2022OFDad posted:

And there were more strikeouts than hits in the MLB for 2018, first time in history. How’s that working for them?

So you have a better way? I mean you are implying a lot of resources that have applied to winning at the highest level are wrong?  I'm sure they'd be interested in your input.

SomeBaseballDad posted:
2022OFDad posted:

And there were more strikeouts than hits in the MLB for 2018, first time in history. How’s that working for them?

So you have a better way? I mean you are implying a lot of resources that have applied to winning at the highest level are wrong?  I'm sure they'd be interested in your input.

You said video doesn’t lie earlier. Neither do the stats. Truth is people are getting bored to death with the game in its current state. The shift, all or nothing at bats, it absolutely takes away from the game. Those folks at the highest levels have done that. Congratulations....and you don’t need to be so smug.

Uultimately, by continuing to teach the same hitting approaches at the college and gasp...high school level, we are virtually guaranteeing the continued demise of the purity of the game. 

The state of the game? I like where baseball is at and the athletes competiting today are incredible giving a little time hitting will catch up again! My son had lessons year around with little breaks through out the year it helped maintain his focus and mechanics as well as pitch recognition and velo training

2022OFDad posted:

Cabbagedad, any hitting coach teaching “loft” ie launch angle necessary to produce HRs to a pre-high school player needs to have their heads examined. That approach requires a physically mature player with an already fundamentally sound swing. Loft approach it situational, depending on the pitch and it’s plane on approach to the plate. Having a loft launch angle on a a high fastball is going to result in a lot of pop flies and strike outs. Even when the pitch is the right one for that approach, many HS aged players are simply not strong enough to generate anything more than a fly-ball for an out.

I teach all my kids a slight upswing and it works pretty well. 

However i don't teach them hitting 30 degree bombs, i basically tell them "slightly up but almost level" to make sure it is only a slight uppercut.

I want them to hit slightly rising line drives.

 

 

Scott Munroe posted:

"This is in contrast to many coaches in town who introduce all sorts of stuff to make the hitter "less comfortable" and or claim their methods are cutting edge"

 "variability training" is cutting edge. Last September 20 MLB teams showed up for a seminar at FBR to learn about this from Randy Sullivan. The same seminar is being repeated in October at the request of several MLB teams and I believe it is almost sold out. 

 

I will occasionally use that but only with advanced players. 

I get that just tee hitting won't prepare you for 95 and facing velo from a short distance can help but really if your swing sucks against front toss it won't magically self organize into a good swing if you bust him inside with a machine at 92.

There is a place and time for both.

old_school posted:

If he gives you a 7' piece of PVC and tells you to practice hitting the ceiling while spinning half backwards as part of body feel type launch angle training thing...you have failed as a parent to use logic!! 

 

I know how to "snap it" too. Sadly I can only "murderize" the ball on the tee only.

Dominik85 posted:
Scott Munroe posted:

"This is in contrast to many coaches in town who introduce all sorts of stuff to make the hitter "less comfortable" and or claim their methods are cutting edge"

 "variability training" is cutting edge. Last September 20 MLB teams showed up for a seminar at FBR to learn about this from Randy Sullivan. The same seminar is being repeated in October at the request of several MLB teams and I believe it is almost sold out. 

 

I will occasionally use that but only with advanced players. 

!!I get that just tee hitting won't prepare you for 95 and facing velo from a short distance can help but really if your swing sucks against front toss it won't magically self organize into a good swing if you bust him inside with a machine at 92.

There is a place and time for both.

Dominik85

Funny you should say that! Your thought process came up at the recent coach's convention in Dallas.  

From what little I understand about variability training is it is not intended to teach mechanics as it is the furthermost thing from mechanics. It is more about body movement.

I agree with your "magically self organize" statement and therefore, I believe,  "some" type of "guided" discovery should be in place. The days of "everyone does it this way" are about to become a thing of the past. In my opinion, once the body understands the general direction in which it needs to go to accomplish the end goal, then the Bernstein Principle can be applied.

Just attended an MLS seminar last week and variability training is on their radar also. 

For those who may not be familiar with the Bernstein Principal:

Bernstein Principle #1: “The body will organize itself in accordance with the overall goal of the activity.” ... They learn through feel and repetition, not through words.

 

OP

Just my opinion for what it is worth....if your son's instructor's goal is more about how your son's swing looks then how your son's body works then it may be something to look at.  For example, prior to my son becoming an FBR guy, his pitching instructors taught him the mechanics that worked for them in the bigs.....boy did my son look good when he threw!

What they did not realize is my son's body did not function the way theirs did. As a result, they made him a 72 mph guy who nobody wanted.  After 3 months at FBR my son went from 72 to 80 by allowing his body to work in a manner that was more beneficial to him. Forward 3.5 years of this same training process, my son is a HS senior now who signed an NLI for a P5 school in November and touched 92 this month. 

Moral of the story is, if an instructor is not continually learning and evolving as a trainer he may just be training his students right out of the game of baseball!  It is easier to say the student did not have "it" when they do not accomplish their dreams than it is to continually strive to learn the latest training technics that may allow a young man or women the opportunity to unlock their true potential. 

I have the utmost respect for instructors who's true intentions are to help players, but even more respect for guys like Randy Sullivan, Ron Woolforth, Eric Cressy, Kyle Body, etc, etc. who continually strive to improve their training techniques. These guys are doing something right if the MLB is coming to them....

Funny thing.   I found a coach I thought might be better than current coach.  However,  while I wield considerable influence,  I let my kid make his own decisions (between great options I’ve presented to him)

He told me flatly,   “I’m staying with (current coach),  he cares about me”

It’s hard to argue with that!  

So you believe a line drive swing should be taught until they are physically mature enough to learn to swing launch angle.  I don't understand the logic in teaching two different swings based on a fallacy that youth players aren't strong enough to hit homeruns or whatever.  Launch angle isn't about trying to hit homeruns - it's about getting the ball into the OF and use all that space to get hits.  If it happens to go out then it goes out.  No different than using a "line drive" swing. 

Baseball is proportional so those youth league hitters who aren't strong enough to learn launch angle are playing against fielders who basically have the same amount of strength and skill.  Teach launch angle from day one and it will provide the best opportunity for your son to be successful.

coach2709 posted:

So you believe a line drive swing should be taught until they are physically mature enough to learn to swing launch angle.  I don't understand the logic in teaching two different swings based on a fallacy that youth players aren't strong enough to hit homeruns or whatever.  Launch angle isn't about trying to hit homeruns - it's about getting the ball into the OF and use all that space to get hits.  If it happens to go out then it goes out.  No different than using a "line drive" swing. 

Baseball is proportional so those youth league hitters who aren't strong enough to learn launch angle are playing against fielders who basically have the same amount of strength and skill.  Teach launch angle from day one and it will provide the best opportunity for your son to be successful.

The quicker the ball gets on the ground in “all that space” in the outfield, the better. That is not best accomplished with a towering fly ball. I will do some research today to try to support this, but a line drive to the out field simply has a better chance of resulting in a positive outcome from a plate appearance than a fly ball does. It’s just my opinion, but I will try to find some data to back that up.

Well you can't really teach a "launch angle swing" because every swing has a launch angle.

It depends on what outcome you want. For a BA about 8-15 degrees LA offer the best result, for power 25-30.

Angles over 20 degrees are only useful if you can hit homers but liners from 5-20 degrees play at every exit velo.

I'm willing to bet my paycheck that a ball hit over the fence has a less chance of being caught than any ball that lands in the field whether it is linedrive or ground ball.  Swing for the fence and if you miss it is still hit with power.  Have to have launch angle. You can exaggerate it to the negative but have to have launch angle.

PitchingFan posted:

I'm willing to bet my paycheck that a ball hit over the fence has a less chance of being caught than any ball that lands in the field whether it is linedrive or ground ball.  Swing for the fence and if you miss it is still hit with power.  Have to have launch angle. You can exaggerate it to the negative but have to have launch angle.

And my paycheck says your batting average will drop, your strikeout rate will increase, and your value to your team will become marginalized as you become a become a one-dimensional hitter.

Are we still helping the OP with how to evaluate private hitting coaches?  hehe 

Multisportdad, like I said at the beginning of the thread, ...  "This topic can be quite controversial and one to which you will get a very wide array of opinions and points of view...  There are more than one hitting philosophies that can work."

There is room in the game for more than one type of hitter.

Son #1 is 5'9", 170lbs., fast, has a great batter's eye, and hand/eye coordination. He can, and does, hit balls out during BP, but in games his job is to hit balls hard, and get on base, where he uses his speed and savvy to get extra bases. His offensive specialty is scoring runs.

Another teammate is 6'5", 240lbs., with average speed. Has a much lower OBP and BA than my son's, but he hits XBH's. He doesn't score a lot of runs, and won't do much for you on the basepaths, but drives in runs in a hurry(on occasion).

To think that both players should use the same hitting approach strikes me as odd. 

2022OFDad posted:
PitchingFan posted:

I'm willing to bet my paycheck that a ball hit over the fence has a less chance of being caught than any ball that lands in the field whether it is linedrive or ground ball.  Swing for the fence and if you miss it is still hit with power.  Have to have launch angle. You can exaggerate it to the negative but have to have launch angle.

And my paycheck says your batting average will drop, your strikeout rate will increase, and your value to your team will become marginalized as you become a become a one-dimensional hitter.

Show me video of a great hitter that does not have launch angle.   Every great batter has a somewhat upward angle to their swing. 

2022OFDad posted:

The point is, although more baseball are in fact leaving the yard, the number of strikeouts have also gone up commensurately. 

Another good site that supports my point is https://tht.fangraphs.com/when...data-become-reliable

 

Are you suggesting people could be taking a solid premis and over doing it to point where it defeats the purpose..... hmmmm happens every day in many ways

What carries a ball out of the park is backspin.  The focus should be on creating a swing that makes the baseball consistently leave the bat with backspin.  That swing will be different for every player and the optimum angle that the ball leaves the bat will also be  different for every player.  The goal of every hitter should be to have a good bat path and keep the barrel in the hitting zone as long as possible. Ideally the plane of the swing should match the path of the incoming pitch - which would make it SLIGHTLY uphill.  Anything more than that is self-defeating as the bat gets out of the hitting zone prematurely.  Swings that are too uphill don't produce more home runs unless you are a big leaguer like  Joey Gallo (and even he has flattened his swing out somewhat). For the vast majority of amateur  ballplayers an uphill swing results in pop ups, fly outs, strike outs, topped balls, and rollover ground outs.  Some of the most accomplished hitters (and hitting instructors) I know think all this focus on launch angle & exit velocity is nonsense. Kids are working on developing swings that produce a number instead of a swing that will allow them to be successful against good pitching. 

PitchingFan posted:
2022OFDad posted:
PitchingFan posted:

I'm willing to bet my paycheck that a ball hit over the fence has a less chance of being caught than any ball that lands in the field whether it is linedrive or ground ball.  Swing for the fence and if you miss it is still hit with power.  Have to have launch angle. You can exaggerate it to the negative but have to have launch angle.

And my paycheck says your batting average will drop, your strikeout rate will increase, and your value to your team will become marginalized as you become a become a one-dimensional hitter.

Show me video of a great hitter that does not have launch angle.   Every great batter has a somewhat upward angle to their swing. 

You are being disengenuous...of course they do. We are talking about launch angle specific to lifting the baseball over the fence.

adbono posted:

What carries a ball out of the park is backspin.

Yes. And no.

30 deg (BALL) launch angle takes it out of the park, plus exit speed.  Backspin may keep it up for a few more feet.

However, hitters can't use 30 deg angle with their bat or they would hardly ever hit a 6-10 deg incoming pitch.  So hitters must use 10-20 deg swing, which by definition undercuts the ball (giving it the extra 10 deg of launch angle), which therefore creates backspin.

So to tie this back to instructors, find one that helps you achieve a 10-20 deg upward (BAT) attack angle, and helps improve your bat speed.  And of course they must be measuring this with a tool, not just their eyeball.  And you must measure them in the same way.

2022OFDad posted:
coach2709 posted:

So you believe a line drive swing should be taught until they are physically mature enough to learn to swing launch angle.  I don't understand the logic in teaching two different swings based on a fallacy that youth players aren't strong enough to hit homeruns or whatever.  Launch angle isn't about trying to hit homeruns - it's about getting the ball into the OF and use all that space to get hits.  If it happens to go out then it goes out.  No different than using a "line drive" swing. 

Baseball is proportional so those youth league hitters who aren't strong enough to learn launch angle are playing against fielders who basically have the same amount of strength and skill.  Teach launch angle from day one and it will provide the best opportunity for your son to be successful.

The quicker the ball gets on the ground in “all that space” in the outfield, the better. That is not best accomplished with a towering fly ball. I will do some research today to try to support this, but a line drive to the out field simply has a better chance of resulting in a positive outcome from a plate appearance than a fly ball does. It’s just my opinion, but I will try to find some data to back that up.

I tend to agree with this as well. Ideally, you want line drive HRs. There is now an emphasis on getting the ball over the fence, which is fine. What is not fine is the K rate and the amount of lazy fly balls that come with that approach. When the hitter just misses the ball it results in a 360 ft pop out, not a hard hit. 

But I'd also rather have a .300 hitter with 15 HRs than a .260 hitter with 30 HRs. Many would rather have the latter. It is a matter of preference, but FWIW I don't like the way MLB is trending. 

PABaseball posted:

I tend to agree with this as well. Ideally, you want line drive HRs. There is now an emphasis on getting the ball over the fence, which is fine. What is not fine is the K rate and the amount of lazy fly balls that come with that approach. When the hitter just misses the ball it results in a 360 ft pop out, not a hard hit. 

But I'd also rather have a .300 hitter with 15 HRs than a .260 hitter with 30 HRs. Many would rather have the latter. It is a matter of preference, but FWIW I don't like the way MLB is trending. 

The MLB SO/HR ratio is worth discussion, along with The Shift, emphasis on launch angles, and many other things in the current game. But the OP was asking about a kid who is just starting middle school, so it seems appropriate to talk about what kind of training is going to give such a kid the best shot at being an impact player on his HS team in a couple years, and the way HS baseball is played, except maybe among the very top schools in the country, is a world away from MLB baseball.

In my experience watching a good number of HS games, the fact of the matter is that the long ball is very, very rarely the deciding factor in a win.  Sac bunts,  line drives up the middle, doubles in the gap or down the line, and ground balls in the 5-6 hole are all far, far more likely to be the winning plays in a game than a HR.  Sadly, I suppose, errors, wild pitches, passed balls, blown pick-off attempts, balks, and brain farts are all also far more likely to cause a loss than giving up a bomb.

If the OP's kid is a true stud who will play higher level college and/or pro, once puberty arrives he'll know that soon enough.  In the meantime, I would focus on the kid being ready to play the HS game. That  means knowing how to bunt, how to hit behind a runner on 2b, how to execute the hit-and-run, how to run the bases, and many other things that don't involve hitting a ball over the fence.

2022OFDad posted:
coach2709 posted:

So you believe a line drive swing should be taught until they are physically mature enough to learn to swing launch angle.  I don't understand the logic in teaching two different swings based on a fallacy that youth players aren't strong enough to hit homeruns or whatever.  Launch angle isn't about trying to hit homeruns - it's about getting the ball into the OF and use all that space to get hits.  If it happens to go out then it goes out.  No different than using a "line drive" swing. 

Baseball is proportional so those youth league hitters who aren't strong enough to learn launch angle are playing against fielders who basically have the same amount of strength and skill.  Teach launch angle from day one and it will provide the best opportunity for your son to be successful.

The quicker the ball gets on the ground in “all that space” in the outfield, the better. That is not best accomplished with a towering fly ball. I will do some research today to try to support this, but a line drive to the out field simply has a better chance of resulting in a positive outcome from a plate appearance than a fly ball does. It’s just my opinion, but I will try to find some data to back that up.

Nobody advocates towering fly balls.  That is what people against launch angle use to try and discredit it.  But back to my original point - why teach one swing when / if a player gets to higher levels he will have to learn a new swing.  That is just ridiculous and a waste.  It will hold more players back than anything.  

2022OFDad posted:
PitchingFan posted:
2022OFDad posted:
PitchingFan posted:

I'm willing to bet my paycheck that a ball hit over the fence has a less chance of being caught than any ball that lands in the field whether it is linedrive or ground ball.  Swing for the fence and if you miss it is still hit with power.  Have to have launch angle. You can exaggerate it to the negative but have to have launch angle.

And my paycheck says your batting average will drop, your strikeout rate will increase, and your value to your team will become marginalized as you become a become a one-dimensional hitter.

Show me video of a great hitter that does not have launch angle.   Every great batter has a somewhat upward angle to their swing. 

You are being disengenuous...of course they do. We are talking about launch angle specific to lifting the baseball over the fence.

Thank you I reckon for saying I'm right and you're wrong.  Every good batter has a launch angle so why would you not teach a launch angle.  My son batted .500 and led his team in HR's and batting average so you can have both and good hitters do.  They attempt to drive the ball hard and deep unless the pitch dictates otherwise and cause backspin.  I don't get your logic to argue against teaching launch angle when you agree that it makes better hitters.

Well, I tried to get the thread back on the OP topic... if you can't beat 'em, join 'em 

Coach, you know I'm usually with you but disagree on this one.  IMO, there is a difference between teaching a different swing and a different swing plane.  A different swing plane can be a somewhat minor adjustment suggested to the right type of hitter with the right profile to benefit from a higher launch angle swing.  I am more in the camp of others who say it is more detrimental for most HS hitters, for many reasons.  This has been discussed at great lengths in other threads.  Most HS hitters will benefit from a swing on plane due to both timing and strength concerns as well as a host of secondary reasons including typical defensive capabilities and field conditions.  

Sultan, I'm sure I am missing something, but I don't understand your statement ...

... "hitters can't use 30 deg angle with their bat or they would hardly ever hit a 6-10 deg incoming pitch.  So hitters must use 10-20 deg swing, which by definition undercuts the ball (giving it the extra 10 deg of launch angle), which therefore creates backspin."

If the incoming pitch is at a 6-10 degree angle and the swing is 10-20 degrees, by definition, wouldn't that result more often in topspin than backspin?  I realize that where on the ball contact occurs is also a factor in this equation.  Just trying to understand the math of your statement.

Also, you said.. 

"30 deg (BALL) launch angle takes it out of the park, plus exit speed."  

Most HS hitters don't have nearly the strength/bat speed to generate a HR with a 30 degree launch angle.  It becomes a routine fly ball out... one of the easiest ways for a defense to get an out.  As the hitter progresses in strength, timing, pitch recognition, etc., it may make sense to take the plane more upward beyond pitch plane, depending on the hitter, again, IMO.

cabbagedad posted:

If the incoming pitch is at a 6-10 degree angle and the swing is 10-20 degrees, by definition, wouldn't that result more often in topspin than backspin?  I realize that where on the ball contact occurs is also a factor in this equation.  Just trying to understand the math of your statement.

In MLB swings the bat head generally goes under the plane of the incoming pitch, and will generally hit under the (horizontal) center of the ball.

If you hit anywhere under the center, the ball goes up, and it has backspin.

hit bottom

under

SultanofSwat posted:
cabbagedad posted:

If the incoming pitch is at a 6-10 degree angle and the swing is 10-20 degrees, by definition, wouldn't that result more often in topspin than backspin?  I realize that where on the ball contact occurs is also a factor in this equation.  Just trying to understand the math of your statement.

In MLB swings the bat head generally goes under the plane of the incoming pitch, and will generally hit under the (horizontal) center of the ball.

If you hit anywhere under the center, the ball goes up, and it has backspin.

 

Thanks Sultan, yeah that's what I was referring to when I said "where on the ball contact occurs is also a factor in this equation".  I am aware of that aspect.  Certainly, if you hit under center, there is backspin.  My question was just in reference to your description of the pitch plane vs swing plane.   It appears you are assuming what you describe with the MLB swing generally hitting under center, in which backspin pretty much occurs regardless of pitch plane vs swing plane.

 

2019Dad posted:

Wonder what the number is for high school baseball:

https://twitter.com/ChrisBurke.../1078854943153549313

There might be a selection bias though. Probably mostly very fast players try and often it probably was against the shift or an infield playing very deep.

If players did it more often the infield would probably play in on him.

Still i like the use of it occasionally especially to disrupt the use of unusual infield alingments.

Hit the ball hard. Hit it in the air. If your son's instructor gets him to do both more regularly, you have a good one. If your son does not do this, you may not have a good one.

People in this thread can disagree all they want with the idea that 2 + 2 = 4, but no matter how hard they try, adding 2 + 2 does not equal 5.

Hitting the ball to the pull side in the air hard yields the best results in all of baseball. It's proven. There is no debate here. Increasing contact percentage and ability to adjust also matter. But do not forget what matters most - demolishing baseballs in the air. And line drives are in the air, before anyone complains about fly balls.

Dominik85 posted:
2019Dad posted:

Wonder what the number is for high school baseball:

https://twitter.com/ChrisBurke.../1078854943153549313

There might be a selection bias though. Probably mostly very fast players try and often it probably was against the shift or an infield playing very deep.

If players did it more often the infield would probably play in on him.

Still i like the use of it occasionally especially to disrupt the use of unusual infield alingments.

Absolutely right. It's also typically used in college with some element of surprise. Those 7,000 bunts only represent 2% of all PAs. The numbers also don't reflect the foul balls/strikes. Having said all that, the success rate is high, so maybe there's room for a little more of it in college ball for the guys who aren't getting many XBH.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×