Red Mosquito

Chris_H_2 wrote:

MadTIGERmaN wrote:I said it before, Ill say it again (and guys like Nolan Ryan will back it up)
THROW MORE! stop shutting these kids down...

your arm/shoulder/elbow can blow out on the first pitch or the 1000000th... theres no science too it. but the only way to build arm strength is to use it!

You're completely oversimplifying the solution and assuming that today's 2-3 year MLB pitchers are the same as yesteryear's. The fact is, they couldn't be more different.

Today's pitchers, by the time that they reach the MLB, have thrown a ridiculous number of pitches over a ridiculous number of innings. Guys 50 years ago (or even when Nolan Ryan was a rookie) didn't pitch in extended Little League or traveling teams, didn't play for college coaches who had no problem abusing the hell out of their pitchers' arms ***, didn't have to pitch year round, didn't throw in Arizona Fall League, New England League, California League, or the Florida League, and didn't throw through A-AAA before hitting the majors. The fact is, on average, today's MLB rookie pitchers are on par with where pitchers were 50 years ago at retirement in terms of the number of pitches thrown. So I don't think the solution is necessarily to "throw more," because that erroneously assumes that pitchers need to build up the arm strength as opposed to having something structurally wrong based on the number of pitches already thrown through those points of their careers.

*** This brings up another point. College coaches don't have their pitchers' best interests in mind and don't worry about preparing them for the next level. In fact, they have an inherent conflict of interest. They worry about their teams' performance and, ultimately, their own job security. So they have no problem putting their 1 starters out to throw 150 pitchers on 3 days' rest. There are some college programs (cough, Stanford) that are notorious for this.

MadTIGERmaN wrote:ummmm, thats ummmm...
http://www.baseballnation.com/2013/5/17 ... itch-count
yeah that says it better... every team freaked out about pitch counts, and injuries (including tommy john surgery) are up... theres no scientific correlation between pitch count and arm injuries, none. But with any other muscle in your body that you plan on using a lot, you work it out, a lot, to build strength.

that article also mentions Livan Hernandez, the guy whos known to warm up before a start, by tossing 150+ pitches in the bullpen, the day of his start...

Chris_H_2 wrote:

MadTIGERmaN wrote:ummmm, thats ummmm...
http://www.baseballnation.com/2013/5/17 ... itch-count
yeah that says it better... every team freaked out about pitch counts, and injuries (including tommy john surgery) are up... theres no scientific correlation between pitch count and arm injuries, none. But with any other muscle in your body that you plan on using a lot, you work it out, a lot, to build strength.

that article also mentions Livan Hernandez, the guy whos known to warm up before a start, by tossing 150+ pitches in the bullpen, the day of his start...

So you have no problem with Mark Appel throwing 150 innings on 3 days' rest for 20 consecutive starts?

numbers wrote:Do you really think kids in the 50s and 60s were throwing far less than kids today?

Chris_H_2 wrote:

numbers wrote:Do you really think kids in the 50s and 60s were throwing far less than kids today?

I'm assuming by "kids" you mean somewhere in the area of 15 to 21. If so, and given that they had less opportunities to pitch in organized games, yes.

@SkitchP wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

numbers wrote:Do you really think kids in the 50s and 60s were throwing far less than kids today?

I'm assuming by "kids" you mean somewhere in the area of 15 to 21. If so, and given that they had less opportunities to pitch in organized games, yes.

That's the word Im going to take issue with. Just because they werent on a travel team, doesn't mean they didnt spend every afternoon out playing and pitching.

Chris_H_2 wrote:

numbers wrote:Do you really think kids in the 50s and 60s were throwing far less than kids today?

I'm assuming by "kids" you mean somewhere in the area of 15 to 21. If so, and given that they had less opportunities to pitch in organized games, yes.

MadTIGERmaN wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

numbers wrote:Do you really think kids in the 50s and 60s were throwing far less than kids today?

I'm assuming by "kids" you mean somewhere in the area of 15 to 21. If so, and given that they had less opportunities to pitch in organized games, yes.

you need to go and read Satchel Pages biography... the dude would literally pitch in pickup games in cities on the way to his next organized game without even telling the team. Sure, in his 30s he had a dead arm, but continued to pitch, into his 50's

MLB network was talking about the Harvey situation this afternoon, and John Hart was talking about how the Mets actually had a doctor do a study on arms to set up a innings program, and his advice was... theres no way of knowing, it could happen on the first pitch or the 100000000th pitch... so just let them pitch, and enjoy the outs while the arm holds up.

Some never break down no matter how hard they throw, see Randy Johnson
some break down multiple times even though they dont throw hard at all

philpritchard wrote:

Fuck You Jobu wrote:He most certainly has some control over whether his team wins. But now we're just repeating the same arguments...

Ok, so here's my point: why bother using a massively flawed "individual" stat that relies heavily on contributions from teammates to evaluate a player when there are so many stats available to show what the individual player actually accomplished?

Fuck You Jobu wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Fuck You Jobu wrote:He most certainly has some control over whether his team wins. But now we're just repeating the same arguments...

Ok, so here's my point: why bother using a massively flawed "individual" stat that relies heavily on contributions from teammates to evaluate a player when there are so many stats available to show what the individual player actually accomplished?

What individual stats are you referring to?

philpritchard wrote:

Fuck You Jobu wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Fuck You Jobu wrote:He most certainly has some control over whether his team wins. But now we're just repeating the same arguments...

Ok, so here's my point: why bother using a massively flawed "individual" stat that relies heavily on contributions from teammates to evaluate a player when there are so many stats available to show what the individual player actually accomplished?

What individual stats are you referring to?

The massively flawed "individual" stat is Wins.

The individual stats that show what the player actually accomplished without the help of his teammates are pretty much everything else, and they don't have to be based on sabermetrics at all: ERA, Ks, BBs, WHIP, HR/9, etc. ERA and WHIP both rely on defense to a certain extent. The other three are completely up to the pitcher. None of them depend in any way on offense or the bullpen.

Fuck You Jobu wrote:I don't understand how you make the argument against Wins since it's dependent on teammates, but it's ok for ERA, WHIP.

Chris_H_2 wrote:

MadTIGERmaN wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

numbers wrote:Do you really think kids in the 50s and 60s were throwing far less than kids today?

I'm assuming by "kids" you mean somewhere in the area of 15 to 21. If so, and given that they had less opportunities to pitch in organized games, yes.

you need to go and read Satchel Pages biography... the dude would literally pitch in pickup games in cities on the way to his next organized game without even telling the team. Sure, in his 30s he had a dead arm, but continued to pitch, into his 50's

MLB network was talking about the Harvey situation this afternoon, and John Hart was talking about how the Mets actually had a doctor do a study on arms to set up a innings program, and his advice was... theres no way of knowing, it could happen on the first pitch or the 100000000th pitch... so just let them pitch, and enjoy the outs while the arm holds up.

Some never break down no matter how hard they throw, see Randy Johnson
some break down multiple times even though they dont throw hard at all

So what would "throwing more" have anything to do with the equation? It sounds like you're saying that, on the one hand, pitchers' arms could blow at anytime regardless of pitches or arm fatigue while, on the other hand, you advocate throwing more to build up arm strength which, in turn, would prevent injuries.

numbers wrote:The difference between today and yesteryear is that teams have so much money wrapped up in these pitchers. In the old days people just threw, if they didn't have the arm strength to hold up, they washed out and no one cared. With the money tied up with these pitchers today teams are more paranoid about taking a bath on their investment.

Chris_H_2 wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

numbers wrote:Do you really think kids in the 50s and 60s were throwing far less than kids today?

I'm assuming by "kids" you mean somewhere in the area of 15 to 21. If so, and given that they had less opportunities to pitch in organized games, yes.

That's the word Im going to take issue with. Just because they werent on a travel team, doesn't mean they didnt spend every afternoon out playing and pitching.

Pitching in a competitive game throwing 100+ pitches is a lot different than playing catch or pitching in practice.

Chris_H_2 wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

numbers wrote:Do you really think kids in the 50s and 60s were throwing far less than kids today?

I'm assuming by "kids" you mean somewhere in the area of 15 to 21. If so, and given that they had less opportunities to pitch in organized games, yes.

That's the word Im going to take issue with. Just because they werent on a travel team, doesn't mean they didnt spend every afternoon out playing and pitching.

Pitching in a competitive game throwing 100+ pitches is a lot different than playing catch or pitching in practice.