We Should Worry about Zambrano

[TheDude]

TheDude, the job is for you to prove what has already been given an extraordinary amount of evidence for.

 

Um, no, sorry. The one with the theory is the one that needs to support the theory.

[TheDude]

But you can't come in to the conversation stating the case absolutely, because it is simply isn't true.

 

No one has done that but you.

 

There are always outlliers in any data set. However, the evidence is completely and overwhealmingly conclusive that high pitches per inning and innings pitched are related to future arm problems. And perhaps more damning, future inefecitveness.

 

Your insistnace that things be "proven" conclusive is both irrational and foolish. It's like the cigerrette companies stating that somking doesn't cause cancer.

 

So because I ask for more than arbitrary evidence, I am now stating a case absolutely? I'm done conversing with you.

[CubinNY]

TheDude, the job is for you to prove what has already been given an extraordinary amount of evidence for.

 

Um, no, sorry. The one with the theory is the one that needs to support the theory.

 

By defalt your theory is the null hypothesis. That has yet to be established either. But you haven't done your research so you really can't say anything.

 

Again, the evidence is overwhealming.

[CubinNY]

But you can't come in to the conversation stating the case absolutely, because it is simply isn't true.

 

No one has done that but you.

 

There are always outlliers in any data set. However, the evidence is completely and overwhealmingly conclusive that high pitches per inning and innings pitched are related to future arm problems. And perhaps more damning, future inefecitveness.

 

Your insistnace that things be "proven" conclusive is both irrational and foolish. It's like the cigerrette companies stating that somking doesn't cause cancer.

 

So because I ask for more than arbitrary evidence, I am now stating a case absolutely? I'm done conversing with you.

 

What is arbitrary?

[goonys evil twin]

There's more to overuse than blatant injury. Loss of effectiveness is often a problem. Pitching through pain or just means you'll rack up innings, it doesn't mean they'll be good innings. Lots of guys pitched big innings/pitches and kept on going but lost their effectiveness while still in their 20's.

[CubinNY]

There's more to overuse than blatant injury. Loss of effectiveness is often a problem. Pitching through pain or just means you'll rack up innings, it doesn't mean they'll be good innings. Lots of guys pitched big innings/pitches and kept on going but lost their effectiveness while still in their 20's.

 

I already showed him that in one of the examples I referenced.

 

The Dude wants something that can't be done, a 1 to 1 correlation.

 

At the same time he's provided not once shred of evidence that supports that high leverage pitching is not related to future trouble.

[Andy]

TheDude, the job is for you to prove what has already been given an extraordinary amount of evidence for.

 

Um, no, sorry. The one with the theory is the one that needs to support the theory.

Theories by definition are not proven, they are merely supported, and there is OVERWHELMING statistical and physical evidence that making young pitchers throw a lot of pitches will result in breaking down quickly. How the heck do you think Mark Fidrych's career was derailed so quickly? Or for that matter, the dozen or so other names that CubinNY among others has thrown at you to show you it probably isn't a good idea to abuse pitchers?

 

They've given you plenty of evidence, and you haven't given us anything other than citing that Bartolo Colon happened to pitch a lot without injury for 8 years.

[SoonerCubFan]

Personally, I don't have a dog in this fight, as I think there's some validity to both sides - moreso on the abise side, but there's also a history of freak pitchers that don't follow any pattern.

 

Couple of points:

 

1. Using Randy Johnson on the side of pro-abuse seems very sketchy. The guy was still dominating at age 40. Kinda like using Nolan Ryan by saying finally blew out his arm at age 46 after 100,000 pitches.

 

2. I agree that I'm more concerned about the back problems at this point on the physical side.

 

3. Lastly, I am totally for the sell high issue. Especially if we can land someone like Miguel Cabrera in the mix. I would ALWAYS trade a great starting pitcher for a great young position player.

[CubinNY]

Personally, I don't have a dog in this fight, as I think there's some validity to both sides - moreso on the abise side, but there's also a history of freak pitchers that don't follow any pattern.

 

Couple of points:

 

1. Using Randy Johnson on the side of pro-abuse seems very sketchy. The guy was still dominating at age 40. Kinda like using Nolan Ryan by saying finally blew out his arm at age 46 after 100,000 pitches.

 

2. I agree that I'm more concerned about the back problems at this point on the physical side.

 

3. Lastly, I am totally for the sell high issue. Especially if we can land someone like Miguel Cabrera in the mix. I would ALWAYS trade a great starting pitcher for a great young position player.

 

Over his career Rj has been much less effective after years in which he pitched a high number of innnings. However, RJ probably isn't a good example.

 

Let's look at Bartolo Colon.

 

Age    IP    ERA+
25      204  129
26      205  127    Cy Young
27      188  129

Total IP 597 AVE ERA+ 128

At age 28 (the prime of his career) he pitched 223 innnings his ERA+ dropped to 111 (4.09 ERA)

29      233  148   Cy Young
30      242  116
31      208   92
32      222  120   Cy Young

From 29 to 32 he averaged 226 IP/year. His AVE ERA+ was 119. But after his 242 IP year look at how his performance dropped in both IP and ERA+. Then after a 222 IP year he comes up with an arm injury.

33        56    86   Arm injury

 

Just for everyone's edifiction I am posting the link from a previous reference. The data are from a "study" Pedromartizfan did on a Yankees Website in 2004.

 

Here is a study I did on this stat a while ago.

 

2003 Pitcher Abuse Points Leaders

1. Javier Vazquez

2003: 230.7 IP, 154 ERA+

2004: 198.0 IP, 92 ERA+

 

2. Kerry Wood

2003: 211.0 IP, 133 ERA+

2004: 140.3 IP, 122 ERA+

 

3. Mark Prior

2003: 211.3 IP, 175 ERA+

2004: 118.7 IP, 118 ERA+

 

4. Mark Redman

2003: 190.7 IP, 112 ERA+

2004: 191.0 IP, 99 ERA+

 

5. Livan Hernandez

2003: 233.3 IP, 155 ERA+

2004: 255.5 IP, 115 ERA+

 

6. Woody Williams

2003: 220.7 IP, 107 ERA+

2004: 189.7 IP, 100 ERA+

 

7. Al Leiter

2003: 180.7 IP, 106 ERA+

2004: 173.7 IP, 133 ERA+

 

8. Russ Ortiz

2003: 212.3 IP, 109 ERA+

2004: 204.7 IP, 104 ERA+

 

9. Jason Schmidt

2003: 207.7 IP, 182 ERA+

2004: 225.0 IP, 139 ERA+

 

10. Carlos Zambrano

2003: 214.0 IP, 136 ERA+

2004: 209.7 IP, 165 ERA+

 

Zambrano pitched better, but that is about it. Everyone pitched alot less or a lot worse. Leiter may be the exception.

 

11. Joel Pineiro

2003: 211.7 IP, 117 ERA+

2004: 140.7 IP, 92 ERA+

 

 

There is a pretty strong corelation to those data.

 

I guess the question becomes, do we want to bet that Big Z is freak?

 

As for me, I wouldn't bet on it.

[SoonerCubFan]

Personally, I don't have a dog in this fight, as I think there's some validity to both sides - moreso on the abise side, but there's also a history of freak pitchers that don't follow any pattern.

 

Couple of points:

 

1. Using Randy Johnson on the side of pro-abuse seems very sketchy. The guy was still dominating at age 40. Kinda like using Nolan Ryan by saying finally blew out his arm at age 46 after 100,000 pitches.

 

2. I agree that I'm more concerned about the back problems at this point on the physical side.

 

3. Lastly, I am totally for the sell high issue. Especially if we can land someone like Miguel Cabrera in the mix. I would ALWAYS trade a great starting pitcher for a great young position player.

 

Over his career Rj has been much less effective after years in which he pitched a high number of innnings. However, RJ probably isn't a good example.

 

Let's look at Bartolo Colon.

 

Age    IP    ERA+
25      204  129
26      205  127    Cy Young
27      188  129

Total IP 597 AVE ERA+ 128

At age 28 (the prime of his career) he pitched 223 innnings his ERA+ dropped to 111 (4.09 ERA)

29      233  148   Cy Young
30      242  116
31      208   92
32      222  120   Cy Young

From 29 to 32 he averaged 226 IP/year. His AVE ERA+ was 119. But after his 242 IP year look at how his performance dropped in both IP and ERA+. Then after a 222 IP year he comes up with an arm injury.

33        56    86   Arm injury

 

Just for everyone's edifiction I am posting the link from a previous reference. The data are from a "study" Pedromartizfan did on a Yankees Website in 2004.

 

Here is a study I did on this stat a while ago.

 

2003 Pitcher Abuse Points Leaders

1. Javier Vazquez

2003: 230.7 IP, 154 ERA+

2004: 198.0 IP, 92 ERA+

 

2. Kerry Wood

2003: 211.0 IP, 133 ERA+

2004: 140.3 IP, 122 ERA+

 

3. Mark Prior

2003: 211.3 IP, 175 ERA+

2004: 118.7 IP, 118 ERA+

 

4. Mark Redman

2003: 190.7 IP, 112 ERA+

2004: 191.0 IP, 99 ERA+

 

5. Livan Hernandez

2003: 233.3 IP, 155 ERA+

2004: 255.5 IP, 115 ERA+

 

6. Woody Williams

2003: 220.7 IP, 107 ERA+

2004: 189.7 IP, 100 ERA+

 

7. Al Leiter

2003: 180.7 IP, 106 ERA+

2004: 173.7 IP, 133 ERA+

 

8. Russ Ortiz

2003: 212.3 IP, 109 ERA+

2004: 204.7 IP, 104 ERA+

 

9. Jason Schmidt

2003: 207.7 IP, 182 ERA+

2004: 225.0 IP, 139 ERA+

 

10. Carlos Zambrano

2003: 214.0 IP, 136 ERA+

2004: 209.7 IP, 165 ERA+

 

Zambrano pitched better, but that is about it. Everyone pitched alot less or a lot worse. Leiter may be the exception.

 

11. Joel Pineiro

2003: 211.7 IP, 117 ERA+

2004: 140.7 IP, 92 ERA+

 

 

There is a pretty strong corelation to those data.

 

I guess the question becomes, do we want to bet that Big Z is freak?

 

As for me, I wouldn't bet on it.

 

Good stuff. However, I've never understodd how any of the Oakland pitchers weren't/aren't at or near the top of this list. Must not fit someone's agenda, since they are the glory boy organization.

 

Zito averaged 230 IP in 2002-3 in his early 20s, and his ERA+ went from 169 to 129 to 105 and has since leveled off at a modest 116. Mulder went 225+ twice, went into decline and finally had his arm fall off this year. Hudson went 235+ three straight years, and has since fallen every year the last three to now become a below average starter.

 

As a postscript, I am very leery of shelling out the big $ for Zito, and would be very skeptical of Hudson helping much, even if he was a throw in with Andrew Jones.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

Well about the A's, back when Zito was good and Mulder and Hudson were healthy (and good) they were pretty friggin economical. The only one who gave any worry about pitch counts was Zito, the A's are pretty damn careful when it comes to taking care of their pitchers.

 

3. Lastly, I am totally for the sell high issue. Especially if we can land someone like Miguel Cabrera in the mix. I would ALWAYS trade a great starting pitcher for a great young position player.

 

I hate to say it but I already have in this thread...

 

It's true. Zambrano is the guy with the highest value on the team, is also a guy looking for a future pay day, is young and tradable, AND we have good reason to think his performance may fall off sooner or later.

 

Theres alot of evidence Z's performance will fall. Why not get what we can? Just the other day John Kruk said he was one of the top 3 pitchers in the NL, he's an idiot, but you get an idea of how highly the guy is viewed. Meanwhile, he's a high walk, high effort, young pitcher who has been overworked, has horrible mechanics, and I'll throw in that he gains weight pretty damn easily.

 

Why not trade him for a Cabrera? Or a package of Howie Kendrick and young guys from the Angels?

 

You could get alot for Z, and its not a bad time to sell high with him. It's harsh but we should be building for the next 5-10 years not just next year. He could be a part of those years, but he would net us a TON, and theres reason to believe that he will never be more highly valued.

[frostwyrm]

Z has said his back hurts when his weight is high. He started getting fat again late this season and admitted it because he had gotten lazy. His back also starting hurting again. He's 25 now. What concerns me a little is that guys have an increasingly tougher time keeping weight off once they pass 25. He better not get lazy again. I don't want a fat dude with a bad back.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I posted this in another Z thread...

 

 

This was posted on a cardinals msg board about a month ago when discussing the Mulder trade,I thought you guys might find this part interesting:

 

Yep, it's my opinion on Big Z as well. Back in the day, I used to post "Big Z Over/Under" threads on that other forum. Although I freely admit that there is definitely significant variability and some pitchers legitimately can "take it," my solid expectation is that Big Z will be a pretty different pitcher starting around the age of 26 or so.

 

In fact, although this season it is probably too early to draw any meaningful conclusions, we MIGHT already be seeing signs of it now. Overall, he looks like he is having a good year -- striking out more than a batter per inning, less than a hit per inning, ERA of about 3.30, etc -- right?

 

Well, check this out:

OPS-against from 2002 to now: 688, 653, 648, 629 -- and 735.

GB:FB rates from 2002 to now: 2.10, 2.28, 1.64, 1.62 -- and 1.35.

HR/9ip: .38, .60, .85-- and .95.

Fielding Independent Pitching: 3.63, 3.72, 3.88 -- and 4.40.

BB/9ip: 3.95, 3.48, 3.47 -- and now 5.56.

 

Is he suffering a loss of control and command? Are batters finding it easier to get the ball in the air against him? Do his peripherals suggest that he is less effective, and suggest that if he pitches exactly the way he is now, he'll get much worse results going forward? YES, to all of the above. I wouldn't say that he'll keep going this way -- YET -- because it is too early in the year to assume that this is a "trend" that can be used to make projections or predictions. But Steverino's Axiom of Young Pitcher Workloads would expect that by the end of the year, we'll be saying yes to all of the above.

 

Actually, this is one of the things about the Mulder trade that I never liked, from the first rumor to when the trade was announced. He was a pitcher with a lot of major league innings and pitches at a young age, and we acquired him right at the age where we typically start to see the toll of that. No doubt some pitchers do bounce back from the Workload Doldrums -- but most do not, and why take the risk???

 

 

 

Why do injuries go UP after age 24? Doesn't that disprove my theory? Actually, no. It fits.

 

Obviously there are many reasons, based on the individuals and the injuries. But the fact that injuries go up after age 24 is completely consistent with my theory. The overwork at a young age increases the risk of injuries and loss of effectiveness later. Note that all along I've said things like "Zambrano may well be a different pitcher starting around his age 26 season" and "the reason I didn't like the Mulder trade, among others, was that he was at the age where the toll often starts to catch up, and there were disturbing signs that he fit the profile."

 

Why 90 pitches? Why age 22 or 25 or what-have-you? Because I've seen data that helped me arrive at those numbers.

 

I'm not gonna suggest that it is EXACTLY these ages or PRECISELY those pitch counts for ALL YOUNG PLAYERS. There are exceptions. Maybe Zambrano ends up being someone who can "take it." Maybe Clemens is (although if my memory serves -- Clemens had leg problems til he was about 23, and didn't pitch more than 135 innings until 1986 -- turning 24 during that season -- meaning he really was not worked all that hard at ages 21-22-23).

 

But by the by, for every example of a pitcher who piled up pitches before age 25 and stayed durable and effective, I can show you ones who did not. Gooden, Fernando, Koufax --

[Soul]

Z has said his back hurts when his weight is high. He started getting fat again late this season and admitted it because he had gotten lazy. His back also starting hurting again. He's 25 now. What concerns me a little is that guys have an increasingly tougher time keeping weight off once they pass 25. He better not get lazy again. I don't want a fat dude with a bad back.

 

Yeah-----that and the fact that back pain usually just gets progressively worse as time wears on even if you do stay in shape.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

What if the Angels came after us with an offer of Kendrick, Mathis, Adenhart, AND Santana?

 

Would you not give up Z for that kind of monster package? Besides for the fact that I'm not a big Santana fan, thats a deal that could become big deals (like Santana for blank).

 

What if the Mets offered Mike Pelfrey/Milledge, and more?

 

I wouldn't do that, but its an idea.

 

What if the Dodgers came and just shoved prospects down our throats. Say a Laroche, Billingsley, Betemit package?

 

Maybe I'm just having a pipedream, but all those guys deals would be huge for pushing the Cubs foward (well maybe not the Mets one). Theres still other ones out there that could potentially bigger.

 

I know trading Z will never happen because the Cubs are just not ballsy enough to piss everyone off. Still, if the right deal came around Hendry should be listening because this team has a ton of holes and trading Z just might fill a few of them.

 

Could you imagine getting a future IF from the Dodgers or Angels?

 

What if the Diamondbacks came with a package like Quentin, Young, Owings/Nipper, and Mock?

 

I'm not completely for trading Z, but the evidence is mostly on the "he will be injured/performance will fall" side. His value is SKY HIGH right now.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

Bump. This is a topic I'd really like to hear more about, since I've heard mention of Z being the only pitcher we can count on next year. I personally am still a worrier.

[Jazz]

If by midseason, Zambrano hasn't been extended, and we are out of the race, I think we could definately see some Zambrano trade talks from teams like the angels, yankees, and mets. We'd get a serious haul from him if he repeats career numbers by that point.

[Backtobanks]

If by midseason, Zambrano hasn't been extended, and we are out of the race, I think we could definately see some Zambrano trade talks from teams like the angels, yankees, and mets. We'd get a serious haul from him if he repeats career numbers by that point.

 

I don't think you have to worry about Zambrano's extension. With the way Hendry is throwing around money and trying to build a winner, there's no way he lets Zambrano leave.

[Guest]

I don't think Z is healthy.

[10man]

ya think that maybe the reason his arm slot is lower is cause of "tired arm" syndrome?

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't think Z is healthy.

 

I don't see how he could be.

 

I don't think I have the energy to be outraged about another destroyed stud arm.

[Guest]

Sadly, all the signs were there last season.

[jmajew]

I would feel horrible for Z if he gets hurt and loses his big pay day. Granted it would be partially his own fault but you still have to feel for the guy.

 

With that said...I wish we would have traded him when we had the chance. But hindsight is 20/20

[abuck1220]

high pitch counts don't matter.

[Connor McConnor]

Pitcher begins to suck.....he's hurt and its Dusty Bakers fault.

 

Maybe he isnt that good? Where is it written that if you were good at one time....you will stay that good....and if you are not....then it is because of injury or because you pitched "too much".

 

Why is it always someone elses fault?