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]

Originally Posted by klw

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]

Originally Posted by Slyder

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]

Originally Posted by Superdude

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]

Originally Posted by mth123

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]

Originally Posted by Superdude

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.

[I(heart)Freel]

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

[mth123]

Originally Posted by I(heart)Freel

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?

[Will M]

Originally Posted by mth123

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]

Originally Posted by Will M

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

[traderumor]

Ah, my tag line appears: can't win with Chapman in the pen, can't win without him in the pen.

I think it is a bit premature to make conclusions about his value in the pen for 2012 vs. his value in the rotation for 2012. He's wasted as a short man in the pen, yet not put him in the rotation because he might not be an immediate ace when he steps into the rotation. Unfortunately, the decision makers have to crap or get off the pot, unlike message board posters.

[Will M]

Originally Posted by Slyder

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

i see things differently than you.
1) i think Bailey is likely to pitch better as a starter in 2012 than Chapman.
i'd rather deal Alonso/Grandal for Shields or Stubbs/Volquez/Masset for Wandy than deal Bailey. even though he has been around for years Bailey could still get it all together and pitch like #2 starter in 2012. Leake is a solid #3 guy. it seems to me that we had 2 holes in the 2011 rotation: Volquez/Willis & Arroyo. since we are stuck with Arroyo I'd rather simply replace the Volquez/Willis spot with a guy like Wandy or Shields. I think we can do that without dealing the other 3 starters. so the way i'd want to set up the rotation there simply isn't room for Chapman unless Arroyo goes which i can't see happening.
2) i'd prefer we not put too many question marks into the mix. thats my philosophy in general and more so since the clock is ticking on Votto's time as a Red. to me it seems Chapman could close in 2012 but as a starter he is an unknown. if we were in rebuilding mode i'd let him start. but i think the team can contend in 2012 with the right moves.
3) also if Chapman starts then the team is going to go out and pay for a 'closer'. i'd prefer a pen of Chapman, Bray, Ondrusek, Lecure, Boxberger plus a cheap vet. the difference between the cheap vet and say resigning Cordero is likely ~$5M.

[nate]

Originally Posted by Slyder

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.

[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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.