 plus WHIP last year, he is no closer and was iffy in the late innings sometimes in 2010 and throughout 2011.
I read a quote from Dusty in the new Baseball America saying we'll decide about next year when next year comes. I do believe that is the answer. They'll see the team needs, consider Aroldis' views to some extent, and decide.
Meanwhile, Aroldis is rested and ready for the next game.
Last edited by Kc61; 08-16-2012 at 10:21 AM.
Me... I'd trade the best closer in the game for the 15th best starter in the game! 18 to 27 outs every 5 games are more important to me than 3 to 9 outs every 5 games.
Spin it any way ya want folks, but each out is as important as the other. 1st out and 27th out. Sure out #27 wins the game, but that opportunity may not be there if out #1 comes after the other team bats around. That seems easy to understand. It is a luxury to have a guy who can drive that last nail in the coffin 95% or more of the time. But 19 out of 20 saves is 95% and does not mean crap if that is over 162 games (20 opportunities in 162 games for those who will not get it).
There are 135 outs in 5 games if those games go a full 9 innings. 18 outs (low end for a starter) is 9.2% of all outs. 12 outs (extreme high end for a closer) is 6.1%. No way to spin that. An out is an out. Each and every one of them important. Hence, most closers seem to default to that role. Like Chapman for peculiar circumstances... injury by Madson took him to the BP and fail by Marshall to the closer role. Most are not trained and developed for that role. Lets not go LaRussa here and try to re-invent the game.
This post signifies why they make different flavors of ice cream. Some like chocolate, some like vanilla.
Well said, excellent expression of your point of view.
I disagree with virtually every word, LOL.
I don't think anyone is arguing that they wouldn't trade Chapman of today for Randy Johnson in his prime. That's a no brainer for everyone. What people are essentially arguing is the risk that Chapman as a closer becomes Kyle Lohse as a starter. Brillant at times, knucklehead at other times.
They aren't only arguing that; I think everybody recognizes that possibility. The crux of the disagreement is around two things: the risk that he'd never be able to return to his level of performance as a closer and the value of the closer position itself.
Though I think people sometimes forget that Chapman was a starter his whole life up until the Reds moved him to the pen and that the Reds were committed to using him as a starter this year until Madson got hurt. When he was blowing people away in Cuba, it was as a starter. That obviously doesn't imply he'll necessarily be a great MLB starter. But it does suggest that:
1. He can maintain effective stuff as a starter
2. If he needs to transition back to the bullpen, it's something he can do
Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.
I'm not sure where a pitcher like Latos ranks in todays game, but I would trade present day Chapman for a present day Latos.
I also think that starters are way more valuable then closers, and I think there is enough risk that Chapman cannot become a better starter than Latos (who I think is a great starter) that I would chose Latos.
Thx, Kc. Nothing wrong with disagreement... esp. w/ tact. We can all learn from that. A lot never do. But "they" like us are the same as us... keyboard GMs/managers.
Not necessarily-Spring Training.
‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ Matthew 25:40
7 pitch effortless 9th for Chapman. Three easy ground balls and no K's tonight. What a bum...
If you subscribe to the theory - which I do - that the best payers of the 21st century have only contributed 11 wins above replacement in a single season, then I don't understand why a team's record should have any effect on the calculation of a player's value.
A player has control over whether or not he is valuable. His teammates, manager, and front office determine whether or not his value makes any difference.
Stick to your guns.
And that's it? Just give him spring training to get acclimated to being a major league starting pitcher and then put him in the rotation?
Posting Permissions
|
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. |
Reply With Quote