FTN wrote:The Rule of 30 is so overrated. Just let guys throw lots of pitches. No rule applies to 100% of people, so why have a rule. I think.

That was certainly called for.

agreed.

right

I disagree.

phatj wrote:I disagree.

you would




All right, I'm through elevating discourse.

Oh Reginald, I disagree!

CFP wrote:Good for Friedman and the rest of the them. Cue a Reynolds, Leiter, Larkin "back in the old days" rant on MLB Network tomorrow.

It would be pretty rich to hear Leiter say that.

IIRC, Dallas Green had him throw something like 146 pitches one cold April night in 1989 when they were both with the Yankees. That was pretty much it for Leiter until maybe '93, when he resurfaced in the Blue Jays bullpen.

Wear one of these and the Rule of 30 is irrelevant:



The Phiten Phils!

In 1948, Robin Roberts pitched 146.7 innings for the Phillies at age 21.
In 1949, he pitched 226.7 innings (age 22). Not sure if he had minor league innings in '48, he probably did, but ML innings up by 80.
At age 23 (1950), Roberts IP went to 304.3, an increase of 77.7 innings.

Surely a candidate to break down according to the rule of 30.

Of course he went on to win 20+ games in 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954 and 1955 and had the following IP in the ten years following the 1950 season: 315.0, 330.0, 346.7, 336.7, 305.0, 297.3, 249.7, 269.7, 257.3 and 237.3.

Of course those were different times.

LoneStarPhan wrote:In 1948, Robin Roberts pitched 146.7 innings for the Phillies at age 21.
In 1949, he pitched 226.7 innings (age 22). Not sure if he had minor league innings in '48, he probably did, but ML innings up by 80.
At age 23 (1950), Roberts IP went to 304.3, an increase of 77.7 innings.

Surely a candidate to break down according to the rule of 30.

Of course he went on to win 20+ games in 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954 and 1955 and had the following IP in the ten years following the 1950 season: 315.0, 330.0, 346.7, 336.7, 305.0, 297.3, 249.7, 269.7, 257.3 and 237.3.

Of course those were different times.

And what magic potion were they drinking back then?

Yeah, why can't these punk kids pitch like that Hall of Famer Robin Roberts?

From 1950-1959, there were 10 seasons pitched of 300 innings or more. Roberts threw 6 of them. He is an exception to the rule.

LoneStarPhan wrote:In 1948, Robin Roberts pitched 146.7 innings for the Phillies at age 21.
In 1949, he pitched 226.7 innings (age 22). Not sure if he had minor league innings in '48, he probably did, but ML innings up by 80.
At age 23 (1950), Roberts IP went to 304.3, an increase of 77.7 innings.

Surely a candidate to break down according to the rule of 30.

Of course he went on to win 20+ games in 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954 and 1955 and had the following IP in the ten years following the 1950 season: 315.0, 330.0, 346.7, 336.7, 305.0, 297.3, 249.7, 269.7, 257.3 and 237.3.

Of course those were different times.

They believed in the crazy notion that more exercise can actually increase strength and durability. Imagine that.

They probably also realized that it's likely a self-fulfilling prophecy to drill into a pitcher's head that his arm will fall off if he throws more than X pitches or Y innings or don't have at least 4 days off between starts. Negative visualization can be just as powerful as positive.

And they may even have had an inkling that mathematical correlation may well not be causation and that a human being can actually be a pretty good judge of his own physical capacities. Can't possibly be so!

I know, I know. I realize that Ton Verducci, who is not an athlete, doctor, physical therapist, mathematician or soothsayer knows better. I just wonder how he explains why it seems pitchers are injured just as frequently (if not more) now that they pitch less innings, throw less pitches, have more time off between starts, have better nutrition, better training year round and better medical care. It couldn't possibly be that they're not getting enough work, could it?

Mark Prior agrees with you. So does Dusty Baker.

So do Nolan Ryan, Gaylord Perry, Don Sutton, Steve Carlton, Greg Maddux, Bert Blyleven, Tom Seaver, Jim Kaat, Fergie Jenkins, Tom Glavine, etc. etc.

But you've got Verducci. Go for it.

Your argument is really lame, to be honest. But I won't even bother explaining why, you don't want to hear it anyway.

Throw in a little insult and accuse someone else of being close-minded. Some things never change.

1. Pitchers today throw much harder than they used to. They throw much harder because the mound is lower, and with the mound being lower, offense has gone up. So as hitters have gained a bigger advantage, pitchers have had to throw harder and throw more offspeed pitches, pitches which are damaging to the arm. Pre 1968, the strikeout wasn't nearly as prevalent as it is today, pitchers were pitching to contact because of the steeper downward angle the mound gave them, which made it tougher on hitters.

2. "Heros" like Sandy Koufax threw obscene amounts of pitches and innings, and the result was a shorter career. Point out Nolan Ryan, its always great to prop up your argument with a statistical outlier. You mentioned 10 pitchers, most of whom are Hall of Famers. So I guess the lesson there is, if you throw tons of pitches and tons of innings, you've got a shot to be one of the best pitchers of all time. Or blow out your arm.

3. Verducci's study isn't anything mindblowing, its common sense. The pitching motion is very unnatural. Its painful. And lots of people who do it for a living get hurt. Especially young pitchers who haven't been conditioned to throw a ton of pitches. No one is saying that a pitcher in his late 20's shouldn't be able to throw 115 pitches in an isolated start, or that a 30 year old pitcher should be shut down if he crosses 225 IP in a season. These "rules" are guidelines meant to condition a pitcher for increasing his workload, not having him throw a shitton more innings in season B than he threw in season A, because that has a tendency to have adverse effects on the pitcher's arm.

4. People are more concerned about injuries now because technology has improved to the point where we can know more. How many careers do you think were cut short because a guy just "took the ball every 4 days" and "finished what he started" by throwing 150 pitches.

FTN wrote:1. Pitchers today throw much harder than they used to. They throw much harder because the mound is lower, and with the mound being lower, offense has gone up. So as hitters have gained a bigger advantage, pitchers have had to throw harder and throw more offspeed pitches, pitches which are damaging to the arm. Pre 1968, the strikeout wasn't nearly as prevalent as it is today, pitchers were pitching to contact because of the steeper downward angle the mound gave them, which made it tougher on hitters.

2. "Heros" like Sandy Koufax threw obscene amounts of pitches and innings, and the result was a shorter career. Point out Nolan Ryan, its always great to prop up your argument with a statistical outlier. You mentioned 10 pitchers, most of whom are Hall of Famers. So I guess the lesson there is, if you throw tons of pitches and tons of innings, you've got a shot to be one of the best pitchers of all time. Or blow out your arm.

3. Verducci's study isn't anything mindblowing, its common sense. The pitching motion is very unnatural. Its painful. And lots of people who do it for a living get hurt. Especially young pitchers who haven't been conditioned to throw a ton of pitches. No one is saying that a pitcher in his late 20's shouldn't be able to throw 115 pitches in an isolated start, or that a 30 year old pitcher should be shut down if he crosses 225 IP in a season. These "rules" are guidelines meant to condition a pitcher for increasing his workload, not having him throw a $#@! more innings in season B than he threw in season A, because that has a tendency to have adverse effects on the pitcher's arm.

4. People are more concerned about injuries now because technology has improved to the point where we can know more. How many careers do you think were cut short because a guy just "took the ball every 4 days" and "finished what he started" by throwing 150 pitches.

1. I think that basically everything you are saying here is really attributed more to pitchers starting to throw the slider?

2. ok

3. ok. So Hamels is past the danger zone now right?

4. right. Also, back in the day there were a lot less teams. Many pitchers who blew out their arms back then probably just disappeared before amounting to anything in the majors.

Its not just the slider. Its the splitter and the cutter too.

Hamels' jump from 23 to 24 was a massive jump, and I think its likely to take its toll this season. Verducci points out that the problems often times manifest themselves the following year, hence, this year.

After the age of 25, if the player's workload has been steadily increased and he shows no signs of problems, then I think you start to take the gloves off a bit. General fatigue is still an issue, its the biggest issue, but I think once you get past a certain point, the threshold has a bit more flexibility.

FTN wrote:1. Pitchers today throw much harder than they used to. They throw much harder because the mound is lower, and with the mound being lower, offense has gone up. So as hitters have gained a bigger advantage, pitchers have had to throw harder and throw more offspeed pitches, pitches which are damaging to the arm. Pre 1968, the strikeout wasn't nearly as prevalent as it is today, pitchers were pitching to contact because of the steeper downward angle the mound gave them, which made it tougher on hitters.

2. "Heros" like Sandy Koufax threw obscene amounts of pitches and innings, and the result was a shorter career. Point out Nolan Ryan, its always great to prop up your argument with a statistical outlier. You mentioned 10 pitchers, most of whom are Hall of Famers. So I guess the lesson there is, if you throw tons of pitches and tons of innings, you've got a shot to be one of the best pitchers of all time. Or blow out your arm.

3. Verducci's study isn't anything mindblowing, its common sense. The pitching motion is very unnatural. Its painful. And lots of people who do it for a living get hurt. Especially young pitchers who haven't been conditioned to throw a ton of pitches. No one is saying that a pitcher in his late 20's shouldn't be able to throw 115 pitches in an isolated start, or that a 30 year old pitcher should be shut down if he crosses 225 IP in a season. These "rules" are guidelines meant to condition a pitcher for increasing his workload, not having him throw a $#@! more innings in season B than he threw in season A, because that has a tendency to have adverse effects on the pitcher's arm.

4. People are more concerned about injuries now because technology has improved to the point where we can know more. How many careers do you think were cut short because a guy just "took the ball every 4 days" and "finished what he started" by throwing 150 pitches.

1. You're guessing. There's no verifiable way to substantiate your claim that pitchers throw harder now than they used to. Even if it were to be shown somehow that average MPH has gone up that could simply be attributed to better health, nutrition, training and similar factors which have increased athletic performance in all sports. And your argument about strikeouts increasing after 1968 is just wrong. In the NL in 18 of the 22 seasons following the lowering of the mound after the 1968 seasons, strikeouts/game were lower than 1968. It wasn't until the mid-90's (during the steroid era), that the strikeout rate increased for good. What about the AL? The strikeout rate decreased in 21 of the 22 seasons following 1968.

2. Sandy Koufax's career wasn't shortened by the Rule of 30. It was shortened by a chronically arthritic elbow. And, of the 10 pitchers I mentioned, every one of them violated the Rule of 30 at least once.

3. Is the Rule of 30 "common sense?" Or is it just the opposite? First of all, this "unnatural motion" argument is a canard. Who's the arbiter of what's natural. Is running "natural?" Our ancestors had to run to evade predators or track prey, but they also threw spears and stones at them and they did it overhand. If that motion is so "unnatural," why didn't natural selection weed them out? All physical exertion is strenuous and has the possibility of injury. Arguably nothing is more "unnatural" than dancing en pointe. But I don't know of any ballet dancer who would argue that doing less of it in your early 20's is a good way to train. Regular exercise and repetitions strengthen other muscles and tendons which help to support the activity in question. Failure to do enough reps is just as dangerous (if not more) to your health than doing too many. Your body has a mechanism to tell you you've reached your limits -- fatigue. The mechanism it has to tell you you're not in good enough shape to perform an activity is injury -- exactly what you're trying to avoid. That's common sense.

4. "People are more concerned about injuries now because technology has improved to the point where we can know more." You're guessing again. One could just as easily say athletes were more concerned about injuries years ago when, in the age of the Reserve Clause, lower salaries and one-year contracts, an injury could easily cost you any further baseball earnings. And, even if people are more concerned now (although how does one measure such a thing), it's probably more likely they're concerned because owners are concerned about larger player investments and players are more concerned about losing millions.

Verducci writes:


The bottom line: a dramatic increase in innings on a young pitcher elevates the risk of injury or a setback to their development.


But the evidence points to the opposite. Pitchers who see a large increase in workload are more likely to continue to be successful than those who don’t. It’s important to remember that correlation does not mean causation—just because throwing a lot more innings than a pitcher ever has before is correlated with future success does not mean that managers should be riding their young pitchers hard—but it does imply that Verducci’s argument is incorrect, and there is absolutely no reason that we should expect these YAE candidates to do worse because they’ve overworked.

Link