Re: Pitchers' Arms = Owned <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Captain @ Apr 15 2007, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I guess I shouldn't have said the pitchers are babies. It has nothing to do with them. It's the people who say "Wow, 100 pitches. They better get him out of there before his arm falls off." That makes me laugh. I guess it's just the mentality in the MLB now that a pitcher shouldn't go more than 7 innings or throw more than 100 pitches because he'll hurt himself. Look at Matsuzaka. In Japan, he once threw a 250 pitch, 17 inning game one day, got the save in the next game, and then threw a no-hitter in the next. That would NEVER EVER EVER happen here.There is no way I am going to find any pictures like that because the photography was so poor back then. No zoom, bad quality, and they rarely took action photos. That picture is also deceiving. Take a picture at the right time and everyone's arm will look like that. When you throw a ball, you get that whip action.Please, I want some evidence that curves, sliders and the like were thrown different back then. If you find something, I'll believe you.</div>I agree that there is too much emphasis on how many pitches are thrown, but it's still an important thing. More pitches = more injury in most cases.I realize that the picture is a bit deceiving, but it is still putting a ton of stress on the shoulder. Not everyone whips like that on every pitch.I'm actually making a common sense argument, so I don't really have to prove sh*t. It's also pretty retarded to make excuses for why you can't prove what you're saying for a VERY SPECIFIC reason, then turn around and say to prove the opposite in the exact same way. The only point I am making is that either: A) You're being short-sighted by only looking at a couple players and not every player from that era OR There is a reason for them being able to pitch more. I do not know any statistics about how much injury they had back then, so I cannot say whether it is A or B. The reason I bring up pitching form is because that would be a common sense reason for why a person would injure their arm. As I said before, it is pretty damned stupid to think that they can pitch more just because they were "tougher." The excuse of saying that the photos back in the day were low-quality is pretty poor. Obviously there were guys that threw the same way that do today, but if you're going out and tossing 150 pitches a day all the time, you're not going to do it sidearm. Right? I mean, that's common sense. If you have better mechanics, you won't injure yourself. Do I have to dumb it down anymore?
Re: Pitchers' Arms = Owned <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Apr 15 2007, 07:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I agree that there is too much emphasis on how many pitches are thrown, but it's still an important thing. More pitches = more injury in most cases.I realize that the picture is a bit deceiving, but it is still putting a ton of stress on the shoulder. Not everyone whips like that on every pitch.I'm actually making a common sense argument, so I don't really have to prove sh*t. It's also pretty retarded to make excuses for why you can't prove what you're saying for a VERY SPECIFIC reason, then turn around and say to prove the opposite in the exact same way. The only point I am making is that either: A) You're being short-sighted by only looking at a couple players and not every player from that era OR There is a reason for them being able to pitch more. I do not know any statistics about how much injury they had back then, so I cannot say whether it is A or B. The reason I bring up pitching form is because that would be a common sense reason for why a person would injure their arm. As I said before, it is pretty damned stupid to think that they can pitch more just because they were "tougher." The excuse of saying that the photos back in the day were low-quality is pretty poor. Obviously there were guys that threw the same way that do today, but if you're going out and tossing 150 pitches a day all the time, you're not going to do it sidearm. Right? I mean, that's common sense. If you have better mechanics, you won't injure yourself. Do I have to dumb it down anymore?</div>Yes, it is an important thing. You don't want someone throwing 200+ every game. It's just some people freak out about it WAYYY too much. It's like if you throw more than 100 pitches, you are in the "Forbidden Zone".Sure not EVERYONE. There could be a couple of people who have such a style where your arm doesn't go back. If you just push the ball. But the majority do. I have pictures where my arm is totally bent backwards and I'm like "What the hell? I didn't think I brought my arm back so much".All of the pitchers were expected to go the full 9 innings. I forgot who said it, but one manager said something along the lines of "I'm paying you so you can pitch the game for me. Why should I have to pay 2-3 other guys to do that too? If you can't last the whole game, you'll be finding yourself without a job" Not an exact quote of course.Walter Johnson pitched sidearm, and he had over 500 complete games. Now, pitchers are lucky to get 30.It could be that the pitchers had better mechanics back then. I don't know. It does seem when I watch old video that there is less "Herky jerky" motions in their deliveries. It's nice and smooth.
