As Noe might say, innuresting...
http://cnnsi.com/2012/writers/albert_chen/05/07/dylan.bundy.trevor.bauer.long.toss/index.html?sct=mlb_t12_a0
Have no idea where the Astros as an organization land on this issue (others would know far better than me). I do remember, however, that a few years ago the Orioles implemented a plan limiting pitchers to a specific number of pitches/innings per outing regardless of the quality of said outing (i.e. potential no-no). Wonder whether that's still in effect and, if so, how Bundy's regimen fits in. Would've also liked to see comments from proponents of the limited long toss, but I doubt the point of the article was to provide a truly balanced commentary.
ETA: Am the only one who finds it ironical that Brady Anderson is Baltimore's strength and conditioning coach?
You're not alone about Anderson.
I don't know where the Astros come down on this. However, this article is spot on. All of this namby-pamby treatment of pitchers for the past 15-20 years has had a self-defeating and self-fulfilling effect: pitchers who are pampered are getting hurt more often. Throw the ball. It's exercise. Pitch counts are nonsense. I think that pro baseball is starting to wake up again about this (look at what the Rangers are doing with letting pitchers go deeper into ballgames). However, you're still going to have some GM's (Mike Rizzo-I've got my peepers on you) who will go overboard to protect their "investment" by limiting innings, even in a pennant race, which is insane.
The GM's who still have this philosophy are so frightened about being second guessed if their guy does get hurt pitching. One of the big problems in pro baseball is the insane length of some of these pitchers' contracts, which makes them "investments." Take Zito's multi-year fleecing of the Giants several years ago. He didn't get hurt, but his pitching sure hurt to watch, although he's doing a bit better this season. Give pitchers short term deals and you avoid the bigger risk of either injury or poor performance.
