D6L posted:
roothog66 posted:
D6L posted:

I think one thing we are forgetting on these studies are alot of statistics are coming from players who are not FULLY developed, especially long toss.  As the players grow and develop eventually they should get stronger and throw harder.  So, are we saying that it was just the long toss or weitghted balls or lifting weight, I don't ever see biological transformation reference from one season to next for the players.

To the proponents of professional clubs not using the weighted balls, yes I would like to know why as well, a sport that's been around since 1845, the mecca of all that have touched, thrown, caught or hit a baseball.  With almost limitless resources to find that franchise pitcher, if weighted ball is the answer for the pitchers then why do these ball clubs search outside the boundaries and spend millions of dollars to find the next Cy Young, instead of developing within.  The ball clubs are gravitating to areas that baseball is played the most, the arms are used the most and the balls are hit the most. 

If the professional pitchers are at their peak therefore they do not need to throw the weighted balls, this doesn't make sense, if you have an equipment that helps you get to the top level, once you get there stop using it?

In football you don't throw, curve, slider, surve, cutter, 2seam, 4seam, change, screw, gyro or a knuckle.  The arm action and the grip for a QB is slightly different then a Pitcher.

 

The things I like to question, I hear stress, strain and tear, but are these the good ones or the bad ones.  I know that to build the muscle you need to tear it down, but is this muscle there to be built, our chest and leg muscles are definitely have space to grow, but some of muscles we are talking about are in places where massive growth can't happen or shouldn't.

 

I just read an article recently, Tampa Bay organization was trying to find "new" method for developing and training, so their low minor league affiliate was the test dummy.  One idea was the weighted balls, for proprietary reasons the group didn't divulge what exactly was done with the weighted balls, but the success story was that this 34th round pick was going to be released, if I read the article correctly he was throwing in the 90s but lost the velocity.  With the weighted ball program he got his velocity back to the 90s not increased his velocity since losing it but got it back.  But the sad thing was that the very next year, he had arm problems and needed surgery.  Now was this injury because of the weighted ball program, or just pitching too much.  I am not sure.  But one thing the parent club made it absolutely clear is that they will NOT use this method on their "TOP" prospects for now.

There are a lot of common misconceptions concerning weighted ball work in this post. First is the idea that MLB clubs don't use weighted balls. It's just not trues. A lot of them do. Even with clubs that may not formally incorporate programs, many very durable mlb'ers do use weighted balls as very important components to their personal programs. You don't have to look any farther than this World Series. If you watched Chapman warm up in the bullpen, you will see him use a weighted ball. In fact, one of the earliest proponents was Rivera. 

A second misconception is that you can probably put off much of the velocity gains to natural growth. While this has some merit concerning long toss, where reports of gains come over longer periods of time, it just doesn't work for weighted ball gains. Every documented study concerning this deals with velocity gains over a very short  period of time - usually no more than three months. Over such a short period of time, natural growth cannot be a factor. Additionally, this is an area where it is possible to separate out the numbers as they apply to younger players. One has to look no farther than Kyle Boddy's work in Washington to see a pattern of fully physically developed pitchers experiencing remarkable velocity gains over a relatively short period of time. Such developments couldn't possibly be the result of natural growth in subjects of this classification.

An anecdotal story of a single pitcher who needed surgery a year after using weighted balls is not very useful to the conversation. However, a long term comparison of injury rates among pitchers who use weighted ball programs and pitchers who don't would be useful. Of course, the conclusions of any such story would have to take two competing notions into account; 1) the idea that increased velocity inherently increases risk factors and 2) the idea that weighted ball work can actually increase the strength the smaller muscle groups surrounding the elbow, therefore allowing it to withstand greater stress factors. So, for example, if you saw increased velocity in our weighted ball subjects, but similar injury rates, you could certainly conclude that it has substantial positive effect. The same conclusion could be reached if you saw no increase in velocity gain rates of change, but substantially lower injury rates in weighted ball pitchers. However, if you saw only slight changes in increased velocity and substantially greater injury rates in weighted ball pitchers, you could conclude the opposite. 

edit: Another misconception is that weighted balls as a general concept are a new untested training method and that the old timers didn't need them. In reality, weighted balls have been around for more than a hundred years. IN the old days, pitchers would soak balls in water to weight them down for throwing "programs."

I believe you are validating what I am saying,  listing individuals who use weighted balls as their individual preference and not the Organizations embracing the weighted ball as the sole source of increasing velocity.  As you noted that this idea has been around for years also supports what i am trying to impart.  As for Chapman you can youtube his mechanics as to why he can throw 105mph, not because of the  weighted balls, but his hip to shoulder separation is BETTER than most elite pitchers and having his size is bonus as well.  My assumption is, if he does use the weighted balls during bullpen session or warmup, this would stretch the hip/shoulder separation or even strength it, without undue stress of lifting heavy weights for the upper body rotation.

I agree that there is a place for weighted balls in a workout, but should not be touted as the "Main" source to increase velocity, in my opinion.  In a 3 month period of "workout" program, you are in essence strength something and in any workout program it does take 3 months to see results.  I know that if you put a load on anything continuously  there will be some results, but why are we overloading the arm to the extreme when most of the power comes from the leg.  When we overload something continuously there will be consequences.

Like you on this board I have read weighted ball research papers, during one of these programs an individual hurt his arm, and this was conducted by professionals as well.

Wasn't the Tampa Bay article done by professionals for the professional who competes at the very top?  I am not sure how we can ignore it completely.

First, can you come the article you're talking about. I'd like to read it. I also wanted to mention that the Indians implement a wb program for their minor league pitchers. To address a few other things. You bring up a good point that lower body is a major component in high velocity throwing. Your question, though, is based on a common misconception as to what the goals of a weighted ball program are. 

It's not about strengthening the arm for the purpose of muscling up a pitch. The basis can best be addressed in terms of proprioception. Your arm will only move as fast as you have trained it to go and only as fast as it can handle. When we talk about muscle memory, it is not exactly what it sounds like. A combination of muscles and capsules in the joints internally "learn" and "remember" patterns of joint movement. It is why a baby has to learn to walk. It is why most people cant thriw the same with their off hand. Now to apply it to pitching.

Research on cadavers has shown that the human ucl,on its own, can only take a force about equal to that applied by an 86mph fastball. However, the musclea surrounding it allow for greater forces. As these forces are applied, the joints "allow" fastwr movement whuch is then engrained into arm action. So, heavy balls build the muscles around the ucl, allowong it to handle a faster movement, and then light balls sort of "trick" the arm into moving faster. So, it is not about simply adding muscle to the arm. 

your analogy to lifting weights does not work here. Yes, it takes about three months to see strength improvement with a weight program, but that is because strength increase is how you are measurong gains. That is not how gains are measured with a WB program. We are measuring gains by mph, and thise gains come much quicker.

Ardolis Chapman needs to be studied closely.  Why and how has he avoided TJ surgery? If 90 mph is dangerous, how does someone that throws above 100 stay healthy?  The guy has been throwing with record breaking velocity for 10 years. He throws power sliders, often over 90 mph.

Seriously, how does he do what he does without getting injured?  Every pitch he throws is far beyond any boundaries the medical profession has established.

Nolan Ryan was a power pitcher well into his 40s.  And he threw more pitches than anyone ever.  Basing that on the fact he holds the record for career strike outs and also the all time record for Walks.  How did he do that without TJ surgery along the way?

It's easy to just say they, and others, are just exceptions or freaks of nature.  At the same time it would be interesting to know what all the pitchers that stay away from injury, did differently than those that suffered injury.

PGStaff posted:

Ardolis Chapman needs to be studied closely.  Why and how has he avoided TJ surgery? If 90 mph is dangerous, how does someone that throws above 100 stay healthy?  The guy has been throwing with record breaking velocity for 10 years. He throws power sliders, often over 90 mph.

Seriously, how does he do what he does without getting injured?  Every pitch he throws is far beyond any boundaries the medical profession has established.

Nolan Ryan was a power pitcher well into his 40s.  And he threw more pitches than anyone ever.  Basing that on the fact he holds the record for career strike outs and also the all time record for Walks.  How did he do that without TJ surgery along the way?

It's easy to just say they, and others, are just exceptions or freaks of nature.  At the same time it would be interesting to know what all the pitchers that stay away from injury, did differently than those that suffered injury.

I won't begin to say I understand how they both remained healthy or how Dizzy Dean could throw both ends of a double header without being carried off the field but I have a theory.

I tend to be curious about the very early (less than 10 years) experience of these players.   I wonder if youth that begin physical labor at an earlier age (carrying feed, lifting, stooping to pick beans in the garden, running from place to place etc.) begin to build the tendon, ligament and connection point strength that children today simply do not often acquire.  As they grow and begin to engage in sports the substructure to prevent injury is already in place and they are building the sports specific muscles the physical structure.

Of course theories are like opinions...everybody has them

When looking at the old timers, I think you have to also work under the assumption that many of them were, indeed, injured and simply played through it as long as they could. Since we didn't have radar, it's hard to tell how much velocity was lost, but I think it is logical to assume that ucl tears happened back then. It's entirely possible to pitch effectively with a torn ucl. Most of the care back then didn't deal with fixing the problem. The major focus was on pain management.

roothog66 posted:

When looking at the old timers, I think you have to also work under the assumption that many of them were, indeed, injured and simply played through it as long as they could. Since we didn't have radar, it's hard to tell how much velocity was lost, but I think it is logical to assume that ucl tears happened back then. It's entirely possible to pitch effectively with a torn ucl. Most of the care back then didn't deal with fixing the problem. The major focus was on pain management.

I'm about 16+ years removed from playing college ball.  I frequently had elbow pain that I had to manage, as you said.  Never had any imaging done.  I'm almost curious enough to have an MRI done of my elbow to see if there is some residual scarring on the UCL.

Since I work with a lot of pro ballplayers, I assure you, the vast majority are taking plenty of pills and doing a lot of things to manage pain throughout the season - position players and pitchers alike. Many pitch with a partial tear of their UCL.

A big misconception is that you tear your UCL and the team pays for an MRI and you get Tommy John within a week. Not so much. The team force feeds you drugs, gets a useless X-Ray, does manual tests that declare "soreness," put you on the shadow DL, jerk you around in rehab, and do everything they can to not MRI your arm and pay for surgery. That's how it really goes down in most minor league organizations. And that can take months.

What you see in the big leagues is not how it goes down for the rest of pro ball. Remember that.

roothog66 posted:
D6L posted:
roothog66 posted:
D6L posted:

I think one thing we are forgetting on these studies are alot of statistics are coming from players who are not FULLY developed, especially long toss.  As the players grow and develop eventually they should get stronger and throw harder.  So, are we saying that it was just the long toss or weitghted balls or lifting weight, I don't ever see biological transformation reference from one season to next for the players.

To the proponents of professional clubs not using the weighted balls, yes I would like to know why as well, a sport that's been around since 1845, the mecca of all that have touched, thrown, caught or hit a baseball.  With almost limitless resources to find that franchise pitcher, if weighted ball is the answer for the pitchers then why do these ball clubs search outside the boundaries and spend millions of dollars to find the next Cy Young, instead of developing within.  The ball clubs are gravitating to areas that baseball is played the most, the arms are used the most and the balls are hit the most. 

If the professional pitchers are at their peak therefore they do not need to throw the weighted balls, this doesn't make sense, if you have an equipment that helps you get to the top level, once you get there stop using it?

In football you don't throw, curve, slider, surve, cutter, 2seam, 4seam, change, screw, gyro or a knuckle.  The arm action and the grip for a QB is slightly different then a Pitcher.

 

The things I like to question, I hear stress, strain and tear, but are these the good ones or the bad ones.  I know that to build the muscle you need to tear it down, but is this muscle there to be built, our chest and leg muscles are definitely have space to grow, but some of muscles we are talking about are in places where massive growth can't happen or shouldn't.

 

I just read an article recently, Tampa Bay organization was trying to find "new" method for developing and training, so their low minor league affiliate was the test dummy.  One idea was the weighted balls, for proprietary reasons the group didn't divulge what exactly was done with the weighted balls, but the success story was that this 34th round pick was going to be released, if I read the article correctly he was throwing in the 90s but lost the velocity.  With the weighted ball program he got his velocity back to the 90s not increased his velocity since losing it but got it back.  But the sad thing was that the very next year, he had arm problems and needed surgery.  Now was this injury because of the weighted ball program, or just pitching too much.  I am not sure.  But one thing the parent club made it absolutely clear is that they will NOT use this method on their "TOP" prospects for now.

There are a lot of common misconceptions concerning weighted ball work in this post. First is the idea that MLB clubs don't use weighted balls. It's just not trues. A lot of them do. Even with clubs that may not formally incorporate programs, many very durable mlb'ers do use weighted balls as very important components to their personal programs. You don't have to look any farther than this World Series. If you watched Chapman warm up in the bullpen, you will see him use a weighted ball. In fact, one of the earliest proponents was Rivera. 

A second misconception is that you can probably put off much of the velocity gains to natural growth. While this has some merit concerning long toss, where reports of gains come over longer periods of time, it just doesn't work for weighted ball gains. Every documented study concerning this deals with velocity gains over a very short  period of time - usually no more than three months. Over such a short period of time, natural growth cannot be a factor. Additionally, this is an area where it is possible to separate out the numbers as they apply to younger players. One has to look no farther than Kyle Boddy's work in Washington to see a pattern of fully physically developed pitchers experiencing remarkable velocity gains over a relatively short period of time. Such developments couldn't possibly be the result of natural growth in subjects of this classification.

An anecdotal story of a single pitcher who needed surgery a year after using weighted balls is not very useful to the conversation. However, a long term comparison of injury rates among pitchers who use weighted ball programs and pitchers who don't would be useful. Of course, the conclusions of any such story would have to take two competing notions into account; 1) the idea that increased velocity inherently increases risk factors and 2) the idea that weighted ball work can actually increase the strength the smaller muscle groups surrounding the elbow, therefore allowing it to withstand greater stress factors. So, for example, if you saw increased velocity in our weighted ball subjects, but similar injury rates, you could certainly conclude that it has substantial positive effect. The same conclusion could be reached if you saw no increase in velocity gain rates of change, but substantially lower injury rates in weighted ball pitchers. However, if you saw only slight changes in increased velocity and substantially greater injury rates in weighted ball pitchers, you could conclude the opposite. 

edit: Another misconception is that weighted balls as a general concept are a new untested training method and that the old timers didn't need them. In reality, weighted balls have been around for more than a hundred years. IN the old days, pitchers would soak balls in water to weight them down for throwing "programs."

I believe you are validating what I am saying,  listing individuals who use weighted balls as their individual preference and not the Organizations embracing the weighted ball as the sole source of increasing velocity.  As you noted that this idea has been around for years also supports what i am trying to impart.  As for Chapman you can youtube his mechanics as to why he can throw 105mph, not because of the  weighted balls, but his hip to shoulder separation is BETTER than most elite pitchers and having his size is bonus as well.  My assumption is, if he does use the weighted balls during bullpen session or warmup, this would stretch the hip/shoulder separation or even strength it, without undue stress of lifting heavy weights for the upper body rotation.

I agree that there is a place for weighted balls in a workout, but should not be touted as the "Main" source to increase velocity, in my opinion.  In a 3 month period of "workout" program, you are in essence strength something and in any workout program it does take 3 months to see results.  I know that if you put a load on anything continuously  there will be some results, but why are we overloading the arm to the extreme when most of the power comes from the leg.  When we overload something continuously there will be consequences.

Like you on this board I have read weighted ball research papers, during one of these programs an individual hurt his arm, and this was conducted by professionals as well.

Wasn't the Tampa Bay article done by professionals for the professional who competes at the very top?  I am not sure how we can ignore it completely.

First, can you come the article you're talking about. I'd like to read it. I also wanted to mention that the Indians implement a wb program for their minor league pitchers. To address a few other things. You bring up a good point that lower body is a major component in high velocity throwing. Your question, though, is based on a common misconception as to what the goals of a weighted ball program are. 

It's not about strengthening the arm for the purpose of muscling up a pitch. The basis can best be addressed in terms of proprioception. Your arm will only move as fast as you have trained it to go and only as fast as it can handle. When we talk about muscle memory, it is not exactly what it sounds like. A combination of muscles and capsules in the joints internally "learn" and "remember" patterns of joint movement. It is why a baby has to learn to walk. It is why most people cant thriw the same with their off hand. Now to apply it to pitching.

Research on cadavers has shown that the human ucl,on its own, can only take a force about equal to that applied by an 86mph fastball. However, the musclea surrounding it allow for greater forces. As these forces are applied, the joints "allow" fastwr movement whuch is then engrained into arm action. So, heavy balls build the muscles around the ucl, allowong it to handle a faster movement, and then light balls sort of "trick" the arm into moving faster. So, it is not about simply adding muscle to the arm. 

your analogy to lifting weights does not work here. Yes, it takes about three months to see strength improvement with a weight program, but that is because strength increase is how you are measurong gains. That is not how gains are measured with a WB program. We are measuring gains by mph, and thise gains come much quicker.

This is the article, http://www.tampabay.com/sports...ning-program/2279420

He gets surgery in 2015.

There was another article on this board, where they compare throwing 4oz ball vs 5oz ball, the stress on the arm was almost off the charts with 4oz ball compared to 5oz.   So my assumption, if your body gets use to throwing 7, 8, 10oz balls, and then throttle down to 5oz regulation weight, I can pretty much guarantee there would be more stress, my opinion.  I have also tried to throw a tennis ball after warming up with baseball, my shoulder felt like it was going to come out of the socket, I was throwing as hard as I would the baseball, generally I would like to be the test dummy before I introduce something to my son.

I am pretty sure any joints/tendons/muscle are very strong in a stabilized position and can hold more load, but trying to strength something while moving the part that you want to strength, I'm not so sure.  I have lifted, I have played, at some level I do understand the body movement needed in sports.

Kyle Boddy posted:

You know my blog has a ton of actual data-collected information on this topic, right? Saying stuff like "Guarantee there would be more stress, my opinion" is a weird way to base scientific thought.

I am not a scientist and if you are I'm pretty sure you would be in the same camp as if you threw a heavier object there would be "more stress" on the same parts of the anatomy in action as the less weighted object being thrown.  I don't need a scientist to tell me that, i can feel it on my own.

D6L posted:
Kyle Boddy posted:

You know my blog has a ton of actual data-collected information on this topic, right? Saying stuff like "Guarantee there would be more stress, my opinion" is a weird way to base scientific thought.

I am not a scientist and if you are I'm pretty sure you would be in the same camp as if you threw a heavier object there would be "more stress" on the same parts of the anatomy in action as the less weighted object being thrown.  I don't need a scientist to tell me that, i can feel it on my own.

Well, the Earth looks flat to me.  I don't care what scientists say.

Rob T posted:
D6L posted:
Kyle Boddy posted:

You know my blog has a ton of actual data-collected information on this topic, right? Saying stuff like "Guarantee there would be more stress, my opinion" is a weird way to base scientific thought.

I am not a scientist and if you are I'm pretty sure you would be in the same camp as if you threw a heavier object there would be "more stress" on the same parts of the anatomy in action as the less weighted object being thrown.  I don't need a scientist to tell me that, i can feel it on my own.

Well, the Earth looks flat to me.  I don't care what scientists say.

BTW, it wasn't a scientists who discovered the earth was round.

D6L posted:
Rob T posted:
D6L posted:
Kyle Boddy posted:

You know my blog has a ton of actual data-collected information on this topic, right? Saying stuff like "Guarantee there would be more stress, my opinion" is a weird way to base scientific thought.

I am not a scientist and if you are I'm pretty sure you would be in the same camp as if you threw a heavier object there would be "more stress" on the same parts of the anatomy in action as the less weighted object being thrown.  I don't need a scientist to tell me that, i can feel it on my own.

Well, the Earth looks flat to me.  I don't care what scientists say.

BTW, it wasn't a scientists who discovered the earth was round.

Mathematicians creating theories from empirical evidence are applying science however you want to parse the phrase.

Much like guys who perform studies on how various implements impact the stresses on the arm.

Of course there are detractors who formulate opinion based on how things feel - just like there were detractors 2000 years ago who thought the Earth was flat because well - look it's flat.

Kyle Boddy posted:

Since I work with a lot of pro ballplayers, I assure you, the vast majority are taking plenty of pills and doing a lot of things to manage pain throughout the season - position players and pitchers alike. Many pitch with a partial tear of their UCL.

A big misconception is that you tear your UCL and the team pays for an MRI and you get Tommy John within a week. Not so much. The team force feeds you drugs, gets a useless X-Ray, does manual tests that declare "soreness," put you on the shadow DL, jerk you around in rehab, and do everything they can to not MRI your arm and pay for surgery. That's how it really goes down in most minor league organizations. And that can take months.

What you see in the big leagues is not how it goes down for the rest of pro ball. Remember that.

What are the MiLB player's options when they feel that a 2nd opinion or additional testing (i.e. MRI versus just the x-ray) is warranted?  Can they pay out of pocket for the MRI and have it read - with findings submitted to the organization?  Or, once you set foot outside of "their" network you are on you own?

2017LHPscrewball posted:
Kyle Boddy posted:

Since I work with a lot of pro ballplayers, I assure you, the vast majority are taking plenty of pills and doing a lot of things to manage pain throughout the season - position players and pitchers alike. Many pitch with a partial tear of their UCL.

A big misconception is that you tear your UCL and the team pays for an MRI and you get Tommy John within a week. Not so much. The team force feeds you drugs, gets a useless X-Ray, does manual tests that declare "soreness," put you on the shadow DL, jerk you around in rehab, and do everything they can to not MRI your arm and pay for surgery. That's how it really goes down in most minor league organizations. And that can take months.

What you see in the big leagues is not how it goes down for the rest of pro ball. Remember that.

What are the MiLB player's options when they feel that a 2nd opinion or additional testing (i.e. MRI versus just the x-ray) is warranted?  Can they pay out of pocket for the MRI and have it read - with findings submitted to the organization?  Or, once you set foot outside of "their" network you are on you own?

I would really prefer some substance in discussion, again you lost me at scientist discovered the earth was flat.

D6L posted:
2017LHPscrewball posted:
Kyle Boddy posted:

Since I work with a lot of pro ballplayers, I assure you, the vast majority are taking plenty of pills and doing a lot of things to manage pain throughout the season - position players and pitchers alike. Many pitch with a partial tear of their UCL.

A big misconception is that you tear your UCL and the team pays for an MRI and you get Tommy John within a week. Not so much. The team force feeds you drugs, gets a useless X-Ray, does manual tests that declare "soreness," put you on the shadow DL, jerk you around in rehab, and do everything they can to not MRI your arm and pay for surgery. That's how it really goes down in most minor league organizations. And that can take months.

What you see in the big leagues is not how it goes down for the rest of pro ball. Remember that.

What are the MiLB player's options when they feel that a 2nd opinion or additional testing (i.e. MRI versus just the x-ray) is warranted?  Can they pay out of pocket for the MRI and have it read - with findings submitted to the organization?  Or, once you set foot outside of "their" network you are on you own?

I would really prefer some substance in discussion, again you lost me at scientist discovered the earth was flat.

Substance in discussion was attempted by Kyle when he told you to go look at the evidence.

You responded with "I know what I feel".

Apparently my attempt at a simple analogy was lost on you.

Throwing 3/4 or 7/8 may feel natural, but I believe that's the problem.  Mike Marshall's straight overhead mechanics look like they'd make your arm fly out of the socket, but his pitchers are healthy and can throw 95mph too.  Cricket bowlers throw the same weighted (5oz) ball straight overhead with a running start, and I don't believe a single bowler has had TJ surgery.  They also rarely have serious shoulder injuries aside from tendonitis which in baseball has been pretty much eradicated through band work. 

Wow, it's been almost 2 years, since i participated in this post.  My son (now 14) is still throwing and pitching, loves the mound and the pressure that brings with it.  We worked out fall of 2016- and spring of 2017. On Feb-2017, per my earlier post added long toss twice a week, during month of Feb.  At the end of last Oct. 2017 about the same time frame prior to shutting him down for the winter we clocked him, was clocked consistently 66-67 fastball and 56-57 change up.

He grew from 4' 10" and 80 pounds to now 5'6" and 105lbs, in 2 years.

This year we did not implement the long toss, but during the early spring I definitely noticed the ball moving faster, pounding the glove harder and the whizzing of the ball can be heard cutting through the air.

Yesterday, though we have one more game left, he will be shutdown from the mound, we visited our customary Pitching Pro and had him gunned again, now he is cruising 71-72 fastball and 61-62 change up.

One constant I can pull out between the 2 season is that he has pitched 50-60 innings each year.  During 13-14 winter/early spring season we hardly did any core exercises or throwing unlike during 12-13

Sadly, one of his ex-teammates, who used weighted balls for his workout program had to be shutdown all of this year, to be perfectly honest, I was slight (father) jealous in the beginning that his teammate threw a tad harder, knowing they were using the weighted balls, but I am really really glad we did not implement weighted ball in our sons throwing program.

I don't know what it is, but he seems to have that certain moxy when he gets on the mound, he controls the situation and not the situation control him.  When he doesn't start, he is brought in to stop the bleeding, get the starter out of a jam, bases loaded and game on the line situations.

 

Thanks...

D6L:

1. The weighted ball program that colleges do isn't designed for a 12 year old.

2. you can expect a 3-5mph gain from 12-14, easily, due to growth.

3. late fall/ early Winter is the time to work out HARD, and not throw a ball.

4. Long toss is what is recommended by most professionals.  Possibly a weighted ball program later down the line, but all ages would improve with long toss.

5. I would guess over 25% of the kids get shut down from age 12-15.  Too much throwing, plus growth plate issues....I saw a LOT of kids have to shut down and some that didn't but should have!  Those are super tender years....throw with extra care.

D6L posted:

Wow, it's been almost 2 years, since i participated in this post.  My son (now 14) is still throwing and pitching, loves the mound and the pressure that brings with it.  We worked out fall of 2016- and spring of 2017. On Feb-2017, per my earlier post added long toss twice a week, during month of Feb.  At the end of last Oct. 2017 about the same time frame prior to shutting him down for the winter we clocked him, was clocked consistently 66-67 fastball and 56-57 change up.

He grew from 4' 10" and 80 pounds to now 5'6" and 105lbs, in 2 years.

This year we did not implement the long toss, but during the early spring I definitely noticed the ball moving faster, pounding the glove harder and the whizzing of the ball can be heard cutting through the air.

Yesterday, though we have one more game left, he will be shutdown from the mound, we visited our customary Pitching Pro and had him gunned again, now he is cruising 71-72 fastball and 61-62 change up.

One constant I can pull out between the 2 season is that he has pitched 50-60 innings each year.  During 13-14 winter/early spring season we hardly did any core exercises or throwing unlike during 12-13

Sadly, one of his ex-teammates, who used weighted balls for his workout program had to be shutdown all of this year, to be perfectly honest, I was slight (father) jealous in the beginning that his teammate threw a tad harder, knowing they were using the weighted balls, but I am really really glad we did not implement weighted ball in our sons throwing program.

I don't know what it is, but he seems to have that certain moxy when he gets on the mound, he controls the situation and not the situation control him.  When he doesn't start, he is brought in to stop the bleeding, get the starter out of a jam, bases loaded and game on the line situations.

 

Thanks...

If he has the hyperflexibilty of a high velocity thrower, with todays technology he will be able to learn mechanics that will enable him to increase his velocity beyond what his joints can handle. Don't let him throw hard (85+?) until you get a doctor to confirm that he is full grown and he has spent a couple years weight training to strengthen his connective tissue and stabilizing muscles. It is one of the worst feelings in the world to know that you hurt your son because you and/or him got caught up in the velocity quest before he had matured.

 

I thought my son was full grown as a senior in high school at 6'2'' 180. He worked on high velo mechanics and got into the low 90's, tore his UCL, and while recovering grew another inch and put on 25 pounds of muscle. According to his doctors he will be filling out for at least another couple years. Kids mature at different rates, know yours. You already have a start by tracking his growth changes.

I think there is no evidence that weighted balls are dangerous but I would also be wary about pushing velo too hard before kids are at least 13-14.

Some plyo work for young kids is ok but I'm pretty sure Kyle did not create his program to push maximum velo on 11 year old old kids. If some parents use it that way it is not his fault.

D6L posted:

Wow, it's been almost 2 years, since i participated in this post.  My son (now 14) is still throwing and pitching, loves the mound and the pressure that brings with it.  We worked out fall of 2016- and spring of 2017. On Feb-2017, per my earlier post added long toss twice a week, during month of Feb.  At the end of last Oct. 2017 about the same time frame prior to shutting him down for the winter we clocked him, was clocked consistently 66-67 fastball and 56-57 change up.

He grew from 4' 10" and 80 pounds to now 5'6" and 105lbs, in 2 years.

This year we did not implement the long toss, but during the early spring I definitely noticed the ball moving faster, pounding the glove harder and the whizzing of the ball can be heard cutting through the air.

Yesterday, though we have one more game left, he will be shutdown from the mound, we visited our customary Pitching Pro and had him gunned again, now he is cruising 71-72 fastball and 61-62 change up.

One constant I can pull out between the 2 season is that he has pitched 50-60 innings each year.  During 13-14 winter/early spring season we hardly did any core exercises or throwing unlike during 12-13

Sadly, one of his ex-teammates, who used weighted balls for his workout program had to be shutdown all of this year, to be perfectly honest, I was slight (father) jealous in the beginning that his teammate threw a tad harder, knowing they were using the weighted balls, but I am really really glad we did not implement weighted ball in our sons throwing program.

I don't know what it is, but he seems to have that certain moxy when he gets on the mound, he controls the situation and not the situation control him.  When he doesn't start, he is brought in to stop the bleeding, get the starter out of a jam, bases loaded and game on the line situations.

 

Thanks...

Just like to update, he is now 5'9" and 123lbs, we went to our customary tryout for his mid level club team.  He was cruising at 76-77 on his fast ball and -10 - -12 on his off speed.  Clocked 7.07 in the 60.

 

This year we did little of weight lifting, squats and dead lift, not more than 100lbs, little bit of plyometrics, a little long toss and cardio.

22and25 posted:

Reinold has a limited study out, I read if for the first time some months ago.  The data certainly gave me pause about doing any weighted ball program with either of my boys.

 

https://mikereinold.com/weight...n-baseball-pitchers/

Yeah...the term "limited" doesn't begin to do the flaws in this study justice. He had them run and gun with TWO POUND balls. That's a ridiculous program that no one would use outside of this ridiculous case study. In fact, the use of such weights in this manner all but guaranteed injury and was, in my opinion, negligent.

roothog66 posted:
22and25 posted:

Reinold has a limited study out, I read if for the first time some months ago.  The data certainly gave me pause about doing any weighted ball program with either of my boys.

 

https://mikereinold.com/weight...n-baseball-pitchers/

Yeah...the term "limited" doesn't begin to do the flaws in this study justice. He had them run and gun with TWO POUND balls. That's a ridiculous program that no one would use outside of this ridiculous case study. In fact, the use of such weights in this manner all but guaranteed injury and was, in my opinion, negligent.

That does seem extreme to say the least.  What is the max ball weight for run and gun throws in a typical program?

 

As to the rest of the findings, do you think the 2lb ball throws invalidates the inferences made as to the mechanism of velo gains with such a program?

 

No questioning your assertions, just genuinely trying to learn as I have no prior exposure to the programs that are out there other than some of the social media cat fights that seem to crop up around the subject.

22and25 posted:
roothog66 posted:
22and25 posted:

Reinold has a limited study out, I read if for the first time some months ago.  The data certainly gave me pause about doing any weighted ball program with either of my boys.

 

https://mikereinold.com/weight...n-baseball-pitchers/

Yeah...the term "limited" doesn't begin to do the flaws in this study justice. He had them run and gun with TWO POUND balls. That's a ridiculous program that no one would use outside of this ridiculous case study. In fact, the use of such weights in this manner all but guaranteed injury and was, in my opinion, negligent.

That does seem extreme to say the least.  What is the max ball weight for run and gun throws in a typical program?

 

As to the rest of the findings, do you think the 2lb ball throws invalidates the inferences made as to the mechanism of velo gains with such a program?

 

No questioning your assertions, just genuinely trying to learn as I have no prior exposure to the programs that are out there other than some of the social media cat fights that seem to crop up around the subject.

For that, and other reasons, I think it does. There was no documentation of what other work was done outside of the wb program and no standard description of warm ups in the program. Just as important to me, they were thrown into a full blown program with no "ramp up" period. I'm sure there are a few out there who implement such ridiculous programs, but none that carry any legitimacy. As to weight...most of the ones I have dealt with max out with 8 ozs top. I, and others will actually have pitchers throw 9 or 11 oz wb's but not at full force in a RNG situation and some drills will use up to 2lb and 4 lb plyo balls in limited arm action drills but not actually "thrown" and certainly not in a RNG. WB programs are only a piece of an overall pitching program.

Trust Root on this one. I am a big fan of Reinold but that study was a joke! Weighted ball and max intent training are safe when used appropriately. Go to Driveline website and spend as much time as possible reading the blog and pitching research page. Educate yourself before you use weighted ball training with anyone. Those who end up having issues are using weighted balls incorrectly as was the case in this study.

 

I wonder if the run and gun ball weight may be a typo?  My son is working with a group now (Optimum Athletes-Sacramento) returning to competition this fall (from TJ surgery). Max ball weight for run and gun is 6-7 oz. Plyos go heavier. I played catch with him the last couple weeks and noticed a shorter arm action, more consistency, and easier velocity.  I didn't put a gun on him because he is not up to full effort yet,
My son studies pitching and his impression is that he is learning to reduce the peak stress points in the chain, which allows him to use more of everything else. I doubt you could describe everything going on verbally, at least not to a kid. The weighted balls are what we call a no-teach in my line of coaching; the balls do the teaching.

A very important point is the increase in shoulder injuries caused by the increased external rotation (and weak rotator cuffs). A nice thick layer of corded steel around the rotator cuff is necessary, and that takes years of training. 

LHP's Roady posted:

 

I wonder if the run and gun ball weight may be a typo?  My son is working with a group now (Optimum Athletes-Sacramento) returning to competition this fall (from TJ surgery). Max ball weight for run and gun is 6-7 oz. Plyos go heavier. I played catch with him the last couple weeks and noticed a shorter arm action, more consistency, and easier velocity.  I didn't put a gun on him because he is not up to full effort yet,
My son studies pitching and his impression is that he is learning to reduce the peak stress points in the chain, which allows him to use more of everything else. I doubt you could describe everything going on verbally, at least not to a kid. The weighted balls are what we call a no-teach in my line of coaching; the balls do the teaching.

A very important point is the increase in shoulder injuries caused by the increased external rotation (and weak rotator cuffs). A nice thick layer of corded steel around the rotator cuff is necessary, and that takes years of training. 

Nope. Definitely NOT a typo. Here's a link to the whole paper:

https://journals.sagepub.com/e...3sHNAEU8dYKawIJ/full

I've also had contact with Reinold concerning this and he claims it's a standard program. Note that they also threw this 3x per week. The program I use and most of the others will have ONE velocity throwing day like this a week. 

Now, I'll admit that I had a lot of bad things to say about Mike two or three years ago when this study first came out and may have even attacked him personally concerning his years with the Red Sox and the problems there. It took him awhile to find someone to publish it - it was turned down by his first choices, mainly due to its severe limitations. However, outside of this, Reinold has a lot to offer and I've come to appreciate his contributions more than I did during my somewhat well-known feud with Brent Pourciau, who hyped this study to the hilt.

I don't think weighted balls cause injury but I do think the pitching s&c and development coaches do pat each other a little too much on the back. Everyone talks about how great pitching dev has become and how it is ahead of hitting and in  some regards this is probably true but pitching dev has done absolutely nothing in the injury prevention department.

I mean there are tons of theories (get strong, do bands, do long toss, take time off, get flexible) but really nothing has worked yet.

Now I don't think it got worse than 20 years ago but no great progress either, injury rates still high.

Pitching dev has improved velo and pitch design but the next step absolutely must be a significant reduction of injury rates as this would be a huge competetive advantage.

Imo the pitching dev guys don't hold themselves accountable enough for injuries which are accepted as part of the process. 

Don't get me wrong it is better to properly lift and condition yourself rather than getting fat in the off season like pitchers 30 years ago but regarding health the progress isn't great.

 

Dominik85 posted:

I don't think weighted balls cause injury but I do think the pitching s&c and development coaches do pat each other a little too much on the back. Everyone talks about how great pitching dev has become and how it is ahead of hitting and in  some regards this is probably true but pitching dev has done absolutely nothing in the injury prevention department.

I mean there are tons of theories (get strong, do bands, do long toss, take time off, get flexible) but really nothing has worked yet.

Now I don't think it got worse than 20 years ago but no great progress either, injury rates still high.

Pitching dev has improved velo and pitch design but the next step absolutely must be a significant reduction of injury rates as this would be a huge competetive advantage.

Imo the pitching dev guys don't hold themselves accountable enough for injuries which are accepted as part of the process. 

Don't get me wrong it is better to properly lift and condition yourself rather than getting fat in the off season like pitchers 30 years ago but regarding health the progress isn't great.

 

1) Hitting development is quickly catching up.

2) I don't think you can compare injury rates today from 20 years ago and make a rational assessment of whether things are better or worse simply because injuries are treated far differently and reported differently. I suspect things may actually be a lot better on that front because we have an improved awareness in detecting and treating injuries to pitchers. Whereas 20 years ago we may have abused pitchers and then tried to "make do" with alternative treatments as long as possible to keep a pitcher on the mound, I believe today we are quicker to shut them down and correct the problems as soon as they arise, by surgery or otherwise. I do think these factors have stabilized in the past 10-12 years and comparisons in that time frame are reliable.

3) I don't know how much improvement we can expect in injury rates unless we totally change the game. Clearly, limiting pitch counts has had, at best, a minor effect. The act of throwing a baseball at high stress over long periods of time simply is injurious - at some point you limit that as much as you can and can go no further. 

roothog66 posted:
LHP's Roady posted:

 

I wonder if the run and gun ball weight may be a typo?  My son is working with a group now (Optimum Athletes-Sacramento) returning to competition this fall (from TJ surgery). Max ball weight for run and gun is 6-7 oz. Plyos go heavier. I played catch with him the last couple weeks and noticed a shorter arm action, more consistency, and easier velocity.  I didn't put a gun on him because he is not up to full effort yet,
My son studies pitching and his impression is that he is learning to reduce the peak stress points in the chain, which allows him to use more of everything else. I doubt you could describe everything going on verbally, at least not to a kid. The weighted balls are what we call a no-teach in my line of coaching; the balls do the teaching.

A very important point is the increase in shoulder injuries caused by the increased external rotation (and weak rotator cuffs). A nice thick layer of corded steel around the rotator cuff is necessary, and that takes years of training. 

Nope. Definitely NOT a typo. Here's a link to the whole paper:

https://journals.sagepub.com/e...3sHNAEU8dYKawIJ/full

I've also had contact with Reinold concerning this and he claims it's a standard program. Note that they also threw this 3x per week. The program I use and most of the others will have ONE velocity throwing day like this a week. 

Now, I'll admit that I had a lot of bad things to say about Mike two or three years ago when this study first came out and may have even attacked him personally concerning his years with the Red Sox and the problems there. It took him awhile to find someone to publish it - it was turned down by his first choices, mainly due to its severe limitations. However, outside of this, Reinold has a lot to offer and I've come to appreciate his contributions more than I did during my somewhat well-known feud with Brent Pourciau, who hyped this study to the hilt.

He hyped this study because right before this study came out Reinold had him at his conference up in MA to present. At that conference Reinold talked about the study, but also did say he didn't think weighted balls were bad, they were just another tool. No one had seen the study at that point. 

The weighted ball program my son has used had nowhere close to that volume. It has the 1 velo day like you describe, and the majority of the program is dedicated to recovery.

 

nycdad posted:
roothog66 posted:
LHP's Roady posted:

 

I wonder if the run and gun ball weight may be a typo?  My son is working with a group now (Optimum Athletes-Sacramento) returning to competition this fall (from TJ surgery). Max ball weight for run and gun is 6-7 oz. Plyos go heavier. I played catch with him the last couple weeks and noticed a shorter arm action, more consistency, and easier velocity.  I didn't put a gun on him because he is not up to full effort yet,
My son studies pitching and his impression is that he is learning to reduce the peak stress points in the chain, which allows him to use more of everything else. I doubt you could describe everything going on verbally, at least not to a kid. The weighted balls are what we call a no-teach in my line of coaching; the balls do the teaching.

A very important point is the increase in shoulder injuries caused by the increased external rotation (and weak rotator cuffs). A nice thick layer of corded steel around the rotator cuff is necessary, and that takes years of training. 

Nope. Definitely NOT a typo. Here's a link to the whole paper:

https://journals.sagepub.com/e...3sHNAEU8dYKawIJ/full

I've also had contact with Reinold concerning this and he claims it's a standard program. Note that they also threw this 3x per week. The program I use and most of the others will have ONE velocity throwing day like this a week. 

Now, I'll admit that I had a lot of bad things to say about Mike two or three years ago when this study first came out and may have even attacked him personally concerning his years with the Red Sox and the problems there. It took him awhile to find someone to publish it - it was turned down by his first choices, mainly due to its severe limitations. However, outside of this, Reinold has a lot to offer and I've come to appreciate his contributions more than I did during my somewhat well-known feud with Brent Pourciau, who hyped this study to the hilt.

He hyped this study because right before this study came out Reinold had him at his conference up in MA to present. At that conference Reinold talked about the study, but also did say he didn't think weighted balls were bad, they were just another tool. No one had seen the study at that point. 

The weighted ball program my son has used had nowhere close to that volume. It has the 1 velo day like you describe, and the majority of the program is dedicated to recovery.

 

His study had some validity as to many of the measurements he recorded. However, trying to stretch that into applying to anything useful in the area of injuries was useless. He originally submitted it to a prestigious journal that eventually wouldn't publish because of the limits of his study. If someone really wanted to do such a study they should include a vast array of different wb programs and study it with a large sample size. Here, he had, I think 38 subjects in a particular program. I believe the most he could legitimately claim was that this particular program which included no ramp up and velocity throwing with balls up to 2lb 3x per week carries a large injury risk, to which I would say "duh."  

@roothog66

Yes we don't really know if it got better or worse. I do think training got better but I still hate that so many pitching prospects flame out.

I only work with hitters so i don't know a lot about this but mlb player dev can't be happy with their p prospects dropping like flies.

Now the question is if healthy pitching at 95 is possible at all of course.

 

roothog66 posted:

Pitching prospects have been flaming out since the nineteenth century, we just didn't know their names like we do today.

Of course this always  happened. But shouldn't the goal to reduce that? The standard for pitching s&c shouldn't be "not worse than 30 years ago" but a lot better as mlb loses like half a billion per year paying injured pitchers.

Of course. But, why do you assume we haven't reduced injuries in the past 30 years? If you're just talking about the MLB, there is reason to believe we have. Games lost by pitchers on the dl is actually down a lot from the 80's. Mainly because treatment has greatly shortened time on the dl. When you take into account there are probably a lot of injuries that did NOT result in dl time 30 years ago (it was common to pitch with injuries until you just couldn't do it anymore and then retire) I think it's a safe assumption things are a LOT better. We'll never know for sure because the data just isn't there.

Going beyond just the MLB, however, I think you probably, because of advances in injury treatment and conditioning, see a lot of big time arms reach the majors or at least some level of pro ball that, in the days when coaches would ride an arm for as many pitches as they could get out of a kid, would have "flamed out" before ever getting the chance to play pro ball. 

Add Reply

×
×
×
×