PDA

View Full Version : Volquez and pitch efficiency



Pages : [1] 2

RedEye
04-17-2008, 04:25 PM
I feel like this topic comes up in game threads every once in awhile, but I haven't actually seen any freestanding threads recently. One of the amazing things about Cueto is his control, and that becomes even more marked when we consider his two young colleagues, Volquez and Bailey. And, as we all know, Homer is in AAA mostly because of his inefficiency with pitch counts due to lack of control. Although Edinson seems to be a bit further up the development ladder in this regard, he has not yet made it out of the fifth inning in a start, and has been racking up pitches on his way to good K numbers.

I'm wondering what the rest of you see for this season for Volquez and also what you think of this topic in general. Do you think he is likely to start being more efficient, or do the current statistical trends point towards a player who has reached his peak? How does Volquez compare to Cueto, Bailey, and our other young arms in terms of control (Maloney, Thompson, etc.)? Who are the historical comparisons for this type of development (Randy Johnson, Nolan Ryan)?

In any case, seems to me that if Volquez can become more efficient with his pitches, the Reds could have a real dynamo on their hands. But that may be a big "if."

RedEye
04-17-2008, 04:26 PM
As we speak, EV has 70 pitches through 3 innings against the Cubs. The trend continues...

fearofpopvol1
04-17-2008, 04:29 PM
Well, what was interesting to me was the guy barely walked anybody in ST. I think most were under the impression that he had turned a corner, I know at least I did.

Now that he has been pitching in the majors, he has walked too many batters. He's gotta have better control for sure.

OnBaseMachine
04-17-2008, 04:29 PM
He wasn't bad in his last start - 75 pitches in five innings. He could have went two innings if not for the rain delay.

Today his control has been bad but the terrible ump hasn't helped.

pedro
04-17-2008, 04:29 PM
He's been getting squeezed a bit today IMO.

I thought that ball 4 to Lilly was strike 2.

Regardless, he is throwing too many pitches.

Reds Fanatic
04-17-2008, 04:30 PM
Of the 70 pitches he has thrown in 3 innings 40 are strikes and 30 balls. If that control does not improve his starts are going to be hard on the bullpen.

RedEye
04-17-2008, 04:30 PM
He wasn't bad in his last start - 75 pitches in five innings. He could have went two innings if not for the rain delay.

Today his control has been bad but the terrible ump hasn't helped.

That's a good point. I had forgotten about that start, and realize that it does constitute over half of our sample size (fires research staff).

RedsManRick
04-17-2008, 04:31 PM
Pitch efficiency is obviously tied in to the rate at which a guy throws strikes. However, I think it's important to distinguish between a guy's willingness to throw strikes and his ability to do so.

Cueto clearly has great control and a willingness to attack the zone. By contrast, Belisle has good control as well but is much more prone to nibbling -- perhaps a result of having worse "stuff" and thus get hit a bit more.

RedEye
04-17-2008, 04:32 PM
Pitch efficiency is obviously tied in to the rate at which a guy throws strikes. However, I think it's important to distinguish between a guy's willingness to throw strikes and his ability to do so.

Cueto clearly has great control and a willingness to attack the zone. By contrast, Belisle has good control as well but is much more prone to nibbling -- perhaps a result of having worse "stuff" and thus get hit a bit more.

So is Volquez a Cueto-type pitcher who is prone to too much nibbling? Or does he just have no idea where the ball is going when it leaves his hand?

SMcGavin
04-17-2008, 04:33 PM
Well I don't think he has reached his peak. Just look at walk rates the past two years:

2006: MLB 4.59 BB/9, AAA 5.37 BB/9
2007: MLB 3.97 BB/9, AAA 3.71 BB/9

I don't have data on pitches thrown per batter, but I would think they'd be dropping with his walk rates. In the short term he may continue to be 5-6 innings per start guy but I don't see any reason to think he won't improve with experience.

OnBaseMachine
04-17-2008, 04:34 PM
So is Volquez a Cueto-type pitcher who is prone to too much nibbling? Or does he just have no idea where the ball is going when it leaves his hand?

I personally think he nibbles too much. He's had a couple guys 0-2 or 1-2 today and tried to make the perfect pitch every time. He needs to learn to trust his stuff more IMO.

RedEye
04-17-2008, 04:35 PM
I personally think he nibbles too much. He's had a couple guys 0-2 or 1-2 today and tried to make the perfect pitch every time. He needs to learn to trust his stuff more IMO.

So that would suggest that he still can improve and on the spectrum from Cueto to Daniel Cabrera, he's more Cueto.

OnBaseMachine
04-17-2008, 04:39 PM
So that would suggest that he still can improve and on the spectrum from Cueto to Daniel Cabrera, he's more Cueto.

I think that's a fair assessment. I think we saw in ST what he could do...but in ST he knew he didn't have to nibble because it was only spring training. Now it looks like he's trying to make that perfect pitch every time. I think it's something that is easily fixable.

As I type this the stupid ump squeezes him on two straight pitches.

REDREAD
04-17-2008, 05:45 PM
As we speak, EV has 70 pitches through 3 innings against the Cubs. The trend continues...

It's a double edged sword. Obviously, you'd like guys to be pitch efficent.
But DanO took it to the extreme with his whole "pitch to contract" philosphy which resulted in "pitch to gopher ball" :lol:

We all want high K guys... usually, these guys come with high pitch counts as well, unless their control is spectacular, which is kind of a rare breed.

I think as Volquez gets experience, he will be more efficent, but I don't want the Reds to overwhlem him with suggestions. He's having some success and making a positive, even though he's not efficient. Since we've got the 12 man staff and some starters to eat innings, I'm not overly concerned with letting Volquez just pitch his game and stay comfortable. I don't want him to think too much at this point and get away from what's working.

RedEye
04-17-2008, 05:54 PM
111 pitches in 5 innings today. FWIW.

dougdirt
04-17-2008, 05:55 PM
It's a double edged sword. Obviously, you'd like guys to be pitch efficent.
But DanO took it to the extreme with his whole "pitch to contract" philosphy which resulted in "pitch to gopher ball" :lol:


I think the whole pitch to contact thing gets taken out of text. I looked at it as more of a 'don't be scared to throw strikes.... if they hit it, so be it. But lets not walk a ton of guys' rather than a 'lets soft toss it up to the plate'.

*BaseClogger*
04-17-2008, 05:59 PM
On the season a 1.17 ERA...

OnBaseMachine
04-17-2008, 06:02 PM
Volquez will be 2-0 with a 1.17 ERA after three starts.

15.1 IP, 12 H, 0 HR, 9 BB, 16 K, 1.17 ERA

Very, very nice. Obviously the walks need to come down, and I think they will once he learns to trust his stuff more. He shows great command one inning and then the next inning he'll nibble. Plus today he was squeezed badly as was Lilly. One or two of those walks should have never happened.

RedsManRick
04-17-2008, 06:03 PM
So is Volquez a Cueto-type pitcher who is prone to too much nibbling? Or does he just have no idea where the ball is going when it leaves his hand?

I think Cueto is more Harang, solid stuff and great command. Volquez is more Bailey, great stuff and iffy command.

REDREAD
04-17-2008, 06:09 PM
I think the whole pitch to contact thing gets taken out of text. I looked at it as more of a 'don't be scared to throw strikes.... if they hit it, so be it. But lets not walk a ton of guys' rather than a 'lets soft toss it up to the plate'.

I understand the point of it. I don't think DanO effectively communicated or implemented it though. Guys with mediocre stuff are kind of forced to nibble.
Again, one of DanO's big failures was his "one size fits all" approach to a lot of things.. like forcing everyone to take the first pitch, forcing all pitchers to learn a changeup, etc.

klw
04-17-2008, 06:12 PM
For those who are able to see, are a number of the balls pitches that he may get the benefit of the doubt for once he is more established?

TOBTTReds
04-17-2008, 06:16 PM
For those who are able to see, are a number of the balls pitches that he may get the benefit of the doubt for once he is more established?

I'd say. He hasn't thrown the ball 2 feet off the plate when he needed strikes today. He just paints corners and has kept it low all day long. Some calls didn't go his way, others did (DLee 2-0 strike call, wow that was low).

I think he will be fine. When he is throwing strikes, the other team isn't hitting the ball anyway. Maybe he'll learn to trust strikes a bit more.

OnBaseMachine
04-17-2008, 06:22 PM
I think Cueto is more Harang, solid stuff and great command. Volquez is more Bailey, great stuff and iffy command.

I think Cueto's stuff is better than just solid. I'd classify it as electric.

Aronchis
04-17-2008, 06:35 PM
Cueto's fastball is IMO, a step below Volquez and Bailey's. His slider, however is top notch. He really improved it over the 2007 season and it is a bigtime outpitch right now. But Volquez and Bailey have a better arm. They just need efficiency. Being that Volquez is almost 3 years older than Bailey, he should be getting more efficient.

RedEye
04-17-2008, 06:41 PM
Cueto's fastball is IMO, a step below Volquez and Bailey's. His slider, however is top notch. He really improved it over the 2007 season and it is a bigtime outpitch right now. But Volquez and Bailey have a better arm. They just need efficiency. Being that Volquez is almost 3 years older than Bailey, he should be getting more efficient.

Is comparing ages really a good way to talk about efficiency here? Cueto is the same age as Bailey and already seems to have it figured out. Seems to me you have to talk about the relative development of each pitcher, and with Volquez that means looking at his earlier stats compared to his current ones (something I'm not equipped to do right now).

I'm also not sure I see that Cueto's FB is a notch below. Wasn't he hitting 98 on the gun in his second start? To me, they all have velocity to spare, but it's the control of all pitches that puts Cueto ahead in terms of progress. To my mind, Volquez has shown encouraging signs, though, and could be much more efficient soon.

reds44
04-17-2008, 06:43 PM
Volquez has the best fastball because of all the movement on it. When he's on, it moves like an offspeed pitch and still comes in the mid 90s. Cueto's in 2nd, and Bailey's fastball is definatley a step below both of them.

Aronchis
04-17-2008, 06:45 PM
Is comparing ages really a good way to talk about efficiency here? Cueto is the same age as Bailey and already seems to have it figured out. Seems to me you have to talk about the relative development of each pitcher, and with Volquez that means looking at his earlier stats compared to his current ones (something I'm not equipped to do right now).

I'm also not sure I see that Cueto's FB is a notch below. Wasn't he hitting 98 on the gun in his second start? To me, they all have velocity to spare, but it's the control of all pitches that puts Cueto ahead in terms of progress. To my mind, Volquez has shown encouraging signs, though, and could be much more efficient soon.

The hardest isn't all I am looking for. Plain, movement, heavy action. They all count. Bailey doesn't get alot of movement, but good plain and heavy action. Volquez is a movement machine which also contributes to his lack of command.

Cueto has the easiest fastball to hit the hardest and the longest. It is no surprise he gives up quite a few johnsons.

OnBaseMachine
04-17-2008, 06:46 PM
Volquez has the best fastball because of all the movement on it. When he's on, it moves like an offspeed pitch and still comes in the mid 90s. Cueto's in 2nd, and Bailey's fastball is definatley a step below both of them.

Yep. I agree with that order.

Aronchis
04-17-2008, 06:49 PM
Volquez has the best fastball because of all the movement on it. When he's on, it moves like an offspeed pitch and still comes in the mid 90s. Cueto's in 2nd, and Bailey's fastball is definatley a step below both of them.

Incorrect. Cueto's fastball is the easiest to hit because of the lack of plain and heavy action. It doesn't take good wood(ala Bailey) to jump off your bat with Cueto.

RedsManRick
04-17-2008, 06:50 PM
Incorrect. Cueto's fastball is the easiest to hit because of the lack of plain and heavy action. It doesn't take good wood(ala Bailey) to jump off your bat with Cueto.

Cueto throws a 2 seamer doesn't he? It's got a lot of tail on it but it's a hittable pitch if it's left over the plate.

reds44
04-17-2008, 06:52 PM
Incorrect. Cueto's fastball is the easiest to hit because of the lack of plain and heavy action. It doesn't take good wood(ala Bailey) to jump off your bat with Cueto.
His fastball has more movement on it and comes in faster than Homer's does.

Aronchis
04-17-2008, 06:58 PM
His fastball has more movement on it and comes in faster than Homer's does.

I disagree. His fastball has modest movement. I don't see it coming in any faster either. When you mix a "good" fastball with a excellent slider plus a useable change, your going to get good results.

*BaseClogger*
04-17-2008, 07:08 PM
Not sure we have seen Homer Bailey's best fastball in some time, making it difficult to rank these guys...

WMR
04-17-2008, 07:12 PM
Agree that pitch efficiency/consistency will be Volquez' biggest hurdle to becoming a true TOR talent. I love his moxie on the mound, however. Both he and Cueto appear to have very strong psychological make-ups.

Cyclone792
04-17-2008, 08:09 PM
Hmmm ... 112 pitches in five innings today?

That's a touch more than I'd like to see. I won't raise any big, red flags or anything, maybe a little yellow one. It's just something to keep an eye on and throw in the memory bank for a bit. Volquez's next start should be Tuesday and it'll be interesting to see how he performs after today's 112 in five.

WMR
04-17-2008, 08:12 PM
Hmmm ... 112 pitches in five innings today?

That's a touch more than I'd like to see. I won't raise any big, red flags or anything, maybe a little yellow one. It's just something to keep an eye on and throw in the memory bank for a bit. Volquez's next start should be Tuesday and it'll be interesting to see how he performs after today's 112 in five.

Volquez really works fast. Do you think it might behoove him to have him make a conscious effort to slow down a little bit? Might encourage him to "think" a bit more on each pitch and help with his efficiency.

RedEye
04-17-2008, 08:25 PM
Volquez really works fast. Do you think it might behoove him to have him make a conscious effort to slow down a little bit? Might encourage him to "think" a bit more on each pitch and help with his efficiency.

Maybe, but there's also a rhythmic quality that he wouldn't want to lose. If he slowed down, Volquez might also "overthink" the pitch, and get a less desirable outcome. I've heard that some pitchers fall apart when they start thinking too much because they start aiming.

I tend to see the most successful guys working with a repeatable frequency and a repeatable delivery. Harang works quite fast, but he is so consistent with release points and arm speed that it doesn't matter for his control. Tom Browning was like that, too. As far as I can tell, Edinson is fairly consistent in these areas too, so perhaps he just needs more experience to know what pitches to throw when, the tendencies of umpires, and the tendencies of hitters. That way, he can get hitters to swing rather than take, and to pound balls into the ground in front of the infielders rather than foul them off.

OnBaseMachine
04-17-2008, 09:12 PM
And the problem? "My release point," he said. "That happens with me when I get an extra day of rest, like this time. It seems like I'm pitching with a different rhythm and a different routine. I just try to make an adjustment, but I threw a lot of pitches for five innings.

"The best thing about it? We got a win," he said.

https://www.daytondailynews.com/s/userreg/ursignup/signup.jsp?UrUsecase=800100&SendBackURL=%2Fs%2Fcontent%2Foh%2Fstory%2Fsports%2 Fpro%2Freds%2F2008%2F04%2F17%2Fddn041808spredsweb. html

RedEye
04-17-2008, 10:10 PM
And the problem? "My release point," he said. "That happens with me when I get an extra day of rest, like this time. It seems like I'm pitching with a different rhythm and a different routine. I just try to make an adjustment, but I threw a lot of pitches for five innings.

"The best thing about it? We got a win," he said.

https://www.daytondailynews.com/s/userreg/ursignup/signup.jsp?UrUsecase=800100&SendBackURL=%2Fs%2Fcontent%2Foh%2Fstory%2Fsports%2 Fpro%2Freds%2F2008%2F04%2F17%2Fddn041808spredsweb. html

Well, I suppose that was the problem today...

Deepred05
04-17-2008, 11:03 PM
Volquez will be 2-0 with a 1.17 ERA after three starts.

15.1 IP, 12 H, 0 HR, 9 BB, 16 K, 1.17 ERA

Very, very nice. Obviously the walks need to come down, and I think they will once he learns to trust his stuff more. He shows great command one inning and then the next inning he'll nibble. Plus today he was squeezed badly as was Lilly. One or two of those walks should have never happened.

Not only was he squeezed, there wasn't a lot of hard hit balls. He is more intimidating than Cueto if you ask me.:beerme:

OnBaseMachine
04-17-2008, 11:06 PM
Steve Phillips was talking about Volquez on Baseball Tonight just now and he said 55% of Volquez's pitches this season have been at the the knees or lower. That's pretty impressive.

RedEye
04-17-2008, 11:29 PM
Steve Phillips was talking about Volquez on Baseball Tonight just now and he said 55% of Volquez's pitches this season have been at the the knees or lower. That's pretty impressive.

I wonder what Cueto's percentage is. It seems like every time he gets a ball up, it's out of the park... which he didn't do that too often in his first two starts.

bucksfan2
04-18-2008, 10:37 AM
And the problem? "My release point," he said. "That happens with me when I get an extra day of rest, like this time. It seems like I'm pitching with a different rhythm and a different routine. I just try to make an adjustment, but I threw a lot of pitches for five innings.

"The best thing about it? We got a win," he said.

https://www.daytondailynews.com/s/userreg/ursignup/signup.jsp?UrUsecase=800100&SendBackURL=%2Fs%2Fcontent%2Foh%2Fstory%2Fsports%2 Fpro%2Freds%2F2008%2F04%2F17%2Fddn041808spredsweb. html

I think this statement goes towards debunking that 6 man rotation. Pitchers like to pitch on a set schedule. When you mess with that schedule pitchers can get out of sync. Even though he struggled a little bit with control today he allowed one run in five innings. I would say that is a pretty good start considering what the cubs had been doing to the reds. Ideally I would like to see him go atleast another inning but he gave the reds one heck of a shot at winning.

PuffyPig
04-18-2008, 01:10 PM
I disagree. His fastball has modest movement.


Volquez has "modest movement".

That's akin to saying that Dolly Parton has an "ample bosom".

A lot of the balls that Volquez threw on Thursday were fastballs that darted out of the strike zone through superior movement.

MikeS21
04-18-2008, 01:15 PM
I think Volquez has been fairly good, considering his second start was in an off and on rain the whole game, and after having about a week in between starts. Don't want to see very many more 115+ pitch games out of Volquez this year, but if in the vast majority of starts, he can give the team seven innings on 95-100 pitches, I don't think any of us can complain.

And I think warmer weather will only help a guy like Volquez. It may be springtime and sunshine in Chicago, but they don't call it "The Windy City" for nothing. And in mid-April, that's a cool breeze sweeping through Wrigley.

One thing I hope the Reds will do is keep Harang, Arroyo, Cueto, and Volquez on some normal five day rotation, and use a guy like Belsile as the swing guy, who may have to skip a start here and there to keep everyone on four days rest rotation. The routine is vitally important to the younger guys, and guys like Harang and Arroyo are much sharper when they aren't too rested. Ironically, Belisle seems to pitch BETTER with the extra days of rest, because he is able to generate a touch more power.

Now, on a related topic, is it me or are the umpires league-wide squeezing pitchers in general, or is it just Reds' pitchers? Tuesday night, Aaron Harang was having a lot of pitches called as balls that last year was called strikes. And others have mentioned that Volquez was getting a little squeezed. I sort of felt Cueto was getting squeezed in his last start, as well. What's going on?

RedlegJake
04-18-2008, 01:26 PM
Now, on a related topic, is it me or are the umpires league-wide squeezing pitchers in general, or is it just Reds' pitchers? Tuesday night, Aaron Harang was having a lot of pitches called as balls that last year was called strikes. And others have mentioned that Volquez was getting a little squeezed. I sort of felt Cueto was getting squeezed in his last start, as well. What's going on?

Inconsistent, too. One pitch it's a strike, the next is a ball. Same pitch. Same spot. First inning the strike zone is big, second inning it disappears. The only consistency I'm seeing from umps has been that they have generally been bad for both teams.

Benihana
04-18-2008, 02:09 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The best comparison for Edinson Volquez is Carlos Zambrano.

Chip R
04-18-2008, 02:27 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The best comparison for Edinson Volquez is Carlos Zambrano.


Maybe you should put it in your sig. ;)

Screwball
04-18-2008, 02:28 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The best comparison for Edinson Volquez is Carlos Zambrano.

I see the similarities, but I think Zambrano's got a little more movement (esp. on his slider), and has way more problems upstairs.

MikeS21
04-18-2008, 02:42 PM
I see the similarities, but I think Zambrano's got a little more movement (esp. on his slider), and has way more problems upstairs.
But doesn't Volquez have a better changeup? (And I completely agree on the mental aspect). If so, I think of the two, Volquez may be a tick above Zambrano as far as ceiling.

And if he reaches that ceiling, Volquez will make a nice addition.

Hoosier Red
04-18-2008, 02:55 PM
But doesn't Volquez have a better changeup? (And I completely agree on the mental aspect). If so, I think of the two, Volquez may be a tick above Zambrano as far as ceiling.

And if he reaches that ceiling, Volquez will make a nice addition.

Slightly better than Zambrano would be a nice addition? ;)
Other nice additions; If Homer Bailey really is the second coming of Nolan Ryan, if Jay Bruce produces just a little better than Ken Griffey Jr.

MikeS21
04-18-2008, 03:19 PM
Slightly better than Zambrano would be a nice addition? ;)
Other nice additions; If Homer Bailey really is the second coming of Nolan Ryan, if Jay Bruce produces just a little better than Ken Griffey Jr.
:p: OK, I forgot the smilie! :D But the point is, I think most of us would be extremely happy if Volquez has a similar career to Zambrano.

Jay Bruce has as high of a ceiling as anyone in baseball and will be a star in his own right, but it will be a different stardom than the Ken Griiffey Jr way. I'm not sure I buy the comparisons to Larry Walker.

And Homer Bailey the next Nolan Ryan? Let's first see if he avoids becoming the next Brett Tomko. :eek:

Matt700wlw
04-18-2008, 05:50 PM
His pitch inefficientcy is evidence that he should be in AAA....


;)

membengal
04-19-2008, 09:41 AM
Inconsistent, too. One pitch it's a strike, the next is a ball. Same pitch. Same spot. First inning the strike zone is big, second inning it disappears. The only consistency I'm seeing from umps has been that they have generally been bad for both teams.

Worth re-visiting from this discussion.

Completely agree with your post and the one from Mike21 you were responding to. The umps have been really, really, inconsistent in a bunch of the Reds' games this season. Both ways. I don't know what's gotten into them, but it is noticeable and it is really making it hard for pitchers to understand what's being called from inning to inning (or even pitch to pitch). Which is less than ideal, obviously.

RedlegJake
04-19-2008, 10:21 AM
Worth re-visiting from this discussion.

Completely agree with your post and the one from Mike21 you were responding to. The umps have been really, really, inconsistent in a bunch of the Reds' games this season. Both ways. I don't know what's gotten into them, but it is noticeable and it is really making it hard for pitchers to understand what's being called from inning to inning (or even pitch to pitch). Which is less than ideal, obviously.

I'm not an umpire complainer. I umpired for years and know its a thankless job and the guys in the pros are the best. I honestly have noticed a deterioration in ML umpiring the past 4-5 years and it seems to get worse each season. When MLB came out and said they were raising the strikezone a few years ago it seems the problems started then. Now every ump has a pretty different zone and it changes as games go on. Questec has been extended indefinitely but is only in a handful of stadiums now. Umps are only reviewed by Questec in those stadiums and if an ump "passes" review when he is rotated to one of those stadiums then he is basically free of further reviews. I wonder if umping is better (or at least more consistent) in Questec stadiums? I wonder if umps feel they can "take it easy" in non-Questec stadiums - resulting in more uneven calling when they know they aren't being reviewed. By labor agreement, if an umpire passes review by Questec, then he is NOT evaluated by other means concerning balls and strikes calls.


"Under the new agreement, which will replace the agreement that expires next Friday, QuesTec will continue to be used to grade umpires but will not be the only system for evaluation. If an umpire meets ball-and-strike standards under QuesTec, no other system will be used.

But if an umpire falls below QuesTec standards, his performance will be analyzed by other means - videotape analysis of his strike zone, live observation by umpiring supervisors - to determine his status."

http://www.questec.com/q2001/index.htm

There is the allegation of course, that Questec is anything but accurate. There are darker allegations, too.

"QuesTec is not only an umpire monitoring system - it's an umpire disciplining mechanism. Umpires whose calls do not match QuesTec at least 90 percent of the time will be judged as not meeting standards. The umpires know that they are being watched and it affects the game.

This really makes me wonder why MLB is so compelled to use the computerized tracking system. Is it because they ultimately want to control the umpires and the strike zone or is there an even deeper and darker motive here? What if Selig is refusing to drop QuesTec for reasons other than those above? What if the reason QuesTec is really important is because the data provided by it is accurate and it is stopping umpires from deliberately miscalling games? The scandal resulting from crooked umpires calling - and altering games would be earth shattering and would make the Black Sox Scandal seem like peanuts by today’s standards. This would give the office of the commissioner and all of organized baseball a reason to cover it up and use a backdoor to try to fix the problem - and quietly."
http://www.athomeplate.com/questec2.shtml

The MUA and MLB reached an agreement after the furor died down allowing Questec to stay. Still, it is only in these parks:

Angel Stadium of Anaheim - Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim
Chase Field - Arizona Diamondbacks
Fenway Park - Boston Red Sox
Jacobs Field - Cleveland Indians
McAfee Coliseum - Oakland Athletics
Miller Park - Milwaukee Brewers
Minute Maid Park - Houston Astros
Shea Stadium - New York Mets
Tropicana Field - Tampa Bay Devil Rays
U.S. Cellular Field - Chicago White Sox
Yankee Stadium - New York Yankees

If you want even more info -on the effects of Questec on how different umps call balls/strikes:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/bp/1563505.html

Basically, most umps call fewer strikes when Questec is in the park, a few call more. The difference is 1-3% +-. In a game where the teams conmbine for 250 pitches that's about 2-7 affected calls. Higher percentage strike callers in non Questec parks tend to call slightly fewer strikes in Questec parks and low percentage strike callers tend to call slightly more.

For me there is a problem in expecting Questec to change things. For one thing it doesn't handle things like taller hitters and shorter hitters, guys 6-7 and 5-9 very well. It doesn't handle sharp, late breaking balls very well. The same thing that fools hitters, apparently fools Questec. Let he umps have their personal zones. Pitchers lived with that for years. Just use the system to ensure they call the same spots the same thing every time. Pitchers can adjust to that.

As for the darker side of things, if umps are calling games wrong on purpose, something I don't believe, don't want to believe, and hope stays buried if it ever was true, Questec standard is just 90%. That leaves an ump around 25-30 pitches agame he can call wrong. If there's crookedness in the works, Questec ain't fixing that. Go two ways MLB. Either get Questec in every park and a few minor league venues or get it out altogether.

reds44
04-22-2008, 10:35 PM
Volquez's outing tonight:
7 IP, 3 H, 1 R, 4 BB, 7 k
105 pitches

He still walks a lot of guys, but he did a much better job getting into the late innings.

guttle11
04-22-2008, 10:40 PM
1 hit and 2 walks allowed his final four innings...

Kc61
04-22-2008, 10:55 PM
Volquez tonight was just tremendous. I'm not worried about a few walks from this guy, he's been super so far.

Benihana
04-22-2008, 11:16 PM
Volquez tonight was just tremendous. I'm not worried about a few walks from this guy, he's been super so far.

He'll be out of the rotation by mid-May, just ask FCB.

OnBaseMachine
04-22-2008, 11:16 PM
Volquez tonight was just tremendous. I'm not worried about a few walks from this guy, he's been super so far.

Yep. With his stuff and ability to miss bats, three or four walks a game doesn't bother me. For some reason he started throwing more junk in the 6th and 7th innings instead using his fastball more, which led to those two walks. But that was just a great outing.Iif Hairston takes a decent route on that ball hit by Furcal then the Dodgers wouldn't have scored at all.

OnBaseMachine
04-22-2008, 11:18 PM
Through four starts:

3-0, 1.21 ERA, 22.1 IP, 15 H, 0 HR, 13 BB, 23 K

RedlegJake
04-22-2008, 11:30 PM
Volquez looked like a pitcher tonight. He's gonna get better and better, too, imo. Harang and Volquez are going to be as good as any top two pretty soon. Cueto, though amazing, is much younger and really needs kid gloved for the season. With Edinson you just don't want him throwing too many innings this first year.

RedsManRick
04-23-2008, 12:14 AM
Volquez looked like a pitcher tonight. He's gonna get better and better, too, imo. Harang and Volquez are going to be as good as any top two pretty soon. Cueto, though amazing, is much younger and really needs kid gloved for the season. With Edinson you just don't want him throwing too many innings this first year.

Volquez is 24 and pitched 182 innings last year. I don't want to say he's made it out of the injury nexus just yet, but this isn't a Homer Bailey situation. He's more physically mature than either Bailey or Cueto and 200-210 innings would be within the safe range using the +30 IP logic.

Of course, I'd still be careful with him, no more than 110 pitches, especially if he's fighting. But I don't think we need to be terribly concerned about his season innings total.

RedlegJake
04-23-2008, 12:39 AM
Volquez is 24 and pitched 182 innings last year. I don't want to say he's made it out of the injury nexus just yet, but this isn't a Homer Bailey situation. He's more physically mature than either Bailey or Cueto and 200-210 innings would be within the safe range using the +30 IP logic.

Of course, I'd still be careful with him, no more than 110 pitches, especially if he's fighting. But I don't think we need to be terribly concerned about his season innings total.

Actually Rick, we're on the exactly the same wavelength - I just expressed it differently -and I was using the 30 innings point as being at 200 or just under. 10 more doesn't bother me. My main point is that Volquez is ready to be a full duty pitcher right now.

fearofpopvol1
04-23-2008, 02:12 AM
I went to the game tonight and Volquez looked fantastic.  Other than 1 jam that hurt him, he was able to get out of trouble when he needed to, however rare that may have been.  His pitch efficiency was not great the first 3 innings, but then he got into a groove and he was pretty much lights out.  I know the Dodgers are slumping, but they have a pretty damn good lineup.  It wasn't a flawless performance, but it was honestly the best performance by a Reds pitcher that I've seen live (at a game) in my lifetime. I was very impressed.  I'm loving the Hamilton trade more and more now. 

Highlifeman21
04-23-2008, 08:06 AM
As long as Volquez keeps his K/BB over 2/1, and keeps his K/9 over 6, it would be splitting hairs to find fault with him.

It's exciting to think of our Harang/Cueto/Volquez future. It'll be even more exciting once Bailey develops to join them.

remdog
04-23-2008, 10:00 AM
As long as Volquez keeps his K/BB over 2/1, and keeps his K/9 over 6, it would be splitting hairs to find fault with him.

It's exciting to think of our Harang/Cueto/Volquez future.

I was thinking exactly the same thing. Volquez is right around that 2/1 K/BB ratio and when you have more Ks than innings pitched that just naturally leads to a high pitch count. 105 pitches in this game was just about right IMO. I also thought Baker handled the IP perfectly.

One other thing about Volquez that I really liked; when the Reds put that four spot on the board you could pretty much see Edinson swooping in for the kill---"now you're mine, meat!" I really like this guys mental makeup.

In a different thread people were discussing whether Arroyo was a #2 or a #3 starter. So far this year, Bronson has been #4 on this staff---and that's a very good thing for the Reds (and I'm not knocking Arroyo)!

Rem

remdog
04-23-2008, 10:02 AM
One other thing about Volquez' performance against the Dodgers that stood out: 13 ground ball outs, only 1 fly ball out. A fabulous thing when pitching in the GAB.

Rem

bucksfan2
04-23-2008, 11:00 AM
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Volquez is right around that 2/1 K/BB ratio and when you have more Ks than innings pitched that just naturally leads to a high pitch count. 105 pitches in this game was just about right IMO. I also thought Baker handled the IP perfectly.

One other thing about Volquez that I really liked; when the Reds put that four spot on the board you could pretty much see Edinson swooping in for the kill---"now you're mine, meat!" I really like this guys mental makeup.

In a different thread people were discussing whether Arroyo was a #2 or a #3 starter. So far this year, Bronson has been #4 on this staff---and that's a very good thing for the Reds (and I'm not knocking Arroyo)!

Rem

Volquez pitched very well last night. I said in another thread but I thought that Hariston took a poor route on that double over his head and Patterson might have been able to get it. Other than that Volquez was impressive. There were times last night where Volquez looked like he wanted nothing to do with some batters.

lollipopcurve
04-23-2008, 11:38 AM
If he can ever learn to hit the outside corner with his fastball to righties, look out. Right now he struggles with that pitch. But it appears to me he's pitching with a purpose -- keep the ball down. With his stuff, that's about all he has to do.

coachw513
04-23-2008, 12:24 PM
The AB against Kent with 2 guys on, a 1-0 game Dodgers (while they were interviewing Harang) was huge...he battled and battled and then just abused him with a great changeup...

The toughness in big AB's shown by both Cueto and Volquez is the most impressive thing to me...they are the "anti-Belisle"...Matt's not yet to me shown the ability to "stop the bleeding" and get the big out in an inning...

Harang does it, Arroyo generally can do it and from the looks of it, Volquez and Cueto can do it...that's what wins IMHO...

RedsManRick
04-23-2008, 12:26 PM
If he can ever learn to hit the outside corner with his fastball to righties, look out. Right now he struggles with that pitch. But it appears to me he's pitching with a purpose -- keep the ball down. With his stuff, that's about all he has to do.

I don't think this point can be emphasized enough. When he misses, he misses down. He really pitches downhill and it's resulted in a 2.0+ GB/FB ratio so far this year. It's all the more important in GABP. I agree that hitting that low and outside corner is key for him really becoming dominant, but so long as he stays low, he's going to remain effective.

OnBaseMachine
04-27-2008, 07:19 PM
Volquez was awesome again today:

7 IP, 5 H, 1 R, 3 BB, 10 K...104 pitches.

Brandon Phillips let a routine pop up drop for a single which was ruled a hit for some reason. If he makes that catch then the third walk doesn't even happen. But what a great outing by Volquez. He's been nothing short of phenomenal so far. He's allowed one run or less in all five starts.

OnBaseMachine
04-27-2008, 07:20 PM
BTW, zero homeruns allowed in 29.1 innings. 33 K's.

Matt700wlw
04-27-2008, 07:27 PM
Yeah, we'll keep him.

HumnHilghtFreel
04-27-2008, 07:30 PM
I'm a fan.

TOBTTReds
04-27-2008, 08:14 PM
Looking like a great deal by our ex-GM. Glad to see Hambone doing well too (but only if EV is doing well too :p:)

Screwball
04-27-2008, 08:21 PM
You know you're good when you give up 1 run in 7 innings and actually raise your ERA.

Stormy
04-27-2008, 08:32 PM
Volquez will be out of the rotation by May 15th!! :eek: The guy is a phenom, and as I said when he was acquired, he's probably the best young pitcher to wear a Reds uniform since we landed Rijo in the Parker trade. Great work, Edinson, and yet another FANTASTIC trade by Wayne Krivsky despite what much of the fanbase thought.

Reds Freak
04-27-2008, 08:37 PM
The thing that is exciting is I feel he is no where close to his ceiling yet. He is pitching very well right now but he still has a lot to work on. His command needs to improve, he could be a little more consistent with his mechanics, and he could use some work on his curve. I can't wait to see the kid continue to improve the next couple years...

SMcGavin
04-27-2008, 09:10 PM
Volquez will be out of the rotation by May 15th!! :eek:

No kidding. That thread will be good for a laugh in a few weeks.

15fan
04-27-2008, 09:19 PM
Next up for Volquez: Saturday vs. John Smoltz in Atlanta.

And I've got my seats in the right field bleachers.

Giddyup!

HumnHilghtFreel
04-27-2008, 09:21 PM
Just out of curiosity, what's the cap for SP to keep them as a rookie? I just looked and added it up to 80IP before the start of this year, so is that too much to have Edi in the rookie of the year running?

Super_Barry11
04-27-2008, 09:26 PM
Volquez missed hitting me by inches yesterday while he was throwing during BP (although he later told me he did it on purpose) and he hit a little boy in the face while warming up today, but other than that, he's fantastic. :eek: Not to worry, the little boy was alright... Going to have a gigantic bruise up by his eye though! :)

Great time at the game today!!! :D

OnBaseMachine
04-27-2008, 09:35 PM
The Reds have three starts in the top 11 in strikeouts. Harang ranks second with 37, Volquez is seventh with 33, and Cueto is 11th with 31 strikeouts, though five guys ahead of Cueto have started one more game him.

MikeS21
04-27-2008, 09:54 PM
So what are you all thinking about Edinson's pitch counts? 104 pitches today. Do you think 104 is OK, or is Dusty pushing the envelope just a little?

Tommyjohn25
04-27-2008, 09:57 PM
So what are you all thinking about Edinson's pitch counts? 104 pitches today. Do you think 104 is OK, or is Dusty pushing the envelope just a little?

I think it was fine today. Low to no stress innings, big lead etc...Also he's coming to the age that I believe he can handle it.

HumnHilghtFreel
04-27-2008, 09:58 PM
So what are you all thinking about Edinson's pitch counts? 104 pitches today. Do you think 104 is OK, or is Dusty pushing the envelope just a little?

Volquez is a little older at 24, looks to have a very solid frame. 104 pitches, mostly stress free, against a bad SF lineup over 7 innings is perfect. I have loved the way Dusty has handled the young guys thus far.

MikeS21
04-27-2008, 10:05 PM
I would love to see Volquez stretch just a bit more, where he could sqeeze eight innings out of 104 pitches. Then, by the time he's 26-27 years old, and goes 110-112 pitches for complete games.

You have to like what we're seeing though.

membengal
04-27-2008, 10:08 PM
Easy to see why Texas was so reluctant to part with him. All those years they put in, developing him, and he flowers elsewhere.

Thank goodness (and WK) he is flowering here.

Sea Ray
04-27-2008, 10:28 PM
In fairness to WK, I think we have to declare this trade a good one, regardless of what happens from here on out. We can't blame WK for future injuries, etc that he couldn't have foreseen.

Sure, anything can happen from here on but it is clear that Edison is a young, talented pitcher just beginning to blossom. That's exactly the kind of player we needed. A starting pitcher that can go 4-0 in a month is the only kind that is worth a player like Hamilton. I love Josh and I'm not surprised that he's leading the AL in RBIs but even so he's not more valuable than a stud starting pitcher

Spring~Fields
04-27-2008, 10:32 PM
In fairness to WK, I think we have to declare this trade a good one, regardless of what happens from here on out. We can't blame WK for future injuries, etc that he couldn't have foreseen.

Sure, anything can happen from here on but it is clear that Edison is a young, talented pitcher just beginning to blossom. That's exactly the kind of player we needed. A starting pitcher that can go 4-0 in a month is the only kind that is worth a player like Hamilton. I love Josh and I'm not surprised that he's leading the AL in RBIs but even so he's not more valuable than a stud starting pitcher

Does look like a good solid trade. I wish we could have our pie and eat it too, have both players, but it doesn't work that way.

RedlegJake
04-27-2008, 11:37 PM
Easy to see why Texas was so reluctant to part with him. All those years they put in, developing him, and he flowers elsewhere.

Thank goodness (and WK) he is flowering here.

The one thing Texas is good at...developing pitchers to trade them just before they become successful.

RedsManRick
04-28-2008, 11:50 AM
Just out of curiosity, what's the cap for SP to keep them as a rookie? I just looked and added it up to 80IP before the start of this year, so is that too much to have Edi in the rookie of the year running?

You must not exceed either of the following:
* 130 at bats or 50 innings pitched in the major leagues
* 45 days on the active roster of a major league club (excluding time on the disabled list or any time after rosters are expanded on September 1)

Volquez is not a rookie.

OnBaseMachine
04-28-2008, 12:43 PM
Another positive sign from yesterday was Volquez's had a very nice curveball. Paul Bako was praising his curve and Volquez said it was his best pitch yesterday. I don't know if it was his best pitch but I did see him buckle some knees with it. He mostly just used it for strike one. The only time he struggled with command yesterday was in the second inning. He retired the first five hitters on just 18 pitches, including the first two hitters in the second inning on five pitches. But then he tried to throw a couple sliders to Castillo and Holm and that's when he fell behind in the count and walked them. The slider is his fourth best pitch right now. He should probably stick to the fastball, changeup, and curve for right now and maybe work on the slider on the side if he wants to develop that pitch.

bucksfan2
04-28-2008, 01:02 PM
Put him in the bullpen or whatever!

Sea Ray
04-28-2008, 03:23 PM
Put him in the bullpen or whatever!

Yeah, that was one of more ridiculous RZ threads this Spring...

TOBTTReds
04-28-2008, 03:26 PM
Yeah, that was one of more ridiculous RZ threads this Spring...

Wasn't that JVal about Homer?

Sea Ray
04-28-2008, 03:29 PM
Wasn't that JVal about Homer?

It was JVal about Volquez

TOBTTReds
04-28-2008, 03:50 PM
It was JVal about Volquez

Gotchya.

bucksfan2
04-28-2008, 03:51 PM
It was JVal about Volquez

Yea apparently our ace catcher, who has trouble communicating with the pitcher, wasn't too impressed with Volquez's stuff.

RedEye
05-07-2008, 03:59 PM
Great start by EV today so far:

7 innings, 4 HA, 6 BBI, 10 K

BUT he has 117 pitches through 7 innings, and 6 walks is an alarmingly high number.

Are we starting to see the infamous Dusty Baker lack-of-hook tendency?

Is EV the kind of pitcher that can keep pitching like this (high K's and BB's)?

The only extant model I know of today is Carlos Zambrano (and maybe Daisuke Matsuzaka to a less extent).

fearofpopvol1
05-07-2008, 04:00 PM
118 pitches total today.

Anyone have a problem with that?

I do, especially with a 9-0 lead. If it's a close game, sure. It wasn't a close game, and the wheels almost came off. I'm glad he got out of the jam, but why Dusty?

Benihana
05-07-2008, 04:02 PM
118 pitches total today.

Anyone have a problem with that?

I do, especially with a 9-0 lead. If it's a close game, sure. It wasn't a close game, and the wheels almost came off. I'm glad he got out of the jam, but why Dusty?

I agree. He better not exceed triple digits next time out.

Dom Heffner
05-07-2008, 04:03 PM
Because Baker just wants him to get through 7. You can tell. It's weird the way these guys think.

There will be a reliever starting the 8th, guaranteed, but rather than let a fresh arm in for a third or two, Dusty is going to eat up tosses for Edinson.

LoganBuck
05-07-2008, 04:06 PM
Massive problem with it. This game is out of hand, that last inning was pointless for Volquez put the mileage on a bullpen arm. Dusty is a fool.

fearofpopvol1
05-07-2008, 04:08 PM
Btw, Volqeuz's previous career high pitch count was 112.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-07-2008, 04:09 PM
There was no reason for him to come out in the 7th.

The 7th added 24 pitches to his total.

It's good to see him get out of a self-induced jam with K's, but this kid's arm is too special to be messing around with an already high pitch count and a 9-0 lead.

bucksfan2
05-07-2008, 04:12 PM
I didn't mind the pitch count all that much. Brantly made a comment that he shouldnt go over 120 pitches. Granted the 7th inning wasn't a critical inning but Volquez had been throwing non-stress innings after the reds put up a 5 spot in the second.

RedsManRick
05-07-2008, 04:16 PM
Well, look at the bright side, now Dusty has a precedent so that he can say Volquez is capable of going 120...:rolleyes:

dougdirt
05-07-2008, 04:18 PM
I didn't mind the pitch count all that much. Brantly made a comment that he shouldnt go over 120 pitches. Granted the 7th inning wasn't a critical inning but Volquez had been throwing non-stress innings after the reds put up a 5 spot in the second.

What is a non stress inning? 24 pitches in an inning after you qualified for the win and have a 9 run lead? This is the crap he got grief for in Chicago for doing to Prior.

flyer85
05-07-2008, 04:19 PM
What is a non stress inning? 24 pitches in an inning after you qualified for the win and have a 9 run lead? there really was nothing to be gained by sending him out to pitch the 7th.

dabvu2498
05-07-2008, 04:20 PM
there really was nothing to be gained by sending him out to pitch the 7th.

Rest for a weary bullpen?

Aronchis
05-07-2008, 04:21 PM
Dusty is back. He should have at least taken him out after the last walk. He will be feeling that one tomorrow. The wrath of Dusty.

Caveat Emperor
05-07-2008, 04:21 PM
there really was nothing to be gained by sending him out to pitch the 7th.

Especially with an off-day coming tomorrow to rest the bullpen.

Though, I have a tough time saying "OK" at 105 pitches and "Oh No!" at 115 pitches. I just don't think 10 pitches makes all that big a difference.

flyer85
05-07-2008, 04:23 PM
Rest for a weary bullpen?there is an off day tomorrow.

LoganBuck
05-07-2008, 04:25 PM
What is a non stress inning? 24 pitches in an inning after you qualified for the win and have a 9 run lead? This is the crap he got grief for in Chicago for doing to Prior.

It is just like handing the keys to a brand new Corvette to a kid that has just turned 16. It is going to end badly. Dusty Baker has to be the most incredibly thick skulled individual I have ever seen manage a baseball team. He has not learned from his past mistakes and it is doomed to repeat his failures.

Pray for Edinson Volquez, Johnny Cueto, and eventually Homer Bailey.

Benihana
05-07-2008, 04:28 PM
On the bright side, Zambrano seemed to survive Dusty. So maybe not all is lost.

dabvu2498
05-07-2008, 04:29 PM
there is an off day tomorrow.

Would have been nice to get some guys 2-3 days off in a row.

(Just playing devil's advocate here. I'm not in favor of him going 118, but not infavor of him leaving after 6 just because, either.)

Caveat Emperor
05-07-2008, 04:31 PM
On the bright side, Zambrano seemed to survive Dusty. So maybe not all is lost.

Volquez does seem to have a little Zambrano in him -- minus the whole headcase stuff.

Cyclone792
05-07-2008, 04:34 PM
This is the Dusty Baker I know all so well and loathe.

Oh well, it's the same thing as before. If they send Volquez through the Dusty Baker Camp of Hard Labor and he comes up injured and/or ineffective in the future (this season or future seasons), then the Reds won't have anybody else to blame but themselves.

kaldaniels
05-07-2008, 04:44 PM
This is the Dusty Baker I know all so well and loathe.

Oh well, it's the same thing as before. If they send Volquez through the Dusty Baker Camp of Hard Labor and he comes up injured and/or ineffective in the future (this season or future seasons), then the Reds won't have anybody else to blame but themselves.

Look...Dusty had a chance to save some innings from Ed's arm today, no question...however, 118 isn't a fatal pitch count. Look at Prior in 2003....pitch counts of 130+ 3 times, and pitch counts of 120-129 6 times.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/gl.cgi?n1=priorma01&t=p&year=2003

If there is a disgusting number of pitches thrown I'll be the first to object.

Was it necessary to have him go out for the 7th today, no. But really...it wasn't necessary for him to go out in the 6th inning for that matter.

He came into today averaging 20 pitches less than Lincecum a start...does that help make anyone feel better/put things in perspective.

Ltlabner
05-07-2008, 04:49 PM
Wait a sec...I was told that Dusty running up a young pitchers pitch count was a myth and old-wives tale.

vaticanplum
05-07-2008, 04:52 PM
On the bright side, Zambrano seemed to survive Dusty. So maybe not all is lost.

I believe Zambrano had a lobotomy. His arm doesn't tell his brain when it hurts, so he can pitch and pitch and pitch. The drawbacks to the lobotomy is that some of his neurons now operate at the same efficiency as tomato paste.

RedsManRick
05-07-2008, 04:52 PM
Volquez going 118 in a given start isn't a problem. Going 118 when not necessary is the problem. This was a perfect opportunity to stay easy on him, save some bullets for a start where they're needed. It becomes abuse when next start, Dusty "needs" Volquez to give that extra inning and so he pushes him again.

That's what happened with both Prior and Wood. He pushed them when he didn't need to, and then continued to push them when he felt he had no choice.

kaldaniels
05-07-2008, 04:59 PM
Volquez going 118 in a given start isn't a problem. Going 118 when not necessary is the problem. This was a perfect opportunity to stay easy on him, save some bullets for a start where they're needed. It becomes abuse when next start, Dusty "needs" Volquez to give that extra inning and so he pushes him again.

That's what happened with both Prior and Wood. He pushed them when he didn't need to, and then continued to push them when he felt he had no choice.

So...can we argue that Dusty is "abusing" Edinson when he actually does just that. He came into the game averaging ~85 pitches a start. One start of 118 is nothing to freak out about. If you want to suggest that Dusty should have pulled him after 6 innings thats fine. But to imply that Dusty is destroying his arm...well...we haven't came even close to the chronic abuse that occured in Chicago. I'm giving Dusty the benefit of the doubt today.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-07-2008, 05:14 PM
So...can we argue that Dusty is "abusing" Edinson when he actually does just that. He came into the game averaging ~85 pitches a start. One start of 118 is nothing to freak out about. If you want to suggest that Dusty should have pulled him after 6 innings thats fine. But to imply that Dusty is destroying his arm...well...we haven't came even close to the chronic abuse that occured in Chicago. I'm giving Dusty the benefit of the doubt today.

Dusty doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt when he runs out a pitcher that has thrown 94 pitches to complete a meaningless inning in a 9-0 game.

If it were for the CG shutout it would be somewhat understandable, but the 7th wasn't a key inning and with a day off tomorrow he wasn't hurting the bullpen by giving them 3 innings.

kaldaniels
05-07-2008, 05:21 PM
Dusty doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt when he runs out a pitcher that has thrown 94 pitches to complete a meaningless inning in a 9-0 game.

If it were for the CG shutout it would be somewhat understandable, but the 7th wasn't a key inning and with a day off tomorrow he wasn't hurting the bullpen by giving them 3 innings.

I'd be interested to hear answers to these questions.

What is the no-exception pitch limit of Edinson?

What should his average pitches per game be?

Look...anytime the game is out of hand, you can make the argument to pull Volquez. Heck, if it was 9-0 after 5, you could make the argument that any additional pitch by Volquez was unnecessary abuse.

Dusty pulled Ed after 6 innings in Atlanta at the 100 pitch mark in a close game. He let him pitch an extra inning today. Big deal. In hindsight, he should him gone 7 in ATL and 6 today.

RedEye
05-07-2008, 05:28 PM
.
Dusty pulled Ed after 6 innings in Atlanta at the 100 pitch mark in a close game. He let him pitch an extra inning today. Big deal. In hindsight, he should him gone 7 in ATL and 6 today.

I think he should have gone 6 in both.

I was glad he pulled him in ATL because I thought it signaled a new approach. Today makes me think that was a mirage.

Chip R
05-07-2008, 05:30 PM
Dusty pulled Ed after 6 innings in Atlanta at the 100 pitch mark in a close game. He let him pitch an extra inning today. Big deal. In hindsight, he should him gone 7 in ATL and 6 today.


It's not a big deal until he winds up on the DL.

kaldaniels
05-07-2008, 05:41 PM
It's not a big deal until he winds up on the DL.

103 pitches a start. High pitch count of 118.

Its unfortuate that his high count came in a blowout game. But the numbers above are nothing that is going to blow out a pitchers arm. If I'm the manager I probably pull Edinson after 6 today unless he really wants to go 7 and pleads a good case. But I'm not going to go overboard on Dusty because he went 7. Can't people just say they disagreed with a move rather than claiming today is going to turn Volqeuz into Mark Prior and saying Dusty is a horrible manager.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-07-2008, 05:45 PM
Its unfortuate that his high count came in a blowout game.

So you agree that he shouldn't have gone into the 7th, right?

That's what we are commenting on. It seems you agree.

lollipopcurve
05-07-2008, 05:45 PM
I think he should have been pulled after 6. But as long as the norm remains around 100-105, I don't have a problem with today. They should give him an extra day with the off day coming up tomorrow.

kaldaniels
05-07-2008, 05:46 PM
So you agree that he shouldn't have gone into the 7th, right?

That's what we are commenting on. It seems you agree.

No I am commenting on...

"Dusty is a fool"
"This is the crap he did in Chicago"
"The wrath of Dusty"

All that is one page back...so see for yourself. Today doesn't warrant those remarks.

Cyclone792
05-07-2008, 06:03 PM
Look...Dusty had a chance to save some innings from Ed's arm today, no question...however, 118 isn't a fatal pitch count. Look at Prior in 2003....pitch counts of 130+ 3 times, and pitch counts of 120-129 6 times.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/gl.cgi?n1=priorma01&t=p&year=2003

And how many innings has Mark Prior thrown since that 2003 season?

You're not helping your case.

RedEye
05-07-2008, 06:16 PM
No I am commenting on...

"Dusty is a fool"
"This is the crap he did in Chicago"
"The wrath of Dusty"

All that is one page back...so see for yourself. Today doesn't warrant those remarks.

I suppose I agree that such ad hominem attacks can be a bit much...

... but I agree with their spirit wholeheartedly.

The Reds finally have young pitching--and it's a precious commodity in this game. We are Reds fans and we are freaking out for a good reason here. We have a manager who has shown a repeated tendency towards pitcher abuse in the past. One of the key symptoms of that tendency is overuse in situations that don't warrant it. That's what Dusty did to EV today. We all saw it, and even you admit the 7th inning probably wasn't necessary.

I think the jury is out on whether that Dusty's pitcher abuse habit is back for good--but we are certainly warranted to cry foul at its first, ugly appearance.

RedsManRick
05-07-2008, 06:21 PM
So...can we argue that Dusty is "abusing" Edinson when he actually does just that. He came into the game averaging ~85 pitches a start. One start of 118 is nothing to freak out about. If you want to suggest that Dusty should have pulled him after 6 innings thats fine. But to imply that Dusty is destroying his arm...well...we haven't came even close to the chronic abuse that occured in Chicago. I'm giving Dusty the benefit of the doubt today.

All I've pointed out is that this is the first step. In fact, my point was that the 118 pitches aren't a problem unless you consider them as part of a pattern -- precisely your point as well. I think we agree that until the pattern develops, we shouldn't spend too much time focusing on it. I'm not implying that steps 2, 3, and 4 are going to happen. But they are predicated on the first. I see no problem in pointing out a possible future.

kaldaniels
05-07-2008, 06:42 PM
And how many innings has Mark Prior thrown since that 2003 season?

You're not helping your case.

My case is simple...a single game of 118 pitches in today's game by Volquez is nowhere near the "abuse" Prior went threw. Not even close. You can't make a comparison if you using the number of pitches thrown.

fearofpopvol1
05-07-2008, 06:42 PM
The thing is, 94 pitches isn't so high you can't send him back out there. But at the very least, you should have a guy warming in the bullpen to start the inning. If he has trouble and/or the opposition extends the inning, then you pull him and let someone else take care of things. Dusty didn't even have someone warming until there were men on 1st and 2nd and was well past the 100 pitch mark.

To me, that's just not smart baseball. He had it in his head from the get go that he wanted Volquez going 7 innings, regardless of the pitch count.

Cyclone792
05-07-2008, 06:44 PM
My case is simple...a single game of 118 pitches in today's game by Volquez is nowhere near the "abuse" Prior went threw. Not even close. You can't make a comparison if you using the number of pitches thrown.

I didn't make the comparison with Prior. You did.

kaldaniels
05-07-2008, 06:51 PM
I didn't make the comparison with Prior. You did.

Umm my point was that the numbers are totally different and you can't consider them equal scenarios. Someone stated this was the crap Dusty got grief for in Chicago and I pulled the numbers to show no, it is not.

Highlifeman21
05-07-2008, 06:54 PM
My case is simple...a single game of 118 pitches in today's game by Volquez is nowhere near the "abuse" Prior went threw. Not even close. You can't make a comparison if you using the number of pitches thrown.

One game @ 118 is abuse, regardless of the pitcher. IMO, anytime a guy is over 115, it's abuse.

95
75
112
105
104
100
118

Those are Volquez's pitch counts to date for the Reds. 112 and 118 jump out at you. 5 out of 7 starts of at least 100 jump out at you.

Let's see The Dusty start to consistently keep Volquez under 105, and I think many of us will be happier with how The Dusty handles the youngsters.

On the flip side, we've seen The Dusty handle Cueto very admirably to date, IMO.

92
96
82
99
99
55
108

That's what we've seen from Cueto. Combine the 55 and the 108, and you average 81.5 between them. Now if we start to see Cueto consistently be at or above 105 per game, then I'll have the same concern about Cueto that I currently have with Volquez.

Cyclone792
05-07-2008, 07:08 PM
Umm my point was that the numbers are totally different and you can't consider them equal scenarios. Someone stated this was the crap Dusty got grief for in Chicago and I pulled the numbers to show no, it is not.

Once again, I didn't make the comparison with Prior. You did.

I didn't like it when Jerry Narron abused Reds pitchers, and I'm not going to like it when Dusty Baker abuses Reds pitchers. There was absolutely no reason whatsoever for Edinson Volquez to throw 118 pitches today. Absolutely no reason.

But the Reds are what they are. They didn't give a crap about pitcher abuse a few years ago when they finally landed some nice starting pitching, and there's still reason to believe they may still not give a crap about pitcher abuse. They burned Arroyo, and now he stinks. Coincidence? You tell me. All I know is I wish Narron hadn't burned Arroyo the way he did. Because if Narron had protected Arroyo the way he should have, then there's likely a better chance that Arroyo wouldn't stink right now.

The Reds have some nice, solid pitching ... much of it young. If this organization kamikazes their pitching staff due to bad decisions, then you won't find me feeling sorry for them.

dougdirt
05-07-2008, 07:16 PM
The Reds have some nice, solid pitching ... much of it young. If this organization kamikazes their pitching staff due to bad decisions, then you won't find me feeling sorry for them.

Will you feel sorry for me and my broken heart if it happens?

kaldaniels
05-07-2008, 07:21 PM
Once again, I didn't make the comparison with Prior. You did.
I didn't like it when Jerry Narron abused Reds pitchers, and I'm not going to like it when Dusty Baker abuses Reds pitchers. There was absolutely no reason whatsoever for Edinson Volquez to throw 118 pitches today. Absolutely no reason.

But the Reds are what they are. They didn't give a crap about pitcher abuse a few years ago when they finally landed some nice starting pitching, and there's still reason to believe they may still not give a crap about pitcher abuse. They burned Arroyo, and now he stinks. Coincidence? You tell me. All I know is I wish Narron hadn't burned Arroyo the way he did. Because if Narron had protected Arroyo the way he should have, then there's likely a better chance that Arroyo wouldn't stink right now.

The Reds have some nice, solid pitching ... much of it young. If this organization kamikazes their pitching staff due to bad decisions, then you won't find me feeling sorry for them.

You keep saying that but it isn't relevant.

1)Dougdirt said that this is the crap Baker pulled with the Cubs.

2)I showed the numbers that clearly state no, it is not.

3)You state it doesn't help my case to compare Volquez to Prior.

When my original case was that the Dusty's handling of Volquez is nowhere near the handling of Prior...I kinda think showing the true pitch counts (Prior multiple,multiple times in the 120s and 130s) it does help my case. However don't act like it was me who brought the Cub pitchers into the discussion in the first place, for I did not.

Cyclone792
05-07-2008, 07:28 PM
You keep saying that but it isn't relevant.

1)Dougdirt said that this is the crap Baker pulled with the Cubs.

2)I showed the numbers that clearly state no, it is not.

3)You state it doesn't help my case to compare Volquez to Prior.

When my original case was that the Dusty's handling of Volquez is nowhere near the handling of Prior...I kinda think showing the true pitch counts (Prior multiple,multiple times in the 120s and 130s) it does help my case. However don't act like it was me who brought the Cub pitchers into the discussion in the first place, for I did not.

You've made several strawmen arguments here, too many for me to care.

dougdirt
05-07-2008, 07:31 PM
You keep saying that but it isn't relevant.

1)Dougdirt said that this is the crap Baker pulled with the Cubs.

2)I showed the numbers that clearly state no, it is not.

3)You state it doesn't help my case to compare Volquez to Prior.

When my original case was that the Dusty's handling of Volquez is nowhere near the handling of Prior...I kinda think showing the true pitch counts (Prior multiple,multiple times in the 120s and 130s) it does help my case. However don't act like it was me who brought the Cub pitchers into the discussion in the first place, for I did not.
Disagree. It is exactly what he did with Prior. He sent a young arm out there with big enough leads for absolutely no reason at all.

May 23, 2003 - Mark Prior and his Cubs lead 10-4 heading to the 6th inning and Prior is sitting at 107 pitches after 5 innings. He went back out for the 6th and threw 17 more pitches with a 6 run lead.

May 28, 2003 - Mark Prior and the Cubs lead 5-2 heading to the 8th inning. Prior has 105 pitches thrown through 7. He goes back out for the 8th and throws 18 pitches and doesn't make it out of the inning.

September 1, 2003 - Mark Prior and the Cubs lead 7-0 after the 6th inning. Prior had 103 pitches at this point. He then goes out for 2 more innings and 28 more pitches.

So yeah, this is exactly the same stuff Baker was doing to Prior in Chicago. There was no reason for it to happen with such a lead. None. Baker is just oblivious to such simple things as keeping a pitchers arm attached to his body.

RedEye
05-07-2008, 07:33 PM
You keep saying that but it isn't relevant.

1)Dougdirt said that this is the crap Baker pulled with the Cubs.

2)I showed the numbers that clearly state no, it is not.

3)You state it doesn't help my case to compare Volquez to Prior.

When my original case was that the Dusty's handling of Volquez is nowhere near the handling of Prior...I kinda think showing the true pitch counts (Prior multiple,multiple times in the 120s and 130s) it does help my case. However don't act like it was me who brought the Cub pitchers into the discussion in the first place, for I did not.

I think the case that we are making is that 118 pitches today--combined with a few other 100ish outings recently--may constitute the first sign of what Dusty did when he was with the Cubs. Is it the "same crap"? Not yet, no. But it could be soon.

RedEye
05-07-2008, 07:35 PM
I think it's also worth pointing out that what Dusty did with the Cubs is so infamous because it is an outlandish example of pitcher abuse--much like Narron's treatment of Arroyo last season. 130 or 140 pitches in a game is just inexcusable. What Dusty's doing this year once in awhile is more just "garden variety" pitcher abuse--but it's still bad.

Cyclone792
05-07-2008, 07:36 PM
Will you feel sorry for me and my broken heart if it happens?

Well, I'll feel sorry for every Reds fan that truly wants this team to make smart decisions and start winning, and I'm assuming you fit that category ... so yes.

But the organization with dwindling attendance and all the Reds front office staff who have lost their jobs (or will lose their jobs) due to stupid decisions? Won't feel sorry for them one bit.

kaldaniels
05-07-2008, 07:37 PM
I think the case that we are making is that 118 pitches today--combined with a few other 100ish outings recently--may constitute the first sign of what Dusty did when he was with the Cubs. Is it the "same crap"? Not yet, no. But it could be soon.

Thats a perfectly reasonable point. But thats not what was being said on here before I jumped in today.

I'm a hated man on this thread right now, so me giving you props right now doesn't help you out. Sorry.

Chip R
05-07-2008, 07:39 PM
I think we can all agree that 118 pitches in a blowout was unnecessary. We have a manager who - rightly or wrongly - has been accussed of mishandling young pitchers at his last managerial stop. We have a couple of young pitchers who up to now have been injury free. I think it's natural to have concerns about this outing. Up until today, I really haven't had any problems with Dusty's handling of the pitchers. I worry that he will us today as an excuse to keep stretching Volquez and Cueto out until they are pitching 110-130 pitches in a game with regularity. If today was an aberration, that's great. But it is cause for concern.

Cyclone792
05-07-2008, 07:44 PM
I think it's also worth pointing out that what Dusty did with the Cubs is so infamous because it is an outlandish example of pitcher abuse--much like Narron's treatment of Arroyo last season. 130 or 140 pitches in a game is just inexcusable. What Dusty's doing this year once in awhile is more just "garden variety" pitcher abuse--but it's still bad.

And unfortunately the real fear is that Dusty could be just getting started since it's still early May.

One of these days he'll send Volquez, Cueto, Harang, whomever out for another inning already having 95ish pitches with nobody warming up in the pen and the starter will just hit the wall. Then as hitters reach base and the pitches pile up, the Reds won't have a reliever ready to come in the game immediately and we'll see 120 and beyond happen under the Dusty Watch.

Then I see an unnamed NL pitcher in another organization (hint: one of the best pitchers in the NL) who has exactly three games with 100+ pitches and a max single game pitch count of only 104 pitches, and I look at that organization with total envy.

dougdirt
05-07-2008, 08:09 PM
Then I see an unnamed NL pitcher in another organization (hint: one of the best pitchers in the NL) who has exactly three games with 100+ pitches and a max single game pitch count of only 104 pitches, and I look at that organization with total envy.
Brandon Webb.... and imagine that, he hasn't even made it past 6 innings in half of his starts this year. He sucks. He can't stay in games long enough, isn't pitch effective enough. Trade him. Oh wait....

RedEye
05-07-2008, 08:28 PM
Thats a perfectly reasonable point. But thats not what was being said on here before I jumped in today.

I'm a hated man on this thread right now, so me giving you props right now doesn't help you out. Sorry.

Naw, I'll still take the props. ;)

Seriously though, I think your differences with the others are mostly a question of degree. You're just choosing to be optimistic that today was a statistical outlier for what is really a "new" Dusty, while everyone else thinks it might be a harbinger of the old one.

Only time will tell.

Kc61
05-07-2008, 09:48 PM
Haven't read the full thread so hope this isn't repetitive. There's a day off tomorrow and it doesn't look like the Reds will skip anyone. So Belisle Fri, Arroyo Sat, Cueto Sun, Harang Mon, Volquez Tues. So Volquez will get an extra day of rest, won't pitch until next Tuesday.

I still think 118 was too much, Dusty probably shouldn't have left him in, but Dusty is probably just desperate for wins now and 118 is not crazy excessive. Perhaps Dusty considered the fact that Volquez will likely get that extra rest this coming cycle.

Matt700wlw
05-07-2008, 11:23 PM
How about this??

Edinson Volquez didn’t allow more than 1 earned run in any of his first 7 starts.
No Reds pitcher had accomplished that feat since earned runs became an official statistic in 1912 (courtesy Elias Sports Bureau).

KronoRed
05-07-2008, 11:26 PM
118 was ridiculous, neither Volquez or Cueto should go over 100.

IMO.

RedEye
05-13-2008, 09:45 PM
Here we are again...

4 INN, 70 pitches, 0 runs, 1 BB, 4 K

Reds up 3-0.

What does Dusty do?

*BaseClogger*
05-13-2008, 09:47 PM
Here we are again...

4 INN, 70 pitches, 0 runs, 1 BB, 4 K

Reds up 3-0.

What does Dusty do?

Watch the fifth inning...

RedEye
05-13-2008, 09:48 PM
BTW, this is by no means a complain about Volkie. His ERA is now 0.96!

RedEye
05-13-2008, 09:49 PM
Watch the fifth inning...

That's true. Maybe I jumped the gun. But there will be a decision soon...

RedEye
05-13-2008, 09:51 PM
God... I hope I didn't just jinx him.

RedEye
05-13-2008, 10:00 PM
5 INN, 95 pitches

3-1 Reds

Dusty?

*BaseClogger*
05-13-2008, 10:02 PM
5 INN, 95 pitches

3-1 Reds

Dusty?

This is why you save Volquez that inning last start, because this is when you need him to go another one IMO. I'd leave him in, but not let him go above 110 pitches...

RedEye
05-13-2008, 10:07 PM
This is why you save Volquez that inning last start, because this is when you need him to go another one IMO. I'd leave him in, but not let him go above 110 pitches...

I wonder if Dusty will have someone warming up in the BP at the beginning of the inning? I hope so.

*BaseClogger*
05-13-2008, 10:12 PM
I wonder if Dusty will have someone warming up in the BP at the beginning of the inning? I hope so.

That's what I would do. If anyone gets into scoring position he'd be done...

fearofpopvol1
05-13-2008, 10:13 PM
See, this is why I think Volquez will be an elite pitcher for a long time to come. He has now shown me consistently that he has the ability to exert damage control. Every pitcher, no matter what the caliber, will get in trouble. Their going to put runners on and load the bases, but great pitchers limit the damage and Volquez showed in the 5th inning that he could not only limit the damage, but he could do it against some tough hitters. I'm very impressed and this is why I think Cueto has work to do. Cueto has not proven that he can exert damage control consistently.

OnBaseMachine
05-13-2008, 10:13 PM
Volquez back out there for the 6th inning. Why, Dusty, why?

RedEye
05-13-2008, 10:48 PM
110 pitches for EV tonight.

RedEye
05-13-2008, 10:49 PM
See, this is why I think Volquez will be an elite pitcher for a long time to come. He has now shown me consistently that he has the ability to exert damage control. Every pitcher, no matter what the caliber, will get in trouble. Their going to put runners on and load the bases, but great pitchers limit the damage and Volquez showed in the 5th inning that he could not only limit the damage, but he could do it against some tough hitters. I'm very impressed and this is why I think Cueto has work to do. Cueto has not proven that he can exert damage control consistently.

Is there a way to measure said "damage control" beyond anecdotal evidence? I'm sure strand rates have something to do with it...

fearofpopvol1
05-13-2008, 10:58 PM
Is there a way to measure said "damage control" beyond anecdotal evidence? I'm sure strand rates have something to do with it...

There probably is some sort of stat/metric thing that helps measure it, but I think it's one of those things you just have to use the eyes for.

RedEye
05-13-2008, 11:29 PM
There probably is some sort of stat/metric thing that helps measure it, but I think it's one of those things you just have to use the eyes for.

Actually, I think it would be something you could measure completely with stats (although I'm not qualified to do so). How are you going to tell if someone is good at "damage control" by watching him pitch one game? The expression on his face? The small sample size outcome of that one game?

That said, I do agree that Volquez has shown a propensity for getting out of jams so far. Which is nice. I'm just wondering how much of it has to do with luck and how much has to do with controllable outcomes. Clearly, EV misses bats and doesn't give up many HR, which helps any pitcher to avoid damage.

Highlifeman21
05-13-2008, 11:34 PM
118 followed by 110?

While I'm concerned about Keppinger's knee, I remain more concerned about Volquez's right arm.

LoganBuck
05-13-2008, 11:45 PM
I am not overly upset about the count tonight, but Dusty should have pulled him before he threw the last two pitches. Young pitchers have not earned the right to say I am ok, let me get this guy. Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo, yes. Anyone not named Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo, no. Those guys have pitched enough to know, I still have it, or I can get this guy. A youngster may just try to throw harder.

fearofpopvol1
05-14-2008, 12:29 AM
Actually, I think it would be something you could measure completely with stats (although I'm not qualified to do so). How are you going to tell if someone is good at "damage control" by watching him pitch one game? The expression on his face? The small sample size outcome of that one game?

That said, I do agree that Volquez has shown a propensity for getting out of jams so far. Which is nice. I'm just wondering how much of it has to do with luck and how much has to do with controllable outcomes. Clearly, EV misses bats and doesn't give up many HR, which helps any pitcher to avoid damage.

Well, no. You watch lots of games and then you come to that conclusion. I'm not qualified on the stats end either and while I think stats can help tell the story, I think the eyes are important here.

I've watched almost every start by Volquez and same goes for Cueto. Obviously, the end result (ie how many runs surrendered) happens to be more telling than anything else, but I think it comes down to pitch selection and selling the pitches to the hitters in those critical moments. Volquez has been great in that respect thus far. Cueto, by contrast, has been weaker.

Damage control to me is defined by how you pitch when you're in jams. Are you able to get that big K with runners on base? Are you able to get that ground ball (for a double play)? If the bases are loaded and the ball is hit in the air, are you able to limit it to a sac fly? All pitchers are going to suffer damage, but the great pitchers have the ability to make the right pitches in the right situations. It's all about minimizing the amount of damage.

*BaseClogger*
05-14-2008, 12:30 AM
LOB%?

Spitball
05-14-2008, 12:31 AM
I'm guessing everyone has seen this article about "Little Pedro" from ESPN:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3392657

fearofpopvol1
05-14-2008, 12:31 AM
LOB%?

Not a bad starting point, but I don't think that tells the whole story.

*BaseClogger*
05-14-2008, 12:33 AM
Not a bad starting point, but I don't think that tells the whole story.

why not?

RedEye
05-14-2008, 12:36 AM
why not?

Probably would have to be LOB% in high leverage situations or something like that. I suppose you'd have to find a way to define "jam."

SMcGavin
05-14-2008, 12:36 AM
For what it's worth Volquez's LOB% was 91.1% going into tonight. That is otherworldly (best in MLB) and also unfortunately unsustainable. The best of anyone last year was Cole Hamels at 78.7%. Of course that doesn't mean Volquez is going to fall apart, just that his ERA isn't going to be around one all year long... and I think we all already knew that.

By the way this start takes Mr. Volquez to mid-May... 6-1, 1.12 ERA. He'll probably stick around the rotation a little while longer.

*BaseClogger*
05-14-2008, 12:39 AM
Probably would have to be LOB% in high leverage situations or something like that. I suppose you'd have to find a way to define "jam."

sounds like defining "clutch" to me... :(

Spitball
05-14-2008, 12:39 AM
BTW, did anyone else see the clip of the tenth inning from Jim Maloney's ten inning no-hitter against the Cubs in 1965? It was shown during a recent Cubs' rain delay. As a twenty-five year old, Maloney walked ten and struckout twelve. With the leadoff batter up in the tenth, Maloney had 177 pitches. I lost count when Ernie Banks grounded into the game ending double play, but Maloney must have been near 190.

RedEye
05-14-2008, 12:41 AM
BTW, did anyone else see the clip of the tenth inning from Jim Maloney's ten inning no-hitter against the Cubs in 1965? It was shown during a recent Cubs' rain delay. As a twenty-five year old, Maloney walked ten and struckout twelve. With the leadoff batter up in the tenth, Maloney had 177 pitches. I lost count when Ernie Banks grounded into the game ending double play, but Maloney must have been near 190.

Wow. That's about as many as that poor high school kid in Japan who gave up 60 runs in less than two innings.

fearofpopvol1
05-14-2008, 12:42 AM
why not?

Yeah, what RedEye said. Obviously, stranding a runner at 1st base after you have 2 outs is quite a bit different than having the bases loaded with 1 out. You know? It's just a hard thing to measure, which is why I think you have to watch a bunch of games to see firsthand.

Highlifeman21
05-14-2008, 12:50 AM
Unfortunately while pitchers might play for the same team, they aren't always getting the same defense behind them.

The only way I can think of off the top of my head where pitchers can set themselves apart from their pitching teammates are strikeouts. If you're doing your job to keep the opposition off the basepaths, then you're eliminating the random element behind you that is your teammates playing defense.

If I wanted to get really simplistic about it, take the K/9 and the BB/9 for a pitcher. The higher the K/9, and the lower the BB/9, and the pitcher is doing his job of keeping the opposition off the basepaths.

Volquez's walks partially negate his strikeouts. Without looking up the stats, I would assume Cueto would have a better K:BB than Volquez, while Volquez most probably has a higher K/9 and a higher BB/9 than Cueto.

What conclusion am I trying to make? At this point, I'm not sure, but what I do know is that Volquez misses more bats than Cueto, and I firmly think in the long run that will help him overcome the horrid defense that is the Cincinnati Reds. Sunday I watched Cueto throw 2 bad pitches, so honestly I only hold him responsible for 3 runs. The other 3, completely on the Reds shoddy D, namely Ken Griffey, Jr.

Screwball
05-14-2008, 02:05 AM
I gotta say, it's pretty amazing to go to mlb.com's home page and see a picture of Hamilton for leading the Majors in RBIs (43), only to see Volquez next to him for leading the Majors in strikeouts (57). What a trade.

BCubb2003
05-14-2008, 02:34 AM
Pitching for the same team, Harang is 2-5 and Volquez is 6-1. If you had to win one game right now, which would you choose?

fearofpopvol1
05-14-2008, 02:44 AM
Pitching for the same team, Harang is 2-5 and Volquez is 6-1. If you had to win one game right now, which would you choose?

Harang definitely. While I think Volquez has better "nautral stuff," Harang is more experienced and is the ace of this staff.

marcshoe
05-14-2008, 12:47 PM
BTW, did anyone else see the clip of the tenth inning from Jim Maloney's ten inning no-hitter against the Cubs in 1965? It was shown during a recent Cubs' rain delay. As a twenty-five year old, Maloney walked ten and struckout twelve. With the leadoff batter up in the tenth, Maloney had 177 pitches. I lost count when Ernie Banks grounded into the game ending double play, but Maloney must have been near 190.

...and that's why Maloney's not still pitching! Well that, and the fact that he's almost 68.

Okay, so it just might have contributed to Maloney flaming out before he turned 30.

dougdirt
05-14-2008, 12:52 PM
Pitching for the same team, Harang is 2-5 and Volquez is 6-1. If you had to win one game right now, which would you choose?

Honestly, I would take Volquez right now. He has yet to allowed 2 runs in any start through 8 starts. Harang has been very good, but Volquez has been dominant. Harang's record is nowhere near indicative of how he has pitched this year, but Volquez has been a better pitcher this year.

fearofpopvol1
05-14-2008, 01:39 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/notebook?page=bbtn

Highlifeman21
05-14-2008, 03:19 PM
Honestly, I would take Volquez right now. He has yet to allowed 2 runs in any start through 8 starts. Harang has been very good, but Volquez has been dominant. Harang's record is nowhere near indicative of how he has pitched this year, but Volquez has been a better pitcher this year.

Volquez has taxed the bullpen more than Harang. The longest Volquez has gone in any game is 7.0 IP, and he's done so 3 times in 7 starts. Harang has gone at least 7.0 IP 6 times out of his 9 starts. Volquez is averaging 6 IP per start thru 7 GS, while Harang is averaging 7 IP per start thru 9 GS. That tells me we're seeing on average, at least 1 IP more from the bullpen when Volquez starts than when Harang starts. We've seen 18.2 IP from the bullpen in Volquez's starts, which is an average of 2.2 IP per. We've seen 16.2 IP from the bullpen in Harang's starts, which is an average of just over 1.2 IP per. While our bullpen sorta seems better, I'd rather the proven workhorse that makes us see less of the bullpen, than the young electric arm that will force us to see more of the bullpen.

Chip R
05-14-2008, 03:25 PM
I believe Volquez has either tied or broken some record for consecutive starts allowing 1 earned run or fewer.

membengal
05-14-2008, 05:10 PM
He's like good, and stuff.

Matt700wlw
05-14-2008, 05:28 PM
I believe Volquez has either tied or broken some record for consecutive starts allowing 1 earned run or fewer.

Tied I think

OnBaseMachine
05-14-2008, 05:30 PM
I believe Volquez has either tied or broken some record for consecutive starts allowing 1 earned run or fewer.

Edinson Volquez tied a major league record by going eight starts and allowing one earned run or fewer in each one. Three others have done that:

Mike Norris, Oakland, 1980
Dana Fillingim, Boston Braves, 1918
Dutch Leonard, Boston Red Sox, 1914

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/redsinsider/

kaldaniels
05-14-2008, 07:32 PM
By the way...Sunday's probables...

Cliff Lee vs Edinson Volquez :thumbup:

membengal
05-15-2008, 09:31 AM
What an excellent and interesting pitching match-up.

Hopefully Sunday is Lee's day to start to regress to a mean, and Volquez can delay his drift for a start longer.

OnBaseMachine
05-15-2008, 11:38 AM
By the way...Sunday's probables...

Cliff Lee vs Edinson Volquez :thumbup:

And I'll be there! :D

RedEye
05-20-2008, 08:25 PM
This from The Sports Xchange (via CBS Sportsline):


News: There is concern about 24-year-old Edinson Volquez's penchant for throwing extra pitches -- 100 or more in eight of his nine starts. Manager Dusty Baker insists he is being careful and said, "He has to cut down on his pitches. He is working too hard to achieve what he is doing. But he is doing good, so how do you say, 'Change?' But you know there is even better in there." The Reds limit Volquez and watch closely when the magic 100th pitch creeps in. He is 7-1 with a 1.33 ERA. Volquez pitched winter ball and there are questions about him running out of gas. Baker couldn't disagree more. "Bob Quinn (former Yankees, Reds and Giants GM) told me once that pitchers usually rust out before they wear out," Baker said. "Latin guys who I've seen play winter ball rarely have arm problems -- Julian Tavarez, Luis Tiant played winter ball somewhere every year, Diego Segui. Japanese pitchers throw more. "Almost all foreign pitchers throw more than American pitchers. Rarely do you hear anybody say some American pitcher has a rubber arm."

Who knew that Bob Quinn was the source of Dusty's madness?

Be scared. Be very scared.

fearofpopvol1
05-24-2008, 01:57 AM
Another amazing amazing outing. 6 IP, 2 H, 1 ER, 2 BB, 12 K and 92 pitches. His ERA has been lowered to 1.34.

Volquez to me is by far and away the most exciting thing about the Reds this year. I find myself doing whatever I can to make myself available just to watch him pitch. I've been a Reds fan my entire life and I know that I'm younger than many that post here, but I've never seen a Reds starting pitcher in my lifetime that has just been filthy dominant the way that Volquez has been thus far.

RedlegJake
05-24-2008, 03:13 AM
Another amazing amazing outing. 6 IP, 2 H, 1 ER, 2 BB, 12 K and 92 pitches. His ERA has been lowered to 1.34.

Volquez to me is by far and away the most exciting thing about the Reds this year. I find myself doing whatever I can to make myself available just to watch him pitch. I've been a Reds fan my entire life and I know that I'm younger than many that post here, but I've never seen a Reds starting pitcher in my lifetime that has just been filthy dominant the way that Volquez has been thus far.

I'm glad for all the younger fans that the Reds have a new equivalent to Jose Rijo, or Mario Soto. It's fun to watch guys like that pitch.

mth123
05-24-2008, 03:17 AM
Another amazing amazing outing. 6 IP, 2 H, 1 ER, 2 BB, 12 K and 92 pitches. His ERA has been lowered to 1.34.

Volquez to me is by far and away the most exciting thing about the Reds this year. I find myself doing whatever I can to make myself available just to watch him pitch. I've been a Reds fan my entire life and I know that I'm younger than many that post here, but I've never seen a Reds starting pitcher in my lifetime that has just been filthy dominant the way that Volquez has been thus far.

I'm not sure it was intentional because it was dictated by the pinch hitting situation, but I think it helps down the road that he was limited to 92 pitches tonight.

fearofpopvol1
05-24-2008, 03:20 AM
I'm glad for all the younger fans that the Reds have a new equivalent to Jose Rijo, or Mario Soto. It's fun to watch guys like that pitch.

I remember those guys, even though I was younger. And while I obviously know more about the game now than I did then, I still don't recall them being this dominant.

HumnHilghtFreel
05-24-2008, 03:27 AM
Volquez is out there making hitters look foolish. I absolutely love watching him work on the mound. It's too bad he didn't get the W tonight.

membengal
05-24-2008, 01:00 PM
He bugs bunny'd the Padres in the second inning last night. All you could do was laugh at how over-matched they were from start to finish.

membengal
05-24-2008, 01:01 PM
By the way, while the Reds ineffective offense was frustrating as hell, a side benefit down the road may be that Volquez had to get pulled after only 92 pitches last night...

RedEye
05-24-2008, 01:04 PM
Yes, I was happy to see he only had 92 pitches. Hope the trend continues because I'd like to see this guy pitching for the Reds for a long time.

fearofpopvol1
05-31-2008, 03:26 AM
I just continue to be WOWed. Is this really happening? And with most of these starts being in GAB??

Volquez's ability to get out of jams and show damage control is unbelievable. Everytime men get into scoring position and you get worried, he makes the right pitch and he's out of it (or only gives up a run). And it's not like the Braves haven't seen him before either. This is a second go around. Guy has an off night and gives up 2 ER. Still leads the majors in ERA and K's.

I mean really, people would rather have Hamilton over Volquez???

bucksfan2
05-31-2008, 09:54 AM
I mean really, people would rather have Hamilton over Volquez???

Triple crown winner or Cy Young winnter???

What I have noticed with Volquez is that he doesn't like to give in. He would rather walk a guy and put him on base than give him a good ball to hit. It almost seems as if at times he isn't comfortable pitching to a certain batter so he tries to paint the corners but he would rather walk him and pitch to the next guy. I like that attitude. I would much rather have a confident pitcher with a runner on first base than a pitcher trying to grove a 3-0 3-1 fastball to get back in the count. The only negative about this style of pitching is that it inflates the pitch count.

HumnHilghtFreel
05-31-2008, 10:02 AM
Triple crown winner or Cy Young winnter???

What I have noticed with Volquez is that he doesn't like to give in. He would rather walk a guy and put him on base than give him a good ball to hit. It almost seems as if at times he isn't comfortable pitching to a certain batter so he tries to paint the corners but he would rather walk him and pitch to the next guy. I like that attitude. I would much rather have a confident pitcher with a runner on first base than a pitcher trying to grove a 3-0 3-1 fastball to get back in the count. The only negative about this style of pitching is that it inflates the pitch count.

I definitely noticed this. I think yesterday may have been an example when he walked McCann. McCann took him deep the first time they matched up and Volquez looked like he knew it and didn't want to give him anything to look at. Then again, he walked the next batter too, so maybe I'm overanalyzing it, but the first thing that popped into my head was the HR when he walked him. If I remember he probably does too.

Highlifeman21
05-31-2008, 11:08 AM
At least 102 pitches is a step in the right direction from The Dusty.

Although Volquez shouldn't have started the next inning. It should have been Bray.

RedlegJake
05-31-2008, 11:20 AM
At least 102 pitches is a step in the right direction from The Dusty.

Although Volquez shouldn't have started the next inning. It should have been Bray.

This is what gets me about Dusty. If Volquez was losing it then he should have seen that after the 6th was over. Did 2 pitches really tell him something? After all, if V was still strong then he had a much better shot at stranding a runner on 2nd with no outs than anyone else on the staff except maybe Burton if he has an "on" night, or Coco. Certainly better than Bray. So if Dusty saw signs in the 6th, with EVs count where it was then he should have started Bray in the 7th. I can probably count on 1 hand the number of relievers in the game one can count on to consistently strand an inherited runner in scoring position if they come in with no outs.

In any case another tremendous game for Volquez. First Cincy pitcher with 8 consecutive QS since 2000.

RedEye
09-08-2008, 11:03 PM
119 pitches tonight. Ouch. EV probably should have been taken out after Cameron got on base. Counsell worked him for at least 10 more pitches. What was the point in a 4-1 game in a meaningless season?

OnBaseMachine
09-08-2008, 11:04 PM
119 pitches tonight. Ouch. EV probably should have been taken out after Cameron got on base. Counsell worked him for at least 10 more pitches. What was the point in a 4-1 game in a meaningless season?

And he threw 117 pitches just five days ago. Dusty will never learn.

RedEye
09-08-2008, 11:05 PM
It's really just a matter of avoiding that extra batter or two. It's not that difficult.

Highlifeman21
09-09-2008, 12:11 AM
The Dusty doesn't seem to be a fan of taking guys (and by guys I mean predominantly starters) out of games until the end of an inning.

OnBaseMachine
09-09-2008, 12:13 AM
Here's a comment from a Brewers fan:

Volquez is getting Dusty'd. He's in excess of 120 pitches already, I believe. That's totally unnecessary for them.

http://brewersfandemonium.yuku.com/topic/15501/t/9-8-08-Reds-Volquez-at-Brewers-Bush-7-05-PM-CDT.html?page=3

HumnHilghtFreel
09-09-2008, 01:54 AM
Here's a comment from a Brewers fan:

Volquez is getting Dusty'd. He's in excess of 120 pitches already, I believe. That's totally unnecessary for them.

http://brewersfandemonium.yuku.com/topic/15501/t/9-8-08-Reds-Volquez-at-Brewers-Bush-7-05-PM-CDT.html?page=3

Totally off-topic, but I found it hilarious reading through their game thread all the "Oh crap, It's Javier Valentin" posts that showed up.

Chip R
09-09-2008, 10:17 AM
Even Marty was strongly suggesting that Volquez had thrown too many pitches on his last batter last night.

Hoosier Red
09-09-2008, 10:36 AM
And he threw 117 pitches just five days ago. Dusty will never learn.

How many is too many for Volquez? What's the magic number?
Or is it a standard 100 pitches and under? Does it matter that because Volquez isnt' the most efficient guy, he's probably going to have to learn to throw more pitches to get through his starts? Just a thought.

Tony Cloninger
09-09-2008, 11:04 AM
He seems like a guy who can take a 110-120 pitch workload....but there is no need to push it every start....i agree that after Cameron got on....he needed to go. Cameron is one of those guys who can be struck out...by Volquez, with his stuff. Once he could not put him away....you get Counsell....who does those things that irritate pitchers...works the count, fouls off pitches.....therefore he was going to tax Volquez even more, which was not needed.

Now that 20 wins is out.....maybe he can refrain from using him past 110 pitches or even 100.

Another thing that would help...would be having this offense scoring early and often....and get Volquez out with a big lead before he hit's 100 pitches.

RedEye
09-09-2008, 11:48 AM
There is just no point in risking the Reds' most valuable asset for meaningless games in September. The fact that Baker let EV go 119 pitches in this game makes me very scared how long he would have let him go in a high stakes situation. That's how Prior and Wood got screwed in 2003.

Even Carlos Zambrano and Aaron Harang--two "big bodied" pitchers who have shown remarkably resilient arms over the years--are showing signs of wear and tear this year. It is time for the Reds brain trust to take pitcher abuse points seriously, even if that means that Walt has to tell Dusty what to do.

RedEye
09-09-2008, 11:52 AM
Sorry to be a Chicken Little about all this, but watching pitch counts is such an EASY and COST EFFECTIVE way for baseball teams to protect their assets... and it is absolutely infuriating to see the Reds ignoring the chance to do so.

Hoosier Red
09-09-2008, 11:59 AM
Sorry to be a Chicken Little about all this, but watching pitch counts is such an EASY and COST EFFECTIVE way for baseball teams to protect their assets... and it is absolutely infuriating to see the Reds ignoring the chance to do so.

But it's not. There isn't a number, there isn't a PC+(pitch count +) baseline that tells us exactly how much each pitcher should be throwing.
100 pitches to one is 110 to another is 119 to another. There is nothing that Volquez has shown this year that says 110-120 pitches is not an accptable range for him to throw.

I'd argue the fact that Kerry Wood and Mark Prior were always hurt aside from a startlingly lucky 4 months of baseball is "what screwed them" in 2003 and beyond.

Cyclone792
09-09-2008, 12:27 PM
But it's not. There isn't a number, there isn't a PC+(pitch count +) baseline that tells us exactly how much each pitcher should be throwing. 100 pitches to one is 110 to another is 119 to another. There is nothing that Volquez has shown this year that says 110-120 pitches is not an accptable range for him to throw.

If an organization is going to invest millions upon millions of dollars in pitchers, then it would behoove that organization to accurately research and determine the proper health, safety, and pitch count tally that each pitcher (and management) should abide by.

Unless of course some organizations enjoy finishing in the basement while having injured and/or ineffective pitchers ... that's always a possibility too.

Hoosier Red
09-09-2008, 12:27 PM
There is just no point in risking the Reds' most valuable asset for meaningless games in September. The fact that Baker let EV go 119 pitches in this game makes me very scared how long he would have let him go in a high stakes situation. That's how Prior and Wood got screwed in 2003.

Even Carlos Zambrano and Aaron Harang--two "big bodied" pitchers who have shown remarkably resilient arms over the years--are showing signs of wear and tear this year. It is time for the Reds brain trust to take pitcher abuse points seriously, even if that means that Walt has to tell Dusty what to do.

I think the discussion over pitch counts has devolved from "hey make
sure he doesn't throw 150 pitches tonight," to "hey, we might want to
limit certain pitchers to below 100 pitches, and keep an eye on
everybody," to "I CAN'T BELIEVE HE LEFT THE PITCHER IN FOR 115 PITCHES!
DOES HE HATE HUMANITY?! I SAY WE BURN HIM"

SteelSD
09-09-2008, 12:32 PM
Sorry to be a Chicken Little about all this, but watching pitch counts is such an EASY and COST EFFECTIVE way for baseball teams to protect their assets... and it is absolutely infuriating to see the Reds ignoring the chance to do so.

To me, what's most alarming is that the Reds currently have 40% of the top 10 NL hurlers in Pitches per IP in their rotation (min 140 IP qualifier). Tracking back to 2000 (as far as ESPN.com will let me go), that hasn't happened this century in either league. Should Fogg (17.5 P/IP) reach 100 IP and if Harang (16.9 P/IP) has one rough outing, we might see five SP over 100 IP and also over 17.0 P/IP. I'm not sure that's ever been done before in a rotation.

It's not just that the Reds rotation is throwing a lot of pitches. They're throwing a TON of high-intensity Innings. And I can't possibly believe that's good news.

Chip R
09-09-2008, 12:37 PM
Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

Cyclone792
09-09-2008, 12:38 PM
Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

That should be a tagline for The Lost Decade.

Hoosier Red
09-09-2008, 12:42 PM
If an organization is going to invest millions upon millions of dollars in pitchers, then it would behoove that organization to accurately research and determine the proper health, safety, and pitch count tally that each pitcher (and management) should abide by.

Unless of course some organizations enjoy finishing in the basement while having injured and/or ineffective pitchers ... that's always a possibility too.

Oh I see, the Reds have been poor because they haven't managed innings pitched correctly. My bad, I thought it was because the pitchers sucked.

Again, somebody tell me how many pitches is too many? Steel makes a good point about the number of high intensity innings and pitches, but to just arbitrarily decide 100 pitches is the correct amount to watch on every pitcher is silly.

Cyclone792
09-09-2008, 12:46 PM
Oh I see, the Reds have been poor because they haven't managed innings pitched correctly. My bad, I thought it was because the pitchers sucked.

Hello Mr. Strawman.


Again, somebody tell me how many pitches is too many? Steel makes a good point about the number of high intensity innings and pitches, but to just arbitrarily decide 100 pitches is the correct amount to watch on every pitcher is silly.

The studies are out there, and they're all over the place, including this board. You're more than welcome to search for them.

Hoosier Red
09-09-2008, 01:00 PM
Hello Mr. Strawman.



The studies are out there, and they're all over the place, including this board. You're more than welcome to search for them.


Found this from the Baseball-Reference board, quoting "The diamond appraised"

Don't know if this has been discredited since.
As a teenager, a pitcher should not be allowed to throw two-hundred-inning seasons or have a BFS (batters faced per start) over 28.5 in any significant span (150-plus innings). This does not include instructional league or winter-ball innings if there is a reasonable amount of time off between the leagues. (MY NOTE: 28.5 BFS is a 100 pitch limit, note that this is the average and not an absolute limit.)
A teenage pitcher should not start on three days´ rest, which generally means no four-man rotations in A-ball.
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.
For age twenty-three to twenty-four, the restraints can be eased up, but their season average should stay under 110 pitches in most cases. The single-game ceiling can be jumped up to 140 as long as the pitcher is still strong.



This seems a more reasonable way of looking at it.

Cyclone792
09-09-2008, 01:16 PM
Found this from the Baseball-Reference board, quoting "The diamond appraised"

Don't know if this has been discredited since.
As a teenager, a pitcher should not be allowed to throw two-hundred-inning seasons or have a BFS (batters faced per start) over 28.5 in any significant span (150-plus innings). This does not include instructional league or winter-ball innings if there is a reasonable amount of time off between the leagues. (MY NOTE: 28.5 BFS is a 100 pitch limit, note that this is the average and not an absolute limit.)
A teenage pitcher should not start on three days´ rest, which generally means no four-man rotations in A-ball.
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.
For age twenty-three to twenty-four, the restraints can be eased up, but their season average should stay under 110 pitches in most cases. The single-game ceiling can be jumped up to 140 as long as the pitcher is still strong.


This seems a more reasonable way of looking at it.

It's a good start, but I'm also fairly certain that The Diamond Appraised was written and published 20 years ago. BP's PAP research is much more recent, and also a bit more strict (i.e. those 130 and 140 pitch ceilings no longer exist).

Hoosier Red
09-09-2008, 01:27 PM
It's a good start, but I'm also fairly certain that The Diamond Appraised was written and published 20 years ago. BP's PAP research is much more recent, and also a bit more strict (i.e. those 130 and 140 pitch ceilings no longer exist).

In looking at the studies, I see a lot of tracking of Pitcher Abuse Points, but I really haven't been able to find anything that validates the theories.
Maybe the data is a little too recent to be useful, but is there any data showing the Red Sox have been better at protecting their pitchers from injuries than say the Giants(man do those guys hate pitchers or what.)

Maybe I'm looking at the wrong spot.

Hoosier Red
09-09-2008, 01:30 PM
Admittedly most of my criticism is coming from the BR blog author but I thought I might as well throw out his criticisms;

http://www.baseball-reference.com/otb/pitcher_usage_old.php

1. The entire idea of PAP3 is based on an effect that shows single high-pitch count games (140 pitches or greater) cause pitchers to allow less than one additional run over their next 24 innings pitched (4 starts). Such an effect while interesting (and I don't question the validity of that number) is far from a smoking gun that anything over 100 pitches is bad. 2. This is a very tenuous result to base an entire system on.
The second study that attempts to show PAP3 predicts long-term injuries better than pitch counts compares the wrong two metrics in my opinion. Keith Woolner compares career PAP3 with the career total of pitches thrown. Comparing PAP3 to average pitches thrown per start would be a much more illuminative comparison. Does anyone really believe that 10 starts of 60 pitches and 6 starts of 100 pitches are the same thing? For his study they are.
3. I would like to see the authors make some of the data available. The scatter plot on page 513 is very confusing and seeing the data points for ourselves would help us understand the method far better. It is unclear to me how less than 30% of the starters can be above average as is stated on page 513 unless handful of data points are severely skewing the overall totals. I understand that they are in the business of selling books, but if the Prospectus crew are the sabermetricians they claim to be and sabermetrics is a science as Rob Neyer claims it to be, it shouldn't be a problem to back up some of the words with data. That is what you do in science.

RedEye
09-09-2008, 05:27 PM
If I had any confidence that the Reds were thinking about this stuff half as much as Hoosier and Cyclone, then I would be reassured. Problem is, I have seen no evidence that this is the case. Would it hurt the Reds' FO just to mention that they are at least AWARE of some of these new methods? For now, all I've seen is a manager who makes his decisions based on a general "sense" of when a pitcher has been out there too long... and a FO that isn't too worried about what that might lead to.

mth123
09-10-2008, 05:48 AM
To me, what's most alarming is that the Reds currently have 40% of the top 10 NL hurlers in Pitches per IP in their rotation (min 140 IP qualifier). Tracking back to 2000 (as far as ESPN.com will let me go), that hasn't happened this century in either league. Should Fogg (17.5 P/IP) reach 100 IP and if Harang (16.9 P/IP) has one rough outing, we might see five SP over 100 IP and also over 17.0 P/IP. I'm not sure that's ever been done before in a rotation.

It's not just that the Reds rotation is throwing a lot of pitches. They're throwing a TON of high-intensity Innings. And I can't possibly believe that's good news.

This won't get better until the Reds have a major league caliber defender at all the positions (not really too high a standard). So far for 2009 we have Phillips, Dickerson and maybe Bruce (his defense has been hugely disappointing IMO). Votto seems a little better, but I still think watching him around the bag makes me think he'd be better in LF. A long way to go.

RedlegJake
09-10-2008, 07:08 AM
100 pitches IS arbitrary. Anytime you pick one number, apply it to everyone - that's arbitrary. And I've read studies, case histories and whatever I find and I have not seen proof that 100 pitches is a set limit - where is this info that is "out there"? I'm not knocking limits at all - the Reds are worrisome. When your team's pitchers are logging league high levels of pitches per inning and abuse points there is a problem. It's the Harang thing in San Diego. His start before his relief appearance and his start after - none looked bad on the face of a single appearance but over 8 days it meant he logged an enormous number of pitches. Not enough attention is paid to work load in a series of games, rather than keying on how many in one game. 115 pitches isn't that bad, imo but 115 pitches 6 games in a row is a lot of workload. Compared to a guy who is limited to a 100 pitches per start average that starter hurled the equivalent of an extra start in there. That IS significant. I still remember the tremendous young staff that Oakland had in the early 80s and how Billy Martin shredded them. It's not that bad but with Harang, Arroyo and Volquez it seems Dusty is determined to get 7 innings sometimes no matter what.

mth brings up a really good point, though. It would seem to me if a team wanted to protect its arms it would certainly pay close attentionto defense. There is a need to score, of course, so there is some balancing involved but too many defensive liabilities mean a lot more higly leveraged innings on your starters arms when they should have been free and clear with a smooth easy inning. We've certainly seen of lot of that with this year's Reds.

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2008, 11:45 PM
120 pitches (a career high) in a meaningless September game. Awesome.

OnBaseMachine
09-13-2008, 11:49 PM
120 pitches (a career high) in a meaningless September game. Awesome.

Worst manager in baseball and it ain't even close. Volquez had thrown 110 pitches in six innings and he sent him back out for another inning. Unbelievable.

HokieRed
09-14-2008, 12:14 AM
Frankly I can't or don't understand why WJ doesn't put an end to this, at least giving Dusty strict pitch limits to work with on Volquez and Cueto. This pitiful season is over; those two arms are the most important things this team has for next year.

RedsManRick
09-14-2008, 01:08 AM
120 pitches (a career high) in a meaningless September game. Awesome.

But he might have had a chance for 20 wins dude. Round number personal statistics are much more important than taking caution when it comes to the long term health of the one of the most valuable assets of the organization. Duh.

dougdirt
09-14-2008, 01:12 AM
Frankly I can't or don't understand why WJ doesn't put an end to this, at least giving Dusty strict pitch limits to work with on Volquez and Cueto. This pitiful season is over; those two arms are the most important things this team has for next year.

You are now assuming WJ knows better than Dusty.... WJ is pretty old school too. Its a scary combo.

Will M
09-15-2008, 03:11 PM
I believe Chris Welch said that a fastball/changeup pitcher like Volquez can throw more pitches each game than a guy like Arroyo who throws so many curves/slurves. The theory being that the curves are the pitches that really strain the arm. Thoughts or opinions?

BRM
09-15-2008, 03:20 PM
Worst manager in baseball and it ain't even close. Volquez had thrown 110 pitches in six innings and he sent him back out for another inning. Unbelievable.

What about Bochy? He's got to at least be close if you're basing it on pitcher abuse.

OnBaseMachine
09-15-2008, 03:21 PM
What about Bochy? He's got to at least be close if you're basing it on pitcher abuse.

I rank Bochy right there with Dusty. Both are ridiculous.

BRM
09-15-2008, 03:23 PM
It looks to me like Dusty's "limit" is 120 pitches, not 100 or 110. I think that's why we see him send pitchers back out for another inning when they are in that 110 range.