Kuzul

As the Chicago Cubs celebrated the 100th birthday of Wrigley Field on Wednesday, Cubs fans around the country will rejoice in the fact that they have…well, something to rejoice.

Although the team hasn’t won a World Series since they began playing at Wrigley Field in 1916, fans of the team are optimistic that a championship may very well be on its way to Chicago’s North Side in the near future.

Unfortunately, that time is expected to be a few years away still. The team finds itself in last place in the National League Central, already 10 games behind the first-place Brewers only four weeks into the season.

Cubs fans have had plenty to yell about, both good and bad. From multiple blown saves by Jose Veras to an 11th-inning game-winner against the St. Louis Cardinals by Welington Castillo, 2014 has been an emotional ride.

Here, we look at five things we have learned about the Cubs in 2014.

Begin Slideshow

New York Yankees starting pitcher CC Sabathia is 8-0 with a 1.36 ERA in his last nine outings against the Seattle Mariners, which is important to consider when making your MLB picks on Tuesday when the two teams face off at Yankee Stadium.

Sports bettors will find that the Yankees are minus-175 home favorites in the pro baseball odds, with the betting total sitting at eight in the market.

Let’s take a closer look at this American League matchup from a betting perspective while offering up a prediction along the way.

Begin Slideshow

She wasn’t happy about it. 

Watch as a guy in the stands spills his beer all over his date while going for a foul ball during the fifth inning of Monday’s Rockies-Diamondbacks game. The worst part? The guy next to them ended up with the ball.

[MLB, h/t SB Nation]

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

Baseball is a very tough sport to predict on a long-term basis, as so much can change in a year. Injuries, unexpected steps forward and backward by established players and the yearly influx of rookies leave the MLB landscape looking significantly different on a year-in and year-out basis.

With that being said, what follows is my attempt to predict who will be the 25 best players in MLB when the 2019 season rolls around five years from now.

It’s important to realize that the 25 best players represent the top 3.3 percent of players in baseball, so you can be a very, very good player and still not be included in this list.

As a result, a lot of guys who are going to be awfully good five years from now are not included for the simple reason that only 25 slots are available.

Still think I clearly overlooked someone? I encourage your feedback in the comments below. I ask only that you also recommend a player to be removed from my list in favor of him, for the sake of argument.

Begin Slideshow

One imagines that, like most adolescents, Brian Cashman was told as a young man not to spend all his money in one place. This past offseason, the New York Yankees general manager applied that advice.

Despite being the biggest decision-maker in the Yankees organization (non-Steinbrenner division) and having exorbitant financial fortitude at his disposal to do with as he more or less sees fit, Cashman made one of his tougher calls in his decade-and-a-half as the club’s GM when he chose to take a stand and let longtime Yankees star—and free agent—Robinson Cano walk.

By not giving in to Cano, who the Yankees offered a hefty $170 million last winter before he eventually inked with the Seattle Mariners for $70 million more, Cashman knew he would have to execute another plan to get the Yankees back to October after they fell shy for just the second time in 19 seasons in 2013.

That plan, as it turned out, involved not spending all of the Yankees’ money in one place—on Cano—and instead spreading the wealth to multiple areas of need in a single offseason.

To be clear, Cashman still spent heaping piles of money—somewhere in the range of, oh, half a billion dollars—but rather than tie up too much of it in one cornerstone player, he went after and landed multiple great ones.

First, there was Brian McCann, the former Atlanta Braves catcher who scored an $85 million contract.

Soon thereafter came center fielder and leadoff hitter Jacoby Ellsbury, the longtime Boston Red Sox player who pulled in $153 million.

Veteran outfielder Carlos Beltran, who’d just played in the World Series for the St. Louis Cardinals, came next at the price of $45 million.

And last but not least: Japanese phenom Masahiro Tanaka, a 25-year-old right-hander who was the pitching prize of the free-agent class at $155 million.

What was a dicey decision at the outset of the offseason has been working out rather well so far for Cashman. It’s also working out well for the Yankees, who are a season-high five games over .500 at 15-10 and in first place in the AL East entering play Tuesday—the day of Cano’s return to New York for the first time wearing a non-pinstriped uniform.

Cano and the Mariners, meanwhile, arrive in New York on a 3-9 stretch, including an eight-game losing streak, that has dropped their record to 10-14, placing them in fourth in the AL West. It’s too early to draw any definitive conclusions, but it’s not too soon to at least point out the two clubs’ divergent paths as the season’s first month comes to a close and Cano is temporarily back in the Bronx.

“Going back and playing for the first time against [the Yankees],” Cano told Adam Lewis of MLB.com, “it’s going to feel weird.”

For the Yankees, though, the start of 2014 has felt anything but weird, even with all of the new faces. As veteran left-hander CC Sabathia told Wallace Matthews of ESPN New York:

I think the chemistry on this team is really good as opposed to the past couple of years. We’re having fun playing and the starting pitching has been great. You don’t want to be that guy that messes it up. Just try to keep it going. …

… It just seems like the team is having more fun this year than last year. We added a lot of good guys, Mac [Brian McCann], Jacoby [Ellsbury], Carlos [Beltran]. It’s just a good group of guys this year.

Speaking of that good group, here’s how the new Yankees have done so far:

As for Cano, he’s sporting his usual high average of .301, but his other (i.e., power) numbers are down so far. In particular, his meager .387 slugging percentage and .086 isolated power are both deflated compared to his career marks (.502 SLG, .194 ISO), as the lefty hitter has all of five doubles and one home run. All told, Cano has been worth 0.3 WAR so far, per FanGraphs.

Obviously, it’s still very early in the season, and the sample sizes are rather minute, especially in the case of a metric like WAR. But at least that—the combined 1.9 WAR by Tanaka, Beltran, Ellsbury and McCann compared to Cano’s 0.3 WAR—puts a quantifiable number down to provide some idea that the Yankees’ spread-the-wealth approach in favor of ponying up for one player has been to the team’s benefit through the first month of 2014.

But for a moment, let’s put Cano and his slow start aside and focus on the Yankees, since those two entities now are mutually exclusive. The club’s biggest benefit is that both the lineup and rotation are now deeper, more diverse and less prone to extended periods where production lags and better able to withstand injury.

Sure, on an individual basis, none of Ellsbury, McCann or Beltran might be quite as good as Cano was last year or over his several years in New York, but the effects of a more solidified one through nine are felt in the form of there being fewer easy outs.

To wit, here’s a quick-peek comparison at where the Yankees ranked in the majors in three key offensive categories from last season—when they were forced to give entirely too much time to the likes of Vernon Wells, Lyle Overbay and Jayson Nix—to this one:

As for the rotation, just imagine where the Yankees would be now if they hadn’t landed Tanaka, the top free-agent arm on the market over the winter.

With stalwarts Hiroki Kuroda (5.28 ERA) and Sabathia still capable but clearly on the decline (Sabathia’s 4.78 ERA through five turns matching last year’s end-of-season figure); Ivan Nova, who appeared to take a big step forward in 2013 (3.10 ERA), now out for the season while he recovers from Tommy John surgery; and Michael Pineda getting himself into sticky situations, New York’s five-man rotation would be in shambles if not for Tanaka, who has been as steady as he has been spectacular so far.

Granted, the Yankees are the rare franchise in Major League Baseball with the financial flexibility to let one $240 million franchise star go but still survive—even thrive—by bringing in multiple other players earning eight and nine figures.

Had the Yankees gone all out to keep Cano, though, spending upward of $250 million to beat the Mariners’ offer, that would have hindered their ability to bring aboard all of the others—Tanaka, Ellsbury, McCann, Beltran—and the roster depth and veteran presence that comes with them.

That spread-the-wealth path is the one Cashman ultimately chose to go down over the offseason, and the early returns are promising. Who knows: Had the other possibility played out, maybe the Yankees would be where the Mariners are now, under .500 and hoping that Cano finds his former form. Fast.

Otherwise, the Mariners are going to start wishing they hadn’t spent all of their money in one place—especially while the opposite strategy is paying off for Cashman and the Yankees.

Statistics come from Baseball-Reference and FanGraphs, except where otherwise noted.

To talk baseball or fantasy baseball, check in with me on Twitter: Follow @JayCat11

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

We sit only a month into MLB‘s 2014 regular season, and the trade market has already heated up with a number of deals consummated between clubs, the latest of which found Lucas Harrell shipped from Houston to Arizona in exchange for either cash or a player to be named later, per Matt Snyder of CBSSports.com.

Things aren’t likely to slow down anytime soon, with trade speculation swirling around a handful of players, some more notable than others, heading into the season’s second month.

Here’s a look at 10 players who, according to the rumor mill, could be wearing a different uniform in the not so distant future.

Unless otherwise noted, all statistics courtesy of Baseball-Reference and are current through games of Apr. 28. All salary information courtesy of Cot’s Contracts.

Begin Slideshow

The Boston Red Sox enter Tuesday with a 12-14 record and a -15 run differential, tied for second worst in the American League. It’s a far cry from where the defending World Series champions expected to be at the end of April.

What can the Red Sox do to get back in first place instead of battling to stay out of the cellar?

While the answer may not be satisfying to many, it’s a fairly simple answer: Stay patient.

After decades of following, learning and writing baseball, two key takeaways this writer can assure nervous Red Sox fans of is: April is far too early to make drastic changes, and regression to the mean will, nine times out of 10, solve the problem.

Let’s look at three key areas in which the Red Sox have struggled, and how patience will end up being the single biggest solution to alleviating these problems.

Lack of Power

While the meat of the order in David Ortiz and Mike Napoli are driving the ball with authority, the Red Sox lack the power throughout the lineup that the 2013 group enjoyed. A lot of that can be traced back to the underperforming power numbers of A.J. Pierzynski and Xander Bogaerts.

Signed to fill the void left by departing catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia, A.J. Pierzynski’s calling card on offense is his power. 

The 37-year-old reached double digits in home runs in nine of his 13 seasons with at least 100 games played—and two of these seasons with single-digit homers were his first two seasons of full-time play.

Unfortunately, Pierzynski has yet to deliver on those grounds. Entering 2014, Pierzynski’s career slugging percentage (SLG) was .428 with an isolated power (ISO) of .145. Isolated Power, as Baseball Prospectus explains, “is a measure of a hitter’s raw power, in terms of extra bases per [at-bat].” \

So far with the Red Sox, his SLG is .377 with an ISO of .116 (see table below).

Before the weekend series, in which Pierzynski collected a home run on Saturday and double on Friday, his SLG was .355. The fact that his slugging percentage increased .22 points after only three games is indicative of how early it is. 

When it comes to sample such as these, one needs a much longer timeframe before anything of substance can be derived from them. In the early going, a slump can skew numbers dramatically, while just one good series good game—like Pierzynski’s weekend output—can make a significant difference. Come August, a good or bad game will barely register in season statistics.

Beware of small sample sizes, as they can cause one to jump to inaccurate conclusions.

It’s more likely than not that by the end of the year Pierzynski’s power production will mirror that of his career. This is where regression (or “trending back”) to the mean comes into play. Far more often than not, skewed numbers that look out of place for a player are simply outliers—a random variation that a regression to the mean will fix. Pierzynski’s poor power numbers to start the year will likely regress to his career power figures.

The same can be said of rookie shortstop Xander Bogaerts. While the 21-year-old won’t smash 30 home runs like it appears he can do one day, per the Telegram & Gazette, expecting him to stay under a .400 SLG the entire season is unlikely. Bogaerts’ minor-league SLG is .489.

For an exercise in small sample sizes, consider Bogaerts’ SLG in 2013, when he played 18 regular-season games with the Sox. That figure came in at .364, while his postseason mark in 12 games played was .481.

Similarly, his sample of 24 games played so far in 2014 is far too small to tell us anything about Bogaerts’ true expected power production over the 2014 season. Like Pierzynski, we can see that just one game can make a big difference early on. Before Sunday, Bogaerts’ SLG was .373. After a two-hit game against the Blue Jays in which he rapped a double, it’s all the way up to .391.

Beware of small sample sizes.

The Sox can count on more than the expected improvement of Pierzynski and Bogaerts’ power. On Friday, the Red Sox welcomed back Will Middlebrooks, the Sox’s power-hitting third baseman who played just four games before going on the disabled list. With a career slugging percentage of .469, that will be a dramatic improvement over the punchless Jonathan Herrera and Brock Holt.

Defensive Woes

Boston has also struggled when it comes to defense. In 2013, the club enjoyed the fruits of Jacoby Ellsbury in center and Shane Victorino in right to track down many a fly ball. Stephen Drew was steady at shortstop while Mike Napoli looked like a Gold Glove candidate at first base.

Fast-forward a year later and the fielding has been so poor it’s fast becoming a storyline.

But again, small sample sizes and regression to the mean come into play here.

Take Bogaerts, for example. He ranks as one of the worst shortstops when it comes to defense, as Fangraphs’ leaderboard shows, with a -1.8 “Defense” mark. Last year, in just as small a sample size as 2014, Bogaerts turned in an +0.2 mark. The takeaway is that it’s yet to be determined just how good or bad Bogaerts’ defense will be. Relying on April’s games to draw conclusions is inadvisable.

Napoli, as mentioned, was a Gold Glove candidate last season. His Ultimate Zone Rating over 150 games was 13.3, the best in baseball. This year, it’s at 0.3. What’s the better bet: Napoli suddenly being barely above average at first base, or small sample size flaring up?

We can bet on Napoli regressing back to the mean and being an above-average first baseman before the year is out. It doesn’t mean it is a lock to happen, but it’s more of a lock than expecting Napoli‘s April numbers to continue.

The last poor fielder to discuss is Grady Sizemore.

Sizemore’s center field defense is disastrous, as his fielding numbers bear out. While he was once a strong defender, age and injuries have robbed him of the ability to play center. It has been apparent just how poor of a defender Sizemore has become just by watching the games.

Sizemore won’t be asked to handle center field anymore, as that job has been turned over to Jackie Bradley, Jr. for good. That relegates Sizemore to left field, where his poor defense can be hidden, especially with the Green Monster looming at Fenway Park. That move alone should boost the Red Sox’s defense dramatically.

Poor Pitching

The last segment of the Red Sox’s performance is pitching. While the team has been enjoying Jon Lester’s starts, the same can’t be said of Clay Buchholz and Felix Doubront.

Buchholz looked to be a Cy Young contender last season before getting injured. This year, he’s one of the worst pitchers in the game with a 6.66 ERA.

Felix Doubront struggled through parts of 2013 but flashed dominance at times. He has yet to do so in 2014 with a 6.00 ERA.

As I’ve tried to hammer home throughout this piece, regression to the mean is likely with both pitchers. Fortunately, there’s a metric that can help us figure out what to expect moving forward.

Buchholz and Doubront will be hard-pressed to finish the season with ERAs above 6.00. Even if they aren’t the pitchers they once were, their talent is too great for that.

Fielding Independent Pitching (FIP) is a figure scaled to ERA that adjusts for park factors and luck, according to Fangraphs. While Buchholz has been far from elite this year, his FIP mark is 4.45. Once you adjust for luck on home runs, that number dips to a 3.97 xFIP.

The takeaway here is that Buchholz has been dramatically unlucky to post a 6.66 figure; Account for elements beyond Buchholz’s control, and he should have a 3.97 ERA on the season. One should feel much better about the right-hander’s odds to emerge again as a front-of-the-rotation starter after seeing these figures.

Doubront has a similar tale to tell. His FIP is 4.88 with an xFIP of 4.90. So while Doubront still hasn’t pitched well according to FIP, his 6.00 is just over a full run higher than it should be.

These numbers show what one can expect from the two pitchers assuming normal regression to the mean. Over time, these numbers should trend back to what FIP and xFIP suggest, and what their true talent level suggests.

How about the bullpen? Two major FIP outliers are Edward Mujica and Craig Breslow. Last season, Mujica saved 37 games while Breslow’s career ERA is 2.89. So far this year, their ERAs are abnormally high. Over time, the performances of these relievers will trend back to normalcy. Besides, the bullpen is the biggest component of a team that is subject to variation and luck, and Boston has the entire season in which to hit upon the right combination.

Take 2013, for example. Brandon Workman ended up being one of the most important relievers in October for Boston … he didn’t make his season debut until July 10.

So, What’s the Takeaway?

Small sample sizes. Regression to the mean. These are two of the overarching themes throughout this piece that we’ve discussed. From power to defense to pitching, we find elements that suggest performances to date can be expected to improve, all by simply waiting things out.

Patience.

Patience is the key to fixing the Red Sox’s biggest problems early in 2014. It may not be an answer you want to hear. Due to the fact the Red Sox’s record sat at 0-0 entering the year, their 12-14 record sticks out like a sore thumb.

But all teams, even elite ones, go through these ebbs and flows. If the Red Sox were 52-37 in July and then went on a 12-14 streak, it would be overlooked. But since the 12-14 record comes at the start of the year, the record sticks out like a sore thumb.

If the Red Sox want to get back to October baseball, its best bet is simply stay the course. Some players will start playing better. Others will play worse. Once the team has a few months to evaluate how well players are performing, then more drastic measures can be taken.

Until then, Boston needs to stay patient.

More from Bleacher Report:

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

The Cleveland Indians made a few minor moves this offseason, but nothing that would be considered scale-tipping.

In exchange for Drew Stubbs, the Tribe acquired Josh Outman from the Rockies, and they also signed four players—Scott Atchison, David Murphy, John Axford and Elliot Johnson—to deals that would eventually land them with the big league club—only Murphy and Axford were signed to the 25-man roster.

Most of these acquisitions have already paid early dividends and have helped the Indians maintain their 11-15 record—which would certainly be worse off without them. 

With nearly a month of play behind us, the time has come to grade the Indians’ offseason acquisitions based on their early-season performances. Most have actually performed quite well, but one player has been unbearably bad through the season’s first month.

We’ll kick it off with the only player acquired via trade, Josh Outman.

All stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference.com and Fangraphs.com unless otherwise noted.

Begin Slideshow

Now that the first month of the major league baseball season is in the books, it’s time to take a look at some early report cards for the New York Mets‘ acquisitions made during the offseason.

Let’s take a look:

Bartolo Colon (Starting Pitcher)

Grade: C

Aside from a disastrous outing in Anaheim, the portly right-hander has pitched effectively for the Mets. The 40-year-old Colon has authored four quality starts in five outings so far.

As usual, Colon’s control was been stellar—he’s walked just three batters in 32 innings of work. He needs to improve his batting average against though. Opposing hitters are batting a robust .284 against him.

Expect Colon to improve greatly on his 2-3 record and 4.50 ERA moving forward.

Kyle Farnsworth (Relief Pitcher)

Grade: B

The 38-year-old right-hander has stepped in and done a solid job as New York’s latest closer. Although it’s a small sample size, Farnsworth has collected two saves in two save opportunities and owns a 2.38 ERA in 12 appearances in 2014.

How much longer Farnsworth can remain effective remains to be seen though considering his age and all the innings he’s logged in his 16-year career. He did save 25 games for the Tampa Bay Rays as recently as 2011 though.

So far, so good.

Curtis Granderson (Outfielder)

Grade: D –

Simply put, it’s been a season to forget so far for Curtis Granderson.

The charismatic Mets outfielder is hitting a feeble .129 with just one HR, seven RBI and an anemic .212 slugging percentage.

He is not becoming another Jason Bay, is he?

Mets fans dread the thought. Granderson has to be better than this, doesn’t he?

Sure, the left-handed hitting veteran had a game-winning RBI single last Friday against Miami, but positive results have been hard to come by. Mets fans have been booing him with more vigor recently, and the pressure of playing for a new team may be getting to Granderson.

The Mets play in Philadelphia and Colorado this week, so playing in two great hitter’s parks should get the “Grandy Man” going.

Finally.

Or will it?

Jose Valverde (Relief Pitcher)

Grade: D

“Papa Grande” has saved two games for the Mets this season, but every game he pitches in seems to be a wild adventure for the flamboyant veteran right-hander.

Valverde has 288 career saves to his credit during his 12-year career but was recently demoted to a setup role based on his 5.93 ERA and 1.548 WHIP in 10 games this season.

His four home runs allowed in just 10.1 innings of work have not helped his cause either.

Chris Young (Outfielder)

Grade: D +

Despite a feeble .194 average, the 30-year-old Young has belted two home runs in his last four games and seems to be getting more comfortable at the plate.

He’ll be needed to help supply some much-needed power to a Mets lineup that is usually devoid of it.

The Mets will have a logjam in the outfield once Juan Lagares (pulled right hamstring) returns from the disabled list. In order to stay in the lineup, Young will have to improve his batting average—he’s a career .235 hitter—and provide the power the Mets signed him for this past winter.

Now is his opportunity to prove what he can do. New York is not expecting him to be an All-Star again, like he was for Arizona in 2010, but they are expecting more production than his 12/40/.200 line for the Oakland A’s last season.

*All statistics courtesy of Baseball-Reference.com.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

Pitch counts are now an acknowledged part of baseball. For all the sabermetric advances in the game, the one that’s made the most inroads into the consciousness of baseball fans and the actions of baseball teams is the simple pitch count.

The problem is, it’s not helping.

Baseball has stuck to something simple, sticking to clickers over research. While the Moneyball revolution has taken over front offices, the old-school mentality is still allowed to manage and mismanage health with a minimum of information. Often pitching coaches have nothing more to go on than a number on a clicker and a cliched response to “how do you feel?” 

Injuries continue to trend up. While it’s well known that Tommy John surgeries are up over the first few weeks of the season, already over the total of all of 2013, it’s not just elbow reconstruction. Injuries have cost MLB a billion dollars over the last five years, and worse, that total has held over any rolling five-year period, according to data in my proprietary injury database and confirmed with MLB and independent data.

Pitch counts and systems of counting were first popularized by Craig Wright in his seminal work The Diamond Appraised. Wright, along with Dr. Tom House, theorized that high usage would be problematic for both performance and injuries. While House was famous at the time for his work with Nolan Ryan, he’s long been an advocate of pitch efficiency and agreed with Wright. However, there wasn’t much change at the major league level.

In 1999, Dr. Rany Jazayerli of Baseball Prospectus (and now Grantland) introduced a better measure, called Pitcher Abuse Points (PAP). That system was improved upon by Jazayerli and Keith Woolner, now a top executive with the Cleveland Indians. Both systems measured the exponential increase in damage of pitchers above 100. 

It’s key that the 100-pitch mark, first stated as a rule of thumb by baseball legend Paul Richards, held up to Jazayerli and Woolner‘s research. However, there’s actually nothing special about the number itself. Moreover, it’s clear that the response to hitting that mark is individualized. While their research showed that there is increasing risk, there was no clear correlation to injury. 

Over the last 15 years since Jazayerli‘s research was published, pitch counts have become orthodoxy. As a pitcher approaches 100 pitches, managers get the bullpen going whether or not a pitcher appears tired. It’s key to PAP that the research was focused on short-term results after high pitch count games rather than longer-term injuries, though it goes without saying that the two should go hand in hand. 

It could be argued that other factors reduced pitch counts from their historic levels to their modern equivalent, such as the La Russa model of bullpen management, increased power around the game that necessitated increased effort/velocity on every pitch, the Jobe “Thrower’s Ten” exercises that reduced shoulder injuries among other factors. That said, the widespread reduction of pitch counts coincident to the Jazayerli/Woolner research seems causative.

Conversely, modern managers have resisted using a “quick hook” when pitchers are in trouble early as well, so as not to extend the bullpen. Starters have become simply another role, just as the closer, the setup man and the LOOGY (lefty one out guy) have become defined, even rigid, bullpen roles. The starter is now designed to go six or seven innings, more or less 100 pitches, every start regardless of any other circumstance.

Jazayerli acknowledges that in today’s game, as a result of his research and baseball’s response to it, high pitch counts matter less, simply because they so seldom happen. “[T]he difference between 100 and 120 pitches is so much less meaningful than the difference between 120 and 140 pitches. It’s not that pitch counts don’t matter – it’s that pitch counts at the level they are in 2014 hardly matter anymore,” Jazayerli told me by email.

Remember that this is all focused on major league pitch counts. Pitchers at this level are the elite of the elite and have already not only survived the long path to the big leagues, they have largely remained injury free. What is reasonable to expect from physically mature pitchers making millions of dollars is nothing like what we should expect from high school athletes or younger. However, over and over, we’re reminded that this is exactly what we’re doing. 

I could link to story after story about pitchers at the high school or college levels that are going 150 or more pitches. I could link to story after story about youth pitchers that play for two or three travel teams and pitch several games a week, often at high pitch counts.

This is in spite of Little League taking a proactive stand on pitch counts. Little League commissioned Dr. James Andrews and Dr. Glenn Fleisig of the American Sports Medicine Institute to research the effect of pitch counts on youth pitchers. Their research, done over a period of years, led to Little League adopting strict pitch count rules in 2007. In a one-year followup, Dr. Fleisig said they did see a reduction in injuries, though he has not done a longer-term study on the effects. 

Unfortunately, these regulations have had an unintended consequence. At the same time that Little League was taking a stand, there was a rise in travel teams and showcase events. In both of these, there is a lack of regulation and a surplus of radar guns. The combination is often cited as a major cause in the rise of pitching injuries.

In the absence of an athletic trainer or other trained medical professional, pitch count is a reasonable tool to be used. When I wrote Saving The Pitcher in 2004, we tested the ability of several groups—scouts, ATs and moms—to detect fatigue. All of them tended to be close and matched well with pitch count. The pitch count had to be individualized, but in the absence of better measures, pitch count regulation or monitoring is likely the best available option.  

“Pitch counts are an artificial control,” said Dr. Glenn Fleisig. “We know that overuse is accumulated and that pitching when fatigued is damaging, so this works for a broad population. It’s not individualized. Some pitchers could go 100 pitches and some could go 50, but we set the limits to do the most good possible. It’s up to the coaches and athletes at some point.”

However, the best available option for youth players with no professional supervision should be far from the best available option for million-dollar arms. Sadly, that’s not the case even in 2014. 

Indeed, the problem is that at the major league level, we learn nothing from the pitch count. If it was merely a linear fatigue problem, relievers would never get injured. What we have is a multivariate issue that goes well beyond what a simple counting stat could ever hope to accurately measure. So why are we stuck on something so simple and ineffective?

Alan Jaeger, one of the top pitching instructors in the country who has worked with many pro pitchers, thinks that the culture itself is the problem. “There is no question in my mind from 24 years of both training arms, and having a pulse on how arms are trained in the amateur community (more throwing/conditioning), compared to the professional community (less throwing/conditioning) that the most fundamental reason why we have so many arm problems is conservatism and restriction at the professional level.”

Jaeger thinks that what we’re seeing is a symptom, not the cause. “The pitch count is simply a by-product of this mentality. So until we deal with the foundation of why arms are breaking down, I feel strongly that we aren’t going to unearth the real answers by ascertaining the role of pitch counts.”

What baseball needs is an accessible direct measure of fatigue. While pitch count is a reasonable proxy, it only works in the aggregate. Greg Maddux may be effective for 85 pitches, but for those, he’s a Hall of Famer. Livan Hernandez could go 150, but no one’s expecting him to head for Cooperstown. Both can be useful, even leading a staff, but neither pitch count on its own tells us much about the pitcher.

Instead, we need a measure of both fatigue and recovery. Baseball in 2014 has no direct measure and few teams are even seeking out this kind of measure. While recovery is understood as a key point, even in a five-man rotation, few teams are doing anything to measure this. We have a descended wisdom only a few decades long, and in those decades, we’ve seen injuries increase.

We do have to consider that at some level, pitch counts do work. They may not reduce overall injuries, but for a certain important subset they work. Jazayerli points out, “I also did a simple study when I wrote about Stephen Strasburg for Grantland back in 2012, looking at the attrition rate of 22-year-old starting pitchers in the majors five years later. Prior to about 1998, roughly 50% of them were still starting regularly five years later; since 1998, that rate has jumped to two-thirds. Maybe it’s a coincidence; maybe it’s not.”

At the same time, we’re seeing a major increase in severe injuries to youth pitchers. Many of the Tommy John surgeries that the top orthopedists do will be on high school pitchers or younger. With the increase in revisions (second or third Tommy John surgeries), the decrease in the incidental age is going to increase the number of revisions we see if the pitcher continues to overuse or overstress his arm.

SI’s Joe Sheehan also believes that we are seeing some effects. “I think we’ve reduced injuries or ineffectiveness due specifically to short-term overuse. Pitchers definitely used to get broken by their managers, and that just doesn’t happen any longer.” Given the lack of 120-plus pitch starts, this is reasonable, which means we’re likely seeing more high-effort trauma. 

The next step is a more direct measure of fatigue. “There’s no such thing as a fatigue-o-meter,” said Fleisig with a laugh, “but if there was one, every team better have one.” There are possibilities on the horizon for such a device. Right now, there are available proxies like heart rate variability and direct measures like the use of portable ultrasounds that could check the integrity of muscles and ligaments very quickly. While it’s unlikely a team would do this between innings, doing it between starts would be a very low-cost solution.

There is also the new baseball tracking system that is expected to come into play this year. While the system is still being developed, it is often referred to as “OMGFX” given all of its information. One possibility is that it will be able to give us in-game, real-time measures of fatigue and pitching mechanics. If so, baseball will have a powerful tool, though one that would be impossible to get out to even minor league stadiums. 

What this comes down to is a failure of imagination and execution. Pitching coaches are working from what they did “back in the day” and seldom the best research. They’re certainly not conducting any research or being given the proper support from their organization. This is a system failure, but one that could be easily corrected given the will of the organization, some of which have made strides.

Angel Borrelli, a top kinesiologist who works with and analyzes MLB pitchers, says it best. “Nothing could be more impersonal than dealing with pitch counts (a number) when not firstly dealing with the pitcher (a human and not a machine).” The system is failing pitchers by not treating them as individuals, and that would be easy to change.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com