Skip to main content

My son threw in an intrasquad game the other day and gave up a couple runs. He was facing the meat of the order for both of those innings as they had 4 of the team's better hitters go up against the team's ace and then against him, but both of the runners who scored reached base on walks. I used this to stress the importance of first pitch strikes to him as he tends to try to throw "perfect" pitches on the first pitch a little too often then has to work from behind. They were starting with a 1-1 count so first pitch strikes were even more important.

My question is, how much should a pitcher "give in" to get the first pitch strike?

I realize it depends to some degree how good their stuff is relative to the hitters they are facing, and I recognize the value of a "get me over" first pitch curve in some situations but let's stick with the first pitch fastball for this discussion.

Should a pitcher be trying to hit a corner on the first pitch with their fastball or should they simply be trying for the outer or inner half of the plate?

This will be especially important for him to figure out this weekend as they're playing a team that has won multiple national championships and will probably make a run at it again this season.
Last edited {1}
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I have seen too many 1st pitch HRs to say that a 1st pitch should be always thrown for a strike. Some batters are taught not to swing at the 1st pitch but I like a pitcher that mixes it up.
Some coaches want pitchers to th row 1st pitch CBs and work on that. To me a pitcher should know whar is working for him on a given day and work with those pitches. If he can tell the batter is a free swinger and will go at the 1st pitch keep it on the corners and low. A pitcher should not be afraid to walk a batter and use his CBs even in a full count situation. Never give in.
SK, who once visited this site, has a large database of very detailed HS pitching stats. Some time back, I calculated from his stats that if the first pitch is a strike, 70% of the time an out results.

Often, you can tell if a team is in the "take until you get a strike" mode. If this is the case, move the aim point into the zone a little more. Don't try to clip the corner.

Once they start swinging freely, as they probably eventually will when the pitcher is throwing first pitch strikes, then that opens up first pitch changeup, etc.
Texan,
I don't remember SKs data but I seem to remember that about 50% of first pitch strikes are taken. Assuming a very good HS hitter who hits .500 on balls put in play and assuming that he puts 2/3 of the first pitch strikes he swings at in play then you'd get a strike on about 2/3 of first pitch strikes, a hit on 1/6 of them and an out on about 1/6 of them. Given 6 batters faced you'd have one hit, one out, and an 0-1 count on 4 hitters at which point their average starts going down. So facing very good hitters you'd be at an advantage throwing first pitch strikes as long as you didn't absolutely groove the pitch. That's all speculation with no hard data behind it of course.

I think one of the reasons Bonds was able to have such a high average during his big home run seasons was that he very seldom saw a first pitch strike.
Last edited by CADad
Your question was about 1st pitch strikes.
I would guess that the hard thrower had trouble throwing strikes period compared to the other huy.
Wins and losses don't mean much to me as there are too many factors inmvolved. Both sound like good pitchers with respectable stats.
Working in relief can be tougher to get great stats. Starter who get in their rythm usually can put up more innings with better stats if they are good. relievers often go in against a team which is on a hot streak and have to shut them down. A good reliever can save a starters tail when they are running out ofr gas. Even a good coach who knows his starters limits can make a huge difference in the guys stats.
I find stats interesting but only a fraction of the whole storey.
Using HS data is even worse.
It is all about establishing control. If the pitcher can early in the game establish that he can throw first pitch strikes, he can then go to throwing pitches off the plate and get the hitter to go fishing for a pitch that looks like a strike and the umpire to call strikes when out of the zone.

If the pitcher can not establish that he can throw the first pitch for a strike, the hitter then has a great advantage that he knows most likely he does not have the control to throw a strike with control where and when he needs to.

For a good hitter, batting averages go up in certain situations and latter in the count.

Win and losses do count over the long run, you can make all the excuses you want but at the end of the day, it matters to the coach and the team.

Baseball is a game of statistics and is very relevant beyond high school, if they don’t matter, why do pro and college teams have so detailed statistics?
Relievers tend to have better stats because the hitters are only seeing them once and because they come in with outs already on the board.

Both of the pitchers I mentioned are excellent talents and Hunter will probably go much earlier in the draft than Enright did.

I'm simply saying that throwing a high percentage of first pitch strikes is valuable and that in order to do so there has to be some degree of give. The question is how much is appropriate at a given level.
quote:
Originally posted by Homerun04:
It is all about establishing control. If the pitcher can early in the game establish that he can throw first pitch strikes, he can then go to throwing pitches off the plate and get the hitter to go fishing for a pitch that looks like a strike and the umpire to call strikes when out of the zone.

You bring up a very good and valid point. A pitcher who shows command early on will tend to get more marginal pitches (or even pitches that are close misses) called strikes than a pitcher who started off having control problems. That old first impression thing...
Perry Husband has the data on first pitch strikes from the inside edge data base,(for MLB) but I don't have the book here at work. I will look it up and post it tomorrow.

One great suggestion from him is to approach each new batter mentally thinking it is a 3-2 count. Might help him get focused for that important first pitch.
Wins and losses matter to a team but is not reflective of a pitchers talent.
I see many a great game pitched by an excellent pitcher and he gets no win. My son threw a perfect game and didn't get a win.
One of the guys who got drafted with a 9-2 record throws mid 90s. He was in a weak conference and it just had no bearing on his being drafted.
If you look at the importance of a 1st strik pitch it depends on the pitcher and the hitter. My son has intentionally stayed out of the strike zone on a kid having a stellar day. He would rather nibble at the corners knowing this guy wants to hit. He would rather walk him in certain circumstances.
That fact that you don't throw a 1st pitch strike dosen't extrapolate into a pitcher who can't throw strikes. Any data is skewed by the pitchers who have trouble throwing a strike so the data would not be valid in making a decision tp throw a strike on a 1st pitch.
How about this?

There is an advantage to getting a strike called on the first pitch (whether the pitch was in the zone, or out of the zone & got swung at & missed).

At the higher levels of ball, relatively few hitters will chase a first pitch that is out of the zone.

While there are exceptions to almost everything, as a rule it is a good practice to start a game throwing the first pitch in the strike zone (albeit not right down the pipe).
Last edited by Texan

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×