The pitch count era

[Just Regular]

Pedro and Grady Little was kind of an iconic moment as peak Pedro was insanely great but even the best are human.

One of my favorite extracts from Fangraphs number of pitches queries is in 2023, the leader had 3286.    2010 Jeremy Guthrie had 3326.

Many of us have been hanging out here all that time and have a good sense what Jeremy Guthrie was.     The pitching strategists don't let anyone - not Spencer Strider, not Gerrit Cole, not Grayson Rodriguez - do what he did.

2010 Guthrie was 30th MLB wide at Pitches Thrown.

 

[DrungoHazewood]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I've been suggesting deadening the ball for years but I don't get a lot of support.

If they keep the current ball and force guys to throw 85 the record book is going to explode.

Perhaps, unless they go back to the old pitcher's box that had a front line about 4.5' closer.

Deadening the ball in today's game would result in a lot of batters slugging .360 while striking out 145 times a year. In 2013-15 it's pretty clear they deadened the ball, and ERAs fell under 4.00 for the first time since '92.

[jabba72]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Perhaps, unless they go back to the old pitcher's box that had a front line about 4.5' closer.

Deadening the ball in today's game would result in a lot of batters slugging .360 while striking out 145 times a year. In 2013-15 it's pretty clear they deadened the ball, and ERAs fell under 4.00 for the first time since '92.

 I was fine with that era of baseball. 

[Sanfran327]

Was talking to my dad about this last night as well. We felt like Nolan Ryan was the poster boy for rubber-armed pitchers. A few others come to mind, even if they're not statistically throwing tons of pitches: Palmer, Clemens, Randy Johnson, Maddux, Verlander, Scherzer, just off the top of our heads. We felt like it was entirely related to effort. Having a repeatable delivery at 90% or so effort instead of trying to wring out every ounce of physics your body has to offer feels like a huge factor. Can you throw 96 because you have a strong arm, or, and I think back to Erik Bedard when I think of this, are you throwing 96 because coaches showed you how to tweak your delivery and how to really whip your arm through your delivery?

Modern techniques are hurting guys. I'm not sure of any current pitchers after Verlander/Scherzer that are equipped to go deep into games anymore. Feels remarkable that Burnes got through 7 full innings, but I think he's going to be one of the guys that stays healthy and effective for a long time. I look at his build and I see a slightly smaller Clemens. We may not want to afford him, but I personally think he's going to be a safe investment for at least another 3-4 years beyond this one. Maybe even a little longer. But that's another conversation for another thread. Point is, I see a guy that has a smooth delivery that isn't throwing every pitch at max effort, so that makes me feel good about his long-term health.

[Hallas]

I'm not entirely buying injury risk or fatigue as reasons why pitch counts are decreasing.  Starters converted to relievers get about the same velocity bump from what I can tell, so this suggests that starters are required to pace themselves even in modern times, in order to get through 6 innings.  Also injury risks due to overuse seem to be overblown unless pitchers are regularly throwing 120+ pitches per outing. 

 

In my eyes the reason for reduced pitch counts doesn't actually have to do with pitch count tracking, but more to do with the fact that teams are hesitant to allow most starters to face the lineup for a third or 4th time, which results in significantly worse outcomes for pitchers.  You could also make the argument that the worse outcomes results in higher stress pitches when the pitcher is already close to emptying the tank, which could have compounding effects on injury and fatigue.

[Hallas]

31 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I've been suggesting deadening the ball for years but I don't get a lot of support.

If they keep the current ball and force guys to throw 85 the record book is going to explode.

I'd prefer they increase the size of parks.

Make every stadium increase the distance of at least 1/3 of their outfield wall by 20+ feet.

Fewer HRs, more triples.  Win/win.  Triples are fun.

[DrungoHazewood]

14 minutes ago, Sanfran327 said:

Feels remarkable that Burnes got through 7 full innings, but I think he's going to be one of the guys that stays healthy and effective for a long time. I look at his build and I see a slightly smaller Clemens. We may not want to afford him, but I personally think he's going to be a safe investment for at least another 3-4 years beyond this one. Maybe even a little longer. But that's another conversation for another thread. Point is, I see a guy that has a smooth delivery that isn't throwing every pitch at max effort, so that makes me feel good about his long-term health.

a) Why are you trying to jinx him?

b) I would be a little concerned about a very expensive long-term deal for a pitcher whose K rates the last four years have been 12.6, 10.8, 9.3 and 8.8. 

[DrungoHazewood]

4 minutes ago, Hallas said:

I'm not entirely buying injury risk or fatigue as reasons why pitch counts are decreasing.  Starters converted to relievers get about the same velocity bump from what I can tell, so this suggests that starters are required to pace themselves even in modern times, in order to get through 6 innings.  Also injury risks due to overuse seem to be overblown unless pitchers are regularly throwing 120+ pitches per outing. 

 

In my eyes the reason for reduced pitch counts doesn't actually have to do with pitch count tracking, but more to do with the fact that teams are hesitant to allow most starters to face the lineup for a third or 4th time, which results in significantly worse outcomes for pitchers.  You could also make the argument that the worse outcomes results in higher stress pitches when the pitcher is already close to emptying the tank, which could have compounding effects on injury and fatigue.

That's definitely part of it. Sandy Koufax' OPSv was 80 points higher the 4th time through than the 1st. Palmer's was 87. And that's with them sometimes not getting to the 4th time because they were tired or ineffective, so that understates the effect. It's essentially universal.

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Hallas said:

I'd prefer they increase the size of parks.

Make every stadium increase the distance of at least 1/3 of their outfield wall by 20+ feet.

Fewer HRs, more triples.  Win/win.  Triples are fun.

How are you going to push the walls back at Fenway?

[Moose Milligan]

17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

How are you going to push the walls back at Fenway?

Bomb it and start over.

[Hallas]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

How are you going to push the walls back at Fenway?

Remove 2 rows of seats from the green monster and relocate the wall to be 10 feet back.

 

If you remove like, 50 seats around Pesky Pole you can push the the foul pole back around 15-20 feet.  Fenway's current dimensions were the result of the team adding some seats in the RF corner in 1940 when they added bullpens.  The dimensions at the RF pole was 334 before this change.

 

You can remove a few seats from above LCF and get some more distance there too.

 

Fenway's the only problem child here and even there it's possible to remove some seats that were previously added to increase dimensions.  Boston has added quite a few seats over the years, so I would feel comfortable telling them to remove a couple.

[NCRaven]

17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

How are you going to push the walls back at Fenway?

They pushed back 1/3 of the wall at Oriole Park and half the Hangout lost their collective minds.

[Moose Milligan]

1 minute ago, Hallas said:

Remove 2 rows of seats from the green monster and relocate the wall to be 10 feet back.

 

If you remove like, 50 seats around Pesky Pole you can push the the foul pole back around 15-20 feet.  Fenway's current dimensions were the result of the team adding some seats in the RF corner in 1940 when they added bullpens.  The dimensions at the RF pole was 334 before this change.

 

You can remove a few seats from above LCF and get some more distance there too.

 

Fenway's the only problem child here and even there it's possible to remove some seats that were previously added to increase dimensions.  Boston has added quite a few seats over the years, so I would feel comfortable telling them to remove a couple.

I thought the opposite...remove some of the seats from behind home plate, move home plate and the entire infield back.  

Those are pricey seats though, they probably wouldn't want to do all that.  

In all honesty though, leave Fenway alone.  It's not it's fault that the Sox play there and the fans for the home team are insufferable.

[Moose Milligan]

1 minute ago, NCRaven said:

They pushed back 1/3 of the wall at Oriole Park and half the Hangout lost their collective minds.

Did we?  I think you have us confused with Aaron Judge.

Would be interesting to go back and look at that thread with that announcement.

Visually, I've gotten used to looking at it.  Thought it was ugly at first, not so much anymore.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Hallas said:

Remove 2 rows of seats from the green monster and relocate the wall to be 10 feet back.

 

If you remove like, 50 seats around Pesky Pole you can push the the foul pole back around 15-20 feet.  Fenway's current dimensions were the result of the team adding some seats in the RF corner in 1940 when they added bullpens.  The dimensions at the RF pole was 334 before this change.

 

You can remove a few seats from above LCF and get some more distance there too.

 

Fenway's the only problem child here and even there it's possible to remove some seats that were previously added to increase dimensions.  Boston has added quite a few seats over the years, so I would feel comfortable telling them to remove a couple.

I'm sure you would, and I'm sure the Red Sox would point at their 28th out of 30 capacity and have an issue with it.

I do think they should enforce larger stadiums when new construction takes place.