Career Pitch Counts

An interesting post (to my very unscientific mind):

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/11/scherzer-lester-shields-and-career-pitch-counts.html

I know there are some people here who are much better versed than I am to comment on this. Would be interested to know what people think.

Bill

Thanks, Bill.

As this is my area of expertise, I can weigh in. I spend a lot of time trying to figure out which professional and amateur pitchers are at high risk of injury, and even more importantly, what can be done to reduce their risk. This reporter has done a good job of shooting down Boras' claim.

- Glenn
The Biomechanical Man

Hi Glenn,

I hope you'll be willing to answer a question I've had in mind for some time. It strikes me that very few pitchers from the 4 man rotation era of the 1960s ever made it to 300 wins. However, since 5 man rotations became more or less the norm, we have a lot more 300 win pitchers. These would include Maddux, Clemens, Carlton, Ryan, Sutton, Niekro, Seaver, Glavine and Randy Johnson. We might think of, say, Seaver as a 4 day rotation guy, but actually he never started more than 36 games in a season.

Very few of these pitchers started over 40 games more than once or twice in their careers--even knuckleballer Niekro only pitched 40+ 3 times in his career. Also, in general the workloads of these pitchers diminished as they got older.

It might see counter-intuitive that 5 day rotation pitchers would win 300 games more often in modern baseball than 4 day rotation pitchers, but it seems plausible to me that these more lightly used guys were able to win more games because they had much longer careers. Most of these pitchers worked well into their 40s.

By contrast, Sandy Koufax was pitched to death between 1963 and 1966 and had to retire at 30. Denny McLain never really recovered from his 30 win season. Ralph Houk started running out Whitey Ford every 4th day. Houk won some pennants (as did the Dodgers with Sandy) but eventually Whitey's arm fell off. Koufax retired despite a 2.07 ERA in his final season because he couldn't stand the pain. Ford's ERA was 1.64 in his last season, but after 7 games he had to give up. Could any of these guys have made it to 300 wins had they been more lightly used?

Anyway, does it seem plausible to you that more lightly used starters have a better chance to get to 300 wins? Are there other factors, do you think, that might be in effect, producing all of these 300 win pitchers.

Thanks for considering this, OL

P.S. I just looked at Warren Spahn and he never started more than 39 games in a season.

Over his career he averaged just 32 starts per 162 games. So maybe Spahn should be admitted to the club.

First, some obvious math:

Pre-1962
154 game season
Starting every 4th game = 38 or 39 starts

1962-present
162 game season
Starting every 4th game = 40 or 41 starts
Starting every 5th game = 32-33 starts

So how long a season is and how often you start are most likely related to annual and career overuse. But there are other big factors. Keep in mind you are talking about 1920 or 1960 4-day starters versus modern 5-day starters. The salaries compared to the rest of society have changed considerably. Along with that, the mind-frame of year-round conditioning has changed with the increased dollars and with vast improvements in the sciences of conditioning, nutrition, supplements (both bad ones and good ones), and biomechanics. I've seen huge improvements even during my career from the 1980's. Also, the medicine has improved by leaps and bounds. For example, you mentioned Sandy Koufax. Koufax blew out his elbow just eight seasons before his team doctor (Frank Jobe, M.D.) took a chance on elbow reconstruction on another Dodger picture (Tommy John). If Koufax had come along a few years later and blew out his elbow in 1974 instead of 1966, he might have played many more years and we might all know of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction as "Sandy Koufax" surgery.

The biographies I have read indicated Koufax retired due to arthritus, not ligament damage. You have the superior medical knowledge so would appreciate your thoughts on that.

I also am reminded of something Nolan Ryan said in an interview. He said early in his career it was common for most pitchers to experience a certain amount of elbow pain. But since there was no Tommy John surgery they pitched through it and scar tissue formed and they overcame it. But then I also remember Vida Blue doing something to his arm, pitched through it and was never the same.

Could you comment on possibility that before the TJ operation came along pitchers gutted it out and maybe had to make the adjustment from power pitcher to finesse pitcher earlier or did those who might have the operation with the same injury today just get their careers ended and we never heard from them again?

The biographies I have read indicated Koufax retired due to arthritus, not ligament damage. You have the superior medical knowledge so would appreciate your thoughts on that.

I've spoken in the past with Dr. Jobe (before he passed away) and others at the Kerlan-Jobe clinic. They told me that in retrospect, Koufax probably had pain from pitching with a torn ulnar collateral ligament. (They didn't have MRI's and other modern imaging equipment, so it is not possible to know for sure.)

I found this quote this morning supporting my recollection:
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/07/14/dr-frank-jobe-it-could-have-been-sandy-koufax-surgery/

the only thing that matters is that this whole stat sheet was created by scott boras. he's a weasel who dumbass MLB teams always fall for even though i think he's on a few teams "do not deal with period" list. his clients always regress, with ,few exceptions, after he gets them the big deal. that lardass prince fielder is making 24 mil this year. in strat you can't give him away! when dealing with boras its CAVEAT EMPTOR!