leadpipe wrote:But this is the crux of the problem.
No way to know for sure, but I'd be skeptical if coaching is gonna restore that velocity. I'd say the wear and tear of pitching is the cause, as it has been for a zillion other guys. Whether I'm right or wrong is up for debate I suppose, BUT IF YOU'RE GETTING PAID TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS YOU BETTER DAMN WELL KNOW WHICH IT IS BEFORE YOU TRADE FOR THE GUY.
If they think - and thought, they could "coach up" his velocity back, than I'd say I think it's a pretty poor gamble, but have at it. If they traded for him thinking the velocity drop wasn't that big a deal, I'd ask what other qualities does the guy bring to the table. Practically ALL his success was based on having a plus fastball, so yeah, might wanna be clear as to why he wasn't throwing too hard.
Two things:
1. I realize my argument may be a little bit simplistic. The test case in Boddy's article was 86 to 90, which is much easier than increasing 92 to 96, and he admitted as much when I asked him about Jimenez. But, I imagine restoring *some* of that velocity is doable. If he could throw 96 before, outside of an arm injury, which we've never heard anything about, it seems reasonable that Jimenez could get back to 96.
2. When I say "coaches", I just don't mean Francona and Callaway. Why wouldn't the strength coach suggest a training regimen to increase velocity?
I can't speak for Boddy, but, his facility has taken a lot of players and increased their velocity by leaps and bounds. I will say that many of them are still developing pitchers, which would probably make a difference in the Jimenez scenario, but if he says it's possible to restore velocity, I have no reason not to believe him.
I asked him why teams and organizations don't do it and he said because they don't think it can be done. When I asked him if it was a systemic issue, he said yes and that velo drops tend to happen due to a reduction in training. A reduction in training is probably both a suggestion from the top and the pitcher adhering to the general consensus of arms getting burnt out and limiting workload.
Overall, my point in the article was this: What do the Indians have to lose? We've already established that Jimenez is borderline useless throwing 92. What does any team have to lose with a non-prospect or a fading starter? If the guy keeps dropping in velo, he'll continue to lose value. Why not try to stop it? Because the culture of babying pitchers has dictated it.
People make mistakes in judgement in deals all the time. No big deal. But there were some big warning sign here they oughta have checked out. Inexcusable.
There were. They were told it was a hip flexor and a finger issue and the Rockies didn't allow the Indians to perform a physical before making the trade, at least from my recollection. That was a big mistake on Antonetti's part.
But, you have to try and salvage what you can. If shutting him down for a couple months to try and increase his velocity, while we still have another option year available, has any chance of working, it should be explored.
A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe
That would have been golden. 
