The doctor who performed elbow surgery on Stephen Strasburg said he did not tell the Washington Nationals to shut down their ace pitcher.
“I wasn’t asked,” Dr. Lewis Yocum told the Los Angeles Times.
Yocum said he had not talked with Nationals General Manager Mike Rizzo since last year and had not talked with Strasburg since spring training….
Yocum said that, had he been asked, he would not have been able to provide conclusive information about whether Strasburg’s long-term health would be best served by shutting him down.
“There’s no statistic as far as studies,” Yocum said.
Yocum noted that Rizzo set his own standard with Nationals pitcher Jordan Zimmermann….
Yocum said that process — and not any medical directive — essentially determined how Rizzo would proceed with Strasburg.
“It’s based on Mike’s experience,” Yocum said. “Mike is extremely confident. His track record speaks for itself. Zimmermann did extremely well.”
Yocum said the results with Zimmermann and Strasburg might well influence how other teams handle the progress of young pitchers coming back from Tommy John surgery, in which a damaged ligament in the forearm is replaced.
“If there was a guarantee, everybody would be doing it right now,” Yocum said. “You just don’t know. This may be the beginning of a trend.”
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
My sense from the thread was that many (most?) of those who support this idea also think that a 160 inning limit is a mistake in the first place. So it seems entirly fair to ascribe this position to them. But if there are folks who agree with the 160 inning limit but think Strasburg should have been limited to just 130-140 during the regular season, then your point is well taken. I should have said "some of those supporting this position..." [Although perhaps you would agree that it is much easier to advocate this position now -- with an 8-game lead -- than it would have been in May. Anyone who can show they advocated this plan back then gets 4 gold stars.]
I wouldn't assume the average GM is any smarter than the average BTF poster. This is a pretty erudite group.
They have more access to information and knowledge of course, but pure intelligence? I actually don't think GMs as a group would rate that highly. They're not selected for it.
What I'd advocate is 160 timed to end with the regular season (so no shutdown) and then you pitch him more if you make the playoffs. That's assuming he's healthy after the 160, of course.
Why thank you, kind sir.
Yet another mildly interesting aspect of this whole affair is that while Rizzo often comes across as a pretty arrogant guy, he clearly is not arrogant enough to have assumed that his team was going to be in playoff position quite this soon. Also, I wondered this in one of the previous Strasburg threads and I'll wonder it again -- was wanting Strasburg to have a longer off-season heading into 2013 part of the thinking that went into the plan? And yeah, I know... there's no compelling evidence for advocating that either.
Seriously. The quality of argument has got to be better than this.
You said, "erudite". Heh-heh. Heh.
(I imagine it will be the plan for many teams going forward, however. Who knows, but I can't imagine that shutting down one of your top starters in mid-September is going to become a routine thing. Starting them a little later in the season makes worlds more sense.)
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main