My son had this as part of a recent showcase write-up:
"3/4 release point with a short, slinging arm action and a tailing fastball"
Is the 'short, slinging arm action' a negative and something to be corrected?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
most of the reports from Perfect Game that I have seen seem to rate the 3/4 release point higher. Tailing fastball is a good thing. I think they would prefer long arm action over short.
If they are referring to "short arming" that would be taken negatively. And it is something to be corrected, IMHO.
There are all kinds of discriptions that could be used for Major League pitchers.
There are short arm and long arm Major League pitchers.
There are Major League pitchers with slinging type arm action and every release point imaginable.
So the discription is only the discription and does not always relate to success. If everyone was exactly the same... They would all be easy to hit!
There are short arm and long arm Major League pitchers.
There are Major League pitchers with slinging type arm action and every release point imaginable.
So the discription is only the discription and does not always relate to success. If everyone was exactly the same... They would all be easy to hit!
Okay!! Thanks for the replies! I thought I was going to have to start putting him on the 'rack' to lengthen him out a bit!
K,
Short arming in some cases could also mean that the ball is being "pushed" to a degree. If corrected you may pick up some velocity, but I'd be careful if it costs you movement. Being able to throw 2-3 mph faster with little, or no movement is not good IMO.
Short arming in some cases could also mean that the ball is being "pushed" to a degree. If corrected you may pick up some velocity, but I'd be careful if it costs you movement. Being able to throw 2-3 mph faster with little, or no movement is not good IMO.
Short arming should not provide any more movement than correct mechanics, IMHO. In fact, short arming can make it more difficult to get a good wrist snap, and less wrist snap means less movement.
quote:Short arming should not provide any more movement than correct mechanics, IMHO. In fact, short arming can make it more difficult to get a good wrist snap, and less wrist snap means less movement.
Agree!
.
Lets shake up the natives...
Tend to agree with PG Staff on this one...
There is the ideal, then there is the practical..
Yes, everyone values and wants a protypical smooth ideal motion without hitches or imperfections. This is the ideal. This is particularly true of the professional scouts.
Then there is the practical...beyond a certain "qualifying veloicty" you have to be able to get players out. Hitters have to be fooled. Velocity does this. Pitch movement does this. Pitch selection and execution does this. Hitches in a pitchers motion that are hard to follow do this. Sometimes a smooth ideal motion is actually easier to time.
Wtach a college game you'll see that here are a great many college pitchers who have achieved qualifying velocity and have imperfect motions but simply get batters out consistently, in part becasue of a hitch that is hard to read.
IMO at a professional level this is somewhat less true. Professional hitters are harder to fool and they see the same pitchers repeatedly.
So...In response to the post....Yes, I would consider changing a motion but at the same time I would be cautious changing a natural arm angle, or a hitch if a player has the requisite qualifying velocity for the next level and has been successful.
OK, take your shots...
.
Lets shake up the natives...
Tend to agree with PG Staff on this one...
quote:There are Major League pitchers with slinging type arm action and every release point imaginable.
So the discription is only the discription and does not always relate to success. If everyone was exactly the same... They would all be easy to hit!
There is the ideal, then there is the practical..
Yes, everyone values and wants a protypical smooth ideal motion without hitches or imperfections. This is the ideal. This is particularly true of the professional scouts.
Then there is the practical...beyond a certain "qualifying veloicty" you have to be able to get players out. Hitters have to be fooled. Velocity does this. Pitch movement does this. Pitch selection and execution does this. Hitches in a pitchers motion that are hard to follow do this. Sometimes a smooth ideal motion is actually easier to time.
Wtach a college game you'll see that here are a great many college pitchers who have achieved qualifying velocity and have imperfect motions but simply get batters out consistently, in part becasue of a hitch that is hard to read.
IMO at a professional level this is somewhat less true. Professional hitters are harder to fool and they see the same pitchers repeatedly.
So...In response to the post....Yes, I would consider changing a motion but at the same time I would be cautious changing a natural arm angle, or a hitch if a player has the requisite qualifying velocity for the next level and has been successful.
OK, take your shots...
.
Krakatoa,
How about posting a video clip of your boy throwing?
Jason
How about posting a video clip of your boy throwing?
Jason
Would if I had one. We're still techno-fogies, no digi-vid.
This is his eval from last year:
"He shows consistant mechanics on the mound, a 3/4 arm slot, and the ability to throw strikes."
Thus the confusion, I guess.
I've seen short-armers, 'pie-throwers', in the negative sense that people are describing above. He's not one of those.
I will see if I can borrow someone's digital camcorder and post something up one of these days.
"He shows consistant mechanics on the mound, a 3/4 arm slot, and the ability to throw strikes."
Thus the confusion, I guess.
I've seen short-armers, 'pie-throwers', in the negative sense that people are describing above. He's not one of those.
I will see if I can borrow someone's digital camcorder and post something up one of these days.