TPM,
That one pitch from Verlander is the only pitch I've ever seen above the line. I checked several of the hardest throwers and none of them had a pitch above the line.
It is well know that it is possible to throw a pitch that is still rising as it crosses the plate by throwing extremely underhand. That pitch is still dropping significantly relative to it's starting trajectory.
The general consensus however has been that it is impossible to throw a pitch that doesn't drop more than it's original trajectory. Verlander just did it by a fraction of an inch.
Verlander doesn't throw a true rising fastball except for that single pitch and that may be the only true rising fastball that has ever been thrown.
quote:Originally posted by TPM:
My understanding is that it's something that just happens, not intentional (the rise).
For many years, like you I believed a good FB could rise, and argued it vehemently on many occasions. Then one day a fellow who taught HS physics took the time to explain, using the appropriate formulas and showing the math, proved to me that what you’re saying goes contrary to the laws of physics. Its definitely possible to get the perception that a pitched ball can rise, but its an optical illusion. Its really that the ball doesn’t drop as much as you’re used to, and the brain interprets that as the ball rising.
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
i would just like to state that Players below the MLB level aren't really that much different than the MLB players besides the fact that the MLB players are generally better and more consistant.
Uhhh, I think that's what makes them different. That's like me saying I'm not that much different than the world's strongest man, except that I'm not as big or as strong as him.
Stats,
I doubt the laws of Physics either Newtonian or Einsteinian have been violated but the fact remains that Verlander did it once and has come close several times. That means that the assumptions used to model ball flight were erroneous. Adair, who is considered the expert in the field has said that actual spin rates are higher than he'd estimated. It looks to me like that fraction of an inch is within the error bands of the PitchF/X system so it is possible that a true rising fastball still hasn't been thrown but within our ability to measure, it has been done.
The spin rate of Verlander's four seamer is significantly higher than Adair assumed.
I'm probably getting excited about nothing though. The ball should drop roughly 1/2*32*.39^2 ft due to gravity which should be over 2 feet and they are showing less than 2 feet of vertical movement due to spin.
I doubt the laws of Physics either Newtonian or Einsteinian have been violated but the fact remains that Verlander did it once and has come close several times. That means that the assumptions used to model ball flight were erroneous. Adair, who is considered the expert in the field has said that actual spin rates are higher than he'd estimated. It looks to me like that fraction of an inch is within the error bands of the PitchF/X system so it is possible that a true rising fastball still hasn't been thrown but within our ability to measure, it has been done.
The spin rate of Verlander's four seamer is significantly higher than Adair assumed.
I'm probably getting excited about nothing though. The ball should drop roughly 1/2*32*.39^2 ft due to gravity which should be over 2 feet and they are showing less than 2 feet of vertical movement due to spin.
quote:Originally posted by bballman:quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
i would just like to state that Players below the MLB level aren't really that much different than the MLB players besides the fact that the MLB players are generally better and more consistant.
Uhhh, I think that's what makes them different. That's like me saying I'm not that much different than the world's strongest man, except that I'm not as big or as strong as him.
I can't get over how are they alike but they are different, makes sense.
Oh well, I was getting excited about nothing. They calculate the effect of gravity starting at 40ft. from the front of the plate for some reason. Over 40' the ball should only drop about 16" due to gravity and that is how much vertical movement Verlander achieves at best.
In other words the ball is dropping about a foot relative to the initial trajectory. No true rising fastball.
In other words the ball is dropping about a foot relative to the initial trajectory. No true rising fastball.
quote:Originally posted by bballman:quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
i would just like to state that Players below the MLB level aren't really that much different than the MLB players besides the fact that the MLB players are generally better and more consistant.
Uhhh, I think that's what makes them different. That's like me saying I'm not that much different than the world's strongest man, except that I'm not as big or as strong as him.
That analogy is ridiculous. C'mon man use your brain a little.
You don't train to be the worlds strongest man so that analogy doesn't apply. Good HS, college and pro players actually train to become the next potenetial MLB player. For your analogy to work you must be training to be the worlds strongest man. So are you?
My point is about there not being a lot of difference "on this issue of control" between HS and MLB pitchers.
It truly amazes me how one person can say so much and yet listen to so little.
GBM- I've placed you on my ignore list because I thought I could not handle your rationales and utterly absurd statements. I was stupid enough to decide to lift that placement because I was curious to see where this thread has gone.
The fact of the matter is that there have been no less than a dozen people here, people of various baseball backgrounds THAT ARE AT A HIGHER LEVEL THAN YOURS that have continually provided absolutely marvelous pieces of advice. These pieces of advice are based off of both past experience and proven scientific studies that have been made readily available to the public and provided here on this board.
This thread is now 13 pages long and holds some of the best pitching advice I've ever read on the Internet. And yet it will forever have a black eye. The reason for the black eye: You, GBM. You continually display an unfathomable heir of ignorance and naivety while you continually preach illogical concepts or false facts. The information here is tainted by the lack of reasoning for your actions, and the holier than thou ground you seem to see yourself on.
Please do us all a favor and sit back and read what other people have to say...and ACTUALLY soak it in. Don't patronize other people's thoughts, ideas and opinions. Don't call out someone for blasphemy if they don't agree with you. Don't belittle situational discussion with immature responses. I am sure everyone would welcome you with open arms here if you were to capably coexist with the other individuals exchanging information. But from my perspective, it ain't happening the way you're doing it now.
Oh, and there is a huge difference between high school players and Major League players- in all aspects of the game. I actually laughed out loud that you even remotely thought otherwise.
Back to the ignore list I suppose...over and out on this one (once again).
GBM- I've placed you on my ignore list because I thought I could not handle your rationales and utterly absurd statements. I was stupid enough to decide to lift that placement because I was curious to see where this thread has gone.
The fact of the matter is that there have been no less than a dozen people here, people of various baseball backgrounds THAT ARE AT A HIGHER LEVEL THAN YOURS that have continually provided absolutely marvelous pieces of advice. These pieces of advice are based off of both past experience and proven scientific studies that have been made readily available to the public and provided here on this board.
This thread is now 13 pages long and holds some of the best pitching advice I've ever read on the Internet. And yet it will forever have a black eye. The reason for the black eye: You, GBM. You continually display an unfathomable heir of ignorance and naivety while you continually preach illogical concepts or false facts. The information here is tainted by the lack of reasoning for your actions, and the holier than thou ground you seem to see yourself on.
Please do us all a favor and sit back and read what other people have to say...and ACTUALLY soak it in. Don't patronize other people's thoughts, ideas and opinions. Don't call out someone for blasphemy if they don't agree with you. Don't belittle situational discussion with immature responses. I am sure everyone would welcome you with open arms here if you were to capably coexist with the other individuals exchanging information. But from my perspective, it ain't happening the way you're doing it now.
Oh, and there is a huge difference between high school players and Major League players- in all aspects of the game. I actually laughed out loud that you even remotely thought otherwise.
Back to the ignore list I suppose...over and out on this one (once again).
J H,
Weren't you the guy who said MLB pitchers never threw down the middle? Seems the evidence speaks otherwise.
BTW, I do listen to "good advice" and there has been some good advice here.
Ignorance? How can that be? I went and watched games, looked at the pitch f/x data and put some intelligent thought into it.
You seem stuck under some false idea that professional pitchers never throw one down the middle. All the evidence says otherwise.
Go ahead and ignore me though. And you think I am ignorant? Hum...pretty strange indeed..
Weren't you the guy who said MLB pitchers never threw down the middle? Seems the evidence speaks otherwise.
BTW, I do listen to "good advice" and there has been some good advice here.
Ignorance? How can that be? I went and watched games, looked at the pitch f/x data and put some intelligent thought into it.
You seem stuck under some false idea that professional pitchers never throw one down the middle. All the evidence says otherwise.
Go ahead and ignore me though. And you think I am ignorant? Hum...pretty strange indeed..
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
In fact, at camps and other tryouts, etc, professional players, including current MLB players, teach the kids the same methods they themselves use at that level. We don't teach kids methods other than what it takes to go to the highest level of play- that is always the goal.
Can you explain the above, I mean aren't the basic tenants the same, who ever said that you teach things differently? I think the point being that there is a time to do things and a time not too, and mostly in pro ball it's about mastering one thing before you move on to another 9that doesn't mean limiting things just how you go about business).
Can you point out those current MLB players that give lessons and where?
The point I think that you missed, given by JW, who actually addressed the topic better than anyone here (including yourself). In case you missed what he said (which I think that you have) you can go back and read it yourself, I think you may have missed it, as cabbagedad says, I very rarely think that you actually bother to read what is posted and miss the important stuff for sure. BTW, he specifically mentioned FB being the most important foundational pitch. I think we have spent hours here discussing that while you have said otherwise.
Even in milb, there is a progression, that is why it's called milb and not MLB. I don't know if you were listening to game 2 of the NLCS or busy charting pitches, but Carp just recently began to use another new pitch. I am thinking that is why most here questioned your bullpen routine and your philosophy in general, but that's ok, IMO it's all what comes out in the wash, and your pitcher and the ones you claim to work with haven't come out of it yet.
JH, surprised that he didn't ask how the weather was where you live. BTW, he mentioned here that he knows a lot about baseballl because he watches MLB network every night and they said this and they said that, and FWIW, I take lot of what they say with a grain of salt and a lot of it is their perception, not always the case, IMO.
CADad,
I said that Verlander had a rising FB, which he does indeed have and appears to the batter he is throwing to. I am sorry that you misunderstood what I origially meant, that was my fault. I just can't stand when guys here have to come on using all these fancy numbers and statistics to prove they are superior to others, don't be like them. JMO.
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
Weren't you the guy who said MLB pitchers never threw down the middle? Seems the evidence speaks otherwise.
Where did he say that? Are pitchers taught to throw down the middle of the plate, I don't see anywhere that JW mentioned that is where you practice throwing a FB anywhere down the middle of the plate?
You stated that is what you do in your BP, I even sent you a copy of the Braves bullpen model and no where do they practice throwing the FB down the middle.
Please correct me if I misunderstood what he stated.
And I 'll bet GBM takes just about everything discussed here and will use it, he may just not admit it. Big example is the discussions about his son using different arm slots, I'll bet he doesn't do that anymore.
quote:Originally posted by TPM:quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
Weren't you the guy who said MLB pitchers never threw down the middle? Seems the evidence speaks otherwise.
Where did he say that? Are pitchers taught to throw down the middle of the plate, I don't see anywhere that JW mentioned that is where you practice throwing a FB anywhere down the middle of the plate?
You stated that is what you do in your BP, I even sent you a copy of the Braves bullpen model and no where do they practice throwing the FB down the middle.
Please correct me if I misunderstood what he stated.
And I 'll bet GBM takes just about everything discussed here and will use it, he may just not admit it. Big example is the discussions about his son using different arm slots, I'll bet he doesn't do that anymore.
This is what he originally said-
quote:GBM- Why would you ever want your kids to throw a ball right down the middle in a bullpen? That's never the goal in a game, so why practice something that you wouldn't execute on the field?
We have beat this dead horse into the ground. He tried to refute this but as one can see reading all of the posts and the data linked, pitchers do throw down the middle in games. There were even several other posters who agreed that there are occasions when a pitcher throws down the middle/ catcher sets up down the middle.
Do you also refute this evidence? As I remember you also believe that pitchers do in fact throw down the middle. So what's your beef then?
I don't care what the Braves do in their bullpens, I have found something that works. It is a matter of opinion at this point.
BTW, there is no harm in throwing a bullpen, working different situations, and calling for one down the middle. That happens all the time in HS ballgames when pitchers are struggling with command and are walking kids. You should know that!
quote:Originally posted by TPM:quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
In fact, at camps and other tryouts, etc, professional players, including current MLB players, teach the kids the same methods they themselves use at that level. We don't teach kids methods other than what it takes to go to the highest level of play- that is always the goal.
Can you explain the above, I mean aren't the basic tenants the same, who ever said that you teach things differently? I think the point being that there is a time to do things and a time not too, and mostly in pro ball it's about mastering one thing before you move on to another 9that doesn't mean limiting things just how you go about business).
Can you point out those current MLB players that give lessons and where?
The point I think that you missed, given by JW, who actually addressed the topic better than anyone here (including yourself). In case you missed what he said (which I think that you have) you can go back and read it yourself, I think you may have missed it, as cabbagedad says, I very rarely think that you actually bother to read what is posted and miss the important stuff for sure. BTW, he specifically mentioned FB being the most important foundational pitch. I think we have spent hours here discussing that while you have said otherwise.
Even in milb, there is a progression, that is why it's called milb and not MLB. I don't know if you were listening to game 2 of the NLCS or busy charting pitches, but Carp just recently began to use another new pitch. I am thinking that is why most here questioned your bullpen routine and your philosophy in general, but that's ok, IMO it's all what comes out in the wash, and your pitcher and the ones you claim to work with haven't come out of it yet.
JH, surprised that he didn't ask how the weather was where you live. BTW, he mentioned here that he knows a lot about baseballl because he watches MLB network every night and they said this and they said that, and FWIW, I take lot of what they say with a grain of salt and a lot of it is their perception, not always the case, IMO.
CADad,
I said that Verlander had a rising FB, which he does indeed have and appears to the batter he is throwing to. I am sorry that you misunderstood what I origially meant, that was my fault. I just can't stand when guys here have to come on using all these fancy numbers and statistics to prove they are superior to others, don't be like them. JMO.
I never ever said that the fastball wasn't the foundational pitch. Get your facts straight. You do this all the time to me and I am tired of it. Go back and read my very first post where I spoke rather plainly about hitting the corners with the fastball- hitting spots and learning control.
But no, you guys don't read that and instead jump on me like white on rice claiming what a bad coach I am for having my pitchers learn to throw a strike when they need it.
Your reasoning and facts are off. Do better homework.
BTW, How is the weather there in Florida
TPM- The weather here has actually been absolutely beautiful lately. Leaves are starting to change colors and Halloween decorations are going up. Everyone on the college team is throwing bullpens and no one is calling for a pitch down the middle. Probably because that's not where anyone ever would want to throw the ball, because in college baseball that's a bad pitch..100% of the time. I guess in my "refuting" I've come to a conclusion that I'm "wrong". Go figure.
CADad,
I suspect its much more likely that the measuring was off someplace, rather than he threw a ball that actually rose, no matter how far off the spin rates are, but its all immaterial. Let’s say that its true. How many times it is gonna happen over the course of a ballgame? Is a rising pitch a factor a batter should try to factor into his plan?
I suspect its much more likely that the measuring was off someplace, rather than he threw a ball that actually rose, no matter how far off the spin rates are, but its all immaterial. Let’s say that its true. How many times it is gonna happen over the course of a ballgame? Is a rising pitch a factor a batter should try to factor into his plan?
Stats,
Check my last post. They do their vertical movement with gravity based only on the last 40' of drop due to gravity so it underestimates the drop due to gravity on a good fastball by about a foot. I have no idea why they use 40' instead of 54 or 55'.
Check my last post. They do their vertical movement with gravity based only on the last 40' of drop due to gravity so it underestimates the drop due to gravity on a good fastball by about a foot. I have no idea why they use 40' instead of 54 or 55'.
Actually, I think it is important for kids to learn to throw down the middle. There are days when you just can't hit your spot and there's no trend to where the ball is missing. In that case all you can do in some situations during a game is try to throw the ball down the middle and hope to miss somewhere in the strike zone.
I don't know about anyone else but there were days when I was missing fairly consistently in one direction and by trying to throw the ball down the middle I was able to get low and outside where due to lack of stuff I needed to be most of the time.
Kids especially need to have the option of throwing the ball down the middle on 3-0 or if they are struggling to throw strikes. At higher levels one hopes that a pitcher has the ability to throw a bit better pitch consistently for strikes even on 3-0.
BTW, I also believe that pitchers don't throw enough BP anymore. Throwing BP teaches you to figure out how to throw strikes when you need to.
I don't know about anyone else but there were days when I was missing fairly consistently in one direction and by trying to throw the ball down the middle I was able to get low and outside where due to lack of stuff I needed to be most of the time.
Kids especially need to have the option of throwing the ball down the middle on 3-0 or if they are struggling to throw strikes. At higher levels one hopes that a pitcher has the ability to throw a bit better pitch consistently for strikes even on 3-0.
BTW, I also believe that pitchers don't throw enough BP anymore. Throwing BP teaches you to figure out how to throw strikes when you need to.
TPM,
Easy to get terminology mixed up between a pitcher who has a perceived rising fastball and a true rising fastball. Nobody is even close to a true rising fastball but Verlander looks to have the most vertical movement of any of the really hard throwers relative to gravity so there's probably more justification for saying he has a rising fastball than anyone else.
Easy to get terminology mixed up between a pitcher who has a perceived rising fastball and a true rising fastball. Nobody is even close to a true rising fastball but Verlander looks to have the most vertical movement of any of the really hard throwers relative to gravity so there's probably more justification for saying he has a rising fastball than anyone else.
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:quote:Originally posted by bballman:quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
i would just like to state that Players below the MLB level aren't really that much different than the MLB players besides the fact that the MLB players are generally better and more consistant.
Uhhh, I think that's what makes them different. That's like me saying I'm not that much different than the world's strongest man, except that I'm not as big or as strong as him.
That analogy is ridiculous. C'mon man use your brain a little.
You don't train to be the worlds strongest man so that analogy doesn't apply. Good HS, college and pro players actually train to become the next potenetial MLB player. For your analogy to work you must be training to be the worlds strongest man. So are you?
My point is about there not being a lot of difference "on this issue of control" between HS and MLB pitchers.
Well, GBM, I don't care what you say about my analogy. Even if I trained to be the world's strongest man, I wouldn't be the same as them.
By you saying there is not a big difference between a HS pitcher and a MLB pitcher is just ignorant. If you put a good HS pitcher out on the mound against a MLB team, he would get rocked. Do HS pitchers and MLB pitchers work on the same thing? Of course they do. Are they basically the same? NO. MLB pitchers are so much better than HS pitchers it is rediculous. They have better stuff, better command, are superior mentally, better conditioned - everything. If that wasn't the case, everyone would make it to the Major Leagues.
GBM, I think you make some valid points at times. Not all your ideas are out in left field. But when you make a statement like "i would just like to state that Players below the MLB level aren't really that much different than the MLB players", it makes it hard to take whatever else you say seriously.
bballman,
You are correct on your points, I agree with you. Perhaps I failed to mention the context of what I was implying. Sometimes I forget to do that. I was speaking in the context of hitting "location" and that good pitchers below the MLB level are really not that much different in that aspect. For instance- Last year we had a good pitcher in our conference- our crosstown rival and he pitched a complete game against us (7 inning game) striking out 20 of the 22 batters he faced. There was a walk i believe at one point and the lone guy who hit it into play grounded out to third for the last out of the game.
You are correct on your points, I agree with you. Perhaps I failed to mention the context of what I was implying. Sometimes I forget to do that. I was speaking in the context of hitting "location" and that good pitchers below the MLB level are really not that much different in that aspect. For instance- Last year we had a good pitcher in our conference- our crosstown rival and he pitched a complete game against us (7 inning game) striking out 20 of the 22 batters he faced. There was a walk i believe at one point and the lone guy who hit it into play grounded out to third for the last out of the game.
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
bballman,
You are correct on your points, I agree with you. Perhaps I failed to mention the context of what I was implying. Sometimes I forget to do that. I was speaking in the context of hitting "location" and that good pitchers below the MLB level are really not that much different in that aspect. For instance- Last year we had a good pitcher in our conference- our crosstown rival and he pitched a complete game against us (7 inning game) striking out 20 of the 22 batters he faced. There was a walk i believe at one point and the lone guy who hit it into play grounded out to third for the last out of the game.
I appreciate the agreement. I also understand that there are some VERY good HS pitchers. However, pitching against HS batters is MUCH different than pitching against MLB hitters. I have no idea what level of play your son's HS plays in. I have no idea what level of play the pitcher you mentioned plays in. I know that my son plays in the highest classification of baseball in our state. He also plays in arguably the best region in the state. It is still no where near the level of competition he will play in college. And that is no where near the level of competition you have to play against in the MiLB and that is no where near the level of competition you will play against in the MLB.
As good as some of the teams we play against in HS, I emphasize the point to him that you take the top 2 hitters on every team you face, and that is who you will be facing up and down the order in college. Now you take those college hitters and maybe two (on average) will go into MiLB. Then the competition is funneled down even more into the big leagues. My son is a pretty decent pitcher and has accepted to play on scholarship at a top 20 D2 team. He was an all region pitcher his Jr. year and second team all region his freshman and sophomore years. There is no way he would be able to compete at the MLB level. For all the reasons I mentioned in my last post.
I just believe that there is no way you can compare any HS pitcher to MLB pitchers. There is just way too much to be learned and honed, both mentally and physically, to consider them anywhere near the same.
My son's pitching coach since he was around 9 was the single A pitching coach for a year and AA pitching coach for three years in the Red Sox organization. He is currently their Advance Scout for the major league team. When he was the AA pitching coach, he said one of the biggest things they need to work on with their pitchers was mental. They all have exceptional stuff. How do they react when they have a bad outing? Are they able to come back in their next appearance and forget about what happened last time? See, pretty much all these guys were dominant growing up. At the higher levels, they will get hit. How do they respond. How do they prepare. How do they handle failure. There is a huge mental component as well.
I know I am rambling a little, but my point is, just because a kid dominates in HS, does not put them on the same level as a professional pitcher. There is still much more weeding out to be done. There is a TON of competition out there for very few spots. There is a reason why these guys make it to the MLB and then succeed in the MLB. There is something different about them than the thousands who wanted to be there and didn't make it. Whether that be their physical stuff or their mental makeup or a combination of the two. There is something different that makes them better.
Just want to say this about MLB or High School pitchers... Nearly, if not every, Major League pitcher was once a high school kid.
Actually, it kind of shows the inexactness involved in scouting. A high school kid goes undrafted... He gets drafted out of college... He becomes a Major League pitcher.
If scouting were really exact, that same pitcher would have been drafted well as a high school player. It's just that no one could predict (project) it at that time or the right person didn't see it. But he is the same person... HS... College... Pro. Every player was once a high school player. Scouts try to predict their future... That is extremely difficult.
I think there has been too much debate over someone throwing the ball down the middle in the bullpen. If anyone out there knows a kid that can throw every pitch straight down the middle at 90 mph, please let me know. Because that same kid should be able to do real good at hitting a different location as well.
I also think there's too much debate about 3-0 pitches. Every 3-0 situation is different. Is someone leading off an inning, are runners in scoring position, who is the next hitter, what is the score, what inning, etc., etc.
When I coached, I can't think of many situations where our hitter leading off an inning was going to get the green light on 3-0. His job is to get on base. Can't tell you how many times I've seen the 3-0 pitch right down the middle and then the 3-1 pitch nowhere near the strikezone. Yes the 3-0 pitch was the best pitch to hit. Maybe a good hitter would hit .500 on that pitch. But that 3-1 pitch in every situation puts him on base 100% of the time. And I might just see the 3-1 pitch right down the middle.
To another extreme... We actually had a swing for sure sign at 3-0. Situation has to be perfect for that to happen. The pitcher shows he is pitching to the hitter. The hitter is going to swing right in his wheelhouse and miss even if the pitch is not even close. In other words, we make the count 3-1 rather than taking the walk.
This happens when the best hitter is at the plate followed by a weak hitter, usually with very important runners on base late in the game. Of course, you would hardly ever see this in MLB because of the quality of the players from one hitter to the next.
We actually did do this a few times in college. Situation example... Late in game, score is tied, Runners at 1B and 2B with 2 outs and our best hitter at the plate, followed by someone much weaker on deck.
I actually could see this possibly happening in MLB with someone like Pujols in that situation. Would you rather have your best hitter up there in that situation with a 3-1 count, or the base loaded with a weaker hitter and a 0-0 count? That's a lot to think about, but at our small college level it made sense in certain situations.
Actually, it kind of shows the inexactness involved in scouting. A high school kid goes undrafted... He gets drafted out of college... He becomes a Major League pitcher.
If scouting were really exact, that same pitcher would have been drafted well as a high school player. It's just that no one could predict (project) it at that time or the right person didn't see it. But he is the same person... HS... College... Pro. Every player was once a high school player. Scouts try to predict their future... That is extremely difficult.
I think there has been too much debate over someone throwing the ball down the middle in the bullpen. If anyone out there knows a kid that can throw every pitch straight down the middle at 90 mph, please let me know. Because that same kid should be able to do real good at hitting a different location as well.
I also think there's too much debate about 3-0 pitches. Every 3-0 situation is different. Is someone leading off an inning, are runners in scoring position, who is the next hitter, what is the score, what inning, etc., etc.
When I coached, I can't think of many situations where our hitter leading off an inning was going to get the green light on 3-0. His job is to get on base. Can't tell you how many times I've seen the 3-0 pitch right down the middle and then the 3-1 pitch nowhere near the strikezone. Yes the 3-0 pitch was the best pitch to hit. Maybe a good hitter would hit .500 on that pitch. But that 3-1 pitch in every situation puts him on base 100% of the time. And I might just see the 3-1 pitch right down the middle.
To another extreme... We actually had a swing for sure sign at 3-0. Situation has to be perfect for that to happen. The pitcher shows he is pitching to the hitter. The hitter is going to swing right in his wheelhouse and miss even if the pitch is not even close. In other words, we make the count 3-1 rather than taking the walk.
This happens when the best hitter is at the plate followed by a weak hitter, usually with very important runners on base late in the game. Of course, you would hardly ever see this in MLB because of the quality of the players from one hitter to the next.
We actually did do this a few times in college. Situation example... Late in game, score is tied, Runners at 1B and 2B with 2 outs and our best hitter at the plate, followed by someone much weaker on deck.
I actually could see this possibly happening in MLB with someone like Pujols in that situation. Would you rather have your best hitter up there in that situation with a 3-1 count, or the base loaded with a weaker hitter and a 0-0 count? That's a lot to think about, but at our small college level it made sense in certain situations.
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
I was speaking in the context of hitting "location" and that good pitchers below the MLB level are really not that much different in that aspect. For instance- Last year we had a good pitcher in our conference- our crosstown rival and he pitched a complete game against us (7 inning game) striking out 20 of the 22 batters he faced. There was a walk i believe at one point and the lone guy who hit it into play grounded out to third for the last out of the game.
So you are saying that this HS pitcher could have pitched against college/pro players or isn't it just really that he was having a "good" day and everything was working, I mean isn't what that is all about? I thought that you established that most likely those down the middle pitches were mistakes? I do not beleive that a HS pitcher throwing 80 can get away with throwing down the middle with a better HS hitter no matter what the count (good point with the pitch called for has to be for the right situation and the right pitcher).
JH,
You brought up a good point, down the middle is the worst pitch in college baseball. My understanding, the throw down the middle is either supposed to be high or low, not mid. Just because a catcher (as seen on TV) sets up in the middle means that is where they called for the pitch, they discussed this last night. Example being Yadi Molina does not set his glove up anywhere specific.
I agree with PG about the difficulty of throwing a ball down the middle at a higher velo, maybe that's the difference here, for HS pitchers throwing 80, it's a lot easier to be more accurate than one throwing 90. Try throwing 90 and placing the ball where you want it, takes lots of practice, I would imagine, wouldn't you all? But I guess that is why the pitcher out of HS with velo of mid to upper 90's get picked over those with 80 FB (but having better stats).
I am curious if this is the right thing to do (practice throwing the FB down the middle), why is it not done in pro bull pens or in college? The braves workout calls for a CB down the middle, specifically states not the FB, now if that was important wouldn't they do it, wouldn't that be in JW's post? I sent the bull pen routine to GBM because he mentions the Braves closer so often and apparently he doesn't parctice throwing his FB down the middle?
The hitter used as example in the 3-0 count was Albert Pujols. Maybe it would have made more sense in another situation. I think that's the point, trying to prove some points by giving giving silly examples doesn't make for a good argument (you can't tell me that Albert won't swing at a pitch down the middle of the plate at anytime).
Yes, I am beating a dead horse.
pg,
Good stuff, I agree.
bballman,
I know that MLB pitchers are really good. My point is that when it comes to location- being able to hit spots to catcher, there isn't a lot of difference between good HS, college, MiLB pitchers with doing that. As the HS and up kids get better- more velocity, better stuff, it also causes them to have to work hard again to establish and keep command and control at the higher velocity.
When my son started his HS career at the pitcher position this last year he was into his third game before he finally walked someone. He works very hard on locating his two main pitches, perhaps harder than anyone else I know of. He will throw a bullpen and keep on one spot until he can hit it regularly. Sometimes it's like 20 pitches to the low outside corner before he moves on. He understands that for each spot, with each different pitch there is a small change in release point.
Somehow some people on this board think that I teach only "down the middle". My intent was never that at all. I teach that it is better to try to throw one down the middle when you absolutely need a strike rather than walk a batter on base. It's about hitting the location.
Good stuff, I agree.
bballman,
I know that MLB pitchers are really good. My point is that when it comes to location- being able to hit spots to catcher, there isn't a lot of difference between good HS, college, MiLB pitchers with doing that. As the HS and up kids get better- more velocity, better stuff, it also causes them to have to work hard again to establish and keep command and control at the higher velocity.
When my son started his HS career at the pitcher position this last year he was into his third game before he finally walked someone. He works very hard on locating his two main pitches, perhaps harder than anyone else I know of. He will throw a bullpen and keep on one spot until he can hit it regularly. Sometimes it's like 20 pitches to the low outside corner before he moves on. He understands that for each spot, with each different pitch there is a small change in release point.
Somehow some people on this board think that I teach only "down the middle". My intent was never that at all. I teach that it is better to try to throw one down the middle when you absolutely need a strike rather than walk a batter on base. It's about hitting the location.
This is a dead horse, and it wasn't a very good horse when it was alive.
quote:Originally posted by TPM:quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
I was speaking in the context of hitting "location" and that good pitchers below the MLB level are really not that much different in that aspect. For instance- Last year we had a good pitcher in our conference- our crosstown rival and he pitched a complete game against us (7 inning game) striking out 20 of the 22 batters he faced. There was a walk i believe at one point and the lone guy who hit it into play grounded out to third for the last out of the game.
So you are saying that this HS pitcher could have pitched against college/pro players or isn't it just really that he was having a "good" day and everything was working, I mean isn't what that is all about? I thought that you established that most likely those down the middle pitches were mistakes? I do not beleive that a HS pitcher throwing 80 can get away with throwing down the middle with a better HS hitter no matter what the count (good point with the pitch called for has to be for the right situation and the right pitcher).
JH,
You brought up a good point, down the middle is the worst pitch in college baseball. My understanding, the throw down the middle is either supposed to be high or low, not mid. Just because a catcher (as seen on TV) sets up in the middle means that is where they called for the pitch, they discussed this last night. Example being Yadi Molina does not set his glove up anywhere specific.
I agree with PG about the difficulty of throwing a ball down the middle at a higher velo, maybe that's the difference here, for HS pitchers throwing 80, it's a lot easier to be more accurate than one throwing 90. Try throwing 90 and placing the ball where you want it, takes lots of practice, I would imagine, wouldn't you all? But I guess that is why the pitcher out of HS with velo of mid to upper 90's get picked over those with 80 FB (but having better stats).
I am curious if this is the right thing to do (practice throwing the FB down the middle), why is it not done in pro bull pens or in college? The braves workout calls for a CB down the middle, specifically states not the FB, now if that was important wouldn't they do it, wouldn't that be in JW's post? I sent the bull pen routine to GBM because he mentions the Braves closer so often and apparently he doesn't parctice throwing his FB down the middle?
The hitter used as example in the 3-0 count was Albert Pujols. Maybe it would have made more sense in another situation. I think that's the point, trying to prove some points by giving giving silly examples doesn't make for a good argument (you can't tell me that Albert won't swing at a pitch down the middle of the plate at anytime).
Yes, I am beating a dead horse.
TPM , give it up already.
GBM,
I can't prove the difference between HS, college, pro wrt location. I do however have a story to tell. One year when my son was attending a Alan Jaeger camp Erik Hiljus showed up to workout as he'd been suspended from the Sacramento Bees for a week. He threw a pen while he was there. He had the best control I'd ever seen in person. He didn't have good enough control for the major leagues however.
Pitchers often have problems as they move up in level because the hitters hit more of their mistakes. The pitchers have to be finer and they end up giving up more walks. Either they learn better command or they stop moving up. Of course the pitchers have better command as they move up the ladder.
I can't prove the difference between HS, college, pro wrt location. I do however have a story to tell. One year when my son was attending a Alan Jaeger camp Erik Hiljus showed up to workout as he'd been suspended from the Sacramento Bees for a week. He threw a pen while he was there. He had the best control I'd ever seen in person. He didn't have good enough control for the major leagues however.
Pitchers often have problems as they move up in level because the hitters hit more of their mistakes. The pitchers have to be finer and they end up giving up more walks. Either they learn better command or they stop moving up. Of course the pitchers have better command as they move up the ladder.
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
TPM , give it up already.
Why just tell me that, besides you need to take some of your own advice.
Where did anyone say that you teach only down the middle? Perhaps you need to go back and read.
Good post CADad, GBM would be shocked to see all the great pitchers that were stars in HS ( including walking hardly any hitters), even college, yet not able to get to ML. Strange misconception that there is no difference.
As mentioned it's much easier to hit the spot at 80 than 90.
I was under the impression that in bullpens, there should be a consistancy. Like in conditioning, working one side (in this instance release) more than the other isn't good, can anyone tell me if this to be true?
Talk about beating a dead horse.
IMO... This is a case where everyone has some good points. We don't all have to agree with each other. One thing for sure... We all love baseball!
The following statistics are kind of interesting.
Albert Pujols
3-0 Count: 4 for 8 with 27 walks, 1 double, 2 RBI
After 3-0 count: 6 for 18 with 34 walks, 1 double, 2 RBI
If I’m adding this up correctly (highly unlikely) the ABs and walks add up to 87 times that Pujols had a 3-0 count. He walked 61 times.
In 2010
3-0 count: 4 for 5 with 53 walks, 1 double, 1 RBI
After 3-0 count: 12 for 18 with 59 walks, 3 doubles, 1 HR, 6 RBI
In 2009
3-0 count: 3 for 9 with 69 walks, 2 HR, 2 RBI
After 3-0 count: 6 for 21 with 79 walks, 4 HR, 6 RBI
In 2008
3-0 count: 6 for 9 with 51 walks, 2 doubles, 1 HR, 5 RBI
After 3-0 count: 11 for 24 with 66 walks, 4 doubles, 2 HR, 7 RBI
Entire career
3-0 count: 29 for 57 with 415 walks, 6 doubles, 1 triple 6 HR, 20 RBI
After 3-0 count: 74 for 191 with 537 walks, 18 doubles, 2 triples, 16 HR, 53 RBI
Not sure what all this means, but if I’m pitching to Pujols I sure don’t want to go 3-0.
The thing these stats don’t tell us is how often Pujols actually swung the bat with a 3-0 count.
I do know on opening day 2004 he swung at a pitch outside the strike zone with a 3-0 count and hit a double. I remember it because I know the pitcher very well.
Of course that is the other thing these stats don’t tell us… The location of all those 3-0 pitches. It does tell us that he is a lifetime .500 hitter with a 3-0 count. Or you could look at as he made an out half the time he had a 3-0 count. Then again that doesn’t count any foul balls or swing and miss on 3-0 counts that might have happened. That would move to the “After 3-0 count” statistic.
Not trying to start an argument, I actually find this stuff very interesting.
The following statistics are kind of interesting.
Albert Pujols
3-0 Count: 4 for 8 with 27 walks, 1 double, 2 RBI
After 3-0 count: 6 for 18 with 34 walks, 1 double, 2 RBI
If I’m adding this up correctly (highly unlikely) the ABs and walks add up to 87 times that Pujols had a 3-0 count. He walked 61 times.
In 2010
3-0 count: 4 for 5 with 53 walks, 1 double, 1 RBI
After 3-0 count: 12 for 18 with 59 walks, 3 doubles, 1 HR, 6 RBI
In 2009
3-0 count: 3 for 9 with 69 walks, 2 HR, 2 RBI
After 3-0 count: 6 for 21 with 79 walks, 4 HR, 6 RBI
In 2008
3-0 count: 6 for 9 with 51 walks, 2 doubles, 1 HR, 5 RBI
After 3-0 count: 11 for 24 with 66 walks, 4 doubles, 2 HR, 7 RBI
Entire career
3-0 count: 29 for 57 with 415 walks, 6 doubles, 1 triple 6 HR, 20 RBI
After 3-0 count: 74 for 191 with 537 walks, 18 doubles, 2 triples, 16 HR, 53 RBI
Not sure what all this means, but if I’m pitching to Pujols I sure don’t want to go 3-0.
The thing these stats don’t tell us is how often Pujols actually swung the bat with a 3-0 count.
I do know on opening day 2004 he swung at a pitch outside the strike zone with a 3-0 count and hit a double. I remember it because I know the pitcher very well.
Of course that is the other thing these stats don’t tell us… The location of all those 3-0 pitches. It does tell us that he is a lifetime .500 hitter with a 3-0 count. Or you could look at as he made an out half the time he had a 3-0 count. Then again that doesn’t count any foul balls or swing and miss on 3-0 counts that might have happened. That would move to the “After 3-0 count” statistic.
Not trying to start an argument, I actually find this stuff very interesting.
PG,
You have to know how much I love seeing numbers like that bandied about! The only thing about me though, is that I couldn’t care less about pro players. But its why I keep such in depth records for the HS teams I score for.
Its not that ML numbers don’t interest me, but those guys are already in the ML. What I try to do is see how the same situations at the HS level play out. Here’s an example of how much things differ. In the ML, I believe the percentage of runs which there were RBI’s credited is over 95%. In my experience, the HS numbers are much closer to 80%.
Here’s another one. I’ve scored 4 of the Det/Tx games, and for those games here’s the percentage of BIP outs by Batting Position for the Ranger’s hitters.
1-54.5%
2-80.0%
3-76.9%
4-75.0%
5-90.0%
6-69.2%
7-77.8%
8-38.5%
9-63.5%
In contrast, here’s the numbers for our school’s batters over 5 seasons.
1-61.4%
2-63.1%
3-58.7%
4-56.2%
5-59.3%
6-60.9%
7-64.4%
8-61.1%
9-57.5%
What I find interesting, is trying to figure out why those numbers look like they do. Is it the great pitching or great defense that’s having the most effect?
You have to know how much I love seeing numbers like that bandied about! The only thing about me though, is that I couldn’t care less about pro players. But its why I keep such in depth records for the HS teams I score for.
Its not that ML numbers don’t interest me, but those guys are already in the ML. What I try to do is see how the same situations at the HS level play out. Here’s an example of how much things differ. In the ML, I believe the percentage of runs which there were RBI’s credited is over 95%. In my experience, the HS numbers are much closer to 80%.
Here’s another one. I’ve scored 4 of the Det/Tx games, and for those games here’s the percentage of BIP outs by Batting Position for the Ranger’s hitters.
1-54.5%
2-80.0%
3-76.9%
4-75.0%
5-90.0%
6-69.2%
7-77.8%
8-38.5%
9-63.5%
In contrast, here’s the numbers for our school’s batters over 5 seasons.
1-61.4%
2-63.1%
3-58.7%
4-56.2%
5-59.3%
6-60.9%
7-64.4%
8-61.1%
9-57.5%
What I find interesting, is trying to figure out why those numbers look like they do. Is it the great pitching or great defense that’s having the most effect?
Stats- 4 games is an awfully small sample size to do a pattern analysis with.
quote:Originally posted by PGStaff:
Not trying to start an argument, I actually find this stuff very interesting.
I don't think that anyone ever would think that what you post here is for the purpose of starting an argument.
Clearly most recognize there are huge differences between posting good information (not for argument sake) that is helpful to the discussion and posting information that is just considered an attempt to show up the previous poster, let alone possibly cause an argument.
Either way, you proved a point, to me anyway, that people who claim they know so much about baseball really don't know as much as they think they do. JMO.
Why would anyone throw a FB down the middle of the plate to Albert Pujols at anytime?
quote:Originally posted by J H:
Stats- 4 games is an awfully small sample size to do a pattern analysis with.
I know, and that’s why I wouldn’t try to do that. However, the sample size doesn’t mean the reasons for what’s going on can’t be contemplated. IOW, why are those numbers what they are, and what affects them?
When you start looking, there are many interesting things going on, and looking at them from different perspectives is a great way to try to answer questions, or at least I think so.
quote:Originally posted by TPM:
…Why would anyone throw a FB down the middle of the plate to Albert Pujols at anytime?
Well, it could be a mistake. Lord knows that happens often enough. Or, like PG pointed out, the game situation might dictate that it’s a good option. FI, if the Cards are down by 8 in the bottom of the 9th and there’s 2 out and a 3-0 count, why not? What’s the worst that could happen, and what’s the likelihood of it happening? If it were me, and I’d been throwing him sliders and CU’s, I’d risk an attempt at piping one, actually hoping he’d hit the dang thing.
Here’s the thing. The possible situations are so many and varied, its ludicrous to say always or never. Those brushes are far too broad to paint with.
quote:Originally posted by TPM:quote:Originally posted by PGStaff:
Not trying to start an argument, I actually find this stuff very interesting.
I don't think that anyone ever would think that what you post here is for the purpose of starting an argument.
Clearly most recognize there are huge differences between posting good information (not for argument sake) that is helpful to the discussion and posting information that is just considered an attempt to show up the previous poster, let alone possibly cause an argument.
Either way, you proved a point, to me anyway, that people who claim they know so much about baseball really don't know as much as they think they do. JMO.
Why would anyone throw a FB down the middle of the plate to Albert Pujols at anytime?
The truth is that if you go look at Pujols hit chart you will notice there are a lot of pitches down the middle of the plate. BTW, those are MLB pitchers throwing either well placed pitches or "mistakes" down the middle. See if you can count all the dots down the middle, the "swing pitch types"-
Pitch types to Pujols in all counts, all season data
I would say that a lot of pitchers throw down the middle to Pujols. Now it can be argued that a lot of them were "mistake" pitches. But remember that claiming this means that the best pitchers in the world really don't have the control we credit them with having. But, if we say that most of them were placed pitches, then one must agree that "YES", pitchers do throw down the middle to Pujols on purpose. I tend to lean in the direction that a majority of those pitches down the middle were mistakes while "some" were placed pitches. To me this shows two facts-
1. Pitchers at the MLB level, don't have the control we credit them with having. and-
2. Pitchers do throw, on occasion, down the middle even to the best hitters.
Just to be fair though, let's look at a not-so-good hitter from this year in comparison. Heres Rick Ankiel who ended up batting .239 with 9 HR and 39 rbi-
Rick Ankiel hit chart for season
Now I know they are different types of batters and were obviously pitched to differently. That isn't the point I want to bring up. Just look at how many are int he strike zone that he swings at versus his takes. It looks very similar to Pujols but obviously Pujols is a much better hitter.
The bottom line is this- Do pitchers throw pitches down the middle to Pujols? Yes, they do- even fastballs down the middle to Pujols. Perhaps they were mistake pitches, or not, but what does it matter? The best pitchers in the world, facing the best batter in the world, still throw pitches, including fastballs, down the middle of the plate.
I rest my case
quote:Originally posted by PGStaff:
IMO... This is a case where everyone has some good points. We don't all have to agree with each other. One thing for sure... We all love baseball!
The following statistics are kind of interesting.
Albert Pujols
3-0 Count: 4 for 8 with 27 walks, 1 double, 2 RBI
After 3-0 count: 6 for 18 with 34 walks, 1 double, 2 RBI
If I’m adding this up correctly (highly unlikely) the ABs and walks add up to 87 times that Pujols had a 3-0 count. He walked 61 times.
In 2010
3-0 count: 4 for 5 with 53 walks, 1 double, 1 RBI
After 3-0 count: 12 for 18 with 59 walks, 3 doubles, 1 HR, 6 RBI
In 2009
3-0 count: 3 for 9 with 69 walks, 2 HR, 2 RBI
After 3-0 count: 6 for 21 with 79 walks, 4 HR, 6 RBI
In 2008
3-0 count: 6 for 9 with 51 walks, 2 doubles, 1 HR, 5 RBI
After 3-0 count: 11 for 24 with 66 walks, 4 doubles, 2 HR, 7 RBI
Entire career
3-0 count: 29 for 57 with 415 walks, 6 doubles, 1 triple 6 HR, 20 RBI
After 3-0 count: 74 for 191 with 537 walks, 18 doubles, 2 triples, 16 HR, 53 RBI
Not sure what all this means, but if I’m pitching to Pujols I sure don’t want to go 3-0.
The thing these stats don’t tell us is how often Pujols actually swung the bat with a 3-0 count.
I do know on opening day 2004 he swung at a pitch outside the strike zone with a 3-0 count and hit a double. I remember it because I know the pitcher very well.
Of course that is the other thing these stats don’t tell us… The location of all those 3-0 pitches. It does tell us that he is a lifetime .500 hitter with a 3-0 count. Or you could look at as he made an out half the time he had a 3-0 count. Then again that doesn’t count any foul balls or swing and miss on 3-0 counts that might have happened. That would move to the “After 3-0 count” statistic.
Not trying to start an argument, I actually find this stuff very interesting.
This is all very interesting data. I wish you had the pitch locations, lifetime for all of Pujols 3-0 and after 3-0 counts. That would tell us a myriad of things. If I did my math correctly, here is what i came up with-
In his career, Pujols ends up reaching at least first base 88% of the time when he gets to 3-0 or after 3-0 counts. Staggering!
But, and I wish we had the pitch locations in those counts, he gets base hits only 8% of the time, extra base hits only 4% of the time and a home run only 1.8% of the time. These low numbers however are due to the fact that in these counts he is walking 80% of the time.
So yes, I do not want to get into a 3-0 count with Pujols- he is going to win the battle pretty much nine out of ten times! My only chance of keeping him from reaching first base is to get him to swing the bat and hope for the best.
Great information PG. There are so many unknown factors here. How many times was he in a 3-0 count because he was being pitched around? How many times was it an rbi situation and they were simply pitching around him? Is it better to pitch around him and give up a walk and force the next batter to beat you? Was the BB a win for the other team? The numbers are staggering no doubt.
quote:Originally posted by CADad:
Stats,
Check my last post. They do their vertical movement with gravity based only on the last 40' of drop due to gravity so it underestimates the drop due to gravity on a good fastball by about a foot. I have no idea why they use 40' instead of 54 or 55'.
That’s pretty simple. It was likely a compromise to allow at least some conventional thinking to maintain its place in the line of baseball wisdom. After all, its not a very good sign, if what the experts say differs too greatly from the facts.
I've been watching the games now while thinking about this thread. I think I see what I always kinda knew.
The pitchers want to stay out of the middle and the hitters want them there. The pitches to the middle come from frustration more than intent in a lot of cases. The pitchers want the umps to give them 3" on both sides of the plate. When it doesn't happen, they inch in further and further until they either get the strike or make a mistake.
The hitters want 3" of the plate on both sides to not count. When it doesn't they expand further and further until they can't get the bat on it.
Braun had an at bat last night that was a great example of staying with the plan IMO. Down and away over and over, making adjustments to the calls and reactions by the batter until Braun fouled one off, then BAM! Up and basically middle - he couldn't lay off or get the bat on it.
As soon as Braun fouled off down and away, I said to myself "Climb the ladder on him". It was beautiful.
I've watched Braun take that same pitch up and drive it into the bleachers more times than not.
The Game is mental. In that at bat, Braun got frustrated first.
The pitchers want to stay out of the middle and the hitters want them there. The pitches to the middle come from frustration more than intent in a lot of cases. The pitchers want the umps to give them 3" on both sides of the plate. When it doesn't happen, they inch in further and further until they either get the strike or make a mistake.
The hitters want 3" of the plate on both sides to not count. When it doesn't they expand further and further until they can't get the bat on it.
Braun had an at bat last night that was a great example of staying with the plan IMO. Down and away over and over, making adjustments to the calls and reactions by the batter until Braun fouled one off, then BAM! Up and basically middle - he couldn't lay off or get the bat on it.
As soon as Braun fouled off down and away, I said to myself "Climb the ladder on him". It was beautiful.
I've watched Braun take that same pitch up and drive it into the bleachers more times than not.
The Game is mental. In that at bat, Braun got frustrated first.
