Baker Abusing Volquez
Well, I am sitting here watching the Reds/Cubs games and I swear I'm having deja vu. Edinson Volquez, he of the overall MLB strikeout lead and currently #2 ERA (behind Cliff Lee) seems well on his way to DVB (Death Via Baker). In today's game, Volquez has once again showed his great stuff (0ER, 10K in 7IP) and his inconsistent control (6BB). That said, believe it or not, he threw 118 pitches in today's game. Now I know what you are thinking, surely this was a 1-0 game - well guess again, the Reds are currently leading 9 to 0. The thing that is bizarre is they sent him out there for the seventh with a pitch count already over 100 (and a 9 run lead mind you) and the Reds didn't even have anyone warming up in the bullpen. Then, when Volquez issued a pair of walks, they were scrambling to get someone ready because he was clearly losing it.
Please Dusty. I tried to give you to give you the benefit of the doubt. I figured with all we have learned about young players and injuries that you would not do this again. Please do not destroy these young arms...
0 recs |
86
comments
Comments
I agree
I have defended Baker in the past, but that is pretty much inexcusable. 9-0 and over 100 pitches? Most little league coaches could make that call.
You would think someone on his staff (ahem pitching coach) would talk some sense into him or at least suggest getting someone up.
by ScottAZ on May 7, 2008 3:31 PM EDT 0 recs
Bullpen
How’s the bullpen feeling? Are they short? Have they been very heavily taxed? How did Volquez look in terms of stamina? I probably would have pulled him as well, but there may have been mitigating factors.
by GuyinNY on May 7, 2008 3:42 PM EDT 0 recs
Re:
Harang threw 7IP yesterday and Cueto threw 6IP the day before so it shouldn’t have been short. In addition, with a 9 run lead, you can throw just about anyone out there for a few innings.
As far as Volquez he was clearly losing his command toward the end (although it wasn’t great all day). The commentators agreed that you could tell by his body language that he was tiring – and he showed clear frustration a few time in the 7th when he couldn’t get the ball over the plate…
by Dfarth on
May 7, 2008 5:29 PM EDT
up
0 recs
WTF?
How dare a pitcher throw 100 pitches… no pitcher has ever survived doing this…
by nms on May 7, 2008 4:20 PM EDT 0 recs
re
Up 9-0 after a kid has already thrown 105 pitches? We are barely into May as well. Not a good idea to pile up such huge work loads in meaningless innings this early in the year.
If it was an old rubber arm (Livan hernandez type) I wouldn’t be as critical, but a 23 year old flame thrower, I say take him out
by ScottAZ on
May 7, 2008 4:35 PM EDT
up
0 recs
He was throwing a shutout, its not like it was a crime to let him pitch
and if you have a pitcher in your rotation who can’t throw 100-120 pitches he probably should be in the pen.
At some point you have to let a starting pitcher be a starting pitcher
by nms on
May 7, 2008 4:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
His job is the win
the game not to get his pitchers shutouts. Do they get credit for 2 wins if the kids throws a shutout?
1941 .406
by FrozenTed9 on
May 7, 2008 4:48 PM EDT
up
0 recs
funny guy
If your pitcher is having a good outing like that you want to see if he can finish it. If he was actually abusing him to do that that would be one thing,.. but if you can’t let a starter make a full start why is he starting ?
by nms on
May 7, 2008 4:53 PM EDT
up
0 recs
even if you had a point...
....about the value of letting pitchers finish their own games, how would it be relevant here?
Volquez had thrown 105 pitches through 6 innings. what were the chances that he’d be able to complete the final 3?
i’d say it’s roughly 1-in-100. and, in that 1 scenario where he does, he throws 150 pitches, so i’m not really sure who won.
by bleedjaxblue on
May 7, 2008 5:02 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I'm not saying he
had to go 9, but how is it unreasonable for a STARTING PITCHER to be asked to handle a STARTERS WORKLOAD… about 100-120 pitches
by nms on
May 7, 2008 5:12 PM EDT
up
0 recs
"a starting workload"
so we’ve established that you don’t think THESE innings (with a 9-0 lead) were important for him to be pitching…..
......and now, you’re backing away from your psychological “gotta-let-him-finish-a-shutout” “it’ll-mean-a-lot-to-him” argument, because that wasn’t even a possibility here…..
.....so your only argument is, “why not? he’s a starter”
i think we’re all telling you why not - because, even if it isn’t “death” to throw 120 pitches - as you hyperbolically imply everyone else is saying—it does take its toll, whether it be by injuries or diminished stamina later in the season.
would you rather Edinson go 7 innings in today’s 9-0 game, or still have gas left in the tank in September? or even go an extra inning in a close game in his next start?
unless you truly believe that either pitchers suffer absolutely no consequences from increased workloads (a fairly extreme and unsupported position) or else that every outing is discrete and has no effect on future outings (patently absurd), then there’s at least some value in pitching pointless innings (i.e., the last 3 innings of a 9-0 game) with pointless pitchers (i.e., not your young stud).
after all, shouldn’t CRAPPY MIDDLE RELIEVERS be able to handle a CRAPPY MIDDLE RELIEVER’S WORKLOAD? and, even if they’re not, i think everyone would agree that it’s better that David Weathers, and not Edinson Volquez, get hurt.
by bleedjaxblue on
May 7, 2008 5:29 PM EDT
up
0 recs
My point is that
100-120 pitches is not an excessively stressful workload for a starting pitcher. It should be a normal start.
130-140, yeah that might be a bit much, but thats not what happened.
I never EVER said his shut out was why he HAD to stay in. You put those words in my mouth. I simply commented that he was in fact throwing one.. he was pitching well.
And since when is David Weathers a crappy MR?
by nms on
May 7, 2008 5:42 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I think 110 is fine
anything more is excessive, and in this case he shouldnt have gone much more than 100, and even then just to let him finish a batter/inning.
by alskor on
May 7, 2008 6:30 PM EDT
up
0 recs
words FROM your mouth
He was throwing a shutout, its not like it was a crime to let him pitch
If your pitcher is having a good outing like that you want to see if he can finish it.
ok. so you’re not saying he HAD to. but why should he at all? why not pull him REALLY early, as long as the game is out of reach?
the only reasons i can think of are:
1) there’s genuine value (not outweighed by risk) in having pitchers throw extra pitchers just for the sake of it. and these opportunities to pitch pitchers extra innings should be taken at every opportunity possible, even a stupid situation like today’s game.
2) you want to protect your middle relievers from throwing too many pitches - which is a completely duplicitous argument, since you’re spending all your time talking about how it doesn’t matter how much a pitcher who really matters pitches. i agree - workload matters for relievers, but i’m not sure how you can agree with that statement and still defend what you’re saying. and, to the extent it matters, i’ll sacrifice Bill Bray before Edinson Volquez.
so which is it you’re saying?
as for the comment on Weathers, i think you just wrote the dictionary definition of “can’t see the forest for the trees.” i just brought up the pitcher who ultimately followed Volquez today, since presumably he would have pitched the extra inning. the point was, it’s better to have him (or, EVEN BETTER, someone worse than him) pitch the inning than Volquez, since the inning is inconsequential. but excellent point—Dave Weathers isn’t “crappy.” he’s at least average, if not better. but maybe we should debate Dave Weathers value.
by bleedjaxblue on
May 7, 2008 6:48 PM EDT
up
0 recs
re
why take the chance in the 1st week of May to throw a young kid 120 pitches? They wer up 9-0! If it was a 2-0 game in Sept pennat race I wouldn’t say much, but a 9-0 game a month into the season? It just doesn’t make much baseball sense to have the kid throw that much. The cons definately outway the pros
by ScottAZ on
May 7, 2008 5:50 PM EDT
up
0 recs
What value?
is there in letting pitchers finish games? You have a bullpen for a reason. Your goal is to get W’s, not CGs.
This was actually abusing him.
Who the hell makes full starts? Is that some sort of requisite for starting these days? What year is this? 1932?
Roy Halladay threw the most complete games in MLB last year at 7, two others had 4… Every team sends out a starter pretty much every day that can’t “make a full start” so that’s not relevant.
In either case the other conditions here dictated against it – up 9-0, young pitcher, etc…
by alskor on
May 7, 2008 6:29 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Not 105 through 6
I think it was 95 through 6. He walked two and fanned one in the 7th, so that is at least 11 pitches right there, only one out. I highly doubt he walked both on four pitches (because I think he had one guy 1-2, IIRC), and fanned the other on three. I also highly doubt he retired the other two guys on one pitch each. A 23 pitch 7th sounds more realistic to me than a 13 pitch 7th.
by drwmsu1 on
May 7, 2008 8:52 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Ummm...
So I guess this comment means you are in favor of this particular decision by Baker?
by DiegoAsFan on
May 7, 2008 4:43 PM EDT
up
0 recs
For the Most Part
I agree with you. However, not in a 9-0 game. I mean this still a young kid, who throws hard, who needs his innings monitored. Although I don’t fully understand PAP, it seems logical that if you have the choice between a lot of PAP or little to no PAP – you should choose the little to no PAP in a 9-0 game. The Cubs’ announcers commented that the Reds would need to closely monitor Edinson’s pitches in his next start. My problem is that 1. what if that game really is 0-0 (when they should leave him in) and they are forced to pull him out or 2. the game is 0-0 and they don’t pull him. Then you have back to back games where the pitch counts are up there – either way the unnecessary usage in this game could potentially hurt them.
by Dfarth on
May 7, 2008 5:02 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Enjoy the run Reds fans
You’ve been Bakerized and the young arms and kids will never recover. Dusty has destroyed more careers than you can count.
by HuskerFan on May 7, 2008 4:50 PM EDT 0 recs
Closing your eyes isn’t either.
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on
May 7, 2008 9:36 PM EDT
up
0 recs
yes it is
helps in scary movies :)
oh, and being with fat chicks. Especially the waking up part.
by pedrophile on
May 7, 2008 9:44 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Yeah, but you’ve got to open them back up so you can flee before it wakes up.
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on
May 7, 2008 9:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
true
but when it’s your own pad you have to pretend you’re sleeping and hope they eventually find their way out. Usually this results in the fridge getting raided and maybe even some items stolen. That’s what I call getting off lightly. pun intended.
by pedrophile on
May 7, 2008 10:25 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Pun intended
BAM! Well done
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on
May 8, 2008 6:26 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I'm not closing my eyes
I just don’t think Dusty Baker has destroyed more careers than you can count. I actually think this type of statement is ridiculous.
Which careers have been destroyed by Dusty Baker?
by jparks77 on
May 8, 2008 12:00 PM EDT
up
0 recs
You countered a hyperbolic statement with more hyperbole. Zero? Come on, he’s been managing for 15 years with a well documented history of riding arms hard, you don’t think he had a hand in anyone’s decline?
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on
May 8, 2008 6:32 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I have no PROOF of any damage done, the same as you have no proof that he’s done no damage. The point is, in 15 years, most of which were spent riding pitchers hard, he undoubtedly contributed to the decline of at least a few pitchers.
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on
May 8, 2008 9:30 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Mark Prior
‘nuff said.
I am like your Dan Aykroyd and biglow would be Jane, the ignorant slut. -Chad
by thecoolest on
May 8, 2008 10:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Cubs fans defended Baker
The same way Reds fans are now. Worked out well for the Cubs, didn’t it.
by HuskerFan on May 7, 2008 4:52 PM EDT 0 recs
Baker did over do things in the Chi
but it is not as if he is the exact reason Wood and Prior got hurt.
Woods arm was toast for a long time and Prior had so many different injuries. Its not Dustys fault he ran into Marcus Giles
by nms on
May 7, 2008 4:54 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Right, Dusty had nothing to do with Priors injuries.
Here is his pitch counts for the month of September 2003 as a 22 yr old
9-1 131
9-6 129
9-11 110
9-16 124
9-21 131
9-27 133
3402 pitches over 30 starts, 113.4 pitches per start ON AVERAGE.
Was never the same pitcher after that.
by HuskerFan on
May 7, 2008 5:01 PM EDT
up
0 recs
oh
cool
those numbers conclusively correlate with his injuries… no doubt about it…
by nms on
May 7, 2008 5:13 PM EDT
up
0 recs
can't wait to see you post your feelings
in 2 years, when Baker has ruined Volquez, Cueto and Bailey
by HuskerFan on
May 7, 2008 5:25 PM EDT
up
0 recs
you say it
as if the only reason a pitcher would fail is Dusty Baker
by nms on
May 7, 2008 5:43 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I'm confused
Is your argument that there is absolutely no correlation between pitch counts and any kind of ill effects for a pitcher? I mean, if 120 pitches isn’t bad for a pitcher, why not have him throw 140? Or 170? Clearly you would agree that even if more pitches don’t negatively affect pitchers that it certainly couldn’t be beneficial so what good could it do by putting Volquez back in the game when you have roughly 7 or 8 guys that could perform the job well enough to win the game?
by neutralluke on
May 7, 2008 6:12 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Pitch Counts
Honestly, as long as the pitcher is feeling good, I dont care how many pitches he throws. We’ve reached a sad time in baseball when there is an uproar over a pitcher throwing 120 pitches in a game.
Teams are already feeling the pinch for enlarged bullpens and shortened benches to accommodate their starters who are routinely pulled from games in the 5th and 6th innings because they have reached the dreaded 100 pitch mark.
Crucifying managers for letting a young kid throw 115-120 pitches will only further force the game into a downward spiral of extreme pitcher and bullpen specialization.
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
- Eleanor Roosevelt
Are all prospect weenies small minds?
by RBI King on May 7, 2008 5:39 PM EDT 0 recs
The Point
Is that it was a 9-0 game. Moreover, if this were an isolated incident I wouldn’t care. But Dusty has a track record for this. Not having a plan to get a guy out of a game when he has thrown 105 pitches and is ahead by 9 runs is reckless and dangerous.
by Dfarth on
May 7, 2008 5:43 PM EDT
up
0 recs
AGreed
Don’t the same people that freak about 100 pitches also complain about 12 and 13 man staffs and no good bats on the bench?
They go hand in hand. If starters can only throw 5 IP, instead of 7, you are going to need 12-13 pitchers and a crappy bench
by nms on
May 7, 2008 5:44 PM EDT
up
0 recs
WOW
I think you guys found something here. Sarcasm intended.
Date Pitches
Apr6 95
Apr11 75
Apr17 112
Apr22 105
Apr27 104
May 2 100
May 7 118
Not a single game here was he abused. 118 pitches is bad if he is continuously at this level. But this log shows his pitch count has been monitored very carefully.
I’m not a Baker fan. But all this crying is much ado about nothing. Maybe some more research should be done before blasting Dusty on a total non-issue.
by pedrophile on May 7, 2008 6:10 PM EDT 0 recs
Wait
How does that pitch log show “his pitch count has been monitored very carefully?”
I dont see that at all. What I see is he has pushed him too hard twice already and its barely May.
Im sure its only a matter of time until Volquez gets injured all the Baker defenders can say he was going to get injured anyway. What a shame.
by alskor on
May 7, 2008 6:24 PM EDT
up
0 recs
easy
112 and 118 are definitely not pushing someone too hard. Doing that game after game I’d agree.
His average pitch count right now is at 100. That is quite good.
Until and unless Dusty starts making those 112 and 118 games the routine instead of the exception there is no problem here.
by pedrophile on
May 7, 2008 7:38 PM EDT
up
0 recs
agreed
Baker hasn’t abused him so far, and people jump on Baker for nothing.
at the same time, you have to call a spade a spade.
there was literally no reason for Volquez to be pitching. it’s probably not that big a deal, but, when someone’s managerial duties on an issue are already in question, making such an unorthodox and unjustifiable move really should raise eyebrows.
early on, they talked about wanting to baby Volquez. now that he’s “proven” himself, you have to wonder whether Dusty hasn’t decided to take the kid gloves a little too far off, and that he doesn’t understand that developing young arms requires LONG-TERM management, not just a few games, and then no-holds-barred. obviously, we’ll see in the next few starts whether Dusty understands that his duty as manager of a young ace isn’t complete after a few carefully managed starts.
by bleedjaxblue on
May 7, 2008 6:54 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Okay sure
But if Volquez goes over 95 pitches next game they should have the press conference announcing he’s fired scheduled before the game ends.
You dont put such valuable young assets at risk for no reason. I thought Dusty would ask too much of his young guys in close games, like he did with the Cubbies. Instead he’s pushing them in games that are long over. That’s an awful sign.
If you own Cueto, Volquez, or Bailey in a keeper league I advise you to sell high.
by alskor on
May 7, 2008 6:59 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Easy for you to say
I DO OWN Volquez ($1 in my $300 32 man mixed league). I also had Cuetto at $3 and traded him for a mittful of talent. I’m in 2nd and have a great shot. I knew I shouldn’t have started reading this thread.
by The commentator formerly known as Yoda on
May 7, 2008 11:38 PM EDT
up
0 recs
+1
The alternative is having a pitcher throw too few pitches and not being able to throw 120+ on a day that the bullpen is tired and needs the SP to go deep. I don’t think a game where Volquez throws 120 will kill him, or his arm. The key is making sure that he doesn’t throw 140 pitch Dusty-specials.
by demondeaconsbaseball on
May 7, 2008 8:17 PM EDT
up
0 recs
-1
Saving a young pitcher’s bullets is the way you keep him available to go deep in the game later in the year.
I really dont think Volquez throwing 118 pitches 6 days in May on short rest makes him MORE likely to go deep into a game later in the year. I would say it makes him far LESS likely to do so.
by alskor on
May 7, 2008 9:00 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Hold on
If you have a SP who is used to throwing 80-100 pitches, how exactly does this teach him to pace himself or to save energy for later innings and larger pitch counts? isn’t that why most starters in the Minors start at about 120-130 innings and increase slightly from there?
by demondeaconsbaseball on
May 8, 2008 12:25 AM EDT
up
0 recs
So youre saying
pitchers change the way theyre pitching based on what their pitch count is expected to be? I dont buy it.
I also dont see how that relates to innings limits. All these things are aimed at preventing players from throwing tired – throwing while tired is how injuries happen. Most minor leaguers start at those innings limits b/c theyre coming from shorter season ball – college or HS.
Either way, there has to be a limit, and I dont think a pitcher should EVER be allowed to throw 120+. There is a direct correlation between throwing that many pitches and getting hurt.
Pitch counts dont have any relation to teaching starters to be more economical with their pitches, IMHO. Do you think theyre out on the mound wondering what their pitch count is? Did you ever pitch? little league/high school? Did you ever change your approach based on pitch count?
by alskor on
May 8, 2008 4:21 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Ok
So you’re saying that a middle reliever, a setup guy like Joba, a long reliever coming out of the bullpen and a starting pitcher don’t change the way they’re pitching based on the role? Look, pedrophile said it later down the board. The kid’s due for an increase in innings, probably up to about 200. Let him get some work in, and let him stretch out his arm.
In this particular start, yeah, Dusty probably should have pulled him, but if the game was close, leave him in for another inning. Hell, even if he has a 9 run lead, this gives him time to experiment or work on control. If he does let up a run, he’s gonna get pulled.
by demondeaconsbaseball on
May 8, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Youre talking about
guys in different roles. Sure, a closer throws differently than a starting pitcher. That’s completely different than saying a starting pitcher will be more economical with his pitches based on his pitch count.
Innings jumps and pitch counts arent directly proportional.
My entire point is that Dusty should have pulled him in this start. Combine his usage yesterday with Baker’s history and Id be scared if I was a Reds fan. That’s all Im saying.
by alskor on
May 8, 2008 1:04 PM EDT
up
0 recs
His pitch counts
Only went over 110 twice in his seven starts this year. So, sure, Baker’s gonna wreck his arm if we only look at yesterday. Look, 120 pitches will not kill a starter if it happens once or twice in a season. It’s trends in pitch counts. Volquez getting tired one or two days in the season will, most likely than not, not result in his arm falling off. If his average pitch count is like Prior’s by the end of the season, then you have a point. But one start only helps Baker gauge how long he’s effective.
by demondeaconsbaseball on
May 8, 2008 4:54 PM EDT
up
0 recs
One four days rest, too
Dusty Baker should be thrown in jail for the careers he’s ruined.
I cant understand how anyone can defend this. If you do, you really to re-evaluate and ask yourself: “Am I being a homer?”
The answer is “Yes, you are.”
This many pitches for a young pitcher = a much higher chance of arm injuries. PERIOD. This has been shown a thousand times.
To be even more succinct: Baker is an idiot. Never been a good manager. Doesnt know what he’s doing out there. Between abusing pitchers and complaining about guys who get on base “clogging up the basepaths” he has definitively shown he doesnt understand the game of baseball. Its a shame he wont crash and burn b/c he arrived at a time of a talent influx in Cincy, but he will not succeed. He’s DOA as usual. Can him already and save yourself a few years of pain and injuries.
by alskor on May 7, 2008 6:21 PM EDT 0 recs
John Maine, today
100+ pitches entering 9th in a 12-0 game. He gave up a run and then was replaced. It was for the shutout.. I clearly understand the difference (Maine allowed 2 hits and a walk in the 9th, 2 hits in a walk in the first 8 innings). He ended with 117 pitches
Where is the outrage here? That’s all I want to know – is this just because Volquez is a first year MLB starter and because Baker is involved?
by BlackOps on May 7, 2008 6:35 PM EDT 0 recs
Honestly
I wanted Maine to keep on pitching and finish the game. I could see why people are upset that Baker is leaving a rookie pitcher out there with that many pitches.
by Duece on
May 7, 2008 6:38 PM EDT
up
0 recs
First year starter
Im not fan of Maine going that long either, by any means.
My outrage is really more that people are defending Baker. If there was a thread about Maine/Randolph and people were defending him Id probably have responded there too.
by alskor on
May 7, 2008 6:40 PM EDT
up
0 recs
The Difference
Is that Maine has thrown 360+ innings in his major league career and Edinson has barely 1/3 that amount. John is also two years older than Volquez and is past the injury nexus while EV is right on the edge.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on
May 8, 2008 4:13 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I can understand the
Arguments for pitchers that have been in the league for awhile but for a young kid why risk it let him pitch a full season at the ML level before you start pushing him past 110 pitches at the very least if he did this with harang or Arroyo I wouldn’t have as much as a problem but let the guy at least pitch a full season so he has an idea of what lies ahead and what he can handle
There are a lot of first year pitchers that after the first year say how it’s so different in the ML they need a season to adjust.
1941 .406
by FrozenTed9 on May 7, 2008 6:46 PM EDT 0 recs
That is true
and even for older pitchers who have shown they can handle that kind of workload if team need dictates, you ABSOLUTELY shouldnt be doing it on May 7th. If its July, the pen has been blown out in the past few games and you need a veteran pitcher to go to 115 to get out of the 7th in a tight game – Sure.
May 7th, young kid, big lead… Stupid any way you cut it.
by alskor on
May 7, 2008 6:51 PM EDT
up
0 recs
umm
Hughes has gone 90 pitches in 3 innings, 97 in 5 1/3, 82 in 3 2/3. Each of these are more of an abuse than 112 over a much longer inning span.
Felix may seem like a veteran. His last bunch of starts? 105, 115, 110, 115, 117
Marcum is at or over 100 pitches in his last 5 starts
Danks is consistently getting very high counts for the number of innings he pitches
Bonderman last 5 games all over 100
Verlander last 6 games all over 100
E.Santana every start but one over 100
I just based this off young starters in the American League. I’m too lazy to check all starters. This is quite a list. And most of the young starters that didn’t have similar pitch counts were because they were getting rocked and pulled early.
The only teams that severely restricted young pitchers were teams that are not expected to contend. Oakland, Minnesota, KC.
by pedrophile on
May 7, 2008 7:59 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Not true
The Red Sox limit their young pitchers. In fact, they’re extremely protective outside of DiceK, who is a unique case, and Beckett, who is a horse, and even then theyre still very carefull. Resting those guys down the stretch and protecting them was a major reason they defeated Cleveland in the ALCS… CC and Carmona were not protected the same way(partly for tactical reasons) and they were gassed in the ALCS.
I think Oakland, KC and Minny are very well run teams, too fwiw. Oakland is competing this year, whereas the ChiSox, Mariners, Yankees, Jays and Tigers all seem to suck. All of them do have something in common – theyre all at or under .500. I realize its early, but I hate they way most of the teams are run(M’s ChiSox, Jays), and/or I think they have idiots for managers(ChiSox, M’s, Yanks, Jays, and Tigers). That’s the common thread here, from my standpoint. I wouldnt be surprised these teams are also abusing young arms.
BUT who said going over 100 was a bad idea, anyway0? Not me! There is a BIG difference between 100-105 pitches and 118 pitches. In fact, its all the difference in the world. The expectation of injury increases exponentially over those 15 pitches or so. That’s the entire point.
In fact, the original poster said:
...but for a young kid why risk it let him pitch a full season at the ML level before you start pushing him past 110 pitches…
So I dont see how all these teams pushing guys who arent first year starters past 100 pitches is all that relevant…
Hughes has gone 90 pitches in 3 innings, 97 in 5 1/3, 82 in 3 2/3. Each of these are more of an abuse than 112 over a much longer inning span.
What…? That doesnt make sense to me. I dont think that’s true. Its not like he was pitching faster…
by alskor on
May 7, 2008 8:55 PM EDT
up
0 recs
are you serious
First let’s get to the Hughes point. Read some under the knife. Or ask Husker Bob. Or just contemplate something:
You are jogging for an hour. You are tired. It was a nice run. But no injuries and you are fine the next day.
Now sprint. But instead of sprinting for 5 minutes sprint all out for 30 minutes. I doubt you will be able to walk properly the next day.
on to baseball ….
Pitching 30+ pitches in an inning is way more harmful than just throwing 118 over 7 or 8 innings. And this isn’t just my feeling or guess. Almost everyone who is an authority agrees on this. If you hear of someone that is respected and disagrees I’d love to hear about it.
Boston
Lester has gone 112 through 6 innings his last start, 106 through 6.1 another, 97 through 4 1/3, 97 through 5 1/3, 83 through 4.
Those are quite high numbers.
Buchholz they have been more careful with. But it’s not like they babied him. 95 through 5 1/3 his last start, 113 the one before, 103 through 6, 85 for 3 2/3, 98 through 6.
The last point? You mention the BIG difference between 105 pitches and 118. How do you know there is a big difference there? The pitch number is not exact. It is not the same for everyone. It is also affected by stressful innings (ie innings with extremely high counts). It is affected by someones recuperation powers. And many other things.
Your argument =
1) You don’t like Dusty
2) An arbitrary pitch count number
As for point one I can understand. He really did abuse Prior. That much is true. And maybe some other guys. That doesn’t mean he will continue to do this. It does mean it bears watching. I’d agree with you totally that we should monitor this in the future.
As for point two I think it means nothing. Volquez is averaging 100 pitches and hasn’t gone into the 130+ range. And it doesn’t seem like he’s getting those 30+ innings either.
I’m totally ok with what Volquez has done so far.
btw: Volquez had 178 innings last year, 153 the year before and 136 the year before. 200 innings this year sounds just about right.
by pedrophile on
May 7, 2008 9:24 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Eh...
I read Under The Knife all the time. Im a BP subscriber. I think youre overstating this on Hughes… but I had thought you were making a different point above about Hughes…
Lester and Buchholz – youre proving my point here. If those guys go long one start they get a shorter leash the next time. Much like Peterson used to do with the A’s. I dont necesarily see that in Volquez’s usage. They also dont go as high as Volquez. You go on to list pitch counts in the 90s… just like above, my point is that 118 is excessive. I have no problem with ~100 to ~110 once in a while.
If you read BP, youre familiar with PAP – Pitcher Abuse Points. Category 2 PAP is 101-109 picthes. Category 3 is 110-121. These numbers arent entirely arbitrary. The higher the number the higher the risk of injury. I understand the number is different for everyone in a sense that people’s bodies respond differently – I STILL dont understand why you risk this here, with this guy.
That’s the crux of the argument here. I dont think you really mean to argue 118 isnt an unusually high pitch count… or at least all the examples youve given so far seem to show that it is an unusally high outlier. You still havent explained why this high pitch count was necessary:
-in a game with a huge lead
-in May
-in a game that is relatively unimportant
-with a rested bullpen
-for a young, first year starting pitcher
If you go back in this thread, I started by listing the reasons I thought this high a pitch count was uncalled for here. You then answered that by listing a bunch of young pitchers who had thrown over 100 pitches… ...?
Bear in mind, Im not arguing Dusty has mishandled Vazquez all year – Im saying I dont get what the hell he was doing today. I then went into a rant up above about how this is probably indicative of Dusty being an idiot going forward like usual. I basically just dont understand why you let him go 118 today…
by alskor on
May 8, 2008 4:38 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I'm not sure why
you are totally skipping the abuse done by high pitch counts in short innings. Like when Hughes had 90+ in 3 innings. This is worse than 118 in 7+ innings.
Also the “horrible” 118 pitch count was at 95 entering the last inning he pitched. Based on the pace he was going it looked like he would end up below 110 after the next inning. My only complaint with Dusty was that he didn’t have the pen ready in case Volquez started to implode. Maybe he has been spoiled with how perfect Volquez has been to date? Or probably just a bad decision.
Also, 118 isn’t horrible in it’s own right. Regardless of whether the game mattered or not. What is important is what’s done for Volquez in the next few starts. If they bump him back a day or go with a count of 90 for the next start he should be fine.
Pushing a pitcher a little bit here and there won’t hurt. Pushing too far (130+) will. Pushing too often also will.
by pedrophile on
May 8, 2008 9:22 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Whew
We can agree again. I’m most worried about what happens next. For some reason, I don’t have any confidence that Baker has learned his lesson…
by Dfarth on
May 8, 2008 10:02 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Volquez
Threw 24 pitches in the 7th so had 94 after six innings. That’s an average of 15 2/3 per inning so if EV had an average inning that would have put him at exactly 110. Edinson was far from perfect yesterday too. 4 hits and walks in those innings say to me that he was lucky to have not given up 2-3 runs.
Personally, I love it. I’m going to enjoy watching DB destroy any hopes the Reds have of contending the next few years. I’m happier than a tornado in a trail

