DUSTY BAKER IS A .......

Um

130, i can see your point about but letting a guy start an inning with 107 pitches isnt anything to blow up at. Jesus

by nms on Jun 10, 2006 8:57 PM EDT reply actions

it isn't under normal circumstances but Zambrano is one of the most over abused pitchers in baseball. When you hit 100 pitches and your team has a 4 run lead in the 8th I would think that's a good opportunity to rest your pitcher. No?

"Baseball is 90% mental, the other half is physical" - Yogi Berra

by the pinstripes on Jun 10, 2006 9:37 PM EDT up reply actions

i can certainly respect that, but......

i`m more concerned about buffet abuse points though. what about these cat`s that go to a buffet? could be any buffet, you know. and they just abuse the heck out of there own shirts and dungarees by stretching them beyond normal capacity. is it like a contest or what? i know this one cat from texas. i never even saw anything like it in my whole entire life. he would start off with his first plate looking like most normal people`s whole meal. then as the "game" wore on he would just get stronger. much like zambrano and his pitching, he would just keep knocking them down. he would double-fist the egg rolls into his esophagus. drop one beer after another. we had to tear him away. never needed a reliever. wanted to finish what he started. he works with plastics now. he tries to design these stash-away plastic containers that he can take to one of his favorite all-you-can-eats and relieve them of some inventory on the q-t. i suppose it will catch up with him one day but he was amazing. he did this for at least 6 years strong. so i wouldn`t about zambrano. he`ll be fine and just get better. glad i could help.

he truly is the best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be- bret hart on zodiac

by thisisthezodiacspeaking (61590) on Jun 11, 2006 3:01 AM EDT up reply actions

thanks

this is the most crazy post ive ever read at this site. it really made my day, thanks for not taking things too seriously.

by sanchez101 on Jun 11, 2006 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Brilliant

Just...brilliant.

by rick on Jun 11, 2006 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions

OBP infatuation?

He also has Juan Pierre and his .277 OBP leading off games again. At least that's better than last year's leadoff hitter Corey Patterson who had a .254 OBP. But I am sure Corey is not complaining about being moved to Baltimore and having a career year.

Dusty just doesn't get it. The guy who leads off the game shouldn't be the guy with the one of the worst OBP's in the starting lineup.

by acr on Jun 10, 2006 9:39 PM EDT reply actions

Wow

He was throwing a shutout at the time, I'm sure Dusty talked to him between innings, he is the Cubs Ace now, and that's kind of normal to see if he wants to continue if an ace has a shutout going.

by SoCalSoxFan on Jun 10, 2006 9:43 PM EDT reply actions

with all due respect...

it's up to the manager to take a player out. Zambrano won't ever ask to leave a game.

"Baseball is 90% mental, the other half is physical" - Yogi Berra

by the pinstripes on Jun 10, 2006 10:27 PM EDT up reply actions

Obviously it's up

to the manager to make the final call whether or not to yank a starter, but when the ace is throwing a shutout, the manager will ask him how he feels between innings. It's not necessarily what he says, but how he says he wants to stay in the game. Kinda like when Penny got yanked before qualifying for the win, he went to the dugout and imploded, there are just certain things you do for your ace, and in Penny's case, Grady might have been wrong to pull his ace

by SoCalSoxFan on Jun 11, 2006 3:51 AM EDT up reply actions

Yea...

I mean Z has taken the load admirably his whole career, but considering the amount of evidence of overworking young pitchers like that, the fact that the Cubs are going nowhere, and that Z isn't even 25 years old...you'd think Dusty would chill a little.

Personally I can't wait for Baker to leave.

by SenorGato88 on Jun 10, 2006 9:52 PM EDT reply actions

he had a .....

4 run lead going into the 8th. The guy throws between 120-130 pitches a game on average. When do you rest him? Is this not a golden opportunity? Are you saying he should make 30+ starts at an average of 125 pitcher per game?

By the way, I mean no disrespect to anyone if I seem adament. It's just that I am... :-)

"Baseball is 90% mental, the other half is physical" - Yogi Berra

by the pinstripes on Jun 10, 2006 10:30 PM EDT reply actions

Rest?

This isn't to defend Dusty who, IMO, isn't a very good game manager. I'm just wondering how pitchers like Juan Marichal, Bob Gibson, Don Drysdale and Steve Çarlton managed to have careers that lasted longer than 2 or 3 years?

by DrBGiantsfan on Jun 11, 2006 1:02 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Rest?

I'm not sure if this holds true for pitchers of the 60s and 70s, but I've read a lot about how pitchers in the pre-60s era would "coast" and rarely throw at maximum effort, except when absolutely necessary.

They could get away with that, as lineups back then generally had middle infielders and catchers who couldn't hit, as well as (in the AL) pitchers batting. Now, MLB has middle infielders who hit 20, 30, even 40 home runs, along with a large number of good-hitting catchers, and (in the AL) the designated hitter. Less automatic outs leads me to believe that pitchers are having to bear down and throw at max effort more often than their predecessors.

Add to that the lowering of the mound, the shrinking strike zone, and the increased emphasis on power hitters, and you have a league full of pitchers who simply have to put forth more effort to get outs. Even if they're throwing less pitches, they're throwing harder, with the odds stacked much further against them.

I'd also be willing to bet that the increased level of competitiveness in high school and college ball leads to some abusive workloads (for amateur hurlers) that may not have been as prevalent in the era when Drysdale, Gibson, Marichal, etc. were pitching. But that's purely conjecture on my part.

by RCCook on Jun 11, 2006 1:23 AM EDT up reply actions

Pitches....

Don't quote me, but I read somewhere that Project Scoresheet determined that the average inning lasted 9-11 pitches in the 60's and now lasts 15-16. Not sure how accurate that is, but it would explain a lot.

by chris in illinois on Jun 11, 2006 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions

60's pitchers

I think that is true, and a likely partial explanation for those pitchers.

However, The problem with saying, "so-and-so pitched all these innings and his arm didn't fall off" is that you can always find pitchers who can handle the workload, but most pitchers can't. There are tons of pitchers whose careers were shorter because of the abuse. Who knows how long Koufax would have pitched without the abuse it took. A few pitchers ability to succeed with a heavy workload is no proof that pitch counts don't matter.

by rcobeen on Jun 11, 2006 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions

Devil's Advocate here...

Ok, so for starers, I have Zambo on my fantasy team and don't like his high pitch counts even though its unclear how it impacts health. Even the BP articles others pointed out seem to put the threshold around 120 pitches.

And I don't like Dusty, never have, start as his man crush on Neifi Perez and end with his aparent abuse of his staff.

It seems that having a shutout going might been the governing factor here. It's possible Dusty wanted to let Zambo go for the shutout, and if Zambo isn't tired, then why not let him go for it?

And when you ask "when do you rest him?" I'd say, when he's tired. The constant in the articles I've read about pitcher abuse is that its an issue of fatigue, not simply raw pitch counts. Some pitchers can throw more before getting tired, others can throw less. The BP article that was referred to me illustrates this point more than anything. 100 or 110 or 120 is just a general guideline, not a hard-fast law.

now, of course, I'd err on the side of caution and not have Zambo pitch above 100 unless the game was on the line, but that's just me, and the bottom line is that its possible they have some information that we don't.

by beastball on Jun 10, 2006 11:16 PM EDT reply actions

Well

Z's sh*tty control is another reason I worry about him.

It's not like we're going anywhere, whats the point of working the 24 year old ace like this?

by SenorGato88 on Jun 11, 2006 1:29 AM EDT reply actions

A very jaded opinion

We as a baseball community make way too much out this pitch count nonsense.

I was having a lengthy conversation with a friend about this very topic on Tuesday.

Couple thoughts:

The teams are making the investment in them and many times it is a for a 4-5 year period. Chances are that if they are really good - some other team will make an offer that can't be matched like an A-Rod or Manny deal. So, as a good business person - you are going maximize your investment and shouldn't care about what kind of product the next team gets. If the bullpen is tired or something else - you throw that guy out there. It is a cold, non-human thought process but these guys make more in 4-5 years than most people make in a lifetime. In addition - a lot of people get treated a lot worse in their work environment than being asked to throw an extra 13 pitches.
Part of the problem with pitchers is that they are babied to the point where they don't build up the strength to throw 125 pitches. Growing up, in your neighborhood, there was usually 2 guys who were good pitchers and you played 4 games everyday and they each pitched all 4 games, 5 days a week for 2 months of summer. They threw 100 pitches a game, 400 a day, 2000 a week and probably about 16,000 for the summer. The highly touted pitcher in Japan has been "abused" according to many accounts because he has pitched a lot of innings including 17 inning complete games followed up by 4 inning relief appearances. I would suggest that maybe he has pitched a lot because he has built up the ability to pitch a lot. Pitchers did this all the time years and year ago. I don't want to hear about how pitchers throw harder now because pitchers are stronger now and have better medical technology so that is washed out in my opinion.

At the end of the day, we want to limit pitch count to extend career when in reality, careers are done in 5-8 years anyways. I say - push the pitchers harder, maximize their output, stop paying middle relievers $3,000,000 a year and give it to the starters who should be pitching anyway.

by slickwdb on Jun 11, 2006 8:31 AM EDT reply actions

I don't agree

AT ALL that we as a baseball community take pitch-counts too seriously. IMO, anybody that thinks otherwise is holding on to old ways of thinking that have been proven to not to be true. A few guys being able to do it with little problem does not out weigh the mounds of evidence we have to the contrary.

Sure, there were guys in the past that seemed to be able to throw endlessly - Gibson, Drysdale, etc. Problem is, these guys are the exception, not the norm. We've got guys like Livan in this era. There were guys like Koufax and tons of others that washed up prematurely, but no one ever mentions them when making that arguement. Hell, even Drysdale was cooked at age 33, same with Marichal. The bottom line is, sure you can always find some out there that can throw endlessly, but these are exceptions, not the norm. There's kids out there that grew up around high power lines in the 50's and are OK, doesn't mean you should be able to build a house around those same lines today.

You can't compare eras, this is a different time. As mentioned above, pitchers in past would "coast" at times knowing they would have to throw again in a few days - sometimes the very next day. Pitchers back then did not throw sliders or cut-fastballs - two of the more strenuous pitches on an arm. The average pitcher does throw harder these days on average.

I agree pitchers for the most part aren't typically in the same shape as they were in the past. Are they babied? No. We have medical/scientific reasons for training them they way they are these days. It's 2006, the days of "throw some dirt on it, you'll be fine" are over.

I also think this maximizing their output is a bunch of garbage. If you look at a pitcher as a piece of meet you have for 4 years, you want him to last those 4 years - not throw 130 pitches a game raising the likelyhood he won't see the end of those 4 years.

I don't have a problem with Zambrano throwing 120 pitches in a game - as long as it's not almost EVERY time he goes out there. He isn't out of the injury nexus yet, Dusty needs to get his head out of his ass, and then his ass out of Chicago.

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jun 11, 2006 9:22 AM EDT reply actions

re

I agree with whatyou said 100%. We can all name numerous potential studs that flamed out because of too much use when they were young, but I don't know of a single case of someone burning out because of UNDER use.

If this were the playoffs or Zambrano was working on a no-no you let him finish with 130 pitches. You don't let someone who pitched 120 pitches last week throw for 130 in consecutive starts in June.

I agree with your assesment of modern medicine and conditioning. Anyone think our understanding of these things has regressed since 1975? There has been so much data and statistics accumalated over the years to support pitch counts (especially for young pitchers) that cannot be ignored.

by ScottAZ on Jun 11, 2006 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions

They are babied

The reason that pitchers start flaming out is because they are not conditioned to throw 100 pitches regularly.

There is no reason why starters can't throw an inning or 2 on the side day like Wang did out of necessity for the Yankees earlier this week or last. They are throwing a 40 pitch session as if it were a game - why not use them in the game?

Mike Myers is on a team to make 30 appearances and pitch 10 innings and you tell me that is an effective use of a roster spot? Randy Johnson could not do that in spot areas from time to time?

Bullpens are depleted when 3 starters for a team flame out in a week, why is it that they rotation cannot be utilized more?

Overall - baseball has come to pay more and expect less and that is just nonsense.

And as far as Zambrano - he may get injured eventually but for the last 3 years I have listened to people complain about his pitch counts on a regular basis and he just keeps doing it. If he flames out in 5 years - big deal, he could have just as easily wrecked his career with his e-mail hobby.

by slickwdb on Jun 11, 2006 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions

BS

pitchers - at least regular starters - are conditioned to throw 100 pitches a game. There is nothing to back up that irresponsible statement. You're in the severe minority in thinking that arms can stand up to the abuse they used to be subjected to. Most in that minority think that way because they are uneducated/haven't seen the mountains of evidence showing them just how wrong they are. Like I said, there are guys that can do it and not display any ill effects. Again, they are the exception, not the rule.

There is more to the way pitching staffs are built/used these days - it's not all about babying the starters. Relief pitching has become more specialized. This trend has paralled the rise of better statistical analysis/application by baseball management. It's about playing the odds with match-ups as much as it is about saving a pitchers arm.

Adding to a need for more bullpen usage is how watered down the rotations have become. When you run a rotation out there like KC or TB, guess what, you're gonna dip into that bullpen a ton more than teams like the White Sox or the Mets. If you were to take todays talent pool and condense the amount of teams to mid-60's levels, the bullpen would not be as big of a part of the game. You really need to let go of the past. It is what is, today is a different ballgame on so many levels. Applying yesterdays ideals of baseball to today is like trying to apply alchemy within a nuclear power plant. Not a good combo.

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jun 11, 2006 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions

hmm

Slurve - why bother?

by pedrophile on Jun 11, 2006 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions

I dunno

I just can't let stuff like that lay. People come here for information, if I think I see bad info - I can't bring myself to just let it be. I know I'm not always right, but at the same time I want to help make this site a place for good, credible info.

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jun 11, 2006 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions

I hear you

but Dusty Baker's son "slick" doesn't like us making fun of him.

Maybe he should pick up a ball and then start throwing. Then when it hurts throw some more. Then come back 5 days later when your arm is still tired and repeat.

Most people don't realize ALL pitchers arms are injured in some small ways. And they frequently lose both range of motion and velocity over the years. Look at Pedros arm angle and you will see the loss of range of motion in his shoulder. Also how he needs the hot weather to get velocity.

by pedrophile on Jun 11, 2006 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions

Selective readers

I guess you missed John's piece on civility. I have an opinion, it differs from yours however it does not mean I lack education or any other nonsense you would like to post up hear.

You failed to address some very concrete examples of things like the fact that, although out of necessity, Torre used Wang on his side throw day to pitch 2/3 of an inning this week. Those side sessions can typically simulate 2-3 innings of work and pretty much full throttle so in essence - there is no reason why it cannot be done more often.

While I could list a long list of credentials, it is obvious that your views of the world exist in a vacuum and anything that does not fit in that small little myopic sphere will not register - so I guess spirited debate turns to assault.

As I also said - using Zambrano to make this argument is pointless because the guy has been doing this for 3+ years - he throws a lot of pitches, walks a lot of batters and doesn't give up a lot of runs. The only thing he has done to injure himself is play around on his computer too much. He is the perfect example of why my argument is correct and why this was the wrong person to start this thread with.

by slickwdb on Jun 11, 2006 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Zambo

right now you are right - at least not wrong as far as Zambrano goes. He may, however, can turn into the poster child for pitch counts at any time. So far Dusty has been lucky and nothing has gone wrong. Even if nothing ever goes wrong, there is no reason to take the chances Dusty has in the past with him. Right now the Cubs are struggling to keep their head above water. He does have a need to push him. Last September he had at least one start that approached 140 pitches - there is no excuse for that when the Cubs were mathematically eliminated long before that.

As far as the throwing on the side thing goes, I'm not totally with you. On the surface it looks good, but usually side sessions are not at 100% and this is done for a reason. Throwing less pitches in a game at 100% like you are saying is not the answer. The side sesions are designed to keep muscle tissue elastic / keep the muscle from "densifying" if that is a word. When we use our muscles, small "tears" occur within the tissue. These tears form voids in which new muscle tissue will grow and fill these voids. This is how body builders increase muscle mass. Cylcle after cycle of filling in the voids. This is not what a pitcher wants - he wants a long, stringy type of muscle - Lance Armstrong, not Arnold Schwarzenegger. I'm no doctor and don't play one on TV, but this is what I've come to understand from my weightlifting days and my reading.

The 3+ years of nothing going wrong is not good support either. I can ride my motorcycle to work everyday on one wheel at 120 mph. Just because I get away with it for 3+ years doesn't make it OK or point towards nothing will ever go wrong.

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jun 11, 2006 9:30 PM EDT up reply actions

Sure

and I can cross the same street on my way to work for 20 years and then on the first day of year 21, get hit by a car and die.

Last September, he threw a complete game against the Cardinals and his pitch count was 126 which was his highest pitch count of the month.

He did have a 136 pitch game on 5/8 of last year which was also a CG against the Phillies.

However 126 is a far cry from 140. In addition - it was against the hated Cardinals in Chicago and you give the fans what they want - Zambrano.

One other point on pitch count is that it can be misleading. A guy throws a 100 pitches in 4 innings - it can be a lot worse than 125 in 9. The reason for that is the mechanics of a pitcher and how they can deteriorate during an inning that is stressful. (see Randy Johnson's 40+ pitch, 25 minute inning last week) You can do more damage throwing 10 bad pitches than you can throwing 20 with proper mechanics.

I think there is too much emphasis on pitch count and that is my opinion. I also think starting this thread with Zambrano is what lends little credibility to it. The guy makes 3.8 mill and makes about 3500 pitches per year - $1085/pitch - not too bad.

If this thread started with something about Angel Guzman throwing a 120 pitches - I would be on board. They let Marmol go 6 innings and 99 pitches last night.

Also - if your not intending to "nitpick," then don't. Last I checked, this was baseball and not english class and sometimes my fingers just don't keep up. :)

by slickwdb on Jun 12, 2006 8:21 AM EDT up reply actions

Come on Slick

I know you're smarter than this - "and I can cross the same street on my way to work for 20 years and then on the first day of year 21, get hit by a car and die."

Of course, bad things can happen at any time. My example included taking an unnecessary chance/being reckless. Just because you are reckless and get away with it doesn't make it OK, nor is it an indicator that it won't happen in the future. Dusty is being reckless with Zambo. Stats back me up.

"it was against the hated Cardinals in Chicago and you give the fans what they want - Zambrano."

Damn straight, I'm a fan and they should give me what I want... a healthy pitcher that isn't on the DL from overuse with Wood/Prior.

As for the example of a ton of pitches in a short outing, I'm not sure why you even brought that up. I'm sure most here would agree with you on that. That does nothing to support what you're saying about high pitch counts or pitching in relief on off days.

Starting this thread with Zambrano takes credibility away from this thread? How so? Zambrano is the perfect archetype of Dusty mis-managing his pitchers. His average pitch count is right about where piles upon piles of evidence + research say he is getting into dangerous territory.

You have your opinion and that's fine, but there isn't a lot to support it.

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jun 12, 2006 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't understand the Wood and Prior thing

Prior - has had an average of 16.8 pitches per inning over his 4 year career. He started 27 games last year, pitched 166 innings or 6 1/3 innings and averaged 105 pitches - looks pretty normal to me. He has had some freak injuries like the line drive off his leg. 2003 may have seen some extra pitch counts but he actually only averaged 16.1 pitches per inning that year and averaged 7 innings per start. His problem last year was that he wasn't getting his curve ball to work in the early part of the season. Dusty will forever be remembered for wasting innings on Prior in a game that Chicago had a 7 run lead in the 2003 playoffs but for the most part he went very easy on Prior last year.

Wood - all pitch counts this year have been 86 or less. Wood has had 2 season where he went over 200 innings and in 2002 he average less than 16 pitches per inning and 6.5 innings per start - not abuse in my book.

They have worked to try to ease these guys back in and it hasn't worked. Wood has health issues that go far beyond any arm troubles. He has a hole the size of a dime in his heart or something like that that will require surgery at some point in the next 10 years so there could be a lot of factors contributing to his problems.

I sat in a bar for the game Dusty let Prior stay out there and was so excited to be in Chicago during the playoff time (live in Buffalo) and I was screaming at the TV to sit Prior down to save his arm but that mistake is what drives a lot of this nonsense when the stats following Woods and Prior's career do not really support abuse.

Zambrano appears to be the "exception" you have referred to numerous times so again, he does not fit the bill for this thread.

by slickwdb on Jun 12, 2006 9:42 PM EDT up reply actions

fair enough

I haven't followed this thread very closely, but you asked for evidence, so here goes it. Rany Jazayerli (a writer at Baseball Prospectus) carried out a number of studies on pitch counts & pitcher fatigue and, after compiling & contrasting years worth of data, concluded that pitch counts beyond certain threshholds--101, 110, 121 & 133--show that pitchers wear down both in the current game & are more prone to injury in successive games. (Importantly, he also found that the amount of rest between starts--whether 3, 4 or5 days--is not a factor that correlates with fatigue & injury.)

In Rany's final work, he came up with a metric called "stress" which compiles what he calls "pitcher abuse points" for the year. Here are Cubs pitchers ranks in MLB by Stress since Dusty took over in 2003:

name.....2003.....2004.....2005.....2006
Prior.....5th.....27th......3rd......N/A
KWood.....2nd......8th....140th.....370th
CZamb....12th......5th......2nd......2nd

Those numbers are damning, no matter how you look at them. Granted, another important thing that Rany found was that pitchers do vary greatly as to how much Stress they can tolerate, so maybe Zambrano is working within his capabilities. The problem, there, is that Prior & Wood spent two full-seasons working through Baker's gauntlet, and have both spent the last year trying to get healthy enough to return. Meanwhile, Zambrano is very young, and the evidence is very strong that, rather than play another 3 1/2 seasons at this high level under this high Stress, he's much more likely to spend months at a time in recovery.

For fun, let's look at how Baker treated some notable starters from 1999-2002 with the Giants.

name.....1999.....2000.....2001......2002
Livan.....2nd*.....2nd......3rd......3rd
Ortiz.....3rd.....44th.....35th......5th
Reuter..101st....162nd....164th.....73rd
Schmidt..15th*.....3rd*....60th*....16th

(*Livan joined SF half way through the 1999 season; Schmidt joined SF half way through the 2001 season.)

by Azteca on Jun 12, 2006 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Pretty interesting

However - I would like to see how "stress" points are defined.

I ask this because Prior is listed as #5 for 2003 when he ranked 25 or 26 in IP's, 33rd in pitches/inning, 17 in total pitches. 2003 for Wood was a little more concerning however there were a number of guys who made more pitches per inning, more pitches, more innings, etc.

As far as Jason Schmidt - he has been treated no differently this year then he was with Dusty and he is 4-5 years older. His pitch counts, innings and everything are on the high side.

Livan Hernandez did not see any real change in key measurements for 2003 versus 2001 and 2002 so again - no credibility in blaming Dusty.

I think Dusty has screwed up a million things but treatment of pitchers is consistent throughout the league - when a guy is healthy and good - teams ride that pitcher.

Barry Zito is among league leaders in pitches thrown every year, Livan threw almost 4000 pitches in 2004, over 4000 in 2005.

The tie to Dusty for this argument is weak at best.

by slickwdb on Jun 13, 2006 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions

right

You're right, the sample size of one team's rotation is too small to determine whether Dusty is to blame for Wood's & Prior's injuries. But the evidence is clear that Dusty has thumbed his nose at cutting-edge research that says pitch-counts matter.

About innings-pitched vs. in-game pitch-counts: Rany is a big proponent of a return to the 4-man rotation. In such a configuration, 4 pitchers would start 40 games each year, and toss about 100 pitches each start. 4000 pitches? 240 innings? No doubt those are big numbers, but what Rany's found is that this would give better pitchers more opportunities to help their clubs, and do no harm to pitchers' arms. As I mentioned earlier, the difference between 105 pitches in a game, and 125 pitches is gargantuan in terms of keeping pitchers healthy; the difference between 3-days rest & 4-days rest is negligible. Innings are not a good measure of how susceptible a pitcher will become to injury; pitch-counts, in contrast, are a very good measure.

About Livan & Schmidt: Livan may be the exception to the rule, a guy that can cruise deep into games, regularly throwing 120+ pitches. (As I mentioned above, noone denies that pitchers have different levels of tolerance.) Schmidt, too, though he notably was injured/ineffective for much of 2005. Most importantly, though, Baker, Felipe Alou (in SF) & Frank Robinson (in DC) comprise a triumvirate who manage the game very differently from others, and I think are dangerous for young pitchers. Livan & Schmidt have been pitching for one of three over the past 5 years.

About Zito: He's been worked hard by any measure, and so far he's been able to handle the stress. Even so, he rarely throws over 121 pitches (9 times in 332 career starts), and has never thrown more than 133 pitches in a game for the A's. (I don't know if this matters, but he also relies on a repertoire of circle-changes & slow curves that may or may not allow him to handle greater counts.)

Stress, defined: I didn't go into all the details of the calculations. If you want to read more about pitcher-abuse-points & stress, here're a couple of links to two free articles...

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1477

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1480

by Azteca on Jun 13, 2006 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions

I'll check

into it a little more after I get off work, but I think the reason Prior/Wood got so far up the PAP list in relation to how many innings/pitches they threw is because the pitches are assigned different points depending upon when they happened - pitch 120 get you you more pitcher abuse points than pitch 95, etc. It also factors in age - being so young surely helped them climb the list.

As far as Wood, they brought him back from rehab too soon and he wasn't completely back in shape yet. If he was effective, you can bet Dusty would have left him there longer. As it happened - Hendry gave him a pitch count.

For easing them back in - fooey. Prior had arm problems last year and Dusty had him out there pitching above the 110 pitch mark NINE times:

126, 116, 119, 117, 123, 118, 131, 122, 130

These are the pitch counts from those nine games, including 4 times in a row in August - right about when the Cubs were out of the realistic playoff hunt. The 2 September starts of 122 and 130 pitches are undefensable given that they were mathematically eliminated by then.

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jun 13, 2006 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Prior is a really tough one

If you keep him to 100 pitches - he is going to be done in 4 innings. Other than his first 2 starts last year - there was only 1 other time he made it 6 innings in less than 100 pitches. He had a 4.1 inning outing that was 101 pitches.

He really struggled after his injury and from July-the end of the season - even 6 innings was usually 115+ pitches. He had a really weird season last year.

Maybe he rushed back to soon from the injury because they were still in it at that time? If that's the case - that is not necessarily the manager's call.

by slickwdb on Jun 14, 2006 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Like you say

it was wierd year for Prior. When's he healthy, he's pretty econimical usually. Last night it took 90 pitches to go 6.2 innings. Last year he didn't have his typical control and the walks / pitchers per inning were higher than normal. Even so, if he's at the 100 pitch mark after 4-5 innings, that doesn't justify riding him for 130 to get through 7 or 8.

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jun 14, 2006 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions

And not to nitpick

but when defending your mental prowess, at least spell all the words in that particular sentance correctly. Other than that, I "here" you... ;-)

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jun 11, 2006 9:39 PM EDT up reply actions

on the side

Not only is it not 100% I doubt they throw as many sliders or curveballs.

Civility? I didn't call names. I just teased you about being Dusty's son. And you got upset over that?

by pedrophile on Jun 11, 2006 10:56 PM EDT up reply actions

as a point of reference . . .

the Mets pounded the Dbacks (again) today. Pedro left after 5 innings with a 13-1 lead. He had given up 5 hits and a walk, throwing 90 pitches.

What could the Mets have gained by leaving him in the game any longer? I don't particularly like Willie as a manager, but at least he has the brains to not overwork his star pitcher when he doesn't have to.

Policeman: Sir, are you classified as human? Korben Dallas: Ah, negative. I am a meat popsicle.

by finman on Jun 11, 2006 9:31 PM EDT up reply actions

Curiosity

Were people carrying on about Dusty like this when he was with the Giants and they had Livan Hernandez? If anyone could handle that workload, I'd think it'd be him.

by drjayphd on Jun 12, 2006 5:57 PM EDT reply actions

Yep

Used to see a lot of the same stuff on Giants boards. It's gotten to be more of a hot-button issue as the subject has become more well known / understood by more people - along with the fact that he has 3 of most talented young arms now.

"Second guessers are guys that could have never gotten it right the first time." - Tommy Lasorda (for guys that have no other defense for their actions.)

by slurve on Jun 12, 2006 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions