Coaching Contact vs. Power Hitters

quote:

Originally posted by baseballpapa:
BA, OB or OPS do not matter in baseball, plating runs is what matters.

You know you have to have both types of hitters...be honest baseballpapa.

Yes, plating runs matter. But, if the guys in front of the power hitters aren't getting on base he is just plating himself every ten at-bats or so. So BA and OB guys matter to.

quote:

Hitting coaches that only teach one way probably teach how they did it, or the one way they learned it and not what is best for the hitter. However, you do not have to have played the game to be able to teach -- you do have to have played the game to gain credibility with most baseball players.

BaseballPapa,

Guess what? I have been talking to professional people all afternoon about mechanics and hitters at local HS game and this statement I just quoted made by you is by far
THE MOST ASTUTE OBSERVATION/COMMENT I HAVE HEARD today. I mean it BaseballPapa. This is one thing that so many times is left out of textbook teaching because every hitter is unique and different and some things that work for some may not work for others during instructional development of swing. OUTSTANDING SIR !!!

Shep Acknowledges

Missouri-BB-Dad I did fail to communicate in that paragraph. What you said is exactly what I was trying to say. My bro-in-law is from Missouri and is a great baseball guy. He says what you did, you need to set the table. My point was you work with what you got. I would love to coach a really fast one hole hitter to keep the ball down, bunt, etc. A two-hitter to bunt move runners, hit behind people, etc. However, I'm a money-ball kind of guy. I think bunts, hit and runs, giving the hitter too much to think about costs runs at a high level, but creates runs at lower levels.

quote:

quote:
Hitting coaches that only teach one way probably teach how they did it, or the one way they learned it and not what is best for the hitter. However, you do not have to have played the game to be able to teach -- you do have to have played the game to gain credibility with most baseball players.


BaseballPapa,

Guess what? I have been talking to professional people all afternoon about mechanics and hitters at local HS game and this statement I just quoted made by you is by far
THE MOST ASTUTE OBSERVATION/COMMENT I HAVE HEARD today. I mean it BaseballPapa. This is one thing that so many times is left out of textbook teaching because every hitter is unique and different and some things that work for some may not work for others during instructional development of swing. OUTSTANDING SIR !!!

Shep Acknowledges

EXCELLENT!!!!!

bbpapa

You'll have to excuse me. I don't always read between the lines very well. You know, the Show-Me thing.

Speaking of Missouri. We do have some great baseball and baseball guys in Missouri. I'm am really PO'd Buck Oneil didn't get into the HOF. He lives here in KC and is one of the greatest ambassadors to baseball you will ever see. His comments about not being elected were about as classy as it gets. I guess you have to be dead to make it in as a Negro Baseaball League player. Buck and the other guy (don't remember his name off the top of my head) are the only two living negro league players that were nominated and neither one got in.

Sorry for digressing from hitting.

I read 7-8 pages of the other thread as well......I am with you. You can not clone hitters. Most of the discussion was that hitters have to do it this way or that. How can you say that? Those at the highest level do not all do it the same. This is a hs baseball site. You should be more concerned about how to get all of your hs players to hit better. At least that is my job since I actually coach hs players. To do that you can not clone them all.

Who cares what is the highest level you played at or the best player you played against. I would be more impressed if they listed you as the best player they played against. Personally, I was not very good at the higher levels, but I sure played against some. So what....

Some of you need to quit letting your arrogance get in the way of your learning and sharing of information. I do not post much on here because most do not want to hear another's opinion or learn. They just want to argue or show how smart they think they are. I just read and glean what info. I think I can use. Sorry, about the rant.....

quote:

Originally posted by baseballpapa:
...I don't like the concept of contact vs. power hitting. ...

I would agree. In fact, I suspect they are not mutually exclusive or opposite ends of a spectrum or continuum. It seems they go hand-in-hand. Take the time to review stats on several hitters (including Gwynn known for contact and Bonds known for power) and usually you will see their best years are marked by an increase in contact (BA) and power (HR & SLG%).

Some HS kids will never be power hitters just based on their physical ability

If you teach "contact" the power will come if the player has the physical ability


I prefer to have our kids be hitters--the power will happen on its own

i don't really distinguish between a contact swing and a power swing (except for maybe swinging out of your shoes!!).

I try to teach my players to swing hard and get the best hit "they" can do. For some its over the fence, for some its gappers. Even a singles hitter can still hit hard singles!

I wouldn't really coach a kid to try to hit ground balls for singles. if its a hit and run, sure, but leading off a game, he is out there to swing hard. Maybe he has just a little less tilt in his swing, but its the same basic swing technique.

We have never taught a hitter to be a contact hitter if that means to choke up and try to put the ball in play. We teach hitters to be aware of their bodies and work on their swings. We teach/have them practice hitting to all fields. We work on pitch recognition and patience allowing the ball to get into the hitting zone and then drive it.

I also have never taught anyone to be a power hitter. If you coach and teach an efficient swing that allows the body to hit the ball then the result is a swing that fits all categories. Naturally, along with this is to teach the mental approach.

quote:

Originally posted by CoachB25:
If you coach and teach an efficient swing that allows the body to hit the ball then the result is a swing that fits all categories. Naturally, along with this is to teach the mental approach.

Great answer..

I like how CoachB25 doesn't stress contact or power hitting. I believe in that approach.

Do any of you teach to elevate or to get the ball down (trajectory) or are you stressing line drive hitting? My son slumps when he hits the ball on the ground, and is a much better hitter elevating. Most kids are not I suspect. Pitchers are often considered effective when they get ground ball outs. (So far this year all of my son's outs as a pitcher are Ks and ground ball outs.) However, many hitting coaches teach to hit the ball down. It doesn't seem to make sense without a lot of speed.

you hit the nail on the head Papa... why would you ever teach a kid to swing down at a ball going down??? especially when every pitching coach tries to get his pitchers to get ground balls???? makes no sense... that is why 90% of ground balls are out (NCAA/MLB).....

The ground ball theory has always been that the more hands that have to touch the ball, the more chances that things can go wrong.

In my reading years ago about the 'Inside Game', I was surprised to see that the majority of hits come from balls hit to the outfield on the fly. I guess it makes sense since only three guys are patroling the outfield.

I found that it is better to teach players how to get the most out of the bat. Using it as a tool to get the most out of the potential energy and minimizing the kinetic energy in the swing creates the greatest force, bat speed and shortest swing.

I teach that the target should always be the lower half of the ball because the ball is in a downward path to the catcher.

quote:

that is why 90% of ground balls are out

Not sure that % is right? I think GB 30% are hits and Fly Ball 20% hits and Line drives 78% hits

I could be wrong here...........

I think thats pretty close SwingB. The ncaa, some coaches, did a study in the early 90's. They concluded that about 38% of ground balls went for hits, 25% of fly balls and about 80% of line drves. They also concluded that if a team hit more Gb's and Ld's they would be .400 hitting teams, seems logical based on their study. I believe I read it in an ABCA publication or newsletter.

What I was getting to is would you want Traveres (sp?) for the Astros to elevate? Would you want Bonds and Pujols to keep the ball down? You teach the best trajectory to the player's attributes. Everyone benefits from linedrives. Some are better hitting from linedrives to elevating and some are better from linedrives to keeping it down. However, while you are teaching those different skill sets you teach both more contact and both more power. And while you are at it you don't tell them they are "contact" or "power" hitters. The tags don't help.

My son is a much better player elevating. I would guess at the highschool level 2 to 3 out of 10 kids should be told to elevate, the others to keep it down. That is a guess. Some of you may have better thoughts on this.

Put your kid or student in a cage and measure with a radar gun the exit speed of a ball from a dead stop on a tee. If the exit speed isn't 85 mph, teach line drives to keeping the ball down. (There are exceptions to this.) There is a football player on my son's team that is graded in the top 20 players at all positions by ESPN, is going to Texas to play defensive end and I clocked his exit speed from a dead stop at 100 mph on my Stalker. He needs to elevate.

By the way, I don't teach to hit the upper or lower part of the ball. It doesn't help. I let the player adjust to the ball by asking for a certain elevation. I tell my son to try to knock the top of the fence down.

Not sure what the exact percentages are, but there’s a very good reason there are so many sinker ball pitchers at the highest level.

It takes 3 ground ball hits to score one run (usually). It can take only one fly ball to score a run (home run). A great percentage of all the hits that could be described fly balls are extra base hits. The only ground balls that go for extra bases are down the lines and hit very hard.

If you added up the total bases of those line drive and ground ball hitters vs the line drive and fly ball hitters, you’d see the obvious advantage of getting the ball off the ground. Also the higher the level the more likely ground balls become outs.

That said, I agree with bbpapa, the benefit of either way is determined by the players ability. IMO - Some will have a better future, line drive up. Others can be more productive for the team, line drive down.

There is no such thing as teaching power hitters vs. teaching contact hitters....

Coaches need to revisit what they teach....And, learn what an efficient swing is all about....Because, from what I read on here, they haven't a clue....

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_11_6.gif What's sup brother Blue ?

Some of the Coaches do....not all are ill-informed.
Shep

Shep, true enough.....

But, not many..........

quote:

Originally posted by BlueDog:
Shep, true enough.....

But, not many..........

My experience also..

Yeager measured Line Drive hitters at 8-10% upper cut and HR guys at 15%.

Swinging up has to be monitered. Swinging up can be intentional or premature collapsing of the back side. Getting on plane and hitting HRs by accident would be my choice

The best HS kids can rarely hit a high ball 66 degree past 350 unless he is really big.

all i am saying is that if you are teaching a kid to swing down at a ball that is traveling down - you are gonna have some problems... not to mention the first being about a 5-7 inch contact area where the paths will meet - seeing how all baseballs travel on a downward plane...

too steep of a swing will have the same effect... the key is to match planes - and you do that by letting the front elbow work up in the swing... it works higher on lower pitches and not so high on pitches up in the zone...

and whoever said 38% of groundballs are hits, is crazy or are charting little league games... does anyone know a groundball hitter (besides Ichiro) who is batting .380??

neither do i.

Diablo

38% of groundballs being hits has nothing to do with a .380 BA--- you guys with the numbers are always out in left field---the game aint that mind boggling once you figure out what you can do and cant do with a bat in your hand

Look what Elias has done to the game--

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
Diablo

38% of groundballs being hits has nothing to do with a .380 BA--- you guys with the numbers are always out in left field---the game aint that mind boggling once you figure out what you can do and cant do with a bat in your hand

Look what Elias has done to the game--

So is your point that Diablo is wrong and we should be teaching to swing down at the ball? And teaching to swing with the plane of the pitch is wrong? Or just let them swing and not teach?

TRhit... so you are saying that swinging down is good? and that is what you teach?

and if i do hit the ball on the ground, by YOUR numbers, 100% of the time, i will bat .380?? no??... explain your % to me then. i only took one elementary stats class in college....

and if the game is not THAT MIND BOGGLING, then why is the major component that seperates guys in triple-A and The Show 90% a mental factor?

and that is a MLB number (90%).. not mine...

p.s. if you do teach the swing level or swing down, where can i see a list of clients that were ever successful in college and or pro ball??

Last time I saw a hitter the barrel was started quite a bit above the strike zone. It has to feed down. If you want a level swing you would have to drop and sweep or start with the hands real low.

It all depends on what part of your swing you are trying to fix. If you are fixing the approach to the ball, you will talk about having the player keep the barrel up thus the "feeling" of swinging down on the backside of the body is probably an acceptable term.

If you are teaching/fixing the path of the bat during the middle/follow through phase of the swing, then you will need to talk to them about swinging slightly uphill to match the plane of the baseball. I agree with Diablo here.

I also think that if you are truly a hitting instructor/coach/father wanting to improve your son's swing, you need to take most terms and use them very loosely. Swinging up through the ball means a lot of things to different people. If your hitter can rotate their backhip and get it to clear so the hands can work, then you can use the "up-hill" swing plane. If the kid's hips don't work, don't bother teaching up-hill swing plane because he will only loop and hip-slide into the ball. Fix the hips first and get him rotating. Sometimes telling them to swing down will initiate the hips better and they will get into a better position to finish up-hill as they progress. It all depends on the player and what they have to work with.

quote:

It all depends on the player and what they have to work with

I thought all players came with the same body parts......

Shep, help me here......I must getting senile.....

I didn't even know the swing should be taught in parts......

Bluedog's Right>

All hitters come with the same bodyparts and should be taught the same, correct way.

Really don't think the statement is referring to muscles/skeletal/tendons/ligaments though Blue; believe what is meant by statement is related more to level of teaching and taking player at present stage of development and enhancing further.

Good Morning Board.

Shep

But, do you believe the swing should be taught in parts?.....

Say it ain't so, Joe......

No bro fo sho ! Definitely not taught in parts !peace

The body is a unit with many parts that has to work together in order to perform baseball related actions and movements. Don't know how else I can put it. Don't xcare who teaches it seperately that's what I believe and I'm sticking to it !!!!! peace

quote:

Originally posted by BlueDog:
But, do you believe the swing should be taught in parts?.....

Say it ain't so, Joe......

I know you don't teach drills such as top hand or bottom hand. Do you then not believe in "count drills" where you try to get young players to "walk their way through a swing?" By young players, I'm talking up through 8th grade. I think this is one of the few places we disagree. We do count drill since, I'm probablly ignorant and just can't get some kids from blocking that backside. I think some would rather break their back legs than to rotate onto the top of their toes.

Also, if one teaches only a complete swing, then all drill work then is based soley on complete swing. Are you then suggesting that essentially BP with a coach monitoring and video is all that you need to do?

quote:

Also, if one teaches only a complete swing, then all drill work then is based soley on complete swing.

Actually, I do value the use of drills alot....But, not drills putting hitters in positions to simulate parts of the swing....

I prefer drills which let hitters feel proper rotation, connection and the correct use of posture.....These types of drills can be useful in teaching hitting, fielding and running.....

IOW, drills which help the player learn how to use their middle to move their body in a more efficient manner.....

IMO, it's about knowing how to move the body in an efficient way....Not about where the hands or some other body part should be at a certain part of the swing..........If the body is moving efficiently to swing the bat, the body parts will be where they need to be for that particular hitter.....

When they learn the value of rotation, connection and correct posture, I put a bat in their hands.......Then, we work on how to power with the middle.....

Coach, someone alot more knowledgeable than myself has convinced me to change my teaching methods somewhat......I will send you a message.....

Diablo and Troy

Never gave any conclusion--just a statement that the method of math used is not correct

Diablo-- what batter goes 100% of his at bats hitting the ball on the gorund ?

I respect the many people on here who are very knowledgable students of the game. What I don’t understand are the many words that are used for debate purposes.

For example, some of the greatest hitting people I know use many of the terms that others profess as useless or even damaging.

Bluedog, you and linear (info) are very serious students/teachers. You guys are good! However, I can’t buy every word written.

When you mention all players have the same body parts… You are correct! Problem is, all those body parts are NOT the same in every individual… Some are loaded with fast twitch muscles and some are not. Some have stronger hands (Not trying to start anything) others do not. Some have better vision (not trying to start anything) than others. Some have quicker hips, some are more coordinated, etc. etc.

Now if you’re saying “most” all hitters need to use these body parts efficiently, I understand. To say they all have the same body parts, doesn’t tell me anything. So do the pitchers who throw 95 and 65 have the same body parts. So do the runners who run a 6.4 and an 8.4.

I truthfully try to see what is happening in the swing of successful hitters even if it were to change my mind about something. I sincerely hope everyone does exactly that. For that I thank many on this site who have made me become even more interested than before about the benefit of watching and breaking down successful ML hitters.

Also, I believe when talking about the swing here we often speak in terms of the perfect swing at a pitch down the center of the strike zone. While this is definitely the starting point, it’s just a small part of being a total hitter. I hear the talk about posture and swing plane and that’s great stuff. I’d be more interested in talking more about something other than the “wheel house” swing. I’d like to read more about margin of error in hitting.

While I’m at it… There are those who study video religiously and bust it to pieces. There are those who say professional hitting coaches and professional hitters don’t have any idea of what they really do. Others do have the proof because of video evidence. Every MLB club uses video, are they not smart enough to analyze it correctly.

Where can anyone actually see on video that these professional hitters hands go soft at contact? We can really only learn that from hearing it from experienced hitters, it’s not apparent on video, is it? Where do we “see” they are not at least “thinking” about hitting through the ball”. How can video or science tell us what these people are thinking. It can only show us what their bodies are doing and granted, that is very important, but it’s just part of the answer. The rest lies in the minds of those truly outstanding hitting instructors and successful hitters. In other words, we need their feedback to know if their hands go soft. What if they were to claim something different. Do we argue that we know better? Am I missing something here? Think I already know the answer I’ll get to that question.

Final thought… Rather than everyone battle for supreme knowledge, wouldn’t it be wiser to use all possible information. The video, the scientists, the instructors, the hitters, each other and every other possibility. And be open to future information that may not be presently available! By the way, many of the martial arts use step by step teaching. Just something to think about. You gotta understand the association between mastering certain martial arts movements and baseball for that to mean anything.

That said, I enjoy the discussions and give thanks to BlueDog and the many other extremely advanced hitting students, coaches, teachers, etc. who start these interesting threads. If I were still coaching or had a young son this stuff would be even more valuable.

quote:

Where do we “see” they are not at least “thinking” about hitting through the ball”.

PGStaff, where do we see MLB hitters are thinking anything at all in the box?.....IMO, they shouldn't be.....You agree or disagree?...