White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
Congratulations on the Rookie records for HR and RBI in April, Jose!

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 08-19-2013, 01:14 PM
kobo kobo is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mount prospect
Posts: 4,377
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragg View Post
Robin knows what 29 other managers don't, I guess. We're just lucky.
Right, no other manager allows their starters to throw more than 100 pitches a game.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-19-2013, 01:16 PM
Noneck Noneck is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Nw Side
Posts: 7,115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
Should also point out that Yu Darvish and Gio Gonzalez each threw 120 pitches yesterday, Homer Bailey threw 119, and Chris Archer threw 106.

Also Warren Spahn averaged over 250 innings a year in a 21 year HOF career. Im sure he averaged 150+ pitches a game. If a pitcher has the right makeup, innings pitched and pitch count means next to nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-19-2013, 02:32 PM
SI1020 SI1020 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Deep in the heart of Dixie
Posts: 4,359
Default

I'm really tired of the whole pitch count thing. I don't blame Dusty Baker one bit for the demise of Mark Prior. MLB starting pitchers should be counted on to go 100-120 pitches a start. They get 4 days rest. I remember 4 man rotations. I don't know why today's pitchers are so fragile. Maybe part of the problem is that they are pampered.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-19-2013, 02:35 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SI1020 View Post
I'm really tired of the whole pitch count thing. I don't blame Dusty Baker one bit for the demise of Mark Prior. MLB starting pitchers should be counted on to go 100-120 pitches a start. They get 4 days rest. I remember 4 man rotations. I don't know why today's pitchers are so fragile. Maybe part of the problem is that they are pampered.
Well, I'm no fan of the pitch count obsession either, as I think TDog has argued time and time again that it's likely not only the accumulation of pitches that affects a pitcher, but also how high pressure his pitching situations are, as well. But I also don't think today's pitchers are any more or less fragile than ever before.
__________________
Attendance records:
09 : 3-2.
10 : 2-3.
11: 0-1.
12: 2-1.
14: 1-2.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-19-2013, 03:18 PM
Tragg Tragg is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gonzales LA
Posts: 12,878
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
Well we do have arguably the best pitching coach and training staff in baseball so, yeah, maybe?

Should also point out that Yu Darvish and Gio Gonzalez each threw 120 pitches yesterday, Homer Bailey threw 119, and Chris Archer threw 106.
3 of the 4 are in pennant races. Sox #2 in majors in this category.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-19-2013, 03:24 PM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 53,910
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SI1020 View Post
I don't know why today's pitchers are so fragile. Maybe part of the problem is that they are pampered.
I have no doubt that it is because hitters today have so much more power, back in the 60's and 70's, power hitters were in the extreme minority and the rest of the league was slap hitters who just tried to put the ball in play AKA you didn't have to give it your best for most of the lineup. Today, you leave a meatball over the heart of the plate to the shortstop batting 9th and he's liable to take you deep.

Guys back then weren't any tougher, players were just ****tier.
__________________
2014 Obligatory Attendance & Record Tracker

0-5

LAST GAME: August 4 - Twins 16, Sox 3
NEXT GAME: I don't know, but I'll be sure to warn you when I know
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-19-2013, 03:31 PM
SI1020 SI1020 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Deep in the heart of Dixie
Posts: 4,359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
Well, I'm no fan of the pitch count obsession either, as I think TDog has argued time and time again that it's likely not only the accumulation of pitches that affects a pitcher, but also how high pressure his pitching situations are, as well. But I also don't think today's pitchers are any more or less fragile than ever before.
It's possible, maybe even likely that both of you are better baseball analysts than I am. I still must disagree strongly with points. Maybe "fragile" isn't the best choice of words but how long has it been since someone threw 300+ innings or pitched 20+ complete games? OK, I'll change the word to durable. I mean just analyze the stats over the years. What better evidence do you need? As for pressure situations, I don't know what to think of that. I try to read TDog's posts but don't remember the one about "pressure situations." If I'm dense so be it but I don't think pitchers today are necessarily in more or less pressure situations than in the days of Rube Waddell or Walter Johnson. Maybe more so in the early part of the 20th Century when scoring runs were at such a premium. I think training methods have changed. I can't remember the last time I saw a pitcher with his wind breaker on doing pre game wind sprints. Or long toss. Also look at minor league box scores. Most starting pitchers are only asked to go 5-7 innings. It's just another part of baseball that has changed in my lifetime.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-19-2013, 04:09 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SI1020 View Post
It's possible, maybe even likely that both of you are better baseball analysts than I am. I still must disagree strongly with points. Maybe "fragile" isn't the best choice of words but how long has it been since someone threw 300+ innings or pitched 20+ complete games? OK, I'll change the word to durable. I mean just analyze the stats over the years. What better evidence do you need? As for pressure situations, I don't know what to think of that. I try to read TDog's posts but don't remember the one about "pressure situations." If I'm dense so be it but I don't think pitchers today are necessarily in more or less pressure situations than in the days of Rube Waddell or Walter Johnson. Maybe more so in the early part of the 20th Century when scoring runs were at such a premium. I think training methods have changed. I can't remember the last time I saw a pitcher with his wind breaker on doing pre game wind sprints. Or long toss. Also look at minor league box scores. Most starting pitchers are only asked to go 5-7 innings. It's just another part of baseball that has changed in my lifetime.
Pitchers may not be called on to go over 300 innings anymore, but the trade off is that today's pitchers mostly have longer careers than they did in the past (at least for those that are good enough to stick around).

When it comes to how the Sox are handling this, two of the few people I trust in this organization are Cooper and Schneider.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-19-2013, 04:27 PM
hawkjt hawkjt is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,180
Default

Garcia is a must see player for me now.
Makes watching the Sox much more fun.

I like watching Phegley, Garcia, Gordo, and the young starters.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-19-2013, 06:19 PM
WhiteSox5187 WhiteSox5187 is online now
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southside
Posts: 14,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
I have no doubt that it is because hitters today have so much more power, back in the 60's and 70's, power hitters were in the extreme minority and the rest of the league was slap hitters who just tried to put the ball in play AKA you didn't have to give it your best for most of the lineup. Today, you leave a meatball over the heart of the plate to the shortstop batting 9th and he's liable to take you deep.

Guys back then weren't any tougher, players were just ****tier.
I disagree, strikeouts are tolerated more so now than they were back in the 1960s and '70s. Guys would cut down on their swing with two strikes rather than take a full cut swinging from their heels. The 1977 White Sox didn't have one guy who struck out more than 100 times, Dave Kingman was striking out 156 times in a year and that was abnormally high. Now it is almost expected from power hitters.
__________________

Go Sox!!!
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-19-2013, 06:53 PM
Tragg Tragg is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gonzales LA
Posts: 12,878
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkjt View Post
Garcia is a must see player for me now.
Makes watching the Sox much more fun.
That's for sure.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-20-2013, 04:24 PM
SI1020 SI1020 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Deep in the heart of Dixie
Posts: 4,359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187 View Post
I disagree, strikeouts are tolerated more so now than they were back in the 1960s and '70s. Guys would cut down on their swing with two strikes rather than take a full cut swinging from their heels. The 1977 White Sox didn't have one guy who struck out more than 100 times, Dave Kingman was striking out 156 times in a year and that was abnormally high. Now it is almost expected from power hitters.
Thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-20-2013, 04:41 PM
TheVulture TheVulture is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
Pitchers may not be called on to go over 300 innings anymore, but the trade off is that today's pitchers mostly have longer careers than they did in the past (at least for those that are good enough to stick around).
I don't think that's actually true. I did a comparison of all members of starting rotations from 1966 and 1996, and the starters from 1966 not only pitched more innings over their careers, on average their careers lasted considerably longer. I don't have the numbers anymore, but I believe the number of starting pitchers from '66 who lasted 10+ years in the majors was over 80%, significantly higher than those from '96.
__________________
A bad idea is better than no idea at all- Hawk
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-20-2013, 07:51 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 16,139
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVulture View Post
I don't think that's actually true. I did a comparison of all members of starting rotations from 1966 and 1996, and the starters from 1966 not only pitched more innings over their careers, on average their careers lasted considerably longer. I don't have the numbers anymore, but I believe the number of starting pitchers from '66 who lasted 10+ years in the majors was over 80%, significantly higher than those from '96.
I've often wondered if that was the case. Money might have something to do with it. Players are paid more than they were in the past. The pension is better than it used to be. Players don't need to play as long as they might have 50 years ago. But the sort of mileage I used to see on some veteran arms is unreal compared to what you see today. It isn't like pitchers over their careers are throwing as many pitches or even innings as they ever did, but spreading them over more seasons.

You look at Mickey Lolich, not a Hall of Famer, but an elite pitcher in his prime. He had four straight 300-plus-inning seasons, but he had to retire at 38. I used to read about how people in baseball thought so highly of Sergio Santos, not just because of his great stuff, but because there was so little mileage on his arm, less than 50 innings in the minors after coming up as an infielder. In his two seasons with the Blue Jays, he has pitched less than 20 in the majors, although this year he has pitched a little more than 20 in the minors.

I have a few problems with pitch counts. Some pitches put more pressure on a pitcher's arm than others. There was a time when the split-finger fastball was the pitch to get hitters out, but many pitchers found it put more stress on their arms. Fastballs tend to be less stressful than breaking pitches. Pitches from the stretch are more stressful than pitches from the windup for most pitchers. Just looking at a pitch count doesn't tell you how much wear pitcher has put on his arm. Not to compare Sergio Santos to Mickey Lolich, but if you are using one pitch-count standard for everyone, that is pretty much what you are doing.

And, really, if you have to come out of the game at around 100 pitches, you are putting strain on the rest of the staff because games pitched is just as big a concern as innings pitched for most relief pitchers. You have your go-to guys in the bullpen, but they won't be as effective if you have to go to them every day. And if strikeouts are part of what you're using to gauge a pitcher's success, that pitcher is going to have to throw more pitches to get hitters out.

Getting back to the money, I think teams are afraid to overuse pitchers because they have so much invested in them. But the pitchers I see sustaining injury aren't the victims of overuse.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-20-2013, 08:35 PM
Noneck Noneck is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Nw Side
Posts: 7,115
Default

Putting a strain on relief pitchers has been mentioned as a result of low pitch counts by starters. It should be noted that the 1967 Sox had 5 reliefers with 85+ innings that year while the 2005 Sox had 1 at 70 innings. The facts are that all pitchers used to throw more pitches than they do now. This could have been because they were pampered less, threw different pitches, the height of mound prior to 68 and they pitched through injuries. Conditioning could also be a factor, the amount of pitches and innings pitched are now restricted at an early age. Back in the day there were no restrictions and its possible that arm strength was increased due to pitching more often. Mechanics could have also been adjusted due to the amount one pitched. The one thing that is for certain is that the human body has not gotten weaker over the past generation.

Last edited by Noneck; 08-20-2013 at 10:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:01 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.