Velocity in your area

LOL  . . . yup, I've experienced this phenomenon myself on more than one occasion.

When you throw the CB at 78-82 for strikes, it helps. People want to talk about their kids and are proud, it's human. I really didnt care if my son was 86-88 as long as he threw well and we won. He got caught up for a while on velo but once i saw 4s and 5s, i knew he had it in him. Sounds like some hatin going on in here.

After the regular HS season was over, I had an MLB scout pull me aside, and among other things, told me that my son's mechanics had changed between last summer and this  spring. Said he was sitting 92-93 all summer and was sitting 88-90 this spring. He told what he was doing wrong. i wish I had known it during the season but alas, I Didn't. I have a radar gun and had I been clocking him every game, I might have been able to put one and one together and determined something was wrong. I did not because I'm not "that kind of dad" and "my wife and son" would have disowned me.  I would not of been able to fix it because I just can't see those things but I could have gotten him back to his summer coaches and I'm confident that they would have. 

Best way to avoid "velo-flation"?  http://www.drivelinebaseball.com/2015/08/05/how-to-make-a-baseball-recruiting-video-coaches-will-actually-watch/

Like this topic as the velocity issue has recently snakebit 2017. He went to a recent showcase and was the most EFFECTIVE pitcher there, striking out 50% of the batters he faced in four innings, giving up 2 hits and 1 walk (16 total batters in 4 innings). Yet his velocity was a few mph lower than normal (he has topped out at 80/81 previously but did not get there).  The guy "blogging" about the event, mentions two other pitchers from the same game, both of whom gave up more hits and earned runs, walked more and struck out fewer guys as well (all as a percentage of how many they saw).  Today they named the top prospects and those two guys make the list and 2017 doesn't.  80 seemed to be the magic number, no pitcher below made the list whereas those that threw over 80 did, despite the lack of effectiveness.

 

In fact, another boy the next day was in the mid 80s, but threw 11 balls in a row. When he did manage to get it over the plate, he was tagged for extra base hits. Yet he was a top prospect somehow.

 

OK, I know it sounds like sour grapes, but now I do truly believe that velocity is king. 

 

Painting the corners, getting guys to swing and miss repeatedly, throwing a good BB and change up -- none of it seems to matter if you cannot keep up with the Joneses on the radar gun.  So, rather than continue to pout about it, mine is working on the mechanics and strength and conditioning in order to eke out a few more mph and not ever experience again that feeling that you were the best guy out there and yet reaping no reward.   

Twoboys, my 2013 was the exact same as your son, it drove me crazy.... but he kept working... and ended up mid level D1 cruising 87-88 with many pitches, location, movement.

 

Lately 2018 is 88-89 and "they" are nuts about him... and I am thinking... but 2013 knows how to pitch..

 

2016  is likely going D3 and he's 84  and 2014  is 90-92 

 

with all the levels and types of programs there's a place for him... gotta keep working.

Two Boys: Sounds like your son has internal motivation with a good plan above, and I feel for you. We used to watch BP at showcases where hitters would swing out of their heels (Like HR derby), only to have a scorecard in the showcase game, K, K, K

Ironhorse.

Our field had a built in radar, and ive been around enough baseball to know when its getting into the 90s

Im pretty sure im right.

One was 6'5" junior D1 commit, pro interest, and an all american lhp at 90

The other sat around 86-88. But i watched him throw 90-91 preseason one day...he won like 11 or more games and is going to a D3 academic cause he is a top of his class type of guy.

Our softmore rhp had been throwing 87 since age 15 and also has splitter that was terribly hard to hit

Our softmore lhp 6'5" was around 86-87 and he isnt even close to reaching his potential and already has D1 offers

Truthfully, these type of teams come along every once in a blue moon, cause we also had 2 solid juco commits, an all American D1 CF, D1 3B, D2 3B, D1 SS, D3 OF, futured D1/D2 catcher and many other big performers...

It was fun to watch

 

I'm mostly in the camp about what's the big deal about velocity - show me someone who can throw strikes, with good mechanics, and I'm much happier than someone who throws hard, but has no clue where the ball will go after it leaves his hand. But coaches fall over each other trying to get the latter thinking they can "teach" the mechanics necessary to throw strikes. None seem to believe the former can gain velocity (although that's been proven to be untrue).  Which takes "more work" is mostly a matter of control over the player. A physical trainer can work through exercises to increase core and leg strength which should help velocity, but teaching mechanics is a coach's domain (and his challenge)... Besides nothing like putting a little fear in the batters mind about a pitcher throwing 90+ with less control...

 

Twoboys: What has been pointed out to me in the past with my son who had similar #'s and experiences at showcases...  It's a showcase - many are filled with players who "pay" for the experience. Collegiate and higher players that are in the starting lineup can hit both - feasting more on the mid 80's regardless of movement. They also have a very good idea of the strike zone. Most players at a showcase *know* how to hit something fast and struggle with slower stuff. They also have less strike zone awareness. Players at a showcase are "graded" on velocity and mechanics more than results. A batter with high bat speed and good mechanics would be chosen over a player with slow bad speed and good mechanics. A fielder with high arm speed and poor accuracy would be chosen over a fielder with low arm speed and good accuracy.  It's the axiom of not being able to teach speed.  Not all coaches think the same way although you have to search harder for those that aren't velo guys. At least you know what questions to ask... One of my sons was able to increase his velo mostly by doing the right exercises and adjusting his mechanics slightly based on feedback he got while on visits.

I'm not saying your team didn't have that. Your comment was most N Tx 6A teams have 1 and some have 2 throwing in the 90s. That's not right.

 

I'm guessing 4-11 6A are all basically N Tx districts. 8 teams each, give or take. You think their are 64 - 128 kids in North Tx 6A schools throwing 90? I've coached at good N Tx HS and had teams that no one threw 90. And faced plenty of teams that had nowhere close.  Some teams may have 3, but acting like everyone has 1 is overselling it a bit.

I don't think anyone, no matter how much baseball they've been around, can tell the difference between 87 and 90 with the naked eye. I used to think I could. People will ask me what I think a kid is throwing and, once I put the gun on them, I'm constantly amazed at how far off my guesses are. I was at a camp last week and was wondering why the staff was so ga-ga over a particular lefty. I guessed he couldn't be throwing 84 or 85, tops. I got in behind the coaches with radar and, sure enough the kid was sitting 88-89. Long slow motion that just didn't look that fast to me. I've seen others I thought were really bringing it, only to put a gun on them and see a 79 or 80.

       
       
Velocity IS king!  And for good reason.  Here is what a lot of posters routinely forget...  less reaction time is NEVER a good thing!  I will mention again and you can look it up, mlb offensive numbers plummet on pitches 95mph and over.  It is simply a flat out myth that you can't throw it by a big leaguer.  Now take that down to college...  whats the number there?  93? 90?  I don't know because there is so much more data from mlb.  But you can bet there IS a number.  And here is what we have to remember, great hitters aren't fooled by offspeed or slow pitchers.  So unless you are ungodly special in some way a slow pitcher will never make it in D1 ball.  Period.  Again people like to point out those very very few exceptions as if it is the rule.  Remember just because you may be able to trick and confuse high school hitters has no relation whatsoever to what will happen at the next level.  The good news is we can all continue to work with our sons toward the goal of more velocity.  Never give up!  Son needs to work hard, get stronger and just approach the situation with tenacity.  But don't fall in the rut of thinking the recruiters are somehow biased or wrong.  They know what some on here refuse to face.  VELOCITY IS KING!

       
       
The radar gun is a hobby of mine too.  I have gotten very very good at guessing at my son's level.  Now it is a game with the parents on our team.  We will all register our guesses on especially the opposing pitchers (we have a.pretty good idea what our kids throw) and we see who the winner is.  It remains to be seen if my accuracy will continue at the higher levels!  But you are right about one thing.  The big kids always look slower.  They simply generate velocity much easier.  The little guy with good velocity simply has to be a max effort guy so it looks faster.

Originally Posted by 2020dad:

…The big kids always look slower.  They simply generate velocity much easier.  The little guy with good velocity simply has to be a max effort guy so it looks faster.

 

People like to point out those as if it is the rule. 

At one of the D1 games I went to last season (Nevada vs Fresno St) there was a lefty starter that was sitting 88-89, touching 90 with an occasional 91.  There were 3 or 4 scouts there.  Tracking and gunning pitches.  This guy went 3 or 4 innings, don't remember exactly, but gave up about 6 runs 6 or so hits with a couple of walks.  The RHP on the other team was a big dude, 6' 6", sitting 84.  He was very effective giving up 0 runs and just 2 hits over 6 innings.  When he was pitching the scouts were sitting there chatting or on their phones.  No interest at all.  

Velo is what they are scouting first.  Other things come into play after that.  I am not saying this is "right" but it is the way it is.  

Agreed



> On Sep 2, 2015, at 9:57 AM, HS Baseball Web <alerts@hoop.la> wrote:
>

Well, I can only speak for myself but, I have nothing to gain by inflating velo's for the NFC players I listed. I'm not associated with the program, kids already graduated from NFC, not really a huge fan of the Head Coach. Nothing against him, mind you, just not the "Mentor" figure one would expect for such a successful program.Having said that, he does get results, fields a good product every year, 31 years to be exact, and players move on to the next level, be it collegiate or pro. I was just answering the initial post question.

 

 

Also, as a side note, NFC has 2 more elite players on the way. Remember the names Brandon Walker(2019) and Mathew Dickey(2018). Both are 5 tool players with projectable frames.Both are/were upper 80's as Freshmen with fast arms, get down the hill well.I see a couple more PG All-Americans on the horizon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here's how much of a factor velocity is:

 

Winter before my son's junior year.  He went to an indoor showcase.  He had planned to only take IF and hit...no pitching.  The showcase was run by his travel organization.  Once he got there, he realized that pitching was between IF and hitting....so he asked to pitch so he wouldn't have to sit around for an hour or more.

 

This event was in January....so pitchers likely weren't in top condition.  Two kids who had been up to 87 the summer before both hit 82.  My son hit 84....second highest of the event.  He got emails from 3 or 4 coaches the next day and all 3 essentially said "so you it 84 in January....what were you last summer/fall?"  They were all very surprised to here him say "79".   Our assumption was that they saw the other 2 guys had dropped 5-6 mph over the winter and thought he likely had done the same.

It seems many forget that scouts and recruiters are recruiting prospects for the future.  It really seams logical to me that it means very little how they performed against others at a days event.  Most times they are trying to determine what potential a player has 3-4yrs down the road.  Only the top top players are ready to contribute at the next level as a freshman or 18-19yr olds in the pro's.  Next time you see an average built 18yr old  senior RHP.  Throwing 80 and dominating a showcase game, ask yourself what a 22yr old seasoned D1 senior hitter would do at the plate against him?  Than ask yourself if the  tall lanky 18yr old throwing 93 that couldn't hit the side of a barn would have a better chance at contributing 3-4 yrs later with a quality pitching coach? 

 

 

I think everyone knows the importance of velocity.  Especially velocity that is rare.

 

Nobody wants to hear about the exceptions, but why not, they do exist. The problem when it comes to scouting is this... If you see a guy throwing low 90s, you know he can throw low 90s. Still there are a lot of those types these days, so all the other stuff separates the pitchers.

 

When you see a guy thowing low or mid 80s and he is performing well, you have to wonder if he can do this consistently against better competition. Then yo have a zillion kids capable of throwing low or mid 80s to compare him to.  Are you going to go watch him pitch time and again to really see how good he might be.  Is he better than this other low to mid 80s kid? Would your time be spent wiser and employment more secure, going to watch the low 90s guy again? It is a hard sell knowing you might be wrong about a low 90s guy, how do you justify being wrong about a low 80s guy. 

 

It is actually something we can do better than the MLB scouts. Because of what we do we often see that mid 80s pitcher perform several times. It's our job to see him, it is the scouts choice to see him again!  So sometimes we see the kid that has special ability and potential despite having below average present fastball velocity. 

 

Most of the low 80s guys I have seen have some success in professional baseball relied on unusual deception, command, or trick pitches. Good example would be Jay Tessmer who is in the University of Miami Hall of Fame. He tried out but was cut from the team his freshman and soph. years. Finally making the roster as a junior.  after setting records at Miami and being an All American, he was drafted in the late rounds by the Yankees. He threw sidearm, almost submarine and basically had one very unusual pitch and great command.  He set records for saves in the minor leagues and eventually pitched some in the Big leagues.  His pitch was a frisby type slider that actually did rise because of his very low release point.  Hitters looked helpless trying to hit that pitch. His fastball topped out in the low 80s with great movement and he could paint with it.

 

Wonder how many young men would accomplish the things he did after getting cut both his first two years in college?  Never underestimate the power of persistence!

 

Anyway there are many exceptions when it comes to those that lack velocity.

 

I do agree with most everyone here though, velocity is the first separater. But there is much more to consider. If it were just velocity, the hardest thrower each year would be the first pitcher picked.

I agree to a point but also believe that athleticism plays a huge role in velo and perception of pitch speed. My son is a sub 6er who explodes to the plate with alot of torque and folks have called him max effort. Up to 95, i"ll take it. As PG stated...if you can hit it that velo, then you can hit it.

 

In many cases, the bigger guys arent as athletic and they just have the arm strength and power to gererate the velo. Im not saying they arent athletic, just maybe not as athletic.

A kid whose top number in his entire history is 92 may well max out at 88 on any given day.  Usually a pitcher will "throw to the gun" to get a number that, while genuine, is representative of his current ceiling, not of a typical, game-situation fastball.

 

A -4 game result actually substantiates, rather than refutes, that he probably has been genuinely clocked at 92 at some point.

Just being honest, I just don't believe in the "throwing to the gun" theory. Pitchers want to throw their best fastball every time they compete.  In games they might pace themself, change speeds more often, but their best fastball that day will show up... With or without a radar gun.

 

I'm sure of this based on what we do.  Sometimes we will see a pitchers top velocity at a showcase event.  Sometimes we see a pitchers velocity better in a competitive tournament game.

 

Now I could always be wrong, but I don't believe pitchers can simply turn their velocity on and off depending on whether there is a gun or not.  In fact, I also think that many pitchers don't reach their max velocity at something like a tryout or showcase because they actually are trying to throw the ball harder than they can.  So they stiffen up, muscle up and it slows down there arm.  They are throwing as hard as they possibly can, but their arm is slower and it results in lower velocity and poorer control.  Later we see them pitching for their team, pitching to win and throwing naturally and we see higher velocity with better control.

 

Also, most pitchers velocity fluxuates a little from one game to the next.  Usually it's not a big difference, but once in awhile it is significant. Like someone we got topping out at 90, topping out at 94 the next week or two. Or vise versa.

 

Just wondering, do any of you younger coaches and parents know if kids now days ever play a game called "burn out"? If the radar gun is the culprit involving all the injuries these days, I'd hate to think how they would label "burn out". Then again, I wonder how many arms were injured by that old game of burn out.

I remember "burn out" damaging more catching hands than throwing arms...

My son has has several of "those" days. Sometimes it was about location,feel for the breaking ball or his velo. Either of them at some point weren't representative of his best. 

Burnout. Now that takes me back.

2017LHPscrewball,

 

After you mentioned that, I just got a sharp phantom pain right below my index finger on my old glove hand.

 

It definitely helped when catching the ball out in the web. Didn't need scouts or radar guns, just take the "burn out" champ.

Originally Posted by PGStaff:

Just being honest, I just don't believe in the "throwing to the gun" theory. Pitchers want to throw their best fastball every time they compete.  In games they might pace themself, change speeds more often, but their best fastball that day will show up... With or without a radar gun.

 

I'm sure of this based on what we do.  …

 

Do you honestly believe the pitchers you deal with in what you do, is representative of all pitchers at all levels? To me, this is a lot like an SK determining what “Ordinary Effort” would be at one of you showcase events for 18Us as opposed to scoring a regular season HSV game. A fielder player is much more likely to get popped with an error by a competent SK at one of your events than he would for the same play during the regular HS season.

 

I suspect when you look at some of the best pitchers in an area, they’ll be much more used to seeing the gun, not to mention they know the main reason for pitching at one of those events is to show how hard they can throw the ball. Come to one of our games where the entire last season, the only time the guys saw a gun in a game for the 1^st half of the season, it was on the opponent’s pitcher. I guarantee that when our guys see a gun pointed at them, they respond differently. I don’t say you’re perception is wrong, but I do say that it doesn’t represent the masses.

Velo to pitchers is similar to size with hitters. It will get you the opportunity but you better be able to use it!

 

I know many velo pitchers in low 90’s to mid 90’s that cant find the strike zone, throw flat or do not have another pitch to complement.   In our area in Florida, a private high school team can have 3-4 arms that can throw.  It is my experience that the more effective pitchers are the ones who do not necessarily throw in the 90’s but rather can locate with 2-3 pitches to mix it up. 

 

       

Stats, I agree with PG on this. It's not because its what I do but what my son does. I have a Stalker Sport that I sometimes take to his pitching lessons. I can attest when he "tries to throw hard" he muscles up, control suffers and velocity decreases. His pitching coach has had me clock him both ways to prove a point.

Burn out usually damaged my shin, or my eye socket.

Originally Posted by Billy19:

Stats, I agree with PG on this. It's not because its what I do but what my son does. I have a Stalker Sport that I sometimes take to his pitching lessons. I can attest when he "tries to throw hard" he muscles up, control suffers and velocity decreases. His pitching coach has had me clock him both ways to prove a point.

 

I’m not sure how that shows you and PG agree. As I understand his position, the gun doesn’t make any difference what-so-ever. In fact, if anything it sounds as though you agree with those who feel when a pitcher tries to “muscle up” for the gun, his execute and performance both suffer.

Stats, I never really care who agrees with me. I just try to tell the truth. I very well could be wrong, but I'm never wrong on purpose.  People can read what I have to say and ignore it for all I care. Certainly I have seen a lot of the very best and also seen those that were average and below average high school players.  I think a pitcher can throw to the gun, I just don't think it works for the pitchers doing that. The gun doesn't improve someone's velocity. Sometimes it does the complete opposite.

 

It's like hitters that over swing.  Most great hitters swing something below their perfect swing that creates the absolute best collision with the baseball. If that were 100% it would be the perfect swing. 98% or even 90% is great. But when it the swing effort gets to 101% that hitter is no good. I'm not sure that will make sense to everyone because I'm not sure I have explained it very well.

Stats, Read the 3rd paragraph of PG's post you referenced.

Originally Posted by PGStaff:

Stats, I never really care who agrees with me. I just try to tell the truth. I very well could be wrong, but I'm never wrong on purpose.  People can read what I have to say and ignore it for all I care. Certainly I have seen a lot of the very best and also seen those that were average and below average high school players.  I think a pitcher can throw to the gun, I just don't think it works for the pitchers doing that. The gun doesn't improve someone's velocity. Sometimes it does the complete opposite.

 

No one has said it “works”, as in makes them throw with a higher velocity! In fact, most of those who don’t like to see the gun are saying almost exactly what you are above. The gist of it is, pitchers are changing only to try to improve a number on the gun, and in doing so are changing their “normal” mechanics. No one can really say what the effect of that is because it’ll be different for every pitcher.

 

It's like hitters that over swing.  Most great hitters swing something below their perfect swing that creates the absolute best collision with the baseball. If that were 100% it would be the perfect swing. 98% or even 90% is great. But when it the swing effort gets to 101% that hitter is no good. I'm not sure that will make sense to everyone because I'm not sure I have explained it very well.

 

I understand the analogy.  

Originally Posted by Billy19:

Stats, Read the 3rd paragraph of PG's post you referenced.

 

I read it before I commented, and I’ve read it again because I thought I might have missed something because of what you said. I don’t see anything I missed and I don’t think I misunderstood anything, so why did you want me to re-read it?

 

 

One component of "throwing to the gun" involves nothing about  changing normal mechanics. Most pitchers cruise along at a speed slightly below what their maximum velocity produces because it's all they need to for 90% of their pitches. A pitcher you see in a high school game throwing 86 might be able to throw 89 and, at a recruiting event, will ramp it up to do so. He is indeed "throwing to the gun," in the sense that he's putting forth max effort within his normal mechanics. Throwing to the gun in this context doesn't involve changing what he normally does, it simply means that he will pull out that 89mph fastball 50-60% of the time rather than the 10% he might use it in a high school game.

Originally Posted by roothog66:

One component of "throwing to the gun" involves nothing about  changing normal mechanics. Most pitchers cruise along at a speed slightly below what their maximum velocity produces because it's all they need to for 90% of their pitches. A pitcher you see in a high school game throwing 86 might be able to throw 89 and, at a recruiting event, will ramp it up to do so. He is indeed "throwing to the gun," in the sense that he's putting forth max effort within his normal mechanics. Throwing to the gun in this context doesn't involve changing what he normally does, it simply means that he will pull out that 89mph fastball 50-60% of the time rather than the 10% he might use it in a high school game.

 

True, one component involves nothing about changing mechanics. But who said ALL pitchers who see a gun do that? I’ve been saying all along that every pitcher’s different, so it stands to reason they’ll act differently. Not only that, they may well act differently at different times.

 

But I’ve also tried to get across that it’s very likely that the lower in level you go, the more the chances are the effect of the gun will not be merely going from some high level of effort to max effort with no change in mechanics at all. In fact, the lower the level the more the chances are of poor or weak mechanics to start with.

 

In the end, there’s a pretty big difference in putting the gun on a 17YO in a recruiting event and a 10YO in a regular season rec game. That’s what I see when I look at the risk factors on the PitchSmart site and read “Radar Gun Use”.

 

While radar guns do not directly cause harm to a young pitcher, they can inspire pitchers to throw harder, oftentimes beyond their normal comfort level, in an attempt to impress others. This may create additional strain on the arm.

Now, you're a bit off the topic. However, to answer you, I could agree IF a gun being present inspired a kid to change his mechanics in a harmful way foe MANY pitches. What PG is getting at is that kids figure out that this doesn't help, so they most likely don't continue with the mechanics long enough for repetitive injury to be a factor or they simply get used to a gun being there long before it matters.

 

Also, the idea that a gun inspires higher velocity is a ridiculous argument standing alone. COMPETITION inspires pitchers to throw hard just like it did in the school yard when I was a kid well before you saw any radar guns around. Refer back to "burn out." That was a game played constantly during warm ups with the SPECIFIC INTENT to throw as hard as possible.

Originally Posted by roothog66:

Now, you're a bit off the topic. However, to answer you, I could agree IF a gun being present inspired a kid to change his mechanics in a harmful way foe MANY pitches. What PG is getting at is that kids figure out that this doesn't help, so they most likely don't continue with the mechanics long enough for repetitive injury to be a factor or they simply get used to a gun being there long before it matters.

 

Hey, I didn’t bring up anything about throwing to the gun. Blame Midlo Dad for that, but even then what he said was accurate in my opinion. That’s when PG interjected with his not believing in the “throwing to the gun theory. If PG really means what you’re saying, it’s not what I’ve been understanding him to say. I’ve taken him at his word that a gun being present won’t affect a pitcher.

 

Also, the idea that a gun inspires higher velocity is a ridiculous argument standing alone. COMPETITION inspires pitchers to throw hard just like it did in the school yard when I was a kid well before you saw any radar guns around. Refer back to "burn out." That was a game played constantly during warm ups with the SPECIFIC INTENT to throw as hard as possible.

 

Why is it so ridiculous to believe a gun, which is a universally accepted measure of velocity, would INSPIRE velocity?