PDA

View Full Version : Jerry Narron and Homer Bailey's 2007 Workload



Cyclone792
06-05-2007, 06:42 PM
Simple question here ...

Regardless of whatever specific front office requirements may be implemented, do you trust Jerry Narron to do everything in his power to protect Homer Bailey's arm and future by limiting Bailey's workload to an acceptable level during the 2007 season?

A second question to ponder: Do you trust the Reds as an organization to do everything in their power to protect Homer Bailey's arm and future by limiting Bailey's workload to an acceptable level during the 2007 season?

Comparing Harang/Arroyo to Homer Bailey as far as workload is a bit of apples to oranges because of their ages and development, I know, but we also know that Harang/Arroyo have been by far the Reds' two best starting pitchers in ages, and we know that the 2007 Reds bullpen is still a complete mess, much like it has been for the past few years. We also know, unfortunately, how Narron has reacted to the combination of those factors. All that being said, here's some food for thought, courtesy of BP's pitcher abuse points (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/sortable/index.php?cid=205026) ...

Aaron Harang: 4th in PAP in 2005, 3rd in PAP in 2006, and 6th in PAP so far in 2007
Bronson Arroyo: 6th in PAP in 2006, and 3rd in PAP so far in 2007

Matt700wlw
06-05-2007, 06:43 PM
Narron better do what he's told......and I'm assuming he'll be given guidelines...I would hope so, anyway.

KronoRed
06-05-2007, 06:45 PM
Absouloutly not, nor do I trust Kirvsky to give him guidelines.

pedro
06-05-2007, 06:50 PM
Narron better do what he's told......and I'm assuming he'll be given guidelines...I would hope so, anyway.

I get the impression that Krivsky is "old school" in that he doesn't "give direction" to the manager. Personally I think it's a mistake if true b/c Narron could sorely use it.

Matt700wlw
06-05-2007, 06:52 PM
I get the impression that Krivsky is "old school" in that he doesn't "give direction" to the manager. Personally I think it's a mistake if true b/c Narron could sorely use it.

If Narron's a "baseball guy" then he should know enough to find out the workload that he's on, if Krivsky doesn't give him specific direction....

That workload is about 100 to 110 pitches (and 110 was more of stretching him out) tops right now....I'd rather keep around 90-100, for now, at least.

If I know that...then he should know that.

Cyclone792
06-05-2007, 06:54 PM
Hmmm ... is this poll stating that the results are hidden for everyone else?

pedro
06-05-2007, 06:55 PM
Hmmm ... is this poll stating that the results are hidden for everyone else?

nope, i can see the results.

pedro
06-05-2007, 06:56 PM
If Narron's a "baseball guy" then he should know enough to find out the workload that he's on, if Krivsky doesn't give him specific direction....

That workload is about 100 to 110 pitches (and 110 was more of stretching him out) tops right now....I'd rather keep around 90-100, for now, at least.

If I know that...then he should know that.

I doubt that the Reds will allow him to go much, in any, over 100 pitches. What I worry more about is overwork in a single inning.

Reds1
06-05-2007, 06:58 PM
This is a no brainer yes! It's against the grain here, but I truly believe they will be careful with him. They shut him down last year and if the Reds are out of it I can see them pitching every 6th day or a low pitch count. I could be wrong.

IslandRed
06-05-2007, 07:09 PM
Narron better do what he's told......and I'm assuming he'll be given guidelines...I would hope so, anyway.

He'd better be given guidelines, and it should be a firing offense if they're not followed.

RedsManRick
06-05-2007, 07:15 PM
I'm just waiting for that first outing where he's at 100 pitches through 5 with 2 hits and 8 ks and Narron brings him out for the 6th only to see him implode with a few walks and a bomb after 20 more pitches...

Cyclone792
06-05-2007, 07:20 PM
I get the impression that Krivsky is "old school" in that he doesn't "give direction" to the manager. Personally I think it's a mistake if true b/c Narron could sorely use it.

I have no idea if you're right or not - and I hope you're not! - but if you are right, then that is painfully disturbing. Words cannot even describe how detrimental a lack of direction handed down from the front office to Narron could be for this organization.


I'm just waiting for that first outing where he's at 100 pitches through 5 with 2 hits and 8 ks and Narron brings him out for the 6th only to see him implode with a few walks and a bomb after 20 more pitches...

That's Narron's M.O., and it's liable to happen by the end of the month, if not sooner. And like pedro said (and I referenced in the other thread), I'm very concerned about high pitch innings and what sort of trouble Bailey could get himself into if Narron lets him throw 40+ pitches in an early inning trying to work through a jam.

pedro
06-05-2007, 07:22 PM
Even more disturbing is if Krivsky is handing down direction to Narron on pitch counts and doesn't have an issue with what's gone on so far.

M2
06-05-2007, 07:22 PM
No, but my caveat would be that almost no major league manager would handle him with kid gloves. He's going to be expected to deliver 6+ IP a start and if he's pitching well, Narron will ride him, like most other managers.

MrCinatit
06-05-2007, 07:23 PM
I would also like to point out that Lohse is 58 and Belisle is 60 on the pitching abuse system. Seems kind of high to have 4 pitchers in the top 60, but I could be wrong.
I have long said I would prefer seeing Homer come up after Narron was gone. Perhaps early on, he might be careful - but I can see that not lasting. And later in the season, that could be more damaging.

smith288
06-05-2007, 07:28 PM
They know this isnt some 28 yr old journy man who has shown he can go long into games so im confident they will be more careful with him than a Harang or Arroyo (if he can make it past 1 inning)

membengal
06-05-2007, 07:29 PM
I have been in favor of Bailey coming up, but that is with some expectations of the Reds:

1. Strict pitch counts of no more than 100 in any given start, no matter how well he is pitching in any given start.

2. If/when he gets to 170 innings for his total season innings between AAA and the majors, shut him down.

3. Don't jerk him around, now that he is here, ride out the highs and lows. Bonderman had an ERA in the mid 5s in his rookie year with the Tigers. No biggie on this roster if Bailey is similar. He can learn much from his experience if he is handled right.

Do all of that, and I am thrilled and glad he is up. Fail on that, and I go over the side that worries about this.

Failure at times is guaranteed to all pitchers, but on balance, I think he will have plenty of success. I just want the Reds to be consistent with their approach and use of him during this transition to the big leagues.

pedro
06-05-2007, 07:30 PM
I have been in favor of Bailey coming up, but that is with some expectations of the Reds:

1. Strict pitch counts of no more than 100 in any given start, no matter how well he is pitching in any given start.

2. If/when he gets to 170 innings for his total season innings between AAA and the majors, shut him down.

3. Don't jerk him around, now that he is here, ride out the highs and lows. Bonderman had an ERA in the mid 5s in his rookie year with the Tigers. No biggie on this roster. He can learn much from his experience if he is handled right.

Do all of that, and I am thrilled and glad he is up. Fail on that, and I go over the side that worries about this.

Failure at times is guaranteed to all pitchers, but on balance, I think he will have plenty of success. I just want the Reds to be consistent with their approach and use of him during this transition to the big leagues.

I don;t think I'd let him throw more than 30-35 pitches in an inning either.

membengal
06-05-2007, 07:32 PM
That's a nice addition to my list as well. Frankly, I would do what was suggested in the other Bailey thread and make Santos the designated "on alert" guy in every one of Bailey's starts.

KronoRed
06-05-2007, 07:32 PM
I'm just waiting for that first outing where he's at 100 pitches through 5 with 2 hits and 8 ks and Narron brings him out for the 6th only to see him implode with a few walks and a bomb after 20 more pitches...

Yeah I can see that happening, another worry would be Bailey has a shutout and they leave him out there no matter how many pitches to keep it.

pedro
06-05-2007, 07:36 PM
That's a nice addition to my list as well. Frankly, I would do what was suggested in the other Bailey thread and make Santos the designated "on alert" guy in every one of Bailey's starts.

That's a good idea too. Santos has shown the ability to go long and that certainly may end up being required if Bailey has difficulty.

Falls City Beer
06-05-2007, 07:36 PM
I'm kind of starting not to care. I've reached the point where I'm just desperate not to watch losing baseball for 3 or 4 days. I've got a win jones.

RFS62
06-05-2007, 07:42 PM
I'm gonna cringe every time it looks like he's having to reach back for something extra. High pitch count in an inning where Narron is letting him work out of a jam... yeesh.

How hard is the adrenaline gonna pump with a kid his age out on the bump on a national stage? Think he's going to use good judgment and stay within himself?

Maybe... I hope so.

Unacceptable risk.

Highlifeman21
06-05-2007, 08:38 PM
I'm gonna cringe every time it looks like he's having to reach back for something extra. High pitch count in an inning where Narron is letting him work out of a jam... yeesh.

How hard is the adrenaline gonna pump with a kid his age out on the bump on a national stage? Think he's going to use good judgment and stay within himself?

Maybe... I hope so.

Unacceptable risk.

I'm gonna cringe every time this kid feels like he needs to throw the ol #1 by someone b/c he knows that his curve isn't good enough, and his change up is still probably a year away.

We're tossing a 1.5 pitch thrower to the wolves.

David Homer Bailey is not a pitcher yet. He still relies too heavily on his fastball, and cannot locate his curve and change on his command. Until he's able to do so, he's a thrower, not a pitcher.

This is quite possibly the worst move the Reds could make right now. The kid needs to make more starts in AAA before he pitches for the big club, but unfortunately we put the cart before the horse.

Here's to hoping we don't turn Homer Bailey into a Kerry Wood or Mark Prior.

Ltlabner
06-05-2007, 08:52 PM
David Homer Bailey is not a pitcher yet. He still relies too heavily on his fastball, and cannot locate his curve and change on his command. Until he's able to do so, he's a thrower, not a pitcher.

I just posted on the other thread, that I wonder if this start, against a rather potent offense, is a round-about way of trying to show young Homer that he can't live on his fastball in the big leagues.

That's been the beef on Homer for a while, that he relies on his fastball. Maybe this is an attempt to break him of it. The implication being that he woln't listen to coaches as evidenced by the same report keeps poping up over time.

Not saything that's a good or bad idea (bad one IMO) but perhaps it's part of the equation.

Always Red
06-05-2007, 08:53 PM
I would also like to point out that Lohse is 58 and Belisle is 60 on the pitching abuse system. Seems kind of high to have 4 pitchers in the top 60, but I could be wrong.


I see that as much a reflection of the Reds abysmal bullpen as it is an indication of Narron's handling of pitchers. The entire time Narron has been manager here, he has never had a decent bullpen to turn to. But he does have at least two very durable, very competitive SP's, who like going deep into games.

Narron's trying to win every game, hell, any game, in order to save his own job. That's part of the equation, too, for good or bad.

Here's Narron PAP numbers his first time around, with his SP's in Texas, just for comparison's sake (taking the 5 pitchers with the most GS):

2001- Helling (14 PAP), Davis(42), Oliver(107), Rogers(82), Bell (154).
2002- Rogers (34), Park (7), Valdez (43), Burba (126), Bell (151).

Of note, Chan Ho Park, who was 7th with Narron in 2002, was considered the 6th most abused pitcher of 2001, when he was with the Dodgers.

So, Narron does not have a history of abusing SP's, at least by these numbers.

Looking back over the "Abuse" list of the last 10 years, the same names keep popping up again and again- Johnson, Clemens, Wakefield, Martinez, Livan, Schilling, Glavine. Pretty good pitchers, who pitch a lot. Yes, they throw a lot of pitches.

I trust Narron to do the right thing by Homer. Narron is certainly not my favorite manager, but I can't see him throwing this kid to the wolves.

Stormy
06-05-2007, 09:40 PM
They know this isnt some 28 yr old journy man who has shown he can go long into games so im confident they will be more careful with him than a Harang or Arroyo (if he can make it past 1 inning)

Why? One could easily argue that the moment they signed their respective extensions, that Harang and Arroyo became the most valuable Reds' pitching commodities in recent history (because of the monetary value, and long-term/future interest invested, in their continued success). Narron responded by basically riding both into the ground within the first 5 weeks of the season, with extremely abusive workloads, everything but their performance in the game at hand be damned.

And, I'd wager that Arroyo and Harang would be higher than #3 and #6 on that list, if not for the fact that Arroyo basically involuntarily orchestrated consecutive early exits for himself via utter ineffectiveness following his most grueling starts, and if Harang's burden had not been alleviated some since his brief bereavement absence.

Why would a manager with such tendencies treat Homer Bailey any differently than he treats his current most value pitching resources? Do you see any signs of him not riding the hot hand into the ground, whether it's a veteran, or a rookie LHP like Coutlangus? Narron has a chance to turn Homer into the next coming of Mark Prior if he's not given a mandate from above.

StillFunkyB
06-05-2007, 10:52 PM
So, if for some weird alignment of the planets Homer has a perfect game through 8, would you send him back out there to pitch the 9th if he is @ or above 100 pitches?

Highlifeman21
06-05-2007, 10:55 PM
I just posted on the other thread, that I wonder if this start, against a rather potent offense, is a round-about way of trying to show young Homer that he can't live on his fastball in the big leagues.

That's been the beef on Homer for a while, that he relies on his fastball. Maybe this is an attempt to break him of it. The implication being that he woln't listen to coaches as evidenced by the same report keeps poping up over time.

Not saything that's a good or bad idea (bad one IMO) but perhaps it's part of the equation.

Watching Homer Bailey not get out of the 3rd inning would be one hell of a lesson, IMO.

Let's take a look at the Indians lineup, shall we?

Sizemore
Blake
Hafner
Martinez
Nixon
Peralta
Michaels
Barfield

(My best guess)

OTTOMH, I only see at most 4 guys he might be able to have success sneaking the fastball. Blake, Peralta, Michaels, Barfield. That's it. The other 5, forget about it.

Not only have we most likely brought this kid up too soon, we're gonna throw him in the deep end and demand he swim like an Olympic Gold Medalist, all the while most likely trying to break his spirit and tame him.

With the command issues Bailey's shown in AAA, I see him easily getting behind 2-0, 2-1, 3-1 to some hitters and just letting that fastball loose. I hope he has a comfortable pair of shoes on for his MLB debut, b/c if he's gonna rely on the fastball, he's gonna get a lot of practice backing up 3B and Home.

Matt700wlw
06-05-2007, 10:57 PM
So, if for some weird alignment of the planets Homer has a perfect game through 8, would you send him back out there to pitch the 9th if he is @ or above 100 pitches?

There are exceptions to every rule

:)

Caveat Emperor
06-05-2007, 11:09 PM
Simple question -- simple answer: No.

Though, I do note for the record that most Narron's pitcher abuse comes to guys who, at this point in their career, should be able to shoulder the extended workload. I desperately want to believe that Narron isn't stupid enough to treat Bailey the same way he treats Harang and Arroyo -- but I can't believe that until I see it in person.

I've never wanted to be proven wrong more in my life, but I don't trust Narron here at all.

They can take the steps to protect Bailey: establish a 35 pitch max per inning, a 100 pitch count strict limit (don't care if he's in the middle of a 3-2 count), keep a longman in the bullpen as his help if he has to get pulled in the 3rd or 4th, etc. But, I don't trust the team being that committed to his health and development vs. winning ballgames and selling tickets.

RedsBaron
06-05-2007, 11:23 PM
Simple answers: No and no. :(

Reds Nd2
06-06-2007, 02:13 AM
Simple question -- simple answer: No.

Though, I do note for the record that most Narron's pitcher abuse comes to guys who, at this point in their career, should be able to shoulder the extended workload. I desperately want to believe that Narron isn't stupid enough to treat Bailey the same way he treats Harang and Arroyo -- but I can't believe that until I see it in person.

I've never wanted to be proven wrong more in my life, but I don't trust Narron here at all.

They can take the steps to protect Bailey: establish a 35 pitch max per inning, a 100 pitch count strict limit (don't care if he's in the middle of a 3-2 count), keep a longman in the bullpen as his help if he has to get pulled in the 3rd or 4th, etc. But, I don't trust the team being that committed to his health and development vs. winning ballgames and selling tickets.
I voted no, but it's not that simple for me. I trust Narron to do what he's told by the FO, but I'm no longer sure I trust the front office to do what's right in regards to running this team. Last night I still had hope that Kriv knew what he was doing, even if some on here didn't. Tonight, not so much. I really don't like bringing up Bailey now and I seriously loathe what I'm beginning to think the reasons are for the move in the first place.

You say, "I desperately want to believe that Narron isn't stupid enough to treat Bailey the same way he treats Harang and Arroyo -- but I can't believe that until I see it in person. I keep thinking back to the way he's used David Weathers. A three inning situation once and he leads the league in +3 out save ops. Now I'm the last person who would argue against using your best reliever in the highest leveraged situations, but at this point, something about it just strikes me as desperation on Narrons part. Like you, I desperately want to be proven wrong.

You say,"They can take the steps to protect Bailey:..."
I say dude, the second he joins the big league teams rotation Friday, the time for protecting Bailey has passed the Reds by. They could implement the safeguards you've suggested and very good ones at that, but let's take a look at something. Arroyo has surpassed 6 IP only twice this season. He's went as far as 5 IP once in his last three starts. It's June the 5th. That's going to tax a bullpen over the next four months. Harrang has only had one game where he's pitched less than five innings, and (beer math alert) he's still on pace for 237 IP. He pitched 234.1 innings last season. If he keeps it up, that won't hurt the bullpen too much. Now that's just your number one and two starters. Belisle hasn't pitched a game with fewer than 5 IP, but he's only went further than 6 IP four times in twelve starts (a career high). Two questions about this. Do you trust Belisle to get better as the season goes along? How bad is he for the bullpen? Lohse has eaten some innings, but he's been run early in three of his last five starts too. Another tax on the bullpen lately. Eric Milton has gone six innings once in six starts this season. Per games started this season, that's your five man rotation. You know there will be spot starts over the course of a season. So far we've seen, Saarloos and two games started/5.1 IP. Livingston with two games started and 12 IP. All of this combined is just going to kill a bullpen that isn't very good to begin with on it's own merits.

Adding a guy with only 313 proffesional innings pitched to the rotation and giving the consideration that he's averaged less than 6 IP during that time, I'm not convinced the Reds can implement your steps, as good as your suggestions are, to protect Bailey. They just don't have the bullpen to protect all of the pitchers who may struggle early in the early innings. They really don't have a pitcher to spare in the bullpen to use as protection for Bailey every five days.

There best bet IMO, if they truly wanted to protect him, would have been to leave him at Louisville. Let him get the needed work on refining the location on his fastball and curveball. Let him work on his change up. Let him learn how to be a pitcher instead of just a thrower. When the Bats season ends, and depending on the innings he's pitched and the number of pitches thrown, bring him up and put him in the bullpen. Let him get a taste of the big leagues and what it takes to get major league hitters out in a way that the team can control in a sensible manner. Kinda like the way they brought EzE up the first time. Let him get a taste of the show, but let him sit on the bench and let him learn from those that have been there before.

Ron Madden
06-06-2007, 05:24 AM
Trust, confidence or hope? I have none in Jerry Narron or Wayne Kriviski right now.

dabvu2498
06-06-2007, 09:10 AM
So, if for some weird alignment of the planets Homer has a perfect game through 8, would you send him back out there to pitch the 9th if he is @ or above 100 pitches?

I know this doesn't really relate to anything, but Homer Bailey has pitched past the seventh inning one time in his life (assuming he didn't pitch into extra innings when he was in HS).

Redsland
06-06-2007, 12:41 PM
I just posted on the other thread, that I wonder if this start, against a rather potent offense, is a round-about way of trying to show young Homer that he can't live on his fastball in the big leagues.

That's been the beef on Homer for a while, that he relies on his fastball. Maybe this is an attempt to break him of it. The implication being that he woln't listen to coaches as evidenced by the same report keeps poping up over time.
That's an interesting thought. I kind of like it. :beerme:

The_jbh
06-06-2007, 02:34 PM
I do not trust Narron however I do trust Kriv to fire Narron if Bailey is pitching past 100 pitches...

I think it should be a strict 100 pitch count. He does not throw one pitch over 100

Always Red
06-06-2007, 02:45 PM
I do not trust Narron however I do trust Kriv to fire Narron if Bailey is pitching past 100 pitches...

I think it should be a strict 100 pitch count. He does not throw one pitch over 100

It depends on what he's used to throwing.

In fact, I think he's been throwing much less than that; 100 might be too much for him at this point.

I'd look for him to throw 70-80 and be out of there by the 5th inning.

Just get him ready for next year...

Chip R
06-06-2007, 02:59 PM
Maybe this is Wayne's passive-aggressive way of firing Narron. He knows Narron won't be able to resist the temptation of overusing Homer so when he does - against orders - he can fire him. ;)

Roy Tucker
06-06-2007, 03:04 PM
Maybe this is Wayne's passive-aggressive way of firing Narron. He knows Narron won't be able to resist the temptation of overusing Homer so when he does - against orders - he can fire him. ;)

Gaaahhh. Chip, I know you're just kidding, but the idea of Krivsky and Narron playing chicken with Homer's future gives me the vapors.

Ltlabner
06-06-2007, 04:24 PM
That's an interesting thought. I kind of like it. :beerme:

Thanks. I really do think that's part of the calculus that lead to bringing him up. It's been a long complaint that he uses the heater too much, there's been more than one report that he's "arrogent" and antcedotally it's easy to beleive he can in fact, get by with his heater in AAA. With the way the Indians are hitting, they are likely to jump all over his fastball in the 2nd and 3rd time through the rotation.

So if Homer comes up and mows them down its good for the Reds. If he gets mowed down by the Indianas the coaches can take him asside and say, "see son, that's what we were trying to get you to understand".

Random thoughts. Not saying it's a good or bad idea (mostly bad IMO) but showing him the hard relatities of life in MLB to get him to accept outside input might be part of the equation.

IslandRed
06-07-2007, 10:19 AM
It depends on what he's used to throwing.

In fact, I think he's been throwing much less than that; 100 might be too much for him at this point.

I'd look for him to throw 70-80 and be out of there by the 5th inning.

Just get him ready for next year...

For what it's worth, I believe he's been typically going 90-100 in his Triple-A starts.

Always Red
06-07-2007, 10:47 AM
For what it's worth, I believe he's been typically going 90-100 in his Triple-A starts.

You're right, IR, I should have looked it up (I just did :), instead of believing what I've read elsewhere...)

in 10 starts this year; 83, 90, 87, 92, 96, 91, 107, 92, 101, 108

He's averaging 94.7 pitches an outing, with a high of 108, which was his last outing.

108 has been called abuse by some, not just here, but on many other baseball boards and forums. We need a better definition of "pitching abuse."

RedsManRick
06-07-2007, 11:33 AM
Narron's use of Arroyo shows to me that the guy just doesn't get it. He's coming off a number of bad outings and has given up 3 ER over 100 pitches through 6. You have the lead. Does he honestly think that Arroyo his 101st pitch is going to be better than a fresh reliever -- even ours? Does he think our relievers will pitch better if he brings them in with men on base, or pitching from a deficit? Does he realize that Arroyo has stunk ever since he made him go 120+ pitches?

I know that Arroyo claims to like the workload. However, if we're going to carry 12 pitches, we can't STILL be overworking out starters. If the relievers suck to the point that you can't use them in a close game, why are they on the roster. Victor Santos has faced 3 batters in the last 10 days. Mike Stanton has a WHIP of 1.69 and isn't a freaking LOOGY. McBeth has pitched in close situations before. Isn't not pitching him with any regularity going to screw him up more than asking him to protect a run 1 run lead with the bases empty in the 7th?

I just don't understand Narron's logic and how he'll apply it to Homer.

Steve4192
06-08-2007, 12:40 PM
108 has been called abuse by some, not just here, but on many other baseball boards and forums. We need a better definition of "pitching abuse."

I don't think you really get into 'abuse' territory until you start taking a guy well into the 100+ range. The occasional 105-110 pitch game shouldn't be a problem. It's when you start stacking 100+ pitch games back to back to back or when you allow a guy to go 120+ pitches that you run into problems. Also, as others have pointed out, one thing that PAP doesn't measure is the monster 30+ pitch innings that can really wear on a guy's arm.

I am fine with the Reds usage of Bailey thus far in his career. I also won't have a problem if they let him go over 100 pitches in the majors. You have to allow some room for subjective evaluation. If Bailey is at 100 pitches and throwing free and easy, I see no problem with letting him go deeper into the game. However, if he is laboring and consistently having to reach back for a little something extra, he needs to pulled even if he has a shutout going.

Always Red
06-08-2007, 01:39 PM
I don't think you really get into 'abuse' territory until you start taking a guy well into the 100+ range. The occasional 105-110 pitch game shouldn't be a problem. It's when you start stacking 100+ pitch games back to back to back or when you allow a guy to go 120+ pitches that you run into problems. Also, as others have pointed out, one thing that PAP doesn't measure is the monster 30+ pitch innings that can really wear on a guy's arm.

I am fine with the Reds usage of Bailey thus far in his career. I also won't have a problem if they let him go over 100 pitches in the majors. You have to allow some room for subjective evaluation. If Bailey is at 100 pitches and throwing free and easy, I see no problem with letting him go deeper into the game. However, if he is laboring and consistently having to reach back for a little something extra, he needs to pulled even if he has a shutout going.

I agree, Steve, especially with the last part. We often hear stories about guys reaching back for something extra late in a game- but that's exactly when injuries occur. My statement was partly tongue-in-cheek; I did a poor job of getting that across.

I don't think pitch counts are the entire story. Some pitchers can throw all day, like Matsuzaka, but some can't, and for them, pitch counts are very important. It's probably the old bell-shaped curve, as much of life is.

Any pitcher who loses his form, and is tired is subject to getting hurt. That's when he needs to come out of the game. Not some magical number of pitches. Each pitcher should have his own "magical number." But when you chart those pitches, and have someone (Jerry? DickPole?)paying very close attention, you can see patterns emerging over time, and you know that, for instance, at 95 pitches or so, Belisle tends to start getting tired and getting the ball up in the zone. A smart coaching staff will take that info and customize it to each player. Because if Belisle is tired at 95 pitches, and starts changing his form in order to get the ball where he wants it, well, that's when injuries happen, when one body part starts compensating for another.

Some power pitchers really don't reach that point until very late in a game, if at all; if you go back and look at those PAP (abuse) lists of the last 10 years, you see the same names pop up on them over and over, they are the very best pitchers of this generation, and they just don't get hurt. They get tired, which is different than hurt.

I think those 30 pitch innings (Arroyo has had a couple of 48-49 pitch innings this year, early in games) add up, and for relievers, all that warming up does take some toll, as well as working game after game. It is hard to quantify, that's for sure, and I take little stock in the PAP list. But it is a start, an attempt to quantify, or better yet, identify which pitchers can handle a heavy work load, and which ones cannot.

I think some guys can go 130 pitches before they get into abuse territory, and for others, 50 pitches will get them there; it's entirely an individual thing. The only time I would term it "abuse" would be when the manager knows what a pitchers limit is, and intentionally exceeds it.

For a young guy like Homer (or any young pitcher)- go slow, for sure. Work him into it, and slowly find out at what number of pitches he starts to lose form. I really think it would take a year to figure it out; he's a young guy, is still growing, actually, and has no established track record, so the obvious decision would be to always pull him early rather than let him go long.

Hoosier Red
06-08-2007, 01:41 PM
If all we're talking about is pitch counts than i trust him.
He may be an idiot, but he's not an idiot.

Eric_Davis
06-08-2007, 11:45 PM
114 pitches. But Narron got him the win.

Steve4192
06-08-2007, 11:50 PM
114 pitches. But Narron got him the win.

4 of those pitches were from an IBB, so it's more like 110 pitches, which is really no big deal. Homer is averaging 95 pitches/start over his last 10 games and threw 108 in his last minor league start.

All the outrage over him going 114 pitches is much ado about nothing IMO.

redsmetz
06-09-2007, 12:30 AM
He needed to get through the 5th inning, no two ways about it.

coachw513
06-09-2007, 01:18 AM
Also, as others have pointed out, one thing that PAP doesn't measure is the monster 30+ pitch innings that can really wear on a guy's arm.

However, if he is laboring and consistently having to reach back for a little something extra, he needs to pulled even if he has a shutout going.

Let's see...

Had to labor through tough innings...check...

Went way over safe pitch count simply to finish 5 innings...check...

Folks, I want to sincerely apologize to every member of RZ who has had to read me in any way, shape or form attempt to defend Jerry Narron...he is a fine man, and I respect his poised demeanor which is a quality trait for a baseball manager...BUT...

This man just took the main (if not only) prized possession in our franchise and extended him for 114 hi-stress, low efficiency pitches...just to have him have a chance to win a game...he clearly had to "reach back" for extra, clearly had no command and had to "will" his way to get through his 5 innings (this is not a knock on Homer...his resolve while not having command nor control was impressive and i'm excited for his future)...but leaving him for any reason tonite was irresponsible...an extra batter here, an extra inning there, and we exponentially expose his still developing physique to injury IMHO...

On top of that, he finds a way to use 3 more pitchers in the 8th inning, and over-extend Weathers for another 4-out save...how 'bout we actually see what happens to the likes of Coutlangus, Burton, Salmon and McBeth when they get into trouble...yes, I know these men will fail much more than we wish, but I think our franchise needs to determine which of these relievers has the ability to get out of ML trouble on a consistent basis...

yes, good win...all of the risk and string-pulling and over-exposure of our arms results in our 24th win...yippee!!...I've come over to the dark side here...Narron and Pole simply cannot manage a pitching staff without incurring inordinate risk to the health of our key arms AND without any development of the young arms in our system...both of which should be the mandate of a bad, rebuilding franchise in my belief...

Fire him tommorrow...no, fire him before he has a chance to leave the clubhouse...

Dang, why do I root for teams that have "good guys" that can't get the job done (over the past few years, Dave Wannstadt, Ron Zook and now Narron)...don't get me wrong...this team is NOT bad because of Narron...but the ability of this team to improve and not destroy its foundation of Harang, Arroyo, Bailey and Belisle depends on WK making a change...and fast...

pedro
06-09-2007, 01:34 AM
4 of those pitches were from an IBB, so it's more like 110 pitches, which is really no big deal. Homer is averaging 95 pitches/start over his last 10 games and threw 108 in his last minor league start.

All the outrage over him going 114 pitches is much ado about nothing IMO.

Perhaps. OTOH, I certainly wouldn't want Bailey to string together too many starts where he threw that many pitches in only 5 innings. I don't think throwing 114 pitches is that big a deal over the course of 9 or even 8 innings but to do so in only 5 really doesn't set all that great a president IMO.

Steve4192
06-09-2007, 01:43 AM
Homer finished the 4th inning at the 91 pitch mark (including a 4 pitch IBB). I have no problem with Narron letting him start the 5th inning and giving him a chance to notch a W in his MLB debut.

Yes, he labored a bit in the 5th, but it's not like he was getting smacked around and he certainly wasn't WAY over his pitch count. Homer has been averaging 95 pitches/start over his last 10 games, has gone 100+ in three of his last four starts, and just threw 108 pitches in his most recent minor league start. He threw an extra six pitches tonight, and four of those were on an IBB. Whoopty-freaking-doo.

Much ado about nothing.

Steve4192
06-09-2007, 01:46 AM
I certainly wouldn't want Bailey to string together too many starts where he threw that many pitches

I agree.

If Narron makes a habit of letting him go over 110 pitches, I'll grab a pitchfork and storm the castle with the rest of the angry mob. But I'm not going to flip out over one start.

Giving the kid the kid a chance to notch is a W in his MLB debut is worth the risk for one game. He entered the 5th having thrown 91 pitches. He certainly had a little something left in the tank, and has regularly been eclipsing that mark in the minors.

pedro
06-09-2007, 02:01 AM
I agree.

If Narron makes a habit of letting him go over 110 pitches, I'll grab a pitchfork and storm the castle with the rest of the angry mob. But I'm not going to flip out over one start.

Giving the kid the kid a chance to notch is a W in his MLB debut is worth the risk for one game. He entered the 5th having thrown 91 pitches. He certainly had a little something left in the tank, and has regularly been eclipsing that mark in the minors.

If Homer strings together a bunch of complete games where he throws 110 pitches and doesn't have any innings where he throws more than 20 pitches I don't think I'd have a big problem with it.

WVRedsFan
06-09-2007, 02:01 AM
This was about PR and fans. It was without regard for Homer Bailey and that disturbs me.

Let me put it this way. If it had been one of our other starters, i wouldn't worry so much, even though Arroyo seems to have suffered most from these long outings, but your prized jewell? I don't know how many pitches per game Homer had in Louisville (maybe someone knows), but to keep him in there to get a win, something he's going to do a lot in his career if he stays healthy, was a little bit screwy.

I'm with the coach. And while we're at it, all the talk Krivsky and Narron had earlier about Homer not being ready and holding him off until he was went by the wayside when things got rough and they needed fannies in the seats. So they brought up Homer. Before he was really ready and then abused him.

We need new leadership and now. Starting with Krivsky, the creator of this horrible club and his sidekick Jerry Narron, a nice guy who just doesn't have it. Only desparate men do the things they've done in the last few days. The future be damned, we need the stadium filled regardless of what else happens. That's a recipe for disaster (as if we didn't already have one on the field in 2007).

SteelSD
06-09-2007, 02:50 AM
4 of those pitches were from an IBB, so it's more like 110 pitches, which is really no big deal. Homer is averaging 95 pitches/start over his last 10 games and threw 108 in his last minor league start.

All the outrage over him going 114 pitches is much ado about nothing IMO.

It's not "much-ado-about-nothing" because pitches per start don't tell us much about actual workload.

114 pitches over five Innings Pitched for Bailey equals 22.8 Pitches per Inning. That's an excessive workload. Ten baserunners in five Innings pitched. 55% of his pitches were Strikes. We can only hope that first-start jitters were the issue. But it's clear that Bailey was abused tonight and he's likely to be abused again by a manager who desperately needs Wins to save his job.

This is the "bad time" for Reds fans.

Cyclone792
06-09-2007, 04:43 AM
Bailey's pitch count per inning ...

1st inning: 29 pitches (29 for game)
2nd inning: 18 pitches (47 for game)
3rd inning: 14 pitches (61 for game)
4th inning: 30 pitches (91 for game)
5th inning: 23 pitches (114 for game)

Jerry Narron has abused Aaron Harang. Jerry Narron has abused Bronson Arroyo. And tonight, Jerry Narron abused Homer Bailey.

That's a 21-year-old arm right there who threw two separate innings of 29 pitches and 30 pitches. That 30 pitch inning came after having thrown 91 pitches for the game. That's an average of 22.8 pitches per inning. That's 114 pitches for the game for a 21-year-old pitcher making his MLB debut.

I won't even go into the fact that I was six rows behind the visitor's dugout and could clearly see for myself that Bailey was reaching for every ounce of energy he could muster against Hafner, Nixon and Delucci in the 5th inning. It was the type of display that was absolutely unnecessary for a 21-year-old pitcher.

So long as Jerry Narron is the manager of this club, the future of this pitching staff is at serious risk.

Get used to it, folks.

Aronchis
06-09-2007, 04:53 AM
Bailey needs some long rest after Jerry's "making a man outta yeah" disturbance. If he skips a start, it would counter the abuse. But I doubt that happens. Get ready to serve up the next 110 pitches.

I bet if this doesn't stop, we are going to hear about Bailey's sore arm soon which was completely unnecessary.

Always Red
06-09-2007, 08:28 AM
I do understand the angst here re: the pitch count, but in Narron's defense, what should he be doing differently? I'm not talking specifically about last night's game, either.

Narron's bullpen is in shambles. Do you trust it? Obviously, Narron doesn't either, and why should he? It's let him down time and time again. He literally has one guy he can count on most of the time. He also has SP's who are rather inefficient, they throw a lot of pitches. Arroyo has had more than one 40 pitch inning this year.

If he's out there removing SP's from games at about the 90-95 pitch mark every night (is that a number we can all agree is a "safe" number of pitches?), he's into the bullpen by the 5th inning almost every single night. This team would not ever win a game again if that were the case.

Narron's job is to win games, literally. Yes, of course he needs to be responsible with the keys to the company Rolls Royce. I was yelling at the TV last night in the middle of the 4th to get Homer out of there, so I'm on board with the feeling, mostly.

So, I can blame Narron some for the high pitch counts. I can also blame the pitchers (Homer last night) for not being more efficient. It's not Narron's fault Homer threw 29 pitches in the 1st inning last night. And I also blame Krivsky (a lot) for not providing Narron with enough pitchers who can get the job done. To satisfy many here at RZ (because if we're not happy, no one's happy ;)), Narron would need a 15 man staff, with as inefficient as his SP's are and as bad as his bullpenners are.

In many ways it really is a no win situation for Narron. Which is why he will ultimately be fired. For a number of reasons, most of which are very good ones, IMO.

One thought about the Pitching Abuse Points. I'm going to use 2 extremes to make this point: every year, it seems as if Livan Hernandez is among the most abused pitchers in the game, and also, every year, Greg Maddux is among the least abused. Yet for the last 3-4 years, these pitchers have had different managers, every year. Their "abuse" or lack of it, has just as much to do with their style of pitching and efficiency (or inefficiency) as it does with who is actually managing them. Just my opinion.

RedsBaron
06-09-2007, 09:18 AM
Narron's job is to win games, literally.

If Narron continues to abuse Bailey, Harang and Arroyo, maybe he will get 70 wins out of the Reds this season instead of 60 or 65. Either way, the 2007 Reds finish well below .500 and do not contend. However, by abusing his pitchers now, Narron increases the chances that they will be of no help at all in, say, 2009 when perhaps the Reds might otherwise have a chance of playing winning baseball. Of course, Narron realizes he probably will not be here in 2009 anyway, so he destroys the hope of tomorrow by chasing a hopeless today.

GAC
06-09-2007, 09:27 AM
4 of those pitches were from an IBB, so it's more like 110 pitches, which is really no big deal. Homer is averaging 95 pitches/start over his last 10 games and threw 108 in his last minor league start.

All the outrage over him going 114 pitches is much ado about nothing IMO.

In 5 innings?


Narron realizes he probably will not be here in 2009 anyway, so he destroys the hope of tomorrow by chasing a hopeless today.

Now I like that. ;)

I was at the game last night. Took two of my kids (it was Sam's first game). The kid had to be nervous with it being his first ML start before a packed house. It was also very hot/humid. The sweat was rolling of him (and the other players).

He had 49 pitches after two innings. I told my daughter he would be lucky to get to the 5th inning. He had 91 pitches after 4. So I was hoping Narron would have him on a short leash IF he even came out for the 5th. He struggled again in the 5th - they send the pitching coach out to talk with him, as well as having a few of the players come to the mound. I figured they were stalling in order to get someone ready in the bullpen. But they left him in there and he somehow got through it and completed the fifth.

I can understand why Narron let him start the 5th in order to get credit for the win (that's if the BP could hold it). That would give the kid an emotional boost - his 1st ML win. But they can't keep doing that to him or, IMHO, he'll be another Kerry Woods.

His curve ball, at this stage is nothing to brag about, and he was having a hard time getting it, as well as any off speed stuff, over the plate. His fastball was averaging 93-94. He needs to learn another pitch.

We'll just have to wait and see as the season progresses. But no, I don't trust Narron, as far as his handling of pitchers. And the guy has some sort of love affair with Stanton. And we wonder why some of the younger guys struggle when they do come in? Narron is inconsistent in his use of them.

Yachtzee
06-09-2007, 10:03 AM
I think the biggest indictment of Jerry Narron was pointed out by the Indians announcers (I was watching on STO), that during the fifth inning David Ross was constantly looking to the dugout as if expecting Narron to come out and get him. Rick Manning said something to the effect that Ross's looks to the dugouts, combined with the fact that Bailey hadn't unleashed a mid-90s fastball in the inning indicated that Bailey was most likely gassed at that point and Ross was trying to hint to Narron to come out and get him.

I'm fine with a high pitch count on occassion if a pitcher is throwing well and showing no signs of fatigue. However, when a pitcher is obviously struggling with fatigue, the manager MUST get him out of there, especially when it's a young pitcher that serves as a ray of hope for a franchise with an otherwise dim outlook.

Always Red
06-09-2007, 10:10 AM
If Narron continues to abuse Bailey, Harang and Arroyo, maybe he will get 70 wins out of the Reds this season instead of 60 or 65. Either way, the 2007 Reds finish well below .500 and do not contend. However, by abusing his pitchers now, Narron increases the chances that they will be of no help at all in, say, 2009 when perhaps the Reds might otherwise have a chance of playing winning baseball. Of course, Narron realizes he probably will not be here in 2009 anyway, so he destroys the hope of tomorrow by chasing a hopeless today.

RB, I agree with what you say. You took that statement of mine out of a larger post. Do you agree that Narron has very few options in the BP? It is Narron's job to win games. It is Krivsky's job to give Narron some tools to work with. (Both have failed miserably at this point, no doubt). The Reds have better SP than they do RP's. After much thought, I blame Krivsky as much for the workload of the SP's as I do Narron.

It's Krivsky's job to think long term, and Narron's job to think short term.

As far as bringing Stanton in; well who else is there? Santos? Yuck. There is no one down there, literally, who I'd trust a one run lead to other than Weathers, and he's mediocre at best.

I see the Stanton move as trying to buff him up a little for the trade deadline. A competitive team like, say, the Cleveland Indians, could sure use a guy like the Stanton of old.

BTW, I fully expect Stanton to pitch well for whatever team he winds up with next. Guys come here and simply cannot pitch in relief; they move on and seem to pitch as they did before coming to the Reds, for whatever reason.

I'm amazed that the Reds won that game, and happy for Homer. No way did I expect them to hang on to a lead for that long.

If Krivsky wants to lesson the workload on his starting staff, he needs to give the manager a good alternative. That is at least half the problem.

GAC
06-09-2007, 10:12 AM
I think the biggest indictment of Jerry Narron was pointed out by the Indians announcers (I was watching on STO), that during the fifth inning David Ross was constantly looking to the dugout as if expecting Narron to come out and get him. Rick Manning said something to the effect that Ross's looks to the dugouts, combined with the fact that Bailey hadn't unleashed a mid-90s fastball in the inning indicated that Bailey was most likely gassed at that point and Ross was trying to hint to Narron to come out and get him.

That's a good point. Your catcher is probably the most reliable person on that field during a game that a manager must rely on, as far as gauging how pitcher is doing.

This first game is obviously not any kind of an indicator; but at age 21, you can't allow this kid to go out there and consistently throw 100+ pitches through 5 innings.

Always Red
06-09-2007, 10:19 AM
I think the biggest indictment of Jerry Narron was pointed out by the Indians announcers (I was watching on STO), that during the fifth inning David Ross was constantly looking to the dugout as if expecting Narron to come out and get him. Rick Manning said something to the effect that Ross's looks to the dugouts, combined with the fact that Bailey hadn't unleashed a mid-90s fastball in the inning indicated that Bailey was most likely gassed at that point and Ross was trying to hint to Narron to come out and get him.



Could be true, but also I've heard that Narron himself actually calls a lot of the pitches; Ross could be looking in there for a signal.

RedsBaron
06-09-2007, 10:30 AM
RB, I agree with what you say. You took that statement of mine out of a larger post. Do you agree that Narron has very few options in the BP?
It's Krivsky's job to think long term, and Narron's job to think short term.



I agree that Narron has limited options in the bullpen.
Krivsky does need to think long term; the whole team does. IF Narron clearly was the guy to lead the Reds as manager in 2009, then Krivsky should need to tell him: "Jerry, don't worry too much about this season. We aren't going anywhere anyway. We are in this together and let's build towards a winner in a couple of years--you will still be here then." Of course, even then, Narron might be a fool to believe Krivsky, and even if Krivsky said and meant that, if the Reds fail to show progress, Krivsky may be gone in a year or two anyway, making any promise to Narron moot.
Because of that, Narron needs to be given firm orders regarding pitch counts and non-abuse of pitchers, with the understanding that if he violates those orders he will be summarily shot.
Generally speaking, Krivsky needs to rid the Reds of most pitchers and players above age 30. Yeah, I'd keep the 37 year old rightfielder unless a decent trade came along, and there are a few others that I might keep as backups, but I'd be pointing towards 2009, and that means using guys who can help me then.

Outshined_One
06-09-2007, 10:30 AM
With regards to these kinds of situations, there are two things worth noting.

For one, a manager should do everything in his power to win every game, regardless of a team's record, quality of opponent, or whatever. While this feat is impossible, sometimes managers have to take unorthodox and risky steps to carry out this accomplishment. This game could certainly be seen as a case of Narron trying to do so, as he felt the Reds' best chance of winning would come from pitching Homer Bailey for as long as he was effective from Narron's point of view. This is not the sole job of a manager, but it is the most important jobs he has.

Secondly, in isolation, there is not much wrong with having a young pitcher throw 114 pitches over five innings. Young pitchers have to learn how to deal with adversity at the major league level, one way or another. They will inevitably come across situations in their careers where they won't have their best stuff, they'll get into a jam, or whatever, and they have to find a way to come out of it in one piece. There are certain situations where it might hurt to coddle young pitchers.

With all of that out of the way, there is one huge caveat to place on those two things.

If this sort of usage becomes a pattern, then you have to worry. Granted, every game in Bailey's career won't see him go 5 innings and throw 114 pitches in doing so. But, if this is an indication of how Narron will use Bailey in the future, there's a lot to be worried about. A guy as young as Bailey needs to be watched closely and carefully; you don't want this team screwing him up because the coaching staff was careless with him.

Even if you do not adhere to the notion that high pitch counts for young pitchers lead to injuries, you will most certainly agree that overworking a laboring pitcher is a really bad idea. Bailey's velocity was down in that 5th inning and he clearly was dead tired. When you get to that point as a pitcher, especially as a young pitcher, that's when mechanical breakdowns are most likely to occur. If a guy's mechanics aren't working correctly, then his likelihood of injuring himself in one way or another goes absolutely through the roof.

As I mentioned, one of the most important jobs a manager has is to try his best to win every game. However, one of the other most important jobs is to keep the guys on the roster healthy and effective. Sometimes, managers have to make sacrifices when it comes to winning games in order to keep guys healthy and effective, such as by not overusing the pitching staff. Obviously, you need those guys to stay healthy in order to keep winning games.

Narron knows his job is on the line. If the Reds continue to have the worst record in the NL, his seat will only get hotter and hotter. If Narron wants any chance of saving his job, he's going to have to rely even more heavily on starting pitching than he normally would. However, in doing so, he will be disregarding his job in terms of keeping the pitching staff healthy because he'll have to overuse those pitchers to keep winning games. Maybe he'll win a few more games, but in the long run, it will most likely hurt his pitchers.

RedsManRick
06-09-2007, 10:34 AM
If Homer goes more than 100 pitches next week, I will be squarely on the fire Narron train. Yes, Homer was extended beyond what he should've done. However, there was some benefit in terms of managing Homer, exposing him to how tough it's going to be while still allowing him to get the confidence that comes from getting the W. As a special circumstance, I'm willing to reserve judgement, but if Homer averages over 100 pitches per start, uggh.

Steve4192
06-09-2007, 10:44 AM
It's not "much-ado-about-nothing" because pitches per start don't tell us much about actual workload.

114 pitches over five Innings Pitched for Bailey equals 22.8 Pitches per Inning. That's an excessive workload.

I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but ... when did pitches per inning become the gold standard for measuring pitcher abuse? I don't doubt that it is important, but there are a lot of people in this thread chirping about workload per inning.

Seriously, did I miss a study on the subject? If so, can someone point me to it so I can get caught up on the latest thinking in regards to pitcher abuse.

Kc61
06-09-2007, 10:48 AM
I think yesterday was a fan event, a media event. It was done to have something positive for the Reds and their fans in a miserable, horrible season. I don't think there was any way Narron was pulling homer until after the Delluci at bat.

That's why I don't think the Reds will trade Griffey. As he approaches 600 homers, it will be another fan, media event. The Reds won't be able to resist having that.

But now that last night's game is history, they should be very careful with this kid. I would have him on a 90 pitch count for awhile. Frankly, until they actually need a fifth starter, I wouldn't mind it if Homer was in AAA or on the bench, or given one planned two or three inning relief stint (instead of a start).

If the Reds keep this pitcher in the major leagues this year, it is as a training period, not to push him to the limit.

Reds Fanatic
06-09-2007, 11:18 AM
If this organization wants to protect Homer they are going to have to set an exact pitch count for Homer. It is obvious you can't count on Narron to protect his pitchers when he has shown time after time that he does whatever it takes to get that extra out or get through one more inning. This team has to think in the long term with Homer. Homer could be the ace of this team for the next decade if they use him right. If you want to see what happens to a young arm when it is overused just look at what has happened to Kerry Wood in Chicago. I am afraid if this team continues to abuse a 21 year old's arm I am afraid Homer is headed toward the same problems.

Yachtzee
06-09-2007, 11:31 AM
Could be true, but also I've heard that Narron himself actually calls a lot of the pitches; Ross could be looking in there for a signal.

Could be, but Ross wasn't taking quick looks to get the sign. He was taking long looks over with his mask off. His body language indicated that he was expecting Narron to come out.

Ltlabner
06-09-2007, 12:17 PM
For once the chat room last night modeled the game thread pretty closely. We were all cyber-screaming, "JERRY, GET HIM OUT OF THE GAME" after the first baserunner reached in the 5th. The hue and cry inceased with intensity througout the inning.

Wether it was totall piches thrown, or pitches per inning, to force the kid to overextend himself to get out of the inning for some alleged "pyscological boost" was a horrable decision. Homer get himself out of the jam in a spectacular fashion, but to what end? Will his carear now be set for great success because he got a win in his first outing? Was he on the edge of mental disaster if he didn't get the win.

In addition of trying to throw harder in the 5th when he was gassed, you can take it to the bank he was over-amped and over throwing the ball in the first inning, maybe two. IMO each one of those pitches was more like 2 pitches, or 1.5 pitches or whatever. They were more stain on his arm than a normal pitch.

So you have over exertion in the first inning, possibly two. And definate over exertion in the 5th while the entire baseball universe, perhaps even Haffner and Nixon thinking, "why on planet earth is this kid still out there".

Yet Jerry wanted to get the kid a win.

Wow. Sorry Jerry. You gotta go.

Caveat Emperor
06-09-2007, 01:42 PM
Yet Jerry wanted to get the kid a win.

Wow. Sorry Jerry. You gotta go.

First night in the bigs for the kid -- I guess I can see the educational value in letting him stay in long enough to at least get a shot at the victory.

Reminds me of the Lou Brown line: "Nice play kid, don't ever do it again."

But, with Narron, long outings seem to be the rule, so I fully expect this to happen again.

GAC
06-09-2007, 02:27 PM
Here's some pics we took at the game last night....

traderumor
06-09-2007, 02:40 PM
Great point about the 114 including an intentional walk, so he was one batter over a 100-105 pitch limit that is a reasonable expectation. All the dire talk seems to fit the melodramatic Cincy fans that Pedro talked about the other day.

Yachtzee
06-09-2007, 03:31 PM
Great point about the 114 including an intentional walk, so he was one batter over a 100-105 pitch limit that is a reasonable expectation. All the dire talk seems to fit the melodramatic Cincy fans that Pedro talked about the other day.

I don't think the pitch count is the point. Pitch count is a nice guideline, but you also have to take the player and the situation into account. I think the concern is that he looked gassed when he walked out there for the 5th and Narron kept him in.

Stormy
06-09-2007, 04:18 PM
Great point about the 114 including an intentional walk, so he was one batter over a 100-105 pitch limit that is a reasonable expectation. All the dire talk seems to fit the melodramatic Cincy fans that Pedro talked about the other day.

Did you actually even watch him in the 5th inning? This is not purely about some arbitrary 'pitch count' being observed, but rather about the individual circumstances of Homer's outing. He undeniably labored through the most pressure filled portion of his evening at a time when he was visibly gassed, as he was passing through that 100-to-114 pitch barrier, with the added stress of facing a difficult portion of the lineup, with numerous runners on base (culminating in a bases loaded jam).

A.) His velocity was noticably down throughout that inning B.) It is undeniable that fatigue, combined with trying to overthrow pitches led him to throw several head high fastballs, and several breaking pitches in the dirt, as his command abandoned him with increasing frequency C.) Anyone watching could see a kid 'reaching back for more' overriding his normal fluid motion. So many studies indicate that those criteria all dramatically increase the chances for injury to a young arm, and we saw all of them on display in a single inning (and one in which he had an elevated pitch count).

You know, you don't have to be so married to your position that you cease to be objective, in favor of calling anyone who disagrees with you 'melodramatic'... that's really dumbing down the discourse. Afterall, everyone else in the thread is supporting their observations with some modicum of evidence. I'm thrilled Homer got the "W", but I'm much more concerned about his longevity during a very fragile stage of his development.

4256 Hits
06-09-2007, 04:44 PM
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but ... when did pitches per inning become the gold standard for measuring pitcher abuse? I don't doubt that it is important, but there are a lot of people in this thread chirping about workload per inning.

Seriously, did I miss a study on the subject? If so, can someone point me to it so I can get caught up on the latest thinking in regards to pitcher abuse.

I don't know about a study but to me it is more about recovery time. It much easier to throw 114 pitches over 3 hours (9 innings) Vs. 2 hours (5 innings).

For example go out and run 10 miles over 2 hours then go out and run 10 miles over 3 hours and tell me which one is easier on the body. Or maybe better comparision would be to go run the 10 miles by running two miles and taking a 5 min. break then running another two before taking a 5 min. break and so on. Compare that to running 1 mile and then taking a 5 min break and then repeating. When you reach 10 miles you will feel much better doing 1 mile at a time Vs. 2 miles at a time.

RedsManRick
06-09-2007, 04:59 PM
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but ... when did pitches per inning become the gold standard for measuring pitcher abuse? I don't doubt that it is important, but there are a lot of people in this thread chirping about workload per inning.

Seriously, did I miss a study on the subject? If so, can someone point me to it so I can get caught up on the latest thinking in regards to pitcher abuse.

Here you go Steve: http://www.baseball-reference.com/otb/pitcher_usage_old.php

Lots of links in there too. There is certainly no hard and fast "rule". I think the general idea is this:

- Throwing too many pitches is bad.
- We don't know exactly what too many pitches is, but data shows that pitchers tend to get less effective over 90-100 pitches, and that chance for injury generally increases exponentially as you move beyond 110.
- Every pitcher is different. We never know if a guy can't handle something until he breaks.
- Getting a little bit less out of a guy because you took him out early is a whole lot better than ruining his season or career because you took him out too late.

When in doubt, take him out.

Matt700wlw
06-09-2007, 05:35 PM
That last out for Bailey HAD to boost his confidence....big time.

Narron pushed the right buttons, even though he may have pushed his pitch count.

Delucci was going to be his last batter anyway....if Bailey gets ahead of more hitters, that pitch count drops. He knows this.

A lot of balls got fouled off last night that in AAA would have been swings and misses....the breaking pitches in the dirt weren't hacked at last night, and they probably would have been in AAA....


He wouldn't learn that if he wasn't up here.

Steve4192
06-09-2007, 06:15 PM
Here you go Steve: http://www.baseball-reference.com/otb/pitcher_usage_old.php


Thank for the link, but I didn't see anything regarding pitches per inning, only pitches per start.

As a matter of fact, everything in that article seemed to support Craig Wright's work from 'The Diamond Appraised' which gave the following guidelines for a 20 year old pitcher.


# For ages twenty to twenty-two, they should average no more than 105 pitches per start for the season (105 pitches is roughly equivalent to 30.0 BFS). A single-game ceiling should be set at 130 pitches.

Homer is averaging 95 pitches/game and didn't come close to the 130 pitch mark. If anything, this article supports my point that all this bellyaching is much ado about nothing.

Steve4192
06-09-2007, 06:26 PM
I don't know about a study but to me it is more about recovery time. It much easier to throw 114 pitches over 3 hours (9 innings) Vs. 2 hours (5 innings).

That makes sense intuitively, but sabremetrics has uncovered all kinds of fallacies that also make intuitive sense. I was wondering if someone had actually read a study on this topic. From the number of people who were jumping on the pitches per inning wagon, I just assumed I had missed something.


For example go out and run 10 miles over 2 hours then go out and run 10 miles over 3 hours and tell me which one is easier on the body. Or maybe better comparision would be to go run the 10 miles by running two miles and taking a 5 min. break then running another two before taking a 5 min. break and so on. Compare that to running 1 mile and then taking a 5 min break and then repeating. When you reach 10 miles you will feel much better doing 1 mile at a time Vs. 2 miles at a time.

Are you sure about that?

Try increasing your rest time to 20 minutes so your body can completely cool down and then running again. In my experience, it is a heck of a lot easier to sustain work output over a long period of time than it is to yo-yo yourself between exertion and resting.

I am perfectly willing to believe that throwing 100 pitches in five innings is more dangerous/destructive that throwing 100 pitches over nine innings, but I'd like to see some evidence rather than blindly accepting it as the truth.

GAC
06-09-2007, 06:31 PM
That last out for Bailey HAD to boost his confidence....big time.

Everyone in the stadium stood and cheered. It was awesome.


Delucci was going to be his last batter anyway....if Bailey gets ahead of more hitters, that pitch count drops. He knows this.

One really can't gauge Bailey on this initial start - his performance or even how he will be handled overall throughout the season. I can understand Narron trying to do everything he can, this being Homer's initial start, to give the kid an emotional boost by trying to get him the win.

He struggled last night. But that would be expected looking at all the various circumstances. I am not going to presume, based on this one start, how he will/will not be used.

I'm not the biggest Narron fan, but I don't think the guy is that stupid to abuse the kid, knowing his age, inexperience, and also the risk to injuring a top prospect.

traderumor
06-10-2007, 12:32 AM
Did you actually even watch him in the 5th inning? This is not purely about some arbitrary 'pitch count' being observed, but rather about the individual circumstances of Homer's outing. He undeniably labored through the most pressure filled portion of his evening at a time when he was visibly gassed, as he was passing through that 100-to-114 pitch barrier, with the added stress of facing a difficult portion of the lineup, with numerous runners on base (culminating in a bases loaded jam).

A.) His velocity was noticably down throughout that inning B.) It is undeniable that fatigue, combined with trying to overthrow pitches led him to throw several head high fastballs, and several breaking pitches in the dirt, as his command abandoned him with increasing frequency C.) Anyone watching could see a kid 'reaching back for more' overriding his normal fluid motion. So many studies indicate that those criteria all dramatically increase the chances for injury to a young arm, and we saw all of them on display in a single inning (and one in which he had an elevated pitch count).

You know, you don't have to be so married to your position that you cease to be objective, in favor of calling anyone who disagrees with you 'melodramatic'... that's really dumbing down the discourse. Afterall, everyone else in the thread is supporting their observations with some modicum of evidence. I'm thrilled Homer got the "W", but I'm much more concerned about his longevity during a very fragile stage of his development.

I watched every freakin' one of the 114 pitches, don't even think I missed one for a pee, thank you very much.

Try your own advice on for size


You know, you don't have to be so married to your position that you cease to be objective

You've made it very clear, with a multitude of long posts on the subject, that you don't even want Homer up here. So, what kind of objectivity do you bring to the table with your comments? Honestly, what you are saying is a fair guideline, but it seems you are turning your thoughts into what should be a policy rather than a guideline.

Stormy
06-10-2007, 12:55 AM
I'm simply pointing out that there are people of good intent on both sides of the issue of Homer's usage, who are simply offering their observations, empirical data, or statistical evidence to support their viewpoints. There's actually a pretty intelligent and meaningful exchange taking place on the subject, as people try to understand each other's perspective and attempt to sift through the research on the topic of protecting young arms.

Your post didn't seem to offer a contradiction to the stated concerns, as you instead opted to simply dismiss opposing views with what I thought was a derisive term. So, no, I didn't have any idea if you had seen him pitch the 5th inning or not. I don't see why everyone of a certain perspective has to be labelled as 'melodramatic', but if you feel that's accurate, so be it. :beerme:

I don't want to detract further from the ongoing dialogue in an interesting thread, so I'm not going to discuss it any further. I'm sorry my response rubbed you the wrong way, but there's no hard feelings here at all.

traderumor
06-10-2007, 01:05 AM
I also had second thoughts about my rant and removed that last part. If you want to keep it in your quote, that's fine, I did throw that out there, but my edit is probably more reflective of my take on your posts. I do hear what you're saying, and Narron does not instill a lot of confidence that last night was something that won't happen again, but I really did not have the take you did on the 5th inning and was watching the same visual evidence.

Stormy
06-10-2007, 01:17 AM
I do hear what you're saying, and Narron does not instill a lot of confidence that last night was something that won't happen again, but I really did not have the take you did on the 5th inning and was watching the same visual evidence.

Completely understandable, and a lot of posters I respect immensely are taking this same approach. I hope it's not a precedent for future usage, and I hope last night's 5th inning was not nearly as stressful an inning as I deemed it to be (in which case, it will all be, 'much ado about nothing' as Steve asserted). I expect greatness out of Homer in the future, so here's hoping he gets the optimal development available.

SteelSD
06-10-2007, 03:42 AM
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but ... when did pitches per inning become the gold standard for measuring pitcher abuse? I don't doubt that it is important, but there are a lot of people in this thread chirping about workload per inning.

Seriously, did I miss a study on the subject? If so, can someone point me to it so I can get caught up on the latest thinking in regards to pitcher abuse.

From a biomechanics perspective, Homer Bailey didn't necessarily throw just 114 pitches because a gross pitch count analysis considers only volume without regard to intensity. Bailey's 114-pitch outing didn't allow for the same recovery time as if he were pitching the bottom of the sixth or seventh Inning with the same pitch count he had prior to or during the 5th Inning.

I know you understand the following, Steve, so please just count this as me simply laying out my case...

When the body gets tired, we need to exert more effort to get the same result and that results in more strain on muscles, tendons, ligaments, everything. Then add on that Bailey faced 66% of opposing hitters out of the stretch, and we've got even more stress on the body than normal.

The high P/IP workload we saw from Bailey, IMO, equals more physical strain than I want to see- particularly from a workload intensity aspect. Due to workload intensity (i.e. high P/IP rate) I'd suggest that Bailey's five-Inning stint is at least equal to, if not exceeding, the 129-pitch effort Narron piled on Bronson Arroyo a few starts back. While pitchers who end up producing 20+ P/IP games consistently are by-and-large products of their own shortcomings (too many baserunners), there isn't a hurler in the land who can peform while putting up those kind of numbers. I'm not saying that Bailey's arm will fall off tomorrow, just that I don't at all like the early returns of how Narron is handling the kid.

The immediate effect of such high-intensity physical strain I'm talking about was, to me, crystal clear. I've seen Friday's Inning Five three times now and every time I watch it I see the same things:

1. Bailey's fastball was consistently clocked between 87 and 91 MPH.
2. Bailey's release point was entirely inconsistent and he couldn't get his secondary pitches over for strikes.
3. Excepting the final out PA, the majority of his fastballs were high out of the zone.

Now, Bailey retired the final hitter on a K while popping off two 93 MPH pitches after a visit from Dick Pole. Prior to that visit, Bailey had attempted to overthrow his fastball; which produced two 93 MPH pitches ending up high out of the zone. And we're talking about a guy who can, allegedly rear back and produce 97 MPH when he needs it. But Bailey had been overexerting himself to reach 93 MPH on two occasions prior to the coaching visit and then overexerted himself to produce two more to Delucci. They happened to be strikes (which is great), but it appeared that Pole's visit (regardless of what Pole said) was taken as a "give it everything you've got" message by Bailey.

Yet, when the Yankees had Phil Hughes in a similar situation after he took the mound in the fifth Inning in his MLB debut at 77 pitches, that team identified he was in serious trouble after his next 14 pitches. There was no pep talk- only a pitching change. Yet considering Narron's "One...more...Out..." mentality, I'm not sure the Reds even considered removing Bailey from the game prior to the last hitter in the fifth Inning. And yes, it frightens me that the only mound conversation a Pitching Coach has with a 21-year old kid is after he's sitting with the bases loaded after pushing 100+ pitches in his first MLB start while demonstrating a lack of command, a lack of velocity, and an inability to throw his secondary pitches.

Color me concerned.

Steve4192
06-10-2007, 10:17 AM
First of all, let me say ... great response SteelSD. I appreciate you taking the time to layout your position and I share your concern about Narron's ongoing handling of Homer, I just disagree about the severity of issues he faced on Friday night.

I also agree in principal with 99% of what you had to say about the biomechanical strain of pitching, but I still have some concerns that we are talking 'perceptions' that are 'eyeballed' rather than anything that can be backed up with facts. For example.


Bailey faced 66% of opposing hitters out of the stretch, and we've got even more stress on the body than normal.

...

The high P/IP workload we saw from Bailey, IMO, equals more physical strain than I want to see- particularly from a workload intensity aspect. Due to workload intensity (i.e. high P/IP rate)I'd suggest that Bailey's five-Inning stint is at least equal to, if not exceeding, the 129-pitch effort Narron piled on Bronson Arroyo a few starts back.


That is 100% opinion without a shred of data. Granted, it is an opinion that I respect and that I intuitively agree with, but that doesn't mean that it is true. I have yet to see any data that backs up the assertion that pitching from the stretch is more stressful on a pitcher's arm, nor have I seen any data that backs up the assertion that a five inning 114 pitch outing is any more stressful than a nine inning 114 pitch outing.

That doesn't mean I think you are wrong, hell I tend to agree with you, but I also agreed with a lot of stuff 20 years ago that I now know is bunk. As the old saying goes "You don't know, what you don't know, until you know it". On the subject of pitch counts and their relation to future injuries, I am concerned that we don't know what we don't know.

Chip R
06-10-2007, 11:14 AM
Good news, everyone! It looks like Homer is on a pitch count. Narron will definitely not let him throw 150 pitches in a game. :bang: :bang: :bang:

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070610/SPT04/706100417/1071/SPT

KronoRed
06-10-2007, 01:48 PM
Good news, everyone! It looks like Homer is on a pitch count. Narron will definitely not let him throw 150 pitches in a game. :bang: :bang: :bang:

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070610/SPT04/706100417/1071/SPT

We're saved!! WOOOO!

pedro
06-10-2007, 02:01 PM
Good news, everyone! It looks like Homer is on a pitch count. Narron will definitely not let him throw 150 pitches in a game. :bang: :bang: :bang:

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070610/SPT04/706100417/1071/SPT

Actually he said he doesn't "think" that'll happen. So it's still a possibility.

traderumor
06-10-2007, 06:15 PM
In response to what Steel had to say, one thing that may be a bit prejudicial is reliance on the FSN gun, which was recording 62 MPH fastballs several times throughout the weekend. It was really about as consistent as the home plate umpiring all weekend. ;) All in all, hopefully the start next Thursday will not be in a circus atmosphere and might give a little more reliable evidence for what is going on with the young man.