PDA

View Full Version : Maybe pitch counts are important.



The Operator
05-23-2010, 03:02 PM
Homer Bailey just left the game after showing bad body language involving his throwing elbow after a pitch. Didn't look good.

Maybe running him through the ringer for 121 pitches in St. Louis wasn't acceptable after all?

Griffey012
05-23-2010, 03:39 PM
Homer Bailey just left the game after showing bad body language involving his throwing elbow after a pitch. Didn't look good.

Maybe running him through the ringer for 121 pitches in St. Louis wasn't acceptable after all?

We don't know what the injury was. Maybe he was cramping...which is due to poor hydration, lack of potassium, etc. Maybe it's some sort of tightness...maybe it's tommy john time. Can't associate a previous start of 121 pitches as causation or him leaving the game. As someone pointed out in the game thread, he has averaged 106 pitchers per start this season. That is not bad at all, especially considering how Homer loves to run up his pitch count.

gilpdawg
05-24-2010, 05:15 AM
It's not the one start at 121 that hurts guys, it's the repeated starts at 121 that hurts guys, from what I've read in the past.

scott91575
05-24-2010, 10:25 AM
I highly doubt 1 start over 3 weeks ago is the reason for his arm problem yesterday.

KySteveH
05-24-2010, 06:44 PM
Homer Bailey just left the game after showing bad body language involving his throwing elbow after a pitch. Didn't look good.

Maybe running him through the ringer for 121 pitches in St. Louis wasn't acceptable after all?

Really? 121 pitches is being "rung through the ringer?" What is a ringer anyway? Whatever it is, throwing 121 pitches is doing your job, if you are a major league pitcher. If you can't throw 121 pitches, every 3rd or 4th start, you should be elsewhere.

sivman17
05-24-2010, 06:49 PM
121 pitches is nothing

GIDP
05-24-2010, 06:54 PM
121 is nothing so much that it only happens like 20 times year. Clearly its just nothing.

sivman17
05-24-2010, 07:08 PM
121 is nothing so much that it only happens like 20 times year. Clearly its just nothing.

46 times in 2009 a starter threw over 120 pitches
71 times in 2008
454 times in 2000

There are a lot more injuries today than in 2000 and in years before that when pitch counts over 120 were very common. Pitch counts are not the only thing to blame pitchers' injuries on.

GIDP
05-24-2010, 07:14 PM
Apparently Baseball Reference didnt work when I put it in.

BTW can you prove that there is a lot more injuries today than in 2000? Just wondering if there is anyway you can prove that one.

KySteveH
05-24-2010, 07:33 PM
According to Sivman's numbers, 10 years ago, it was much more common to have a starter go 120+ pitches. In fact, it was or the order of 10 times more frequent. If the argument for lower pitch counts is that we can avoid injuries to pitchers, then it would seem like we would see fewer injuries today than 10 years ago.

Can you prove that is happening?

sivman17
05-24-2010, 07:36 PM
Apparently Baseball Reference didnt work when I put it in.

BTW can you prove that there is a lot more injuries today than in 2000? Just wondering if there is anyway you can prove that one.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=kurkjian_tim&id=4359938

I guess I can't actually prove it, but I can take Tim Kurkjian's word for it, which I think is a pretty reliable source.

I just realized the 46 number might not be totally accurate from last year. 1.9% of starts up to the point of that article had been over 120 pitches. 1.9% for the whole season would be 46, but I don't know exactly how many games there were before this article was published.

Griffey012
05-24-2010, 10:25 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=kurkjian_tim&id=4359938

I guess I can't actually prove it, but I can take Tim Kurkjian's word for it, which I think is a pretty reliable source.

I just realized the 46 number might not be totally accurate from last year. 1.9% of starts up to the point of that article had been over 120 pitches. 1.9% for the whole season would be 46, but I don't know exactly how many games there were before this article was published.

Well if you take the 1.9% over the course of the season you have 30 teams X 162 starts per team X .019 = 92 starts. So it would be fair to make that an estimate.

I agree the lower pitch counts are not lowering injuries. Their are more injuries now than ever because the pitching focus went to power, strikeouts, and breaking balls for most of the steroid era. Now you are seeing a trend back to control and natural sinking movement, basically pitchers like Leake, Maddux, etc. It is much easier for these kinds of pitchers to go 120+ pitchers. I think we see pitch counts back on the increase in the near future.

sivman17
05-24-2010, 11:05 PM
Well if you take the 1.9% over the course of the season you have 30 teams X 162 starts per team X .019 = 92 starts. So it would be fair to make that an estimate.

Oh yeah good call. I was using 2,430, which is the total number of games every year. You are correct. 92 is a much better estimate than 46.

sivman17
05-25-2010, 12:36 AM
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100524/SPT04/305240035/1071/Reds-put-Homer-Bailey-on-DL


Jocketty stressed that the injury was not a result of overuse.

“One thing that Kremchek also made a point of is that this is not from overwork or overuse,” Jocketty said. “He probably tried to put too much effort on a pitch or two that caused it and he tried to pitch with it. What happened is it got worse.”
“He hasn’t thrown that many pitches.”

The Operator
05-25-2010, 05:04 AM
I don't think you'll see the GM come out and say "Yea, we abused him. Our bad on that. Sorry, Homer."

Not to mention Kremcheck is well known for being overly optimistic. Remember all those rosy outlooks on when we'd be getting Junior back in the lineup back in the early part of the decade? None of those turned out very well.

My main premise is that, as much money is wrapped up in these guys, there's no reason to RISK injuring them with high pitch counts, whether or not they might be able to handle it.

Yes, guys were able to go a lot longer in games back in the day but there also less teams, so the talent pool wasn't nearly as watered down as today. Not to mention that for every Bob Gibson and Nolan Ryan I'm sure there were many pitchers who fell by the wayside since they couldn't handle those insane workloads. Wayne Simpson comes to mind.

Any time a pitcher leaves a game due to anything arm or shoulder related, it's bad. I don't care if they downplay it or not. With as used up as the bullpen's been lately, them pulling Bailey tells me something.

Now he's on the DL. Supposedly not serious but neither was Volquez's last year... until he had Tommy John Surgery.

Also, I've seen a good number of people both on here and the ORG say Homer should handle a higher workload because he's a big Texan workhorse. Really? Because yes he is tall, but he looks pretty skinny to me. His sleeves look huge around his arms. Not to mention he's 23.

Griffey012
05-25-2010, 08:19 AM
I don't think you'll see the GM come out and say "Yea, we abused him. Our bad on that. Sorry, Homer."

Not to mention Kremcheck is well known for being overly optimistic. Remember all those rosy outlooks on when we'd be getting Junior back in the lineup back in the early part of the decade? None of those turned out very well.

My main premise is that, as much money is wrapped up in these guys, there's no reason to RISK injuring them with high pitch counts, whether or not they might be able to handle it.

Yes, guys were able to go a lot longer in games back in the day but there also less teams, so the talent pool wasn't nearly as watered down as today. Not to mention that for every Bob Gibson and Nolan Ryan I'm sure there were many pitchers who fell by the wayside since they couldn't handle those insane workloads. Wayne Simpson comes to mind.

Any time a pitcher leaves a game due to anything arm or shoulder related, it's bad. I don't care if they downplay it or not. With as used up as the bullpen's been lately, them pulling Bailey tells me something.

Now he's on the DL. Supposedly not serious but neither was Volquez's last year... until he had Tommy John Surgery.

Also, I've seen a good number of people both on here and the ORG say Homer should handle a higher workload because he's a big Texan workhorse. Really? Because yes he is tall, but he looks pretty skinny to me. His sleeves look huge around his arms. Not to mention he's 23.

Problem is, something has to give with Homer. He continuously runs up ridiculously high pitch counts by the 5th inning. He can't be pulled after 4 innings every time he gets in the 90-100 pitch range. Because then we are facing the same problem by overusing our relievers. Homer's pitch counts will decrease, when Homer learns to throw more strikes like he has shown he is capable of. And as of right now, I believe he is averaging 106 pitches per start, thats nothing horrible.