Josh Beckett

[iortiz]

7 run rule goes beyond frustration these days... it is comic now!

[seabeachfred]

They need to get all of the pitchers running in spring training. They need lots of road work before camp breaks and they need to maintain a running program between starts. These guys had terrible stamina. The 100 pitch count thing is ridiculously stupid. They need to be stretched out earlier in spring training. Starters should be conditioned to go 7 innings every time out even if the pitch count is high. The only time they shouldn't work into the 7th or 8th should be if they are getting hammered.

 

Bravo 700!!!!! But why did you stop there. The same can be said for the regular players who looked painfully out of shape this year and once again were ringed with injuries....Youkilis, Drew, Lowrie, as well as the pitchers. We need a new medical staff to correctly diagnose what appears to be an injury, some the clowns we currently employ have failed miserably at. A new strength and conditioning team is also a must because we can't win squat if our team can't stay on the field.

 

And later to that 100 pitch count. No less an authority that Nolan Ryan pilloried that when he took over as President of the Texas Rangers. Their pitchers now go deep into games and last time I checked they've gotten to the WS two years in a row. We also need tough pitching coach who will push the pitchers, something ancient Curt Young either couldn't or wouldn't do.:(:(

[Elktonnick]

Bravo 700!!!!! But why did you stop there. The same can be said for the regular players who looked painfully out of shape this year and once again were ringed with injuries....Youkilis, Drew, Lowrie, as well as the pitchers. We need a new medical staff to correctly diagnose what appears to be an injury, some the clowns we currently employ have failed miserably at. A new strength and conditioning team is also a must because we can't win squat if our team can't stay on the field.

 

And later to that 100 pitch count. No less an authority that Nolan Ryan pilloried that when he took over as President of the Texas Rangers. Their pitchers now go deep into games and last time I checked they've gotten to the WS two years in a row. We also need tough pitching coach who will push the pitchers, something ancient Curt Young either couldn't or wouldn't do.:(:(

Fred they say the conditioning and strength guy was okay but the players who needed him most blew him off and he was powerless to do anything about because the FO wouldn't back him up.

[3rdManOut]

You know, back in the 50's and 60's it used to be the norm that pitchers would go an entire game. When did it become common practice that pitchers would only pitch to the 6th - 7th innings or until they hit the 100 pitch count?

[seabeachfred]

Fred they say the conditioning and strength guy was okay but the players who needed him most blew him off and he was powerless to do anything about because the FO wouldn't back him up.

 

Elk, I don't know who the people are who say "they say", but since your sources are better than mine since you right on top of things in Boston, if what you just wrote is true it simply speaks volumes just how out of touch and out of sorts this 2011 Red Sox ensemble was this season. I take it he went to FrancoMa since he was on the field. Apparently Fetch blew him off to start the debacle. Then again, many of us had little faith in the guy to begin with, but again if this is true the front office had better hire a manager with balls who will read the riot act to the players that they had better stay in shape next season.

 

That is why naming a new manager as soon as possible would be in the best interests of the ball club. The new skipper has to make his mark and lay down a set of rules that will prevent this season's debacle from happening. As each day goes by it becomes more and more evident just how much damage from a lack of responsible leadership was wrought by FrancoMa and Epstink.:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown

[jung]

Baseball is that most unique of sports where you could easily play to the requirements of your contract or more importantly the terms of the CBA without being in great shape. For example, in the case of Beckett or even others of the Sox starters the fact that they took the ball for their turn every time would far outweigh their inability to go deep into games if one were to actually try to make a case for termination of contract based on conditioning.

 

The motivation for conditioning is so different in just about all of the other team sports. In football if you are out of condition you can easily be run over on a play and you are taking your life into your hands. In basketball it takes a pretty high level of conditioning just to stay on the floor.

 

The language in the baseball CBA makes it very difficult to do anything to force baseball players to toe the line either. In many ways it boils down to the player himself having enough personal integrity to stay in the kind of shape that allows him not to just take the field but be able to play well deep into the game.

 

Then on top of everything else, there is so much physical effort that a pitcher must put out compared to an outfielder that may have to show a burst of speed on occasion but not much else.

[jacksonianmarch]

I have listened to WEEI and strayed from this site for the most part. But I have to throw my two cents in on the Beckett issue. I have heard idiot after idiot after idiot demand Cherington (strange, lol) deal Beckett. Digest this...

 

30GS 193IP 146H 175K 52BB 2.89ERA 1.03WHIP

 

The only dig you can make at his production is his IP. Even his September wasnt bad by most standards. WHIP of 1.34 with 26K in 23IP is pretty nice. His ERA was more a product of bad luck than anything else.

 

He's 31 yrs old and signed for 4 more yrs at reasonable money when you talk about top of the rotation options. He got out of shape at the end of the yr, well, the easy fix is to bring in a disciplinarian pitching coach a la Farrell. The problem is, reasonable money is still too high for half the teams in the bigs to stomach. And the other half dont necessarily need a Beckett enough to give up an MLB ready package for him. Then you are talking about a sox team that died on the mound and you're talking about moving your best pitcher from that team without a viable replacement. Beckett's going to be a sox in 2012. That's a given.

[jacksonianmarch]

You know' date=' back in the 50's and 60's it used to be the norm that pitchers would go an entire game. When did it become common practice that pitchers would only pitch to the 6th - 7th innings or until they hit the 100 pitch count?[/quote']

 

What people dont realize is how many pitcher's arms exploded in the minors and majors in that time. The best of the best didnt get injured and could throw forever. We still have those guys (Verlander, CC). But a lot of these other pitchers who have put together good careers would have been done by 28 if they threw 300IP a season

[VA Sox Fan]

I have listened to WEEI and strayed from this site for the most part. But I have to throw my two cents in on the Beckett issue. I have heard idiot after idiot after idiot demand Cherington (strange' date=' lol) deal Beckett.[/b'] Digest this...

 

30GS 193IP 146H 175K 52BB 2.89ERA 1.03WHIP

 

The only dig you can make at his production is his IP. Even his September wasnt bad by most standards. WHIP of 1.34 with 26K in 23IP is pretty nice. His ERA was more a product of bad luck than anything else.

 

He's 31 yrs old and signed for 4 more yrs at reasonable money when you talk about top of the rotation options. He got out of shape at the end of the yr, well, the easy fix is to bring in a disciplinarian pitching coach a la Farrell. The problem is, reasonable money is still too high for half the teams in the bigs to stomach. And the other half dont necessarily need a Beckett enough to give up an MLB ready package for him. Then you are talking about a sox team that died on the mound and you're talking about moving your best pitcher from that team without a viable replacement. Beckett's going to be a sox in 2012. That's a given.

 

Come on doc. Listening to WEEI? You lose IQ points everytime you tune in. Cut it out man.

[jacksonianmarch]

Come on doc. Listening to WEEI? You lose IQ points everytime you tune in. Cut it out man.

 

The hosts actually arent idiots, for the most part. Well, Mikey is a retard, but the rest actually seem knowledgeable. I just dont know how they dont throw 3/4 of the callers off the air and ban their phone numbers. I actually heard a dummy call in and propose a package for Felix centered around DiceK. Really?

[VA Sox Fan]

The hosts actually arent idiots' date=' for the most part. Well, Mikey is a retard, but the rest actually seem knowledgeable. I just dont know how they dont throw 3/4 of the callers off the air and ban their phone numbers. I actually heard a dummy call in and propose a package for Felix centered around DiceK. Really?[/quote']

 

The callers are an embarassment. When some of their calls get broadcast on National radio, I shake my head in shame.

[jung]

There is no way that the Sox should try to deal Beckett and I don't actually think many have called for it. On the other hand there has been a much more balanced discussion about getting rid of Lackey.

[jacksonianmarch]

That's an easy discussion. Lackey will be gone. He was an embarassment on the field and is a black eye to the organization with the contract. And, you don't "need" him. Nobody really needs the worst pitcher in baseball since 2005.

[SoxSport]

You know' date=' back in the 50's and 60's it used to be the norm that pitchers would go an entire game. When did it become common practice that pitchers would only pitch to the 6th - 7th innings or until they hit the 100 pitch count?[/quote']

 

Good question. You wonder whether that's real progress. I've harped on this quite a bit in posts.

I've talked to 2 or 3 HOF pitchers I've met about it--they say it's a bunch of crap. Seems like it has gradually shrunk down from 120 to 110 to 100 over the last 5-10 years---putting increasing pressure on the bullpen.

 

I read recently the Red Sox FO got their guidelines from their medical staff. How their medical staff arrived at those magical 100 or so pitches God only knows. It certainly isn't based on experience--there is no such data I know of.

 

I do know this: You condition a pitcher to throw 100 pirtches--that's all he'll be able to throw.

 

Before pitch counts, a good pitcher could throw 120-130 pitches before his stuff weakened.

I've seen Schilling throw 145 pitches with the Phillies--and get blown away. His limit was about 130. But Francona would leave him anyways--before he got his pitch counting machine.

 

Reading that "Moneyball" book, I now realize Tito was managing the Sox strictly by the BIll James version of the Bible--according to the wishes of the FO. James says no bunts, sacrifices or stolen bases. I.E, no smallball. The FO/medical staff says 100 pitch limit. That's Tito. He kept the FO happy, but got too lax with the players.

[SoxSport]

There is no way that the Sox should try to deal Beckett and I don't actually think many have called for it. On the other hand there has been a much more balanced discussion about getting rid of Lackey.

 

I doubt there's a sensible fan out there who wants to see Beckett traded. All is not what meets the eye. He was actually one of the hardest workers on the team--and it showed up in the excellent season he had--save for his last couple of starts.

 

On the other hand, Lackey is a goner. Unanimously.

[jung]

I read recently the Red Sox FO got their guidelines from their medical staff. How their medical staff arrived at those magical 100 or so pitches God only knows. It certainly isn't based on experience--there is no such data I know of.

 

Another bit of evidence for what passes for "contemporary" thinking over at Yawkey Way. What the f**k do the medical staff jackasses know about how many pitches a pitcher should pitch. Pitch count is already a bad idea but making your medical staff the arbiter tells me how little these knuckleheads actually know about baseball.

 

As far as I am concerned they can take their computers and shove them up their own asses sideways....idiots!

[User Name]

Question: How does anyone here know better than everyone working on MLB how many pitches should pitches throw?

 

Not meant as a slight, but i'd like to know the actual theory behind why every MLB team is wrong about having pitch counts.

[jacksonianmarch]

Young had a magic number of 330 pitches over 3 starts.

[jung]

Well OK, I will take a shot:

because the pitch count disregards whether the pitcher is actually tired or not and establishes in some cases a completely arbitrary number that dictates the he comes out of the game. The result is what you see. Inherently the number of pitches that a starting pitcher would throw is going to come down under those circumstances. There is no option but for it to come down. That then has its own result. Pitchers no longer even think in terms of complete games and WHAT A SHOCK....the number of complete games goes down.

 

The pitch count is an aberration. It is evil and it should be burned at the stake.

 

While on the topic, I will take Nolan Ryan and his opinion over the jackass Sox medical staff every day and twice on Sunday.

[User Name]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but don't you guys think you're pretty much making up this 100 pitch rule?

 

What you usually see in games is either a younger pitcher whose arm is being protected pitch under an actual limit, or a veteran who looks tired and they take him out for a tough matchup near or above 100 pitches.

 

There are a bunch of guys who averaged near 120 pitches per game last year (Sabby, Verlander, Lincecum off the top of my head). It seems to me that it's dependent on the pitcher, the situation and the manager.

[jung]

There are a bunch of guys who averaged near 120 pitches per game last year (Sabby, Verlander, Lincecum off the top of my head). It seems to me that it's dependent on the pitcher, the situation and the manager.

 

And that is how it should be

 

However there are teams that use pitch count exclusively as the arbiter of when a starting pitcher comes out of a game. There has even been some that have used the same number for all their starting pitchers...how screwed up is that?

 

It should be no surprise under the circumstances that starting pitchers are no longer even in condition to pitch complete games. If you had no other evidence to suggest it is an aberration look at total number of complete games pitched since the pitch count came into fashion vs before it came into fashion. It has been more telling and has had more of an impact than even the lowered pitching mound which I would also suggests has some impact on starting pitchers and complete games.

[User Name]

It's a different time. Teams want to protect their investment. As the poster jacksonianmarch mentioned above, the amount of pitchers blowing their arms out and screwing up their careers in the 60's-80's is insane.

 

Teams nowadays want to take every precaution to keep pitchers healthy, and obviously, not every pitcher has the same amount of stamina so they take care of them on an individual basis.

[jung]

It's a different time. Teams want to protect their investment. As the poster jacksonianmarch mentioned above, the amount of pitchers blowing their arms out and screwing up their careers in the 60's-80's is insane.

 

We are talking here about major league baseball. While pitch counts in youth leagues likely have some value, often it is the types of pitches that young arms are allowed to throw that have more bearing than total numbers of pitches.

 

You make it sound like there is no evidence that a major league starting pitcher is tiring so we must use a number to determine that he come out of the game.

 

Before pitch counts came along the accepted method for understanding that the pitcher should come out of the game was his inability to throw his pitches. Virtually all starting pitchers throw over the top or 3/4. When your arm begins to tire it starts to drop down out of its normal position and you get balls that are now up in the strike zone, balls that are usually deposited in the grand stands. In the case of fastball pitchers, there fastball no longer explodes at the plate (Their stuff is gone). The pitch is dead straight and that pitch is deposited in the same grand stands. There is not that much mystery to this thing. Managers may decide to ignore that their pitcher is tiring but there is not much mystery about whether or not he is tiring.

 

In addition the idea that you are saving arms is a joke. As you condition arms for less work, it then takes less to damage them. You are never going to save injury to major league pitchers arms with pitch counts. In fact most of the evidence suggests that virtually nothing has changed with regard to injury to pitchers as it relates to pitch count in the major leagues.

 

While I am sounding like the pitch count should be completely eliminated I really don't believe that. I just don't think it should be used as the single arbiter of whether a pitcher comes out of a game or not. It should simply be a record that pitchers, their coaches and managers use just like any other tool.

 

There is one thing that has changed dramatically that I believe has had a negative impact on pitchers arms....the shrinking strike zone. While it is probably easy to understand how that would impact complete games, it also has an impact on how the pitcher pitches. You want to start to jam up a pitchers arm? Make him try to get finer and finer. Suddenly he will not be throwing as freely as he should be and that is a stress on his arm all its own. Ya' wanna' cut down on arm injury in major league baseball....get some of these idiot umpires to recognize and reward the pitcher for a good pitch. Why the hell do you think these games are going on for 4 hours now?

[User Name]

It really doesn't matter what you and i think. Teams will do their best to protect what matters most to them: Money. And if that means a hard pitch count, then a hard pitch count they will have. No use complaining about it.

[jung]

It really doesn't matter what you and i think. Teams will do their best to protect what matters most to them: Money. And if that means a hard pitch count, then a hard pitch count they will have. No use complaining about it.

 

Right, which is why Nolan Ryan has thrown the pitch count out on its miserable ass as the arbiter of whether Texas Ranger pitchers will be taken out of games. I suspect we are going to see the pendulum swing back toward the middle with pitch counts continuing to be recorded but used as I am suggesting they should be used in part for the reason you suggest, to protect arms. However I do not believe it will long remain as the arbiter of whether a pitcher should come out or not.

 

The real goal should be.to make pitchers stronger, more able to pitch more AND better and extend the number of pitches between injury. There is no benefit to a major league team to continually remove its best pitchers and allow the competition to hit against its poorest pitchers. In fact you could argue that the biggest sin of all is to have your best pitcher out there throwing bullets for some number of pitches and remove him solely pitch count based only to have some reliever come in and open the flood gates thus losing the game. How much of an asset did your starting pitcher represent in that game?

[User Name]

Baseball Reference has a detailed statistic for pitch average per start for starting pitchers.

 

Here's the average number of pitches per starts for the Rangers rotation:

 

Dave Bush: 72

 

Scott Feldman: 93

 

CJ Wilson: 106

 

Matt Harrison: 100

 

Colby Lewis: 100

 

Alexi Ogando: 93

 

Derek Holland: 100

 

Rangers pitch/start average: 99.

 

League pitch/start average: 98.

 

Then Ryan is flat out lying. They're right around the league average in pitches per start for pitches.

 

Again, teams are looking out for their investment. I'm not saying they're right, i'm just pointing out how it is. And it's unlikely that it will change.

[jung]

Oh OK so Nolan Ryan is lying about pitch count and the Rangers. There is a rational argument for ya'. What basis would Nolan Ryan have for doing that?

 

By the way, if the Rangers do not use pitch count to remove their starters and their average is about where the league average is then what basis is there to believe that pitch count should be the arbiter of whether a pitcher comes out as opposed to simply using the traditional method to judge whether or not a pitcher should come out. I should also point out that it will take some time for Ryan's newly adopted regimen to actually develop more shoulder strength in pitchers and it likely even take more time for the numbers to validate it as not all Ranger pitchers will stay in the Ranger's system or even come from the Rangers system.

 

His starting pitchers now also pitch batting practice for the Rangers another newly adopted part of Ryan's regimen for the Rangers.

[User Name]

Don't ask me. The pitch counts are what they are.

 

The way i see it, managers usually know what the boundary for effectiveness is for a pitcher on any given night and play it conservatively both to win games and to keep the pitchers healthy.

 

I'm going to go ahead and say that the pitching coaches and managers of MLB teams know better than us how to handle a pitching staff.

 

You're welcome to disagree if you so desire, but we're running in circles here.

[jung]

The way i see it, managers usually know what the boundary for effectiveness is for a pitcher on any given night and play it conservatively both to win games and to keep the pitchers healthy.

 

I'm going to go ahead and say that the pitching coaches and managers of MLB teams know better than us how to handle a pitching staff.

 

You're welcome to disagree if you so desire, but we're running in circles here.

 

I rest my case.

[onlybereaved]

I would care to retain Josh if he was more classy. Great pitcher but somewhat of a big baby. Always rubbed me the wrong way - Wish he had a better attitude and smaller ego.

 

Rather him pitch for us than against us though I guess...I am on the fence with this guy.