2009 Draft Prospect: Stephen Strasburg, San Diego State
by John Sickels on Mar 3, 2009 6:54 PM EST
64 comments
Several people have asked me to weigh in on Stephen Strasburg, the San Diego State right-hander expected to be the top talent in the 2009 draft.
Scouting reports on Strasburg are a series of superlatives. He's got a strong pitcher's frame at 6-4, 220, and has gotten himself in much better physical condition after drawing concerns about his weight and being "soft" when younger. He works at 95-97 MPH, has hit 100 a few times, and shows movement on the fastball. HIs breaking ball and changeup are above average, and he has exceptional command and control for a power pitcher.. Scouts also like his mound presence and overall pitching instincts.
Performance-wise, Strasburg has been outstanding: he posted a 1.57 ERA with a 133/16 K/BB ratio in 97 innings last year, 61 hits allowed, obviously outstanding performance at any level. This year he's been even better in two starts: 12.1 innings, 1.46 ERA, 27/3 K/BB, eight hits allowed. If he stays healthy this spring, and has non-insane bonus demands, Strasburg is the current favorite to go number one overall due to this combination of stuff, command, and performance.
So, how does he rank in comparison to other prospects? I've received many questions about where Strasburg would rank among current minor league pitching prospects. This is a difficult question since he hasn't pitched pro ball yet, and I tend to be conservative about players like that. On my Top 50 in the book, I think I would slot him at Number Four, behind Madison Bumgarner but ahead of Trevor Cahill and Rick Porcello. On a Top 100 list, he would rank in the 8-12 range.
Strasburg is all the rage,and with reason, but keep in mind that being "a polished college pitcher with great stuff and great command" doesn't mean you will be a great pro. It certainly helps load the odds in your favor, but you still have to throw the dice, and as the examples of Paul Wilson and Mark Prior show, you may still come up snake-eyes if injuries strike.
On that note, Kyle Boddy at Driveline Mechanics, part of SB Nation, has an interesting (and none-too-optimistic) breakdown of Strasburg's delivery last fall which you can find here.
0 recs |
64 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
thanks for the writeup
hadnt heard anything about this guy.
by jsmall404 on Mar 3, 2009 8:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
There are multiple reports on the net about his mechanics being poor. I’m pretty sure Chris O’Leary did a writeup and somewhere else I read from time to time but can’t seem to remember at the moment.
It’s definitely a concern but I think you would shoot yourself if you passed on him and he didn’t get hurt. Really a tough spot to be in, you almost wish you were the guy after them so you can say well I couldn’t pass him up, he shouldn’t have even dropped to me!
by jfish26101 on Mar 3, 2009 8:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
unfortunaltley
people correlate imperfect mechanics with SP getting hurt…just because you dont have perfect mechanics dosent mean you will get hurt, and vice versa.
ex. Tim Lincecum not getting hurt but Mark Prior getting hurt every year.
Also, several people at BA and KG at BP have said they havent talked to any scouts that have major concerns about his mechanics.
by jsmall404 on Mar 3, 2009 8:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So then rename the Cy Young award again already? Lincecum has only won one!
In all seriousness, scouts loved Prior to. Lincecum is a freak and the amount of innings on his arm + the abnormal mechanics should make his next 4-5 years even that much more interesting. If his arm does fail, surely everyone who is pro Lincecum will blame it on the coaches but it could just as well be the mechanics if it were to happen. I’m not saying Strasburg is definitely going to go under the knife but the Nats can’t afford for that to happen nor can they afford to pass him up. To me, that puts them in a tough spot and enough people seem to think there is cause for concern for it to be noted.
by jfish26101 on Mar 3, 2009 8:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
right
which is exactly what i am saying..Lincecum has “unconventional” mechanics but was fine this year, but Prior had what was seen as close to perfect mechanics and gets hurts.
No one can show proof that mechanics really factor into a guy getting hurt or not
by jsmall404 on Mar 3, 2009 9:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There is a fairly strong correlation.
You said BA/KG say they haven’t heard a scout say they disliked his mechanics but scouts praised Prior as well. The study of mechanics have changed quite a bit since then I think, I’m not exactly sure you can move forward with the opinion that it isn’t a concern.
by jfish26101 on Mar 3, 2009 10:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Prior had what was seen as close to perfect mechanics and gets hurts.
I never thought that. Prior and Anthony Reyes have identical mechanics. I guarantee you that Reyes will have serious injuries in his future (like he already does in his past).
No one can show proof that mechanics really factor into a guy getting hurt or not
Certainly false.
Webmaster of Driveline Mechanics
http://www.drivelinemechanics.com - An Unconventional Look at Scouting
by Kyle Boddy on Mar 3, 2009 10:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No definites.
I think when speaking about pitching mechanics and injuries, there are no sure things.
We have learned a lot since Prior got drafted. His “perfect” mechanics are now shown to be less than perfect (Inverted W). I think of it like poker, just because 2-7 offsuit is a bad hand doesn’t mean it can never win. And just because pocket aces are the best hand doesn’t mean they always win. But you are not going to fold pocket aces pre-flop, and most people won’t play 2-7 offsuit. Mechanics are like that… some pitchers just have a motion that gives them a better shot of not getting an injury, and some (like Strasburg, Reyes, Prior, etc) have a throwing motion that will give them a better shot of see Dr. James Andrews.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Mar 3, 2009 11:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I hear that
I lost a 600 dollar pot on the river with pocket aces, nailing the other guy’s hand, AND a 96% chance of winning. Damn.
by JayWise on Mar 4, 2009 12:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
then please do??
I am all ears for actual evidence that says pitchers “who do this will definitley get hurt”
To rest my case..from Jim Callis’s Feb 25 chat on ESPN:
Alex NY, NY: Recently I found a few blogs on the internet breaking down Stephen Strasburg?s pitching mechanics. The jury is pretty much split. One source says that Strasburg?s mechanics are deeply flawed and that he is destined to have a short, injury riddled career. Another blog said almost the complete opposite?that Strasburg has displayed mechanics that are as sound as one could ever dream of from a collegiate pitcher. However, both sources cited that Strasburg has sown the dreaded ?inverted W? that doomed Mark Prior. I?m wondering if you guys could please set the record straight? What?s the verdict? Are scouts concerned about Strasburg?s mechanics? Have you heard anything about this?
SportsNation Jim Callis: I’ve talked to a lot of scouts about Strasburg, and no one has brought up mechanical concerns. Here’s the thing about mechanics—it’s great if someone has dream or textbook mechanics, but we still don’t know why pitchers get hurt. Prior was supposed to have a picture-perfect delivery, and he couldn’t stay healthy. Tim Lincecum has unorthodox mechanics, but they work great for him. I don’t profess to be an expert on mechanics, but if a guy repeats his delivery without putting a lot of stress on his elbow or shoulder, who cares if it’s perfect.
No offense, but just because you never thoughts that Prior had great mechanics does not mean he didn’t. I can find article after article from scouts (who get PAID to know mechanics) that said he had great mechanics.
by jsmall404 on Mar 3, 2009 11:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+
I understand you will say scouting mechanics has come along way since Prior got drafted. Granted. But, there is no evidence saying that players with a specific “deficiency” will get hurt…I am sorry to say fan blogs dont count as evidence.
by jsmall404 on Mar 3, 2009 11:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Again...
You are speaking in definites. “But, there is no evidence saying that players with a specific "deficiency" will get hurt…”
I am not saying that if you have a certain motion or arm angle or something else that you will go under the knife. But there is also correlation between the Inverted W and arm injuries. I believe it puts you at greater risk to have injuries. But I am also positive there are pitchers out there who have the Inverted W who have never had a pitching injury.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Mar 3, 2009 11:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ok?
so “But there is also correlation between the Inverted W and arm injuries.”
BUT
“But I am also positive there are pitchers out there who have the Inverted W who have never had a pitching injury.”
That gets us no where! That is like saying “picthers with size 8 feet will get hurt, because some have and some have not”
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 12:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You are looking at the wrong thing
You’re taking a situation that is DEMONSTRATED to have an effect on durability (even if it is not 100%) and comparing it to a situation where one thing (size 8 feet) has NOTHING to do with the other. … You’re going to need to delve a little deeper than that if you want to argue logic, reasoning and facts.
by Flynn Blake on Mar 4, 2009 12:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
thats my point
obviously size 8 feet has nothing to do with durability…and if your best argument is “some guys who have the inverted W get hurt, and some dont” then you cant say the inverted W will get a guy hurt either.
What the point in saying “doing this MIGHT get a guy hurt”?? who cares, unless you can prove it with some level of consistency..I am not saying you gotta do the scientific method on it 100 times or get a paper published by the Harvard Review..but you need to come up with something better than “sometimes it does, sometimes it dosent”
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 12:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Correlation v. Coincidence
Correlation gets us somewhere, coincidence does not.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Mar 4, 2009 12:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
how do you know?
Its not just a coincidence when you use phrases like “sometimes players with this get hurt, and some times they dont”???
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 12:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sometimes you play Russian Roullette and win
Doesnt mean it was a good idea
by alskor on Mar 4, 2009 1:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
When someone shows a concrete correlation...
I will be all for it. Promise.
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 12:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There are no absolutes
But there are things that improve or decrease your chances of being injured. That’s like saying “Never slide into first base.” Sometimes it can help (1B pulled off the bag and has to go for the tag.). There are very few absolutes in life or baseball, but there are odds.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Mar 4, 2009 1:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ok
so what are the odds?? lol. I am not trying to be a jerk, but I am not going to just take someones word for it just because it is on the internet.
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 1:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not a statistician
or a baseball expert. But we can point to several recent Inverted W cases and the injuries they have had… Prior, Reyes, Bonderman…
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Mar 4, 2009 2:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bondo
His injury was a blood clot- dunno if that can be caused by the inverted W.
by demondeaconsbaseball on Mar 4, 2009 9:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bonderman is a bad example
As deamondeac pointed out, his injury was not baseball-related.
by SBcaptain2 on Mar 4, 2009 4:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
OT
This is OT, but why is it called an “Inverted W.” Why not just call it an M?
by SBcaptain2 on Mar 4, 2009 4:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think
If you knew how little we do actually know about the world, you’d be even more stressed out. Here’s the thing: even in the medical profession, we often don’t know the precise cause of an affliction and we don’t know how exactly a prescribed “cure” works a lot of the time. But we do know that in many of the cases it does work.
You can look at mechanics the same way. We can say that a certain set of mechanics tips the scales towards injuries a bit, but we don’t know how much and we certainly don’t know how often or to what extent they will be injured. But statistics help tell us that this player is more likely to get injured than another player of the same height, weight, previous work load, etc. We control for these factors statistically because there is no way to ethnically experiment on these variables.
Maybe one day we’ll be able to examine a pitcher’s mechanics on an atomic level, but that’s a long way off. Until then, you’ll have to learn to deal with the uncertainty.
by son.of.sourman on Mar 4, 2009 4:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
PS
when dealing with humans there is not going to be a “concrete correlation” as you call it. that’s actually quite absurd. there will always be a confidence interval around those estimates (and they are estimates).
by son.of.sourman on Mar 4, 2009 4:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
And if for some reason we werent willing to work from this correlative basis then we by necessity must throw out ALL analysis of pitching mechanics. Clearly, that would not be a desirable outcome.
Let us say this much:
-Strasburg has a long arm action, which is something that tends to more often result in injuries
-Strasburg whips his arm in a way that tends to more often result in injuries
-Strasburg raises his shoulder and elbow during scap loading in a way that tends to result in timing problems during delivery and consequently tends to more often result in injuries
Id still probably take him number one overall. I just think the fanboy love is getting stupid… like usual. Every flavor of the month pitcher has to be heralded as the next GOAT.
O-M-G! Jesse Foppert Gavin Floyd Edwin Jackson Greg Miller Scott Kazmir Matt Cain Felix Hernandez Chad Billingsley Adam Miller Fransisco Liriano Justin Verlander Phil Hughes Homer Bailey Andrew Miller Clay Buchholz Joba Chamberlain Tim Lincecum Rick Porcello Clayton Kershaw David Price Stephen Strasburg is going to be TEH BEST PITCHER EVER! He looks like an !ALL TIME GREAT!!
I was way more excited about a bunch of guys on that list than I am about Strasburg and his inverted W delivery. Curb your enthusiasm, people. You all know how this works by now.
by alskor on Mar 4, 2009 4:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, but
What are the statistics on this? At the moment everything posted on here is just observations, that are no more conclusive than uneducated guesses. If for example, someone had statistics showing 5% of pitchers get injured, but 30% of those with an inverted W delivery get injured that is statistically significant and is absolute proof of the danger.
Your post is 100% correct, but none of the things you mention have been supported in any conclusive manner on here.
by Cormican on Mar 4, 2009 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that's the other thing
as far as i know, the study of pitching mechanics leading to injury isn’t even at the point where it can operationalize these factors and come up with the estimates jsmall wants. maybe it is, but i don’t know about it.
by son.of.sourman on Mar 4, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So?
If we said some people run across internet highways and survive would that mean there is no correlation between running across interstate highways and dying?
by alskor on Mar 4, 2009 1:45 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Damn internet highway...
taking so many lives.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Mar 4, 2009 2:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
thats fine
but you would be able to at least say “this many people died when they ran across the high way, and these didnt”
THEN other factors would come into play that might also affected the outcome, the density of traffic, the speed of traffic, the athletic ability of the person running etc..
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 11:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and yet still
we could say “this guy runs across interstate highways so he’s at a higher risk of getting injured than guys that don’t”
That’s all anyone is saying about Strasburg – he does something that, in the past, has correlated with a higher risk of injury. Physio-mechanically we can see why this is, as well.
It is nearly impossible to do a study of the issue because, much like with food poisoning or getting a cold, its impossible to tell what exactly the cause was. Its like if you visited five friends of yours who are sick. Then a week later you got sick. Now, we cant tell which of your friends got you sick – heck, maybe you even caught it someplace else! BUT you increased your chances of getting sick by visiting those friends… of that we can be sure. The inverted W, similarly, does not CAUSE injuries. It screws up timing and other things and pitchers end up messing up their mechanics in other ways because of it – because they raise their shoulder and elbow too high and that results in injuries. Sometimes its shoulder, somtimes it elbow, etc…
It may never be possible to draw a straight line causal relationship between the act of inverted W pitching and the injuries it causes. This does not mean there is no causal relationship.
by alskor on Mar 4, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
RE
It may never be possible to draw a straight line causal relationship between the act of inverted W pitching and the injuries it causes. This does not mean there is no causal relationship.
Like I said, I am not calling for an earth shattering study to be done or it get published in a scientific journal.
However, I dont think I am wrong for asking to see a little more than – a mechanical issue that several pitchers have in common, that happened to get hurt.
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Challenge
If this has been done already, please link me to where.
I’d like to challenge Kyle to an expirement. Let’s take 50 pitching prospects with clean injury histories. You pick the pitchers. Classify them as high, medium, or low risk. Then, we will track these pitchers over time and compare the results to the average young pitcher attrition due to injury (which I’m sure we can figure out). Say, a period of five years. This would give some quantitative proof to the doubters about the value of these analyses, or vice versa.
by threesixteen on Mar 4, 2009 10:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good idea.
This is really late in responding, but I totally forgot about the thread. What your challenge presents is something that I am interested in building as the Pitcher Risk Database. Unfortunately, many of the elbow injuries that occur in pitchers are related to the fact that they throw breaking balls with a supinated grip – and I can’t tell for sure if they do without high-speed close-up video.
Webmaster of Driveline Mechanics
http://www.drivelinemechanics.com - An Unconventional Look at Scouting
by Kyle Boddy on Mar 28, 2009 3:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lincecum's mechanics are "unconventional"
that does not coincide with imperfect. Who is to say Lincecum’s are not perfect and others have just been wrong?
I understand the concerns with Strasburg’s mechanics, and that is something to maybe address during the short time he will be in the minors, but should that scare the Nats away from drafting him? I feel its a risk you have to take with that kind of potential
churchofbaseball.com
by MJMars on Mar 3, 2009 9:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
regardless
of what semantics you want to use, the bottom line on why Linceum dropped in the draft to 10 is because scouts thought his mechanics would break down.
Which proves the point, no one really knows what pitchers will get hurt and which wont, and no one has shown that mechanics really have anything to do with who gets hurt and who dosent.
by jsmall404 on Mar 3, 2009 9:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i should say*
his mechanics would cause him to break down
by jsmall404 on Mar 3, 2009 9:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It was mainly because of his frame
he is only 5-11 i believe. Not a typical pitcher frame. He repeated the mechanics well which makes them almost no concern
churchofbaseball.com
by MJMars on Mar 4, 2009 10:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i dont think that is correct
I read ALOT about him leading up to the draft, and the frame did bother people but it was also his less than fluid motion
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
and it is still a concern, actually. He has lots of moving parts and his delivery is somewhat… complex.
He is awesome at repeating it, but there is the chance his mechanics do break down at some point. He hasnt exactly been a professional pitcher all that long… its not time to close the book.
OTOH, he’s very aware of the potential issues with his mechanics and his father helps him a great deal…
Im not sure there’s a lesson to be learned here though, and I wouldnt recommend these mechanics for other guys by any means. Lincecum just pulls it off so well. Sort of like how Rick Barry shot underhanded free throws… HE could pull it off and it made perfect sense for HIM. Most guys cant do it.
by alskor on Mar 4, 2009 1:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lincecum
Here’s what Kyle at Driveline had to say about Lincecum: “Lincecum is 18-19 frames from maximal leg lift to footstrike. Excellent… His arm is lightning-fast, obviously. I give him a Very Good – Excellent grade… Excellent ball release phase… Excellent [followthrough]… Lincecum’s mechanics are basically perfect. His stuff is ridiculous.”
http://www.chop-n-change.com
by alexwithclass on Mar 4, 2009 8:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well kudos
he said the same thing ESPN the mag wrote last year when the did a story on him. or the other way around.
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly...
similar to the situation Seattle was in a few years ago with the whole Oden/Durant thing. I said then that they were in the best position. There were majors concerns about Oden back then, but how could you pass on him? Seattle was in the best position because they could just draft whoever fell to them. Lucky for them it worked out, unlucky for them that they were hijacked to OKC.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Mar 3, 2009 11:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, John.
Webmaster of Driveline Mechanics
http://www.drivelinemechanics.com - An Unconventional Look at Scouting
by Kyle Boddy on Mar 3, 2009 10:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Any general consensus
shaping up for the draft this year overall? It’s early, but is there a general feeling about strengths and weaknesses?
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Mar 3, 2009 11:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
College pitching...
Seems to be the Strength..Strasburg, Crow (not exactly college), Alex White, Kyle Gibson, Andy Oliver, Volz, and Alex Wilson to name guy who could go in the first round…
Doesnt seem like there are any star level high scool position players other than Donovan Tate
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 12:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Prior as Cautionary Tale
If I were the Cubs and given the option of drafting Prior again, I’d do it in a heartbeat. Perhaps he was destined to get very, very hurt, but I don’t think you can look at Prior’s case and ignore the fact that he was very abused as a young pitcher. Either way, you draft the guy every time. If managed properly, I still think he could have been great, and he WAS a great pro – in the majors, no less – until Dusty Baker tore his arm off and beat him with it.
I don’t think Prior is the argument against great college pitchers being great major leaguers, I think he’s the case you point to when you need to say that great college pitchers still need to be treated as young players, and you need to avoid the temptation to treat them as seasoned pros, no matter what their performance.
by Fanon on Mar 4, 2009 8:19 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
+1
For all the Internet HYSTERIA about the dreaded inverted W, the root cause of Prior’s demise was the unconscionable abuse Dusty put that arm though. If he had a manager with two working brain cells, he’d still be the perennial Cy Young candidate everyone thought he’d be.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Mar 4, 2009 10:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
-.5
He was overworked but that could just be an excuse. You really don’t know if it was the innings on his arm or the poor mechanics. Someone who feels it is his mechanics can just as easily say it wasn’t the innings, it was the mechanics and I’m guessing from your post you would disagree completely and blame Baker…which is the much more popular course of action on the internet then actually studying Prior’s mechanics for reasons why his arm may have worn down.
jsmall404, you can say the same thing about innings pitched. Why is it such a problem now and it wasn’t 20 years ago? Why can pitchers like CC and Santana and Lincecum take the innings and other pitchers can’t. Your argument here is sort of hypocritical, you are using reasoning to debunk why some feel the problem is related to mechanics (show me proof that there is a definite correlation) and then making the same mistake by saying it was the innings pitched (you have no direct correlation that proves it was innings pitched). At one point in time, pitchers had never dreamed of throwing the ball so it curves or sinks until someone did it. At one point in time, walks were looked at as a negative for a hitter because you went up there to hit. Are you really telling me that there is nothing to the evidence suggesting that certain types of mechanics are far more likely to lead to specific types of injuries? This cyclical argument we have going here is getting nowhere and I’m pretty shocked how stubborn you are being by simply repeating “show me proof” over and over. No offense, I’m not meaning it as an insult, but that was something I’d do in grade school. :D
by jfish26101 on Mar 4, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no
I never said it was innings pitched, so that whole paragraph you wrote was a waste…I have said multiple times that no one can pinpoint one thing that causes a pitcher to get hurt. You agree with me when you say “You really don’t know if it was the innings on his arm or the poor mechanics”.
Never in this whole thread have I pointed out one reason pitchers get hurt.
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and
before you write a mini essay dissecting what I said, make sure you understand my point of view.
“Your argument here is sort of hypocritical, you are using reasoning to debunk why some feel the problem is related to mechanics (show me proof that there is a definite correlation) and then making the same mistake by saying it was the innings pitched”
I never said it was soley innings pitches. IN FACT I said RIGHT ABOVE your post that there are tons of factors.
No offense, but I learned reading comprehension in grade school :D
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 1:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps you learned it in grade school but you have seemingly forgot it. You +1’d a post saying that it amounts to innings pitched and Baker being a dumbass. There aren’t tons of factors, tons would mean hundreds? Thousands? There are are few, probaly less then you can count on your fingers and toes if not just your fingers (trying to keep it simply and along the lines of concepts you probably learned in grade school). People are suggesting that mechanics play a huge role in whether a pitcher gets hurt and not and you keep stomping your feet and repeating the same 4 word phrase. “Show me the proof”! It’s alright though, go ahead and take your ball and go home.
by jfish26101 on Mar 4, 2009 1:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
haha
I +1 it and then went on to explain my point. I am sorry you read the plus one and then decided to put words in my mouth…my stance was clear if you just read what I wrote. That shouldn’t be asking for too much.
And also, I +1 because Baker is notoriously known for being awful on young pitchers..which could not have helped.
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Mechanics DO matter
but to point out and say “its the inverted W”!!!!! alone is foolish
Excuse me for asking for proof about something on the internet, because, you know, everything you read on the internet you should believe and take as fact no matter what
by jsmall404 on Mar 4, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree with your first sentence.
I don’t think the Inverted W alone is to blame for any injury. I think with Prior (this is my opinion) that it was the Inverted W combined with Baker’s mishandling of him. Going deeper into games causes pitchers to change their mechanics midgame, but just a little. It causes extra stress on the arm and shoulder. I think him going deeper into games than needed cause stress on an already stressed arm.
As for Bondo, I think it was the amount of innings at such a young age, combined with his Inverted W. Before he was age 25, he had almost 1,100 innings on his resume as a pro. And it would have been more if he wasn’t shut down near the end of 2007.
I think of the Inverted W almost like the HIV virus (sorry if this offends anyone). HIV or AIDS don’t really kill you themselves, but they just weaken the immune system so something else can. The W seems to put uneeded stress on the arm, so if a pitcher is mishandled, those two things combined will most likely take you to the surgeon.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Mar 4, 2009 2:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Innings pitched?
The response was +1 to my post, which said nothing about innings pitched. Dusty could have had Prior throw 300 innings and I don’t think it would matter. The fact is that he had him throwing 120 pitches in a game far too often, and 130 pitches more than a few times, if I remember correctly. Dusty just doesn’t believe in pitch counts. Having a huge inning jump is bad, but having guys throw that many pitches is just a recipe for disaster.
by Fanon on Mar 4, 2009 3:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks John
I was one of those asking for a write up.
It will definitely be interesting to watch the guy this year and see how fast he can make it to the majors.
Visit my D2 Baseball Blog - Northern Sun Baseball
by FishingMN on Mar 4, 2009 12:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Strasburg's Pitching Line from 3/5/09 vs. USD
(Vs. #16 University of San Diego – 5-3 SDSU Win):
8 IP, 5 H, 2 R, 2 ER, 1 BB, 18 K (W, 3-0) – 116 Pitches
His numbers on the season:
20.1 IP, 14 H, 4 ER, 4 BB, 42 K (W, 3-0, 1.77 ERA, 0.89 WHIP, 10.5 K/BB, 18.6 K/9)
by Pappagiorgio on Mar 5, 2009 7:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
