Could the Strasburg situation have been beeter thought out???

quote:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Prime9:
Too bad the Nationals weren't concerned much earlier about protecting his arm. Perhaps, their actions would have prevented the surgery BEFORE it was necessary.
[QUOTE]

Can you explain how it was the Nats fault that he needed TJS? These things usually happen way before the actual injury occurs, and we all know what his work load was like in college.

TPM; You are right. I wasn't implying that they alone were responsible. Certainly, that train wreck was well along towards a collision prior to that. But, SD State and Gywnn can't be pointed to anymore than his 13U or 17U Travel or High School team. Moreover, The Nats assumed fiduciary responsibility when at the Draft, in the Minors and during his call up Season when the Injury, in fact, occurred.

Now as only a HS amateur pitcher and the Dad of a College position player, I'm going to bow to your pitching experience gained through your son. But, I don't agree with this quote;

"Wouldn't it be terrific if we really knew what could keep a pitcher from being injury free? It just doesn't work that way and mostly because all pitchers are different."

The fact that pitchers are different isn't the reason some are injured. I.E. I don't think some are "genetically" predisposed for injury. If that were the case, the dramatic increase in elbow and shoulder surgery is because pitchers, and people, today are MORE different than years past. I don't think so.

I do agree that the Nats should, as an employer, do what they can to safeguard a special commodity. But really, why wouldn't they treat EVERY pitcher that way? He will only maintain value to the organization if he is able to remain injury free and perform on the field. Everyone, doctors, pitchers, teams, coaches, parents, all want to blame somebody else. It's good to see Teams become somewhat more concerned about keeping athletes healthy, even if it's misguided at times. Also, let's see how some of these newer BREED of pitchers coming into the league, with different and somewhat non-traditional training methods, hold up regarding pitching injuries?

I kind of look at this situation as a gamble either way. The goal is to keep the guy healthy for future success... Both his and the organizations success.

Then again, winning the World Series is success in a big way. It's not like the same team wins it every year. It's hard to stay at the top.

It will look like a great decision if Washington wins it all without Strasburg and he is a dominate pitcher again next few years.

Then again, pitchers get hurt, even with a good plan to protect them. For the organization, the worst outcome would be shutting him down, the team gets eliminated early this year (when they have a chance to win it all) and having him get hurt early next year (And the team not make the playoffs).

That would create some unrest with the fan base and also within the organization.

Usually playoff time is when players play hurt. Not sure I ever remember a case where a healthy star player was shut down for the playoffs for precautionary reasons.

One thing, sure have to give Rizzo credit for having the courage to stick with the decision. I actually admire and respect that, and the reasoning behind it.

I'm still confused with the number of innings. Why not play it even safer and make it 130 innings or 100 innings. Why 160?

BTW, they just released info that Strasburg will be scratched for his next start which was to be his last. Report said it was more due to mental, rather than physical reasons.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Prime9:

Now as only a HS amateur pitcher and the Dad of a College position player, I'm going to bow to your pitching experience gained through your son. But, I don't agree with this quote;

"Wouldn't it be terrific if we really knew what could keep a pitcher from being injury free? It just doesn't work that way and mostly because all pitchers are different."

The fact that pitchers are different isn't the reason some are injured. I.E. I don't think some are "genetically" predisposed for injury. If that were the case, the dramatic increase in elbow and shoulder surgery is because pitchers, and people, today are MORE different than years past. I don't think so.
[QUOTE]

Prime,
My son is a great example of a pitcher with great mechanics, body type, not over used yet has had several injuries to set him back.
He had two surgeries, both were because of biological reasons, one an enlarged corticoid bone that was causing irritation and fraying. It was very hard to detect. It took years to figure out what was going on.

So that means, IMO that he was different. You would have no clue what he tried to avoid the issue. And how frustrating it was. As soon as that was cleared he began having issues with his ulnar nerve (irritation) and that had to be moved. The doctor didn't rule out that the arm was compensating for the shoulder at one time or another. I wonder how many other pitchers are walking around with the same thing, experience tendinitous in shoulder often and don't even know why.

The human body isn't perfect, I would suppose that many TJS could be a result of the pitchers bad ulnar ligament to begin with (genetics).

While even I agree that strasburg's innings should be limited this year, what I don't get is why so many people feel that Washington's baseball people should be applauded when truthfully, they totally bungled this whole situation. Just a few innings less a month, maybe eight or ten and Strasburg would have been fully available for the playoffs. This could have been accomplished in a number of ways. They totally failed his teammates and fans, yet many people think they are being noble and intelligent when their handling of Strasburg's limited innings was anything but intelligent and well thought out. Rizzo has done a lot of things right this year, yet the poor handling of Straburg's season is probably going to have reprecussions with the fans in about one month. And as far as they know, he might blow his arm out at anytime in the spring or next year or the year after as no one has a handle on what prevents these kinds of injuries except by avoiding pitching at all.

The thinking that this somehow protects him in the years to come can't be proven. One writer said he can be a great pitcher for the next fifteen years if Washington protects him-- but if limiting him to 160 innings and ending his season early every year is how you do it, then what have they really gained except turning him into a number five starter when he has some of the greatest stuff ever seen.

I am wondering what you think they could have done different? Keep in mind that he didn't pitch last year, so what would be your suggestion. As discussed no one really knows even if the 158 he has done will effect him eventually.

You just can't put a starter out there and cut him off at less than the required innings or shorten his days to prepare or make them longer. He did his work and got them the wins they needed. Now it's time for others to step in.

I don't know, as a parent of a pitcher who has had injuries, I see no issue with what they did. There is nothing worse than the DL, even worse than getting your innings cut short, trust me on this one.

They could have skipped a start once a month. They could have limited him to 5 innings in his first ten starts or so. They could have done like a lot of clubs and put him on the disabled list with an "injury" for 15 days back in May or June. They could have started him every six days but this would have required adjusting the rest of the rotation. Really doesn't take a lot of imagination. All of these things have been done multiple times in the past. Now you have a teed off pitcher too.

quote:

Originally posted by Three Bagger:
They could have skipped a start once a month. They could have limited him to 5 innings in his first ten starts or so. They could have done like a lot of clubs and put him on the disabled list with an "injury" for 15 days back in May or June. They could have started him every six days but this would have required adjusting the rest of the rotation. Really doesn't take a lot of imagination. All of these things have been done multiple times in the past. Now you have a teed off pitcher too.

I understand what you are saying, seems that there could be an easier solution, but is there really?

Teams do shut down pitchers, the cubs just shut down Samardzija, who was a reliever last year and this year a starter with a lot more innings. Of course we didn't see it all over the news or up for discussion because they are not in contention.

A missed start or starts puts pressure on the other starters and their routines, going 5 innings or less puts added unneeded pressure on the bullpen.

MLB does not allow someone just to go on the DL for a "rest".

Keep in mind that with the DL, there is roster juggling within the entire system to meet rostered requirements. This doesn't make sense to me, to disrupt an entire system so one pitcher can have a rest. Starting a bit later could have made sense, but then again, would they have won those games to put them where they are?

Couple of weeks ago I asked son why his manager was pushing the starters to go deep at end of year. He said the bullpen was pretty maxed out and one guy went down so they were short. Sometimes we see things and assume there is an easy answer, and as I am learning, there usually isn't.

Strasburg made a statement that he knew all along he would be shut down, but he thought that because of where they are, things would change. IMO being that they already lost a year with him, he should understand they have the right to protect their investment.

I know people are upset, however, I think they handled the whole thing extremely well.

quote:

Originally posted by Three Bagger:
They could have skipped a start once a month. They could have limited him to 5 innings in his first ten starts or so. They could have done like a lot of clubs and put him on the disabled list with an "injury" for 15 days back in May or June. They could have started him every six days but this would have required adjusting the rest of the rotation. Really doesn't take a lot of imagination. All of these things have been done multiple times in the past. Now you have a teed off pitcher too.

Then you are really unwilling to listen to the need for pitchers to have a routine and rhythm in order to stay sharp and healthy. Much of what you are describing not only throws off his rhythm, but the rest of the rotation's too.

They did the right thing. I applaud them.

Every year countless times teams make pitching adjustments for injuries, steroid suspensions, poor pitching by someone in the rotation. To skip a start once a month is not a big deal for the pitcher or his team. If a routine and rhythm are so all important in the health process than why are there more and more injuries as time goes on. If a healthy pitcher can't be used when the World Series is within grasp then what the heck is the whole season played for? This is the ultimate and Strasburg is p***ed off and instead of getting to show his value to the team as a player and teammate, Washington wants to protect its "investment". I know how I would feel.

We'll just have to see how this plays out this season and in the future for Washington and Strasburg.

quote:

Originally posted by justbaseball:

quote:

Originally posted by Three Bagger:
They could have skipped a start once a month. They could have limited him to 5 innings in his first ten starts or so. They could have done like a lot of clubs and put him on the disabled list with an "injury" for 15 days back in May or June. They could have started him every six days but this would have required adjusting the rest of the rotation. Really doesn't take a lot of imagination. All of these things have been done multiple times in the past. Now you have a teed off pitcher too.

Then you are really unwilling to listen to the need for pitchers to have a routine and rhythm in order to stay sharp and healthy. Much of what you are describing not only throws off his rhythm, but the rest of the rotation's too.

They did the right thing. I applaud them.

I know that you understand and not just because of personal reasons.

Ask any ML pitcher how they feel when there is a rainout, most don't like it. Pro starters have their starts circled on the calendar, they prepare according to that schedule. One rain out can throw everyone off a bit.

Three Bagger, We'll just have to agree to disagree. The Nats have proved themselves to be a team that has bonded well and knows what to do to get the job done.

Most teams in contention at this point play their schedule one game at a time, and that seems to be what they are doing.

coulda, woulda, shoulda...what a bunch of experts...

ThreeBagger - You're talking like a fan rather than someone who lives it or lives with someone who lives it...not too different than a number of writers with little firsthand experience.

The situations you're describing do in fact come up during a season with every team. But what you're missing is that its not weekly and not in a routine manner. And the solutions usually work to maintain the rotation of the other pitchers.

Injuries? - skip a start but insert a Triple-A pitcher for a 'spot start' or upgrade a long reliever to keep others on schedule.

Poor pitching? - demote/promote or same as injuries.

Steroids? - Suspension, bring someone up. This is not common.

But none of these involves continuously disrupting the entire rotation. I know, I know...it all seems so simple. But its not. Rotation pitchers have a regimen, a rhythm, a routine...you cannot disrupt the whole thing for one guy. Aside from the possible physical disruption, there's also the mental side. Its huge.

Doesn't seem like you wanna be persuaded, so I'm about to give up. But I know from 'living' day-by-day the career of a pro pitcher (son)...that these things matter...very much. And I know how MLB (and MiLB) teams make this all work and its not as simple as you wanna make it.

Ok TPM and Justbaseball we'll agree to disagree.

Skip a start(Strasburg's start) and bring up a Triple A pitcher for a spot start or up grade a long reliever. Just what you said Justbaseball. Doesn't disrupt anyone but Strasburg. And since he's not in their plans for the most important games of the team's and his career what does it matter? Tommy John himself, when the surgury was new and unsure, pitched 207 innings the next season and over two hundred each of the next five years winning 20 games three times years. Skip a start once a month--not too complicated although thinking outside the box is not ML executives long suit of course. After all these guys still use their best relief pitcher in save only situations and think there is statistical value in early game sac bunts.

It's the very regimentation of modern baseball that may be most of the problem. Gos help any ML starter who completes more then ten or twelve games or pitches more than 240 innings. Also, while I may approach things like a fan, parents are actually the ones who are too close to the situation since their sons must be careful with their health to reach the summit of the ML's. But once the player is there, his teammates and fans are a priority and he owes them something. ESPECIALLY when the pitcher is perfectly healthy!!! Just couldn't help myself again!