Biomechanical Pitching Evaluation

I have serious concerns with ASMI's methodology. From what I have heard (please correct me if I am wrong), ASMI evaluates everyone relative to their ideal pitcher. My understanding (again, correct me if I am wrong) is that their ideal pitcher is Mark Prior.

I find this troubling, given Mark Prior's history of injuries.

I have heard lots of people say that Mark Prior's problems are due to bad luck and poor conditioning, but I think Prior's problems are more mechanical in nature. I base this on the fact that Paul Byrd and Anthony Reyes, whose motions I have analyzed and have found to have nearly identical mechanics, also have serious problems with injuries.

- Pitcher Analysis - Mark Prior

- Pitcher Analysis - Paul Byrd

- Pitcher Analysis - Anthony Reyes

I could be persuaded that what Mark Prior does is very mechanically efficient. However, I have real concerns that the way he throws the ball exceeds the limits of his body (and thus contributes to his injury problems).

And you background, DR Coach Chris , to make such evaluation--other than your faith in Dr. Marshall?

What is your background to evaluate, analyze and issue documents?

Please tell the general population of posters because what you do scares me

Coach Chris,
Nowhere in the ASMI analysis did I see anything remotely related to the words "Mark" and/or "Prior," and the ASMI website might be a good place for you to start looking for information before you toss up your loose anecodatal "evidence" regarding their methodologies. Please refrain from poisoning this thread with any further insight into ASMI.
Through use of high speed video equipment and modern biomechanical analysis tools, ASMI has apparently generated a sizeable database and established norms. This data is then used for comparative purposes. It is these norms that are referenced throughout the anaylis, and not any one pitcher or pitching style.
I can see from your post that you have a collection of still photographs that you use for your own analysis. Great! Where is your statistical evidence? Conjecture is one thing, but it doesn't help your argument when you most certainly cannot back up your arguement without useful data. Chris, perhaps you were born 30 years too late.
I had intended this thread to be a focused inquiry into very well-reputed, high tech, and statistically driven analysis tool. I wanted to hear from anyone who might have first hand experience with their work, and gain insight into the application of data that results from a well-designed BPE. I'm still anxious to hear from someone with a qualified opinion on ASMI.
Chris, your serious concerns about methodology will be better served when focused inward.

So if you already knew the answer to your question, then why did you ask it?

quote:

Originally posted by Coach Chris:
So if you already knew the answer to your question, then why did you ask it?

If you DONT know which you have proven over and over again than why do you answer? Ive got news for you Chris the more you pontificate in regards to your "notions" the more you put yourself up for scrutiny. Which results in people such as myself calling you out. Which I will continue to do everytime you put forth one of your "notions" while trying to pass it off as being solidly researched evidence. Spouting off something that is endorsed by M&M does not make it right in fact for many its one step from being considered sheer quackery! Im a firm believer in people can only see what they can see. My suggestion to you GET GLASSES NOW!!

LOL !!!
Coach Chris you quack me up. Saw the video from a past post, it explains everything. The one of you in the backyard "pitching". I fully encourage anyone who is considering taking advice from you to see it.

Personalities aside fellas we still have 2 good questions brewing here.
1. Any input on AMI that anyone has would be good (Chris "heard" they used Prior for a baseline... okay, that's info, and that my friends is what we all want,)
Point 2. Is Prior a good baseline or is there such a thing or should we define kids based on physical characteristics of some type??? (Paul Byrd and Mark Prior have very different body styles as do a lot of my players)

I look forward to any and all comments
(Oh, one more thing, how much does the AMSI thing cost?)

For the record, I stand corrected on ASMI's approach and who or what they use as a baseline.

quote:

I can see from your post that you have a collection of still photographs that you use for your own analysis. Great! Where is your statistical evidence? Conjecture is one thing, but it doesn't help your argument when you most certainly cannot back up your arguement without useful data. Chris, perhaps you were born 30 years too late.

There is nothing inherently wrong with using large numbers of still photos to do an analysis, as long as you correlate them with video clips to make sure you have sequenced things properly.

As for statistical evidence, I will work on that once I have a big enough pool of samples to get some good correlations. In the meantime, I am continuing to collect data, look for patterns, and make predictions based on what I think I see.

Let's wait a couple of years and see if what I think I see bears out.

DR Coach Chris

Big Pools are where little fish get eaten and spit out--dont try to be something you are not

Trojan Skipper,
Thanks for returning this discussion to the original topic. The quote from ASMI is $500, which doesn't seem unreasonable. But if you don't live near Birmingham (and I don't) then it can become very pricey once you figure in travel expenses. Has anybody done this?
I'm also wondering if there are other analysts (no Chris, not you) doing BPEs. I'm assuming that the same technology is also used for biomechanical evaluations in golf and maybe some other sports as well.

As for Chris, I have to say that you're apparently doing things backwards. Formulate your hypothesis based on the available data and then test it. You don't have any workable data now, yet apparently you do have a working hypothesis. Be very careful on how you test it. Don't cherry-pick your data as you go in attempts to bolster your claims. That's not scientific method. Sorry, but it sounds like you've already tainted your own experiment.
And one more thing, Chris. Your children may be your own concern, but don't experiment on others' children on this or any other internet site. It doesn't matter how much you think you're being helpful. This is an big ethical no-no for you to dispense your psuedo-medical diagnoses without a proper license. Stop.

quote:

As for Chris, I have to say that you're apparently doing things backwards. Formulate your hypothesis based on the available data and then test it. You don't have any workable data now, yet apparently you do have a working hypothesis. Be very careful on how you test it. Don't cherry-pick your data as you go in attempts to bolster your claims. That's not scientific method. Sorry, but it sounds like you've already tainted your own experiment.
And one more thing, Chris. Your children may be your own concern, but don't experiment on others' children on this or any other internet site. It doesn't matter how much you think you're being helpful. This is an big ethical no-no for you to dispense your psuedo-medical diagnoses without a proper license. Stop.

I disagree. This is exactly what I'm doing.

I don't see how you can say I have any workable data. Have you seen all of the analyses I have done and how detailed they are? Also, I am going to gather more data this Summer.

Here's my process...

1. Collect data.

2. Examine that data looking for patterns.

3. Formulate hypotheses (of cause and effect relationships) that would explain those patterns.

4. Test those hypotheses by making predictions based on those hypotheses.

5. Wait to see whether your predictions bear out.

6. Iterate.

Some of the hypotheses I am testing aren't my own. Instead, I am also trying to test hypotheses developed by Will Carroll, Tom House, and Dr. Mike Marshall. Some of these seem to have merit but others seem to not to be born out (including a couple of Dr. Marshall's).

For example, my concept of Early Pronation came out of my rejecting Will Carroll's hypothesis that all you have do to protect the elbow is to pronate. I found that merely pronating was not correlated with an absence of elbow pain.

We do our hypothezin and gozinta's on the field. We have a kid pitch and then we figger how to work with him to git him gooder.

Coach Chris,
I really like how you analyzed Prior, Byrd, and Reyes. Do you think you could do that for Billy Wagner for me? I'd like to be able to see how his mechanics and delivery are broken down and how someone with his frame can throw so hard. If you could, thanks a bunch.

Yeah Chris, and then maybe Honus Wagner... Billy Chapel?

DR COACH CHRIS

You miss the main point--what background to you have to make such an evaluation other than you coach your two kids?

I have been around this game a lot of years and allow our pitching coaches to make the evaluatios on our pitchers--I know my limits in pitching-- I can see things that are wrong but our guys are way far better than I in fixing the situations

Take a hint from an old baseball guy--know your limits