No amps = a huge number of injuries. No drugs at all = players unable to play through pain. The season MLB has put us through from the standpoint of the quality of the product on the field has been a ripoff.

I have no idea what #1 means, but it's fun to see Boswell writing about the Os again.

The Orioles are a pretty fun team to root for outside of Showalter. Jones, Wieters, Hardy, Reynolds,...lot of guys I like and seeing Machado step in the way he has has been great.

#2: For some reason, Vaux thinks that amphetamines prevent injuries. I suppose he thinks the mechanism is that playing tired leads to mechanical flaws leads to injury, except that speed has nothing to do with muscle fatigue. It's a new schtick, like YR and revenue sharing.

But why is he posting it in this thread? As the first post, even?

Is he intending to post the same comment in every thread? I think people get banned for that.

Has there been some huge quantity of injuries this season? The teams I follow (Nats, A's, Orioles) seem to have had a fairly usual set of them. A little bit of extra bad luck for the O's recently but you can't attribute a broken thumb to lack of amphetamines.

Maybe the Yankees have had a lot but they are old.

Superfluke?

Maybe the Yankees have had a lot but they are old.

Yeah, ARod is old, but they've had a lot of non-age/fluke injuries too.

Pineda and Gardner are young, and have missed the whole season. Rivera and Pettitte's injuries were flukes, not age related. Sabathia and Teixeira are not old, but they've had multiple DL stints.

Sabathia and Teixeira are two years older than the Orioles oldest starter and oldest everyday player, respectively.

Sabathia and Teixeira are two years older than the Orioles oldest starter and oldest everyday player, respectively.

So? 31 and 32 are not ages where you'd expect a marked increase in injuries.

I'd actually expect a 21-25 y.o. pitcher to be more injury prone than a 31 y.o; even if it's just the survivor effect.

Rivera and Pettitte's injuries were flukes, not age related.

I don't know about that. Part of the problem when you get older is that your body doesn't respond as quickly and precisely as it once did, which makes it harder to get out of the way of a line drive, or makes you more likely to move awkwardly catching a fly ball.

I know there are historical comps for Baltimore's unreasonably good W-L in 1-run ballgames, but are there any historical comps for teams that have greatly outperformed their Pythagorean record that turn it around with a different set of personnel, have a very strong month and are actually performing at the level of their record? I'm not sure I expressed that clearly, but hopefully it makes sense. I don't think I've ever seen a season take quite this shape.

So? 31 and 32 are not ages where you'd expect a marked increase in injuries.

I'd actually expect a 21-25 y.o. pitcher to be more injury prone than a 31 y.o; even if it's just the survivor effect.

So, nothing, I just thought it was interesting.

Although, speaking for myself as a professional non-athelete, 30 - 31 is where I noticed that the minor pains stick around a bit longer and I take longer to warm up and get loose.

I don't know about that. Part of the problem when you get older is that your body doesn't respond as quickly and precisely as it once did, which makes it harder to get out of the way of a line drive, or makes you more likely to move awkwardly catching a fly ball.

Pettite had zero chance to get out of the way, I doubt he even saw the liner.

So, nothing, I just thought it was interesting.

OK

I'm happy to see Dan Duquette out there again, juggling his roster like some sort of disordered obsession, telling journalists to put together a run differential spreadsheet, and building a winning roster. I don't understand how it took a decade for him to get another GM job.

I'm happy to see Dan Duquette out there again, juggling his roster like some sort of disordered obsession, telling journalists to put together a run differential spreadsheet, and building a winning roster. I don't understand how it took a decade for him to get another GM job.

Because he traded Kazmir for nothing?

I also don't understand why he didn't get a job.

It's fascinating to see two guys in the last chance saloon have such divergent paths.

You have to figure that Duke has salvaged a good part of his reputation with this year, and if he continues to be successful he might even get another chance at a good job. Hell, I'd take him on the Red Sox over Cherington.

Meanwhile I would be astonished if any MLB club ever hired Bobby V again. He wasn't in obscurity like the Duke was with the Japanese success and the ESPN gig, but he's not going to be taken seriously for a job again.

Because he traded Kazmir for nothing?

Wrong Duquette.

Dan didn't get a job for a decade because he's kind of a difficult character and maybe because he didn't want a crappier job than the Red Sox (He's strongly hinted he was offered the Pirates gig several years ago).

Wrong Duquette.

Ha! I know.

edit: I mean, everyone knows Al Leiter made that trade.

He was also busy trying to get Jake Beckley elected to the HoM

RE Spectral (#12) - Don Malcolm, in his very good blog "BigBadBaseball.blogspot.com", just wrote an article dealing with exactly that, looking at teams with very high records in close games, and what happened to them the rest of the season, as a context for the O's. You'll have to scroll down past a few articles that he wrote even more recently, but the effort is worth it, if you're interested in that topic. - Brock Hanke

if he continues to be successful he might even get another chance at a good job.

Maybe he's already got one...

He was also busy trying to get Jake Beckley elected to the HoM

Enjoyed that.

"Part of the problem when you get older is that your body doesn't respond as quickly and precisely as it once did"

Ain't it the truth. Sigh

I haven't noticed any karlmagnus gloat posts. Have I missed them?

But why is he posting it in this thread? As the first post, even?

Maybe he is saying that the quality of MLB being down this year due to injuries caused by less amphetamine use is why the Orioles are in the thick of the postseason race?

The new market inefficiency is players who don't need amphetamines to be consistently productive. Maybe that explains why they targeted Nate McLouth.

Maybe he is saying that the quality of MLB being down this year due to injuries caused by less amphetamine use is why the Orioles are in the thick of the postseason race?

Crabcakes are natural amphetamines?

Am I wrong to think that players being tireder would lead to more injuries? Maybe it's just that they're recovering less quickly because of no steroids. Anyhow, it seems that the other highly intelligent observers here don't think that's a reasonable proposition. I hope that's true, because that would mean that this year's glut of injuries isn't necessarily a trend. It's depressing.

I hope that's true, because that would mean that this year's glut of injuries isn't necessarily a trend.

First, you'd ahve to establish that this year's injuries are out of line with seasons prior. I don't know that it is. The Yankees and Red Sox got hit hard, sure. But I don't know that's a league-wide trend.

Second, even if there were more injuries this year than in past seasons, you'd have to explain why, if it's connected to the PED ban, this is suddenly manifesting itself this year. I don't know of any reason why 2012 should be any different than 2011, at least as far as PEDs are concerned.

Am I wrong to think that players being tireder would lead to more injuries? Maybe it's just that they're recovering less quickly because of no steroids. Anyhow, it seems that the other highly intelligent observers here don't think that's a reasonable proposition. I hope that's true, because that would mean that this year's glut of injuries isn't necessarily a trend. It's depressing.

The physical, muscle fatigue is there whether you're on amps or not.

I would think that camouflaging the fatigue with uppers, is just as likely to lead to more injuries, when they try to do things their bodies can't, but their hopped-up minds think they can.

Crabcakes are natural amphetamines?

No, lake trout I think. Or maybe pit beef.

Am I wrong to think that players being tireder would lead to more injuries?

I think it's logical, but isn't the effect of amphetamines more on the psychological side of fatigue and less on the physical side? Tired muscles are more likely to get get hurt, but amphetamines don't make tired muscles less tired, do they? They just make a tired person 'feel' less tired.

We'd probably need a few years to make a determination one way or another, but I do think it's logical that fewer PEDs in general will lead to reductions in playing time for the best players. Whether it's injuries or just needing more rest than they did before, there's got be some effect.

I would think that camouflaging the fatigue with uppers, is just as likely to lead to more injuries, when they try to do things their bodies can't, but their hopped-up minds think they can.

That's a good point. I hadn't thought about that.

First, you'd ahve to establish that this year's injuries are out of line with seasons prior. I don't know that it is. The Yankees and Red Sox got hit hard, sure. But I don't know that's a league-wide trend.

It would be nice to have that database that was discussed in another thread. An anecdotal impression is all I have, which is no doubt fueled by the fact that injuries have clustered on certain teams. It also strikes me that there have been more injuries in the AL than the NL But I don't have any evidence for any of that. I would probably try to gather it if I had time.

Second, even if there were more injuries this year than in past seasons, you'd have to explain why, if it's connected to the PED ban, this is suddenly manifesting itself this year. I don't know of any reason why 2012 should be any different than 2011, at least as far as PEDs are concerned.

I guess I figure that it's a combination of it having been longer and longer since each individual took PEDs, and some kind of increase in enforcement, since it also seems (again, purely anecdotally) that there have been more suspensions in the past couple of years than there were earlier. Maybe some players have been risking it, but fewer and fewer each year.

But yes, my ranting is primarily baseless.

but I do think it's logical that fewer PEDs in general will lead to reductions in playing time for the best players. Whether it's injuries or just needing more rest than they did before, there's got be some effect.

Yes, it's a matter of me thinking "there's got to be some effect" mixed with a heavy dose of confirmation bias. We need actual evidence.

Although, speaking for myself as a professional non-athelete, 30 - 31 is where I noticed that the minor pains stick around a bit longer and I take longer to warm up and get loose

Ha ha! Just wait a couple decades. You'll long for those days.

. . . it's fun to see Boswell writing about the Os again.

The rise of the Nationals and resurgence of the Orioles seems to have kick-started Boswell's interest in baseball again. He was pretty good early in his career (despite a few questions on the accuracy of his quote attributions) but he really tailed off after he made big money from his books and built a water-front mansion near Annapolis. Didn't write that often and more than a few columns seemed to be just phoning it in. Big difference this year, although it is a lot easier to write interesting stories about teams that are doing well.

Bourbon Samurai in #29 hit upon th true Fountain of Youth - Maryland Blue Crab crabcakes.
it's the only plausible explanation for why the Birds are flying so high.

a professional non-athelete

Whoa, you can get paid for this? I have been missing out my whole life.

It would be nice to have that database that was discussed in another thread. An anecdotal impression is all I have, which is no doubt fueled by the fact that injuries have clustered on certain teams. It also strikes me that there have been more injuries in the AL than the NL But I don't have any evidence for any of that. I would probably try to gather it if I had time.

I looked up the data on MLB's website for last year and this year and got:

2011 AL: 227 players placed on the DL. 60 trips to the 60-Day DL (16.2 per team, 4.29 60-day per team)
2011 NL: 277 DL trips, 64 60-Day DL trips (17.3 per team, 4 per team)

That's a total of 504 DL trips, 124 stints on the 60-Day DL.


2012 AL: 219 DL trips, 73 60-day DL (15.64/team, 5.21 60-Day)
2012 NL: 267 DL trips, 72 60-day DL (16.68/team, 4.5 60-Day)

That's a total of 486 trips, 145 on the 60 day DL, through two days ago.

I compiled that from MLB's transaction website, it's likely there's errors both there and in my transcription, but you get what you pay for. Arizona's transaction page this year frequently referred to DL stints as "changed roster status of PLAYER X" instead of the usual "placed X on the 15-Day DL", but I think I caught all of those. I also included players who get DL'ed in February or March when they're recovering from injuries suffered the previous year (IE: Tommy John), and if a player got moved from the 7 day DL to the 15 day DL I counted it as two stints because of the language on the website. I didn't count days spent on the DL. This would be very useful to know but it also would've more than doubled the amount of work I'd need to do on this. I think that's all the disclaimers I need.

As you said, this is dependent on heavily injured teams: the NL had 5 teams over 20 DL stints (including LA's 27) and the AL only had 2 (including Boston with thirty-#######-one trips to the DL, which outpaced last years Twins for the least healthy team of the past two years).

If anyone else has DL-related questions related to 2011-2012 (eg: team injuries, player injuries, type of injuries), I probably can answer them now. My favourite was reliving the Blue Jays 5 days, 3 starting pitchers, 3 trips to the 60-Day DL fun times in June of this year, and seeing that you can DL players for tonsillitis and sleep disorders.

That's fascinating, GCH-DK, ND, ND (thanks for the e-mail, by the way). So it looks like injuries are at the same level this year as last year, anyway. It's apparently artifacts of perception and confirmation bias that have had me up in arms.

It would be nice to have that database that was discussed in another thread. An anecdotal impression is all I have, which is no doubt fueled by the fact that injuries have clustered on certain teams. It also strikes me that there have been more injuries in the AL than the NL But I don't have any evidence for any of that. I would probably try to gather it if I had time.

I'm not sure where it is on their website, but sometime ago baseball prospectus bought out the guy who was trying to track injury records, including non-dl stints. You can get individual information on current players under transactions, but it's not historically deep and I haven't been able to find a team/league sortable/summary for any of that information on their website.