Pitch Counts

[moe416]

The Countdown to 100 pitches

Hall of Famers on Pitch Counts

What do you guys think?

[snepp]

Re: Pitch Counts

I think the concept of pitch counts is good. Unfortunately their current application with little-to-no regard for the context of the game situation is completely asinine.

[rsox]

Re: Pitch Counts

I think Nolan Ryan has the right philosophy: throw 'em out!.

[Blzer]

Re: Pitch Counts

Pitch counts almost don't matter, anyway. They warm up at least five pitches between innings as well, right? Plus throwing to bases if they field the ball, or pickoffs. It is true that the form isn't the same and the effort may not be either, but it is still throwing.

So a pitcher that throws 100 pitches in seven innings may actually throw about 140 times. We're not even including warming up in the bullpen before the game, long toss and everything. Maybe 215 - 230 throws the entire day. The pitch count is hardly anything to be concerned about after all that is considered.

For instance, today Matt Cain threw nine innings of three hit shutout ball, 111 pitches. The game had only lasted for about 2 hrs 20 minutes at that point. His spot was due up sixth and he looked perfectly healthy going into the dugout. Considering our closer just threw yesterday, I would have rested him for the four game series against the fighting Phils unless we necessarily needed him. It would have been nice for Cain to go out there for a tenth inning if he felt that he could. He was still throwing 96 on the gun and showed little signs of losing control. Lincecum threw 115 pitches in his complete game on Monday and he was still no where near wanting to leave the game himself.

It's a decent benchmark for concern, but you should always be able to ask the pitcher first how he's feeling. I know there is a "want ball" mentality where they feel they can shove through it at times, but they'll be honest to you if they're done. Base it on that or if you need to pinch hit in his spot in the lineup.

[SPTO]

Re: Pitch Counts

I think Nolan Ryan has the right philosophy: throw 'em out!.

Ditto,

I think it was Mike Marshall (best known as a Dodger closer) who said that pitch counts were originally used back in the day for guys who came back from injury and guys who were older. Essentially the pitch count would be used as a monitoring thing with 100 pitches being viewed as a cautionary number and not a definite "shut down" limit.

I think because guys like Billy Martin and others who abused their pitchers to no end that pitch counts came in as something for all pitchers and then we started seeing guys get some really terrible arm injuries as well. I think pitch counts are the worst thing that's been introduced in baseball as it's enforced in the last 15 years.

[NYJets]

Re: Pitch Counts

Pitch counts almost don't matter, anyway. They warm up at least five pitches between innings as well, right? Plus throwing to bases if they field the ball, or pickoffs. It is true that the form isn't the same and the effort may not be either, but it is still throwing.

So a pitcher that throws 100 pitches in seven innings may actually throw about 140 times. We're not even including warming up in the bullpen before the game, long toss and everything. Maybe 215 - 230 throws the entire day. The pitch count is hardly anything to be concerned about after all that is considered.

That doesn't argue against pitch counts. The pitchers routine stays the same so there's no need to count bullpen pitches or warmup pitches because it's basically the same number each time.

Anyway, I think pitch counts are important. I think there are other factors, and that a lot of managers ignore them and focus just on the number, which is wrong, but pitch counts have their place.

I think the old school mentality doesn't see the whole picture. I think overall there's just more good hitters nowadays. In the past there were more easy outs and pitchers could get by with lesser stuff, I don't think they can do it as much now. Also specialized relief makes it not smart to leave in a tired starter. In the past, guys in the bullpen were just pitchers who weren't that good, so you would rather stick with a tired starter than a reliever.

Also, when talking about the past, we only talk about the all time greats. Yes, some guys were able to be great pitchers while throwing 300 innings in a year and consistently throwing 150 pitches, or whatever the number is. That's why they are hall of famers. What about all the guys who had career ending injuries, or just would burn out when being pushed that far. We never hear about them.

So I think just being a slave to the 100 pitch number is dumb, but protecting pitchers is extremely important, and pitch count has a big role in that.

[TheLetterZ]

Re: Pitch Counts

I agree with Jets. Plus, it's important to protect multi-million dollar investments. When the guy's making a few hundred bucks a month like players did decades ago, his workload is not nearly as much of a concern.

[CMH]

Re: Pitch Counts

I think a pitcher will show you when he's done.

When a guy reaches 100 pitches then it's time to really pay attention. Are the balls staying up, is there less life on his fastball, less movement on his breaking balls?

A guy who is dominating at 100 pitches shouldn't leave the game. If he's at 120 and he's still throwing amazing stuff, then he's not tired.

Wasn't there a study done on how it's not about the pitch count, but the amount of time on the mound? Something about it being the two hour mark on the mound that a pitcher begins to tire.

Games were going much faster in the past and games weren't three+ hour marathons. Today, with longer games, pitchers are being forced into working longer and I think that's where the extra exertion originates from outside of the fact that recording an out is simply harder today than it was years ago.

[CMH]

Re: Pitch Counts

Here's a study that was done to determine the likelihood of muscle fatigue causing injury after particular pitch counts.

Conclusion: The relatively few differences observed imply that pitching biomechanics remained remarkably similar between collegiate starting pitchers who threw between 105 and 135 pitches for 7 to 9 innings and approached muscular fatigue.

http://ajs.sagepub.com/content/35/1/23.abstract



This, however, ignores how much time was spent throwing. If you have someone throw 100 pitches at max effort for one hour, I would think they'd be more likely to continue longer compared to someone who threw 100 pitches at max effort for two hours.

[Blzer]

Re: Pitch Counts

That doesn't argue against pitch counts. The pitchers routine stays the same so there's no need to count bullpen pitches or warmup pitches because it's basically the same number each time.

My point just becomes that "ten more throws" doesn't seem like such a big deal anymore when, proportionately, it is a lower increase in pitches thrown if that makes sense.

I just say this because when I was 17 years old and did not pitch often I was asked to start a game in a summer league. Leading up to that I hadn't started a game since I was 14 years old. That game I threw one run ball and went into extra innings (went to the ninth in seven inning regulation ball) and the coach just kept asking if I was good, and I said I had zero problems. Truth is, I felt perfectly fine. I ended up at 127 pitches, and aside from the ice that I required that night I was wanting to go back out to the mound in two days after that. They never told me how many pitches I threw until the end and I was very surprised because it didn't feel like it.

I just think that over the winter pitchers should be simulating 130 pitch games, and maybe increasing it each time. Obviously the reason they can't go so many is because they're not nurtured to go so many. Pitchers way back in the day threw 200 pitches no problem, and went back out there three days later. That's scarily improbable to let happen to any pitchers that are playing professional ball today, but if trained to do so it could happen. It's like asking me to go out there and run ten miles right now. I couldn't do it, but give me a month of training and I can do it for you.

And I think they should pitch longer. Middle relievers are the one downside to this sport IMO and they should only be used to chew up innings. Set-up men and special relievers are different, but unless you just want one long reliever, these other guys are just wasting space on the roster IMO. If a pitcher can throw just one more inning each game (hoping about 15 more pitches or less), that should benefit teams much more.

[DrJones]

Re: Pitch Counts

Also, when talking about the past, we only talk about the all time greats. Yes, some guys were able to be great pitchers while throwing 300 innings in a year and consistently throwing 150 pitches, or whatever the number is. That's why they are hall of famers. What about all the guys who had career ending injuries, or just would burn out when being pushed that far.

Or both, like Sandy Koufax. There's a recent article in the LA Times where Mike Scioscia uses the example of Fernando Valenzuela as someone who didn't need pitch counts and regularly threw 130+ pitches. Scioscia must've forgotten about the part where Fernando blew out his shoulder in 1988 at age 27 and was a shadow of his former self for the rest of his career.

[SPTO]

Re: Pitch Counts

Or both, like Sandy Koufax. There's a recent article in the LA Times where Mike Scioscia uses the example of Fernando Valenzuela as someone who didn't need pitch counts and regularly threw 130+ pitches. Scioscia must've forgotten about the part where Fernando blew out his shoulder in 1988 at age 27 and was a shadow of his former self for the rest of his career.

True true, it all depends on the pitcher but I think it also has to do with conditioning. You didn't have all these crazy arm injuries in the '30s to the late '70s. The old timers MUST'VE done something right.

A great example of a guy who's career ended far too soon due to arm problems was JR Richard. IIRC from what I know about him he was counted on a lot and pitched well in excess of 100 pitches per start. The guy had one of the most lively arms ever and his fastball was probably the 2nd most dominant in baseball behind Nolan Ryan's.

Imagine if Richard was still healthy and a huge factor in '86? The Astros surely would've gone to the WS that year.

[DrJones]

Re: Pitch Counts

True true, it all depends on the pitcher but I think it also has to do with conditioning. You didn't have all these crazy arm injuries in the '30s to the late '70s. The old timers MUST'VE done something right.

Again: Koufax? Has most dominating 4-year stretch in history, throws between 310-335 IP for 3 of those seasons, arm falls off at age 30.

[SPTO]

Re: Pitch Counts

Again: Koufax? Has most dominating 4-year stretch in history, throws between 310-335 IP for 3 of those seasons, arm falls off at age 30.

Wasn't it more because he had arthritis as well?

[DrJones]

Re: Pitch Counts

Wasn't it more because he had arthritis as well?

From everything I've read about Koufax, the two were related, although I'm no medical expert.

NOTE: Koufax threw 205 pitches in a 1961 start. Ouch.