Please tell me the Reds aren't keeping Aroldis at closer...

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

Why don't the Braves make Kimbrel a starter?

He's never started a game as a professional, for starters. I'm guessing he has never exhibited stamina or the variety of pitches needed to be a starter. Chapman is uniquely qualified to get an opportunity to start and has done so in his young career. Kimbrel is Billy Wagner, Chapman is potentially John Smoltz.

[puca]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

Why don't the Braves make Kimbrel a starter?

And why didn't the Cardinals make Adam Wainwright a starter?...oh wait....

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?

[15fan]

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.

[JaxRed]

Put me in the "starter" category.

[corkedbat]

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?

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by corkedbat

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?

Is anybody penciling him in as the next Verlander? It's a long ways from the "give it an honest go" to the "sure thing #1" camp. I think most people who want him to start share your same concerns. But I do know that the chance of him becoming the next Verlander if he's in the pen are a solid 0.0%

[Blitz Dorsey]

Originally Posted by puca

And why didn't the Cardinals make Adam Wainwright a starter?...oh wait....

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?

Wainwright is nothing like Kimbrel and Chapman who are both fireballers. My question was why are Reds fans up in arms about Chapman not being a starter, while there is no discussion from Braves fans (all six of them) about making Kimbrel a starter?

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.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

Wainwright is nothing like Kimbrel and Chapman who are both fireballers. My question was why are Reds fans up in arms about Chapman not being a starter, while there is no discussion from Braves fans (all six of them) about making Kimbrel a starter?

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.

You are making a category mistake from the outset. Kimbrel has NEVER started a professional game. I imagine there is a good reason for that, so no one says, "hmmm, wonder if he should be considered for a starting role?" It would be a "let's try Kearns at 3b" situation.

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?

[Rojo]

Originally Posted by 15fan

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.

[Patrick Bateman]

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.

[WildcatFan]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

Maybe some guys are just better in the closer's role.

Prove to us that Chapman is better in the closer's role than in the starter's role.

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.

[RANDY IN INDY]

We do know he is an "elite" closer. Top of the chart.

[Slyder]

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).

Starters>Closers.

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.

[kpresidente]

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.

[Blitz Dorsey]

Originally Posted by traderumor

You are making a category mistake from the outset. Kimbrel has NEVER started a professional game. I imagine there is a good reason for that, so no one says, "hmmm, wonder if he should be considered for a starting role?" It would be a "let's try Kearns at 3b" situation.

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?

I disagree. By reading your post, one would think Chapman has extensive history as a starting pitcher in Major League Baseball. However, he doesn't. He's barely been a starting pitcher at this level. He did have a season as a starter in the minors. Not exactly a lot of experience as a professional baseball player.

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.