Turn Off Ads?
Page 6 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 240

Thread: Aroldis Chapman and history

  1. #76
    Future Fame of Holler WildcatFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    1,171

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Quote Originally Posted by backbencher View Post
    Daniel Bard says otherwise.
    One example does not a proof make. Neftali Feliz would also like to put his two cents in.
    "I never argue with people who say baseball is boring, because baseball is boring. And then, suddenly, it isn't. And that's what makes it great." - Joe Posnanski

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #77
    On the brink wolfboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    is everything
    Posts
    2,685

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Quote Originally Posted by WildcatFan View Post
    I would disagree that the slider is iffy. He hasn't thrown it much, but he hasn't had to for reasons you stated above. Fangraphs has it at 88 mph with hard movement and a K rate in the 60s. People keep comparing his stuff to Randy Johnson's, and it'd be hard to convince me without seeing it that he wouldn't be extremely effective as a starter with two plus pitches and a developing changeup.
    Thanks for the info. on the slider. I was just going off of my personal observations, which really don't carry much weight; however, what you've presented relative to Chapman's slider doesn't convince me that he would be this dominant if he was in the rotation. That being said, I think it would be a shame if the Reds never gave it a shot.
    How do we know he's not Mel Torme?

  4. #78
    Haunted by walks
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    6,691

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    What level of outcome short of Randy Johnson would be acceptable? Roy Oswalt, dominating but short-lived; Johnny Cueto, everybody's favorite non-ace; or Homer Bailey, above-average starter's innings?

  5. #79
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,383

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Okay, this blew me away. From FAY of all people.

    http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/201...pmans-numbers/

    With the three strikeouts last night, Aroldis Chapman’s strikeout rate per nine innings is at 17.16. That would be the all-time high for a pitcher with more than 50 innings. Chapman has struck out 89 and walked 14 in 46 2/3 innings.

    Watching Chapman lately, it seems like anytime he gets ahead in the count, it’s pretty much over. The numbers support that (Source: baseball-reference.com):
    He actually used BR and Fangraphs as references. Fay? Anyway, the good stuff is in the link.
    2014 predictions:
    99-63 WS champs (Cards take 2nd WC, Mil 3rd, Pit 4th, Chi 5th)
    Bruce/Votto neck and neck MVP race (neither takes it)
    Bailey CYA winner
    Hamilton ROY & GG

  6. #80
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,297

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    In Vegas you have a 49% chance of doubling your money and 51% chance losing it all.

    In this situation, the odds are much different. Let's call the upside still 2x value. What are the possibilities?

    20% you double up the value
    30% you go up 1.5x
    30% you hold steady
    20% you go down by .5
    10% you lose it all

    We can play with the math as much as we want. I think the above is generously conservative. The upside is more than 2x and I don't see a 10% chance of complete loss. I think the downside risk is basically getting put back in the bullpen. Short of injury, I can't see why it would harm him otherwise. But even the conservative scenario above, the expected return is a gain of 25%.

    If I won a million bucks and was asked if I want to roll the dice -- when rolling the dice produces, on average, a 25% return, I'd do that in a heartbeat.

    I think the heart of the matter here is that you see there being a very significant chance Chapman gets ruined in the process. I certainly don't and I doubt Doug does.
    I don't think the chance is significant (depending on your definition of significant), however I think the chance is real and do we really need to take the chance?

  7. #81
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    The Bush Leagues
    Posts
    9,176

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Quote Originally Posted by BCubb2003 View Post
    What level of outcome short of Randy Johnson would be acceptable? Roy Oswalt, dominating but short-lived; Johnny Cueto, everybody's favorite non-ace; or Homer Bailey, above-average starter's innings?
    Bear in mind that Randy Johnson wasn't Randy Johnson until he was 29. He wasn't dominant until 31.

    If this were the same ol' losin' Reds this would be a more interesting discussion.
    The widow is gathering nettles for her children's dinner; a perfumed seigneur, delicately lounging in the Oeil de Boeuf, hath an alchemy whereby he will extract the third nettle and call it rent. ~ Carlyle

  8. #82
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,500

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Quote Originally Posted by backbencher View Post
    Daniel Bard says otherwise.
    Daniel Bard is a tough example to use. Neither Bard nor Chapman did a whole lot of minor league time, but in Bard's time in the minors as a starter, he was brutal. In 2007, at age 22 in A ball (he split Low and High A that year) he walked 78 batters and struck out 48 in 75 innings as a starter and had an ERA over 7.00. He never started again in the minors until this season.

    Chapman on the other hand, at the same age in AAA, as a starter, walked 40 and struck out 76 in 65.2 innings.

    The two guys are a very tough comparison because of things like that.

    I can come up with relievers who went to starters and have been successful. It just doesn't do much for the situation at hand because there simply aren't many comparables for Chapman because of the whole Cuba thing.

  9. #83
    Member Superdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,795

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Quote Originally Posted by edabbs44 View Post
    I don't think the chance is significant (depending on your definition of significant), however I think the chance is real and do we really need to take the chance?
    We don't have to do anything, but I think there's enough potential return to take the chance. I'd give him one year, and if he puts up mid-rotation numbers or below and the coaches don't see improvement, put him back in the pen and let him dominate.

  10. #84
    Cruisin' for trouble
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Posts
    3,290

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Wrong thread
    Last edited by GoReds; 07-25-2012 at 06:35 PM.

  11. #85
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,039

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Quote Originally Posted by edabbs44 View Post
    I don't think the chance is significant (depending on your definition of significant), however I think the chance is real and do we really need to take the chance?
    Need is an interesting word. There's no one thing we "need" to do. Rather, success is the accumulation of a lot little steps forward that increase your chances of winning.

    I think taking the chance on Chapman as a starter, on net, increases our chances of winning a world series. If we had a 98 win team that looked like it could coast to a ring, that would be one thing. But we have a team in a dog fight with two others for the division and which hasn't won a playoff game in 17 years.

    I'm still in "maximize upside" mode. And given that I think it's a chance that carries very little (though admittedly real) downside risk and a whole bunch of upside.
    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.

  12. #86
    Moderator Plus Plus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    1,511

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Here's my $0.02 when it comes to considering a move for Chapman from bullpen to rotation:

    First, let's take a look at scarcity. According to this post on LoneStarBall.com, "elite" starters (5.5 WAR or higher) are slightly rarer than "elite" relievers (2.0 WAR or higher) over the last 10 years (based on number, not percentage of players). This would imply that a conversion to starter, assuming Chapman remained elite, would be a lateral move in terms of scarcity. Obviously, if Chapman were not elite as a starter, it would be a downgrade in terms of scarcity. However, the article goes on to bring up another good point:

    These numbers show the increased use of fastball/slider combination among relievers compared to starters and their use of more diverse secondary pitches. Though I think it's important to note, the difference between a potential starter and reliever is more than just their ability to throw certain pitches. Each pitchers mechanics and body type has an impact on their durability and ability to manage a starter's workload as well.
    So, Chapman's two-pitch mix that he has shown for the greater part of being a reliever obviously profiles him as more of a reliever than a starter, and the table illustrates that very clearly. When ESPN ran a sports science explanation of Chapman's mechanics as a pitcher, no red flags were raised about his potential as a starter. Chapman, however, did spend time on the disabled list in 2011 with shoulder inflammation.

    Tangotiger posted earlier this season a table of run conversion ratios here. A quote from the article specifically applies to Chapman:

    Taking Aroldis Chapman, the way to understand this is that if you think that Chapman’s run-prevention value over replacement will be equal no matter what his role (or, perhaps more importantly, if you think that the Reds think this), then his innings in the bullpen must be at least 2.43 times as important as his innings as a starter in order to provide equal value. If you think he can be twice as good in the bullpen, then those innings need only be 1.21 times as important.
    If you reverse-calculate using Chapman's pLI, which is 1.57, one would be expecting him to be giving up runs at about a rate of 0.65 compared to what he would as a starter. That would take his "rERA" of 1.54 to a "sERA" of 2.37. Obviously this is very crude, but it gives a little bit of an idea of what to expect. However, Jason (the author of this post) states that he generally uses a conversion rate of 0.8 to calculate a starter's effectiveness as a reliever. Furthermore, he states this:

    So, it should be a pretty rare situation that you’d want to make someone a reliever. Mariano Rivera, Trevor Hoffman, Billy Wagner Papelbon maybe.... guys who are so lights out in relief, that you figure they must have an extra benefit from being a reliever that the others don’t have. And that maybe they would give up runs at 60% of the rate they’d give up as starters (rather than the standard 80%).
    I could only find one website that discussed his numbers as a starter in the minors. Seamheads.com showed that his numbers as a starter were significantly less thrilling than his numbers as a reliever: FIP- 4.01 vs 1.92, BAA- .244 vs .159, WHIP- 1.46 vs 0.96, and also better numbers in HR/9, GB%, and IFF%. Obviously, this was a very small sample size.

    All that being said, even if Chapman isn't at the 80% where his ERA would be an eye-popping 1.93 and is at the 60% of elite relievers which would put him at 2.37, he still carries tremendous value.

    It should also be considered that the "worst" Reds starter is either Latos or Bailey, both who have a WAR so far this season of 1.2 (Chapman is more than double that already!!), but both of who also possess huge upside- Latos had a 4.0 WAR season two years ago, and Bailey had 109 IP in 2010 for 1.9 WAR, giving him similar upside. Meanwhile, Sean Marshall is the second most valuable Reds reliever, with 0.9 WAR.

    So, subjectivity time. I *think* that there is a larger downgrade from Chapman to Marshall than there is upgrade from Chapman to Bailey. When also combined with potential strain related to innings, both over the course of a game and over the course of a season, I *think* that I would leave Chapman in the closer's role for the foreseeable future, or until an opening arose in the rotation.

    I also have a handful of gut-related thoughts here:

    1) I *prefer* hard-throwing relievers to soft-tossing relievers. Since Chapman is a fastball-first guy and Marshall seems like a curveball-first guy, I greatly prefer Chapman to Marshall in the bullpen. I don't see the Reds as having an effective hard-tosser besides Chapman in the bullpen, even though their bullpen has been very effective this year.

    2) Having a guy who is so elite in a relief role makes me *think* that there is a greater value in being able to shorten the game by three outs at the end of several games in a series than any stat that I can immediately find can show.

    3) The atmosphere in GABP when Chapman is in, regardless of situation, is different than any that I have ever been exposed to in my entire life as a Reds fan. I can't remember the atmosphere ever being as electric as it is when "good Chapman" comes in.

    So, anyway, that's how I kind of understand the situation. I don't think I gave a real answer, but... I don't think there will be one until, if ever, he is tried as a starter.
    Quote Originally Posted by westofyou View Post
    Thus his team was punished

    Long live punishment
    Quote Originally Posted by BCubb2003 View Post
    The base you want to acquire is home.

  13. #87
    Future Fame of Holler WildcatFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    1,171

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfboy View Post
    Thanks for the info. on the slider. I was just going off of my personal observations, which really don't carry much weight; however, what you've presented relative to Chapman's slider doesn't convince me that he would be this dominant if he was in the rotation. That being said, I think it would be a shame if the Reds never gave it a shot.
    That's fair, none of us know for sure. Your last sentence is the only thing I believe without a doubt.
    "I never argue with people who say baseball is boring, because baseball is boring. And then, suddenly, it isn't. And that's what makes it great." - Joe Posnanski

  14. #88
    Future Fame of Holler WildcatFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    1,171

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Does anyone know about Chapman's changeup? Is he developing it? He's thrown it 8 percent of the time, but I can't remember seeing one. I thought there was talk of him asking Soto how to throw it, but maybe that was Cueto.
    "I never argue with people who say baseball is boring, because baseball is boring. And then, suddenly, it isn't. And that's what makes it great." - Joe Posnanski

  15. #89
    On the brink wolfboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    is everything
    Posts
    2,685

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Great post Plus Plus!
    How do we know he's not Mel Torme?

  16. #90
    Member mdccclxix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Crown
    Posts
    3,821

    Re: Aroldis Chapman and history

    Quote Originally Posted by Plus Plus View Post
    Here's my $0.02 when it comes to considering a move for Chapman from bullpen to rotation:

    First, let's take a look at scarcity. According to this post on LoneStarBall.com, "elite" starters (5.5 WAR or higher) are slightly rarer than "elite" relievers (2.0 WAR or higher) over the last 10 years (based on number, not percentage of players). This would imply that a conversion to starter, assuming Chapman remained elite, would be a lateral move in terms of scarcity. Obviously, if Chapman were not elite as a starter, it would be a downgrade in terms of scarcity. However, the article goes on to bring up another good point:



    So, Chapman's two-pitch mix that he has shown for the greater part of being a reliever obviously profiles him as more of a reliever than a starter, and the table illustrates that very clearly. When ESPN ran a sports science explanation of Chapman's mechanics as a pitcher, no red flags were raised about his potential as a starter. Chapman, however, did spend time on the disabled list in 2011 with shoulder inflammation.

    Tangotiger posted earlier this season a table of run conversion ratios here. A quote from the article specifically applies to Chapman:



    If you reverse-calculate using Chapman's pLI, which is 1.57, one would be expecting him to be giving up runs at about a rate of 0.65 compared to what he would as a starter. That would take his "rERA" of 1.54 to a "sERA" of 2.37. Obviously this is very crude, but it gives a little bit of an idea of what to expect. However, Jason (the author of this post) states that he generally uses a conversion rate of 0.8 to calculate a starter's effectiveness as a reliever. Furthermore, he states this:



    I could only find one website that discussed his numbers as a starter in the minors. Seamheads.com showed that his numbers as a starter were significantly less thrilling than his numbers as a reliever: FIP- 4.01 vs 1.92, BAA- .244 vs .159, WHIP- 1.46 vs 0.96, and also better numbers in HR/9, GB%, and IFF%. Obviously, this was a very small sample size.

    All that being said, even if Chapman isn't at the 80% where his ERA would be an eye-popping 1.93 and is at the 60% of elite relievers which would put him at 2.37, he still carries tremendous value.

    It should also be considered that the "worst" Reds starter is either Latos or Bailey, both who have a WAR so far this season of 1.2 (Chapman is more than double that already!!), but both of who also possess huge upside- Latos had a 4.0 WAR season two years ago, and Bailey had 109 IP in 2010 for 1.9 WAR, giving him similar upside. Meanwhile, Sean Marshall is the second most valuable Reds reliever, with 0.9 WAR.

    So, subjectivity time. I *think* that there is a larger downgrade from Chapman to Marshall than there is upgrade from Chapman to Bailey. When also combined with potential strain related to innings, both over the course of a game and over the course of a season, I *think* that I would leave Chapman in the closer's role for the foreseeable future, or until an opening arose in the rotation.

    I also have a handful of gut-related thoughts here:

    1) I *prefer* hard-throwing relievers to soft-tossing relievers. Since Chapman is a fastball-first guy and Marshall seems like a curveball-first guy, I greatly prefer Chapman to Marshall in the bullpen. I don't see the Reds as having an effective hard-tosser besides Chapman in the bullpen, even though their bullpen has been very effective this year.

    2) Having a guy who is so elite in a relief role makes me *think* that there is a greater value in being able to shorten the game by three outs at the end of several games in a series than any stat that I can immediately find can show.

    3) The atmosphere in GABP when Chapman is in, regardless of situation, is different than any that I have ever been exposed to in my entire life as a Reds fan. I can't remember the atmosphere ever being as electric as it is when "good Chapman" comes in.

    So, anyway, that's how I kind of understand the situation. I don't think I gave a real answer, but... I don't think there will be one until, if ever, he is tried as a starter.
    Dang, nice post. I should print this out and get my highlighter.

    edit: I wonder what you could come up with for 10 cents?


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