2013 Reds

Mat Latos X-ray negative. Exhale.

Mat Latos was removed from today’s game after being hit on the left foot by a one-hop ground ball. He was taken to the hospital for X-rays.

Mark Sheldon just posted that the X-rays were negative.

Whew.

16 thoughts on “Mat Latos X-ray negative. Exhale.

  1. Just to stir the pot, if he was actually hurt what do you think that would have meant for The Chapman to the Rotation saga? We don’t have a 6th major league ready starter. Cingrani and Corcinci both need more time. If Latos is still limping in a week doe we do ANOTHER 180? So that would be like a 78290.

    • @eric nyc: Probably nothing. Dusty can make an injury be the meaning for Chapman to close, but I doubt he’ll ever make an injury the reason for him to start. Probably just be like “See? That’s what I mean, gotta be durable to be a starter. That’s why Chapman is best as a Closer.”

      Either way, to give my opinion on who would be the next starter if one went down… Sam LeCure. He’s been a starter before (10 games between ’10 and ’11). Already a long reliever so he’s used to pitching multiple innings in a row.

      • @ToddAlmighty: Double posting here because I bothered to look up the numbers..

        2011: 4 starts, 20 2/3rd IP, 11 ER, 5 BB, 19 K.
        2010: 6 starts, 33 1/3rd IP, 18 ER, 20 BB, 22 K.

        I think he could probably manage a 4-4.5 ERA… I think his control is better now than it was seeing as how in 2012 he had 23 BB in 57 1/3 IP. He also has been able to get his HR/9 from 1.1 and 1.2 in ’10 and ’11, down to 0.5 last year. As a starter he’d nothing spectacular, but solid.

        • @ToddAlmighty: So compare the “nothing spectacular” you describe to Chapman’s potential. We might have been a few millimeters away from a season ruining injury. Exactly why the Chapman decision is so horrendous. Any team would drool over a Cueto-Chapman top of the rotation. You think anyone cares about a Cueto-Arroyo one? We are going to be on a razors edge all year instead of having a ridiculously deep rotation. All so Dusty can feel better in the 9th inning.

        • @eric nyc: Hey, I never said it was the RIGHT choice, or what I would do.. it’s just what I said in my opinion was the most likely. Dusty is clearly never going to let Chapman be the starter. If I had to guess, the order of backups would be something like LeCure/Hoover/Cingrani/Outside Option. Either way, lets just pray everyone stays healthy and Leake goes back to ’11 form.

        • @ToddAlmighty: I looked all around and can’t see that Gallarrago has been cut loose yet. He’d probably close to the top of the emergency list, either right before or right after LeCure

          Question is would this move them to go on and get Chapman down to AAA to round him into starting form

        • @ToddAlmighty: I think Sam LeCure and JJ Hoover are both finished as starting pitchers. I don’t think Hoover will ever start a major league game (no offense to him, Marshall and Broxton shouldn’t either) and LeCure’s best chance is an injury to a starter an hour or two before a game.

          I think that entering the season Armando Galarraga (who was recently reassigned to minor league camp but is headed to AAA with his minor league contract) is the top candidate for a short term rotation substitute (kinda like Todd Redmond last year, who made 1 start) while Tony Cingrani would be a long term substitute. Whether or not Cingrani is ready is a topic for debate. Daniel Corcino could also emerge as an option later.

          I really doubt we’ll see any other ‘outside options’ brought in.

    • @eric nyc: I think an injury to Mat Latos would provide Chapman’s long awaited doorway into the rotation. They’d only regret making a contrary announcement – Chapman to the bullpen – so prematurely.

  2. I’ve said before I would like to see Chapman remain as closer. I’ve also said I would like to see what he could do as a starter. If he didn’t make it, fine, we just keep him at closer. What gets me is all the people who thinks Chapman would be a #1 caliber starter right now, from game 1 on (or even game 2 or 3). And, why? Because he can throw the ball 100 mph? Because of his performance when he came into the game with the lead at the end of the game and only needs to throw 1 inning? Because he had a better ERA than any of the starters during ST? Spring Training? These are really conditions for a #1 caliber starter?

    I’m not saying Chapman can’t be a #1 caliber starter, but I’m not going to give him that status based on those conditions or even based on what he would do if given a couple of months to start. There is so much more than goes into it. Can he field? I haven’t seen enough of him for that. Can he hold runners on? From what I saw, he did that poorly. Can he hit? I haven’t seen any of that. “Reports said he can hit.” I need to see it in games. Practice situations are great, but they aren’t games. Can he hit his spots? The last time he ever tried to start near this level, in AAA several years ago, the reports were he could get through about 4 innings fine. But, then, after that, he lost it.

    Not to mention, knocking Leake so much when he is one season removed from being the leader in victories on this team. So many people talk about how “Was this season a fluke”, “That was one good/bad season”, etc., why not with Leake? He did have one bad season. That means he’s a horrible pitcher? Not by a long shot. I would not say Leake is a better pitcher than Chapman at all. But, I will say Leake is a better starter than Chapman, until Chapman was to get his chance at starting, to see what he could do.

    Does Chapman have a lot of potential as a starter? Lord, yes. But, that is potential, as in he’s still working on it. That’s not talent, that’s not anything definite until “after” he was to show and prove that he can do the job; I don’t believe success in ST means he can do the job. And, if given that chance, his trip could get off anywhere along the way, from #5 starter (if that high) to #1 starter.

    Even if Chapman was a starter this season, it sounds like some people were ready to anoint him the messiah for us to the promised land, a WS Title. When was the last time a closer did that? When was the last time a rookie starter (essentially that’s what Chapman would be, since he hasn’t started at this level before) did that for a WS champion? I’d be willing to bet never.

    Again, I wanted to see Chapman be given a chance to start. I was interested in seeing what he could do outside ST. But, some of the talk of people looking to make him a #1 starter now or even this season, I think they need to tone that down. Shoot, if he was to become that, there would be no way we would be able to re-sign him. We would probably definitely be looking to trade him, possibly as early as next off season. And, Chapman would be more valuable in a trade as a starter. As a closer, I believe we will at least still have a shot at re-signing him. That could even end up giving us more time to make him a starter.

    • @steveschoen: I’ve heard Brantley say that Chapman is the best fielding pitcher on the team. That’s really saying something given that Arroyo has a Gold Glove and Leake is a fantastic fielder. I’ve heard Jocketty say that Chapman is the best athlete on the team and that he’s also a really good hitter.

      I don’t think we should be worrying about what factors would make it more or less likely to re-sign Chapman. That’s never going to happen. He’s too big of a draw and if he succeeds over time at either closer or starter, some big market team is going to outbid the Reds. Instead of worrying about re-signing him, the Reds should be maximizing his value to the team over the next three years that he’ll be with the team.

      Regarding a trade, I called for that two years ago when it looked like the Reds were going to make Chapman a relief pitcher. But I’d rather them try him as a starter to see what his upper bound is than trade him.

      • @Steve Mancuso:
        Hi, Steve,

        I just prefer to see the skills in actual competition. It does ease my mind with Chapman that some like Brantley and Jocketty are saying those things. But, it’s still always different in the games.

        I do agree it is unlikely that we will re-sign him. Something is going to need to happen for that to occur, I believe. Mostly getting rid of some of the other contracts, unless the fans start to come out in droves. That’s also why I would have liked to see him given a chance to start. I think he would have been more valuable as a starter in any kind of trade, I believe.

  3. Shoot, what would you consider from your 4-5 guys in the rotation, anyhow? I would expect nothing better than a 500 record. If the 1-3 guys go 10+ total themselves, we are looking at 91 games for the season right there, a record I could probably take. Given that, I could take Leake as our 5 guy. If Latos was seriously injured, would we have a problem? Somewhat. But, like I said, we would only need a guy to go 50% for the season. Shoot, #5 guys are pretty much a dime a dozen.

    • @steveschoen: Here are a few points regarding your comments. These are not directed at you or at your comments, but as further discussion to points raised by your comments.

      First Chapman’s contract: Chapman is signed through 2014 with a $5MM player option for 2015, but the Reds have player control through 2016. If Chapman declines the 2015 option, he begins arbitration eligibility for the 2015 & 2016 season. Based on some of the comments I’m seeing, this isn’t clear to some of the Nation.

      Second Chapman’s status or potential as a starter: Maybe I’m misinterpreting or at least intertrepting the comments dofferently, but I’m not seeing anyone annoint Chapman as a top of the rotation starter and certainly not a top of the rotation starter for the 2013 season. What I am seeing is talk about potential, the same potential used when discussing Cingrani or Stephenson. He will certainly not make an effective starter with only 1 plus pitch and nothing to back it up, but Chapman has demonstrated effective supporting pitches whenever he has regularly used them over the past two years. How effective those supporting pitches would be in a regular starting roll can only be determined in a regular starting roll. There is enough evidence from limited performance to think Chapman might have the ability to be an effective top of the rotation starter, but he also might fail as a regular starter too.

      Third Leake’s performance: I don’t see anyone disparaging Leake as a back end starting pitcher. I don’t think he’s not a top of the rotation pitcher, but he is good and he is valuable. If Chapman competes as a starting pitcher, he is in direct competition with Leake for innings as a starting pitcher. I don’t see him replacing Leake in the starting rotation. If that occurs, it will happen next season when the young starting pitchers start competing for the major league rotation.

      Fourth the value of back end starting pitchers: If a #5 starter (and I think Leake has more value than a #5 starter) are really a dime a dozen, then there wouldn’t be so many team still looking for starting pitchers to fill out their rotation. When discussions start digressing to the least harmful option for a #5 starting pitcher from castoffs (like Gallaraga) those are not effective options. Leake is not a castoff or a least harmful option.

      • @Shchi Cossack:
        Hi, Shchi,

        I agree with a lot of what you said. I was not aware of Chapman’s full contract status, only through next season. Thank you for that information.

        As far as other’s comments, I have read much from people, including here but maybe not specifically on this post, how Chapman is going to be a #1 pitcher. This year, not by a long shot. Next season, probably not. The season after, possibly. But, there are still so many conditions that need to be met that I feel it’s ridiculous to even discuss Chapman with this hysteria. Chapman isn’t going to be the key to our success this year. I do believe the team would do just as well with or without Chapman this year, maybe fall short just a couple of games without him at most.

        Also, I have read several posts on here with people, in short, already putting Chapman as a starter and Leake to Louisville before this decision was done. While if Chapman was a starter, that would be where Leake would probably go, that entire scenario wasn’t necessarily fact, nor even most likely to be done. It is obvious, Chapman’s upside is huge. But, also, given he hasn’t started at this level yet, and Leake has experienced some success as a starter at this level, I would rate Leake the better starter, only interested in seeing what Chapman could do as a starter.

        As for the #5 starter, I may have been simplifying the scenario a bit. But, the only reason that teams would be looking to round out their 5 man rotation is because they are wondering what dime to go with for the #5 starters, one of the reasons for ST, to see what is the best dime in the lot.

      • @Shchi Cossack:
        Also, Shchi, just because the player is under our control through 2017, that doesn’t mean we can say what he pays. You think his agent is going have him take the $5 million option for 2015? Highly unlikely. Thus, Chapman would be going through arbitration starting 2015 season. Given that, we would need to be able to pay him as such. If we can’t afford it, we would be looking at either trading him or getting rid of other contract(s) to afford him.

        Fact is, Chapman is still possibly trade material, probably after this season, more likely middle to end of next season, I believe.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s