Bruce's take on Dusty era: It’s been a hoot

[OBPMatters]

Who cares about pitchers, Dierker uses and believes in stats.

[snoodmonger]

Who cares about pitchers, Dierker uses and believes in stats.

 

That won't get us very far either if we're running the Les Walronds of the world out there because all our good pitchers are DL'd from over use.

 

That's enough to scare me awayt from Dierker.

[C.C.]

There is a diifference between leaving your starter in too long in a heat of a pennat race and leaving your starter in too long when your team is 25 games under 500.

 

Well isn't that what Dusty did in 2003? Dierker was never 25 games under, so we'll never know if that's true.

 

Me personally,as much as I despise Dusty, I don't hold the pitch counts against him in 2003. 99% of managers would leverage that talent .

 

The Twins are doing it now, so are the Tigers.

 

I agree and be prepared for posters who don't....

[CaliforniaRaisin]

There is a diifference between leaving your starter in too long in a heat of a pennat race and leaving your starter in too long when your team is 25 games under 500.

 

Well isn't that what Dusty did in 2003? Dierker was never 25 games under, so we'll never know if that's true.

 

Me personally,as much as I despise Dusty, I don't hold the pitch counts against him in 2003. 99% of managers would leverage that talent .

 

The Twins are doing it now, so are the Tigers.

 

The Twins seemed to have been pretty careful with Liriano, the Tigers with Verlander this season.

 

And I disagree in regards to the pennant race. When you leave a pitcher in too long, you have to take account not only the end results this season (pennant race) AND his career.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

As to not derail this thread any longer, here is a thread on my reasons for liking Dierker.

[C.C.]

Dierker's beliefs are well-thought out. I'd reccomend reading This Ain't Brain Surgery if you'd really like to get a grasp on his philosophies.

 

I think he'd be an ideal person as he can combine his experience as a player with a proper use of stats.

 

Furthermore, based on what I've read from Dierker, I can almost guarantee he'd have had someone getting up in the pen at the start of the 7th inning in game six against the Fish.

 

I guess we'll never know because Dierker has never made it out of the first round of the playoffs. I'm just saying....

 

In fact he's only won 2 games in 4 trips to the playoffs.

[Soriano12]

There is a diifference between leaving your starter in too long in a heat of a pennat race and leaving your starter in too long when your team is 25 games under 500.

 

Well isn't that what Dusty did in 2003? Dierker was never 25 games under, so we'll never know if that's true.

 

Me personally,as much as I despise Dusty, I don't hold the pitch counts against him in 2003. 99% of managers would leverage that talent .

 

The Twins are doing it now, so are the Tigers.

 

The Twins seemed to have been pretty careful with Liriano, the Tigers with Verlander this season.

 

And I disagree in regards to the pennant race. When you leave a pitcher in too long, you have to take account not only the end results this season (pennant race) AND his career.

 

They took Lirano from a bullpen role early in the year and threw him into a starting role allowing him to go 7-8 innings every start.

 

He pitched a total of 76 innings in June and July..thats on pace for a 230 IP season.

 

Again..I'm not trying to condem them...but I would hardly say they were careful with him when the team got on a roll during those months.

[stitchface]

Sounds like Dusty all over again.

 

not really. dierker at least has some thought behind his decisions.

 

So did Dusty doesn't mean either of them is right...

 

I don't think Dusty does. I think he manages by emotion and intuition. Dierker has a thought out philosophy on how to manage games and applies that philosophy. There's a big difference.

[Soriano12]

Sounds like Dusty all over again.

 

not really. dierker at least has some thought behind his decisions.

 

So did Dusty doesn't mean either of them is right...

 

I don't think Dusty does. I think he manages by emotion and intuition. .

 

I don't even think he uses that.

 

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3867/801/400/dusty_dice.jpg

 

That pic never gets old.. Never.

[goonys evil twin]

 

They took Lirano from a bullpen role early in the year and threw him into a starting role allowing him to go 7-8 innings every start.

 

He pitched a total of 76 innings in June and July..thats on pace for a 230 IP season.

 

Again..I'm not trying to condem them...but I would hardly say they were careful with him when the team got on a roll during those months.

 

Innings aren't the same as total pitches. If you have a guy throw 9 every game but he does it in 90 pitches, that's a lot less stressful than a guy who goes 5 every game but throws 120+. Liriano only had 5 outings with 100+ pitches, none over 110. I think the biggest mistake may have been having him start less than a week after he missed a start with elbow problems. He had as many sub 7 inning outings as he had 8 inning outings.

[TheDude]

Who cares about pitchers, Dierker uses and believes in stats.

 

That won't get us very far either if we're running the Les Walronds of the world out there because all our good pitchers are DL'd from over use.

 

What? How do you know that every pitcher that has seen the DL in the Dusty era has a root cause of "overuse"? That's just wild and inaccurate speculation. I recognize you can show pitcher overuse through study, but you have to back it up by showing a direct correlation to overuse and injury.

 

Folks can make a claim that something has to be amiss in the organizational pitching approach (because of the high rate of injuries) and I would agree, but there are numerous other factors too consider. Overuse might account for a small fraction of injuries in the grand sceme of the Dusty era, but I'd argue issues with strength and conditioning and mechanics are more likely and more of concern.

 

Additionally, the organization aggressively seeks high stuff pitchers with power, little control, and raw talent (which often means poor mechanics). Pitchers like this are bound to break-down and when you stock your system with them, what you see is what you get.

[QCMan5]

The time is about right for a management change, I think that Carlos Zambrano and Aramis Ramirez are the only active players from 2003. (Prior and Wood have been hurt, so I'm not counting them as active.)

They've been plugging in a lot of young players into the pitching staff and lineup. They should bring in a guy who knows how to work with young players and can manage the pitching staff. I'm pretty sure that just about everyone here is holding out for Girardi.

[Banedon]

The time is about right for a management change, I think that Carlos Zambrano and Aramis Ramirez are the only active players from 2003. (Prior and Wood have been hurt, so I'm not counting them as active.)

They've been plugging in a lot of young players into the pitching staff and lineup. They should bring in a guy who knows how to work with young players and can manage the pitching staff. I'm pretty sure that just about everyone here is holding out for Girardi.

 

Welcome! :D

 

Actually that's not true about Girardi though. There's a lot of mixed opinions on who the next manager should be, and I would say that while Girardi would be a positive change from Dusty, there are a lot of skeptics about him as well.

[C.C.]

 

They took Lirano from a bullpen role early in the year and threw him into a starting role allowing him to go 7-8 innings every start.

 

He pitched a total of 76 innings in June and July..thats on pace for a 230 IP season.

 

Again..I'm not trying to condem them...but I would hardly say they were careful with him when the team got on a roll during those months.

 

Innings aren't the same as total pitches. If you have a guy throw 9 every game but he does it in 90 pitches, that's a lot less stressful than a guy who goes 5 every game but throws 120+. Liriano only had 5 outings with 100+ pitches, none over 110. I think the biggest mistake may have been having him start less than a week after he missed a start with elbow problems. He had as many sub 7 inning outings as he had 8 inning outings.

 

I agree about pitch counts, but innings pitched is still stressful. Perhaps not as stressful, but who knows? Look no further then the South Side and their staff. Last year they had low pitch counts, but threw a ton of innings. Which may answer why their staff (with those same pitchers) aren't nearly as effective this year.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

The time is about right for a management change, I think that Carlos Zambrano and Aramis Ramirez are the only active players from 2003. (Prior and Wood have been hurt, so I'm not counting them as active.)

They've been plugging in a lot of young players into the pitching staff and lineup. They should bring in a guy who knows how to work with young players and can manage the pitching staff. I'm pretty sure that just about everyone here is holding out for Girardi.

 

Welcome! :D

 

Actually that's not true about Girardi though. There's a lot of mixed opinions on who the next manager should be, and I would say that while Girardi would be a positive change from Dusty, there are a lot of skeptics about him as well.

 

:raises hand:

[snoodmonger]

Who cares about pitchers, Dierker uses and believes in stats.

 

That won't get us very far either if we're running the Les Walronds of the world out there because all our good pitchers are DL'd from over use.

 

What? How do you know that every pitcher that has seen the DL in the Dusty era has a root cause of "overuse"? That's just wild and inaccurate speculation. I recognize you can show pitcher overuse through study, but you have to back it up by showing a direct correlation to overuse and injury.

 

Folks can make a claim that something has to be amiss in the organizational pitching approach (because of the high rate of injuries) and I would agree, but there are numerous other factors too consider. Overuse might account for a small fraction of injuries in the grand sceme of the Dusty era, but I'd argue issues with strength and conditioning and mechanics are more likely and more of concern.

 

Additionally, the organization aggressively seeks high stuff pitchers with power, little control, and raw talent (which often means poor mechanics). Pitchers like this are bound to break-down and when you stock your system with them, what you see is what you get.

 

Overreact much? My point was about Dierker. He's a guy who ignores pitch counts and pitcher abuse, and all I was saying was that, while his offensive philosophy is nice, a good offense won't get us far if our premiere pitchers are ridden to injury (or ineffectiveness--see Zambrano in 2003 postseason).

 

As for Dusty...no, we can't prove that every injury was related to overuse. In fact, clearly some weren't. But it's certainly safe to say it was a factor in our two prize pitchers--Prior and Wood. And yes, Wood's mechanics were a problem from the beginning. All the more reason to be judicious in your use of him. Why pile on a huge workload to a guy who's mechanics render him injury-prone?

 

That goes for all of our arms w/bad meachanics. You say bad mechanics are a bigger factor than overuse. I say the two go hand-in-hand. If a pitcher's mechanics are bad, then one must take care to not overpitch him. And once he learns better mechanics, one must make sure he's not left out so long that he reverts from fatigue.

 

With Prior, it's harder to say what caused his problems, but he did see an increase of 100 ML IP from 2002 to 2003. This is a power pitcher, a K pitcher, so he probably had high pitch counts. That's a dramatic increase. I don't dispute there are other factors with both men, but pitch count and innings played a role.

 

That's why I was among the many happy about Marshall getting that oblique injury--it shut him down for a while. This is another young arm who's seeing a dramatic increase in workload--during a lost season. At best it has no effect on him. At worst....

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Who cares about pitchers, Dierker uses and believes in stats.

 

That won't get us very far either if we're running the Les Walronds of the world out there because all our good pitchers are DL'd from over use.

 

What? How do you know that every pitcher that has seen the DL in the Dusty era has a root cause of "overuse"? That's just wild and inaccurate speculation. I recognize you can show pitcher overuse through study, but you have to back it up by showing a direct correlation to overuse and injury.

 

Folks can make a claim that something has to be amiss in the organizational pitching approach (because of the high rate of injuries) and I would agree, but there are numerous other factors too consider. Overuse might account for a small fraction of injuries in the grand sceme of the Dusty era, but I'd argue issues with strength and conditioning and mechanics are more likely and more of concern.

 

Additionally, the organization aggressively seeks high stuff pitchers with power, little control, and raw talent (which often means poor mechanics). Pitchers like this are bound to break-down and when you stock your system with them, what you see is what you get.

 

 

Overreact much? My point was about Dierker. He's a guy who ignores pitch counts and pitcher abuse, and all I was saying was that, while his offensive philosophy is nice, a good offense won't get us far if our premiere pitchers are ridden to injury (or ineffectiveness--see Zambrano in 2003 postseason).

 

As for Dusty...no, we can't prove that every injury was related to overuse. In fact, clearly some weren't. But it's certainly safe to say it was a factor in our two prize pitchers--Prior and Wood. And yes, Wood's mechanics were a problem from the beginning. All the more reason to be judicious in your use of him. Why pile on a huge workload to a guy who's mechanics render him injury-prone?

 

That goes for all of our arms w/bad meachanics. You say bad mechanics are a bigger factor than overuse. I say the two go hand-in-hand. If a pitcher's mechanics are bad, then one must take care to not overpitch him. And once he learns better mechanics, one must make sure he's not left out so long that he reverts from fatigue.

 

With Prior, it's harder to say what caused his problems, but he did see an increase of 100 ML IP from 2002 to 2003. This is a power pitcher, a K pitcher, so he probably had high pitch counts. That's a dramatic increase. I don't dispute there are other factors with both men, but pitch count and innings played a role.

 

That's why I was among the many happy about Marshall getting that oblique injury--it shut him down for a while. This is another young arm who's seeing a dramatic increase in workload--during a lost season. At best it has no effect on him. At worst....

 

 

I'd say it is a mischaracterization to say Dierker ignores pitch counts. He's mindful of them. He has a differing philosophy in regards to the distance a pitcher should be physically able to perform. His writings seem to indicate that if a pitcher is struggling, and this isn't just in the runs scored, he's not going to leave them out there. But he thinks that a pitcher should be conditioned to throw nine innings. I'd reccomend reading his book as it is explained better there than I can do here.

[goonys evil twin]

That's why I was among the many happy about Marshall getting that oblique injury--it shut him down for a while.

 

Did anybody else hear Brenly the other night refer to Marshall's situation as a problem with his elbow? I swear that's what he said.

[C.C.]

Who cares about pitchers, Dierker uses and believes in stats.

 

That won't get us very far either if we're running the Les Walronds of the world out there because all our good pitchers are DL'd from over use.

 

What? How do you know that every pitcher that has seen the DL in the Dusty era has a root cause of "overuse"? That's just wild and inaccurate speculation. I recognize you can show pitcher overuse through study, but you have to back it up by showing a direct correlation to overuse and injury.

 

Folks can make a claim that something has to be amiss in the organizational pitching approach (because of the high rate of injuries) and I would agree, but there are numerous other factors too consider. Overuse might account for a small fraction of injuries in the grand sceme of the Dusty era, but I'd argue issues with strength and conditioning and mechanics are more likely and more of concern.

 

Additionally, the organization aggressively seeks high stuff pitchers with power, little control, and raw talent (which often means poor mechanics). Pitchers like this are bound to break-down and when you stock your system with them, what you see is what you get.

 

 

Overreact much? My point was about Dierker. He's a guy who ignores pitch counts and pitcher abuse, and all I was saying was that, while his offensive philosophy is nice, a good offense won't get us far if our premiere pitchers are ridden to injury (or ineffectiveness--see Zambrano in 2003 postseason).

 

As for Dusty...no, we can't prove that every injury was related to overuse. In fact, clearly some weren't. But it's certainly safe to say it was a factor in our two prize pitchers--Prior and Wood. And yes, Wood's mechanics were a problem from the beginning. All the more reason to be judicious in your use of him. Why pile on a huge workload to a guy who's mechanics render him injury-prone?

 

That goes for all of our arms w/bad meachanics. You say bad mechanics are a bigger factor than overuse. I say the two go hand-in-hand. If a pitcher's mechanics are bad, then one must take care to not overpitch him. And once he learns better mechanics, one must make sure he's not left out so long that he reverts from fatigue.

 

With Prior, it's harder to say what caused his problems, but he did see an increase of 100 ML IP from 2002 to 2003. This is a power pitcher, a K pitcher, so he probably had high pitch counts. That's a dramatic increase. I don't dispute there are other factors with both men, but pitch count and innings played a role.

 

That's why I was among the many happy about Marshall getting that oblique injury--it shut him down for a while. This is another young arm who's seeing a dramatic increase in workload--during a lost season. At best it has no effect on him. At worst....

 

 

I'd say it is a mischaracterization to say Dierker ignores pitch counts. He's mindful of them. He has a differing philosophy in regards to the distance a pitcher should be physically able to perform. His writings seem to indicate that if a pitcher is struggling, and this isn't just in the runs scored, he's not going to leave them out there. But he thinks that a pitcher should be conditioned to throw nine innings. I'd reccomend reading his book as it is explained better there than I can do here.

 

But isn't that the kind of thinking that gets pitchers hurt these days? The days of conditioning a pitcher to go 9 innings are over in this day and age. To condition a pitcher to go 9 innings, you need to start in the minor leagues.

 

BTW - I will pick up his book...

[Bruce Miles]

Thanks for the thread. Dierker is an intriguing guy. He'd certainly be good for the writers. He has worked as a broadcaster and as a manager, he was more than accommodating to the writers. I guess I'd have to look into his pitch-use patterns closely.

 

I'm a big fan of Jim Riggleman. He was prepared day in and day out and gave reasoned answers to every question, whether you agreed with him or not. I still talk to him on occasion. He had a losing record in San Diego and a losing record in Chicago, so that makes him a tough sell in other cities.

[swordsman]

Hey Bruce, can you shed any light on the "Hate Mail" story. Some are suggesting that this is a tactic by Dusty to make excuses for the season. My reading of it is he is just answering reports questions. How did this story get started and what are your thoughts about Dusty's intentions regarding it if any?

 

BTW - sorry for hijacking this thread. I figured my little question didn't warrent a whole thread on it's own.

Edited August 29, 2006 by swordsman

[fiver]

reasoned answers

 

 

ah yes...I long for those as well. Dusty doesn't do himself any favors by not caring what crap spews from his mouth when responding to reporters and/or fans' questions. It seems that he doesn't feel that he owes the media a thoughtful response. I certainly hope that is the case, anyway. I'd hate to think that he is incapable of formualting such a response.

[Bruce Miles]

Hey Bruce, can you shed any light on the "Hate Mail" story. Some are suggesting that this is a tactic by Dusty to make excuses for the season. My reading of it is he is just answering reports questions. How did this story get started and what are your thoughts about Dusty's intentions regarding it if any?

 

BTW - sorry for hijacking this thread. I figured my little question didn't warrent a whole thread on it's own.

 

That's a tough subject. From my understanding, he was responding to reporters' questions. Dusty has received hate mail _ one hate letter is too many. I honestly don't know his motivation for keeping the subject going. The one thing I'm glad he said was that he received hate mail in San Francisco. There are certain media members there who have painted Chicago as some racist backwater. From what I know, most of the people who have criticized Dusty have done so based on his job performance. But you're always going to have racist crackpots.

[snoodmonger]

Who cares about pitchers, Dierker uses and believes in stats.

 

That won't get us very far either if we're running the Les Walronds of the world out there because all our good pitchers are DL'd from over use.

 

What? How do you know that every pitcher that has seen the DL in the Dusty era has a root cause of "overuse"? That's just wild and inaccurate speculation. I recognize you can show pitcher overuse through study, but you have to back it up by showing a direct correlation to overuse and injury.

 

Folks can make a claim that something has to be amiss in the organizational pitching approach (because of the high rate of injuries) and I would agree, but there are numerous other factors too consider. Overuse might account for a small fraction of injuries in the grand sceme of the Dusty era, but I'd argue issues with strength and conditioning and mechanics are more likely and more of concern.

 

Additionally, the organization aggressively seeks high stuff pitchers with power, little control, and raw talent (which often means poor mechanics). Pitchers like this are bound to break-down and when you stock your system with them, what you see is what you get.

 

 

Overreact much? My point was about Dierker. He's a guy who ignores pitch counts and pitcher abuse, and all I was saying was that, while his offensive philosophy is nice, a good offense won't get us far if our premiere pitchers are ridden to injury (or ineffectiveness--see Zambrano in 2003 postseason).

 

As for Dusty...no, we can't prove that every injury was related to overuse. In fact, clearly some weren't. But it's certainly safe to say it was a factor in our two prize pitchers--Prior and Wood. And yes, Wood's mechanics were a problem from the beginning. All the more reason to be judicious in your use of him. Why pile on a huge workload to a guy who's mechanics render him injury-prone?

 

That goes for all of our arms w/bad meachanics. You say bad mechanics are a bigger factor than overuse. I say the two go hand-in-hand. If a pitcher's mechanics are bad, then one must take care to not overpitch him. And once he learns better mechanics, one must make sure he's not left out so long that he reverts from fatigue.

 

With Prior, it's harder to say what caused his problems, but he did see an increase of 100 ML IP from 2002 to 2003. This is a power pitcher, a K pitcher, so he probably had high pitch counts. That's a dramatic increase. I don't dispute there are other factors with both men, but pitch count and innings played a role.

 

That's why I was among the many happy about Marshall getting that oblique injury--it shut him down for a while. This is another young arm who's seeing a dramatic increase in workload--during a lost season. At best it has no effect on him. At worst....

 

 

I'd say it is a mischaracterization to say Dierker ignores pitch counts. He's mindful of them. He has a differing philosophy in regards to the distance a pitcher should be physically able to perform. His writings seem to indicate that if a pitcher is struggling, and this isn't just in the runs scored, he's not going to leave them out there. But he thinks that a pitcher should be conditioned to throw nine innings. I'd reccomend reading his book as it is explained better there than I can do here.

 

Yeah, t be honest, I'm going only off what I remmeber and what little I've read, so it's possible he's not as abad as thought.

 

And TheDude does raise a good point--it's foolish to be a pitch count nazi, as there are certainly many other factors. I'd just rather err on the side of caution.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Thanks for the thread. Dierker is an intriguing guy. He'd certainly be good for the writers. He has worked as a broadcaster and as a manager, he was more than accommodating to the writers. I guess I'd have to look into his pitch-use patterns closely.

 

I'm a big fan of Jim Riggleman. He was prepared day in and day out and gave reasoned answers to every question, whether you agreed with him or not. I still talk to him on occasion. He had a losing record in San Diego and a losing record in Chicago, so that makes him a tough sell in other cities.

 

Please look into Dierker. His book was great and his blog on the Houston Chronicle site is a good read as well.