Nice obituaries tag.

The Vols were granted a run in the fifth on Adam Gliebe's single that sent Matecki toward home plate. With the catcher standing in the baseline prior to the ball getting there, Matecki bulled over Jacquot, who held on to the ball for an apparent out. However, the umpired ruled Jacquot was obstructing Matecki's path to the plate and awarded Logan with the run and a 9-5 lead.

Which development is more newsworthy? The 172 pitches or an ump calling a catcher for blocking the path without the ball?

The Braves drafted Dennis a year or two ago. Hes supposed to have a real nice arm that is maybe starting to fulfill its projectability.

John A Logan has one of the better cold-weather state JUCO programs out there. Actually they've just got a pretty good team, period. Surprisingly they are probably as good or better than lots of Arizona, Cali, Texas and Florida teams. Illinois in general has some underrated JUCO ball... Logan, Kaskaskia, Triton and Parkland all produce some players. Kaskaskia and Parkland seem to produce alot of draft picks and Kaskaskia and Parkland usually send several good guys to the Big 10, MAC and MVC and elsewhere. Arizona State's .400 hitting (at one point at least) shortstop transferred from Kaskaskia.

They bring in the small-town Illinois kids who didn't play top competition in HS, and often divided their time between football and baseball too, and let em develop both physically and as ballplayers.

The Braves usually draft a few out of there or a guy entering there.

EDIT. Keegan Dennis is heading to U Evansville, for whatever it is worth. The Purple Aces, who love to recruit the IL JUCOs, were one of the top midwestern teams and top mid-major teams for a little while there - and on the road to becoming an established national top 25 team - but they have just completely gone to HELL this year. Really amazingly horrible, horrible, bad year. It was going to be a rebuilding year all along but everything has gone wrong for them

Also FWIW, the college's coach (Halstead) has over 1,000 career wins over 25 years.
Impressive

For every story like this in the majors, there are ten in colleges, 20 in JUCOs and 100 in high school/summer ball. Guys aren't shredding their arms on TV, they're doing it years before hand. However, in a mirror of how defense used to get analyzed, because we don't see it and can't easily (or at all) find pitch counts from ages 15-20, this abuse gets discounted or ignored altogether. It's far more fun to rag on millionaire managers who oblige by acting the old fogey part on talk shows.

For every story like this in the majors, there are ten in colleges, 20 in JUCOs and 100 in high school/summer ball. Guys aren't shredding their arms on TV, they're doing it years before hand. However, in a mirror of how defense used to get analyzed, because we don't see it and can't easily (or at all) find pitch counts from ages 15-20, this abuse gets discounted or ignored altogether. It's far more fun to rag on millionaire managers who oblige by acting the old fogey part on talk shows.

Exactly, this will probably have ten times the impact on future arm health that a 125 pitch start in AA at age 23 would have.

bunyon is spot on...

I coached 11-12 year olds a few years back and was the only coach who counted pitches. I'd ask the other coaches about it and they had no idea why I would do that and parents would look at me funny when I pulled a kid. I have to admit even in the middle of a Little League game it's hard to take your guy out when you are winning and there is a huge gap between the guy you are taking out and the guy you are putting in...and everyone knows it. You gotta do it though. I saw many 12-year olds throw 100+ pitches, many of which were poorly thrown curve balls or (more accurately) sliders.

When I played baseball as a 10 year old in the late 70s we had pitch counts. I thought that was pretty standard for everyone even then.

We had innings restrictions in Little League (something like 7 innings per 7 days), but there was no pitch count.

My first cousin is a sophomore in high school and is his school's best starting pitcher. He's lefthanded and is still filling out but already throws in the high 70s/low 80s. He even won county Pitcher of the Year in a populous metro Atlanta county. He's asked to pitch a CG every time out unless his team is far enough ahead that it won't matter. He's had a 145 pitch game, a 138 pitch game, and several other 100+ pitch games... and a CG is only 7 innings, so that's a lot of high-pitch innings.

Pisses me off. The coach knows that going with Andy is his best shot to win games, so he rides him hard without thinking of his future.

Oh, and the Atlanta high school innings restrictions are 10 innings in 1 day or 14 innings over two days. No other restrictions. I think they haven't been changed since the dead ball era.

All the limits I've ever seen were inning limits - I'd be favorably impressed with a league that used pitch counts. At an age when walks and errors are abundant, inning limits can leave kids out there for a lot of pitches (I once threw a 147 pitch complete game...5 innings, whee!). In addition to the kind of "rules" Kyle S mentions, most leagues have an allowance to "relax" the rule once for each player in a tournament. I played against a kid in high school who threw 2 complete games in two days in a regional playoff. He got a scholarship and was effective for about half a season in college. That was pretty common in small town ball. A good team might have two quality pitchers, most had just one (if that, of course). Those guys would get rode awfully hard. As hard as it might be as a minor league or college player to speak up about it, it's almost impossible for a high school player.

#2 obviates the point I was going to make in this specific case, but generally speaking, I think we get too worked up about pitcher abuse at the high school and college level in certain cases. The vast majority of these guys aren't pro prospects and a high school playoff or Division III college tournament game is likely to be the most important baseball game in which they will ever pitch. If a pitcher doesn't have a reasonable chance to pitch at a higher level and he wants to be in the game, I don't see much problem in running up his pitch count to win a game he will probably remember for the rest of his life. I could be wrong, but I think most people in the world could get along just fine with a frayed labrum.

I don't disagree with the idea of what you say, billyshears - I would have blown my arm out for a chance to complete a game in a state final, say - but you seem to imply (or I'm reading others' implication into it) that a frayed labrum is an acute injury. I think it's more likely that the abuse points accumulate over time. YOu may point to Mark Prior's abuse in 2003 as the cause of his subsequent injuries. I would argue that if abuse in 2003 is bad, abuse prior to that is worse and at least as responsible for his later injuries. I just don't see why you'd get worked up over a long outing as a 22 or 23 year old and not worry about it for a 17 year old. Unless you think that only mediocre or non-prospect young pitchers are being abused. My experience and all the anecdotal evidence I've seen is the opposite: the better the pitcher, the more pitches they'll be asked to throw.

In other words, I think Mark Prior's usage in his 2003 season is less responsible for his ultimate injuries than his usage between the ages of 12 and 20. At those ages, you could have said that the odds he'd ever pitch in the big leagues is low - it is for all young pitchers.

I don't disagree with you bunyon. I don't think it is generally a good idea to abuse any pitcher's arm on a systemic basis. I just think that it is much worse when a manager abuses a guy like Mark Prior or any pitcher who can reasonably be expected to pitch at the next level in pursuit of goals that are much more significant for the manager than the player. Obviously, it's a judgment issue as to the player's ability and I think managers do have a responsibility to err on the side of caution. But I also think that there is no reason to save a player's arm for a future that doesn't exist.

Yeah, I think we agree. I just think it's likely that any kid you'd want to (as a coach of a young team) ride hard would be one with enough of a future that you shouldn't. Forget big league money - how many of the kids who get rode hard in high school could get a scholarship?

The fundamental problem is that the person making the decision is the one person who has the most to gain and least to lose by riding a good pitcher hard. I think it is a lot to ask any coach* to not use his best pitcher in a big game or tough spot. With some rules in force you can relieve the coach of that burden and provide a framework in which the player or parent can lodge a complaint. In fact, it's universally (I think) agreed on that such rules should exist. It's just that as they stand they're far too weak.

*My dad once left me in a game I was pitching well for 7 innings - a complete game! (loss, however, 2-1). On the drive home we were talking about how well I'd pitched and he, all of a sudden, said, "Dammit." I asked what was wrong and he said he hadn't really thought past the game and how well I was pitching but he suddenly figured I'd thrown a lot of pitches. He was really hard on himself for leaving me in. He's an old school kind of guy but fairly progressive in not having a kid throw too many pitches. Anyway, it was his own son, he had in mind that he shouldn't ride any one pitcher and, yet, he let me go longer than he'd like. It's just too easy for that too happen at that level. I'd far rather see kids with strict limits and major leaguers throwing complete games.

Little League does now use a pitch count. 85 for the 12 year olds--though you can finish the batter or inning, whichever comes first, if you hit 85 in the middle of an at bat.

Little League does now use a pitch count.

Now they do. From my days of being a Little League scorekeeper, I have record of a game (in the playoffs, went 10 innings) in which a pitcher threw about 160 pitches. That particular pitcher is now in the high minors and I see his name occasionally mentioned around here as a prospect.

"That particular pitcher is now in the high minors and I see his name occasionally mentioned around here as a prospect."

Out of curiosity, who was it?

I just think it's likely that any kid you'd want to (as a coach of a young team) ride hard would be one with enough of a future that you shouldn't. Forget big league money - how many of the kids who get rode hard in high school could get a scholarship?"

But often it is pitching so much and so well that gets the guy the scholly anyway.
If he threw 80/90 pitches every 5-7 days he might be be impressing a college coach like the guy who threw back to back CGs did

Vlad: the name is James McDonald.

MM1f, do you really think Evansville was/is "on the road to becoming an established national top 25 team" - 'cause I didn't see that happening at all (not to challenge the rest of your posts).

85 for the 12 year olds--though you can finish the batter or inning, whichever comes first, if you hit 85 in the middle of an at bat.

Maybe I'm just tired, but I can't figure out how you would finish an inning before you finish the batter...

"Vlad: the name is James McDonald."

Wow, that's a healthy K-rate.

Maybe I'm just tired, but I can't figure out how you would finish an inning before you finish the batter...

Caught stealing (or more likely, caught trying to advance on a passed ball) to end the inning. Same batter leads off next inning.

He pitched for the Gulf Coast Dodgers in 2003, but missed all of the 2004 season and most of the 2005 season due to injury.

--from the Wiki page on James McDonald (I'm guessing it's the same one OCF mentions)

Yeah, that's the one. I found my full writeup of that 1997 game. McDonald threw 166 pitches, and I'll bet 120 of them were curve balls. ("Knuckle curves," someone told me - his control was better on that pitch that night than it was on his fastball.) The game went into extra innings tied 2-2. McDonald hit a 3-run HR in the top of the 9th, but he couldn't hold it in the bottom of the 9th - two walks, two hits, a wild pitch, and the game was tied 5-5. At that point, the rules which allowed him to work 9 innings but no more came into play, and he had to shift to SS. His team (Long Beach LL) then lost in the bottom of the 10th. McDonald's full line: 9 IP, 7 H, 5 R, 5 ER, 8 BB, 17 K. And 3 1 3 3 with a walk and a sacrifice as a hitter. The opposing starter (pitching for the league I was associated with) also went 9 innings and threw 120 pitches. Here's something I wrote immediately after the game:

You’ve long heard me complain that Little League pitcher usage rules are given in innings rather than pitches and that the rules seem to give the managers incentives to misuse and abuse their 12-year-old pitchers. This game was about as bad an example as I’ve ever seen. The operative rule is that any pitcher who pitches more than one inning may not pitch in that team’s next game (so Los Altos could not use (X) in this one even though he probably had adequate rest), but a pitcher is allowed to go as long as 9 innings in any one game. This leaves managers reluctant to make pitching changes for fear of reducing their flexibility for the following game - but look at what actually happened here.(Y) gave up the three-run home run to McDonald on his 111th pitch of the game. Had I been running the team, there’s no way he would have been on the mound for that to happen. (Y) never looked particularly sharp in this game - he didn’t look smooth on the mound, and he didn’t ever seem to be throwing as hard as I’ve sometimes seen him do. By the 7th or 8th inning, I knew he was losing it, his mother knew he was losing it, his grandfather knew he was losing it - how hard could it have been for his manager to see that he’d lost whatever effectiveness he had? But that’s not the worst of it. James McDonald threw 166 pitches in the game. One hundred and sixty six! And I’d bet that 120 of them were curve balls. How can this possibly be good for McDonald?

Fortunately that 1997 comment about the rules is now obsolete.

bunyon, billyshears:

That debate was so incredibly civil I think I'm gonna cry big wet tears. If this were any other thread on BBTF you guys would have been calling each other names and telling momma jokes within 5 minutes.

MM1f, do you really think Evansville was/is "on the road to becoming an established national top 25 team" - 'cause I didn't see that happening at all (not to challenge the rest of your posts).

They lost a strong senior core after 07 (3 aces plus some power bats) but they had brought in a strong recruiting class including a 14th round pick and a top 5 round talent the year before.
I guess an established top 25 team might be a bit strong if by "established top 25" you mean a team that is almost never not in the top 25 (like a South Carolina, Fullerton, Arkansas, ect) but they had a chance to be the type of team that was an established top 25 type team in the sense that they could have been in the discussion most years if that recruiting class lead them to a good year or two and in doing so brought in an even better class and they started knocking off Wichita from the top of the MVC every couple years. (<-run-on sentence alert)

Looks like a moot point now at any rate. That recruiting class is looking like crap and the team has tanked.
Too bad.