Remember me

The Greatest Generation

August 7, 2008

 

I have always had an interest in the generation of pitchers born in the early to mid-forties, the last generation of pitchers who routinely threw 300 innings, the generation that boasts a lot of the 300-game winners. My interest in this generation of pitchers is connected to my fascination with baseball statistics in general. I started looking at stats on the backs of baseball cards, and, well, these were the pitchers who had the most impressive stats. I remember the way Topps used to list a player’s entire career on the back of the card. For the old guys the print was near-microscopic. And Topps used to italicize the league leaders, and somehow those italics made the accomplishments of Palmer and Schmidt and Ryan and Reggie all the more impressive.

Last week one of the poll questions asked, “Are managers handling starters correctly, or are pitchers being babied?”

In light of that question, I thought it might be interesting to take a look at that last generation of 300-inning guys and see what their records show. How did these guys, who often notched 300 innings a year, manage to play for so damned long? How did a guy like Nolan Ryan last until his mid-forties? What about the guys who didn’t last? What happened to them? Who was babied and who wasn’t? What can we learn from this generation of pitchers? What conclusions can we draw?

 

The Names

I used the years 1942-1947. This was an arbitrary choice, and it leaves out a few guys (Phil Niekro, Jim Kaat, and Gaylord Perry on one side, Luis Tiant, Vida Blue, and Bert Blyleven on the other) who probably belong in the discussion. It seemed a six-year stretch was enough. The players I looked at are, for the most part, known pitchers, guy you probably know a little about:

Name (Birth year)

Career Wins

Name (Birth year)

Career Wins

 

 

 

 

1942

 

1945

 

Fergie Jenkins

284

Ken Holtzman

174

Jerry Koosman

222

Jim Palmer

286

Sam McDowell

141

Don Sutton

324

Dave McNally

184

Rick Wise

188

Jim Lonborg

157

 

 

 

 

1946

 

1943

 

Larry Dierker

139

Tommy John

288

Catfish Hunter

224

 

 

Paul Splittorff

166

1944

 

Mike Torrez

185

Steve Carlton

329

 

 

Rudy May

152

1947

 

Denny McLain

131

Joe Coleman

142

Joe Niekro

221

Nolan Ryan

324

Tom Seaver

311

 

 

 

That’s four 300-game winners (Seaver, Ryan, Carlton, and Sutton), six 200-game winners (Palmer, Tommy John, Jenkins, Koosman, Joe Niekro, Catfish), and eleven 100-game winners (the rest of ‘em). It’s a reasonable list of the best pitchers of that generation. The 100-game guys aren’t slouches: you’ve got a Cy Young winner in Lonborg, and the three Mc’s: McLain, McNally, and McDowell (there was a time when debates about the best pitcher in the game were crowded with Mc’s.

 

Innings Pitched

In baseball, it is generally believed that young arms should be protected. This came to attention during the trials of  Kerry Woods and Mark Prior, but the debate about pitch counts and how to develop arms has been part of baseball discourse for a lot longer than that. I remember reading Nolan Ryan’s first autobiography, where he complains about the 100-pitch count that the Astros had him on for much of the 1980’s.

But if it’s always been part of the conversation, concepts like pitch counts and limiting a young pitchers innings have never before been the dominant strategy, the official strategy, as I think they are now.

Limiting a young pitcher’s innings wasn’t the dominant strategy of the late 1960’s, but, as the following chart shows, it was practiced:

Name

Age 18

Age 19

Age 20

Age 21

Age 22

Age 23

Age 24

Age 25

Fergie Jenkins

0

0

0

0

12

184

289

308

Jerry Koosman

0

0

0

0

0

0

22

264

Sam McDowell

6

88

65

173

273

194

236

269

Dave McNally

0

9

126

159

199

213

119

273

Jim Lonborg

0

0

0

0

0

185

182

273

Tommy John

0

0

20

94

184

223

178

177

Steve Carlton

0

0

25

52

193

231

236

254

Rudy May

0

0

124

0

0

0

180

208

Denny McLain

0

21

100

220

264

235

336

325

Joe Niekro

0

0

0

0

170

177

221

213

Tom Seaver

0

0

0

0

251

278

273

291

Ken Holtzman

0

4

221

93

215

261

288

195

Jim Palmer

0

92

208

49

0

181

305

282

Don Sutton

0

0

0

226

233

208

293

260

Rick Wise

69

0

99

181

182

220

220

272

Larry Dierker

147

187

99

234

305

270

159

215

Catfish Hunter

0

133

177

260

234

247

262

274

Paul Splittorff

0

0

0

0

0

9

144

216

Mike Torrez

0

0

6

19

108

179

39

243

Joe Coleman

18

9

134

223

248

219

286

280

Nolan Ryan

0

3

134

89

132

152

284

326

 

Look at those numbers for a moment. Only Larry Dierker was pitching a lot at age 19. Two guys (out of 21) had 200 IP at age 20. Thru Age 21, only 9 of the 21 pitchers had ever thrown 200+ innings in a season (although McNally and Carlton had come close). Even at age 22, only 62% of the pitchers had ever notched a 200 inning season. Fergie Jenkins had 12 major league innings through Age 22. Lonborg didn’t reach the majors until he was 23. Koosman didn’t reach until he was 24.

But by their Age 25 season, every single pitcher had notched at least one 200-inning season. 16 of the 21 had notched 250+ innings in a season. Five pitchers (Jenkins, Ryan, Dierker, Palmer, and McLain) has notched 300+ innings in a season.

Another way to look at their development is their innings pitched at a certain age:

Name

Thru Age 20

Thru Age 21

Thru Age 22

Thru Age 23

Fergie Jenkins

0

0

12

196

Jerry Koosman

0

0

0

0

Sam McDowell

159

332

605

799

Dave McNally

135

294

493

706

Jim Lonborg

0

0

0

185

Tommy John

20

114

298

521

Steve Carlton

25

77

270

501

Rudy May

124

124

124

124

Denny McLain

121

341

605

840

Joe Niekro

0

0

170

347

Tom Seaver

0

0

251

529

Ken Holtzman

225

318

533

794

Jim Palmer

300

349

349

530

Don Sutton

0

226

459

667

Rick Wise

168

349

531

751

Larry Dierker

433

667

972

1242

Catfish Hunter

310

570

804

1051

Paul Splittorff

0

0

0

9

Mike Torrez

6

25

133

312

Joe Colman

161

384

632

851

Nolan Ryan

137

226

358

510

 

Entering his Age 24 season, Fergie Jenkins had a total of 196 major league innings. Larry Dierker had five times that many. Carlton, John, Palmer, Seaver and Ryan were all hovering around 500 innings pitched. Catfish Hunter had a ton of innings, as did McLain and Coleman. Paul Splittorff and Jerry Koosman had 9 innings, combined.

Whether this was a strategy of the time, or merely a measure of necessity, it is worth noting that a good number of these pitchers were protected as young pitchers. Some weren’t. Nolan Ryan didn’t pitch because he was wild, and the Mets didn’t trust that. Fergie Jenkins came up with the Phillies, who had good arms and liked Rick Wise better – Jenkins didn’t get a shot until he was dealt to the Cubs. Dierker pitched because the Houston team was in last place, so what did it hurt? Catfish pitched because there was a ‘bonus-baby rule,’ and besides, it wasn’t like Charles Finley to waste money on a minor leaguer.

You know what’s interesting, though? If you set an arbitrary number of innings pitched, and split the guys up, between, say, ‘Throwers’ and ‘Babies,’ you get a pretty interesting list. Let’s say, Age 21, 300 or more major league innings:

Age 21

More than 300 IP

Less than 300 IP

 

(Throwers)

(Babies)

 

Jim Palmer

Tom Seaver

 

Catfish Hunter

Steve Carlton

 

Denny McLain

Nolan Ryan

 

Sam McDowell

Don Sutton

 

Ken Holtzman

Fergie Jenkins

 

Rick Wise

Tommy John

 

Larry Dierker

Joe Niekro

 

Joe Coleman

Jerry Koosman

 

 

Dave McNally

 

 

Jim Lonborg

 

 

Rudy May

 

 

Paul Splittorff

 

 

Mike Torrez

 

How about Age 23? And let’s add two seasons worth of innings, bringing the total to 700 IP:

Age 23

More than 700 IP

Less than 700 IP

 

(Throwers)

(Babies)

 

Catfish Hunter

Tom Seaver

 

Denny McLain

Steve Carlton

 

Sam McDowell

Nolan Ryan

 

Dave McNally

Don Sutton

 

Ken Holtzman

Fergie Jenkins

 

Rick Wise

Jim Palmer

 

Larry Dierker

Tommy John

 

Joe Coleman

Joe Niekro

 

 

Jerry Koosman

 

 

Jim Lonborg

 

 

Rudy May

 

 

Paul Splittorff

 

 

Mike Torrez

 

Palmer and McNally switch places, which seems apt. Palmer was worked a bit as a kid, but then he had arm trouble and missed the better part of two seasons. McNally’s right on the edge in the last table: at Age 21 he had 294 IP. He certainly wasn’t babied as a young pitcher. He belongs on the left side.

What’s obvious about this list? These are guys who have had their Age 23 season. The guys on the right have not thrown a lot of major league innings. I don’t know exactly why they’ve been protected, not in every case. And I don’t know how many of those guys threw a ton of innings in the minor leagues.

But what’s obvious to me, about the two lists, is how much better the second list is. Those guys, the guys who didn’t pitch a lot as young pitchers, they were the ones who had the careers. They were the guys who threw 260-300 innings and won 20 games a year like clockwork. You have six Hall-of-Famers on that list, 12 Cy Young Awards.

On the other side you have the burnouts. Sam McDowell struck out 325 hitters in 276 innings when he was twenty-two years old. He was done at 29, out of the majors at 32. Denny McLain won an MVP at twenty-four. Four years later he was out of baseball.

Same list, different measure:

More than 700 IP

Age at retirement

Less than 700 IP

Age at retirement

Catfish Hunter

33

Tom Seaver

41

Denny McLain

28

Steve Carlton

43

Sam McDowell

32

Nolan Ryan

46

Dave McNally

36

Don Sutton

43

Ken Holtzman

33

Fergie Jenkins

40

Rick Wise

36

Jim Palmer

38

Larry Dierker

30

Tommy John

46

Joe Coleman

32

Joe Niekro

43

 

Jerry Koosman

42

 

 

Jim Lonborg

37

 

 

Rudy May

38

 

 

Paul Splittorff

37

 

 

Mike Torrez

37

 

The guys who started slow, the guys of that generation who took their sweet time getting to the majors, those babies, they lasted. The guys who were thrown to the lions, who tossed tons of innings at young ages, they were out of the game early.

Eight of the thirteen guys who were babied as young pitchers managed to pitch into their forties. None (zero) of the guys who threw a lot as youngsters made it past 36.

 

(Are there any) Conclusions

Are starting pitchers today being babied? I don’t know the answer to that. But I generally think that baseball evolves: strategies that lead to success become dominant strategies, while strategies that don’t succeed are replaced. If most teams limit pitch counts, I imagine they are doing so because it is in the team’s best interest to do so.

Heck, another chart. Here’s a list of the pitchers in the last 50 years who threw 400+ major league innings through their Age 21 season, and the age they retired:

 

IP>400, Age 21

Age Retired

Dwight Gooden

745

35

Fernando Valenzuela

495

36

Dave Rozema

428

29

Frank Tanana

552

39

Bert Blyleven

730

41

Don Gullett

430

27

Gary Nolan

485

29

Larryh Dierker

675

30

Catfish Hunter

569

33

Wally Bunker

550

26

Ray Sadecki

482

36

Mike McCormick

738

32

Milt Pappas

559

34

Don Drysdale

532

32

 

Again, you have a list of burnouts. Aside from Blyleven and Tanana, these guys were done at a young age. Gooden and Fernando: they sure looked like Hall-of-Famers as young pitcher. So did Gary Nolan. Heck, even Don Drysdale and Catfish Hunter, who are in the Hall, were done at a young age.

Are pitchers being babied? I don’t know about that. Kerry Wood and Mark Prior threw a lot of innings for the Cubs. Felix Hernandez, the fine pitcher for the Mariners, is the latest entry on the list above. I think teams still overwork young pitchers, even in the face of history, and I think teams continue to do detriment to those young pitchers.

As to older pitchers being babied: do I think pitchers could throw 300 innings a year, every year, without trouble? I think they could, yes I do. There is a historical precedent to it: the generation of pitchers between 1942-1947 had an awful lot of guys who could throw 280-320 innings in a season.

But the guys who managed to do it every year, well, they were all babied as young pitchers.

You want a pitcher to throw 300 innings in a season, without him getting injured? The best way to do it is to make sure he doesn’t throw too much at a young age. Limit his innings. Limit his pitch counts. Baby the hell outta him.

 

(Thanks to baseballreference.com for the statistics)

 
 

COMMENTS (17 Comments, most recent shown first)

wydiyd
Matt --- I have completed the work on comparing high school and college pitchers. I was wondering if you are interested in looking over the results. Email me at wydiyd at hotmail dot com -- Jeff
11:36 AM Nov 13th
 
Steven Goldleaf
The whole question of what constitutes "work" is hazy to me: it counts as "0" when someone doesn't pitch in MLB but puts in a huge workload in the minors? How is that not strain on an arm? Hell, even throwing a Spaldeen against a brick wall very hard for hours a day (which was my life from ages 11-17) has got to be capable of doing damage, don't it? It seems to me that any kind of throwing could cause damage, and especially throwing supervised by an untrained coach, or no coach at all, could be the most damaging of all. But that will never show up in any of these studies.
8:11 AM Aug 13th
 
DaveFleming
I think the five-man rotation thing wasn't used by all major league teams until the early eighties. The Dodgers, I think, swere one of the first teams on board, and other teams quickly followed.

On the bonus baby thing...I looked into that, but only a few of these guys qualified as bonus babies. Steve Carlton, for one. And the bonus baby rule of 1962-1964 were different from the rules of a generation earlier: players had to be in the majors for one year, not two, and teams found a lot of ways to get around the rule. So only a few of these guys were protected by the bonus baby rule.

There's a great article about the bonus baby rules on the Hardball Times, written by Steve Treder.

1:52 PM Aug 9th
 
tjmaccarone
One thing that I think sort of forced some of these guys to be protected was that a few of these guys were bonus babies. They couldn't be sent to the minors, but weren't really good enough to pitch in the majors, at least not with the game on the line.
11:56 AM Aug 9th
 
Richie
Tall mounds didn't breed confidence. Well OK, maybe they did, but so what. Especially regarding this topic, where confidence breeds more innings at young age which breeds burnt out young arms.

What tall mounds did was breed outs, which get you out of innings quicker with fewer pitches. Ergo less damage or wear-and-tear on arms, on a by-inning basis.

Did teams all go to the 5-man rotation in the mid-70s? I didn't know it was that quick.
11:44 AM Aug 9th
 
DaveFleming
'Dcmurray' makes a great point about the five-man rotation coming into vogue around the time these guys hit their thirties. I'd add that they probably received some benefit from the tall mounds they were pitching off until 1969, something along the lines of 'early success breeds confidence.'

Ralph's comment about Weaver reminded me of something I read in one of the early abstracts. In the 1980's, Whitey Herzog junked the strict five-man rotation, and pitched his guys in an unusual order: for guys like Forsch and LaPoint he had them on regular rest (4-6 days), but Joaquin Andujar, he pitched on three-days rest. Herzog adjusted his rotation to fit each player's need. This was in 1985, and they won the pennant.

This would be an effective way to bring up young pitchers, and an effective way to use older starters. Unfortunately, it's unconventional: the set five-man rotation has become the norm, the expected strategy, and to go against that would be a risk.
9:56 AM Aug 9th
 
nettles9
In one of the Earl Weaver books, he mentioned that the thing he did with young pitchers was to let them be long-reliever/spot-starters so they wouldn't pitch too many innings, be in less tight situations but it would give them enough time to pitch and learn their craft. I found this to be sensible. Limited exposure-- not just with innings but with situations. I think it's a good way to get a pitcher's feet wet. However, this is not possible today because there is no such thing as a "long-reliever". I still think it's a good idea.
7:21 PM Aug 8th
 
dmcmurray
In looking at the career records of this generation, consider that they were young in the 1960's when baseball favored pitchers. During that time and in the early 1970"s (when pitchers were still favored), they worked on a 4 man rotation, which they could handle because they were younger. However, in the mid 70's, baseball went to a 5 man rotation, which kind of protected the arms of these guys while they were getting older (into their 30's), so they were able to last longer. From the standpoint of baseball history, they came along at just the right time for pitchers.
7:01 PM Aug 8th
 
DaveFleming
Matt asked: "How much do you think was burnout from overuse and how much was due to personal problems."

Well, it'd help to know when the problems started. When did McLain start hanging out with gamblers? Was it before or after 1969? If McDowell was a drinker, was it a problem before or after his career sputtered out?

And, as Matt pointed out, there are a lot of drinkers who had very successful careers. Mantle comes to mind, as does Pete Alexander. A starter has to play thirty-five games...drinking might not help his career, but it might not hurt it as bad as it would an everyday player.

McLain is probably an outlier: it seems obvious that personal problems effected his career. But the other guys...I don't know nearly enough about 'em to hazard a guess.
4:34 PM Aug 8th
 
MattDiFilippo
I checked out "The Curse of Rocky Colavito" (outstanding book, by the way) and McDowell's agent said his drinking was becoming a problem about 1970. He won 20 games that year but did start to go downhill after that.
4:30 PM Aug 8th
 
DaveFleming
Matt asked: "How much do you think was burnout from overuse and how much was due to personal problems."

Well, it'd help to know when the problems started. When did McLain start hanging out with gamblers? Was it before or after 1969? If McDowell was a drinker, was it a problem before or after his career sputtered out?

And, as Matt pointed out, there are a lot of drinkers who had very successful careers. Mantle comes to mind, as does Pete Alexander. A starter has to play thirty-five games...drinking might not help his career, but it might not hurt it as bad as it would an everyday player.

McLain is probably an outlier: it seems obvious that personal problems effected his career. But the other guys...I don't know nearly enough about 'em to hazard a guess.
3:55 PM Aug 8th
 
DaveFleming
'Stevebogus' brings up a good point about minor league innings. I absolutely should've used them in the article. To be honest, I didn't know old minor league records were available. But they are and I should have used them.

Of the 13 guys who were 'babied' (prevented from throwing too many major league innings), only one of 'em pitched a substantial number of minor league innings. I wish I could post a nice chart, but you'll have to settle for summaries:

-Don Sutton pitched a TON...he's the guy who most belongs with the tossers. He threw 220 at Age 20, and then he was in the majors, going 200+ every year.
-Seaver had one season in the minors. He was 21, and threw 210 innings.
-Ryan and Rudy May each threw over 200 innings at Age 19, but then they didn't throw much at all before or after that.
-Similiarly, Jenkins and Palmer had big inning totals at Age 20, but low inning totals around that one year.
-The other guys (Carlton, John, Neikro, Koosman, Lonborg, Spillorff, Torrez) didn't have a lot of minor league innings.

It gets blurry, but I think it still holds: the guys who had the longer careers were throwing the fewest innings, majors OR minors.
3:45 PM Aug 8th
 
stevebogus
Why don't minor league innings count? Many of the pitchers who were "babied" were just in the minor leagues longer than the other guys. They were still racking up innings. I will grant you that minor league workloads are generally lighter due to a shorter season.
2:46 PM Aug 8th
 
MattDiFilippo
This is very interesting research. I agree with Dave that today's pitchers could throw many more innings than they are.

As a curiosity, I checked Kerry Wood and Mark Prior. Neither were anywhere near either burnout standard at age 21 or 23. Prior had 116.6 major league innings before he turned 22, and Wood had 166.6 by the end of the season he turned 21. So both were definitely "babied" by the standards above. Even if you figure they're throwing more pitches because of today's approach by hitters, it's still not enough to push them to the left side.

(Wood may just be one of those guys who gets hurt no matter how you use him. Felix Hernandez does go way over the 300-IP mark by his age 21 season. He'll be interesting to watch.)

Jeff had a really interesting point too, about high school and college pitchers. Intuitively, it would seem correct, and I'd love to see the research when Jeff and/or someone else completes it.

Dave, I'm wondering: You mention Sam McDowell and Denny McLain as two burnouts. How much do you think was burnout from overuse, and how much was due to their personal problems? (With McDowell, Mickey Mantle comes to mind here as another obvious drinker/drunk. Ryne Duren was too, and he flamed out as well.)

10:19 AM Aug 8th
 
Trailbzr
This is important work, and there's a similar study about catchers. (I forget exactly what, but there's something in the human body that matures around 27-28, and could conceivably be causing this.)
But then the next issue to consider is the impact of free agency on teams' career management of a young player. 27-28 is about the time a great player can wave bye-bye. Like BillJ wrote about Gary Carter in '83[?], if you only own the guy's first six years, you want the most innings you can get for six years. You're not going to spend them babying him, so he can sell his mature 300 innings to the highest bidder.

7:20 AM Aug 8th
 
wydiyd
I was wondering the same thing, but wanted to compare pitchers drafted out of high school vice college. It seems that college coaches know that they can start a pitcher on short rest and because the pitchers are still young, they can handle the punishment. They get do get good experience, can come to the majors quickly and then flame out (i.e. Oakland's Big 3). High School pitchers on the other hand would have the Major league closely monitoring the pitch count, thereby lasting longer in the pros. It is something I plan to eventually look into, but someone can take this and run (let me know if you do, I would mind helping you crunch the numbers wydiyd@hotmail.com). I have few other projects on my hands currently, but plan on getting to it some time this year.
12:39 AM Aug 8th
 
Richie
First of all, please show this study to Matt.

I'd also suggest your study perhaps actually minimizes the damage by limiting itself to career 100-game winners. A list Prior and Wood wouldn't make. Any guys from those years who tossed mucho innings, then flamed out before getting to 100 Ws?

And again, it's not really the innings, it's the pitches thrown. Throwing 300 innings worth of pitches today, to batters working the count, in parks with little foul ground, to bulked-up middle infielders, in a season which if as successful as hoped extends up to November? That's a ton more pitches than 300 innings' worth circa 1970. No way, dude.
10:33 PM Aug 7th
 
 
©2024 Be Jolly, Inc. All Rights Reserved.|Powered by Sports Info Solutions|Terms & Conditions|Privacy Policy