...........

Dr. D fearlessly gives the ball to K-Pax, just as soon as the M's get stateside off their A's series.  Many remain unconvinced.  In the chat thread, we get this very good question:

Isn't the issue with Paxton innings? He only logged 95 IP last year. The M's are very cautious with young arms. I can't see them pushing Paxton over 130 IP or so this year. I guess they could do that in an M's uni and just shut him down in July or something but I don't see it happening.

A dumb question - be the first to collect the whole set.  Can somebody link me to the evidence that demonstrates this to be dangerous?

It is certainly a popular idea (BaseballHQ, etc) that a young pitcher's IP should only be increased by a small amount (25-40 or so IP) each successive year.  Where is the research confirming this suggestion?  

I'm not asking for a link to "any published article expressing an opinion."  I'm asking for convincing research that isolates the IP-Increase Variable.  And that demonstrates increased risk beyond the risk that occurs simply because a man is throwing pitches.  Of course a guy who throws 2,000 pitches has greater risk of injury than one who throws 1,000.  

BaseballHQ invented this idea, and the only thing they've got in Forecaster's research section is this baffling statement:

Research suggests that there is a finite number of IP in a pitcher's arm (agreed - Dr D).  ... Any pitcher who significantly increases his workload from one year to another is a candidate for burnout symptoms in a future year.  That threshold may be 50 or 100 IP, depending upon the pitcher, and the results may not be seen for several seasons after the increase.

Wait, wait, wait.

"Any pitcher who chews Bazooka may show symptoms of burnout in some future year, maybe 2017."  By "symptoms" I could mean that he has a high ERA some year or other.  Okay, test that hypothesis scientifically.  Dr. G?  Dr. K?  Can you design us something to test my Bazooka Gum theory?  

HQ's guys are sharp, which is why they state this theory so malleably as to make it useless.  Do they do this, do you think, because they're sitting on convincing research?  Or because they are sitting on zero research?

But even here.  Let's say I spot HQ their assumption.  The threshold may be 100 IP?!  So, Paxton being lefty, effortless and leveraged, we can go to 2011 plus 100 IP?

.

=== Way To Burn Him Out, Tiggers ====

Supposing that a 22-year-old AAA pitcher had thrown a fairly brief (100-130 IP) season in 2011, but exploded on the AL in 2012, would you consider letting him make 30 starts if he were feeling good throughout?

..........

An illustrative case - Justin Verlander threw 130 IP in 2005, and then threw 200+ IP seasons, if you include playoffs, from 2006 and each season since.   Here, let's chart Verlander's innings -- including playoffs -- by season:

Verlander's last fastball of 2011 clocked 100 mph.

.