09/21 Milwaukee (Wolf) @ CUBS (Garza) 1:20 CDT, WGN TV

[bukie]

Garza reached 120 pitches in those two outings, but his pitches per inning were really low, and he was on cruise control for the vast majority of both of those starts. Given the circumstances, I'd say that the benefit of trying to ensure his arm is stretched enough to handle a full 200 IP next year is probably worth the minimal risk of hitting that pitch count in those two specific situations. At the very least, it's not nearly as reckless as it's portrayed here.

Unless Matt Garza and Ryan Dempster are unique cases among the 150 or so starters in baseball that somehow need more work at the end of the season than they had the rest of it, then the Cubs are simply doing something with their starters that no other team not in contention is doing. Of course it's not a guarantee that their arms fall off, and nobody's even implying that. It's just totally needless at a time in the year where every team has 3-4 extra pitchers on the roster, and there's basically no reward except a complete game.

 

How many of those 150 starts were at 100 pitches or less through 8 innings? I'm not going to tell you Dempster should have been extended, but I don't see a whole lot of risk with letting Garza finish two very strong performances where he hasn't been laboring.

It was actually 572 starts among about 150 starters, for reference. Regardless of where Garza was through 8, there's no reason to not even have a reliever warming up when his pitch count gets up there. Complete game victories are nice and all, but it's just a risk that doesn't need to be taken at this point in the season.

 

If anything, as Cub fans, we should be conditioned to think high pitch counts are no big deal, since the organization has had such a problem with it over the years (better in the Piniella years, but Baylor/Baker were terrible). But when even DBR's Reds aren't doing what you're doing with your two best starters, it might just be a good idea to back off.

[XZero771679666304]

 

It's commentary on repetition of a frustrating organizational philosophy as opposed to a specific condemnation of today's game as some kind of breaking point.

 

This. And at this point in a lost season with the rosters expanded, there is absolutely no reason to have any of our guys pushing their PC. No one here is saying that Garza's arm is going to explode because he threw back to back 120 pitch games, Just that given the circumstances, there simply isn't a reason for it. There is no reason to rack up mileage on a guys arm, other than "rewarding" him with a CG, which would be dangerously close to allowing the inmates to run the asylum.

 

However there are reasons to cut starts shorter, like getting looks at younger players and cutting down the workloads of guys who we'll need to be big in coming seasons. Especially a guy like Garza who has had arm trouble this year already.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

Because you decided that people were declaring that Garza was going to be injured based on today's pitching load, or the two times he's gone over 120 pitches this year. It's an invention from inside of your own brain that twisted what was actually being said. A fine strawman, really. Well spun.

 

Wow. Well spun indeed. What exactly are you people declaring then? Or is this just whining to whine and I'm getting in the way?

 

I fail to see how you've offered nothing but strawmen, if your..."arguments" are even worthy of that lofty title. How many times did you tell me I would be OK with this again?

[Sammy Sofa]

Because you decided that people were declaring that Garza was going to be injured based on today's pitching load, or the two times he's gone over 120 pitches this year. It's an invention from inside of your own brain that twisted what was actually being said. A fine strawman, really. Well spun.

 

Wow. Well spun indeed. What exactly are you people declaring then? Or is this just whining to whine and I'm getting in the way?

 

I fail to see how you've offered nothing but strawmen, if your..."arguments" are even worthy of that lofty title. How many times did you tell me I would be OK with this again?

 

This is just asinine.

 

It's commentary on repetition of a frustrating organizational philosophy as opposed to a specific condemnation of today's game as some kind of breaking point.

 

Stop making up what's being said or discussed; stop acting like you have no clue what people are saying, because if you really don't then you're not really reading anything that's being posted.

 

Hell, I don't think you even know what "strawman" actually means when you made that last post based on your "I'm rubber and you're glue"-style response.

 

Hopefully you've actually read the posts on this page.

[bukie]

Sabathia is over 120 now. So it's 9 in 573, up to 1.5% of starts.

 

EDIT: The situation was Longoria extended an at-bat to 9 pitches. Soon as he reached base via walk, Sabathia was lifted for a reliever. He finished with 127 pitches.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

This is just asinine.

 

It really is, yet here we are. If you'd just spend less time trying to call everything stupid and actually make a point...

 

It's commentary on repetition of a frustrating organizational philosophy as opposed to a specific condemnation of today's game as some kind of breaking point.

 

Already replied to it. You didn't even make this point to me. Even further, this point is based solely on a perception that today's 123 pitch complete game W from Garza is the perfect example and perpetuation of this vaguely described (I assume everyone knows perfectly well what that means, of course) assumed philosophy. Like the rest of this, it's a little asinine with even less evidence than your first point.

 

Stop making up what's being said or discussed; stop acting like you have no clue what people are saying, because if you really don't then you're not really reading anything that's being posted.

 

You mean like this game of how many times it's OK? Or the complete turn this "debate" has taken since you entered?

 

Hell, I don't think you even know what "strawman" actually means when you made that last post based on your "I'm rubber and you're glue"-style response.

 

Example of a strawman argument:

 

How many times is OK huh? 20? 40? 68? 72? Herp? PEOPLE LIKE YOU just don't care until something happens!!

 

Everything else you've said.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

Double.

[mul21]

By the way KKG, your reading comprehension needs help. He was only citing starts and PCs over 120 in the month of September, so his numbers were accurate.

 

I don't think a single 120 pitch game is a big deal, but after seeing what happened to Prior, it's pretty obvious that continued high pitch counts certainly do have a detrimental effect.

[TruffleShuffle]

I like how certain people think they're scoring points in this debate by pointing out that no pitcher's arm has ever flown off as a result of overuse, nor has anyone conclusively, beyond a shadow of a doubt, proven that any pitcher's career has been ruined by pitch counts. It's like discussing smoking with a Philip Morris exec. "hey that guy just smoked a few cigarettes and lo and behold, he's still alive!!!" "so what if that 30 year smoker just died from lung cancer, can you prove conclusively that it wasn't genetic or from the environment around him?" "here's a 50 year old dying from lung cancer, never smoked a day in his life!"

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

From the rewatch:

 

DJ LeMahieu can play. He's no Castro talent wise obviously, but I think the Cubs (or other teams with young vets who want to trade) won't mind seeing what this guy can do next year. I still hold out hope that 1. the bat translates like I think/hope it can and 2. they let him play 2B. To borrow the old scouting adage (aka BS) that will disappear in due time, he carries himself like he belongs out there. There's no hesitation defensively, which is a very good quality for a callup/rookie to have and it's something I've definitely noticed about him from college to the MLB.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

I like how certain people think they're scoring points in this debate by pointing out that no pitcher's arm has ever flown off as a result of overuse, nor has anyone conclusively, beyond a shadow of a doubt, proven that any pitcher's career has been ruined by pitch counts. It's like discussing smoking with a Philip Morris exec. "hey that guy just smoked a few cigarettes and lo and behold, he's still alive!!!" "so what if that 30 year smoker just died from lung cancer, can you prove conclusively that it wasn't genetic or from the environment around him?" "here's a 50 year old dying from lung cancer, never smoked a day in his life!"

 

I hate how certain people have actually made a big deal out of this absolute nothing of an issue and won't admit it's based on nothing but the most basic thinking on pitch count analysis (which is just looking at the number and throwing up arms). I know you really want to cling to your logic as foolproof and flawless, but it's based on basic thought and built alot like swiss cheese.

[TruffleShuffle]

the old scouting adage (aka BS)

 

literally nobody has said that scouting doesn't matter, and a moderate specifically suggested that you knock off all the "statheads think this is bs" nonsense, yet you're still on this asinine crusade.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

By the way KKG, your reading comprehension needs help. He was only citing starts and PCs over 120 in the month of September, so his numbers were accurate.

 

I don't think a single 120 pitch game is a big deal, but after seeing what happened to Prior, it's pretty obvious that continued high pitch counts certainly do have a detrimental effect.

 

Yeah, enough with the Prior. Get over it. Garza is not Mark Prior.

 

To hopefully help catch up those still stuck in 2003 with Prior, because I know it's not just this guy...Le Futur:

 

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/columnist/thorne/2009-04-26-thorne-column_N.htm

 

As far as the analysis: even if I mis-read (I did), what's the significance of the data? What's it supposed to mean? Why did the Tigers let Verlander throw 120 in 6 out of 7 starts to close last year when their games were "meaningless?" What's the significance of that data? Which is more significant in their implications? Why is Verlander's arm still attached today? HOW DID HE LIIIIIIIIVE!?!?!??

 

 

 

 

Garza didn't even struggle today after the 3rd...this is such a stupid [expletive] argument.

Edited September 22, 2011 by KingKongvs.Godzilla

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

literally nobody has said that scouting doesn't matter, and a moderate specifically suggested that you knock off all the "statheads think this is bs" nonsense, yet you're still on this asinine crusade.

 

Stop being paranoid, stoner. I wasn't being passive aggressive about what people think I think here. BS is just what I call cliches, which are still capable of offering insight if you want it so I used it.

 

As far as my stance on numbers...I'm just annoyed at how easy anyone can play with them if you want. In this thread I'm more insulted for statheads, as the "analysis" offered here is nothing but an idea watered down to it's most basic thought and analysis and presented as The Truth. No real stathead would have an issue with 4 starts between two well conditioned veterans resulting in 120+ pitches, bad team or not. This is particularly true given how each performed in those 4 games, particularly the latest one.

[SouthSideRyan]

Oh and just to be a dick on Prior...there was always the s-word. His trainer/coach Tom House studied the stuff, and knew it as well as most in baseball probably.

 

[expletive] you, you [expletive] worthless [expletive] [expletive].

[mul21]

The point isn't whether it will or won't result in an injury. The point is that these games mean nothing and it's an unnecessary risk to take because, in your own words, you don't know what the tipping point is going to be for a guy's arm to fall off. Is it likely that either one of them could have an issue as a result of a couple 120+ outings in September? Probably not, but why take the risk when there's literally zero to be gained from it.

 

And just because somebody else did something in the past that didn't result in a bad outcome doesn't mean it wasn't the wrong decision. Whether Verlander was adversely affected by his long outings at the end of last year is immaterial. And using Prior as an example (or Wood, or Livan Hernandez or any of the other guy's arm destroyed by Dusty due to overuse) is perfectly relevant if you go look at the pitch counts coming down the stretch in 2003 and the injuries he's had since then.

[Sammy Sofa]

This is just asinine.

 

It really is, yet here we are. If you'd just spend less time trying to call everything stupid and actually make a point...

 

It's commentary on repetition of a frustrating organizational philosophy as opposed to a specific condemnation of today's game as some kind of breaking point.

 

Already replied to it. You didn't even make this point to me. Even further, this point is based solely on a perception that today's 123 pitch complete game W from Garza is the perfect example and perpetuation of this vaguely described (I assume everyone knows perfectly well what that means, of course) assumed philosophy. Like the rest of this, it's a little asinine with even less evidence than your first point.

 

Stop making up what's being said or discussed; stop acting like you have no clue what people are saying, because if you really don't then you're not really reading anything that's being posted.

 

You mean like this game of how many times it's OK? Or the complete turn this "debate" has taken since you entered?

 

Hell, I don't think you even know what "strawman" actually means when you made that last post based on your "I'm rubber and you're glue"-style response.

 

Example of a strawman argument:

 

How many times is OK huh? 20? 40? 68? 72? Herp? PEOPLE LIKE YOU just don't care until something happens!!

 

Everything else you've said.

 

Well, no, those aren't strawmen because I wasn't making anything up to distract from the main point. I was actually asking you if you had a "breaking point" as to how many 120+ pitch games would be too many. And "people like you..." was talking about...people like you.

 

And points are being made if they aren't expressly made "to" you? Come the [expletive] on. Just admit you were making up a stance nobody was taking (that tonight's game was some kind of breaking point for Garza's pitching health/ability) and that most of your rampage hinged on it.

[Fred Hornkohl]

This discussion stopped being about today's game a couple of pages back. If you want to continue the discussion, start a thread in CUBS discussions. If the name calling, snarkyness, and generally bad manners continue, there will be recriminations.

 

Now play nice !!