As a Bammer, I obviously know less than dick about baseball, but I gotta ask....

[TUSK]

this Matt Harvey cat, can he just decide NOT to pitch in the post season if he wants?

How does that work?

Is his contract for so many innings*?

[Really Clark?]

Great question. Some of this has to do with post surgery limits advise from his doctor and most of the controversy has to do with Scott Boras, his agent and the way he and Harvey handled the situation. At the beginning of the year everyone knew he would have innings limits and the organization intended to do that. Washington shut down a pitcher a few years ago and he didn't pitch in the playoffs but it was to protect a young arm and was an organizational descision. I think the Mets making this playoff run surprised them but my understanding is they are all trying to get on the same page and develop a plan for him to pitch this post season. He is coming out saying even with the risks if he has to go over the limits he will pitch. But it wasn't handled very well but again with Boras things get heated. So is the agent doing right by the client and his long term prospects, what does the player really think and what concern does he have about added innings? What do studies really so about damage? There is very strong evidence and is widely accepted that there are issues in younger pitchers. But studies are having a much harder time showing if there is significant damage after about 25 years of age. The damage, if there is any, was from younger years but it could still limit their longevity just that there is less collaborating data for more damage occurring after the mid 20's. Then you have questions of mechanic flaws causing problems over usage. Questions of real workload vs just pure innings limits. To me any over hand throw should be counted but at what ease and strain is put into each pitch is a big factor as well. It's an interesting debate.

Back to your original question though, contractually I would say that he can't really decide stop at a certain point but what did the organization agree to do initially at the beginning of the year? That we don't really know. The 180 innings limit is a soft limit I believe in this case recommended by the doctors. Nothing I recall has come out stating there was anything in the contract for that but again what did the parties agree to at the start? Don't really know.

[TUSK]

Great question. Some of this has to do with post surgery limits advise from his doctor and most of the controversy has to do with Scott Boras, his agent and the way he and Harvey handled the situation. At the beginning of the year everyone knew he would have innings limits and the organization intended to do that. Washington shut down a pitcher a few years ago and he didn't pitch in the playoffs but it was to protect a young arm and was an organizational descision. I think the Mets making this playoff run surprised them but my understanding is they are all trying to get on the same page and develop a plan for him to pitch this post season. He is coming out saying even with the risks if he has to go over the limits he will pitch. But it wasn't handled very well but again with Boras things get heated. So is the agent doing right by the client and his long term prospects, what does the player really think and what concern does he have about added innings? What do studies really so about damage? There is very strong evidence and is widely accepted that there are issues in younger pitchers. But studies are having a much harder time showing if there is significant damage after about 25 years of age. The damage, if there is any, was from younger years but it could still limit their longevity just that there is less collaborating data for more damage occurring after the mid 20's. Then you have questions of mechanic flaws causing problems over usage. Questions of real workload vs just pure innings limits. To me any over hand throw should be counted but at what ease and strain is put into each pitch is a big factor as well. It's an interesting debate.

Back to your original question though, contractually I would say that he can't really decide stop at a certain point but what did the organization agree to do initially at the beginning of the year? That we don't really know. The 180 innings limit is a soft limit I believe in this case recommended by the doctors. Nothing I recall has come out stating there was anything in the contract for that but again what did the parties agree to at the start? Don't really know.

wow, that was well written and decipherable even for a PsychoPhant...

thanks, buddy.

[Really Clark?]

No problem. Sorry for the length but it is a topic that is passionate in baseball, and with Fastpitch softball now as well, with youth sports and its impact in the college and professional ranks. And think about this in relation to baseball and its impact with football. How many outstanding pitchers are also high school QB's. Add that motion on top of pitching as well. I do believe that youth are becoming too sports specialized at a young age, so I'm not saying they should only play one sport. But you take a high school pitcher who pitches the bulk of his high school games, throws BP, plays and pitches travel ball, summer workouts with the football team, throwing a lot of footballs in conjunction with his travel season, straight into the football season where they may so be doing side pitching work on weekends, etc. That adds up to a lot of throws over the top of your shoulder. The biggest problems with arm and/or shoulder injuries is overuse and bad mechanics. Couple that with kids throwing at max velocity all the time, it's a very real concern out there.

[Intramural All-American]

As I haven't followed too closely, is it Harvey that is wanting to shut it down or the Mets? Obviously Borax wants him shut down. This is a lot like the Strasburg thing, but if I remember correctly, it was the Nats who forced him to shut it down and not Strasburg. Also, as we have discussed before, an innings limit isn't as good as a pitch limit since you can throw 30+ pitches in an inning or 3 pitches in an inning. It should have been black and white what the cutoff was before the season started, and the Mets should have handled him much differently in april-July to make sure he would be able to go in the playoffs.

[Really Clark?]

As I haven't followed too closely, is it Harvey that is wanting to shut it down or the Mets? Obviously Borax wants him shut down. This is a lot like the Strasburg thing, but if I remember correctly, it was the Nats who forced him to shut it down and not Strasburg. Also, as we have discussed before, an innings limit isn't as good as a pitch limit since you can throw 30+ pitches in an inning or 3 pitches in an inning. It should have been black and white what the cutoff was before the season started, and the Mets should have handled him much differently in april-July to make sure he would be able to go in the playoffs.

Well Boras made the opening shots a week or so back and then Harvey was kind of quite about it until the storm came. I think he wants to pitch in the playoffs but also watch how many innings for the remainder of the season. You have to remember though the Strasburg deal had nothing to do with coming back from an injury. It was definitely an organizational decision, that nearly all teams go by, in dealing with ramping up a starters innings. You can't just go from 100-120 innings to 200. As far as the pitch number vs innings, in younger ages I agree. But when you are talking over 150 innings it's not really any difference. If you are having a lot of plus innings then you are not going to be getting to 200 innings anyway. The opposite is also somewhat true, if you are getting 200 innings in a season are having a lot of good outings. In youth, yes pitch counts are more important but at that level you are throwing so much it's a moot point overall. In the Mets defense though, nobody is going to limit early in the season like that in this situation and you are not even debating the playoffs and this pitcher in the first half of the season if you are not winning at the time because you are limiting his pitching then. Got to get in the discussion first before this even became an issue.

[Bubb Rubb]

Here's the full story.

Harvey has Tommy John surgery. The rule of thumb is after coming off surgery of that magnitude, you don't want to exceed the number of innings pitched in a year that is greater than what you did before the surgery. Harvey's career high for innings in a season I think was a shade under 170. So, the decision was made to limit him to around 180 innings in the regular season, and if they make the postseason, they would extend him a little bit. That was easy to agree on since nobody really expected that the Mets were going to be playing postseason baseball. Now, here we are, and Boras is trying to move the goalposts because he doesn't want his meal ticket to get injured.

Harvey's situation is unique because his surgery happened almost two years ago now. He could've come back to play at the end of last year but the Mets wouldn't let him. He is much farther removed from the surgery than other examples of this (like Strasburg). Plus, he has an insane number of innings pitched where he threw 15 or less pitches, and the most pitches he's thrown in a game is 110. In other words, he has a lot of low-stress innings on his arm, so the 166 innings he's thrown so far aren't as bad as it would be with some others.

The Mets have been blindsided by this and they have a right to be pissed, and it's all because of Scott Boras. My prediction? He will start tonight, start once or twice more in the regular season, and then pitch the postseason. If Harvey and his agent make a stink about it, they will trade him to someone and get a king's ransom in return. When you have guys like Jacob DeGrom, Noah Syndergaard, Steven Matz, and Zach Wheeler in your rotation, you can afford to lose a diva, even if he is one of the top five pitchers in baseball.

[Intramural All-American]

Well Boras made the opening shots a week or so back and then Harvey was kind of quite about it until the storm came. I think he wants to pitch in the playoffs but also watch how many innings for the remainder of the season. You have to remember though the Strasburg deal had nothing to do with coming back from an injury. It was definitely an organizational decision, that nearly all teams go by, in dealing with ramping up a starters innings. You can't just go from 100-120 innings to 200. As far as the pitch number vs innings, in younger ages I agree. But when you are talking over 150 innings it's not really any difference. If you are having a lot of plus innings then you are not going to be getting to 200 innings anyway. The opposite is also somewhat true, if you are getting 200 innings in a season are having a lot of good outings. In youth, yes pitch counts are more important but at that level you are throwing so much it's a moot point overall. In the Mets defense though, nobody is going to limit early in the season like that in this situation and you are not even debating the playoffs and this pitcher in the first half of the season if you are not winning at the time because you are limiting his pitching then. Got to get in the discussion first before this even became an issue.

Strasburg was the exact same thing. He was still recovering from his Tommy John so they limited him. He was just further out than Harvey. But your point about the innings instead of pitch limit makes sense. However if you have an innings limit on some one, especially the ace of your staff who you will need to win a championship, it absolutely would make sense to limit his innings earlier in the season. You could easily throw him every sixth game instead of fifth game. You can't rely on a horse to get to the playoffs and then expect to win there when you can't use him. You saw how poorly it worked for the Nats at the time also.

[Really Clark?]

Strasburg was the exact same thing. He was still recovering from his Tommy John so they limited him. He was just further out than Harvey. But your point about the innings instead of pitch limit makes sense. However if you have an innings limit on some one, especially the ace of your staff who you will need to win a championship, it absolutely would make sense to limit his innings earlier in the season. You could easily throw him every sixth game instead of fifth game. You can't rely on a horse to get to the playoffs and then expect to win there when you can't use him. You saw how poorly it worked for the Nats at the time also.

That's true about Stras but like you said his TJ was earlier and he was still building up from a lower point than Harvey I believe. I just a disagree about limiting early, especially since this is a surprise run for the Mets. They have to play well early in the year to get to this point for it even to be a debate.

[Bubb Rubb]

Strasburg was the exact same thing. He was still recovering from his Tommy John so they limited him. He was just further out than Harvey. But your point about the innings instead of pitch limit makes sense. However if you have an innings limit on some one, especially the ace of your staff who you will need to win a championship, it absolutely would make sense to limit his innings earlier in the season. You could easily throw him every sixth game instead of fifth game. You can't rely on a horse to get to the playoffs and then expect to win there when you can't use him. You saw how poorly it worked for the Nats at the time also.

Strasburg was only out 12 months - he pitched in a big league game just one year after his TJ surgery.
Harvey was out for 19 months - had surgery in Oct. 2013 and pitched in a big league game for the first time in April of 2015.

Harvey had a longer recovery, longer rehab, was handled more delicately during the season. This is why he shouldn't be as restricted as Strasburg was. I don't think the two situations are even comparable, other than them having the same surgery.

[Intramural All-American]

Strasburg was only out 12 months - he pitched in a big league game just one year after his TJ surgery.
Harvey was out for 19 months - had surgery in Oct. 2013 and pitched in a big league game for the first time in April of 2015.

Harvey had a longer recovery, longer rehab, was handled more delicately during the season. This is why he shouldn't be as restricted as Strasburg was. I don't think the two situations are even comparable, other than them having the same surgery.

I guess it never really occurred to me how long Harvey had been out. I forgot that he sat out all of last year as well as half the season before. But even with Strasburg, he pitched 44 innings total in 2011 with minor league and major league. So then when he came back the next year it was around 18-19 months since his surgery, so I feel like they are a little bit comparable especially since Strasburg's arm was more in pitching shape. Either way, this is a bad situation.

And ReallyClark, we can just agree to disagree on the philosophy of when to save the pitcher. I understand your reasoning, but me personally would rather have him when it mattered to win it all. In my opinion, If you can't get to the playoffs without him, you don't really stand much of a chance winning the World Series without him.

[Really Clark?]

I guess it never really occurred to me how long Harvey had been out. I forgot that he sat out all of last year as well as half the season before. But even with Strasburg, he pitched 44 innings total in 2011 with minor league and major league. So then when he came back the next year it was around 18-19 months since his surgery, so I feel like they are a little bit comparable especially since Strasburg's arm was more in pitching shape. Either way, this is a bad situation.

And ReallyClark, we can just agree to disagree on the philosophy of when to save the pitcher. I understand your reasoning, but me personally would rather have him when it mattered to win it all. In my opinion, If you can't get to the playoffs without him, you don't really stand much of a chance winning the World Series without him.

Well like you said we can disagree. No biggie. And with a true contender I could see it. But the Mets didn't really have big expectations to be contending this late and the Nats not playing to their potential.

[Todd4State]

If I were the Mets, I would use him out of the bullpen in the postseason for 1-2 innings at a time. It might the best compromise even though he is their most talented pitcher.

[Intramural All-American]

If I were the Mets, I would use him out of the bullpen in the postseason for 1-2 innings at a time. It might the best compromise even though he is their most talented pitcher.

This only issue is if the change in mindset would make him less effective. As we all know, relievers and starters have different mindsets, and sometimes it can be really hard to be a reliever when you are used to starting and vice versa. But like Smoltz and Eckersley and Wainwright have shown, it can be done. I would be more apt to start him with a 5 inning limit and full 4 days rest between starts. No Baumgartner stuff where he pitches games 1,4, and 7 obviously.

[Bubb Rubb]

If I were the Mets, I would use him out of the bullpen in the postseason for 1-2 innings at a time. It might the best compromise even though he is their most talented pitcher.

Using him out of the bullpen would actually be more strain on the arm. The Mets have completely dismissed this as an option because the doctors were pretty adamantly against it.