Soon to join the 3500 pitch non-base clogging club:Aaron Harang, Bronson Arroyo, Johnny Cueto, Josh Fogg and Edinson Volquez

More than somewhat - for pitchers that exceeded this level from '03 through '06, a case could be made that all but 1 or 2 (Oswalt, Rogers more than 2 seasons' delay from '04 to '07 injury) out of 22 fit the pattern!

Still wait and see on Harang from '06 & '07, Zambrano '05 through '07, though one could argue the latter is declining. And Zito and Livan Hernandez are curious - multiple years of exceeding the mark, only showing declines well after the first heavier workloads.

 

How do you account for the fact that sustaining success from year to year is HARD for 90% of the league no matter how many pitches you throw? Seems like a very loose theory, but still very interesting

So is the conclusion that pitchers who get worked more have more of a tendency to perform poorly in the future. I dont think that's news. I'm just trying to figure out how 3500 pitches thrown in 1 season, should be a predictor of future problems. Which is what this article was trying to prove in a way

Kazmir is 160 lbs soaking wet and throws a VERY HARD cutting slider. Kazmir is destined for elbow surgery. Look at David Price. Its hard to imagine him throwing his slider for 15 years without blowing out his elbow, and he has 6 inches and 40 lbs on Kazmir.

What would it say for this 3500 pitch theory if Kazmir posts a sub-3 ERA? I think if he overcomes this elbow strain, he will flirt with that possibility.

What about CC Sabathia? The guy just entered the 3500 pitch club right? Most people think 2007 was his jumpoff, not the begtinning of the end

Carlos Zambrano, Livan Hernandez, Dontrelle Willis, Bronson Arroyo, Barry Zito-- I can list 10 reasons for each of  these guys downfall

I'm not trying to poo poo all over this guy's studies. It looks like he put a lot of hard work in it, and there was a lot of good thought behind it. I just think there is too much adversity facing pitchers nowadays, regardless of innings thrown, to prevent them from stringing together several great seasons. And if they are in that small group, qand they do happen to be an inning eater, I doubt they are seeing dips in production. Look at Randy Johnson, Curt Schilling, Mike Mussina, David Cone, Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, etc these guys pitched a TON of innings every year

If you go back 20-30-80 years you probably had 100s of guys pitching 3500 pitches every year and posting great year after great year. Pitching was easier then. Hitters were a lot worse

"If you go back 20-30-80 years you probably had 100s of guys pitching 3500 pitches every year and posting great year after great year. Pitching was easier then. Hitters were a lot worse"
__________________
This may be true, but I am not sure it is. Posnanski has an article that looks at pitchers who got to 100 wins by the age of 26. While the study is hardly conclusive about anything, there is at least a suggestion that many of those pitchers were worked very hard in their young years and many flamed out pretty early, by ages 28-32 in most cases. Even those few who went on to the HOF, pitchers like Palmer and Hunter, lost much of their effectiveness by the time they were 30. And that pattern holds even for deadball era pitchers.

There are exceptions, and often other explanations for decline. And the study is not about # of pitches per se. But it may be a case of us remembering the exceptions because they were among the very few who were so good, and thus so unusual, rather than remembering the great majority whose careers were cut short by early overuse.

Just for fun, I checked two great pitching staffs from the deadball era: The 1906 Cubs and the 1910 As. Except for Mordecai Brown and Eddie Plank, none are in the HOF, and most are forgotten, but at the time they were ace pitchers winning 20 games with great ERAs even for that era. Except for Plank, not one lasted as a useful starter after age 34.

Here are the pitchers with the last year (age) of real effectiveness:

1906 Cubs:

Brown: 34
Pfiester: 31
Lundgren: 27
Reulbach: 28 (He made a comeback at 32, then faded entirely)
Jack Taylor: 32
Overall: 28

1910 As:

Combs: 29
Cy Morgan: 32
Bender: 30
Plank: He lasted into his late 30s
In 1913, Shawkey was integral to the World Series champs. He was done by age 33.

I am guessing such career arcs were common, but hidden in the bright lights of Walter Johnson, Mathewson and Alexander, the few who avoided arm destruction. And Mathewson was also done at age 33 while his teammates Wiltse (29) and Dummy Taylor (31) were also finished young.

And of course, the saddest story of all, the great Joe Wood who went 34-5 in 344 innings at age 22 and never pitched more than 158 innings in a season again. In 3 years, he was totally washed up as a pitcher.

One of my childhood heroes was Robin Roberts. 6 straight seasons of 20 wins and over 300 IP. Age 28 was his last season as a great pitcher, and although he pitched to age 39, the rest of his career he swung between slightly above league average to significantly worse, with a few somewhat better years mixed in.

Good post. Again, I dont think there is any question that overuse causes problems. Also, I agree that every pitcher has a certain amount of "bullets" in the arm, and when they are all used up they are DONE. Whether its over 5 years, or 15 years.

Randy Johnson has pitched 4,000 innings. That is incredibe, and still his back is what always gives him problems, not his arm. Randy Johnson has thrown 1800 innings after the age of 35. And that isn't because he was "saved" in his early years. Other than injury filled years in 2003, 2007, and 1996 and a strike shortened season in 1994, The Unit has been a workhorse his entire career.

David COne threw 2500 innings in 12 years, and never saw a dip in production until the age of 37.

Mike Mussina has been consistent threw 17 years and 3400 innings

I just don't see Kazmir, Sabathia, or Harang falling off or getting hurt because of 3500 pitches thrown last year. If Kazmir gets hurt, its because his throwing style is suscebtible to injury.

I think this theory is saying A (pitcher) + B (throws 3500 pitches in 1 season) = C (blown out arm/loss of ability) and I just think it's too generalized to practically apply it to any individual player ahead of time. If I say it is going to rain July 17th and it does, does that make me a prophet? No, it just means that we live in Florida and it rains everyday during the summer.

Show me why throwing 3500 pitches will make Kazmir less of a pitcher in the next 3 years.