BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Verducci: Seven young pitchers who could be injury risks in ‘08

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Verducci: Seven young pitchers who could be injury risks in ‘08

YAE!, YAE!...Ducci is back on his Year After Effect kick.

1. Ian Kennedy, Yankees, 23 (+61 IP)

Kennedy sailed through three minor league levels and reached the big leagues last year, his first full season in professional baseball. The Yankees allowed him to ring up 165 1/3 innings at age 22, after he threw 101 2/3 innings at USC in 2006 and 2 2/3 innings at Staten Island after signing. Kennedy was shut down late in September and left off the postseason roster because of what was described as mild back soreness.

Kennedy’s path may recall how the Angels pushed Jared Weaver, another college stud, by 56 innings in 2006. Weaver started 2007 on the DL with shoulder soreness and saw his ERA rise by 1.45.

7. Yovani Gallardo, Brewers, 21 (+33)

Good thing Milwaukee didn’t make the playoffs. Pushing a 21-year-old pitcher to make a 33-inning jump to 188 total innings was risky enough; Gallardo didn’t need another 20 or so innings on the arm. His jump is reminiscent of what the Twins did with Francisco Liriano in 2005: +34.2 at age 21. Liraino turned out to be the worst-case scenario for YAE: He blew out his elbow the next year.

Repoz Posted: February 05, 2008 at 07:45 PM | 30 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: general

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.

1. SG Posted: February 05, 2008 at 08:02 PM (#2684223)

The Yankees allowed him to ring up 165 1/3 innings at age 22, after he threw 101 2/3 innings at USC in 2006 and 2 2/3 innings at Staten Island after signing.

Kennedy also threw 30 innings in the Hawaiian winter league in 2006, so he's not a +61, he's a +31.

2. Cris E Posted: February 05, 2008 at 08:24 PM (#2684237)

While Gorzelanny was passing his career high in innings, the Pirates let him throw 105, 118, 107, 107 and 117 pitches in meaningless consecutive September starts. Why?

Cleverly assuming that 2008 was not a pennant season, the Pirates were already setting up his baseline to avoid injury in 2009. Some of this gets pretty complicated.

3. AROM Posted: February 05, 2008 at 08:26 PM (#2684238)

Gaudin has handle-with-care written all over him, because he's just 5-foot-11, 165 pounds but whips his fastball in the low to mid-90s. (I can vouch for it, having popped up against him in my week with the Blue Jays in 2005 spring training.)

If Verducci can make weak contact against a major league pitcher, so can I. Take that, people who said no amateur could ever touch a major league pitcher back when I claimed I could outhit Pedro Martinez.

4. Cowboy Popup Posted: February 05, 2008 at 08:28 PM (#2684242)

Take that, people who said no amateur could ever touch a major league pitcher back when I claimed I could outhit Pedro Martinez.

Hey, I was on your side about that one, it was the fielding that I thought you were wrong about.

5. Dizzypaco Posted: February 05, 2008 at 08:31 PM (#2684246)

Take that, people who said no amateur could ever touch a major league pitcher back when I claimed I could outhit Pedro Martinez.

Hey, I was on your side about that one, it was the fielding that I thought you were wrong about.

Not me. Popping it up once during spring training is not the same thing as outhitting even Pedro Martinez in a game setting. Most amateurs could not do it, at least not without several months of intense training.

6. AROM Posted: February 05, 2008 at 08:36 PM (#2684255)

Hey, I was on your side about that one, it was the fielding that I thought you were wrong about.

I did quickly back off on the fielding- I agree with you there. I initially picked Ryan Braun at 3B, where he fields .890 or so. Bad decision, I'd probably field .300 or so there. I should have said I could play a better CF than Frank Thomas - that I could probably back up.

Most amateurs could not do it, at least not without several months of intense training.

In my fantasy world where a MLB team gives me playing time, I'm assuming a full winter of intense training to get to the peak of my limited skills. It would be different than pulling me out of my cubicle, handed a bat, and told to "go get em".

7. _ Posted: February 05, 2008 at 08:37 PM (#2684258)

Only seven? There are probably more than seven young pitchers whose workloads did not increase at all last year who will suffer major injuries this year. Back to the drawing board.

8. SoSH U at work Posted: February 05, 2008 at 08:43 PM (#2684262)

Is No. 7 is a tie between the rest of them?

9. pkb33 Posted: February 05, 2008 at 08:44 PM (#2684263)

Is it documented that work in a winter league changes the analysis for increase in innings? Not sure either way on that

10. Skinner! Posted: February 05, 2008 at 09:02 PM (#2684279)

Has anyone done a study over whether this "year after effect" on certain pitchers is a temporary one, or career effecting one? In other words, do the pitchers generally rebound after the YAE?

11. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: February 05, 2008 at 09:10 PM (#2684289)

12. Repoz

Posted: February 05, 2008 at 09:32 PM (#2684310)

IIRC, Verducci has a pretty good athletic pedigree.

Yea...but he's still no Klapisch!

13. Iwakuma Chameleon (jonathan) Posted: February 05, 2008 at 11:16 PM (#2684403)

Does Rich Harden still count if he doesn't throw a single major league inning in 2008?

14. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: February 05, 2008 at 11:20 PM (#2684405)

Is Verducci the SI writer who carried the torch for world series winners being teams who return 4 pitchers with at least 150 IP in the previous season?

15. greenback

Posted: February 06, 2008 at 12:45 AM (#2684447)

I thought that was Mariotti.

16. Dewey, Steven Wright Wannabe and Soupuss Posted: February 06, 2008 at 12:47 AM (#2684448)

No, it was Phil Rogers.

17. _ Posted: February 06, 2008 at 12:55 AM (#2684452)

. . . and it was 190 IP.

18. shoewizard Posted: February 06, 2008 at 01:29 AM (#2684460)

I read something at BP by Will Carrol that said that the 30 innings rule really only applied to major league innings because minor league innings are not as stressful. Can't find the link though.

19. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: February 06, 2008 at 01:58 AM (#2684467)

I read something at BP by Will Carrol that said that the 30 innings rule really only applied to major league innings because minor league innings are not as stressful. Can't find the link though.

Yeah, but I think the buzz was he discarded that data b/c it made his point better.

20. ValueArb Posted: February 06, 2008 at 02:41 AM (#2684480)

I think the "Girardi" rule is a lot more predictive than the 30 innings rule. i.e. any young pitcher managed by Joe Girardi will be run into the ground and collapse the following season.

21. SouthSideRyan Posted: February 06, 2008 at 02:47 AM (#2684482)

. . . and it was 190 IP.

Coupled with 30 starts.

Was still better than his +/- system.

22. BeanoCook Posted: February 06, 2008 at 03:02 AM (#2684488)

14. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: February 05, 2008 at 05:20 PM (#2684405)
Is Verducci the SI writer who carried the torch for world series winners being teams who return 4 pitchers with at least 150 IP in the previous season?
15. greenback06 Posted: February 05, 2008 at 06:45 PM (#2684447)
I thought that was Mariotti.
16. The Jerry Royster Experience Posted: February 05, 2008 at 06:47 PM (#2684448)
No, it was Phil Rogers.
17. I'm HSF. That's who I am. Posted: February 05, 2008 at 06:55 PM (#2684452)
. . . and it was 190 IP.

How does this exchange occur between not 2 people, but 4? And quickly, too. AHHH, BTF!

23. cardsfanboy

Posted: February 06, 2008 at 04:13 AM (#2684512)

How does this exchange occur between not 2 people, but 4? And quickly, too. AHHH, BTF!

I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one thinking this same thing.

24. Russ Posted: February 06, 2008 at 04:33 AM (#2684524)

I should have said I could play a better CF than Frank Thomas

Frank Thomas used to be a Division I tight end. I doubt that the above statement is true, even in Frank's current state.

25. Crispix Attacks Posted: February 06, 2008 at 04:41 AM (#2684528)

Okay, okay! I could play a better center field than, um, Ray King maybe? Matt LeCroy?

Ooh, Jim Mecir. There's one.

Also probably Tony Gwynn, from what I saw at his induction ceremony.

26. AROM Posted: February 06, 2008 at 04:49 AM (#2684533)

I doubt that the above statement is true, even in Frank's current state.

What was Frank's home to first speed last year? Looking at how often he gets a double on balls hit in the gaps or even off the wall, I like my chances of outplaying him in center field if any team put either of us out there.

27. AROM Posted: February 06, 2008 at 04:55 AM (#2684538)

Actually frank had a decent 30 doubles last year, though only 11 the year before. He hasn't hit a triple or stolen a base since 2002. Speed is what makes centerfielders. Its also the easiest skill to measure. I don't have any doubt in the world that I'm faster than Frank is right now.

28. Kyle S Posted: February 06, 2008 at 05:36 AM (#2684553)

SG - Verducci in the article says this:

One caveat: Kennedy's jump is not as alarming as first blush indicates. The Yankees did give him an extra 30 1/3 "unofficial" innings of winter ball in 2006 (see Carmona below); not your high-stress big league innings, but still good incremental training. If you count that work, his jump of 30 2/3 innings barely pushes him into the danger zone.

I think this column is a strong one, myself.

29. Melo's Love Handles (NJ) Posted: February 06, 2008 at 05:37 AM (#2684554)

Kyle S, that edit was added after the article was published. Verducci probably feels like an ass for making such a strong statement by placing Kennedy #1 only to find that shitty fact checking meant Kennedy wasn't such a clear cut #1.

30. Walt Davis Posted: February 06, 2008 at 05:48 AM (#2684558)

and it was 190 IP.

The funny thing was it was 190 IP the previous year. In some of his qualifiers, the pitchers in question got hurt in the playoff/WS year and didn't pitch 190 IP; others didn't pitch that well.

So starting the season with guys who were durable LAST YEAR was the key to the Series even if those same guys weren't durable in your WS year.

It just makes no sense.

Basically his point was: start the year with pitchers who were good last year, they'll most likely be good this year and WS champions (or playoff teams, I forget which he was fixated on) tend to have pretty good staffs ... especially in years in which they win the WS.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Verducci: Seven young pitchers who could be injury risks in ‘08

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics