Can't win with 'em
Can't win without 'em
If the Reds are convinced Chapman would not be a TOR starter then I agree with keeping him as a closer. However the only reason they are keeping him as closer is because he had a good season then I strongly disagree (see Adam Wainwright)
All through spring training and the first few months of the season all we heard was that Chapman's future was as a starter. So if they have changed their mind now, then why?
Leave the hammer at the back of the bullpen where his electric arm can impact a lot more than 30 games per season.
And potentially every game in a playoff series.
Put me in the "starter" category.
If they want to try Chapman inthe rotation, but I'm not so sure you should be penciling him in as the next Justin Verlander just yet.
1) Will he be as dominant with his fastball as a starter at 94-95MPH as opposed to 99+ as a closer?
2) Will he be able to work his offspeed stuff in effectively enough as a starter?
3) Will the command issues he saw as a starter in the minors be ironed out as easily when his innings lengthen out as many here seem to think?
4) Are the Reds gonna want to "Strassberg" him in August when he reaches 150-160 ip in the middle of a pennant drive? Or will they keep pitching him, knowing he had fatigue issues this year pitching reliever's innings?
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.
People act like Aroldis Chapman has been a starting pitcher his entire life. Heck, he didn't even become a pitcher until he was 16. He played first base before that. I know we all thought he was going to be a starter, but it just so happens he's established himself as one of the elite closers in all of MLB. And we're complaining about that? Maybe the Reds believe he would fizzle out as a starter? I don't know. It's just strange there is all this hand-wringing over Chapman not being a starter (because we're wasting his innings) but no one seems to be concerned about all the innings the Braves are wasting by not making Kimbrel a starter. Maybe some guys are just better in the closer's role.
With Chapman, there is a history as a starter from which to build. It is "I wonder if BP can still play SS?" situation.
Two different scenarios, so why argue as if its apples to apples?
Can't win with 'em
Can't win without 'em
I would put him wherever I thought it was more likely he could stay healthy (based on the type of guy he is). I'm not sure what the answer is, but I honestly feel like if the Reds thought he could be a consistent 200+ innings guy without being a huge injury risk, then he'd already be starting.
It's impossible to prove that because we don't know. He was signed as a starter. He started a few times in the minors and had success. He moved to the bullpen out of necessity and was VERY good there. But that doesn't mean he fizzled out as a starter.
If you're scared to find out who he is as a starter because of what could happen to his head if he's not successful, that's absolutely fine. But we can't say he's better as a closer than a starter because we just don't know.
"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
We do know he is an "elite" closer. Top of the chart.
Talent is God Given: be humble.
Fame is man given: be thankful.
Conceit is self given: be careful.
I'm late to the thread but theres a reason why Mariano Rivera is the highest priced closer in baseball was paid ~$15 mil and thats only a hair higher than what Ervin Santana will make this year ($13 mil).
Chapman will be a much better value starting every fifth day if the Reds can get him to it. It doesn't matter who you have in the pen if you don't have the starters to get the game to them with a lead.
How good is Chapman's slider? Is it a real pitch or just something other than a fastball to throw every once in a while? You can't throw 90% fastballs as a starter, and especially since he won't be 98-99 mph every pitch. If he doesn't really have command of the slider leave him in the pen.
Also, he didn't even start pitching until he was 16. He was a first baseman before that. There is this misconception that Aroldis Chapman was made to be a starter. Why is that? Why does the same not apply to Craig Kimbrel? Just because the Braves immediately moved him to the closer's role after drafting him? I'm sure Kimbrel was a starter in high school.
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.