Matt Harvey

I was waiting for the raising the mound statement...

The mound was lowered 40 or so years ago, cause the hitters were at such a disadvantage. But pitchers didn't get injured than...

Randy Johnson on a real hill... I for one would never have stepped in that hitters box.

But were there no injuries back then cause they were never diagnosed... or, was it because the hill changed the release point, possibly lessening the stress of the arm?

Part of me is tempted to go with the injuries not being diagnosed.

But wouldn't that mean a lot of pitchers pitching with blown out elbows? And if pitching with a tear is so difficult surgery is needed how could so many pitchers do so well that it was deemed the mound had to be lowered because they were pitching too well. Something seems off about that picture.

Occasionally I think maybe the injuries just happened and the guys disappeared and we never heard about them. But seems like there should have been enough that had begun promising careers getting their careers ended it should be documentable.

That leaves the possibility you mention that the lower hill produces more stress and leads to more injuries. If there is a connection should that not be a solid reason for raising it back up again?

But how are we to objectively know? Here is an idea. Raise it only in the AL. Pitchers there have the disadvantage of having to face the DH so they deserve a break. Then in a few years we will have a reasonable body of evidence to say objectively whether it made a difference in reducing injuries.

I don't think the mound height has anything to do with it. Injuries -- they are a reflection of the contemporary sport. Yes, many were not diagnosed years ago, and guys just disappeared. That, and the fact as mentioned above that risk-averse front office management is inclined to "protect" arms. That said, I do believe the old school types who advocate more throwing to strengthen the arm. I mean, how do you juxtapose the incredible innings of pitchers from decades ago with the lowly lot of IPs today? It is baffling.

Having said that -- and in defense of today's pitchers -- most pitchers from Cy Young or even Sandy Koufax's day did not have the wide assortment of specialty pitches, some of which do place more stress on the arm. That's especially true the further you go back in baseball history. Also, I believe pitchers did not throw as hard back then -- that's seems abundantly clear; many paced themselves like Dizzy Dean used to say, but also, I think today's pitchers are throwing harder today than ever (stress on the arm?) So maybe it was possible to pitch more innings back then without as much duress as today.

I absolutely agree with Hack that pitchers did not throw as hard many years ago and fewer high stress types of pitches.
I also think there are more high stress pitches thrown today. And I am not talking about the variety of types of pitches. I am talking about the quality of hitter throughout the lineups. I remember rooting for Cardinal teams that went to world series with a middle of the order guy hitting HRs in the 20 and 30s. Jack Clark on one playoff team I think had 22. Another year Porter was the cleanup hitter. In the 60s Maris was cleanup struggling to reach double digit HRs. And in 68 Cepeda with his 16 HRs was accompanied by that storied slugger Mike Shannon.

Getting closer to back on target read this week that Harvey has talked with Roy Halladay who chose to pitch through early injuries. Who knows, if he had the operations early he might be healthy now and still be a top of the rotation starter now.