Some are saying that short pitchers are the new "Moneyball" market inefficiency.  But obviously short pitchers have different builds.  A short pitcher can be lanky or stocky, which is going to have an effect on throwing motion and fluidity.

The Seattle Mariners acquired LHP Mauricio Robles from the Detroit Tigers in the Jarrod Washburn deal.  The stuff is that of a top starting pitching prospect, but he's 5'10 and stocky.  As a lefty his fastball sits in the low 90s and can reach the mid/upper 90s when he reaches back.

There are examples of short starting pitchers maintaining velocity over the course of time, but guys like Pedro Martinez and Timmy Lincecum aren't exactly the same shape as Robles.  They're short, but they have some length.  I'm having a hard time finding any short, stocky guys who throw hard as starters.

Wandy Rodriguez was the closest thing I could think of, but he doesn't throw especially hard.  But most of the other examples of short pitchers, especially lefties, are the soft tossers like Randy Wolf or Jamie Moyer or whoever else.

Getting to the point, I'm wondering if there is any evidence out there that suggests that "lanky" pitchers are able to maintain velocity over multiple innings, outings, seasons better than a "stocky" pitcher.  Obvious, a pitcher's specific mechanics should be studied, but let's try to generalize. 

John Jaha was a Moneyball player, but he still had a good career before Billy Beane recognized his real value.  Can short, stocky pitchers be a market inefficiency if there were hardly any guys making it before the attention was shifted over to them?  Does that make sense?

Basically what I'm asking is this: Is there any reason to believe that a guy like Robles can maintain his fastball velocity over the course 5-10 seasons as a starter despite his build?