I've never been impressed with the logic that Andrews uses. For years, he preached the whole "don't throw a breaking ball until you shave" advise. His logic was that the forces on the elbow were greater and, thus, injury risk was greater. This was a logical conclusion based on a good understanding of anatomy. However, when his own organization started with this hypothesis and, as scientific theories are correctly tested, did a 10 year study and published the results, they had to come to the conclusion that it was not proven that curve balls (self-reported, so this includes ANY mechanics used) resulted in any greater injury risk than fast balls. However, he continues to preach the notion that youth pitchers shouldn't throw curves, but his logic changed. He now cites his reasoning as one of efficiency. In a way it makes sense. His theory is that pitchers who throw curves at younger ages have greater success and, because of this success, are relied on more by their coaches and are, therefore, more prone to overuse. I mean, it does make some sense in a weird sort of way. Personally, I think if there is an argument to be made for holding off on the curve, Boddy has the better arguments and they have nothing to do with injury rates or overuse.
The other logic problem with Andrews (and a LOT of other people) is the thinking behind increased injury rates. The problem is that it starts with a flawed premise. There may or may not be a recent increase in ucl injuries, but using the number of surgeries as the sole evidence behind the contention is simply ludicrous. Yes, there are more surgeries than in past years and they are being done on younger kids than ever before, but is this truly an indication that there are more injuries or just an indication that we resort to surgery more than in the past?
10-20 years ago, pitchers pitched through a ucl tear far longer than today before resorting to surgery. As to youth pitcher? How often would ANYONE even consider TJ surgery on a 13yo in 1995 even if they had torn the ucl? First, it's unlikely they ever would have even SEEN a surgeon. Most likely you would take your kid to his pediatrician, put some ice on it, pitched until the pain got too bad and eventually just stopped pitching. Bottom line is that we will never really know if injury rates have increased, especially among kids, because the data isn't available. I'm sure to an orthos surgeon it seems like injuries are on the rise because they have more patients and I think that's a good thing because now we pay attention to these injuries and don't just write kids off.
The only long term indicator we can look at is MLB DL lists. In fact, though, time on the disabled list for arm injuries, as measured in days, has steadily decreased for years. However, that may just be more proof that recovery time, due to increased use in surgery as an earlier treatment option, has compacted. We are still in an era where at the pro level we can try and blame injuries on too many pitches when they were younger. In ten years, though, if, despite all the pitch count rules and emphasis on recovery and decreasing throwing regiments, injury rates (or surgery rates since it will in the future be a better indicator of injury than today) increase or remain steady, we may have to readjust our thinking. Don't forget, there was a time not so long ago when the scientific opinion was pretty set that the curve itself was simply an optical illusion.
