I paraphrased you. You guys were advocating Chapman remain at closer, seemingly for always. That is not where he can provide the most value for the Reds.

 

And you know this because???

 

We all know what happened to Chapman last year. I don't believe he's cut out to be a starter or a 3 inning guy.

And you know this because???

 

We all know what happened to Chapman last year. I don't believe he's cut out to be a starter or a 3 inning guy.

 

I don't recall any point last year where the Reds asked him to pitch three innings or start. At least, not seriously.

 

And if you believe he's not cut out to be a starter or three-inning guy, then he needs to go because there are lots of guys out there who can do his current job at a fraction of the cost.

It needs a solution in that there's too high priced a guy in that job. Ultimately, it becomes the "bullpen solution," then in upcoming years it becomes the "starter solution."

 

But it definitely makes more sense to seize on a couple of words than to read the entire suggestion I've laid out in this thread.

 

All I've really heard is people not wanting spill the apple cart and "mess up a good thing." Problem is, that "good thing" is a scenario of coming up short in the postseason again.

 

No one has really come up with a good reason why my scenario isn't one that not only helps out the team this year, but helps out the team going forward. Some have seized on the "starter" part of my initial post a little too much, as though I'm advocating shutting Chapman down for a few months then bringing him back as a full-time starter in August, and that's not the case. Just use him where you'll get more value — in an as-needed role to get through the tough patches of an opposing lineup instead of a 9th-inning, three-outs-only defined "closer" role — and put Cingrani in that spot, where he is best suited, and where the dropoff is negligible. By stretching him out some now, and getting him used to not pitching every day, Chapman is better able to make the transition to starter next year, which should be the ultimate goal for the franchise.

 

Continuing to keep Chapman in a three-outs-at-a-time 9th inning role is a waste of money, since there are plenty of guys out there you can get for a million a year who can do that. If you're not going to ultimately use Chapman as a starter for the long-term, the Reds might as well trade him and get something for him while his value on the market is high.

 

After you suggested moving Chapman out of the closer role, there was no point in reading the rest.

 

Everything about him says closer. Stuff, velo, recovery time...etc.

I don't recall any point last year where the Reds asked him to pitch three innings or start. At least, not seriously.

 

And if you believe he's not cut out to be a starter or three-inning guy, then he needs to go because there are lots of guys out there who can do his current job at a fraction of the cost.

 

How much do you think Chapman makes???

I don't recall any point last year where the Reds asked him to pitch three innings or start. At least, not seriously.

 

And if you believe he's not cut out to be a starter or three-inning guy, then he needs to go because there are lots of guys out there who can do his current job at a fraction of the cost.

 

He's only making $2 million this season and $3 million in 2014. Who are you going to get that is that dominant in any role in the bullpen for that price?

 

As an example, the Tampa Bay Rays, who espouse the disposable closer mentality, pay both Joel Peralta and Fernando Rodney more than Chapman. Also, Pittsburgh, who changes closers regularly, has more than that in Jason Grilli.

Edited June 20, 201313 yr by AverageJoesGym

How much do you think Chapman makes???

 

Not as much as I thought. But the numbers I see don't count bonuses and such.

 

He's only making $2 million this season and $3 million in 2014. Who are you going to get that is that dominant in any role in the bullpen for that price?

 

As an example, the Tampa Bay Rays, who espouse the disposable closer mentality, pay both Joel Peralta and Fernando Rodney more than Chapman. Also, Pittsburgh, who changes closers regularly, has more than that in Jason Grilli.

 

I still contend a guy with Chapman's talents can be better used in other spots to help the team. As dominant as he is in a three-inning role, he could be even more valuable in a longer, as-needed role, and if the transition is handled correctly can be just as dominant.

Not as much as I thought. But the numbers I see don't count bonuses and such.

 

 

 

I still contend a guy with Chapman's talents can be better used in other spots to help the team. As dominant as he is in a three-inning role, he could be even more valuable in a longer, as-needed role, and if the transition is handled correctly can be just as dominant.

 

Since Cingrani already has been conditioned to go more than 1 inning, and he has the potential to be dominant out of the bullpen as well, wouldn't it make more sense to keep Chapman in a role that he is comfortable in and in which he has flourished? You could use Cingrani in the 2-3 inning role or in an as-needed role. This way you only have one player adjusting their role instead of two?

 

And Chapman's bonus was around $15 million. It is spread out in payments until 2020--the Reds are already on the hook for it so it would do no good to trade Chapman. His listed salary is what he will cost them each season. If you want to get rid of the true drain on the payroll then dump Marshall and Broxton.

Really, this is one of the more outlandish threads I have read on here. Kind of thinking we are being duped... Thats the only legit explanation for it that I could come up with

And you know this because???

 

We all know what happened to Chapman last year. I don't believe he's cut out to be a starter or a 3 inning guy.

 

Agreed, that's why I gave up on the Chapman as a starter argument even though I think closers currently are the most overrated players in baseball history. 20 years from now when managers use their best relief pitcher in far different roles than to start the 9th inning only the current situation will be laughed at.

 

As far as Chapman as a starter this year good thing it didn't work out b/c there is no way he would have been better than Leake has been IMO.