CubinNY

Again, examples are easy. Were I properly motivated, I guarantee you I could find plenty of examples where this level of ptiching (even "high stress" pitching) did not result in injury. Interesting as they may be, examples are not useful data for understanding cause and effect. What the hell are you talking about? I just showed you 7 pitchers whose career were shortented or their effectiveness was lessoned, or were out of baseball at an early age after a) high innings and b) high pitch counts. Sonofsamiam just provided you with five more. You don't need to do regression analysis or complicated statistics to look at those data and be able to draw an inference. The obvious answer is that pitching all those IP and pitches per inning contributed to whatever results that occured. However, that doesn't rule out other factors too. Yet, it also doesn't take a Rhodes scholar to come to the conclusion that it's probably not a good idea to have a young pitcher throw when they are fatigued. No, what the hell are you talking about? You obviously have no understanding of inferential statistics. But thanks for posting the PAP data. It's nice that someone out there understands the kinds of data that are required to back a claim. Sheesh. I understand inferential statitics quite well. However, you don't use them to show a cause and effect relationship becuase in fact they cannot show a cause and effect relationship. Individual injuries after high pc over a prolonged period can show a cause and effect relationship although other factors cannot be ruled out. Using huge data sets like the study I referenced only hammer home the obvious.

I'll simply provide the definition for you: PAP^3 is the name for the new system for measuring pitcher abuse via pitch counts introduced in Baseball Prospectus 2001.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1480 PAP study done in 2002 But pitchers are not all created the same.

You are such a word smith. Group research is only useful for making generalizations about a population. The fact that arm injuries occur after high innings pitched is not a group design question. Arm injuries are an individual phenonenon.

Again, examples are easy. Were I properly motivated, I guarantee you I could find plenty of examples where this level of ptiching (even "high stress" pitching) did not result in injury. Interesting as they may be, examples are not useful data for understanding cause and effect. What the hell are you talking about? I just showed you 7 pitchers whose career were shortented or their effectiveness was lessoned, or were out of baseball at an early age after a) high innings and b) high pitch counts. Sonofsamiam just provided you with five more. You don't need to do regression analysis or complicated statistics to look at those data and be able to draw an inference. The obvious answer is that pitching all those IP and pitches per inning contributed to whatever results that occured. However, that doesn't rule out other factors too. Yet, it also doesn't take a Rhodes scholar to come to the conclusion that it's probably not a good idea to have a young pitcher throw when they are fatigued.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/brogler01.shtml (Brogleio) 60s http://www.baseball-reference.com/k/koufasa01.shtml (Kaufax) 60s http://www.baseball-reference.com/f/fidryma01.shtml (Fidrych) 70s http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/hamptmi01.shtml (Hammpton)90s http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/millewa04.shtml (Miller) 90s http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/martira02.shtml (Martinez) 90s http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/boydoi01.shtml (Boyd) 90s That's all I could come up with in a spare five minutes

Instead of adding to the irrelevent post counts in this thread you could have just as easily sent a pm to a mod. Exactly how long did it take you to find the date of the posts? 10 seconds. You must have a very busy life. Oh, the irony. :lol: Indeed :D

Instead of adding to the irrelevent post counts in this thread you could have just as easily sent a pm to a mod. Exactly how long did it take you to find the date of the posts? 10 seconds. You must have a very busy life.

ibl viewtopic.php?t=39655&start=120

When is the Trib finally going to put a different reporter on the Cubs beat? They used to rotate them regularly, but we've been saddled with him for a heck of a long time. I know. I miss the days of Teddy Greenstein. I guess he was too good.

Harang is still ugly as all get out and there is no way he can pitch as well as he did last time. Go Cubs!

What's the point of releasing Prior? He's under contract and the Cubs probably can't get anyone for him until he shows he can pitch. I'm putting him out of my thoughts until he starts pitching in games either in the minors or majors.

Exactly.

If Soriano isn't seeing any pitches then the manager should have a hart to hart about swining at junk. That's the problem.

I'm neither pro nor con Cuban. I think it's really silly to be make declaritive statements when Cuban hasn't said he's interested and the Cubs haven't been put up for sale yet. Cuban is a smart guy. My guess is that if he's interested he'll get his ducks in a row and make a good case and a good offer. Whether its accepted probably has more to do with what other offers are on the table then it has to do with Jerry F. Rinsedorf.

I guess you don't understand the business of baseball then. Just because all of you think Cuban is the solution and want him to buy to Cubs, it doesn't mean that MLB and the owners agree. He has no chance. Do you have inside information? If so please share. If not, your post is very presumptive.

Hill wasn't completely skipped. They're just keeping Z on his usual 4-days rest at all times. Z Friday, Hill Saturday. I think this is a good thing. When Z has too much rest it seems as if he is not as effective. His sinker seems to flatten out and he doesn't have as good control.

FWIW, he was significantly better each of his first two years. 2005: .366/.470/.581/1.051 2006: .355/.480/.606/1.086 He's now up to .336/.467/.588/1.055 He also now has 31BB/21K. I think he was at 20/20 at one point, so he's starting to get hot. Callis said we'd take Wieters in a chat he did today. be still my beating heart No kidding. I saw him on CSS against Georgia the other day. The kid is a monster. I don't know about him sticking behind the plate but with his arm he could hold down a corner outfield spot.

Guys drop all the time becuase of signability issues. It's not like scouts didn't know about him. Wilken didn't find him bailing hay in Backass Nebraska. The Cubs gave him first round money and then some. I guess it all depends on one's defention of "steal". Anyway, let's wait until he has pitched a day in the majors to call him a steal.

Defensive? Carlos Beltran, Mike Cameron, to name two.

It works in the favor of the Cobs too, who are playing pretty pathetic baseball at the present time.

what makes middle relievers unreliable from year to year Lack of talent. Really I think it has a lot to do with discrete components. What I mean is that relivers work at most 1 or 2 innings per outing. Such a small performance sample is unduely influenced by luck, both bad and good. I don't think so. In terms of ERA it is, but for looking at the rate at which a pitcher gets people out. OBP against, stuff like that. I think it's more that there aren't a lot of consistently good middle relievers, and teams too often jump at the flash in the pan or the guy in his early to mid 30s who's right about to go downhill. I think you have a good point. If I were going to judge a reliever I would look at secondary stats like WHIP. I haven't given my "discrete component" theory much thought recently, but I think it is so hard to judge a reliever because we doen't yet have real good metrics. Anyway, giving a 38 year old reliever who was comming off of high IP totals the last two years is a receipe for disaster. I'm look at you Mike Remmlinger.

what makes middle relievers unreliable from year to year Lack of talent. Really I think it has a lot to do with discrete components. What I mean is that relivers work at most 1 or 2 innings per outing. Such a small performance sample is unduely influenced by luck, both bad and good.

It's hard to call an 8 million dollar investment a steal. Even if he pans out and makes it to the bigs as a starting pitcher it won't be a steal.

You shouldn't be surprized when a guy who doesn't get regular playing time struggles. You also shouldn't be surprized when a young player attempting to hang on in the bigs overcompensates and starts trying to hit his way into the starting line up. A platoon is never a good situation for a younger player. Once a guy gets labeled in baseball the label sticks. I'm sure Muton doesn't want to get the "platoon" player label. It will haunt him forever.