Handling Young Pitchers
This article was initially meant to be one piece, but there was too much information to analyze. In order to save everyone from one massive article, I’ve decided to split this piece into two parts. Part two will run in the coming days.
While traveling for the holidays, I find that a good book makes a flight much more enjoyable. Last night, I began my journey through The Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2011. While I have found many of the articles intriguing, Craig Wright’s How to Handle a Pitcher was particularly interesting. In the article Wright examines the Texas Rangers new approach to pitching, argues against current pitch count restrictions and explains how to handle young pitchers. In this piece, we are going to focus on young pitcher workloads. With more prospects reaching the majors at younger ages, how difficult is it for team to prevent long-term injuries to their prospects while pushing them just enough to maintain short-term success?
In this article, Wright explains that “younger pitchers in their formative years need to be handled with exceptional care that eases to general monitoring in the prime seasons.” This belief has been widely accepted by both teams and analysts as pitchers in their formative years, defined as ages 18-24, are no longer pushed like Frank Tanana and Dwight Gooden were early in their careers.
One of the major advantages to restricting pitchers in their formative years is that it allows teams to gather more information on their prized prospects. It gives teams the opportunity to see how the pitcher responds after a small innings increase, or a higher pitch count than usual, without pushing that pitcher past their limit. Teams can also learn how injuries or fatigue can affect their prospects. Not all players heal at a similar rate, so knowing whether one pitcher will heal in two weeks rather than six weeks can be advantageous to managers and coaches.
The main issue with this pitching strategy is that it’s tough for teams to completely obey. Like Tanana and Gooden, the best pitching prospects will reach the majors while still in their formative stages. The truth is, it’s difficult for teams to hold back their young prospects when a) that pitcher is living up to expectations, and b) their team is in the middle of a pennant race. Even though it is widely believed that pitchers are handled more carefully today, there are still reasons for concern. For example, Felix Hernandez nearly threw 200 innings as a 20 year old and Clayton Kershaw experienced nearly a 70 inning workload increase between his age 20-21 seasons.
How will these workloads affect Hernandez and Kershaw? Entering 2011, Hernandez will officially exit his formative years according to Wright’s research. If his formative years are indicative of his prime seasons, it appears Hernandez can be relied upon as a pitcher who can endure a lot of innings (he did throw 249.2 last season). At the same time, it’s unclear how a high workload during his formative years will affect his future. One analyst could point to Hernandez’s formative years and tell you that it proves he is a workhorse, another might tell you that he’s built up a lot of innings on a young arm. Which analyst is wrong?
Kershaw, meanwhile, is still in his formative years and it will be interesting to see how far the Los Angeles Dodgers are willing to push their young ace. How to handle a pitcher like Kershaw is one of the toughest tasks in baseball. Kershaw is the Dodgers best pitcher, meaning the more innings he throws, the better the Dodgers should perform. If the Dodgers find themselves in a playoff race next season, their best chance at making the post-season may depend on starting Kershaw on short rest. While pushing Kershaw could pay off in the short term, the Dodgers could be in a situation where they ruin his long term success.
While teams have gotten better at managing the workloads of their young starters, there is still a chance teams are pushing young starters too hard. When you line up Felix Hernandez’s ages with his innings pitched, it’s easy to worry about his future. However, Hernandez has handled the innings workload without any major issues. Wright doesn’t really use current pitchers when discussing this issue in his article, but I would be interested to hear his thoughts on the subject.
In part two, I will examine Wright’s arguments against current pitch count restrictions.
1
Just don’t let Dusty baker manage your ballclub.
Where is the data to back up what you’re implying? Kerry Wood’s mechanics were screaming ‘arm surgery’ to even the untrained eye long before he put on a professional uniform. A lot of people believe Mark Prior had ‘perfect’ mechanics, but that rumor got started by his ex-pitching coach, who wasn’t exactly being objective. Don’t believe me?
http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/Baseball/Pitching/rethinkingpitching/Essays/MarkPriorPitchingMechanics.html
http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/baseball/pitching/professionalpitcheranalyses/KerryWood.html
So please–tell me how Dusty Baker is horrible with young arms. What’s next? He favors veterans over younger players? This is a fact because he chose to play Neifi Perez everyday at shortstop? Well, let me ask you this: what were his options? The only shortstops younger than Perez were Ryan Theriot–who joined the Cubs late in the year and had never played above A+ going into the season–and a 22-year-old Ronny Cedeno, who has produced a negative WAR over the course of his entire career. Who should Baker have used instead? Cody Ransom? Shane Halter? Scott McClain? Mike Moriarty? Please, please, please tell me about what a horrible manager Dusty Baker is.
I bet Mike Leake and Travis Wood would love to hear about how horrible Dusty Baker is with arms. I’m sure they’d also love it if you could explain to them why Dusty Baker (and/or Walt Jocketty) took them out of the rotation to limit their innings. And I bet Drew Stubbs would like to hear about how Dusty prefers veterans over younger players. It was only his second year in MLB, and he got stuck with playing center field so often that he was second in the league in putouts at his position.
All that crap about Dusty Baker is just that: crap. People got ideas stuck in their head about him, and there’s no actual basis behind any of it. Don’t get me wrong–the guy isn’t perfect as a manager–but he’s not *that* horrible with young arms, and he doesn’t have a problem with favoring veterans over younger players. If you’re going to criticize Baker, please let it be for something like favoring the hit-and-run too often or being overly eager when it comes to bunting.
It really saddens me that a group as (supposedly) informed as FanGraphs can like your comment as much as they did.
Mark Prior’s mechanics were perfect because Tom House said so.
For brevity and politeness, I’ll leave it at that.
Jim Leyland is by far the worst manager of pitchers. Stupid people will believe what they want to believe.
Baker is an extremely highly respected manager amongst people that matter. Don’t sweat the stupidity. They are acting on a gut feeling, which is no different than a dog barking at you.
What I have almost NEVER seen taken into account is the body of the athlete.
Guys like Verlander, Lester and Jimenez haven’t had problems because they have strong frames than can handle the extra work.
Look at how the Red Sox treated Lester and Buchholz – it was a bit different, they were trying to back Buchholz off the last couple of years (the injury break this year wasn’t that big of a deal because they were going to skip him anyway). As for Lester in 2008/09 they just pitched him every turn because unlike Buchholz he had a strong frame that could handle extra work.
From 2008-2009 Lester was 24 and 25, so the risk of injury was supposedly drastically reduced. The Red Sox did not buck the trend here.
Those guys throw a majority of fastballs of one variety or another.
I think those things have been taken into account with teams drafting bigger SPs with the thought that the bigger guy will be more durable. I haven’t seen any evidence to prove that’s the case. Is the glenoid labrum on a guy that’s 6’4 230 stronger than one who is 5’11 185? I don’t know the answer that, but my layman guess is that they are not.
i thought it was because the taller you are in theory the faster you are probably going to be able to throw, with less effort.
More so with the “less effort” part. Smaller guys tend to have to use strange deliveries or strange grips (usually for changeups) to get the same effect (see: Lincecum, Martinez, Harden). Also, big guys are usually stronger and more able to handle large workloads, partially for the “less effort” reason.
Wright’s article was my favorite part of The Hardball Times Annual. I heartily recommend checking it out.
Why should a team care about the health of a player 6 years, or even 3 years down the road? Other than you know, ethics, but who has time for those. The main value of these players to their teams is in their cost controlled years. The best thing for the player might be to pitch 100 IP then 140, then 170, then 200, but that’s a waste of millions of dollars of value for a good pitcher. Why should they care if his arm falls off when he’s 32 years old and making $25m/yr for the Yankees?
some teams actually do that, you know – especially college teams. UCLA is one of the more notorious examples – for instance, Gerrit Cole (originally drafted in the first round out of high school) consistently throws 120 or more pitches in his starts (he turned 20 years old in September). obviously, college teams know for sure that they’re losing the pitcher in 4 years or less, so they have even less incentive to take care of the arms.
Because a team that blows out arms quickly and shows little interest in the long-term success of its draftees will probably have trouble drafting young pitchers in the future because of it.
Under Bavasi, the Mariners approach with Hernandez was to cap his IP at 10x his age in years. That wasn’t the product of any complex evaluation, of course, but they felt it would provide a gradual increase in his workload as he matured.
age 17: 69 IP
age 18: 169 IP
age 19: 172 IP
age 20: 191 IP
age 21: 190 IP
age 22: 200 IP
age 23: 238 IP
age 24: 249 IP
The big jump was at age 18, which was his first season above rookie league. After that the increase in workload was fairly steady.
Another factor to consider is that as he was coming through the minors, he didn’t labor as much as most other pitchers because so often he was performing beyond his level.
also pitching mechanics make a difference. Do you want someone wacky like francisco rodriguez or jose valverde blowing out their arms with violent deliveries or the nice and easy, as well as repeatable, mariano rivera mechanics? The stress put on an elbow or shoulder can be a product of violent mechanics, not just size and velocity.
Hardly the same scenario., In MiLB Rivera was a position player, who they just taught a very basic delivery (ala, Rob Nenn).
Tom Lincecum has a violent delivery.
I would humbly suggest that just because a guy looks smooth and effortless, does not mean he is not putting serious effort into the pitch.
There’s a reason why every picture of a pitcher has them with strain on their face. They are exerting a lot of effort.
Smooth and effortless are two different things.
just read about Sandy Koufax’ perfect game vs. the Cubs at Dodger stadium.
After his outings, he arm would ‘bruise from the elbow up to the arm pit’. Yikes!
ok well i have heard in scouting reports deliveries described as “easy” or as not putting undue pressure or strain on his arm/elbow. whether or not it looks effortless, some deliveries are less stressful on a pitcher’s arm than others, which undoubtedly affects their longevity. and you are kind of arguing my point that Rivera’s delivery (regardless of his path to the majors) is simple, repeatable, and not hard on his arm, unlike lincecum or valverde or K-rd (who practically falls down after every pitch).
How is Lincecum and K-Rod’s delivery hard on their arms?
Rich Harden’s delivery is hard on his arm. Does his delivery look smooth and effortless?
I understand what you are saying. But you also realize that Mark Prior’s mechanics were once viewed as being “perfect”, effortless, and easy …. but we now know that raising your elbow about your shoulder line (inverted-W) and having your pitching arm make a downward facing right angle (inverted-L) are two of the worst things you can do.
Smooth and effortless are desirable because they are easier to keep consistent (repeatable). But K-Rod’s craziness doesn’t really have anything to do with arm stress.
Lincecum’s delivery is probably more hazardous to his groin than it is his arm. You want to see pitchers using their legs and core. You don’t want to see guys short stride, using all arm, and don;t let their arm decelerate or recoil.
Tim Lincecum – small and athletic.
I think it really depends on the team that is developing the player. A smaller market team with a smaller payroll isn’t as focused on the long term health of the player. They are also less likely to rush a player to the majors, because they start accruing service time. They are better off polishing a player in AAA than in the majors. Their workloads are going to be smaller, building up in the minors until they feel the player can perform very well at the major league level.
“New” approach by the Texas Rangers? You do realize that Texas is using a very old approach, primarily consisting of “throw often” but at low-med intensities.
An article on handling “young pitchers” needs to be directed at coiaches of 12-18 year olds, not major league clubs …. IMHO.
How many national tournaments did Strasburg pitch in by age 17? How many did Nolan Ryan.
This kids, especially from Southern Cal, are pitching in multiple showcase leagues, for around 10 monthes out of the year. Essentially they are handling major league workloads.
It is not uncommon for HS pitchers to throw 150-180 IP when you count HS ball, summer leagues, and legion (or semi-pro). So, they do this from spring to summer, and then go to college (fall ball) and throw another 20-40 IP.
IMHO, the issue is not at the major leagues. Look at how many IP these guys throw in college. They are ridden like low grade mules.
Find out what pitch causes them the least amount of stress on the arm and teach the pitchers how to rely on that and use the more potentially structurally damaging pitches as the knockout punch.
fastball change-up
Or alternatively, start them all on knuckleballs and never turn back…
Anyone need a 5th starter?
Quiet old man – that’s MY gig.
Bitches, please.
I read something a while back (can’t remember where – very possibly here) that talked about how throwing in high leverage/high stress situations created a lot more wear and tear than pitching in low leverage/low stress ones. Throwing the whole “each arm has a certain number of bullets in the gun” argument out the window in effect by saying that not all bullets are the same. Has anyone done any good research on this topic as it relates to developing young arms?
I hear that in some states, handling young pitchers can get you 10 years minimum, plus mandatory registration. So really, a no handling policy is probably best…
The frame idea is bull. Size really appears to have very little impact on a guy getting hurt or not. The only sub 6 foot right handed guys with real carrers recently are tim and roy oswalt. How long have those guys been on the dl? Strausburg on the otherhand is a hoss. That obviously helped his durability a ton. I believe this might be because big projectable guys can get away with bad mechanics, as well as the fact that larger guys actually put more stress on the mussles that get injured easily. Those tiny hinge mussles don’t get much stronger with a bigger person.
Kershaw through 169 innings between the majors in minors at age 20
Kershaw through 171 innings in the majors at age 21.
errr….threw that should be
82.2, 111, & 20.2
Those are the innings Madison Bumgarner tossed in 2010 for his time in the minors, the majors and the postseason respectively. Thats over 224 at age 20-21.
But he’s built like a horse. And did you see his last 8 innings of 2010 ? Way to finish strong!
Bumgarner’s excessive innings last season are a major concern to me. The fact that he ended strongly doesn’t alleviate that concern.
However, the Giants have also overworked (by most formulas) Cain and Lincecum at young ages, and so far they have not only survived, but thrived.
I would like to see some good, original FanGraphs analysis on this subject.
I do believe that if the Giants were not in a playoff chase he would have been shut down.
Any other team would have handled him the same way if they were likewise in the hunt.
Seems like it would be wise to ease their pitchers back up to speed in spring training.
Bumgarner unquestionably would’ve been shut down were it not for the pennant race and postseason. I’m very curious to see how he responds.
That said, the one Giant who really did seem to buckle under the extra work was Jonathan Sanchez, who very clearly hit a wall after his NLDS start. Reasons for this are many — he’d never worked so many innings, he’s extremely thin, and his mechanics have almost never been consistent from start to start.
The Giants have had a few prospects flame out with shoulder injuries (oddly, few elbow injuries), but to date their track record with young starters is pretty impressive. And I think the reason for this is that any notions of pitch counts, innings limitations, etc. are macro solutions to micro problems. Teams need to have highly specified plans for each pitcher, rather than any overarching mantra.
I know this is far from an exact science, as Prior and Strasburg indicate. But I think you need to identify how risky pushing each pitcher is, and accept the risk. The Giants knew, for example, that a big, strong kid with an effortless delivery that relies a lot on his legs (Cain) could theoretically bear a much greater strain than other young prospects, and they took a gamble on pushing him and reaped the rewards. Cain has lost significant velocity over the past few years, but that’s been inversely proportional to his success.
I am 100% in favor of extreme care with young pitchers, but I don’t believe in the intrinsic value of pitch counts or anything like that. Those kinds of rules just don’t make sense when you consider how dramatically different pitchers are from one another with respect to size, mechanics, and athleticism.
Me too … to some degree. I favor caution if that is the only alternative to recklessness, in regards to the health or career of another. For myself, pitch me as often as possible, and use up everything I have. That’s my nature individually.
But, in terms of evidence, I don’t see where all the pitch counts and extreme caution is having any effect on pitcher durability and volume … as compared to the “go throw a complete game or your ass goes home” mentality (or the “I ain’t coming out no matter what so get your butt back to the dugout”) of decades past.
What has changed the most is the pitcher themselves. No more pacing. Guys come up looking to light the radar gun up from the first inning on. It’s balls out all the time. Some would say it’s because of the velocity is everything mentality. Some would say it’s because hitters have gotten better and there are no “easy outs” even at the bottom of the order (I disagree with that). Others would point to relief usage and pitch counts and see that pitchers throw fewer pitches, but more intensity.
IMO, intensity is the greater enemy than volume. I think the human body was designed/evolved to handle endurance better than it handles intensity. I am referring to ligaments and tendons, etc.
I’m not sure we’re making advancements in pitcher handling and care. I like the idea of PAPs and pitch counts (especially at the younger ages, and for a variety of reasons). But, I don’t see the evidence really supporting this being an advancement in terms of fewer injuries, more IP, more GS, etc.
If we took all of the 20-24yo pitchers at the MLB level for the last 60 years, and looked at their career numbers, which group/decade would have the most IP, most GS, etc?
Let’s clear up some of the conjecture related to body dynamics and physiology.
Larger framed athletes are not necessarily better equipped to handle larger workloads than guys who are medium/small framed. There’s no data to back up those assertions and I’d chalk it up to ignorance on the part of MLB GM’s.
You can only go by the genetics of the individual and what strengths and weaknesses are inherent within their body structure. In essence, there’s no reason to think a slight framed Tim Lincecum is any less durable than a burly Halladay.
In addition, when you’re talking pitchers, you have to take in to account the stabilization muscles which are the easiest to injure. That’s why you see pitchers on the DL for oblique/lower-back, calf injuries. There are so many muscle groups working in conjuction with a pitcher due to repeated delivery that the smaller muscle groups tend to get overlooked in terms of pre-game preparation and stretching.
Repetitive motion injuries from pitching revolve around the connective tissue, which holds the joints together. We’re mainly talking about the shoulder capsule and elbow joint.
If you get a guy with bad genetics and throw him in the MLB meat grinder you will end up with a Brandon Webb situation.
If you get a guy with great genetics and do the same, you might be lucky enough to end up with a Felix Hernandez/Tim Lincecum.
There’s no evidence to suggest a right or wrong way to acclimate a pitcher to a 200IP workload at the MLB level.
It’s really sink or swim.
Statistical analyses indicate that young starting pitchers who are allowed to undertake heavy workload early in their career are more likely to suffer severe injuries than young starting pitchers who are brought along more slowly in the majors. Baseball Prospectus cites the study in “Diamond Apprised” to show that pitchers with more than 30 Batters-Faced-Per-Start early in their careers – before they turned 25 – were far more likely to crash and burn than those who were brought along more slowly.
Somehow, I’m left doubting both the scope and variables included in the study. How many years was it conducted over? How many pitchers?
In a general sense you can make a correlation, but that’s not causation………..and without that, you have nothing to stand on.
…….and that still doesn’t explain the outliers like Tiny Tim and King Felix.
What does statistical analysis show about heavy workolads in general?
I’m guessing heavy workloads in general are detrimental to pitching health.
I’ll also go out on a limb and say that those that pitch the most have the most talent. Furthermore, those that have the most talent also had the most talent as young pitchers.
Roger Clemens threw a boatload. He was also a serious workhorse in college (damn near abuse).
My guess is if you look at the guys that threw the most innings from their age 27-32 seasons, and looked back at how they were used from age 19 to 23, you wouldn’t find any gradual progression or “bringing them along slowly”.
I think what we’d find is that some guys are more mechanically sound, better conditioned, and quite frankly have the genetics to “take it” in terms of use. Some of the guys that rack up big innings are not always the most efficient in terms of pitching counts and control, nor do they have the best mechanics.
There are plenty of things that still make us say “I dunno”.
As smart as we think we are. As much research as we think has been conducted. It may very well come down to this.
I know the saberists are tremendously desperate to come up with a pattern or formula that shows intelectual superiority over what current managers, coaches, etc do.
The example listed is off Felix Hernandez. A non-American drafted early and has spent his entire career as a pro … most likely the level where his well being and health mean the most.
The other guys mentioned are Strasburg who has pitched all over the nation in high level showcase tournaments since age 10 (and with bad mechanics before his upper levels of college).
Those two situations are not even comparable.
Regardless, teams are going to try and get as many MLB innings as they can out of a guy while he’s still under team control. They’re not going to bring them up easy, use small progressions, so they cn have a long and healthy craeer for some other team (if that really is how things progress).
In short,I don;t think we know all that much about how to handle young pitchers. To be completely honest, I don’t think we know that much about all the aspects involved.
Beware the guy who says he has it figured out. He’s probably the one that knows the least.
In terms of athletics, genetics are the equalizer.
No matter how fluid the mechanics or how conditioned the athlete, when it comes right down to pitching 200+ innings at the MLB level, it’s sink or swim. Either an athlete’s body acclimates to the rigors or it breaks down and he has to compromise something in-between. Whether that means changing mechanics, conditioning or perhaps lessening the IP load, something must change or the body deteriorates.
That was the point I was making between guys like Brandon Webb who broke down and mini-marvels like Tim Lincecum who thrive.
I say Webb’s genetic predisposition is such that he wasn’t mean to take the mound throwing sinkers for 200IP+ for seasons on end, but we didn’t know that until he broke down.
I also predict that Lincecum, while being a genetic freak, will have to make a compromise very soon in his career regarding off-season conditioning and/or mechanics because he is already seeing some deterioration in his FB velocity and control consistency.
I think he has the type of body structure that can stay flexible IF he maintains the same training regime that got him this far. If he neglects his off-season training, though, he will start to get injured as the 200IP seasons mount up.
It’s one thing to have great genetics, but being a professional athlete demands alot from someone just in terms of body maintenance.
How long Tim Lincecum maintains his excellence really depends on him mostly. He’s already proven he can do it, now it’s just about doing what it takes to protect his body and health for the longterm.
Laying off the weed can only help in this regard…….
“I know the saberists are tremendously desperate to come up with a pattern or formula that shows intelectual superiority over what current managers, coaches, etc do.”
Don’t be a dick. It isn’t a search for superiority over coaches and managers, it is simply the eternal hunt for more knowledge. I don’t care WHO the patter or formula is superior to, I just WANT a superior formula or pattern than what we’ve got – which is basically nothing.
“
“Laying off the weed can only help in this regard…….”
Now I don’t think there is ANY evidence for THAT.
Perhaps I am being a dick.
The author used King Felix as an example of gradual progression, and the conclusion is that by using this method, young pitchers will be more durable/valuable..
[1] How does Felix compare/contrast to other MLB pitchers?
Well to start I’d say (A) He’s non-American and (B) he’s damn talented.
(A) American pitchers with unique talent are very likely pitching in “important games” continuously from age 10 to 18. If you live in a warm weather climate, this might be year round (i.e., no recovery period). This is far from the “playing baseball all day long” that we did as kids, that our dads did as kids, and that kids from other nations probably due.
(B) For all we know, Felix could have thrown 275 IP each season of his career and been fine.
[2] Couldn’t one use Nolan Ryan (and a LOT of other guys) as evidence that young pitchers should be thrown into the fray, and with conditioning, their body will acclimate to the workload. Furthermore, guys in those camps could point to the IP/season numbers of decades past and compare them now.
[3] Dwight Gooden is used an example of how not to do it? Dwight Gooden threw 200 IP 7 times out of 10 years, during times of drug abuse, and no conditioning. How is that evidence AGAINST anything? Seems like, if you have the talent, the Dwight Gooden model resulted in quite a bit of success? 41.3 WAR over 7 years. Felix has 21WAR over 6 years.
Couldn’t one look at that and say Seattle is NOT getting enough value out of a top line pitcher? Just sayin.
What I saying is that there is not more evidence for gradual progression than other methods. It makes sense, it aligns with my preferences, but does not “out-evidence” the other methods.
Nothing? What we have is a method where teams put their best talent on the field, and try to win.
Due to increased financial investments, we have pitchers throw less often, throw fewer innings, make fewer starts, and injuries are still a serious problem.
Human individuals respond differently to same stimulus. While we are similar, we are also genetically unique.
If you take ALL young pitchers and put them on the “Felix Progression Plan”, how many pitch 200 IP for 6 straight years? How many flame out with injuries? How many are up and down with injuries? We don’t know. It could be less injuries, it could be more injuries, or the same number of injuries.
I love exercise physiology and strength training. We know gradual progression is a great way of increasing strength and muscle, while minimizing injury (combined with great mechanics). But, we also know that you get to a point where your progression and mechanics cannot overcome the physical limitation of your physiology (structure).Bluntly, your tendons and ligaments, and muscle and bone, can only take so much regardless of how you build up.
My preference is aligned with the author’s view. But, I also acknowledge that the evidence is not strongly supportive of this method over others, nor does we know the physical limitations of those involved.
We would need large scale numbers of both groups, and significant deparity in the “final data” to reach a good conclusion.
^Marijuana contains more toxic elements than cigarettes do and this is FACT.
In terms of athletic performance, him not smoking will help, if only in a very peripheral way (cardiovascular stamina).
This, to me, is common sense.
While I agree that smoking marijuana is detrimental, I don’t think it’s a fact that it contains more toxic elements than cigarettes. This is just high school health class level info in the back of my head, but cigarettes are super processed and weed is all natural. I’m no expert, I just think to say anything is a fact, especially if you’re going to caps lock it, you should at least link some information.
No it doesn’t. Not even close.
I would like to know peoples thoughts on where Jeremy Bonderman fits into all of this? Can he rebound? Will he be able to ever pitch 200 plus innings again (he did once in his career). Just curious. What about Mark Prior. Will he ever make it back to the bigs and be a big inning guy?
Joba in the bullpen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I appreciate anything you did listed here. I’m keen on the area wherever you express you are doing this to give back and yet I would imagine by means of all the feed-back this is doing the job for you at the same time.