Chapman to start? Maybe not

[jojo]

Not only is it an awesome narrative, it also happened, so, you know.

No way he mastered a new pitch and transformed into a different pitcher in a few weeks.

But it's an awesome narrative.

[Wonderful Monds]

No way he mastered a new pitch and transformed into a different pitcher in a few weeks.

But it's an awesome narrative.

Except for when he did and the stats prove it.

It's not so much about him turning into a different pitcher as it is him turning back into the pitcher he used to be.

[jojo]

Except for when he did and the stats prove it.

It's not so much about him turning into a different pitcher as it is him turning back into the pitcher he used to be.

The stats don't prove anything- its 22 innings. And BTW, statistically his 22 IP as a Red really dont look much like his career numbers.

[traderumor]

I read that earlier today. It makes me think he should be nowhere near the rotation and that the experiment to put him there will fail so badly that he'll be back in the pen by June.

I don't know how someone could read that and think positively about the guy. Issues-wise, he's the pitching equivalent of Josh Hamilton and we've been none the wiser about the kid gloves the Reds are using to handle him.

I think comparing to Josh Hamilton is a bit overboard. A single guy in his 20s struggling with staying away from loose women and fast cars is a far cry from a drug addict trying to stay sober.

[Superdude]

No way he mastered a new pitch and transformed into a different pitcher in a few weeks.

But it's an awesome narrative.

I don't know what narrative you're talking about, but Broxton definitely added a cutter. That's not even debatable. Whether or not that's transformed him is still up in the air, but it's certainly worth noting the fact that after adding a statistically effective pitch, he put up by far his best month of the season.

[jojo]

I don't know what narrative you're talking about, but Broxton definitely added a cutter. That's not even debatable. Whether or not that's transformed him is still up in the air, but it's certainly worth noting the fact that after adding a statistically effective pitch, he put up by far his best month of the season.

I'm talking about the narrative where he added a pitch and transformed into a different pitcher..... The narrative even you admit begrudgingly is up in the air probably because you've just drilled it down to a 13 inning sample.

[757690]

I'm talking about the narrative where he added a pitch and transformed into a different pitcher..... The narrative even you admit begrudgingly is up in the air probably because you've just drilled it down to a 13 inning sample.

The 13 innings don't tell us that he's a different pitcher. However, knowing that he mastered a new pitch, and was effective with it against major league hitters, however briefly, does tell us something important. It shouldn't be ignored, nor taken lightly.

[RiverRat13]

Does the fact that Bryan Price is from all indications on board with Chapman in the rotation give pause to the "if it ain't broke" crowd on here? Sure, Dusty's been given a bad rap when it comes to misuse of young starters, but I still trust Price much more than Baker when it comes to decisions about the pitching staff.

One of the many interesting parts of this whole saga is the difference between the comments of the manager and pitching coach on the matter have been in media.

[Superdude]

I'm talking about the narrative where he added a pitch and transformed into a different pitcher..... The narrative even you admit begrudgingly is up in the air probably because you've just drilled it down to a 13 inning sample.

Nothing begrudging about it. It is up in the air, but just because we can't definitively conclude he's a different pitcher doesn't mean we can't draw anything from that information. Especially when the improvement lines up perfectly with the timeline of the cutter he added.

[AtomicDumpling]

Fact: In the 2010 season the top 20 closers in baseball all got 25 saves or more and 7 dominant closers had 40 or more saves.

Fact: Of those top 20 closers from 2010, 16 of them have already lost their job as closer in the two seasons since then. Of the 7 dominant ones who had 40+ saves that year only 1 is still a closer after only two more seasons.

Fact: Of the top 30 closers in 2011 only 9 are still a closer after only one season!

Lesson: The job of closer is a dangerous and volatile position. Very few pitchers are able to perform that role for multiple seasons. Even the most spectacular closers are highly likely to lose the job in short order, whether due to injury or poor performance. It is foolhardy to expect a pitcher, no matter how good he is, to remain a dominant closer for an extended period. Aroldis Chapman was awesome last year, but there is absolutely no guarantee he would repeat that feat again this year. History says it is unlikely that he would.

Being a closer is risky business. Closers get hurt all the time due to the rigors of the job. Frequently pitching on back-to-back days, and often pitching three or four days in a row is a killer combination. Closers rarely have time for their arms to recuperate between outings. They have to warm up quickly and come out firing max effort immediately. Sometimes they warm up and don't even get in the game. A starting pitcher has 4 or 5 days between outings to recuperate. He only has to warm up once or twice a week instead of 3-5 times per week, which saves wear and tear on the arm. A starter has time to fully prepare physically for a game instead of being forced to rapidly warm up on a moment's notice. All these factors combine to make being the closer the most dangerous role a pitcher can have. A pitcher can get hurt in any role, but a closer is much more likely to get hurt than a starting pitcher despite throwing fewer innings. Chapman could get hurt just as easily by staying in the bullpen rather than moving to the rotation.

Many of the best starting pitchers in baseball began their careers as relievers. Johan Santana, CJ Wilson and Adam Wainwright all did it. Just last year Chris Sale, Jeff Samardzija and Lance Lynn all made the transition successfully. Moving Aroldis Chapman is not a radical decision. Moving stud relievers into the rotation has been a very common occurrence throughout the history of baseball. There is no guarantee it will work, but a good starting pitcher is much more valuable than a good closer, so it just makes sense to try it.

[gilpdawg]

The fact that Keith Law endorses him as a starter makes me want him to be a reliever even more

Law is a cocky dude, but I really respect the man's baseball knowledge. I used to listen to his podcast he used to do on ESPN with Karabell almost every day.

[gilpdawg]

I think comparing to Josh Hamilton is a bit overboard. A single guy in his 20s struggling with staying away from loose women and fast cars is a far cry from a drug addict trying to stay sober.

Yeah, don't we all like loose women and fast cars?I know I do.

[jojo]

The 13 innings don't tell us that he's a different pitcher. However, knowing that he mastered a new pitch, and was effective with it against major league hitters, however briefly, does tell us something important. It shouldn't be ignored, nor taken lightly.

It should be treated pretty skeptically based upon what we know about pitching.

[elfmanvt07]

It should be treated pretty skeptically based upon what we know about pitching.

Namely?

Coming into this conversation late, you make it sound as if a pitcher never changes, always yielding to the stats on the back of his baseball card.

Those stats are certainly made up of good spells and bad, but it's not everyday a pitcher adds a new pitch. If Broxton added a cutter that in his mind allows him to attack the plate more than he could previously, there will be a change. It may not be a good change long term, but it's a change.

Would Billy Hamilton learning a great third base side bunt not mean anything toward the type of player we could expect him to be? When a player adds a tool, there's a chance that it could prove quite beneficial.

[jojo]

Namely?

Coming into this conversation late, you make it sound as if a pitcher never changes, always yielding to the stats on the back of his baseball card.

Those stats are certainly made up of good spells and bad, but it's not everyday a pitcher adds a new pitch. If Broxton added a cutter that in his mind allows him to attack the plate more than he could previously, there will be a change. It may not be a good change long term, but it's a change.

Would Billy Hamilton learning a great third base side bunt not mean anything toward the type of player we could expect him to be? When a player adds a tool, there's a chance that it could prove quite beneficial.

I make it sound as if it's pretty rare and extraordinary thing for a pitcher to add a pitch in a span of days that not only is major league quality, he possesses exceptional command of it and it dramatically changes his true talent. The evidence for this rare event is 13 innings in which he had a 14 k/BB rate and a BB rate roughly 3 walks/9 lower than his career line.

I'm not sure how the default isn't healthy skepticism.

Has anyone argued he'll suck eggs? No. If David Weathers and Ryan Franklin can be classified as closers, Broxton can probably manage. But factually disproved arguments that his velocity increased as the season progressed and the notion that he pulled a plus pitch out of his back pocket after being traded tend to muddy expectations of Broxton's ability to be a true high leverage arm for the next three years IMHO.

So I make it sound as if he still has a lot to still prove concerning his cutter in general and his new-found plus/plus command. I make it sound like given enough innings, regression to the mean is the safest bet.

It's just not that hard to put together a solid bullpen and three year contracts to relievers are rolls of the dice-very few have been enlightened over the the years. That said, a 3 yr/$21M commitment is alot better than a 4 yr/$46M commitment.