Further proof that prospecting ... is not an exact science.

[Padres]

As I continue to watch these trades get challenged and read the various rationales both pro and con, I also saw this reminder from yesterday's BA the prospecting, while fun, is certainly not an exact science. This is probably even more true when it comes to pitchers.

The following is from Jim Callis 2/23/07 chat in BA:

I don't want to give away too many Top 100 secrets in advance, but I don't think it will shock anyone that we rank the three best pitching prospects in this order: Daisuke Matsuzaka (Red Sox), Philip Hughes (Yankees) and Homer Bailey (Reds).

Here are the rest of the top pitching trios from the previous Top 100 lists from this decade:

2006: Francisco Liriano (Twins), Chad Billingsley (Dodgers), Justin Verlander (Tigers)
2005: Felix Hernandez (Mariners), Scott Kazmir (Devil Rays), Matt Cain (Giants)
2004: Edwin Jackson (Dodgers), Greg Miller (Dodgers), Scott Kazmir (Mets)
2003: Jesse Foppert (Giants), Jose Contreras (Yankees), Gavin Floyd (Phillies)
2002: Josh Beckett (Marlins), Mark Prior (Cubs), Juan Cruz (Cubs)
2001: Josh Beckett (Marlins), Jon Rauch (White Sox), Ben Sheets (Brewers)
2000: Rick Ankiel (Cardinals), Ryan Anderson (Mariners), John Patterson (Diamondbacks)

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/askba/263426.html

Some of these guys have had some very good years; some have been subject to injury (some both already) - and some have just not panned out as planned. Surely though, at some point in the IBC's history each of the above would have been highly sought after based on their ranking.

That being said, more power to the GMs willing to trade for the gem in the rough as well as for the GMs who keep mining the minors seeking the next unranked youngster who will surprise even the experts and rise above the designated top tier.

[Rangers]

You know, I break this group of guys into four groups:

Flat Out Busts
Edwin Jackson
Gavin Floyd

Productive Starters
Justin Verlander
Felix Hernandez
Scott Kazmir
Matt Cain
Jose Contreras
Francisco Liriano (could go in the injured cat obviously)
Josh Beckett
Mark Prior (could go in the injured)
Juan Cruz
Ben Sheets
John Patterson

Career hindered or ruined by injury
Greg Miller
Jesse Foppert
Jon Rauch
Rick Ankiel (could be called a bust)
Ryan Anderson

Haven't had their chance to establish themselves yet
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Philip Hughes
Homer Bailey
Chad Billingsley

Let's exclude the last four. Liriano and Prior would be cy young types if not for their arm problems. Four or five other guys out of 18 have had their careers pretty much ruined by arm injuries (although Miller and Rauch are still kicking). And Gavin Floyd and Edwin Jackson are busts so far. If you include Ankiel with them, since he probably would have busted either way, that's only three non-injury busts out of 18, and it's not like the book is closed on either of them. You could argue that Cruz doesn't yet belong in the productive category, which is fine too, but really, the only lesson here is, if these guys avoid blowing out their arms they have about an 85% (11 of 13) chance of being really good at least for a period of time. That doesn't exactly strike any more fear than I'd already felt when it came to pitching prospects.

[Mets]

It can be argued that Patterson and Sheets have had injuries delay their careers, and Kazmir is one major surgery away from being a closer.

You know, I break this group of guys into four groups:

Flat Out Busts
Edwin Jackson
Gavin Floyd

Productive Starters
Justin Verlander
Felix Hernandez
Scott Kazmir
Matt Cain
Jose Contreras
Francisco Liriano (could go in the injured cat obviously)
Josh Beckett
Mark Prior (could go in the injured)
Juan Cruz
Ben Sheets
John Patterson

Career hindered or ruined by injury
Greg Miller
Jesse Foppert
Jon Rauch
Rick Ankiel (could be called a bust)
Ryan Anderson

Haven't had their chance to establish themselves yet
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Philip Hughes
Homer Bailey
Chad Billingsley

Let's exclude the last four. Liriano and Prior would be cy young types if not for their arm problems. Four or five other guys out of 18 have had their careers pretty much ruined by arm injuries (although Miller and Rauch are still kicking). And Gavin Floyd and Edwin Jackson are busts so far. If you include Ankiel with them, since he probably would have busted either way, that's only three non-injury busts out of 18, and it's not like the book is closed on either of them. You could argue that Cruz doesn't yet belong in the productive category, which is fine too, but really, the only lesson here is, if these guys avoid blowing out their arms they have about an 85% (11 of 13) chance of being really good at least for a period of time. That doesn't exactly strike any more fear than I'd already felt when it came to pitching prospects.

[Cardinals]

It can be argued that Patterson and Sheets have had injuries delay their careers, and Kazmir is one major surgery away from being a closer.

You know, I break this group of guys into four groups:

Flat Out Busts
Edwin Jackson
Gavin Floyd

Productive Starters
Justin Verlander
Felix Hernandez
Scott Kazmir
Matt Cain
Jose Contreras
Francisco Liriano (could go in the injured cat obviously)
Josh Beckett
Mark Prior (could go in the injured)
Juan Cruz
Ben Sheets
John Patterson

Career hindered or ruined by injury
Greg Miller
Jesse Foppert
Jon Rauch
Rick Ankiel (could be called a bust)
Ryan Anderson

Haven't had their chance to establish themselves yet
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Philip Hughes
Homer Bailey
Chad Billingsley

Let's exclude the last four. Liriano and Prior would be cy young types if not for their arm problems. Four or five other guys out of 18 have had their careers pretty much ruined by arm injuries (although Miller and Rauch are still kicking). And Gavin Floyd and Edwin Jackson are busts so far. If you include Ankiel with them, since he probably would have busted either way, that's only three non-injury busts out of 18, and it's not like the book is closed on either of them. You could argue that Cruz doesn't yet belong in the productive category, which is fine too, but really, the only lesson here is, if these guys avoid blowing out their arms they have about an 85% (11 of 13) chance of being really good at least for a period of time. That doesn't exactly strike any more fear than I'd already felt when it came to pitching prospects.

really, kaz is going to be closing?

is liriano going to be closing when he gets back?

shit, kaz isn't even hurt and he's "one major surgery away" from closing. you're off your rocker. i guess thats what happens when you have a good lineup... in 2001

[Royals]

You know, I break this group of guys into four groups:

Flat Out Busts
Edwin Jackson
Gavin Floyd

Productive Starters
Justin Verlander
Felix Hernandez
Scott Kazmir
Matt Cain
Jose Contreras
Francisco Liriano (could go in the injured cat obviously)
Josh Beckett
Mark Prior (could go in the injured)
Juan Cruz
Ben Sheets
John Patterson

Career hindered or ruined by injury
Greg Miller
Jesse Foppert
Jon Rauch
Rick Ankiel (could be called a bust)
Ryan Anderson

Haven't had their chance to establish themselves yet
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Philip Hughes
Homer Bailey
Chad Billingsley

Let's exclude the last four. Liriano and Prior would be cy young types if not for their arm problems. Four or five other guys out of 18 have had their careers pretty much ruined by arm injuries (although Miller and Rauch are still kicking). And Gavin Floyd and Edwin Jackson are busts so far. If you include Ankiel with them, since he probably would have busted either way, that's only three non-injury busts out of 18, and it's not like the book is closed on either of them. You could argue that Cruz doesn't yet belong in the productive category, which is fine too, but really, the only lesson here is, if these guys avoid blowing out their arms they have about an 85% (11 of 13) chance of being really good at least for a period of time. That doesn't exactly strike any more fear than I'd already felt when it came to pitching prospects.

Wow, hey, great logic. You ruled out all the guys who failed and, look at that, got a great success rate. Are you, by chance, a lawyer?

I can't believe you actually put Prior and Liriano in the 'productive starters' column. Prior is a walking Disaster and liriano had about half a season as a starter before his arm blew up. The mechanics which caused said explosion are still there. Well, he won't be the first pitcher with multiple TJ...

[Royals]

One other thing...
If you're gonna knock Kazmir's Mechanics, well, his certainly aren't the worst on that List. That distinction belongs to His Holiness, Emperor Felix...

[Rangers]

You know, I break this group of guys into four groups:

Flat Out Busts
Edwin Jackson
Gavin Floyd

Productive Starters
Justin Verlander
Felix Hernandez
Scott Kazmir
Matt Cain
Jose Contreras
Francisco Liriano (could go in the injured cat obviously)
Josh Beckett
Mark Prior (could go in the injured)
Juan Cruz
Ben Sheets
John Patterson

Career hindered or ruined by injury
Greg Miller
Jesse Foppert
Jon Rauch
Rick Ankiel (could be called a bust)
Ryan Anderson

Haven't had their chance to establish themselves yet
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Philip Hughes
Homer Bailey
Chad Billingsley

Let's exclude the last four. Liriano and Prior would be cy young types if not for their arm problems. Four or five other guys out of 18 have had their careers pretty much ruined by arm injuries (although Miller and Rauch are still kicking). And Gavin Floyd and Edwin Jackson are busts so far. If you include Ankiel with them, since he probably would have busted either way, that's only three non-injury busts out of 18, and it's not like the book is closed on either of them. You could argue that Cruz doesn't yet belong in the productive category, which is fine too, but really, the only lesson here is, if these guys avoid blowing out their arms they have about an 85% (11 of 13) chance of being really good at least for a period of time. That doesn't exactly strike any more fear than I'd already felt when it came to pitching prospects.

Wow, hey, great logic. You ruled out all the guys who failed and, look at that, got a great success rate. Are you, by chance, a lawyer?

No, I think you didn't quite get my point. I'll type it again for you:

but really, the only lesson here is, if these guys avoid blowing out their arms they have about an 85% (11 of 13) chance of being really good at least for a period of time.

I'm not saying that all of the guys who got hurt weren't failed. Obviously getting hurt is just another way of not succeeding. My conclusion was "IF these guys avoid blowing out their arms" (not sure how to more emphasize that so you catch it this time) "they have a good chance of being really good".

I can't believe you actually put Prior and Liriano in the 'productive starters' column. Prior is a walking Disaster and liriano had about half a season as a starter before his arm blew up.

Also, I take it that when I say:

Francisco Liriano (could go in the injured cat obviously)
Mark Prior (could go in the injured)

...that reads without the parentheses to your eyes.

So I'll type it in a way that may catch your attention this time:

Francisco Liriano - COULD GO IN THE INJURED CATEGORY OBVIOUSLY
Mark Prior - COULD GO IN THE INJURED

[Rangers]

It can be argued that Patterson and Sheets have had injuries delay their careers, and Kazmir is one major surgery away from being a closer.

Starting from the beginning here, Jim posted Callis' list as another piece of evidence of how tough it is to identify top pitchers (and there are tons). My response was intended to point out that at least for this group, the big roadblock seems to be injury and that if guys stayed healthy, they turned out pretty well for the most part. If you're saying that the standard needs to be 10-15 years of dominant starting pitching without injury, I think that's a little harsh. I think any of us would be more than happy to have Sheets in our rotation, and there might be five top starters in all of baseball about whom you could say there is absolutely no concern of potential injury. To me, Patterson and Kazmir are very good when healthy, and I'd also happily have either at or near the front of my rotation. I just don't see how those guys are counterexamples of highly regarded prospects having good careers.

[Royals]

Liriano IS injured. His career HAS been "hindered" by injury and currently IS. He doesn't belong in the Productive Category. Ditto prior, his career has most definitely been "hindered" by injury, there is nothing successful about his career thus far.
You're assuming that if the players you toss in the injury group weren't injured, that they would have been successful, which isn't the case. And injury is such a common and well known risk for young players that saying "Well if he could have only stayed healthy..." is rather like saying "Well if he could have only thrown strikes..."
I wonder too what you're using as a definition of "Productive". How is Juan Cruz Productive, but Gavin Floyd or Ed Jackson aren't? Cruz has been no more of a picnic than the other two, at least they still have youth on their side. I wouldn't want anything to do with any of them.
You've got 8 guys who could be called really productive right now, 4 guys who are busts
Sure, as long as they don't get injured, they might have a 2 out of 3 chance of making it.
Sure, if the throw strikes they might have a chance of making it.
Sure, if their pitches don't rely on mechanics that look like they went through a blender they might make it.
8 out of 18 are 'productive' right now, 2 of the 8 are mechanical messes depending on who you ask (some people insist Felix's mechanics are not bad).

[Rockies]

Red Sox: "How is Juan Cruz Productive, but Gavin Floyd or Ed Jackson aren't? Cruz has been no more of a picnic than the other two, at least they still have youth on their side. I wouldn't want anything to do with any of them."

I think you're being a little harsh on ol' Juan here. He's been jerked around as a reliever, posted a better than league average ERA in 3 of 5 years, good K rate regardless, and pitched well in a bandbox last year. Not saying he's a world beater but you could do much worse at the end of your rotation. Jackson and Floyd haven't had anywhere close to the measure of success Cruz has had.

Who ever owns Juan Cruz, if you value him like Bren does. Let's talk. Shit he'd be my Ace.

Baseball-Reference and Baseball Cube seem to differ by two years (!) on his birthdate which could be an issue. Not sure, but it could have been the difference, back then, between him being a top 3 prospect and a top 50 prospect. Just speculating, I have no idea either way.

I for one, still have hope for Juan Cruz.

[Mets]

And as a Mets fan, I have every right to hope that Kazmir winds up becoming a closer, or failing as an ML pitcher all together.

It will be the only way I can stop hearing about the trade that happened several years ago for the rest of my life.

Joking aside, I can't be the only one who has read that Kazmir doesn't have the body type to be a successful long-term starter. And the fact he's already hit the DL a few times has people looking out of the corner of their eyes.

Then again, people said Pedro didn't have the body type to be a ML quality starter either, and I think he was pretty good.

[Dodgers]

As the guy who has Juan Cruz and Francisco Liriano, Bren you can go fuck yourself.

Liriano was the talk of the entire majors before blowing out his arm again, so just because I won't deal him to you don't go knocking him all over.

Cruz was a damn useful pitcher for the DBacks last year, much in the mold of how they used Miguel Batista if I recall.

[Royals]

As the guy who has Juan Cruz and Francisco Liriano, Bren you can go fuck yourself.

Liriano was the talk of the entire majors before blowing out his arm again, so just because I won't deal him to you don't go knocking him all over.

Cruz was a damn useful pitcher for the DBacks last year, much in the mold of how they used Miguel Batista if I recall.

Liriano was great last year, no doubt and I'd still like to get ahold of him, but his mechanics ARE terrible. Not as bad as Felix's from what I've heard, but Liriano also seemed to have more concerns about his arm coming up through the minors, which is why SF was willing to trade him.

[Giants]

SF was willing to trade him because of makeup questions, not injury concerns (as per Brian Sabean, Ned Colletti, and Larry Baer ETA: in countless interviews on KNBR, I should cite my sources). The knock on him (according to them) was that minor league coaches questioned Liriano's work ethic. That's why it's going to be fascinating to me to see how he rehabs recovering from this injury, if he doesn't rehab hard his career could be derailed. But seriously Bren, come on, you're talking about mechanics "from what you've heard?" You've really never seen Felix or Liriano enough to judge for yourself? Both were on national TV enough during their phenom years (not to mention all the SportsCenter highlights). Or are you saying that you just don't know what good mechanics look like?

[Royals]

SF was willing to trade him because of makeup questions, not injury concerns (as per Brian Sabean, Ned Colletti, and Larry Baer ETA: in countless interviews on KNBR, I should cite my sources). The knock on him (according to them) was that minor league coaches questioned Liriano's work ethic. That's why it's going to be fascinating to me to see how he rehabs recovering from this injury, if he doesn't rehab hard his career could be derailed. But seriously Bren, come on, you're talking about mechanics "from what you've heard?" You've really never seen Felix or Liriano enough to judge for yourself? Both were on national TV enough during their phenom years (not to mention all the SportsCenter highlights). Or are you saying that you just don't know what good mechanics look like?

I'm saying
1. I spend WAY too much time doing schoolwork to watch many games (even the Sox). I listen on the radio/Net radio.
2. I'm smart enough to know that guys like Will Caroll or even Rich know far more about breaking down a pitcher's mechanics than I do (or possibly ever will). So even if I see felix or liriano pitch once or twice a year (or even more) I'm going to defer to the opinions of people that know more than me on the subject.

[Giants]

You ever take any sort of formal logic/debate/critical thinking class in any of that schoolwork? One of the big no-nos in making a valid argument is making its premise be "well so-and-so said something and they know more than me so it must be true." If you don't know enough to make that assertion yourself, don't talk like you know it authoritatively. Quote the article and pass it on as information, but don't come at us like your conclusion should carry any weight if you're already acknowledging you don't know what you're talking about.

[Royals]

You ever take any sort of formal logic/debate/critical thinking class in any of that schoolwork? One of the big no-nos in making a valid argument is making its premise be "well so-and-so said something and they know more than me so it must be true." If you don't know enough to make that assertion yourself, don't talk like you know it authoritatively. Quote the article and pass it on as information, but don't come at us like your conclusion should carry any weight if you're already acknowledging you don't know what you're talking about.

nah, i leave that stuff for the sleazy lawyers....
It's pretty common knowledge that Felix's Mechanics are a disaster and that Liriano's aren't too pretty either. It's not my particular insight that tells me the Sox finished a game behind the Bluejays last season, but I don't feel the need to quote a source when i say it either because it's pretty common knowledge. This isn't a law paper, it's a simulation league messageboard.
We have too many freakin lawyers in this league.

[Giants]

That's the problem with Americans, people don't want to think anymore they just want to be told what is and what isn't. It's one thing to say that Felix Hernandez has bad mechanics, that would be a fact you could cite. It's another to say

"If you're gonna knock Kazmir's Mechanics, well, his certainly aren't the worst on that List. That distinction belongs to His Holiness, Emperor Felix..." and then to later say "Liriano was great last year, no doubt and I'd still like to get ahold of him, but his mechanics ARE terrible. Not as bad as Felix's from what I've heard, but Liriano also seemed to have more concerns about his arm coming up through the minors, which is why SF was willing to trade him."

Those are some pretty strong statements about Felix Hernandez that can't just be taken at face value. If the conclusion that Felix Hernandez had the worst mechanics of every young pitcher on that list was as obvious, objective, and black and white as the the fact that the Red Sox finished 1 game behind the Blue Jays then you would be able to tell that by the one time you watched him last year the way you can tell the first time you looked at the final standings that the Red Sox finished behind the Blue Jays and you wouldn't need to cite a source (and as I mentioned in my other post the stuff you said about Liriano being traded was flat out wrong, but don't let the facts get in the way of the truth right?).

If you don't know how to scout and you don't care to learn, then don't try to make a scout's conclusions. Leave doing that to the people who actually know what they are talking about and are willing to expend the effort to honestly make the judgements they are trying to support.

[Royals]

That's the problem with Americans, people don't want to think anymore they just want to be told what is and what isn't. It's one thing to say that Felix Hernandez has bad mechanics, that would be a fact you could cite. It's another to say

"If you're gonna knock Kazmir's Mechanics, well, his certainly aren't the worst on that List. That distinction belongs to His Holiness, Emperor Felix..." and then to later say "Liriano was great last year, no doubt and I'd still like to get ahold of him, but his mechanics ARE terrible. Not as bad as Felix's from what I've heard, but Liriano also seemed to have more concerns about his arm coming up through the minors, which is why SF was willing to trade him."

Those are some pretty strong statements about Felix Hernandez that can't just be taken at face value. If the conclusion that Felix Hernandez had the worst mechanics of every young pitcher on that list was as obvious, objective, and black and white as the the fact that the Red Sox finished 1 game behind the Blue Jays then you would be able to tell that by the one time you watched him last year the way you can tell the first time you looked at the final standings that the Red Sox finished behind the Blue Jays and you wouldn't need to cite a source (and as I mentioned in my other post the stuff you said about Liriano being traded was flat out wrong, but don't let the facts get in the way of the truth right?).

If you don't know how to scout and you don't care to learn, then don't try to make a scout's conclusions. Leave doing that to the people who actually know what they are talking about and are willing to expend the effort to honestly make the judgements they are trying to support.

Was there some ambiguity that I didn't see Felix pitch last season? I did not because I almost Never Watch Baseball. Aside from a lck of time, the idiots in the broadcast booth make watching baseball on TV almost completely unbearable.
Felix's mechanics are hideous. It's common knowledge. Most of his boosters don't want to talk about it, they're too busy fellating him with praise. Felix's mechanics SUCK. You're not even disputing it, all you're doing is complaining about how I make the argument. Because the facts don't matter, just how they're presented. Definitely a lawyer.

Here's a strong statement for you, Will Caroll, the top writer in the field of baseball injuries and health only didn't give Felix a worse rating than he did because he doesn't HAVE a worse possible rating.

Also, I'd disagree with your first statement. The biggest problem with most Americans is a complete and total unwillingness to accept responsibility for their actions. Something goes wrong? Not my fault, I'll sue someone. Someone else should fix it. Invaded Iraq on false pretenses? Not the President's fault. Nor the vice president. Nor anyone else actually.

[Giants]

Not to turn this into a political debate, but the last statement you made is patently absurd. There are no shortage of Americans willing to blame the President and the Vice President and the entire administration for the fiasco in Iraq. The problem is that most of those people are willing to do that because they accept at face value what is told to them by the authority figures they respect rather than doing their own research the same way Bush supporters accept everything he says at face value. Much as the left hates to admit it there isn't a difference.

Now back to baseball. I'm not disputing whether or not Felix Hernandez has bad mechanics. Anyone who's seen him pitch can see that (and apparently you've been blessed with the super power of seeing it even without having seen him pitch). What I won't do is make a value judgement about whether or not he has worse mechanics than Kazmir or Liriano because I'm still learning what exactly makes bad mechanics and what flaws are more significant than others. The fact that I'm disputing (or more accurately refusing to accept based only on what you have to say) is that King Felix has worse mechanics than Scott Kazmir and Francisco Liriano (who you've already proven you don't know as much about as you think you do). You've got Will Carroll's quote and it's a nice one, but let me ask you this: What's wrong with King Felix's mechanics? What does he need to do to improve them and why are the flaws he currently has so bad? Most importantly considering the direction of our discussion: What about King Felix's delivery is worse than Scott Kazmir's or Francisco Liriano's?

You can be damn sure Will Carroll knows the answer to those questions, which is why he can make that statement, but you don't. Next time just point us to Will Carroll's article and credit him for his work rather than trying to mooch off of it and make yourself sound smarter.

[Royals]

Actually, if I'd give credit to anyone, it'd be our dear departed Ronniewoowoo, since he was the first person I (and probably everyone else in the league) heard decry Felix's deplorable mechanics, he was the first of many, most notably Caroll.
This is an internet messageboard, I don't, and won't, cite my sources unless it suits my purposes. Reason number one... I don't have to, it's a messageboard, not a law review or thesis paper! Reason number two, why should I give up a useful resource which my competition may or may not have or may not know I use?
Try debating the point, not the debate. I suspect you would, except for the fact that

"There are no shortage of Americans willing to blame the President and the Vice President and the entire administration for the fiasco in Iraq."
once again, how much responsibility do those people take responsibility for their actions? Zip. Bush and Cheney? HAHA HA HA! Bush still liks Saddam and Iraq to Al Qaeda. How many people say "Hey, I voted for Bush, I screwed up?" HA!
As for people believing only what they're told... there are two types of information in the world, what people have firsthand and what we don't. The latter is a lot easier to come by. Everyone has to evaluate the source of the latter and make a judgement call on it. Accepting the information you're given is not a mistake or a problem. Not considering the source or looking at multiple sources IS a problem. Not accepting responsibility for the decisions and mistakes that YOU make is an even bigger problem.

[Giants]

First of all Bren, how many Republicans do you know? I know many, and of that group many (I'd even be comfortable saying dozens) do regret voting for Bush. Certainly a large enough fraction of Republicans across the country did to vote the Republicans out of the House and Senate. Politicians are so carefully controlled that you can't expect to take at face value everything they say, but here's a counter-example (and hey it's from a Republican). How about Governator Schwarzenegger? After fighting with the legislature across partisan lines in 2005 and going down to dismal defeat in the special election he called (his approval rating falling so low he appeared completely dead politically), he called a press conference where he acknowledged his mistake, began working with the legislature and turned his administration around, comfortably winning reelection in one of the most heavily Democrat states in one of the most heavily Democrat elections in recent memory.

You simply cannot expect a wartime leader (however ineffectual the war might be, I won't dispute you on that point) to under any circumstances question the war being fought. That's not his role and it would do far more harm then good. The other fact is that an eq We get it, you don't like the President, I don't either but this is a baseball forum. Just like in our old smackdowns on SoSG you're missing my point about critical thinking completely, but frankly it might be too complicated for you to understand so we don't need to worry about it.

Honestly, I'm pretty much done with this argument. You're talking out of your ass, you freely acknowledge it, and you don't apologize for it. I don't think there's anything else that needs to be said.

[Yankees]

I think an argument about baseball mechanics is just patently absurd anyway. You can site hundreds of examples of pitchers with both clean mechanics and bad mechanics having injuries and being workhorses.

Clean mechanics usually create a faster or more moving pitch, while funky deliveries usually create deception and, a lot of times, allow pitchers without the leg power (most people on this planet aren't Roger Clemens) to use their upper bodies to generate the power (whether through pure arm strength or leverage).

This is just like a political argument because anyone here can argue a side forever and pretend they're right - when, in fact, the answer is clearly smack in the middle of what you are all saying.

My college pitching coach used to cringe everytime he saw Dontrelle Willis and CC Sabathia throw a baseball, and yet they continue to be two of the more stable pitchers in the game.

Cue the argument where they are throwing too many innings too early in their career...Sometimes I genuinely despise these discussions.

[Royals]

"how many Republicans do you know?"
Are you aware I live in Cincinnati? This school is chock full of 'good christian patriots'. Fortunately the students in the architecture department are less right leaning, leading to about a 50-50 split.

"I'm pretty much done with this argument."
That's a shame, I was hoping that at some point you might actually dispute the information presented, rather than just arguing about the argument. But if you're not going to do that, then now certainly is the time to bow out.

[Royals]

I think an argument about baseball mechanics is just patently absurd anyway. You can site hundreds of examples of pitchers with both clean mechanics and bad mechanics having injuries and being workhorses.

Clean mechanics usually create a faster or more moving pitch, while funky deliveries usually create deception and, a lot of times, allow pitchers without the leg power (most people on this planet aren't Roger Clemens) to use their upper bodies to generate the power (whether through pure arm strength or leverage).

This is just like a political argument because anyone here can argue a side forever and pretend they're right - when, in fact, the answer is clearly smack in the middle of what you are all saying.

My college pitching coach used to cringe everytime he saw Dontrelle Willis and CC Sabathia throw a baseball, and yet they continue to be two of the more stable pitchers in the game.

Cue the argument where they are throwing too many innings too early in their career...Sometimes I genuinely despise these discussions.

I agree, and clean mechanics are no guarantee of health (Mark Prior anyone?) and bad mechanics aren't a death knell on a career. But they are indicators of future potential. When you take into account, for example, Felix's poor mechanics, combined with questionable commitment to conditioning and the fact he has yet to get through the so-called 'injury nexus' it seems that along with this remarkable talent, there is also a remarkable degree of risk. Certainty? No, but his success is not a certainty either.