Velocity

I agree. I doubt that anyone posting on this forum would argue that development of off speed pitches and a full pitching arsenal is a bad thing. At all levels, especially as you move up the ladder, off speed stuff and location are essential elements to being a solid pitcher.

That being said, velocity is more important than you make it seem, and that is largely due to what pro scouts are looking for. Look at the first round draft picks from the past few MLB amateur drafts. All pitchers taken are guys with blistering fastballs. Especially for me personally, coming out of a state like New Hampshire, a high velocity fastball is the foot in the door to higher levels. The off speed stuff is can what make or break a career.

3bpitcher,

This is a good topic to bring up. I'm a freshman in high school and I honestly DO throw 82 mph. I get gunned once every two weeks in my plyometrics program. My curve however, is my strike out pitch. UNHBaseball11 talked about scouts. All the scouts will look at is how hard you are throwing. They could care less where it goes. If you're throwing 95 mph, you're going to get drafted. What are the Minor Leagues for? They are used to help pitchers gain control over their pitches and if they already have that control, then more power to them. I will agree that having at least two off speed pitches (for me it's a curve and a three finger change), is extremely important. Keep me posted on how you're doing and good luck in the state.

TSP4

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation."--Satchel Paige

I'm a Jr. and right now I'm at 87 MPH. A good fastball is a huge part of being a good pitcher. If you have a good curveball but no FB, hitters will be sitting on the off speed stuff and no matter how good your CB is, it will get hit. To be a good pitcher, you need to have control over all of your pitches and be comfortable enough to throw them anytime.

You guys all make a valid point. A picther isnt going to get anywhere without having a least some fastball. The offspeed junk is what throws the hitter off, but it seemed that everytime somebody mentioned fastball it was if it was there only pitch. Also, i think UNHbaseball makes a good point with scouts and fastballs, but also even if you dont have a 95 mph fastabll but a curveball that drops of the table and a changeup the difference of 20 mph from your 88 mph fastball, you might still get drafted. Thanks for claryfing stuff guys. Best of luck to you in your upcoming high school seasons.

3bpitcher,
I hate to tell you but in our area you'd probably be considered an OK JV pitcher with a decent chance of making varsity next year if your velocity picked up. We've got a lefty who throws like you on our JV team. I don't know how much longer they are going to stick with him because he just isn't getting the job done against the good JV teams, while there are 5 pitchers who can throw high 70s and hit 80 with a couple of them doing that before getting all the way back from injuries. They've all got curves and changes. We've got a kid playing JV ball on one of the teams in the league who throws low to mid 80s and knows how to pitch. He won the LLWS US championship a few years back and pitched his team to the PONY WS last season.

The guys who locate, have good breaking stuff, etc. on varsity around here are throwing low to mid 80s. The league's top "junkballer" throws mid to high 80s. He is a very good pitcher, but he's going to be drafted as a position player not as a pitcher. The kid on another team in the league who throws 90-91 consistently isn't as good of a pitcher as he is but he'll get drafted as a pitcher.

I understand that I am from Maine and wouldnt really be a great pitcher anywhere else, but anybody with good control, I mean can always it their spots and never leaves one over the plate, and good junk can be successful. I have pitched against kids as a freshman that won the American Legion World Series and I did well using a change of speeds. They might sit on my fastball but it is the element of surprise that makes a god junk pitcher. Look at Jamie Moyer and Kenny Rogers, both leftys and both have good junk and throw off the hitters. I was just saying that even if you dont have a blazing fastball, it doesnt mean you arent or cant ba a good pitcher. Of course you have to work to get there, but its not impossible.

quote:

Originally posted by TSP4:
All the scouts will look at is how hard you are throwing. They could care less where it goes. If you're throwing 95 mph, you're going to get drafted. What are the Minor Leagues for? They are used to help pitchers gain control over their pitches and if they already have that control, then more power to them. I will agree that having at least two off speed pitches (for me it's a curve and a three finger change), is extremely important. Keep me posted on how you're doing and good luck in the state.

This certainly isn't what I'm looking for when I evaluate a guy. As long as he's throwing 85ish, I am far more concerned with...

1. Mechanics.
2. Movement.
3. Command.
4. Number and quality of secondary pitches.

There have been multiple guys with incredible fastballs who have never made it to the big leagues due to an inability to throw strikes and to get guys out.

I am also currently trying to figure out how to not write off the Jamie Moyers who throw in the 70s but still know how to get guys out.

quote:

Originally posted by 3bpitcher:
Also, i think UNHbaseball makes a good point with scouts and fastballs, but also even if you dont have a 95 mph fastabll but a curveball that drops of the table and a changeup the difference of 20 mph from your 88 mph fastball, you might still get drafted.

Guys,

Don't buy into hard and fast rules about the MPH drop between your FB and your CU (be it a 10 MPH drop or a 20 MPH drop).

The reality is that the best pitchers' change-up tend to come in about 10 PERCENT slower than their fastball. That's fast enough to not obviously be a fastball but slow enough to still screw up the hitter's timing.

Guys like Maddux and Moyer understand this, and that's one reason why they are able to be successful.

quote:

Originally posted by thepainguy:

quote:

Originally posted by TSP4:
All the scouts will look at is how hard you are throwing. They could care less where it goes. If you're throwing 95 mph, you're going to get drafted. What are the Minor Leagues for? They are used to help pitchers gain control over their pitches and if they already have that control, then more power to them. I will agree that having at least two off speed pitches (for me it's a curve and a three finger change), is extremely important. Keep me posted on how you're doing and good luck in the state.

This certainly isn't what I'm looking for when I evaluate a guy. As long as he's throwing 85ish, I am far more concerned with...

1. Mechanics.
2. Movement.
3. Command.
4. Number and quality of secondary pitches.

There have been multiple guys with incredible fastballs who have never made it to the big leagues due to an inability to throw strikes and to get guys out.

I am also currently trying to figure out how to not write off the Jamie Moyers who throw in the 70s but still know how to get guys out.

There have also been thousands of guys who threw in the 85mph range who never pitched past high school,because they could not get guys out either. But,
if you can throw in the mid 90's you will get a chance to move on.

If mechanics is your #1 thing when watching a pitcher, you won't sign many big leaguers, but you are still not sure what good mechanics are. About a year ago you were pumping up the Marshall delivery and tried to demonstrate it in a clip that was just posted a few days ago. If you don't know what a good delivery looks like, how can it be #1 on your list?

quote:

Originally posted by bbscout:
If mechanics is your #1 thing when watching a pitcher, you won't sign many big leaguers, but you are still not sure what good mechanics are. About a year ago you were pumping up the Marshall delivery and tried to demonstrate it in a clip that was just posted a few days ago. If you don't know what a good delivery looks like, how can it be #1 on your list?

First, I wasn't pumping up the Marshall delivery. Instead, I created the video to demonstrate what his mechanics look like (because at the time nobody knew what Marshall's mechanics looked like). At the time I believed, and continue to believe, that what Mike Marshall says is interesting (if not always correct).

Second, I am not convinced that you have to go with Marshall's mechanics to be successful. I think he may have gone too far in his ideas and has gotten some stuff (e.g. scap loading) just plain wrong.

Third, when scouting guys I look for the arm action, timing, and general mechanics of guys like...

- Greg Maddux
- Tom Glavine
- Nolan Ryan
- Roy Oswalt
- Felix Hernandez
- Daisuke Matsuzaka

...and avoid guys who have the arm action and timing problems of...

- Mark Prior
- Kerry Wood
- Bobby Madritsch

To give an example relevant to this site, I would have drafted Zach Duke in a second. From what I have seen, his arm action, timing, and general mechanics are very solid (and Glavine-esque).

This is all great stuff guys. I actually made a comment about Jamie Moyer in another discussion. It amazes me how he does it but he is one of the best guys at fooling hitters. And since I am from Maine, and dont know anybody on this site, you guys mind telling me who Zach Duke is? Thanks

I believe he pitches for the Pirates, not 100% sure though

quote:

Originally posted by thepainguy:
Third, when scouting guys I look for the arm action, timing, and general mechanics of guys like...

- Greg Maddux
- Tom Glavine
- Nolan Ryan
- Roy Oswalt
- Felix Hernandez
- Daisuke Matsuzaka

What is it you like about Matsuzaka's mechanics/timing?

tpg

quote:

...and avoid guys who have the arm action and timing problems of...

- Mark Prior
- Kerry Wood
- Bobby Madritsch

These 3 all pitched in the big leagues. Mark and Kerry were 1st rounders while Bobby was a sixth rounder. My point is scouting is about searching for prospects and players to play with those prospects. If you avoid these guys' as you stated you would, then you will have a very short lived secret scouting career. Scouts dont get the opportunity to draft guys who will play in the big leagues every year, and the three guys you passed on all did... Two pitched at a very high level, while Bobby was a 6th rounder who pitched a couple of seasons in the big leagues. It is a success when a sixth rounder pitches in the big leagues...If your secret teams first rounder this year turns out to have a career like Kerry Wood then your scouting dirctor will be tickled pink...

According to the NPA's efficiency model, which is based on motion-analysis cameras that break down a pitcher's delivery to 600-1,000 frames per second, Prior's mechanics were "among the best who have ever thrown the ball," House said. And his conditioning program was "state of the art."

So it looks like you could have great mechanics and train hard and still get hurt.
95 will always get you looked at.

Absolutly true.

Well the point is he didn't have the mechanics that were "among the best who have ever thrown the ball,"

And they have a point about the drafting thing, but what if the pitcher that gets drafted in the 20th, 30th, 40th round (because of this person's input) and makes it to the big leagues

quote:

Originally posted by XFactor:
I believe he pitches for the Pirates, not 100% sure though

Zach Duke does pitch for the pirates.

He's one of a couple of nice lefties they have.

quote:

Originally posted by bb1:
According to the NPA's efficiency model, which is based on motion-analysis cameras that break down a pitcher's delivery to 600-1,000 frames per second, Prior's mechanics were "among the best who have ever thrown the ball," House said. And his conditioning program was "state of the art."

So it looks like you could have great mechanics and train hard and still get hurt.
95 will always get you looked at.

Obviously the NPA's efficiency model is seriously flawed.

It may measure efficiency correctly, but it doesn't take injury risk into account.

If you look at Mark Prior's mechanics, and in particular his arm action, they look nothing like the mechanics of great pitchers like...

- Nolan Ryan
- Roger Clemens
- Greg Maddux
- Tom Glavine

quote:

Originally posted by Roger Tomas:
What is it you like about Matsuzaka's mechanics/timing?

1. He understands deception (e.g. herky-jerky wind-up and limited reverse-rotation of his shoulders that helps to hide the ball from the batter).

2. His arm action is solid. No sign of an M.

3. His hip/shoulder differential is good, which means that he knows how to throw with his entire body (not just his arm).

quote:

Originally posted by deemax:
These 3 all pitched in the big leagues. Mark and Kerry were 1st rounders while Bobby was a sixth rounder. My point is scouting is about searching for prospects and players to play with those prospects. If you avoid these guys' as you stated you would, then you will have a very short lived secret scouting career. Scouts dont get the opportunity to draft guys who will play in the big leagues every year, and the three guys you passed on all did... Two pitched at a very high level, while Bobby was a 6th rounder who pitched a couple of seasons in the big leagues. It is a success when a sixth rounder pitches in the big leagues...If your secret teams first rounder this year turns out to have a career like Kerry Wood then your scouting dirctor will be tickled pink...

We are looking for guys who will be able to deliver maximum value during the time period in which we control them. Time spent on the DL is time that takes away from delivering value.

Just look at the disarray that Prior and Wood's problems have thrown the Cubs into. They think they're set for pitchers, and start drafting for other things, and then those pitchers break down.

Every year the draft is full of...

1. Guys who will have long successful careers.
2. Guys who will have short, unsuccessful careers.
3. Guys who will have promising but injury-plagued careers.

It's hard enough to tell Group 1 guys apart from Group 2 guys. Our concept is to rule out Group 3 guys so that we can focus on telling the 1s from the 2s.

quote:

We are looking for guys who will be able to deliver maximum value during the time period in which we control them. Time spent on the DL is time that takes away from delivering value.

TG you obviously understand deception with the comments you make. Any ML team that listens to you is run by fools.
You are starting to sound like you are delussional like that coachchris that posted here awhile back.

Is this FANTASY ball you are talking about ?

quote:

Originally posted by thepainguy:
Obviously the NPA's efficiency model is seriously flawed.

Please explain what aspect of their model is flawed and how.

quote:

It may measure efficiency correctly, but it doesn't take injury risk into account.

FWIW, House and the NPA just recently came up with an injury prevention model that, I believe, identifies precursors for injury. I haven't seen it yet and I don't believe it's published yet. But it has been presented in at least one major baseball conference so far. Should be good stuff.

quote:

Originally posted by Roger Tomas:

quote:

Originally posted by thepainguy:
Obviously the NPA's efficiency model is seriously flawed.

Please explain what aspect of their model is flawed and how.

There's more to efficiency than raw velocity. There's also the question of what the body can tolerate.

TPG,

Ok, to be honest, I'm not sure what an "efficiency model" is. Nor do I know whether or not the NPA has one. Regardless, who said their efficiency model only considers velocity?

I'm just tryin' to understand all these comments being tossed about.


bb1,
What is the NPA's efficiency model?

quote:

Originally posted by Roger Tomas:
Ok, to be honest, I'm not sure what an "efficiency model" is. Nor do I know whether or not the NPA has one. Regardless, who said their efficiency model only considers velocity?

I understand.

One thing that bugs me is Tom House's contention back in 2003 that Mark Prior had/has perfect pitching mechanics. Given Prior's injury history, I am extremely skeptical of that claim and the methodology that led Tom House to make it.

It also bugs me that House seems to have blamed Prior for his problems (due to a lack of conditioning).

At the end of the day, my problem isn't with House himself as much as it is with his (and Will Carroll's) continuing to hold Mark Prior up as the standard of excellence. I think young pitchers would be much better served trying to emulate...

- Greg Maddux
- Tom Glavine
- Nolan Ryan
- Roger Clemens
- Roy Oswalt
- Dan Haren
- Johan Santana

I wish House would just admit that he was wrong, work to understand why he was wrong, and then move on.

The same thing goes for Will Carroll.

quote:

Originally posted by thepainguy:
One thing that bugs me is Tom House's contention back in 2003 that Mark Prior had/has perfect pitching mechanics.

Prior's mechanics might not be perfect for everyone but how do you know they aren't perfect for him? Because he's been injured? How do you know Prior's injuries were caused by his mechanics? The fact is, noone knows the answers to these questions.

Many folks, IMHO, have a big hang-up with that now-outdated claim about Prior's mechanics. House's mechanics model has changed since then so what he claimed about Prior back then may or may not still apply today. I haven't heard House say that Prior's mechanics are perfect relative to his current mechanics model. (Of course, he learned his lesson the first time he made such a claim. ) As far as I'm concerned, the claim is nothing more than a tiny piece of history and y'all need to get over it.

quote:

Given Prior's injury history, I am extremely skeptical of that claim and the methodology that led Tom House to make it.

You certainly have the right to be skeptical. However, the true cause(s) of Prior's injuries are unknown (except, maybe, to his orthopedist). All that exists are theories and guesses as to the cause(s) which could actually be entirely unrelated to his mechanics. FWIW, I saw a story about injured pitchers on ESPN a week or so ago. Orel Herschiser put the cause for Prior's injuries as "bad connective tissue". That's probably just yet another guess but it's also probably just as likely as any other guess.

quote:

It also bugs me that House seems to have blamed Prior for his problems (due to a lack of conditioning).

Can you elaborate on this? The only blame I've heard is overuse while Prior was under someone else's watch (e.g. when he was at USC).

quote:

At the end of the day, my problem isn't with House himself as much as it is with his (and Will Carroll's) continuing to hold Mark Prior up as the standard of excellence.

I'm not sure this is really continuing to happen (though I don't claim to be up on Carroll's spewings). The way I see it, it's all the folks that are hung up on the Prior claim who continue to perpetuate this notion. Based on what I see in clips of Prior as compared to what House teaches today, I don't think it's a perfect match.

quote:

I think young pitchers would be much better served trying to emulate...

- Greg Maddux
- Tom Glavine
- Nolan Ryan
- Roger Clemens
- Roy Oswalt
- Dan Haren
- Johan Santana

I don't think it makes sense to suggest that a pitcher should try to emulate another pitcher because that implies emulating him in totality. While there may be certain specific aspects of a particular pitcher's mechanics that would be ok or even good to emulate, emulating everything would seem to rquire having similar body characteristics (e.g. strength, flexibility, etc.) and that doesn't seem very realistic.

quote:

I wish House would just admit that he was wrong, work to understand why he was wrong, and then move on.

Why are you so hung up on this? Let it go, man! Personally, I wish everyone who thinks they have everything figured out would just admit they're not omniscient and that they might be wrong. But, please explain how you think House was wrong. What, specifically, was he wrong about?

quote:

The same thing goes for Will Carroll.

I don't know enough about Carroll to pass judgement.

Look, I'm sure it's obvious and I admit that I like House's current ideas. That doesn't mean I think he's perfect. Nor do I limit myself to only his ideas. But I do think he is on the right track. Furthermore, he presents and teaches his ideas without resorting to any of the low-handed tactics some of the other "experts" employ. And I like that. If you want claim he was wrong about Prior, fine. But make it clear that you think he was wrong relative to his mechanics model that he was using at the time he made the claim - not relative to his current model (of which, in my judgement, most people today are ignorant). I've read plenty of comments in this thread that confirm to me the ignorance about House's current teachings.

Roger, Just so well written and said. There is so much validity to what you say. A pitcher should emulate himself, with proper learning and study, he can be like someone else. I just wish some of these internet taught guru's would read more of what you have to say and stop spewing all of this know-it-all stuff.