Complete games are becoming rare.

[chuckywang]

Remember last year when we were sweating that we would be the first team to go an entire season without a complete game? Well, Rich Hill finally got one late in the year.

 

However, this year there are three (!) teams without a complete game yet:

Washington Nationals

Florida Marlins

Texas Rangers

 

No surprise that those three teams also rely on young starting pitching. We are entering a new era where pitch count will be a primary concern for pitching coaches.

[C.C.]

How many CG do we have? I can only think of Marquis.

[Drew Doughty]

How many CG do we have? I can only think of Marquis.

 

Marquis's, and Zambrano's loss to the Padres in the Lee/Young game.

[OleMissCub]

The question is whether

a) pitchers are so coddled these days that they get fatigued much earlier

or

b) pitching coaches and managers are pulling pitchers earlier to try and protect them

[C.C.]

The question is whether

a) pitchers are so coddled these days that they get fatigued much earlier

or

b) pitching coaches and managers are pulling pitchers earlier to try and protect them

 

Or C the investment in a pitcher is a lot of money, so the owners and coaches do everything in their power to keep them healthy.

[Mephistopheles]

Did you come up with this theory all by yourself? Of course this is happening as micro-managing is becoming widespread and the [female-anatomy]ication of baseball. Brilliant!

 

Now that I said that, I think within twenty years teams are going to move to three mean rotations where their starters throw say 75 pitches max and then there are tons and tons of relievers. This can work because teams will carry 13 pitchers as position players are becoming more and more flexible as offense rises and defense becomes less valuable.

 

There's some macro-baseball ideas for you

[OleMissCub]

The question is whether

a) pitchers are so coddled these days that they get fatigued much earlier

or

b) pitching coaches and managers are pulling pitchers earlier to try and protect them

 

Or C the investment in a pitcher is a lot of money, so the owners and coaches do everything in their power to keep them healthy.

 

That's the same as B

[Rob]

Did you come up with this theory all by yourself? Of course this is happening as micro-managing is becoming widespread and the [female-anatomy]ication of baseball. Brilliant!

 

Now that I said that, I think within twenty years teams are going to move to three mean rotations where their starters throw say 75 pitches max and then there are tons and tons of relievers. This can work because teams will carry 13 pitchers as position players are becoming more and more flexible as offense rises and defense becomes less valuable.

 

There's some macro-baseball ideas for you

 

I'd be happier if they had a three-man rotation with tandem starters and just a few relievers, to give us more position players off the bench.

[Roast]

Did you come up with this theory all by yourself? Of course this is happening as micro-managing is becoming widespread and the [female-anatomy]ication of baseball. Brilliant!

 

Now that I said that, I think within twenty years teams are going to move to three mean rotations where their starters throw say 75 pitches max and then there are tons and tons of relievers. This can work because teams will carry 13 pitchers as position players are becoming more and more flexible as offense rises and defense becomes less valuable.

 

There's some macro-baseball ideas for you

 

I understand it's really not my place to be calling him out, but honestly, the whole "I'm so much smarter than you, trust me, I'll tell you" game is getting really annoying. Why can't you just post like an average person?

[CoolHandLuke]

Shouldn't it be [female-anatomy]fication?

[David]

Shouldn't it be [female-anatomy]fication?

 

That it should.

[BigSlick]

Speaking of complete games, we had 2 complete games in the KC-White Sox game today, with Garland taking the loss. :lol:

 

EDIT: My bad, I just checked it online. Strange, ESPN said both Greinke and Garland had CG's...

[CuseCubFan69]

I would like to see some scientific study done on this subject. Put some type of contraption on a bunch of pitchers of different ages and pitching styles and see how the stress effects the different parts of the shoulder/elbow as they pitch. Watch their mechanics and to see when they break down and see the results from that as well. I would think there would be big money in this for somebody if they could do this, as an incentive of course.

[UK1679666180]

I would like to see some scientific study done on this subject. Put some type of contraption on a bunch of pitchers of different ages and pitching styles and see how the stress effects the different parts of the shoulder/elbow as they pitch. Watch their mechanics and to see when they break down and see the results from that as well. I would think there would be big money in this for somebody if they could do this, as an incentive of course.

 

I'm sure they have done that already with all the biomechanical work that's already been done.

 

As far as poss. causes, better understanding of the long-term value of the pitcher, batters are more concerned with working deep into the count than they were in the 60s raising pitch counts, and they're putting more stress on their arm than it once was.

[CuseCubFan69]

I would like to see some scientific study done on this subject. Put some type of contraption on a bunch of pitchers of different ages and pitching styles and see how the stress effects the different parts of the shoulder/elbow as they pitch. Watch their mechanics and to see when they break down and see the results from that as well. I would think there would be big money in this for somebody if they could do this, as an incentive of course.

 

I'm sure they have done that already with all the biomechanical work that's already been done.

 

As far as poss. causes, better understanding of the long-term value of the pitcher, batters are more concerned with working deep into the count than they were in the 60s raising pitch counts, and they're putting more stress on their arm than it once was.

 

What was the typical pitch count in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60s, and 70s? I understand that the mound was higher and that helped relieve the stress but I'm curious on the difference on amount of pitches.

[UK1679666180]

I would like to see some scientific study done on this subject. Put some type of contraption on a bunch of pitchers of different ages and pitching styles and see how the stress effects the different parts of the shoulder/elbow as they pitch. Watch their mechanics and to see when they break down and see the results from that as well. I would think there would be big money in this for somebody if they could do this, as an incentive of course.

 

I'm sure they have done that already with all the biomechanical work that's already been done.

 

As far as poss. causes, better understanding of the long-term value of the pitcher, batters are more concerned with working deep into the count than they were in the 60s raising pitch counts, and they're putting more stress on their arm than it once was.

 

What was the typical pitch count in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60s, and 70s? I understand that the mound was higher and that helped relieve the stress but I'm curious on the difference on amount of pitches.

 

I looked at the NL in 1950 when runs were most similar to they are today in the NL.

 

It was probably similar, the big thing to look at is their careers. The elite pitchers always stuck around which is why they were elite. Back then, they had 10 pitchers in the NL that made it to 2000+ career innings. Right now, there are 10 with 2000 IP and likely 10-15 more when all is said and done.

 

Sure they're throwing less but if you can double the amount of pitchers staying healthy enough that will give you more of 10 years worth of +200IP, it's worth it trying to conserve the better arms.

[CuseCubFan69]

I would like to see some scientific study done on this subject. Put some type of contraption on a bunch of pitchers of different ages and pitching styles and see how the stress effects the different parts of the shoulder/elbow as they pitch. Watch their mechanics and to see when they break down and see the results from that as well. I would think there would be big money in this for somebody if they could do this, as an incentive of course.

 

I'm sure they have done that already with all the biomechanical work that's already been done.

 

As far as poss. causes, better understanding of the long-term value of the pitcher, batters are more concerned with working deep into the count than they were in the 60s raising pitch counts, and they're putting more stress on their arm than it once was.

 

What was the typical pitch count in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60s, and 70s? I understand that the mound was higher and that helped relieve the stress but I'm curious on the difference on amount of pitches.

 

I looked at the NL in 1950 when runs were most similar to they are today in the NL.

 

It was probably similar, the big thing to look at is their careers. The elite pitchers always stuck around which is why they were elite. Back then, they had 10 pitchers in the NL that made it to 2000+ career innings. Right now, there are 10 with 2000 IP and likely 10-15 more when all is said and done.

 

Sure they're throwing less but if you can double the amount of pitchers staying healthy enough that will give you more of 10 years worth of +200IP, it's worth it trying to conserve the better arms.

 

Wouldn't the 5 man rotation have something to do with that though? In the 50's, didn't some teams even have a 3 man rotation thus meaning they would have less 200IP guys? Also, there are a lot more pitchers then there are now as there are almost twice as many teams as the 50's.

[ctcf]

Did you come up with this theory all by yourself? Of course this is happening as micro-managing is becoming widespread and the [female-anatomy]ication of baseball. Brilliant!

 

Now that I said that, I think within twenty years teams are going to move to three mean rotations where their starters throw say 75 pitches max and then there are tons and tons of relievers. This can work because teams will carry 13 pitchers as position players are becoming more and more flexible as offense rises and defense becomes less valuable.

 

There's some macro-baseball ideas for you

 

I understand it's really not my place to be calling him out, but honestly, the whole "I'm so much smarter than you, trust me, I'll tell you" game is getting really annoying. Why can't you just post like an average person?

 

Insecurity will do that to a person roast.

[Banedon]

Did you come up with this theory all by yourself? Of course this is happening as micro-managing is becoming widespread and the [female-anatomy]ication of baseball. Brilliant!

 

Now that I said that, I think within twenty years teams are going to move to three mean rotations where their starters throw say 75 pitches max and then there are tons and tons of relievers. This can work because teams will carry 13 pitchers as position players are becoming more and more flexible as offense rises and defense becomes less valuable.

 

There's some macro-baseball ideas for you

 

I understand it's really not my place to be calling him out, but honestly, the whole "I'm so much smarter than you, trust me, I'll tell you" game is getting really annoying. Why can't you just post like an average person?

 

Insecurity will do that to a person roast.

 

You realize both of you have insulted him, while he hasn't insulted anyone. You can both put him on ignore if you don't like his posts, or you can complain to the mods about him. But these posts are unnecessary and against board guidelines.

[cheapseats]

I would like to see some scientific study done on this subject. Put some type of contraption on a bunch of pitchers of different ages and pitching styles and see how the stress effects the different parts of the shoulder/elbow as they pitch. Watch their mechanics and to see when they break down and see the results from that as well. I would think there would be big money in this for somebody if they could do this, as an incentive of course.

 

I'm sure they have done that already with all the biomechanical work that's already been done.

 

As far as poss. causes, better understanding of the long-term value of the pitcher, batters are more concerned with working deep into the count than they were in the 60s raising pitch counts, and they're putting more stress on their arm than it once was.

 

What was the typical pitch count in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60s, and 70s? I understand that the mound was higher and that helped relieve the stress but I'm curious on the difference on amount of pitches.

 

We don't have pitch count data that goes that far back.

[hardcorecubfan]

I think Lilly could have had a cpl of complete games but again as stated the four year contract with a lot of dollar signs makes pulling him easy.

 

would have been nice though to give the pen a rest once in a while though

[UK1679666180]

I would like to see some scientific study done on this subject. Put some type of contraption on a bunch of pitchers of different ages and pitching styles and see how the stress effects the different parts of the shoulder/elbow as they pitch. Watch their mechanics and to see when they break down and see the results from that as well. I would think there would be big money in this for somebody if they could do this, as an incentive of course.

 

I'm sure they have done that already with all the biomechanical work that's already been done.

 

As far as poss. causes, better understanding of the long-term value of the pitcher, batters are more concerned with working deep into the count than they were in the 60s raising pitch counts, and they're putting more stress on their arm than it once was.

 

What was the typical pitch count in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60s, and 70s? I understand that the mound was higher and that helped relieve the stress but I'm curious on the difference on amount of pitches.

 

I looked at the NL in 1950 when runs were most similar to they are today in the NL.

 

It was probably similar, the big thing to look at is their careers. The elite pitchers always stuck around which is why they were elite. Back then, they had 10 pitchers in the NL that made it to 2000+ career innings. Right now, there are 10 with 2000 IP and likely 10-15 more when all is said and done.

 

Sure they're throwing less but if you can double the amount of pitchers staying healthy enough that will give you more of 10 years worth of +200IP, it's worth it trying to conserve the better arms.

 

Wouldn't the 5 man rotation have something to do with that though? In the 50's, didn't some teams even have a 3 man rotation thus meaning they would have less 200IP guys? Also, there are a lot more pitchers then there are now as there are almost twice as many teams as the 50's.

 

In the NL in '50, they had 18 200IP pitchers for 8 teams. In the NL in '06, they had 22 200IP pitchers for 16 teams.

[CuseCubFan69]

It was probably similar, the big thing to look at is their careers. The elite pitchers always stuck around which is why they were elite. Back then, they had 10 pitchers in the NL that made it to 2000+ career innings. Right now, there are 10 with 2000 IP and likely 10-15 more when all is said and done.

 

Sure they're throwing less but if you can double the amount of pitchers staying healthy enough that will give you more of 10 years worth of +200IP, it's worth it trying to conserve the better arms.

 

Wouldn't the 5 man rotation have something to do with that though? In the 50's, didn't some teams even have a 3 man rotation thus meaning they would have less 200IP guys? Also, there are a lot more pitchers then there are now as there are almost twice as many teams as the 50's.

 

In the NL in '50, they had 18 200IP pitchers for 8 teams. In the NL in '06, they had 22 200IP pitchers for 16 teams.

 

So, percentage wise, more pitchers went 200 innings in 50 than in 06, correct? I wonder if science has helped the 06 pitchers too. With all the surgeries they can do now that they couldn't do in the past has to be a huge advantage for the current pitchers.

[UK1679666180]

Yeah, %wise it definitely favors '50 and the 18 that did went well over 200IP compared to it in '06.

 

Salary commitments are a big reason as well that no one talks about. When you sign players to one year deals you can run them into the ground to get a better short-term return with no long-term commitments. Now, we have contracts like Zambrano, Zito, Hampton, K. Brown, etc.

[CuseCubFan69]

Yeah, %wise it definitely favors '50 and the 18 that did went well over 200IP compared to it in '06.

 

Salary commitments are a big reason as well that no one talks about. When you sign players to one year deals you can run them into the ground to get a better short-term return with no long-term commitments. Now, we have contracts like Zambrano, Zito, Hampton, K. Brown, etc.

 

It's funny you mentioned those 4 as 2 were injury plagued and Zito had some problems of late. I agree with the amount of money that is invested on pitchers like this you have to be more careful. I just wonder if we're really looking at the right things to keep them healthy. I think a straight pitch count is used by those who don't know how to look for mechanical break downs or other things before the breakdown occurs. Obviously you need it in LL because some of these nuts will throw a kid as much as possible to win that precious game.