Pitchers: I just can't understand why taller is better.

Yeah, look at tim hudson, jake peavy, pedro martinez, and juan rincon. all of them are 6'0 or under and can throw pretty hard.

I agree w/ the comment that height is not a direct correlation to success as a pitcher but one thing is.....Numbers (statistics).....the one common denominator that all of the successful pitchers at any level have are numbers........I assume you may (but quite possibly may not)be bitter because someone you know is a smaller pitcher and don't understand why he has not gotten a chance to play a higher level.

MLB (general) grading scale:
20 to 80....50 is average

20 = 80-81 mph (poor)
25 = 82-83 mph
30 = 84-85 mph
35 = 86 mph (well below avg)
40 = 87-88 mph (below avg)
45 = 89 mph (Slightly below avg)
50 = 90 mph (average)
55 = 91 mph (Slightly avove avg)
60 = 92-93 mph (above avg)
65 = 94 mph (well above avg)
70 = 95-96 mph
75 = 97 mph
80 = 98 mph (insane)


The one thing you cannot teach is velocity. It is measurable.......heart is not and it is a **** shame.....there are plenty of guys who have not gotten a chance to play because they did not touch the magic numbers above.......with that said......the other important thing is statistics.

If you don't have an avg FB and something to go with it you will probably not have the numbers to back it up.....If you are a pitcher on a top ten DIV - II , NAIA or DIV-1 JUCO Team and can post an ERA below 2.50 w/ less hits than innings pitched as well as close to as many, if not more K's than innings pitched w/ an ability to throw srikes (control not command)....example: 100 IP, 35 BB......If you can't do that at those levels w/ a below avg FB and fair, if not better, off-speed stuff to go w/ it then you will probably not get a chance.......

As much as it seems I disagree w/ you it is quite the contrary.........If someone who doesn't meet the above criterea never gets the chance it still remains unknown if they could ever succeed at a higher level......

However; if a young man is equiped w/ avg to above avg tools his success rate is much improved.....and usually height is directly correlated. It doesn't mean if you are tall will you be successful.....but that the successful pitchers are usually tall......

But like I said before.....if the sub 6 ft pitcher never gets the chance how will we ever know.....he better put up numbers as well as at least avg tool on the scale above....

Yes, I know 97 mph is better than 68 mph. But that's not what I wrote about.

I was kinda hoping there were a few physicists or engineers out there, or at least some HS kids with a better trig background than mine to discuss the arrival angle issues.

Something interesting that I've noticed...

The only sub-6 ft Pitchers to make to the big leagues are stars.
Pedro, Tim Hudson, Billy Wagner, Tom Gordon, John Franco, Mike Hampton, Roy Oswalt, etc. There are no borderline MLB Pitchers at 5'10. The only way a 5-10 guy can make it is if he is so good that he will obviously be a star. Otherwise, the opportunity will go to a 6'5 guy.

What about the mid range (average) height pitchers. No one ever recognizes their accomplishments. And what about the taller middle infielders and the catchers over 6’1”? Look at Mike Piazza, he’s listed at 6’3” and if we factor in the “shorter catchers are better” philosophy, he’s probably closer to 6’5”. Professional baseball is so unfair, I just don’t get it. And while we’re on the subject of those that get passed over, I think we need to recognize the lesser talented players too. There are so many lesser talented players that have great intangibles and make up that I’m sure they could compete at the highest levels but always seem to be passed over. Take Mike Piazza for instance; a 62nd round pick and only then because his father was friend of Tommy Lasorda and look at what he’s done.
-------------------------------------
OK no more sarcasm. If we divert enough attention and focus to what we perceive as an obstacle (pitcher height) we are only creating an obstacle that doesn't exist. I think we’re using lack of height as a scapegoat or an excuse. I say pick up your ball and glove and as NIKE says... JUST DO IT!
Fungo

quote:

The only sub-6 ft Pitchers to make to the big leagues are stars

Interesting. That should be very easy to prove by studying the ERAs of the shortest pitchers vs the tallest pitchers over a period of years.

Another oddity is there are very few 5'9" or 5'11 players at any level of play, even HS. Obviously there's a lot of upward rounding. 5'10" and 6' just look so much better.

Anyone listed at 5'9" is probably really about 3 feet tall.

Keep in mind that most HS pitchers head to college not the pros so why not concentrate on what they need for the college career--- best to be real in your thinking--if the pros happen that is a bonus

Angle of Attack of Pitch Into the Strike Zone

The following explains the angle of attack of a fast-ball into the strike zone at the knees of most players. It assumes the following.
The strike zone is at the knees approximately 2.5 ft from the ground at its lowest point. The ball does not go to the ground, but to the knees of the batter.
The pitcher is throwing from a mound 10 inches from ground level, with the first foot flat and then a drop of 1 inch for every 1 foot towards the plate.
The pitcher will deliver the pitch in front of his face and at 6 inches above his head. This assumes an unusually high delivery with most pitchers actually delivering about head high. The pitcher will offset this somewhat with a knee bent on the landing leg. Therefore, the delivery height will be the pitcher’s height plus the elevation of the mound.
The pitcher strides 80% of his body length.

The angle of attack is roughly with a delivery roughly 54 feet to the front of the plate after adjusting for the plate being 17 inches. (The pitcher’s plate is 60.5 ft from back or point of the home plate.) The pitcher also will stride approximately 5 feet. Therefore, the distance from delivery to the front of the plate is 60.5 – 6.5 feet or 54 feet. The ball will start at approximately 6.5 feet high and end at 2.5 feet from ground level at the bottom of the strike zone. The angle of attack can be adjusted by height and if it is up in the strike zone. The following table is for pitchers from 6 feet 6 inches to 5 feet tall. The calculation assumptions are for the greatest angle of attack. It is probably less for most pitchers.



4.7 Degree Angle With 6.5 foot Pitcher

The angle is a right angle with a side of approximately 54 feet and a drop of 4.5 feet with a six foot six inch pitcher. The hypotenuse is the square root of 542 + 4.52 = 54.187176 ft. The angle of entry is found by determining the angle corresponding with the cosine of 54 divided by 54.187176 = .9965. The following is the table of cosines and angles of attack.

Size of Pitcher Drop of Pitch Cosine Approximate Angle
5.0 foot 3.0 feet .9985 3.2 degrees
5.5 foot 3.5 feet .9979 3.7 degrees
6.0 foot 4.0 feet .9973 4.3 degrees
6.5 foot 4.5 feet .9965 4.7 degrees

This can also be approximated with geometry. The 54 feet to the plate is the radius of a circle. The circumference would be C = d x pi, or C = 108 x 3.14 = 339 ft. The circle has 360 degrees and the 4 feet would be 4/339 x 360 degrees = 4.24 degrees.

Therefore (as you said to me in your PM)

quote:

"The bottom line is the 6'6" pitcher has about a 1 degree steeper angle of attack than the 5'7" player."

That arrival angle difference is microscopic even between an extremely tall and an extremely short pitcher. How come no one knows this?

What do you think of the first argument, about the close release point?

----
Another argument proffered in support of tall pitchers is that their bigger bodies may be better suited for enduring the wear and tear of throwing many long innings. Maybe or maybe not. Ever see an old ex-football player hobbling around? Big bodies do a lot of damage to themselves.

I can think of only one other pro-tall rationale: Big pitchers are perhaps more intimidating to hitters either on some primitive subconscious level or because hitters wrongly ascribe too much advantage to height.

Tall kids are certainly rightly intimidating to smaller kids; the tall pitchers are often older, stronger and faster. But in the Majors, 90 is just 90.

I tell this to every scout who will listen. My son is 6'1" (really) and tops at 91, touches higher. He is a real prospect. Another kid in our area was identical in velocity, threw 3 no-hitters and was overlooked by the draft because he is 5'8". I actually sat down with 3 scouts and did the math. They then said even if it is correct their job would be in jeopardy if they brought in a 5'8" pitcher. It's interesting that Randy Johnson has such a low delivery point. Also, look at the original post who started the thread, the type of pitch is more important on angle of attack than the height of the pitcher (change, curve, slider, splitter, etc.). When I tell the scouts this they tell me "we don't draft off-speed." I tell them that is my very point, draft arms not height. Roy Oswalt is not an accident, and Pedro is not 6' (and not an accident) as Billy Wagner, etc. etc. The Oswalt story is amazing. Nolan Ryan's daughter was dating a player in minor league ball and asked her dad to see a game. Roy pitched and he called the Astro front office to tell them they were .... Nuts for not fast tracking him. He told them Roy was better than at least half of their major league staff right now. The injury rate of tall and short pitchers should be an easy study. I talked to tall and short pitchers and unempirically they tell me the lanky guys seem to be hurt more than the shorter guys that can rev it up. They are more compact. However, I really do not know if it is true. I would love to do a study on it though. However, I am positively sure angle of attack is not an issue. The ball gets to the plate in approximately 42 miliseconds at 90 mph. I one foot taller pitcher delivers about 9 to 10 inches closer to the plate with an 80-90% stride. That is about .9/54, or 2% quicker. That is a little factor but I'm still drafting arms not height. If there are two pitchers same velocity, different height, I'm drafting the taller. One of my best friends is a D-1 coach. I told him he can beat other teams by recruiting short guys with good velocities who got the tops of orders out in baseball. He was a tall major league pitcher and does recruit arms, not height and with success.

quote:

The ball gets to the plate in approximately 42 miliseconds at 90 mph. I one foot taller pitcher delivers about 9 to 10 inches closer to the plate with an 80-90% stride. That is about .9/54, or 2% quicker. That is a little factor

But my point is that a pitch starts when the delivery begins, not when the pitch leaves the pitcher's hand. The throw starts with the hand extended BACKWARD. A tall pitcher's throw starts FARTHER away from the batter.

---
University of Missouri had a very short pitching staff last year with several 5-8 to 5-10 guys. They were ranked at season's start about 10th in the country in D-1. But you certainly don't see many pitchers under 6 feet in D-1.

"University of Missouri had a very short pitching staff last year"

Missouri has ONE of the best pitchers in the country on their team. This is a big part of their high ranking. Scherzer(sp) is amazing. I don't think the other pitchers have much to do with the ranking.

quote:

The ball gets to the plate in approximately 42 miliseconds at 90 mph.

90MPH => 132ft/s

For an average velocity of 90MPH the time would be about 450 miliseconds.

IMO taller pitchers are more interesting because the smaller ones are a dime a dozen. If you had 5,000 RHP that threw 87MPH which ones would you draft? Probably the tall ones and hope that they could figure out how to throw 93 more easily than the short ones.

The closer release point is IMO a bogus argument. I've seen 12YO hit a 80MPH fastball from 48' that couldn't touch a 100MPH fastball from 60'. Velocity matters much more than distance.

You caught my error, thanks! 42 ms would be humming. The release point is generally 80-90% of body length and the plate is 17". I usually use 54-55 foot distances from release points. 132 ft/s at 54 ft is 54/132 = 409 ms, and at 55/132 = 417 ms. I agree with you on the distance, it doesn't seem to matter as much. I throw BP to kids from 30 feet at 60mph and they wear me out. OK, I can't throw 60, maybe its 52 mph.

quote:

For an average velocity of 90MPH the time would be about 450 miliseconds.

But the ball slows maybe 7 MPH as it travels to the plate. Pretty sure that the faster it's thrown, the more it slows. 90MPH ball encounters more air resistance than a 70MPH one.

My own "fastballs" don't slow much anymore.

quote:

Originally posted by SoCalDadx5:

quote:

The ball gets to the plate in approximately 42 miliseconds at 90 mph.

90MPH => 132ft/s

For an average velocity of 90MPH the time would be about 450 miliseconds.

IMO taller pitchers are more interesting because the smaller ones are a dime a dozen. If you had 5,000 RHP that threw 87MPH which ones would you draft? Probably the tall ones and hope that they could figure out how to throw 93 more easily than the short ones.

The closer release point is IMO a bogus argument. I've seen 12YO hit a 80MPH fastball from 48' that couldn't touch a 100MPH fastball from 60'. Velocity matters much more than distance.

I would draft the one who could truly pitch, not just throw, and who got outs.

Son visited Mizzou and first thing I noticed on roster was size of pitchers. Asked their staff about it and they said they look 1st for kids who can pitch and then athleticism. Size didn't seem to be a big factor.
KC, they have had some good staff era's over the years and a number of pitchers who put up good #'s. Scherzer a stud to be sure but Culp and a few others are very good.

KCBaseball, valid point about Scherzer. He's 6-2 by the way.

Mizzou has some good pitchers this year and have produced some good pitchers in the past.

They currently have two pitchers in Baseball America's Top 100 college players: Max Scherzer(3) and Nathan Culp(64) as well as outfielder Hunter Mense(37). All will be off the draft boards before the 5th round gets going in June(Scherzer off before pick 4). Add to them 5'10" lefty, Taylor Parker, Mizzou's stud closer who will probably be drafted in the top 10 rounds as he throws in the low to mid 90s.

In 2004, Mizzou produced Garrett Broshius and Danny Hill, a pair of early round draft picks, and reliever Mark Alexander who went later in the draft and is having great success in the minors.
The 2005 team produced a 9th round draft pick(Andrew Johnston) and a 13th round choice(Doug Mathis) as well as 3rd round outfielder, James Boone.

Mizzou definitely has the talent to be a Top 15 team and CWS contender. I mean Scherzer picked up just 9 of Mizzou's 40 wins in 2005.

I just hope Scherzer's shoulder and elbow hold together.

His arm action (e.g. making what some would describe as an Upside-Down W) reminds me a lot of Mark Prior. Based on Prior's injury problems, I don't think that is a good thing.

Doc Coach Chris strikes again. Mark Prior's injures were a result of his work load in college, read up on Boyd Nation's pitcher's abuse studies.

quote:

Mark Prior's injures were a result of his work load in college, read up on Boyd Nation's pitcher's abuse studies.

I have read Nation's stuff but don't find it compelling...

- Pitcher Workloads In College Baseball

The concept of Pitcher Abuse Points (or PAP3) doesn't make logical sense (if "abuse" as they define it is bad, then why are Randy Johnson and Roger Clemens be at the top of the career lists) and has been largely discredited by such people as Bill James.

I find it interesting that two other pitchers who have very similar mechanics, Anthony Reyes and Paul Byrd, have had continual injury problems.

I don't think it's a coincidence.

There was a hall of fame pitcher, I want to say it was Don Drysdale, who sort of predicted Mark Prior's injuries.
He had said that Prior would soon run into arm problems if he didn't stop that swinging arm motion that he has.

quote:

Originally posted by Coach Chris:
I find it interesting that two other pitchers who have very similar mechanics, Anthony Reyes and Paul Byrd, have had continual injury problems.

There is a hugh difference between Paul Byrd and Anthony Reyes. Reyes is totally stiff in the shoulder area as he comes over the top. It looks as if he is crunching his shoulders and shoulder blades together(like he's bench pressing) and pulling in his arm as he throws. Paul Byrd is totally loose as he comes over the top. Also, don't forget that Reyes has yet to suffer from a major arm injury. A lot of his time off has stemmed mostly from the Cardinals just trying to protect their prized prospect. Also, Byrd has had elbow injuries while Reyes has had all shoulder injuries since his USC days.

BTW, Reyes is a stud. I'd say Rookie of the Year in most years, but it could be quite a race with Matt Cain, Paul Maholm, Jeremy Hermida, Prince Fielder and others looking to pick up the award at seasons end.

quote:

There was a hall of fame pitcher, I want to say it was Don Drysdale, who sort of predicted Mark Prior's injuries.
He had said that Prior would soon run into arm problems if he didn't stop that swinging arm motion that he has.

It was Dr. Mike Marshall.

It was his ability to predict injuries before they happened that convinced me that this was a topic that was worth pursuing.

Hey pal

Guess who's dad just signed on

If I were you I would go back and clean up as much of that garbage as possible

I'm serious

Your really asking for it

quote:

Also, don't forget that Reyes has yet to suffer from a major arm injury. A lot of his time off has stemmed mostly from the Cardinals just trying to protect their prized prospect. Also, Byrd has had elbow injuries while Reyes has had all shoulder injuries since his USC days.

For the record, both Byrd and Reyes have had both elbow and shoulder problems.

If I'm right, Mark Prior is due for shoulder problems.

quote:

BTW, Reyes is a stud. I'd say Rookie of the Year in most years, but it could be quite a race with Matt Cain, Paul Maholm, Jeremy Hermida, Prince Fielder and others looking to pick up the award at seasons end.

I hope so, but I'm skeptical. I'm concerned that he might break down as soon as the Cardinals put a significant load on me.

Coach Chris - Scherzer missed his first start this season after jamming his finger in a car door.
Bad mechanics?