velocity, location or movement?
http://www.fangraphs.com/commu...ation-or-movement-2/
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
In general terms:
1. Velocity
2. Location
3. Movement
Although velocity is most important, at the upper levels it is assumed a player has sufficient velocity to compete. Therefore, velocity becomes less important, and the order becomes:
1. Location
2. Change of Speeds
3. Movement
There are tons of 90-95 guys at the pro level that are being consistently hit.
1. Velocity
2. Location
3. Movement
Although velocity is most important, at the upper levels it is assumed a player has sufficient velocity to compete. Therefore, velocity becomes less important, and the order becomes:
1. Location
2. Change of Speeds
3. Movement
There are tons of 90-95 guys at the pro level that are being consistently hit.
Interesting question.
However, the fangraph author didn't do much to answer it by studying 'split finger fastballs', and only home run swings, and swinging strikes.
I would say the general rules would be:
The ball must move, regardless of velocity (unless its 98+), or you get hammered.
The ball must be located, away from the middle of the plate, regardless of velocity (unless its 98+) or movement, or you get hammered.
The ball must be at a certain velocity, regardless of location, or you will get hammered.
I think this is where scouts get into trouble... they pick a lot of pitchers with flat fastballs. Then, when they try to add movement, location suffers.
However, the fangraph author didn't do much to answer it by studying 'split finger fastballs', and only home run swings, and swinging strikes.
I would say the general rules would be:
The ball must move, regardless of velocity (unless its 98+), or you get hammered.
The ball must be located, away from the middle of the plate, regardless of velocity (unless its 98+) or movement, or you get hammered.
The ball must be at a certain velocity, regardless of location, or you will get hammered.
I think this is where scouts get into trouble... they pick a lot of pitchers with flat fastballs. Then, when they try to add movement, location suffers.
Scouts are always going to favor velocity. As I have said before:
Velocity is not the show. It is the ticket to the show.
Velocity is not the show. It is the ticket to the show.
Interesting reading. As he concluded, the analysis didn't really reveal much that conventional baseball wisdom didn't already conclude.
- Movement can be good. But, if it's movement towards the center of the plate and barrel of the bat, then it's NOT good.
- Velocity is good if located, if not, then it's NOT good unless it meets or exceeds 100mph, then nothing else matters.
- Location is good if you have some measure of velocity, above 88, and movement (away from the hitters bat).
What you can't see from this analysis is what is a huge factor in getting swings and misses. That's pitch sequencing. Another factor is which pitches you throw when, to different hitting styles. Some of those right handed hitters were pure power guys, many were more slap style guys.
I can throw pitches with movement in to a speed, slap hitter but can't do that regularly, with exceptional location, to a power guy.
So, we are talking FB's,
- you must LOCATE the fastball.
- extreme VELOCITY is always coveted; but most pitchers need "differences" of velocity in their arsenal.
- MOVEMENT is great, if it's in the right direct and location.
- Movement can be good. But, if it's movement towards the center of the plate and barrel of the bat, then it's NOT good.
- Velocity is good if located, if not, then it's NOT good unless it meets or exceeds 100mph, then nothing else matters.
- Location is good if you have some measure of velocity, above 88, and movement (away from the hitters bat).
What you can't see from this analysis is what is a huge factor in getting swings and misses. That's pitch sequencing. Another factor is which pitches you throw when, to different hitting styles. Some of those right handed hitters were pure power guys, many were more slap style guys.
I can throw pitches with movement in to a speed, slap hitter but can't do that regularly, with exceptional location, to a power guy.
So, we are talking FB's,
- you must LOCATE the fastball.
- extreme VELOCITY is always coveted; but most pitchers need "differences" of velocity in their arsenal.
- MOVEMENT is great, if it's in the right direct and location.
quote:Velocity is not the show. It is the ticket to the show.
That is a tremendous quote!!
Let's start with average on all 3 pitches. Above average velocity and above average movement with average or even a bit less than average control will do quite well.
Above average velocity and above average control will do quite well without great movement.
Above average movement and above average control will do well with average velocity.
It takes two to tango and it takes two to pitch. If you've got all 3 then you're Felix Hernandez.
Above average velocity and above average control will do quite well without great movement.
Above average movement and above average control will do well with average velocity.
It takes two to tango and it takes two to pitch. If you've got all 3 then you're Felix Hernandez.
quote:The idea that movement on a fastball matters appears to be totally erroneous. A pitcher probably can’t live on a fastball that is 92 mph with a lot of movement if he can’t locate it. A pitcher probably can live on an 88 mph fastball with little movement as long as he can locate it. Location is far more important than movement for fastballs.
Some erroneous info must be sorted through. Movement on the fastball is important. The author trys to lead one in t o belief that a straight throwing pitcher is better than one who throws with movement. What is missing here is this truth-
If you had two pitchers, both of which had average velocity and both had no control over where they were throwing, what then may be viewed as a plus? Whoever has m ore movement will be chosen. This truth testifies in the reality of things like more weakly hit balls, more broken bats, etc.
Whats worse than a guy who has no control on his tailing fastball? The one who has no control and throws straight as an arrow. I tend to dislike studies like this because it is too hard to determine truths. We had a pitcher this year who threw nothing but tailing, sinking fastballs. He was wild, had little control, etc. But, he was very effective at getting ground ball after ground ball. So much comes into play with arm slot, deceptiveness, how much movement, direction of movement, etc. I have seen herky-jerky guys who throw straight as an arrow but create so much deception they are very effective, even when they leave it right down the middle. I have seen others who throw so robotically they get hit quite a bit, even with tons of movement.
Each pitcher is different. Swing and misses versus homeruns is a weak way of determining desired results. For instance, Tim Hudson, a ground b all pitcher isn't graded on his swing and misses so much as balls hit into play th a t get the exact desired result the pitcher intended. A 3 pitch inning recording 3 quick outs to the shortstop is way more desirable than the same results but adding in extra swing and miss pitches. Where does control come into pkay here? Hudson is effective not because of his pinpoint control or velocity (both of which he lacks), but because he thr laws at least 4 different pitches at different velocities that all move in different directions. His advantage here is his ability to start all of his pitches generally to look like the same pitch and thus keep hitters guessing and misjudging where the ball will end up "because of movement" and not location control.
Skylark brings up a good point. Deception is important. Going back all the way to LL I had a pitcher who threw fairly hard but more importantly looked like he was throwing even harder. The weaker hitters couldn't touch him. The better hitters tended to square him up every now and then. I had another pitcher who threw about 1 mph slower but didn't look like he threw that hard. He had more movement on the ball. The weaker hitters weren't intimidated and were much more likely to put the ball in play against him, but the better hitters squared him up far less often.
Moving forward to HS I saw pitchers throwing mid to upper 80s who dominated because they had deception in their motions while harder throwing pitchers got hit harder. Jered Weaver is the proof of the importance of deception.
BTW, going back a few years Scot Shields was proof that velocity and movement with only adequate control could be successful at the major league level.
Moving forward to HS I saw pitchers throwing mid to upper 80s who dominated because they had deception in their motions while harder throwing pitchers got hit harder. Jered Weaver is the proof of the importance of deception.
BTW, going back a few years Scot Shields was proof that velocity and movement with only adequate control could be successful at the major league level.
