BASEBALL 2010

Now there is a topic composed by a "pitcher at heart." Whereas us Coaches and Dads of Hitters might view your question with disdain! But that's another topic.

IMO, too many pitchers have fallen under the spell of the "Radar gun and the Strikeout." If they spent more time focusing on control (stay out of the middle of the dish), spin (to both their glove and arm sides), and then learned to effectively pitch to contact, they would see greater dividends for their efforts. Was it Leo Mazzone that said " a good hitter can time a jet through the strike zone if he saw it a enough times." Leo may have exaggerated a little bit there, but the premise being that pitching is all about disrupting the hitters timing. I think that's a lost art .... except for "Mad Dog" who had a pretty good grasp of the concept.

so see .... it should be easy as they only see a hitter a few time through the lineup anyway before they turn it over to the short reliever, set-up man and then the Closer! Good hitters still fail 7 out of 10 times. Come on, what else do pitchers need? A few more fielders?? lol!!!

Good question Josh.

Simply put, pitching vs hitting and I may add base running is a game of execution. The pitcher's job is to keep the hitter off the base by either K, groundout or fly out. The hitter's job is to get on base by any means possible and once on base to get to the safety of home...and as we know all too well Josh last season, the D-back pitchers failed miserably...oh, how we are going to miss Jusmeiro Petit...

I will agree with P9 about the radar gun...as Joe Garagiola said about his teammate Whitey Ford, 'If the radar gun was used back then Whitey would have never made it to the big leagues.' ..and as we know now, the Baseball Hall of Fame. The radar gun has become king measuring velocity, but missing the art of pitching. It has become the lazy man's way of evaluating pitching ability. But, there is no use in fighting it...the radar gun has become the master of pitching talent and baseball destinies...

I pray and hope that someday the baseball decision makers will stop overlooking talent that once in a while slips through the radar's web such as Chad Bradford, a submariner who throws no more than 82.

What we need Josh are guys who have learned to become pitchers rather than hurlers for the radar gun. So that is my baseball prayer for the coming seasons of the future...that one day a pitcher is not evaluated just on his velocity, but upon his skill as a craftsman of generating outs against his opponent.

I agree coach 110%. There is more to a pitcher than velocity.

Joe Garagiola and Whitey Ford were never teammates. (But I understand your point).

Jemaz, of course you are right...he was speaking of playing in the same era...

I will find out first hand with my son. He is an outfielder now going to be a #2 pitcher in the rotation having to rely on location and mixing it up. Tough too, because a third consecutive State Championship rides on his success and control. I hope he remains more calm than Dad. I am freaking out!!! LOL

quote:

So that is my baseball prayer for the coming seasons of the future...that one day a pitcher is not evaluated just on his velocity, but upon his skill as a craftsman of generating outs against his opponent.

Your prayers will be answered. In fact, they have been all along. Velocity alone is not enough to make the Big Leagues. No one is ever evaluated on just velocity. If they were all the guys who throw 90 would be equal, all those throwing 94 would be equal, and so on. It has never worked that way, it doesn't now, and it never will. The high school pitcher with by far the top velocity in the 2010 class is not considered the top pitching draft prospect.

All that said, those that want to ignore the importance of velocity will always be disappointed.

.

I agree PG...ignoring velocity could have serious consequences!






.

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:

All that said, those that want to ignore the importance of velocity will always be disappointed.

PG,

This discussion about pitching velocity seems to be an everlasting topic on this board. Certainly velocity is important and to ignore it would be foolish...I would never suggest this...nor am I willing to fight it...it is what it is and I admit to pitch at ever higher levels a pitcher's FB velocity must be close to 90 or above to get the attention of those who make the decisions on a pitcher's future. At least his opportunity to prove he is a pitcher.

I understand and appreciate that the radar gun is a tool for helping to evaluate a pitcher. The key should be on 'tool' and not as a sole means of evaluation as often seems to be the case. If a pitcher cannot ignite interest in his velocity in scouts and recruiters he will definately not generate interest in further evaluation.

How many pitchers has PG (or any scout for that matter) measured a FB at 75 to 83 mph that have not generated interest for that sole reason? It happens all too often. Reliance on the radar gun has precluded further evaluation by scouts beyond a pitcher's FB velocity. I understand that and am not taking that on...it is what it is...

What did scouts do before the radar gun? I suppose it took a little more effort...

quote:

What did scouts do before the radar gun? I suppose it took a little more effort...

Yea, they measured velocity with a stop watch and a math equation.


And, even in the stone age.... some tribe scout, using his eyes... said "hey, that guy throws a rock FAST".

quote:

What did scouts do before the radar gun? I suppose it took a little more effort...

Being that I'm old enough to answer that question. We looked for those with the best arms! Then look for those who could pitch. Oddly enough it's the same now days except for there is a tool (radar gun)

It doesn't take a radar gun to seperate those who throw 75 to 83 to those throwing 90 to 98.

I have seen pitchers who threw in the low 80s that I knew would become good college pitchers and they were. These guys have great breaking balls and good life on their fastball. They also have outstanding command of the strike zone and are extremely competitive. They are very good and some will get a chance to prove they can be successful at the next level. However, the guys getting all the money will be the ones with the great arm. What everyone seems to forget at times is that some of the guys who can light up a radar gun, also have a good breaking ball, good life and have good command. All those other things in addition to velocity don't just belong to the soft tossers.

Actually back to the original statement by futurecoachjosh, hitters have not really been dominant for the last five decades. Modern Baseball history goes like this:

1900 through about 1919 pitchers dominate very much. So called dead ball era.

1920-1941(Beginning of WWII), hitters dominate peaking in 1930 when the whole NL bats over .300.

1942-1945(War Years) pitchers rule especially when balata ball is used.

1946-1962 batters and pitchers both have good balanced times sometimes offense a little better and sometimes pitching.

1963-1968 pitchers completely rule. 1968, Carl Yastrzemski leads AL with .301 average

1969-1986 gradually hitting improves and baseball is pretty balanced offensively against pitching.

1987--Hitters year--sure looks like livelier ball that year.

1988-1992--balanced.

1993-2009 Never before seen offensive years start provided by roids, smaller new parks, poor pitching cycle, expansion of teams, very small strikezone, and possibly livelier balls. 2009 was still the 10th best HR year of all time.

Overall the hitting frenzy has been mostly in just the last two decades actually.

Threebagger,

In 1969 MLB lowered the mound and shrunk the plate. This caused batting averages to skyrocket from the previous year and the effect of those two changes are seen even today. That's the genesis of your hitting frenzy. Add the facts that baseball tightened up the baseball in the 90s, making it more like a Superball than what Ted Williams was hitting in the 40s. Combine it with the arrival of the Steroid Era and a strike zone of today called by umpires that is more like a postage stamp than the armpit to knee zone from the 50s and 60s.

Adds up to bigger numbers at the plate and more home runs. In short, what sells tickets to games.

quote:

Originally posted by Coach Waltrip:

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:

All that said, those that want to ignore the importance of velocity will always be disappointed.

PG,

This discussion about pitching velocity seems to be an everlasting topic on this board. Certainly velocity is important and to ignore it would be foolish...I would never suggest this...nor am I willing to fight it...it is what it is and I admit to pitch at ever higher levels a pitcher's FB velocity must be close to 90 or above to get the attention of those who make the decisions on a pitcher's future. At least his opportunity to prove he is a pitcher.

I understand and appreciate that the radar gun is a tool for helping to evaluate a pitcher. The key should be on 'tool' and not as a sole means of evaluation as often seems to be the case. If a pitcher cannot ignite interest in his velocity in scouts and recruiters he will definately not generate interest in further evaluation.

How many pitchers has PG (or any scout for that matter) measured a FB at 75 to 83 mph that have not generated interest for that sole reason? It happens all too often. Reliance on the radar gun has precluded further evaluation by scouts beyond a pitcher's FB velocity. I understand that and am not taking that on...it is what it is...

What did scouts do before the radar gun? I suppose it took a little more effort...

I agree with you coach. I also agree with PG. I think that the radar gun is like getting a Masters Degree. If you have it, it qualifies you to get in the door. Once you have that qualification, you are evaluated on your other atributes to get the job. It does not mean that those who do not have a Masters Degree cannot do the job just as well, it just means that the door is not even open to them.

Same with velocity. If you can hit 90, the door is open to you. You will then be evaluated, with those others who can hit 90, on your other atributes.

I think the radar gun is a qualifying tool. Got to be so high or you won't be considered. It doesn't mean you can't do the job, it just means you have been screened out prior to being given the opportunity to be evaluated.

I hate to bring this in to the equasion, but I think size is the same way. Unless you are a certain height, the "Projectability" is not there and the chance is not given by many.

There are always exceptions. In the business world, if you know someone who has seen you do the job, likes you and is willing to give you the chance, you may get that job without the Degree. In the baseball world, if you happen to know someone who has seen you get outs and be effective without the qualifying velocity or pre-requisite height, they may be willing to give you a chance as well. The key is knowing someone. I just think when you are out there among the thousands and thousands of players going to showcases to be seen, the velocity and height indicators are used as a qualifying factor and the chance may never come for you.

Baseballdad1228,
Another overlooked factor was that 1969 was an expansion year and in those years that new teams are added, hitting always spiked as in 1961.