GM Rankings

[CubsInNC]

Usually, players without talent don't make their major league team out of Class A. In fact, only special players do.

 

Nothing wrong with Class A ballplayers. The AL East has a team full of 'em.

 

[Elrhino]

I like how everyone acts like its scientifically proven that Wood/Prior would have had injury free careers if not for Dusty's overwork (what top of the rotation pitchers aren't overworked in a pennant race that comes down to the wire? Its not like Beane and the A's weren't sending Zito and Mulder out there 230 innings in their second years in the heat of pennant races). Especially Prior, who has had some fluke injuries.

 

The truth is no one knows, and to say with certainty is ill-founded. Its just been repeated over and over again on that its taken as truth .. which is how faulty baseball heuristics are founded in the first place. Or are some faulty speculative heuristics better than others?

[goonys evil twin]

I like how everyone acts like its scientifically proven that Wood/Prior would have had injury free careers if not for Dusty's overwork

 

I like how you claim everyone acts like its scientifically proven when that's not even close to true.

[cheapseats]

I like how everyone acts like its scientifically proven that Wood/Prior would have had injury free careers if not for Dusty's overwork

 

1. Not "eveyone" here believes that Dusty had anything to do with Wood and Prior's injury histories.

2. Of course it can't be "scientifically proven," but then again, hardcore empiricists like Hume and Bertrand Russell dismiss causation altogether. While it can't be proven that Dusty damaged the careers of his young pitchers, it is quite likely.

3. No one said they would have "injury free" careers. However, Dusty's overwork made injury more likely.

 

(what top of the rotation pitchers aren't overworked in a pennant race that comes down to the wire?

 

"But everybody else is doing it" is not an argument that holds much weight.

 

Its not like Beane and the A's weren't sending Zito and Mulder out there 230 innings in their second years in the heat of pennant races).

 

Many who study such things believe that pitches per appearance is much more important than total number of innings. Rany Jazayerli, for example, is in favor of starting pitchers pitching more innings over more starts but throwing fewer pitches per game. In short, it's not so much the innings that matter, it's the number of pitches per appearance.

 

 

 

 

Especially Prior, who has had some fluke injuries.

 

True. I was at the ballpark when he took a line drive off his elbow (and watched Aramis make a great play to catch the ball for an out).

 

But you're not arguing that all of Prior's problems have been caused by freak injuries, are you?

 

The truth is no one knows, and to say with certainty is ill-founded. Its just been repeated over and over again on that its taken as truth .. which is how faulty baseball heuristics are founded in the first place. Or are some faulty speculative heuristics better than others?

 

Again, if you're going to be a hardcore empiricist, then no one's going to be able to convince you that the there's a cause and effect relationship between anything.

 

Feel free to be skeptical about pitch counts or pitcher abuse points; lots of smart people, including Bill James, for example, see them as almost useless.

 

But it's pretty universally acknowledged that throwing too many pitches is dangerous and can lead to both short term and long term injuries.

 

Leo Mazzone doesn't believe in pulling a pitcher based soley on pitch counts, for example, but he does believe in taking a pitcher out when he loses his mechanics.

 

I and many others here have seen Dusty leave Prior (and more recently) Zambrano in the late innings of games even when they began departing from their normal throwing motions to get the ball over the plate.

 

Look, whatever you might think of the use of pitch counts to measure pitcher usage, or whatever you feel is an acceptable workload for a starting pitcher in the year 2003, you have to agree with certain principles. One of those is that there is some level of overuse that is dangerous for a pitcher, even one with great mechanics and the heart of a lion and the eye of the tiger and the spleen of a woolly mammoth. If you'll grant that, then I think you'd grant the idea that not using a pitcher when he can no longer have an impact on the game, to allow his body some brief respite from the rigors of pitching, is helpful.

[Amazing_Grace]

I like how everyone acts like its scientifically proven that Wood/Prior would have had injury free careers if not for Dusty's overwork (what top of the rotation pitchers aren't overworked in a pennant race that comes down to the wire? Its not like Beane and the A's weren't sending Zito and Mulder out there 230 innings in their second years in the heat of pennant races). Especially Prior, who has had some fluke injuries.

 

The truth is no one knows, and to say with certainty is ill-founded. Its just been repeated over and over again on that its taken as truth .. which is how faulty baseball heuristics are founded in the first place. Or are some faulty speculative heuristics better than others?

 

I assume you're referring to my post, so I'll respond. I didn't say it was scientifically proven that overworking those particular pitchers "caused" their injuries, but it's hard for me to believe that a guy throwing 120+ pitches every outing isn't putting more stress on his arm than a guy that throws 100 or 90 pitches. I believe that overworking pitchers increases the likelihood of injury and I suspect that Prior and Wood's overuse contributed to some of their injury problems, though admittedly, I can't scientifically prove that.