How important is Pitching Velocity

Have there been any studies done on the longevity (both short term during a season and long term career wise) of pitchers relating to velocity? In other words do guys throwing at the upper end of the velocity scale have more,less or the same rate of injury relative to those topping out at lower speeds?

snowman,

You bring up a good question.  I don't have an answer. The guy that threw more pitches than anyone in history is Nolan Ryan.  The reason I believe he threw the most pitches is because he pitched in the Big Leagues for 26 years and he is the all time leader in both Strike outs and Walks. Obviously he was one of the hardest throwers for most of those 26 years. Of course, Nolan Ryan is a rare case.  However, there are other high velocity guys that had a long career. Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens, etc.

I think some guys can throw at a very high velocity with no more effort than those throwing at a lower velocity.  Just like some can run faster or jump higher with no more effort (sometimes less effort) than others. Also, I believe most everyone that pitches for a long time will experience arm problems.  It is a very low percentage that are able to avoid arm, elbow, shoulder problems.

I believe that ASMI has come up with some studies showing that the harder throwers have a higher rate of injury.  From what I remember, they are not sure whether this has to do with the fact that they throw harder, or that they possibly threw more often as they progressed through the ranks.  Theory being that the harder throwers, especially at younger ages, ie thru HS, were more effective in getting hitters out and were therefore used more often and threw more pitches.  Scientifically, I think the jury is still out on why the harder throwers were injured more often.

All of this is interesting but what would be the point of the study?  To recommend to those at the upper-end of the velocity scale not to throw hard?  Or to take an early retirement so as not to rack up innings?  Not going to happen.

Haha, no Bum.  Of course I can't speak for ASMI, but I think their goal overall is to help reduce throwing injuries in pitchers.  Two things I think they are doing.  One is to analyze the mechanics of the elite - hard throwing - pitchers who have been injury free and applying those mechanics to other pitchers.  Improving mechanics will possibly help reduce injuries.  The other thing they are doing is recommending pitch counts for younger pitchers.  The change was made at the bottom of the continuum rather than at the top.  Hopefully, keeping a handle on the workload and improving the mechanics of the young guys will help extend the back end of a pitchers life.

Like I said, I am not with or a spokesman of ASMI, but that is my feeling about what they are trying to do.

There aren't two better topics for stoking a fire on a baseball website than velocity and size. We have both going at the same time. Someone call the fire department.

As with any study the point is to learn more about a given subject. Sometimes the unobvious pops up.

Not sure how the following fits in.

 "To recommend to those at the upper-end of the velocity scale not to throw hard?  Or to take an early retirement so as not to rack up innings?"

That seems to imply a belief that the study would be biased with a specific goal in mind. I doubt that would be the case here. Are you saying no study should be done or that such a study would be a waste of time? 

Any study can be biased or non-biased.  So no, I wouldn't dismiss it out-of-hand.  I'm just saying I doubt hard throwers will pay much attention to the results.  Even bbball man mentioned ASMI couldn't figure out what the results meant.

Ain't that the truth!  I've followed both threads pretty closely.  All I can say is that I have two high school age sons, both good sized so the physical side is not an issue.  I have one that throws in the 90's and one that I don't believe will ever approach that.  The one with less velocity can PITCH.  Multiple pitches, almost no walks, very effective numbers.  The other one throws gas.  I hope I'm wrong, but I'm betting the velocity one is the only one who plays at the next level.

Fortunately, I don't have a dog in this fight. My son is 4'11" and consistently throws in the high 90s!

When it comes to power pitchers who retained their velocity while pitching an unusually high number of innings: Nolan Ryan and Randy Johnson, yes.

Clemens, no--at least not without some help from Winstrol Depot

Very true PG. It seems though that high velocity guys who also throw a very hard slider lose it quicker when it goes. Not faster in length of service just that when the velocity goes downhill it GOES downhill. Ryan for sure threw a curve not a slider. not sure about Johnson. Seaver perfect example. When velo fell it fell.

But he would not have been Tom Terrific without that Fastball! As an aside remember that he was about the fifth hardest thrower as senior on his high school team. Weighed about 165. Some time in the Marines and WHAM! Fresno City college to USC and the rest as they say is history!

I would love to know what those guys took to stay in the game so long. We already know that Clemens cheated, so rule him out as one of the great ones.

The hard slider is deadly on the arm/elbow and many guys are going away from using it frequently.

"The Thread (Topic?) That Would Not Die"    

Topic for the Month of November: "Linear vs. Rotational Hitting"   

TPM I am not convinced that Clemens did. Actually there is more circumstantial evidence that Nolan Ryan used vs Clemens. Ryans daily workout partner for tears at Texas was one Tom House, admitted user. Where there is smoke there is fire and Ryan seems to have come out of this without any questions at all. Maybe Jack Clark knows something because he was one of the ones mentioned in the Pujols rant on radio. Remember after PED scandal broke wide open House was quoted as saying 'we never felt we were outpitched only out pharmaceuticaled' . He seems to have escaped any questions of his famous workouts as being fueled by anything other then himself. Even my favorite pitcher of all time Tom Seaver seems to maybe had gone tover to the dark side as he was quoted to have stormed at a teammate that he needs to find the extra 10-15ft to get the ball over the wall. Now what did that mean?   

Topic for December:  Politics in Making the High School Baseball Team

There are no questions asked, unless someone gets caught.

Sending a pm.

I've read Nolan Ryan's Pitching Bible and I believe that he did so well because of hard work, exercise and nutrition.   I would think using PED's there would have been tell tale signs such as larger physical features.   

Short people always believe height doesn't matter.  I was in this boat as a young ptcher.  People who throw below 90 don't think velo matters.  I am finding out they both are factors to many scouts.  Being 6'4, When BB junior broke 90 scouts called, then 91 and now 92.  Each MPH jump brings more scouts.  Not saying its fair just what we've witnessed first hand.  

throw'n bb's.. did junior get drafted?

Did Ryan Braun look like he took PED's, or Manny, Arod, or the last few guys who got suspensions? 

Don't be so naïve to think that everyone who uses PED's may end up looking like Bonds.

From what I have seen I tend to agree with you.  In most cases it works in your favor, someone without that height or velo has to be exceptional, projectable in what he does (for all players).

Bum he is still in HS.  TPM again not saying its right.  What is "projectable", is really educated guessing.  I had a friend who's son was 93 and was not drafted out of HS due to his "projectability" (height), went to school and was a later mid round pick after his Junior year and now is a closer throwing 97/98.  Had he been 6'4 the scouts said he would have been a top 5 round pick.

Bum, Jr. was drafted out of h.s. and was only 5'9".  Yes, size affects draft status but so does talent. 

People often associate size with projection.  Sizes can be a reason for good projection, but there are many other things that are considered.

A player can have the perfect 6'4/220 body and give he appearance of a Major Leaguer. But if that player is not well coordinated, lacks athletic actions, lacks hand eye skills, he won't project much in anyone's eyes.

A pitcher 5'10 that is exceptionally athletic, smooth effortless actions, good arm strength, etc. would project much better than the player above.

Give the 5'10 pitcher the 6'4 body and he would be even more projectable.

In order

1. Talent and Size

2. Talent and no size

3. Size and no talent

BTW the hardest thrower Bum, Jr. played with was a 5'10 closer throwing 100 MPH.  No one would catch him except son, and he'd have to ice his hand.  He'll break into the bigs next year for sure.

Hey I am with you, son out of HS was 6'3" and ranked top 50-100 in his class, strong future projectibility and hitting over 90 and not drafted due to sign ability (strong college commitment).

And then there are those not hitting 90 and 6'5".

In this players case size didn't matter but the velo and talent did.

Bum, Jr.'s very close friend, J. R. Graham.  Now a starter in the Atlanta Braves organization.  Tops at 100 MPH and played with R in Madison, Wisconsin in the Northwoods league.  Watch for big things from him next year.  He's 5'10".

http://www.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=543242

Eight players from my son's senior year of high school ball went on to college ball at various levels. If I told a person new to watching the team to pick out the top college prospect just by physical appearance everyone would have pointed to a 6'3", 200 pitcher. 

I think the kid got three appearances his senior year. He either got rocked or walked the park. He was a JV player his junior year. He threw 82 with no command. When he threw strikes they tended to be up. From 8th grade on I instructed the dad on what his son needed to do to increase velocity. The kid wasn't interested in doing the work. 

The kid is a bright kid in a Big Ten Engineering school. It's not like all is lost. The kid just didn't have the passion to put in the work for baseball. As a preteen he got by on size. He was a large, flame thrower relative to preteen ball.

As an engineer, I kind of loved this comment.  

The kid is a bright kid in a Big Ten Engineering school. It's not like all is lost.

How important is pitching velocity?  It all depends on how hard your son throws.  If he has a good fastball it's very important.... if he lacks velocity then it isn't important..... 

I noticed on MLB tv the guys were talking about the height of a pitcher and that the downward angle is tougher to hit.  And that taller pitchers release closer to the plate.....

I found it interesting

Yup. 59 feet, one inch from the front of the slab to the front of home plate. And most pitchers drive off the slab to release 58 feet or less. So 95 on the gun for someone who is releasing from 58.5 feet is slower to  the plate than 95 from 58 feet.

Maybe some of the engineers on the board can figure out exactly what the time difference is. Must be hundredths of a second...but it still matters. Would be interested to know.

The angle thing I'm not convinced about. Grateful for more discussion about that.

Not that Koji Uehara would care much......but still

It takes a 95 mph pitch about 7 milliseconds (0.007 seconds) to travel one foot. It will take about 0.43 seconds to reach the plate.  However, it is commonly believed that the combination of reaction time and the time needed to initiate a swing uses up more than 250mSec, so the batter actually has only about 150mSec to decide whether to offer at a 95mph pitch.  I also think that pitchers vary in release point by up to 2 feet--or about 14 mSec if they are both fireballers.  So the long strider (e.g. Lincecum) might give the batter about 10% less time to recognize the pitch.

The good ole Fungo "boiling it down to a succinct truth" post.

Fungo = #BestPosterofAllTime

Wish you would come 'round more often.  

The angle thing I'm not convinced about. Grateful for more discussion about that.

Its all about the swing plane vs. the pitched trajectory plane.  And yes, its most likely important.  Can you hit something thats flat/level and in a swing plane longer more easily than something that enters and exits the swing plane more quickly on a downward trajectory/angle?

Answer?  Most likely...yes and I've talked to scouts that firmly believe this (and so do I).

JB,

I agree with you.  I enjoyed the analysis by Harold Reynolds on MLB Network regarding the downward trajectory and how much faster the ball gets on the hitter with a taller pitcher with a long stride.  Not to mention, 22 year old Michael Wacha was fun to watch...all 6'6" of him!