Chapman

[Trajinous]

I don't see this at all.

Here's a pitcher who, as far as I can tell, has one very valuable pitch -- a 100 MPH fastball.

As far as I can tell, his secondary stuff isn't special. He can be effective with the change up, but largely because his fastball is so dominant the differential is great.

As a starter, he won't be able to use that 100 MPH fastball. His best attribute will be taken away, since he'll have to throw many more pitches.

The logic of taking Chapman and putting him where he can't use his best attribute is highly debatable.

I do not think it's a no-brainer to put Chapman in a spot where he can't throw his 100 plus MPH fastball.

Then you haven't been watching him pitch then. His slider is brutal and what people actually strikeout on. The "only one pitch" argument is just wrong since Chapman only uses 2 pitches because he is in the bullpen. He has more but when you only throw 20-35 pitches in a game, it doesn't make since to prolong AB's with change-ups and curveballs.

As a starter, Chapman would use a 98 mph fastball which is still 5-6 mph faster than most starters. Hitters will still have trouble catching up with it.

[redsfandan]

I think there is a clear difference between pitching 2 innings at a time, multiple times a week than there is 1 inning at a time, multiple times a week.

There is a reason relief pitchers are used the way they are, and that 2 inning relievers are more the exception, not the rule.

But you don't bother to read or interpret correctly my posts anyways, so I'm not sure why I bother!

Yeah, I'm curious too. Cuz I completely misunderstood what? Maybe, because between you and me you're not making a point with any logic behind it. Put another way, if you were a gm you're team would suck cuz you'd be too afraid to do anything. If you're in chage you've gotta make bold moves sometimes. WALT FAILED. If you want him as your gm, congrats, he's all yours.

[RollyInRaleigh]

Then you haven't been watching him pitch then. His slider is brutal and what people actually strikeout on. The "only one pitch" argument is just wrong since Chapman only uses 2 pitches because he is in the bullpen. He has more but when you only throw 20-35 pitches in a game, it doesn't make since to prolong AB's with change-ups and curveballs.

As a starter, Chapman would use a 98 mph fastball which is still 5-6 mph faster than most starters. Hitters will still have trouble catching up with it.

For 6 - 7 innings? You're sure about that, huh?

[Kc61]

Then you haven't been watching him pitch then. His slider is brutal and what people actually strikeout on. The "only one pitch" argument is just wrong since Chapman only uses 2 pitches because he is in the bullpen. He has more but when you only throw 20-35 pitches in a game, it doesn't make since to prolong AB's with change-ups and curveballs.

As a starter, Chapman would use a 98 mph fastball which is still 5-6 mph faster than most starters. Hitters will still have trouble catching up with it.

Sure, I guess you're right, I haven't seen Aroldis Chapman pitch much.

Right on. You've got it.

Sure.

[Patrick Bateman]

WHY wouldn't you want to find out WHAT he COULD be as a starter? Afraid?

As I have already stated (but you have preferred to ignore, and then question me in aggressive fashion):

1. From what the Reds have seen in their attempts as a starter in his career as a Red, they might already not like what they have seen, and perhaps see his conversion to a starter be a multiple year progression.

2. The Reds are trying to win a world series this year. The Reds do have other options at starter, and perhaps it makes more sense to use Chapman in a role in which he is a pretty close to a lock to dominate it, rather than use him in a role in which he might be a higher injury risk, might not be able to control his innings in a fashion that would make him a weapon come playoff time (ie. Strasburg plan), and perhaps be less valuable to the Reds in a year in which we are contending.

I'm suggesting that the Reds winning this year is more crucial than Aroldis' professiona development, and that using him in the way they currently are might be the best course of action for the upcoming season.

Again, I'm not saying as fact, I'm suggesting there simply is a counter argument that exists, and there may be some logic you are not considering. I'm not sure why this has to be "only one answer" makes sense, especially when we don't have all of the facts in front of us.

[RollyInRaleigh]

As I have already stated (but you have preferred to ignore, and then question me in aggressive fashion):

1. From what the Reds have seen in their attempts as a starter in his career as a Red, they might already not like what they have seen, and perhaps see his conversion to a starter be a multiple year progression.

2. The Reds are trying to win a world series this year. The Reds do have other options at starter, and perhaps it makes more sense to use Chapman in a role in which he is a pretty close to a lock to dominate it, rather than use him in a role in which he might be a higher injury risk, might not be able to control his innings in a fashion that would make him a weapon come playoff time (ie. Strasburg plan), and perhaps be less valuable to the Reds in a year in which we are contending.

I'm suggesting that the Reds winning this year is more crucial than Aroldis' professiona development, and that using him in the way they currently are might be the best course of action for the upcoming season.

Again, I'm not saying as fact, I'm suggesting there simply is a counter argument that exists, and there may be some logic you are not considering. I'm not sure why this has to be "only one answer" makes sense, especially when we don't have all of the facts in front of us.

[redsfandan]

Interesting phrase, most "valuable" slider. You didn't say one of the best sliders.

You have to look at an Arolidis Chapman without his 100 MPH fastball. The "anti-closer" group has to say, ok, I want to put Aroldis in a spot where he cannot throw that 100 MPH fastball. Then decide.

To me, Aroldis with a 93 MPH fastball is a much more questionable pitcher than Aroldis with a 100 plus MPH fastball. It impacts his fastball. It also impacts a hitter's approach to Chapman. It likely impacts the "value" of all of his pitches.

I think keeping him as a closer is a reasonable decision.

IF Chapman is to develop as a pitcher he has to develop his other pitches so his fastball is STILL an effective pitch as a contrast to the other pitches in his arsenal.

FORGET his fastball, concentrate on his other pitches. IF it's true that his other pitches aren't that good, or CAN'T be that good, then, sure, he's destined to be a reliever. That's a big IF though.

[westofyou]

Could have been Billy McCool version 2, still could be too.

Wait and see

[redsfandan]

But I also don't think it is fair or reasonable to simply make up reasoning and present it as fact.

I agree. I presented it as my opinion of the decision (IF true).

[WMR]

What a half assed attempt this was. Just became much more bearish on the Reds chances of winning it all now or in Chapman's remaining years with the club.

[Caveat Emperor]

2. The Reds are trying to win a world series this year. The Reds do have other options at starter, and perhaps it makes more sense to use

Mike Leake proved, effectively, last year that he isn't really a valid option for a team trying to win a World Series.

Short and soft-tossing aren't usually a recipe for greatness, and that's what the Reds just committed themselves to for 150+ innings.

[RollyInRaleigh]

It has been said, for ages that you don't really own a pitch unless you can consistently throw it for strikes. Not so true in the 9th inning when you can throw and locate your fastball at 105 mph. In that particular situation, velocity, alone, will cause hitters to swing at pitches they wouldn't ordinarily swing at in the first 7 innings when a pitcher isn't throwing 100+ and the game isn't on the line. A slider, anywhere, is a threat.

[redsfandan]

I don't see this at all.

Here's a pitcher who, as far as I can tell, has one very valuable pitch -- a 100 MPH fastball.

As far as I can tell, his secondary stuff isn't special. He can be effective with the change up, but largely because his fastball is so dominant the differential is great.

As a starter, he won't be able to use that 100 MPH fastball. His best attribute will be taken away, since he'll have to throw many more pitches.

The logic of taking Chapman and putting him where he can't use his best attribute is highly debatable.

I do not think it's a no-brainer to put Chapman in a spot where he can't throw his 100 plus MPH fastball.

And why wouldn't he be able to use his 'best attribute'? Some starting pitchers are known to reach back and throw some extra heat when they need it. Why couldn't Chapman do that as a starter?

[OnBaseMachine]

Ugh. What a disappointment, I should have saw it coming though. Dusty gets his way again. I would just rather see Chapman traded than to waste his talents in the bullpen yet again. I'm sure he could fetch a significant return. Giancarlo maybe? Austin Jackson? Profar?

[RedEye]

Ugh. What a disappointment, I should have saw it coming though. Dusty gets his way again. I would just rather see Chapman traded than to waste his talents in the bullpen yet again. I'm sure he could fetch a significant return. Giancarlo maybe? Austin Jackson? Profar?

Hey! Let's start up another Chapman-for-Giancarlo thread!