"Resting" players

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Agreed... I'll just add that you may not be considering the arm strength, which is at a whole new level across the diamond and it has to...  just to match the increased speed in the game. Scouts are not taking long looks at players who can't at least pick em and put em down a little bit. 

 

Defensively... Arenado and Chapman are as good as we have ever seen. 

 

On the next tier... Bregman and Machado will compare with anyone in the past. 

 

I'm not slamming Brooks... I never would. The athlete today is just at a whole new level. 

Agreed, and third base is a good way to bring up this conversation because third is the most unappreciated position in baseball history (fewer 3B in Cooperstown than any other position).

 

To highlight that point, you missed what is literally the most obvious sneaky OF COURSE HE SHOULD BE IN THE HALL candidate, Adrian Beltre.

 

Go ahead and guess Beltre's career WAR off the top of your head.

 

I almost guarantee you that your guess is wrong by 30-40 WAR unless you've already looked at his career win total.

[USAFChief]

Agreed, and third base is a good way to bring up this conversation because third is the most unappreciated position in baseball history (fewer 3B in Cooperstown than any other position).

 

To highlight that point, you missed what is literally the most obvious sneaky OF COURSE HE SHOULD BE IN THE HALL candidate, Adrian Beltre.

 

Go ahead and guess Beltre's career WAR off the top of your head.

 

I almost guarantee you that your guess is wrong by 30-40 WAR unless you've already looked at his career win total.

to bring this conversation back on topic, Beltre's another guy who was going to play 150 plus games every single healthy season.

 

Also, I dont think there's anything "sneaky" about Beltre as a HOFer, 3100+ hits and 477 HRs. He's a no brainer.

[gocgo]

I'll be shocked if Detroit wins any in Cleveland (15-1 so far).  Phillies maybe win 1 of 3.  So that means only 1 game in the magic number contributed by Cleveland.  Meanwhile, the Twins play the White Sox who are young and improving.  Twins need a win with Berrios going Monday and probably throw a rookie lineup against Giolito.  If they can win 4 of the next 7 that cuts the magic number to 4.  Then get the regulars back for Detroit and KC on the road.  Win 3 of 6 there while Cleveland finishes up with White Sox and Washington on the road...they need to lose 2 of those.  In a perfect world, wrap up the division with 3 games to go and then get some rest.  I'm not counting on it though.  Kepler needs to get healthy and get on track as does Cron.  Post season roster should be interesting.  The bullpen games have been going pretty well.  Use it for the playoffs?

[prouster]

I would say yes since every new season sets a new record in for trips/days to the IL.

 

A lot of that may be roster manipulation since they switched it to 10 days but nobody can or does stay on the field anymore.

 

Unfortunately this website only goes back to 2015 but the trend is as expected.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/disabled-list/2015/cumulative-player/

The alternative reading is that teams more readily use the IL these days, partly because it’s only a ten day list, and partly because they actually invest in their minor league systems. Your reading also doesn’t account for the fact that a lot more guys washed out with injuries way back when, which might not always have registered as trips to the DL.

 

Impossible to say whether guys get injured more or less often now (and the definition of “injured” is a lot more slippery than we fans would like it to be). But there’s no argument to be made that teams aren’t better at managing injuries. Which includes resting players.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

to bring this conversation back on topic, Beltre's another guy who was going to play 150 plus games every single healthy season.

Also, I dont think there's anything "sneaky" about Beltre as a HOFer, 3100+ hits and 477 HRs. He's a no brainer.

He's sneaky because he never had a 3-5 year stretch where you just went "wow". He was silently great, if there is such a thing.

 

Like I said, if you tried to guess Beltre's career WAR without being led into it, you'd probably be off by 30-40 WAR.

[USAFChief]

The alternative reading is that teams more readily use the IL these days, partly because it’s only a ten day list, and partly because they actually invest in their minor league systems. Your reading also doesn’t account for the fact that a lot more guys washed out with injuries way back when, which might not always have registered as trips to the DL.

 

Impossible to say whether guys get injured more or less often now (and the definition of “injured” is a lot more slippery than we fans would like it to be). But there’s no argument to be made that teams aren’t better at managing injuries. Which includes resting players.

I dont think managing injuries and resting players are related.

 

There's zero evidence resting players results in fewer future injuries.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I dont think managing injuries and resting players are related.

There's zero evidence resting players results in fewer future injuries.

You're working in a bit of a circle here, Chief. You claim something without evidence, but then demand others prove evidence otherwise. 

 

It shouldn't be a revelation that none of us have the data to confirm this either way, though teams are certainly working on it.

 

So maybe instead of demanding evidence to counter your point, maybe realize that your point has no evidence, either.

[Twodogs]

Offensively, yes. But I think you're underselling Robinson a bit. Are players better defensively? Of course. But I think past defense translates much more to the modern game than offense, especially once you consider gear like cleats and gloves, never mind metric positioning.

 

But Robinson never faced an 88mph slider, never mind a 95mph fastball. Even if he did, it was once or twice, not five times in a row against a bullpen designed to exploit his handedness. Night after night after night for 162 games.

. IDK, I think Nolan Ryan might have thrown 95 or so. Plus there were quite a few pitchers back then that threw really really hard, however, when or if they got hurt, they were then done, they didn't have the ability to come back a year later after arm surgery. That didnt really come about until the 90's where a lot of guys got that procedure done. I mean Nolan had another guy on his Houston staff that could dial it up to 95 when hed pitch. Then in Oakland and SF had Vida Blue and he would regularly hit 100. Clemens regurlarly threw 98, but those are only a few. There were a lot of starters back then that could really dial it up. Prob not so many in the BP, you know you had your Gossage's and such. But teams hit differently back then. Guys like Carew and such would just slap at those 100 mph fastballs that guys like Ryan threw. They'd get hits, I think a guy like Ryan would probably strike out 6000 to 7000 guys had his career started in say 2006 instead of 1966. No doubt the top atheletes are stonger these days, however the ball is also juiced etc... I think a lot of the pitching from the past would play today, but the hitters were different, so it didn't matter if there were a few soft throwers also because you knew you weren't going to get destroyed by them, also good D from the past would probably still play also, I mean I'm pretty sure Ozzie Smith would do just fine defensively. The game is different, so many of the things that were normal in the past aren't now. But it really doesn't mean that some of those dudes wouldnt still domintate the heck out of everyone nowadays, they'd have to adjust a little. But I really don't see a guy like Verlander going back to the 60's and 70's and then being able to win 400 games all of the sudden. He is one of the more dominate guys in today's game, but I don't see him matching up with Ryan and some of those other guys back then.

[USAFChief]

You're working in a bit of a circle here, Chief. You claim something without evidence, but then demand others prove evidence otherwise.

 

It shouldn't be a revelation that none of us have the data to confirm this either way, though teams are certainly working on it.

 

So maybe instead of demanding evidence to counter your point, maybe realize that your point has no evidence, either.

I don't have any research data, but think it fair to say I have plenty of history and anecdotal evidence on my side.

 

I also think it fair to respond to those demanding evidence with a similar response, particularly since it's Baldelli who is changing what had been standard practice. Not to mention if any season ever demonstrated that scheduled time off has no influence on preventing injury, it would be this one.

[Platoon]

Two dogs: ". IDK, I think Nolan Ryan might have thrown 95 or so.". Yes he might have. With today's three true outcomes approach, a lot of the outcomes would have been SO's. Also a lot less hitters would have been swinging as freely, guys back then were "effectively wild". While there is no doubt the athletes in today's game are better, and the game is faster, many from the "old days" would have survived quite nicely. Plus they too would have benefitted from the better gloves, cleats, and the Tiltleist 3 BB. I wonder if Harmon would have hit a few more? Or Aaron? As to defense? Some conflate the shifts (team defense) with players (individual defense). Yes, the shift can take away obvious hits, but that has zero to do with a players ability. The shifts are the results of the people who brought us the computer, and the people who knew how to integrate them into baseball analysis. Player defense should not be confused by team defense in this day. The field and the bases measure the same. An Ozzie, or a Brooks, or a Mays would still do quite nicely in today's game. Take a local example: The shift makes Polanco a "palatable" SS. Without shifting it's doubtful even Polancos above average bat could carry his glove for a season at that position. He plays SS like a third baseman. The harder it's hit the better he is. Let it bounce twice, and he is in trouble.

[terrydactyls]

And I'd like the regulars to play 155 games, minimum. 158 is more like it, and truth be told, 162 isn't asking too much. It's never been out of the norm for players other than catchers.

 

I highly doubt an extra day off makes any difference whatsoever in how they feel, or function. And I'd rather the regulars be in the lineup when available, since there's a really good chance they'll be out of the lineup due to injury at some point anyway. Why intentionally add time off?

Since 2010, a player has played in 162 games only 31 times. I would hardly call that "the norm."

[twinsnorth49]

So, rest is not a component in injury prevention? What is a component? It's a widely studied field, surely there are some concrete examples. Are people really saying fatigue is not a factor in injury among athletes? There is a difference between damage to connective tissue, muscle and cartilage injuries due to overuse and direct injury due to impact. Running into a wall at high speed has nothing to do with rest, the cumulative wear and tear on a body over the course of playing 135 games of baseball is quite different. Rest will definitely help keep the latter from potentially turning into something worse, it has zero to do with the former, until after it happens ironically. There is a reason you rest injuries. 

 

The equivalencies being made in this thread are completely false. 

 

 

 

"The importance of resting seems to be too obvious for science to bother testing directly". 

 

-Paul Ingraham

[USAFChief]

 

So, rest is not a component in injury prevention? What is a component? It's a widely studied field, surely there are some concrete examples. Are people really saying fatigue is not a factor in injury among athletes? There is a difference between damage to connective tissue, muscle and cartilage injuries due to overuse and direct injury due to impact. Running into a wall at high speed has nothing to do with rest, the cumulative wear and tear on a body over the course of playing 135 games of baseball is quite different. Rest will definitely help keep the latter from potentially turning into something worse, it has zero to do with the former, until after it happens ironically. There is a reason you rest injuries. 

 

The equivalencies being made in this thread are completely false. 

 

 

 

"The importance of resting seems to be too obvious for science to bother testing directly". 

 

-Paul Ingraham

Yes, I'm specifically saying I do not believe playing MLB baseball six or 7 times per week is too much for a 20 or 30 year old. I do not believe resting players makes any significant difference in future injury or performance. I do not believe the "fatigue" associated with playing MLB is a factor, or enough of a factor to justify not playing your best players nearly every game.

 

My opinion is that all it accomplishes is needlessly limiting the playing time of your better players. 

 

I think history is on my side here. 

 

 

 

 

[USAFChief]

 

Since 2010, a player has played in 162 games only 31 times. I would hardly call that "the norm."

Try 155, and add in all the times players played every day when healthy but didn't meet the 155 game threshold due to injury.

 

 

EDIT: see below. 2010-2018, AL East, 63 seasons of 155 or more games played.

[twinsnorth49]

 

Since 2010, a player has played in 162 games only 31 times. I would hardly call that "the norm."

 

Since 2010, less than 125 position players on average have played 135 games or more in a season. That includes stints at DH. Could time on the DL been mitigated or reduced due to more rest? How do we know which injuries could have been prevented if players had more time to recover? 

 

There are no absolutes either way, which seems to be what some are looking for. 

[jkcarew]

With Chief on this one. It's baseball. Can a 27 year old professional athlete that is consistently getting good nutrition and good sleep play 160 games without getting injured and without compromising his performance. Yes. If that athlete is playing in his 151st game of that season, is his chance of getting injured in that game greater because he had one game off previously instead of a dozen. No, it isn't.

 

The are lots of good reason to 'rest' a player, IMO...but keeping an already healthy player healthy isn't one of them.

[twinsnorth49]

 

Yes, I'm specifically saying I do not believe playing MLB baseball six or 7 times per week is too much for a 20 or 30 year old. I do not believe resting players makes any significant difference in future injury or performance. I do not believe the "fatigue" associated with playing MLB is a factor, or enough of a factor to justify not playing your best players nearly every game.

 

My opinion is that all it accomplishes is needlessly limiting the playing time of your better players. 

 

I think history is on my side here. 

 

No, it actually isn't. There is no historical data to indicate performance is either helped or hindered due to more or less rest. The prevailing sentiment is it's common sense. 

 

Having said that, scheduled rest has been a part of MLB for years. Pitchers have always rested, because  throwing a ball 90+mph, 100 times, is going to fatigue your arm and unless you rest it, you are going to suck the next couple of days and also get hurt. 

[Craig Arko]

Would be interesting to hear what Heezy1323 has to say about research on prevention/treatment of repetitive stress injuries among professional athletes.

[USAFChief]

 

Since 2010, less than 125 position players on average have played 135 games or more in a season. That includes stints at DH. Could time on the DL been mitigated or reduced due to more rest? How do we know which injuries could have been prevented if players had more time to recover? 

 

There are no absolutes either way, which seems to be what some are looking for. 

Between 2010 and 2018, just in the AL East, I found 63 seasons of 155 or more games played.

 

Too lazy to look up all of baseball, and the AL may get more seasons due to the DH, but 155 games played is not at all unusual.

[twinsnorth49]

I wonder why so few players play every game?

[nicksaviking]

 

Would be interesting to hear what Heezy1323 has to say about research on prevention/treatment of repetitive stress injuries among professional athletes.

 

Considering there is no legal requirements for employers in this country to give employees PTO, and the people running those companies tend to loathe giving anything away for free, I'm guessing they've done enough research to see that there are considerable benefits to giving people time off from work.

[twinsnorth49]

 

Between 2010 and 2018, just in the AL East, I found 63 seasons of 155 or more games played.

 

Too lazy to look up all of baseball, and the AL may get more seasons due to the DH, but 155 games played is not at all unusual.

 

Each season, less than 125 players play more than 135 games. The number that plays 155 is very low. Lat year only 6 played 150. 

[USAFChief]

 

Each season, less than 125 players play more than 135 games. The number that plays 155 is very low. Lat year only 6 played 150. 

Huh?

 

There were six players just in the AL Central that played 155 or more games in 2018.

[Mr. Brooks]

Considering there is no legal requirements for employers in this country to give employees PTO, and the people running those companies tend to loathe giving anything away for free, I'm guessing they've done enough research to see that there are considerable benefits to giving people time off from work.

Or they offer PTO to attract better employees.

[Linus]

I also think the physical demands of playing baseball are overstated. Playing a NHL or NBA season would be way harder. It’s like when the PGA players have to play 36 holes and commentators talk about fatigue being a factor. It’s all relative

[insagt1]

I love this discussion! Was expecting someone to bring up Cal R. I recall all the critics (mostly Yankee fans who didn't want Lou's record to be broken) carping as Cal got close that he was hurting the team by playing everydayl that he would have benefitted from rest; that the O's would have won more games with him on the bench once in awhile; that he was selfish...anyone here remember all of that? The guy was being keel hauled for bascially showing up for work everyday.

Cal is a HOFer and had a very nice career...outside of the 'streak'. Can't please everyone. And by todays standards he was certainly an outlier. I doubt anyone will play 162 games per year anymore.

 

Overall I think Rocco has done pretty well with his day to day lineups. He has a lot of versatility with his players...and it turns out they needed that. I would also 'hope' that the manager's goal 'every game' is to win it. There aren't many players who make it to the show...so you'd like to think that the 25 on each roster can do the job. ...some better than others of course.

[JW24]

 

Huh?

 

There were six players just in the AL Central that played 155 or more games in 2018.

ESPN's page for 2018 is broken (can get AL data, but not MLB), but here is games played by player for 2017

 

38 played 155+ in 2017

53 played 155+ in 2016

 

This does not account for pinch hitting appearances, or getting pulled from a game early. It is just appearances. I'm not saying this to either support or refute your point, just providing the data (and source).

[In My La Z boy]

There are no baseball stats to measure the effectiveness of resting players but there are metrics used to measure rest and recovery on the human body - which are being extrapolated to insinuate the baseball benefits. The assumption being made is if the body gains these benefits of rest and recovery - then the baseball stats will benefit. It is very subjective in my opinion. To Chief's point - A Football analogy would be the tailback who just keeps getting better into the 4th quarter after being fed the ball 30 times. Would he have been EVEN BETTER if he had taken the 3rd quarter off and only carried the ball 20 times? I don't think so. All this resting and recovery stuff is subjective, and player specific. Maybe it helps, maybe it doesn't. Its not as common sense as the human body stats may suggest I think.

[twinsnorth49]

 

Huh?

 

There were six players just in the AL Central that played 155 or more games in 2018.

Sorry, was looking at the wrong category. 38 played 155 or more, 14 in the AL. I think the point still stands, that is low percentage of players. Essentially 1 per team. So far only 6 players have appeared in 150 games so far this season.  Splits obviously play a role in that number, but I'd still expect that number to be higher if it were so easy. 

 

 

The high water mark for the last 10 years is 53. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[twinsnorth49]

 

There are no baseball stats to measure the effectiveness of resting players but there are metrics used to measure rest and recovery on the human body - which are being extrapolated to insinuate the baseball benefits. The assumption being made is if the body gains these benefits of rest and recovery - then the baseball stats will benefit. It is very subjective in my opinion. To Chief's point - A Football analogy would be the tailback who just keeps getting better into the 4th quarter after being fed the ball 30 times. Would he have been EVEN BETTER if he had taken the 3rd quarter off and only carried the ball 20 times? I don't think so. All this resting and recovery stuff is subjective, and player specific. Maybe it helps, maybe it doesn't. Its not as common sense as the human body stats may suggest I think.

Take that running back who carries the ball 30 times every game vs the running back who carries the ball 20 times every game, into week 15 and there will on average be a distinct difference, talent levels aside. Now extend that 3 years into their careers. Again, you're looking for absolutes, they don't exist. 

 

Fatigue is real, it is related to performance and it is related to injury. How much and to what extent that effects each individual is different and part of what teams are paying more attention to. Which also only includes the physical, the mental side is an entirely different topic. I'm sure it's not relevant though......