I've been really wondering about the 'Verducci Effect' I'm no SABR expert, but I do understand the concept of Small Sample Size. While the Verducci Effect makes perfect sense to me, 10 years ago I would have said the same thing about Batting Average and RBIs as an indicator of the best hitters.
So, as a total non expert, I wonder if the Verducci Effect has enough data to be "proven". While younger pitchers do seem more fragile, it seems like a tough thing to really know how much is innings pitched, how much its "stressful" innings (lots of pitches in one inning) how much it is unpredictable, and how much of it is caused by Dusty Baker.
There are a few things with the New York Yankees that never change. That's pride, tradition, and most of all, we have the greatest fans in the world. -Derek Jeter, 9/21/08 -- last words from old Yankee Stadium
I haven't been able to follow any rationale in this post for selling high THIS year. Unless you just think he stinks, is overrated, and will blow up any day now. If its a keeper, OK but make that point.
That will hurt his value for this year because a team isn't going to increase a 23(soon 24) year olds innings enough to make him going 6+ deep in september and maybe august starts. People will whine when he goes to the bullpen saying how they are messing with his mindset. But it's either that, or down to the minors going 3 or 4 innings for a few starts then shutting him down having him watch the playoff games from home. And the yankees wouldn't get hurt to much with him going to the pen when he's at 120 innings or so since they proved last year they can go with a 3 man rotation in the playoffs.
Skin Blues wrote:Is there any research done on these innings pitched increases, pitch count limits, and all that? I'm not being facetious, I'm seriously wondering. I assume there is a huge amount of variance on how certain IP counts affect different players. Starting a dozen games and throwing 80 IP is certainly different than being a reliever and throwing 80 IP. Not to mention relievers warm up more often than they actually pitch, they pitch back-to-back days, etc. This whole "limit him to 170" thing seems very arbitrary and a bunch of anecdotal hocus pocus, if you ask me. There certainly should be concern with over-use, but intuitively a guy throwing 120 pitches every 5 days and being shut down in August is far more harmful than consistently throwing 100 pitches every 5 days all season. So many variables to account for. So is there any actual data on this? It can't be hard for somebody with the resources to run the numbers.
This really doesn't answer my questions at all. It's anecdotal and most of those pitchers had good years. His top 5 "riskiest pitchers" for 2009 all had very good seasons well within the expected range, including the NL Cy Young winner and a 22 year old Clayton Kershaw that ended up with 2.79 ERA in 30 starts. Jon Lester increased his K/9 from 6.5 to 10.0 (!!!) while his BB rate stayed identical, over 32 starts. And these are the absolute WORST CASE scenarios according to Verducci. It seems like a bunch of voodoo to me, and I'd like to see some actual research. In no way is it logical or useful to assume all innings are comparable to each other, which is the fatal flaw of this theory. Picking arbitrary division points (Jan 1 to December 31) is silly when pitchers pitch all year round, in fall leagues, winter leagues, playoffs, spring training, etc. There is at least some logic to the idea that younger pitchers shouldn't be pushed too far in a single game, such as 90 or 100 pitches. But if a guy is going out throwing 95 pitches per game every 5 days, it's not logical to assume he should be shut down once he hits an arbitrary amount of innings. This is assuming innings in March and April have a bearing on his innings in September and October, yet not vice versa. Basically, this is very rudimentary, and not something I would expect to see blindly accepted by a group such as this one. Injuries and drops in production are extremely common with all pitchers, so it's easy to tie a meaningless measure to a catchy title like "The Verducci Effect".
So I ask again... is there any actual data available on this? Something reputable? Or is everybody content with a quick and dirty method of looking at innings pitched totals for a given calendar year?