I was thinking the same thing just the other day. There’s a huge difference between players who have great natural talent and coaches/managers/members of the organization who understand how to teach.

It worries me that Nolan Ryan may think he’s the new sheriff in town and, because he’s high on the organizational chart, he can (and should) model the organization after his baseball beliefs. I hope my concerns about this are wrong.

Let me also say that, growing up, Nolan Ryan was my favorite baseball player. He still is. I always thought he got shortchanged in the “greatest pitchers of all time” discussion due to the high walk rate and bad winning percentage. I really hope he doesn’t add another “yeah, but…” clause to his baseball legacy.

I don’t know yet what to think of Nolan’s involvement. I don’t necessarily think it is bad simply because he is involved – it seems a little early to make that call right now. While I believe that he should leave JD in place, because he’s done a good job in talent acquisition, I’m not as enamored with the development side of the organization. Basically this team cannot develop pitchers. I cannot get mad at tinkering if it needs to be tinkered with.

As for the strategy itself, I think it probably is a good move. Texas is widely considered one of the hardest places to pitch. People always say the heat wears down our pitchers as the year goes on more than other teams, and I’ll admit that I kind of see how that could be true. The question is what are you sacrificing to push your talent in this way?

It probably all amounts to playing the odds. By limiting pitchers in low levels, you probably keep most of them healthy all the way through the system, but few, if any, will develop the durability to be effective starters in Texas (though they may make very nice trade chips to other teams). On the other hand, pushing guys more at lower levels will almost certainly cause more injuries – we’ll likely lose at least one and maybe two of Beavan, Main, Feliz, Ramirez and Font – but those that do persist may develop the ability to go deep in games and not falter in the Texas Summer.

Now, is that ethically the right move? Who knows. Strategically? For this organization, I think you have to seriously consider it. I also think that it means you need to adjust your draft strategy accordingly – find pitchers who have shown durability in college so that you aren’t shocking their system by doubling their workload all of a sudden.

...when you suggest Nolan Ryan might not possess all the answers to all the important questions and problems that the Rangers (or any other team for that matter) have.

Surely you are aware that on the seventh day, when God rested, he turned over his duties to one Lynn Nolan Ryan Jr.

...any real way for Nolan’s “decree” to not be troubling.

decree that Ryan sent forth? All I really recall is a TV or radio interview where someone (Lavine?) said that minor league managers did not have to hold their pitchers to a strict pitch count. They could allow their pitchers to exceed the pitch count based on game conditions, etc. I think people are making something out of this that is not there.

...I don’t think Nolan, as a personel guy, is what the team needed. Nolan as the president, ok, i can deal with that… but when every year you are either hiring a new manager, gm, or team president, at what point do you give them all to get on the same page and follow a plan though for more than, say, i dunno… 12 months…

Nolan scares the $hit outta me as a personel guy and for the exact reason ajm says… what worked for him isn’t necessarily gonna be right… and in a place where he walks on top of rose petals and bare virgins backs, who’s gonna tell him that what he’s saying is a bad idea if it is one?

Was this a Ryan gut feeling “pitchers need to be pushed to more innings” with no data to back it up…

or has he in the past seen studies or done research that would back up this philosophy.

Well if we have a few pitchers that start blowing arms out, then Ryan is setting himself up to be majorly critizied.

But on the other hand, not only did he have high pitch counts, rotations were also smaller… so he had a lot of innings pitched, as well. In 1972, he pitched 284 innings, in 1973 it was 326 and in 1974 it was 332 2/3. In those three seasons, he pitched 20, 26 and 26 complete games out of 39, 39 and 41 starts. He pitched 12 seasons of 220 or more innings, which now is considered to be freakishly durable. The point is as much as high pitch counts in a game can be bad, high pitch counts in a season are what leads to fatigue, etc. and wanting pitchers to go 100-110 pitches every time out, up to 120 on occasion, still won’t approach the season-long cumulative pitch counts Nolan racked up.

If you can get your starting pitcher to still be strong after 100-110 pitches, instead of being gassed, the benefits are that your bullpen is less taxed, and relievers that do enter the game are put in better situations since pitches 105-110 are thrown for strikes instead of ending up out of the zone or in deep left field.

I wouldn’t think Ryan is out by himself on an island in his thinking here. Ryan has been at this game a long time. That does not necessarily mean that he knows it all about developing pitchers, but it probably does mean that he has access to the opinions of a lot of very well respected longtime baseball men, whether inside the organization, or externally. I can’t think that his many years within the industry in several different capacities, he hasn’t bounced these ideas off of many pitching coaches, scouts, other pitches, and front office personnel. It is probably an opinion developed over time. I would like to think it is an opinion he developed from past experience and through other’s experiences. I agree that just because he is Nolan, that it doesn’t mean that his words are gospel, but at the same time, he is an intelligent person who has been very successful in many areas of his professional life, and someone who has spent many years observing the evolution of the way pitchers are handled, and that can’t be written off. He is in a unique position with the club in that this is a job he wants to do, and not a job he needs. He, unlike the majority of general managers, scouts, player development personnel etc can afford to do some minor experimentation with things such as this and not be worried about his job. Would it seem like the end of the world to him if he messed up here? Probably not. He would move on to other things that he has been successful at. That is not the case with most others in charge of a major league baseball team. Most would probably fear losing that job or that position, and would be afraid to ever go out on a limb and take a chance if they thought the move might backfire on them. I doubt Ryan has those worries. Also, from what I have read, I don’t see this as Ryan saying that he wants the Ranger’s pitchers throwing X amount of pitches per game as much as it is overall conditioning of the pitchers, which would in turn allow those pitchers more stamina to go deeper into the games. I don’t think he is advocating any Cy Young/Babe Ruth type pitch counts as much as he is trying the get the theoretically best pitcher in the game (the starter) to stay in the game longer so to skip the weaker middle relief. Arm injuries are going to happen whether the pitchers are coddled or not, although I do believe there comes a point where over working them is detrimental, but it also may be possible that less injuries will happen if the pitchers are better overall conditioned. It may also be possible that we have more effective pitchers when they get here. I like the plan that Ryan is implementing. I don’t know if in the end it will be beneficial or not, but with the Rangers track record, it might not hurt to try.

Tom Hicks we aren’t winning now, so what can we do to change it routine we’ve seen for over a decade. Nothing new. JD hasn’t developed a pitcher in 2 years? Time to churn it up.

Same ol same ol.

While i agree that maybe building pitchers up to work longer (stamina, etc) isn’t an all around bad idea…. working young pitchers into high pitch counts just seems like a sure fire way to get a buncha guys recovering from TJ surgery.

I also don’t like the idea of the team president setting club policies like this, nolan may have been a great player but that doesnt mean he knows how to develop great players

I have had a feeling – without doing much research to back it up – that pitching durability is preordained regardless of inning counts and arm stress. Basically that a guy prone to be injured will start getting injured and continue to be hurt. Along with this theory it seems that pitchers who are “turned loose” early seem to have long careers if they aren’t injury prone.

Nolan’s perspective seems easy to place since the 69 Mets included Koosman, Seaver, and himself who were remarkably durable pitchers (over 3800 IP each) who each threw at least 178 innings in the minors their first or second years there, with Ryan and Seaver being 20 or less.

I understand that this was a different time and may have been par for the course so I tried to find some contemporary pitchers who seem very durable. Roger Clemens had 250+ ML innings in his age 23 season, the great Johan had 160 in his age 20 season, Buerlhe had 170 IP in his 1st full season, Curt Schilling had 185 in his 1st full season, Greg Maddux 186.

Whether this is because durable pitchers are always durable is certainly debatable. But it does seem like slapping a big workload on someone has been the norm for several of the more durable starters that I had off the top of my head.

to open up.

It would be great to have the local media ask some of the questions AJM is asking. Especially a question like, could JD not implement this idea if he felt the consensus of the developmental staff were against the idea.

I think, though, that Ryan as the messenger has more effect on the minor league pitchers. So, it is important to distinguish between a groupthink decision delivered by Nolan, and a decision decreed by Nolan.

Sure is a big turnaround from the Fuson days with the tandem starter system.

how much power should someone with no real experience in terms of developing players and overseeing on-the-field baseball management be given?

Do you feel that JD has more experience in the realm of player development?

it’s the best news I’ve heard about this organization since I’ve been following it in 1991. I admit I am a pretty big Nolan Ryan fan. but the ironic thing is that his book with tom house – the pitchers bible, which i’ve read many times since a little kid – and his and house’s pitching philosophies in the 80’s i think can be directly attributable to the deterioration of pitching in our generation. a lot of what they were doing made no sense and was basically made up by house as he went along. i think nolan would have been an even better pitcher if he trained more by pitching from a mound instead of throwing footballs.

but regarding the higher workload, i am in complete agreement. you don’t develop aces by having them pitch 5-6 innings and top out at 90-100 pitches. i cannot think of anohter skill activity that you are expected to become better at by limiting the specific activity. but i don’t think a higher workload by itself will necessarily produce results if the pitchers are not taught how to pitch using their bodies and not their arms.

and knowing how entrenched baseball is with its belief-based teaching systems, perhaps the only way of making a significant change to a player development philosophy is to have a pitching legend come in to implement it. otherwise, no one would listen.

They have still done things like start Castillo in the bullpen then move him to the rotation to limit innings, and we have not heard about any pitchers being left out there way too long, the only exception perhaps being the no hitter.

Beyond some vague comments I’m just not sure there is a “there” there.

What part do the Snow Monkeys play in his pitching development plan?

I think Adam covered most if not all, of the “what ifs” to this edict-someone tossed in the idea that there might be an attempt to build durability -maybe some merit, but “built” durability can be done also in other than game conditions. My thoughts on pitch counts:
-does it include warm up pitches before the game? before each inning? how much does this vary? (and consider starting vs relief pitchers). What about in-between game workouts and pitches. And how does this schedule(today’s schedule, which has to be variable for each pitcher), compare with with the workouts of 30-40 years ago? And of course, it’s not significant most of the time, but pitchers field their position and throw to different bases-included in the pitch count?. If there was an accompanying “plan” to build stamina along with pitching later into games, I could go along with it—but doesn’t sound like it.

What was his minor league career like?

I don’t have the internet know how, or frankly the care, to research it but simply by looking at his career stats it doesn’t look like it was very long. He was drafted in the 12th round in ‘65 out of high school and made his ML debut the next year.

Also the example I think of is Bill Parcells. Back in the 80’s and early 90’s Parcells was a great coach who’s style of game was great. Fast forward to the early 2000’s and he didn’t adapt to a changing sport and his game was not successful anymore. Thats what I see with Nolan. He was a great pitcher in his time and did things most people couldn’t ever or will never duplicate. But the game has changed so much since then. The players, both pitchers and position players, are bigger, stronger, faster, etc. Back in Nolans era there wasn’t the kind of specialized pitchers in relief and so Nolan would pitch deeper into games. Nowadays we have loogys, setup men, closers. The absolute best HS pitchers generally take 3 years minimum to even make it to the bigs. Much less 12th round draft picks.

What scares me is him coming in here and trying to implement his old school ways on a new school era of players and because of his aura of invincibility with the public and with Hicks it will happen. He needs to focus on getting butts in seats at The Ballpark. Do a few more commercials and radio spots and leave the player development to the guys who have been around the game the last few years

That’s the question. If Nolan said all pitchers need to go 100 or 110 pitches, that’s bad (Hunter’s statement seemed to indicate this, but we need more info). But if Nolan removed a sub-100 pitch edict, that’s good. In fact, it would the complete opposite of what AJM is worried about – in that situation, Nolan is empowering the lower level managers and coaches to make their own decisions on whether to let someone go past 100. It would be the removal of top-down decision making and would let the people in the trenches to use their own knowledge and experience.

Another thing I am wondering is does this mean there are no more inning limits on pitchers. For the past several years I have read and heard about they want to hold so and so back so he doesn’t pitch too many innings. There have been studies that show if a young pitchers increases their inning totals by more than 30 (I think) a year they are more prone to injury. So does this edict or supposed edict from Nolan mean we have stopped caring about inning totals? I look at Hunter being 2nd in the minors in IP and Beavan pitching into the 7th inning several times so far including his very first pro start this year and think to myself there is no way those players do the same thing in this organization before this year.

historically it seems like in the past pitchers always threw a lot more pitches, it just seems now, these days, the are not, but i don’t think it’s because they can’t, but more because the pitchers aren’t as good as they use to be? and it’s harder for pitchers to repeat their delivery consistently?, or it’s just that they are being taught the wrong mechanics?, or they are not conditioning themselves properly?

i dunno, just thinking out aloud. .

we can’t get someone like Greg Maddux to do this instead of Nolan Ryan.

I don’t think there is any doubt that Maddux got much, much more out of his physical abilities than Ryan did.

This may have been covered elsewhere, in fact I’m sure it has, but I’m just going to throw it out there.

One thing I could see as a problem with pre-set pitch counts is that young pitchers believe/know that they need to win games and be pitch efficiently to be noticed and promoted. As a result, a pitcher who has 2 dominant pitches will tend to rely on those rather than working on a 3rd or 4th pitch. Because a really good young pitcher can get A or even AA hitters out by simply overpowering them and using an occassional offspeed pitch, it isn’t in their immediate interest to “slow down” their game by developing their lower quality pitches. Having this added “must get through 6 innings for the quality start on 90 pitches” incentive is counter to their development.

If you loosen the pitch count policy by giving managers some leeway on when to pull guys out and allowing guys to stay in when they are pitching well and productively, then you may see more pitchers with more complex stuff come out of the system. This is an added plus in addition to durability.

I doubt this is what Nolan is thinking, which is more what Adam’s post was about, but I don’t think the move in and of itself is outlandish.

I keep thinking that this thought is rattling around in Tom Hicks’ head…..

“Hey, 1 Hall of Fame player turned GM got my hockey team to the conference finals so surely another one can turn the baseball team around.”

We have to change this mindset,” says Ryan. “Some of the guys have been on a pitch count since Little League. It should be tailored to the individual.

“These pitchers have to realize what their capabilities are, and build up their stamina. I remember it used to be that 300 innings was the benchmark for an ace. If you were a starter, you were expected to pitch at least 250 innings. Now, you may have one guy go 200 innings on your whole staff. “That’s why you see 12, 13 pitchers on every team..”

Ryan expressed these sentiments to the Rangers front office and coaching staff. He may be a softy at heart and always a gentleman, but when the boss talks, you better listen.

“He made suggestions along those lines about pitch counts,” Rangers manager Ron Washington says. “So we’re trying to keep them out there as long as they can. We have to be smart monitoring what they’re doing, but if you got the horses, you can let them go a bit.”

There was a moderate difference in the first three weeks. The Rangers’ rotation averaged 96.3 pitches per game and lasted 5.93 innings per start. A year ago, they averaged 81.2 pitches and 5.44 innings.

Rangers ace Kevin Millwood became the first Ranger in nearly two years to throw a complete game. It was April 5 vs. the Los Angeles Angels, albeit an eight-inning effort in a 2-1 loss. The starters have thrown at least 100 pitches in eight games.

“I love it,” Millwood says. “It seems like they’ve let me go a little longer than I did in the past. I’m not going to jeopardize the game just to be a tough guy, but I can tell you when I’m tired and when I’m not. “But what (Ryan) did, I don’t see anyone doing anything like that again.”

Ryan, who threw the fifth-most innings in baseball history, told the Rangers’ executives and coaches how critical conditioning was to his career. He would not only routinely throw batting practice to his teammates, but would do wind sprints after each 10-minute interval, lasting about 30 minutes.

“Obviously, he’s got strong feelings about pitching,” Rangers general manager Jon Daniels says, “and we were able to incorporate some of the things Nolan did into our farm system. We’ve encouraged a lot of our (minor league) managers and pitching coaches that they have the flexibility to let their pitchers go past 100 pitches. We’re not going to call down there (and complain) as long as they’re not putting the pitchers at risk. We’re having our young pitchers throw live batting practice, too.”

I am not quite sure where I stand on Nolan, but I keep thinking of all of the pitchers that prospered after leaving Texas, from Dave Stewart to Edinson Volquez. It seems as though the mindset over the years hasn’t/isn’t working well. Maybe there should be another way to approach pitching in this organization. Whether Nolan’s ideas are fundamentally sould, I cannot say, but as we have all seen, what is being used is not really working.

The same persons, including AJM, who question Ryan’s on-field decision-making abilities, have never seemed to have a problem with Daniel’s involvement with on-field decision-making…actually inserting players into certain positions…yet JD has virtually no baseball experience whatsoever.

about how pitchers of “yesteryear” could pitch so many innings for such a long period of time. I know there were 4 man rotations and expansion had not occurred, but still the human body has not changed over the years, conditioning should be at a much higher level, and strengthening of players arms should also be at an all time high with the current means available. There are few new pitches being thrown. So why all of the injuries? I know playes of “YY” pitched through a lot of pain and injuries, but that can’t be the primary factor in their longevity. I know the as the salaries increased in the 80’s IP decreased, as did the number of quality pitchers available after expansion. But still, guys like Bob Gibson, Sandy Koufax, Bob Feller, Steve Carlton, Tom Seaver pitched 300 plus innings for several years and 250+ on a regualr basis. So back to my original question, leaving $$ out of it, why can’t pitchers pitch 200+ innings without arm problems? Does it start in LL and progress into HS and college over using arms? Just always wondered about that?

...during the broadcast, Lewin asked Grieve if the media usually had trade rumors accurate in the newspaper. He said they never once had anything completely right, although they usually had some things right.

I bring that up because we have no freaking idea about whose decision it was to get the kids to throw more pitches. I’d like to think that it was a committee decision…that Ryan, Daniels, and the player development people made came to some sort of agreement about it. Just because Nolan Ryan shows up and this decision was made doesn’t mean it was a unilateral thing.

You nailed it.

Not a whole lot for me to say, except PLUS ONE.

You nailed it.

Not a whole lot for me to say, except PLUS ONE. to this entire post.

Too many possibilities. Hopefully, the background will be fleshed out shortly.

Man I’d love to be a fly on the Ranger wall right now.

...Nolan might not have hands-on experience, but it’s well known and documented that he helped Randy Johnson find consistency by suggesting a small tweek to his delivery back in 1992. Johnson has acknowledged that this meeting helped him become the superstar he became, and I personally think this says a lot about Nolan’s ability to recognize the skills of individual players, thereby suggesting that Nolan just might understand something about developing pitchers, especially when it comes to using proper mechanics. (Not that mechanics were the point of AJM’s original post.)

Higher pitch counts for players that have the proper skills, mechanics, etc. are not a bad thing, and I’ll never be convinced otherwise. With pitchers, mechanics are often overlooked by the general observer, and those pitchers that had/have good ones will be able to handle the workload, while those with improper mechanics won’t… It’s really THAT simple.