Piece on Earth: Phillies 2, Marlins 1 (10)

truer words never been written

You’re not real

So if you take away 3 months of the season…..

Who does that?

Go away.

Wow.
There are no words.

You’re like the Little Carmine of the internet.

There was a double-rainbow forming a complete arch from horizon to horizon over CBP as fans were filing in for the nightcap. Quite cool.

+ Eleventy Billion for Muppet Movie references.

I might agree with you if we hadn’t just played a day game hours before where we used Kendrick, bastardo, Stutes, Lidge and Madson.

We only had Herndon and Schwimer fresh in the pen, and it was a 1-0 game, Lee was at 102 pitches and ptretty much cruising….. (4 hits, 11 K’s and no walks on 105 pitches is pretty damn sickeningly efficient)

Different story once HF and the division are in the books.

Sheesh, what the hell happened here? I didn’t think I was starting anything.

So anyway, obviously nobody knows what the cutoff line for any given pitcher in any given game beyond which he’s thrown too many pitches. But that doesn’t matter. All that matter is that throwing fewer pitches presents a lower risk or injury, wear-and-tear, etc. than throwing more pitches does. Therefore, we should err on the side of throwing fewer pitches.

Does that mean we should hold all the starters to zero pitches? Is that the necessary implication of what I said above? I like reductio ad absurdums as much as the next guy, but in this case it just doesn’t work because nobody is actually arguing that reducing injury risk is the only consideration here. Obviously there are countervailing considerations, namely, that you want your pitchers to be ready to pitch at max capacity when the playoffs start. So the goal should be to err on the side of lowering their pitch counts as much as possible without taking away from their “stretched-out-ness.”

So the crux of the debate is whether Joecatz is right that lowering Halladay’s or Lee’s pitch counts to 100 pitches for a couple of games will make them unable to throw 125 or whatever in Games 1 and 2 of the NLDS. With all respect to Joe, I just don’t think that’s very likely. First of all, it isn’t uncommon at all for guys during the course of a season to throw 100 pitches for a couple of games and then go out and throw more pitches in the third game. For instance, that’s exactly what Lee himself did last night. He threw 100 in back-to-back games, then threw 117, without showing any ill effects. Second, it seems to me that the main thing that a starter needs to do to maintain their stamina is just to start games. The pitch count in any individual game doesn’t matter that much because it’s not the energy you expend is directly proportional to the number of pitches you throw. The difference between not pitching at all vs. throwing 30 pitches is a lot bigger than the difference between pitches 30 to 60. That’s because in order to pitch at all you have to longtoss, you have to work in the pen, you need to warm up before each inning, etc. The difference between 0 and 1 is the biggest difference there is because there’s a certain “fixed cost” to pitching in a game. Therefore, after pitch 1, the amount of marginal energy you exert decreases – at least until you start to get fatigued, which is when the curve of the line inverts.

Now, does this then mean that Lee should have been held to 80 pitches, or 70, or 60? I don’t think that’s necessarily the conclusion you need to draw. Again, nobody knows exactly where the line is between OK and Not-OK, but that doesn’t mean that all guesses are equally valid or invalid. Standard industry practice generally isn’t such a reliable standard to go by in any industry but it’s better than nothing – thus it’s reasonable to rely on it when you aren’t able to rely on quantifiable data one way or the other. In baseball, the industry practice is that 100 pitches are used as a rule of thumb for when you have to start keeping an eye on a pitcher. I think the wisest possible policy is to look to that industry standard in determining how many pitches your starters throw when the present games don’t matter but the future games will matter immensely. There’s some leeway on where exactly you draw the line since it really is guess work – who knows if someone will get hurt after only 60 pitches in one particular game – but at the very least, don’t be more aggressive than the industry standard in a game that doesn’t matter.

On one hand, I am OK with that (getting players who will not play much some post season experience instead of bringing them up to ride pine), but last night the Phillies practically banked on being able to get through game 2 in nine innings and with only Lee and two (maybe three depending on Herndon) relief pitchers, which is more than a little inexcusable in September.

Food for thought:

Kershaw has 14 games started where he left before the start of the seventh inning, and of those 14, 7 of them he gave up at least 4 runs. 17 starts where he went at least 7 innings. in 16 of those starts he gave up less than 2 runs.

Lee has 7 games where he didn’t start the 7th inning, and in 3 of those games where he gave up at least 4 runs. 23 starts of 7 innings or more, and in 18 of those he gave up LESS than 2 runs.

Halladay has 7 games where he didn’t come out for the 7th, and only 1 of those games where he gave up more than 4 runs. 21 starts of 7 innings or more, and he gave up less than 2 runs in 15 of them. no more than 3 or 4 in the rest.

Halladay has had one really bad start all season. kershaw and Lee have both had at least 4.

Halladay has been the most consistently good pitcher in the NL this year.

Thanks! This is good stuff.

Feierabend is not a prospect, unfortunately. He was one long ago for the Mariners, but didn’t pan out, then had major surgery. Phils took a flyer on him. He’s old.

I’m at least happy that not of the relievers who crapped the bed were prospects.

I’ve been to Coca Cola Park once and it was freezing. I really enjoyed the corn on the cob with cheese.

u mad

Be 100% sure.

I doubt I could get my arms around one of Howard’s arms.