Red Reporter: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

New Blog: Five For Howling - for Coyotes fans Bar-right-arrows

Dusty Baker and Pitcher Abuse

Hobbes_icon_aol_tiny by Charlie Scrabbles on

Before the season started, there was a great deal of concern among many Red Reporters about the hiring of Dusty Baker as our manager.  Many wondered if the veterans would get playing time over the budding young players on this team (mixed results on that one.  Keppinger, Patterson, Bako, and Cabrera have all played much more than they should, but Encarnacion and Votto have started nearly all year). But perhaps the biggest point of concern was the fact that the Reds were putting the futures of three young (remember Homer Bailey?), talented and very promising pitchers in the hands of a man many believe ruined the career of Mark Prior and seriously set back the career of Kerry Wood. 

Over the course of the season, we have held our breath as Volquez has been sent out for the 6th or 7th inning after laboring the entire game and throwing well over 100 pitches.  We've screamed in protest as Dusty scoffed at the idea of pulling back on Volquez and Cueto because 'they need the experience of pitching in September' so they can be 'stretched out for this time next year'.  And of course, there was The Game, and Aaron Harang is only now showing signs of being his former self.

So with about a week to go before these guys shut it down for the winter and Baseball Prospectus just releasing their updated numbers on Pitcher Abuse Points, I thought it a good time to assess the damage caused by Mr. Baker.

As you can see from the chart, all four starters, Arroyo, Volquez, Harang, and Cueto show up in the top 30 league-wide for stress this season.  Arroyo leads the way with 15, Volquez has 14, Harang has 11 and Cueto has 10. To be honest, these numbers are a bit of a surprise to me.  Arroyo I'm not worried about.  He is over 30 years old and has never had a significant arm injury in his career, so this amount of abuse doesn't seem all that drastic to me (mind you, I'm not terribly familiar with these stats from BP, but I think I have a decent idea of how to interpret them.  If I'm completely off base here please call me out on it).

Volquez stress number is much lower than I assumed.  It seems routine for Dusty this season to send the kid out there for an extra inning after throwing 110+ pitches.  But as the chart shows, he has never thrown more than 121 pitches in a game, which is right on the edge of being a Cat 4 start (between 122 and 132 pitches).  He has 14 Cat 3 starts though, which is a bit of a cause for alarm for a guy his age. 

As for Harang, outside of the disaster in San Diego, he has been pretty well taken care of.  This is most likely due to said disaster, as he has been ineffective or on the DL for most of the time since then.  Guys who give up 5 runs before the 4th inning are rarely left out there too long.  Fortunately, he has looked like the ox we all grew to know and love before The Game and appears to show no long-term affects from it.  Of course, he's not out of the woods yet, but I'm feeling better and better about him every time he goes out and shuts out the Cardinals. 

Cueto is the biggest and most pleasant surprise on this list.  As a 22-year-old, he is still within the dangerzone for young arms in respect to devastating arm injuries.  With a stress number of 10, he has been managed pretty well by Mr. Baker.  10 is about what I would expect for a guy who pitches a full season.  He has been handled well throwing only 8 Cat 3 starts.

Contrast Volquez and Cueto with some of the most abused guys in the league, and you should be breathing a huge sigh of relief.  Bruce Bochy in San Fran really likes his young pitchers Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain, which is a real shame because there is a huge possibility that they will both see long-term affects from this kind of abuse (Lincecum's stress number is 51(!!!!), which means he'd have been better off having a nuclear submarine dropped on his shoulder).  Sheets and CC have been ridden hard on the Brewers drive to the playoffs, and while CC can most likely handle it, I would be worried about a guy with such a long history of injuries like Sheets.  Whoever signs him next year might be in for a disappointment.

So I'm going to go ahead and cautiously congratulate Dusty for a job well done this year.  His reputation really preceded him when he rolled into the Queen City, but for the most part he has acted responsibly with regards to our young pitchers.  Surely he could have done better, nearly killing Harang and consistently pushing Volquez to the limit, but in the end there isn't reason to believe that any of our pitchers will need major arm surgery in the near future.  That's a win in my book.  These 4 should make up quite a pitching staff next year for us and I'm really looking forward to that.  Well done, Dusty.

6 recs | Comment 91 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Great post, and really interesting findings

Because they’re bad and far away, I haven’t paid attention to the Giants very much, but goddamn! That seems like a really high number for Lincecum. Even though I always look at him as the one that got away (you better have a Hamiltonian spring training, Drew Stubbs!), I want him to do well. His mechanics have been something of a worry point for awhile, and the added abuse by Bochy isn’t going to help things. I caught Rick Sutcliffe on ESPN scoffing about how people started worrying around 110 pitches, and throwing out the name of Nolan Ryan as a reason why pitch counts are silly. It made me grind my teeth.

Getting back to Dusty, one thing that’s not really focused on here (and I don’t really remember it being an issue when Dusty first arrived) is how he’s handled the bullpen. He clearly has favorites, and sometimes the young guys in the ‘pen won’t get the action they need. More worrisome though is his tendency to trot out guys like Burton, Weathers, and Coco three or four days in a row, sometimes after just having come off the DL. Does BP have an abuse points system for relievers?

by Brendanukkah on Sep 19, 2008 12:13 PM EDT   0 recs

God, I hate that as well

Trying to answer the pitch count issue by pointing out how many “complete games” pitchers in the past threw is just about as fundamental a logical error as one can make.

Not to mention that clubs didn’t so much give a fuck if they burned through pitchers prior to free agency. Pitching talent was cheap and deep. Pitch counts obviously aren’t a perfect indicator of fatigue, but they are a sign of an organization valuing its investments and practicing wise stewardship.

Kentuck Arts Festival: October 18th.
Details at Sinful Savage Tigers

by Man Mountain on Sep 19, 2008 12:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Not to mention it's a classical sample selection issue.

Great pitchers of the past threw tons of pitches because they had to be the kind of guys who could throw tons of pitches to last long enough to be great.

Everybody's a jerk. You. Me. This jerk.

by andromache on Sep 19, 2008 1:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah

How many pitchers were used like Nolan Ryan, but didn’t have his special build and skill set? There might be a good reason you never heard of them.

by Brendanukkah on Sep 19, 2008 1:36 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Agree on the bullpen

I posted something in July about Coco’s blown saves, which I felt was being blown out of proportion. Basically, don’t use him three games in a row.

by ken on Sep 19, 2008 1:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Is that a typo on Lincecum, or is his stress number really 51?

And if it is not a typo, good job SanFran on ruining any future he may have.

by jacob brumfield on Sep 19, 2008 12:48 PM EDT   0 recs

It says 51 in the link

Next highest is CC Sabathia… with 29! Great billowing bilge rats, Bruce Bochy ought to be keelhauled! Yarr!

(just getting ready for tonight)

by Brendanukkah on Sep 19, 2008 12:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

something to add

I recently did a quick and dirty study for every starter in baseball with over 18 starts. I looked at their game logs and counted how many 110 or more pitch games they had. The Reds led all of baseball. They had 4 starters qualify, Harang, Cueto, Volquez and Arroyo. 34% of the time one of those guys steps to the mound, they are throwing 110 or more pitches. 19 teams in baseball were sitting at less than 17%, less than half of where the Reds sit at. \

No team in baseball had 3 players with at least 8 such starts….. except the Reds who have 4. Why? My guess is that other teams will ride their horses a bit. The Giants are also at 34% but 75% of those came from Cain and Lincecum. The Blue Jays are pretty high too at 32, but most of those are from Halladay and Burnett. The Mets are in 4th at 26. The Reds have a big problem in that Dusty doesn’t ride the horses, he rides everyone.

Here is the chart (with no formatting, sorry)

Tm GS 110+ %
Cin 119 41 34
SFG 120 41 34
TOR 113 36 32
NYM 117 31 26
CHC 118 28 24
PHI 119 26 22
SEA 82 16 20
LAA 140 26 19
BOS 112 20 18
DET 114 20 18
KC 114 20 18
MIL 129 23 18
COL 108 17 16
CLE 110 16 15
ARI 114 17 15
SDP 91 14 15
STL 133 19 14
NYY 83 10 12
BAL 104 12 12
TEX 77 9 12
PIT 109 13 12
LAD 111 13 12
CHW 141 14 10
TB 143 13 9
FLA 80 7 9
HOU 107 9 8
MIN 128 6 5
OAK 99 5 5
ATL 95 5 5
WAS 110 6 5

Some teams just don’t have the pitching to put up large numbers, like Baltimore, but other teams do and are just smart about it. The Reds and Dusty are trying to get 110+ every time out and it shows. Be very scared.

http://www.redsminorleagues.com and http://www.RedsPitchFX.com

by dougdirt on Sep 19, 2008 1:00 PM EDT   0 recs

interesting

i think this illustrates that we have 4 guys who have pitched relatively well this year, going deeper into games, rather than systemic abuse. im a little more liberal with pitch counts than some, and i dont think 110-115 is really so bad (its pushing it though for sure). it seems Dusty has a hard cap of 120 on these guys, and they havent often approached it. i think my point is that these guys could have been ridden much harder and im surprised that they werent. maybe im giving Dusty too much credit, but im feeling charitable today.

"for integrity of races and the game" - Dusty Baker

by Charlie Scrabbles on Sep 19, 2008 1:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm sorry, but....why?

Why should we be scared if the Reds’ pitchers are throwing 110-120 p/g? Is 110 the magic number where injuries become more likely?

Here’s the folly of using a number like 110. In 10 of Volquez’s starts, he threw 110-112 pitches. If Baker had taken him out one batter earlier in those starts, would that have significantly changed the “abuse” on Volquez? I submit no.

What should be more of an indictment on Baker is how the pitchers have thrown recently. Since Sept. 1, when rosters expanded (so we now have 137 relievers), these 4 have 14 starts; four have been for fewer than 110 pitches. Four. Has Dusty forgotten the phone number to the bullpen?

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Sep 19, 2008 1:33 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think 110 is pretty acceptable to most people

It’s when guys are close, or at least over 100 pitches, and he sends them out to start the next inning when he could go to the bullpen. Still, it’s refreshing to see that Dusty’s not giving us any of those 130+ pitch outings.

Speaking of the bullpen, you bring up a good point about his utlization of expanded rosters. You mentioned it in relation to leaving starters in, but it also goes back to my point about his bullpen management. Bringing Burton in so many days in a row after coming off the DL was especially unneccessary when we’ve got all these recent callups he could go to. He specifically referred to them at one point as “no’s,” meaning he’d made up his mind prior to the game that he wasn’t going to pitch them. If any of them had physical problems, it wasn’t made known to the fans. It just leads me to believe that he’d rather go with guys he knew instead of any of the extra bodies that had just come up.

by Brendanukkah on Sep 19, 2008 1:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Well typed!

Rec for you.

Overserved and underwhelmed.

by Pops Daniels on Sep 19, 2008 4:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That doesn't answer the question
because its obvious that the Reds are the only team out there that doesn’t grasp the idea of giving someone a break. They are out there running these guys 100+ EVERY start and nearly 110+ every 3 starts.

But why is that bad? Your’re jusy assuming that it is without any evidence or context. Unless he shows signs of struggling, how is 100 pitches bad for a pitcher’s health?

Now, it’s certainly bad managing to leave a guy with a 4.5 ERA in when you have a dozen better pitchers giving each other noogies 300 ft. away (just like playing Paul Bako is bad managing) – if that’s what you think we should be scared of, OK. But scared that the pitchers are being blindly, or even purposely whipped? I don’t see it.

Cueto’s numbers make it look like he’s gassed; on the other hand, he’s pitched 13 1/3 IP in the past month, so I’d guess the powers that be see it. The other three are all pitching better recently, so I don’t see how you can assume that allowing them to go 110-120 pitches a third of the time has harmed them.

Someone mentioned the ‘03 PAP numbers. Arroyo’s “stress” number of 15 would have tied for #43 that year; Volquez would have tied for #47, and Cueto would have tied for #64. 59 pitchers that year threw at least one Category 4 start, and 25 threw more than 1; this year, Arroyo has the only Cat 4 start for the Reds.

In that context, it looks like the entire league has lessened the workload of their starters, including the Reds.

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Sep 19, 2008 5:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Why its bad

As a pitcher accumulates pitches they tire out. When you tire out you over exert yourself and that can lead to changing your mechanics. Then you have bad mechanics that your muscles aren’t used to and you are using more effort to get it done. That stuff leads to injuries. Now 100 pitches in itself isn’t bad. If a guy is throwing 100 pitches over 8 innings, its not bad. When a guy is doing it just to get through the 5th or 6th inning and is then sent out there the next inning, it is bad.

As far as not seeing where its harmed them, well odds are you aren’t going to see it right away. Pitchers shoulders and elbows don’t often just blow up. Most pitching injuries happen over time. Sure, there is one pitch that does the final damage, but all of the damage done before that pitch led up to it.

As far as the entire league taking it easy on pitchers, yes, they have and they have done it for good reason. Throwing a ton of pitches leads to arm injuries and most people in baseball know that.

Starting Pitching is the most rare commodity to come by in the major leagues. To consistently allow your starters to push the envelope is not a smart investment move for your future. The Reds are sitting here 22 games out of first place, fully eliminated from the playoffs and just had their starter go back out last night for the 13th time for 110 or more pitches. To serve what purpose? Oh, so he as an individual maybe could benefit from a comeback win and get that nice little W next to his name.

As for the context that everyone has cut back including the Reds, you are right. The problem is, everyone cut back a lot more than the Reds with the exception of the Blue Jays and Giants and both of them are really only relying on two guys that make up a large portion of their high pitch games. The Reds on the flip side seem to be riding all of their guys into high pitch games and according to last nights broadcast neither Dusty or Walt Jocketty think its a problem. That is why you should be scared. When you have two guys that are old school as can be are going against what nearly every other team in baseball is doing when it comes the most important thing in baseball (starting pitching).

You can go ahead and not be concerned about it. I am well on the other side of that fence and downright frightened to where our pitchers are going to be by the end of next season.

http://www.redsminorleagues.com and http://www.RedsPitchFX.com

by dougdirt on Sep 19, 2008 6:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Here's where we disagree
As a pitcher accumulates pitches they tire out. When you tire out you over exert yourself and that can lead to changing your mechanics. Then you have bad mechanics that your muscles aren’t used to and you are using more effort to get it done…As far as not seeing where its harmed them, well odds are you aren’t going to see it right away. Pitchers shoulders and elbows don’t often just blow up.

With the exception of Cueto, whose workload has been severely reduced lately, there is no indication in the numbers that any of the 4 main starters are tiring or changing anything. None.

The Reds are sitting here 22 games out of first place, fully eliminated from the playoffs and just had their starter go back out last night for the 13th time for 110 or more pitches. To serve what purpose?

Your statement is equally well stated if you say there are guys in the bullpen who need the work, which is where Baker is wrong. But simply because there is no good reason to do it doesn’t mean that it’s actively damaging.

Now 100 pitches in itself isn’t bad. If a guy is throwing 100 pitches over 8 innings, its not bad. When a guy is doing it just to get through the 5th or 6th inning and is then sent out there the next inning, it is bad.

How do you know this? How do you know it’s 100 in 6 IP and not 120? You’re still clinging to a number that, quite frankly, seems pulled out of thin air.

The Reds on the flip side seem to be riding all of their guys into high pitch games and according to last nights broadcast neither Dusty or Walt Jocketty think its a problem.

Maybe because it isn’t. Only 5 years ago, many pitchers pitched much more than any of the Reds starters you are claiming are getting ragged. While as a whole in the context of today’s game the pitch counts are higher than usual, they aren’t individually alarmingly high (like Lincecum).

And please understand, I do think you can overuse pitchers; Bruce Bochy should be fired for what he’s done with Lincecum. But the Reds’ numbers only look bad when you add them together; individually, I just don’t understand the hyperventilating.

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Sep 19, 2008 7:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Hmm

Will Carroll certainly thinks Volquez is tired as can be and its affecting his game. He wrote about it today over at Baseball Prospectus.

As for the idea that as the game goes on a pitcher tires out, Josh Kalk did a study using the Pitch F/X data that shows that as a pitchers pitch load increases over the game, the movement on his fastball decreases. That suggest the pitcher is ‘losing’ something as he continues to see his pitch count rise during the game. Below is the chart that shows the movement at the start of the game on a fastball for the average major leaguer (100%) and the movement it gets compared to that at differing intervals through the game.

And still, if you don’t think the Reds are overusing these guys I have to ask you why Arroyo and Harang have more 110 pitch games than the White Sox, Rays, Marlins, Astros, Twins, A’s, Braves and Nationals do and why Volquez has more than those teams listed above as well as the Yankees, Orioles, Rangers, Pirates and Dodgers all by themselves? Or why the Reds have twice as many starters with 8 or more 110 pitch games than any other team in baseball?

http://www.redsminorleagues.com and http://www.RedsPitchFX.com

by dougdirt on Sep 19, 2008 8:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Maybe they're worng?
And still, if you don’t think the Reds are overusing these guys I have to ask you why Arroyo and Harang have more 110 pitch games than the White Sox, Rays, Marlins, Astros, Twins, A’s, Braves and Nationals do and why Volquez has more than those teams listed above as well as the Yankees, Orioles, Rangers, Pirates and Dodgers all by themselves? Or why the Reds have twice as many starters with 8 or more 110 pitch games than any other team in baseball?

We are starting with the assumption that there is a point where pitchers throw too many pitches. We are also assuming that in the past, teams let pitchers reach that point too often. Finally, we have the fact that the Reds, along with everyone else, now use their starters for many fewer pitches than they did even 5 years ago. I think I’m safe in saying we agree on these 3 points.

You are then using the pitching frequency of other teams today to state that the Reds still make their starters pitch too much. My question is this: How do you know that these other teams are properly using their pitchers? What if 110 pitches in 6 IP is fine, and the other teams are underutilizing their starters? The problem is, we don’t know.

You can say it’s foolish, especially in a lost season. You can say you’re taking chances with Cueto and Volquez for no good reason. But that’s not what you said; you said “Be very scared”, as if you know that this is the threshold for pitcher stamina (and later injury), instead of just guessing.

And still, if you don’t think the Reds are overusing these guys I have to ask you why Arroyo and Harang have more 110 pitch games than the White Sox, Rays, Marlins, Astros, Twins, A’s, Braves and Nationals

Easy – they just happen to pitch on the same team. Those two have shown, over the past 4 years, that they can go deep into games. Arroyo has 11 games of 110+ pitches this year, the same as last. In ‘06, he pitched 21 such games. Harang has 10 this year, but 15 in ’07, 18 in ’06 (including this Cat 5 game), and 14 in ’05 (in fact, both had more games in ’06 of 110+ pitches than of <110)). Also, because even though they’ve shown the ability to do it, neither is in the top 10 individuals in 110 pitch games.

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Sep 19, 2008 9:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

We are going to just have to disagree I guess

I believe there is a certain area where pitch counts really matter and you don’t seem to have that same thing going on. The Reds have a pitching philosophy and I strongly disagree with it and by the looks of it, so does nearly every other team in baseball. Sure, those other teams could be wrong, but I doubt it. The Reds aren’t exactly on the cutting edge of anything. The people making the baseball decisions are as old school as it gets. Our manager is known for abusing pitchers and our GM was run out of town where he built a contender for years upon years and was just a year removed from a WS because of his resistance to statistical analysis in player evaluation. So, personally, I am very worried and scared where the two of them are going to be leading our team and specifically our pitching staff in the future.

http://www.redsminorleagues.com and http://www.RedsPitchFX.com

by dougdirt on Sep 19, 2008 10:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Rec for the thread!

Hey guys,
I don’t think you can rec a whole thread, but this one deserves it. It’s fantastic to see reasoned debate on an interesting point, without it degenerating into an argument about which one of you is actually Hitler.

Congrats, guys! Good points all around, and a very interesting read.

thanks.

by bbjones on Sep 21, 2008 5:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You can

At the top, just under the description. And I agree, lively intelligent discussion. Reminds me of the Enquirer boards….

"Aio, quantitas magna frumentorum est."

by jch24 on Sep 21, 2008 6:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

that's kinda

for the whole fanpost discussion, rather than this particular discussion, but you know what? Close enough. Rec’d.

by bbjones on Sep 21, 2008 8:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

yeah

good discussion. personally I agree more with the “baker overuses them” camp, but good points from both sides. I always like a good debate.

Pitch them more now so they are ready to go deep in the playoffs? Thats a bunch of BS, If they stopped right now you think they would all the sudden out of the f-ing blue are going to hit a wall in the postseason? Maybe from being young, but not because we rested their arms late in a lost season. come the fuck on dusty.

hopefully we are lucky enough that neither of our young pitchers get injured. Or the old ones for that matter.

by sharks on Sep 22, 2008 12:28 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I can sorta see their side to the arguement

but they should proceed with caution. Lets say they shut down Cueto and EV. NExt year this team kicks ass into late October, that is an extra month of pitching. If 30 additional innings is considered safe, they probably should pitch some in September. If Cueto or EV show any signs of problems I want them shutdown. I also don’t want them to excede 95 pitches.

The Dusty Path to the World Series!*

*Note this is not an endorsment of Dusty Baker.

by justin007000 on Sep 22, 2008 1:31 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Agree to disagree?

Why, because you refuse to read what I wrote?

I believe there is a certain area where pitch counts really matter and you don’t seem to have that same thing going on.

In each of my last 2 posts, I’ve said that I believe pitch counts matter:

And please understand, I do think you can overuse pitchers…We are starting with the assumption that there is a point where pitchers throw too many pitches.

So obviously I do agree with you on the premise; it’s on the detail that I have a problem with.

You keep trotting out 110 pitches. Where does that come from? Show me something that says 110, and not 105 or 112 or any other number, is the problem. You can’t.

You posted the “pitch movement” chart above; what does it show? Other than “a pitcher loses movement on his fastball”, which anyone could guess, so what? It does not show that pitchers change their mechanics at some point leading to injuries, as you suggest.

You cannot dispute that pitchers today pitch fewer pitches than even 2 years ago; you cannot dispute that 2 of the pitchers Reds pitchers have shown the ability to handle the workload they have; you cannot dispute that there is nothing in the stats that even hint that Volquez is tired, or changed his mechanics.

The Reds have a pitching philosophy and I strongly disagree with it and by the looks of it, so does nearly every other team in baseball.

I looked, and that’s a stretch. Specifically, I looked at starters 25 or younger with at least 25 starts.

Tampa – 3 of the 4 youngsters had at least 4 110+ pitch outings.
Boston – Lester 6 of his 32 outings were 110+ with a 130 pitch outing.
Toronto – Litsh 5/26
Detroit – Verlander 15/32
KC – Greinke 4/31
LAA – Santana 12/30; Weaver 3/29
Seattle – Hernandez 10/30
Philly – Hamels 9/32 with 2 120+; Kendrick 3/29
NY Mets – Pelfrey 8/31
Florida – Olsen only 2/31, but both over 120; Nolasco 5/30, with a 120 and a 132
Atlanta – Jurrjens 3/30
Pittsburgh – Duke 4/30
LAD – Billingsley 7/31
Colorado – Jiminez 7/32
San Fran – in addition to Cain and Lincecum, Sanchez was 3/28.

Now, a number of teams did start youngsters without allowing them to go over 110 pitches (or rarely so); 9 pitchers on 6 teams are not listed. But to say that "nearly every team in baseball" thinks 110 pitches is some kind of wall isn’t supported by the evidence.

So I don’t agree to disagree, because you’re offering nothing to support your position. Your only arguements are “Dusty destroys pitchers” (which has been shown to be as much Flubs blathering as anything else) and “Our pitchers pitch deeper into games than anyone else’s”, which is only true if you look at them in the aggregate and not individually, and still doesn’t mean they are being overused.

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Sep 22, 2008 10:05 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm wondering out loud,

how much does pitch efficiency factor into all of this? If a pitcher throws 110 pitches in six innings, that’s better than 18 pitches per inning. What number of pitches per inning are we comfortable with?

The manager, of course, has to take responsibility, especially with young arms. What, however, can pitching coaches from rookie ball through the majors do to help pitchers pitch more efficiently and lessen their loads?

Is the answer as simple as throwing more strikes? I’m inching dangerously close to the dreaded “pitch to contact” theory here. We like our hitters to be selective, forcing pitchers to work harder and to throw more pitches. The flip side of that appears to be that hurlers are going to throw more pitches unless they throw more strikes.

We Are ... Marshall!

by Thundering Turtle on Sep 19, 2008 1:13 PM EDT   0 recs

I dunno

Throwing strikes seems like a good philosophy and is just different enough from pitching to contact as to be palatable. However, perhaps our pitchers are aware that there’s not a gold glove defense behind them. There’s a very good chance that our fielders are prolonging innings just as much as our starters are. The best idea is to avoid walking batters as much as possible. Everything after that involves a bit of luck.

by Brendanukkah on Sep 19, 2008 1:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Will Carroll says...

110 pitches in 5 innings is worse than 110 pitches in 9 innings. I don’t know how that factors into pitcher abuse points though.

by Snake the Jake on Sep 19, 2008 2:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm guessing here

But wouldn’t it be because there are fewer pitches thrown consecutively and more rest between “sets” of pitches?

"Aio, quantitas magna frumentorum est."

by jch24 on Sep 19, 2008 2:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think...

They talk about “high stress” pitches. In other words, 110 pitches in 5 IP likely means more baserunners, hitters going deep into counts, etc. 111 pitches in 9 IP looks alot like this.

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Sep 19, 2008 2:37 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Surprisingly,

that’s not the highest game score for us this year. I wouldn’t have guessed the answer.

by ken on Sep 19, 2008 3:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I wouldn't have either

But that was one hell of a game for a ML debut.

"Aio, quantitas magna frumentorum est."

by jch24 on Sep 19, 2008 3:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm with you

I was just looking for a logical explanation of why spreading 110 pitches over 9 innings is better than spreading them over 5.

"Aio, quantitas magna frumentorum est."

by jch24 on Sep 19, 2008 3:09 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Could it have something to do with the deliveries?

Is pitching from the stretch more stressful than pitching from the windup? If you’re throwing more pitches in less innings, you’re probably putting people on base, and having to pitch out of the stretch more often. That might be a source of added stress, apart from just the mental strain of dealing with baserunners.

by Brendanukkah on Sep 19, 2008 3:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If a pitcher's mechanics are sound

then there is no evidence so far to suggest that pitching from the stretch is fundamentally more stressful than the wind-up.

per Carroll

Kentuck Arts Festival: October 18th.
Details at Sinful Savage Tigers

by Man Mountain on Sep 19, 2008 3:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Pretty simple to me

The more pitches you throw in a row, the more tired you get. When you are tired, you use more than usual to get through it and sometimes that can lead to breaking down in mechanics. That causes even more stress than normal. When you throw 110 pitches in 5 innings you are throwing 22 pitches an inning. When you throw 110 pitches in 9 innings you are throwing 12.2 pitches an inning. Thats a whole lot of extra stress on your arm per inning.

http://www.redsminorleagues.com and http://www.RedsPitchFX.com

by dougdirt on Sep 19, 2008 3:27 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Essentially then,

pitcher simply should do what we were all taught in Pee Wee ball, throw the ball over the plate. Odds are, if it’s hit, somebody will catch it.

We Are ... Marshall!

by Thundering Turtle on Sep 19, 2008 5:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Funny

Sounds like an Ohio Lottery commercial:

“Hey Reds pitchers! Pitch to contact……odds are they’ll catch it and you’ll have fun!!”

"Aio, quantitas magna frumentorum est."

by jch24 on Sep 19, 2008 5:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm with you

I’d figure there would be a debate over whether having an arm heated up for twice as long is worse than heavy muscle load at a more rapid pace, but not a clear hands-down declaration that 9 is better because of high-stress pitches. What is that?

He had alot to say.
He had alot of nothing to say.
We'll miss him.

by sukr on Sep 19, 2008 5:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

From Will Carroll at BP

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=8094

Edinson Volquez is suffering from fatigue and has lost much of his control. You fill in the blank. .

http://www.redsminorleagues.com and http://www.RedsPitchFX.com

by dougdirt on Sep 19, 2008 1:21 PM EDT   0 recs

Lost his control?

Is that why he has 36 K (and 16 BB) in 25 2/3 September IP?

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Sep 19, 2008 1:36 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think those numbers aren't inconsistent with a decrease in control.

He’ s still got stuff, but 5.6 bb/9 is not impressive (~4.3bb/9 on the season)

Everybody's a jerk. You. Me. This jerk.

by andromache on Sep 19, 2008 1:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yet

Both his k/9 (8.9 before Sept. 1, 12.6 after) and k/bb (2.1 before, 2.25 after) have both increased while his h/9 (7.84 before, 6.66 after, completely negating the rise in walks) has dropped.

In fact, July was the disaster month; he pitched much better in August, and a little better yet in September by any measure except ERA – and while 3 HRs will do that, one good outing will bring that in line, too.

Often wrong, never uncertain.

by sidnancy on Sep 19, 2008 2:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

PAP

I’m not sure of the utility of PAP. BP hasn’t put much focus on it in recent years (they have a history of leaving their less successful ventures to gather dust in dark corners of the garage). Their seems to be a pretty low opinion of it from the informed crowd at BBTF.

I think the problem is the metric is a bit of a blunt tool. In the early part of the decade there was something of an epidemic of starting pitcher abuse and efforts like PAP were a great way to raise the alarm. But now teams have taken many steps to protect pitchers. Look at the PAP chart for a few years previous. Lincecum’s “shocking” total would have placed 6th in 2003 (behind Vazquez, Wood, Livan, Prior and Mark Redman). Beyond the league leaders things tail off even faster.

The league as a whole (and Dusty) seems to have learned their lesson. Now that there’s a decline in variance in pitcher abuse we need more sophisticated methods to analyze it.

by Red Menace on Sep 19, 2008 4:31 PM EDT   0 recs

We shouldn't be worried about Dusty's pitcher abuse

but rather Dusty’s abuse of Red’s fans

AKA redsfan68 Nobody listens to Andrew

by nlt-andrew68 on Sep 19, 2008 6:33 PM EDT   0 recs

"Well done, Dusty."

gross comment, real gross

by Reynard on Sep 19, 2008 9:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Holy fuck, you're back!

Good to see you. We need a differing opinion on this site every now and then. A change if you will.

"Aio, quantitas magna frumentorum est."

by jch24 on Sep 20, 2008 2:41 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Slyde is the man capable of giving us the change we need

The Dusty Path to the World Series!*

*Note this is not an endorsment of Dusty Baker.

by justin007000 on Sep 20, 2008 11:32 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

anyone watch College Gameday?

Someone had a sign of Tommy Tubberville in the Obama style. It was pretty awesome.

Oh yeah, and College Gameday sucks these days. They had a piece on “Now Syracuse Sucks” that was just an advertisement for their new movie about the Cuse RB back in the day. The entire ESPN Network is like sports Pravda.

...because there's already someone posing as Jacob Brumfield

by Cy Schourek on Sep 20, 2008 11:49 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Death Pool...

Anyone have Travis Barker or DJ AM?

They may be close to qualifying

What's the ratio of Stanley Nickels to Schrute Bucks?

by chandrathan on Sep 20, 2008 11:48 AM EDT   0 recs

Holy shit.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26803108/

"My wife ain't never ran and got me no pheasant." - Fistbands

by BK on Sep 20, 2008 12:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

What the hell is ADD

Best line ever.

People Don't Kill People. Burning Couches Kill People.

by crolfer on Sep 22, 2008 7:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm not looking forward to my next birthday.

Nobody likes you when you’re 23.

"My wife ain't never ran and got me no pheasant." - Fistbands

by BK on Sep 22, 2008 8:03 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

...nobody likes me when I'm 17...

Oh well…

People Don't Kill People. Burning Couches Kill People.

by crolfer on Sep 23, 2008 7:35 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

...and that's when Caesar walked away from me.

Nobody wants to be Mark Antony.
I’d even rather be Cleopatra
Who the hell is Amun Ra?
Did Shakespeare have to change my name?
What’s my name again?

Thanks, sophomore english.

Everybody's a jerk. You. Me. This jerk.

by andromache on Sep 23, 2008 9:04 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs