Honestly, I don't think recruiters know or care about the strike % statistic of any pitcher they are looking at. They may form some general opinion of his ability to control an at bat, but they could care less what the actual percentage is. They look at measurable numbers - not statistics. Additionally, throwing that stat out there can be deceptive. Simply being able to throw consistent strikes is not the same as useful "control."
Can someone please define strike percentage to me? Are we saying the strike percentage relates to the percentage of pitches thrown in the strike zone? Are we assuming the pitcher is trying to throw every pitch in the strike zone? Maybe I missed the definition being used for this discussion, but if not, then much of the commentary does not make great sense to me. If a guy can throw 50% strikes and has good swing/miss, then he should be able to strike out a lot of folks. Furthermore, if he is throwing 50% on purpose (actually controls which pitches enter the strike zone and which ones do not), then there needs to be additional comparisons made between the pitchers to account for intent.
I'll use my own kid as an example. Last season, he sported an overall strike % of almost 60%. However, his first pitch strike percentage was around 25%. What this reflected was a LOT of 2-0 counts followed by strikes and often a lot of pitches being fouled off (count these as strikes) before getting the K. So, his overall K% was pretty nice but in no way watching him would you say he was a pitcher with really good control and command.
Strike percentage is, of course, the number of strikes divided by the number of total pitches. Strikes consists of called strikes and any ball that is contacted with, whether it be a foul ball, ground out, fly ball, or even a home run. Of course the majors have the equipment and ability to actually measure strike zone percentage, but at other levels we're only left with strike %. I've had kids in the past with 70% strike percentages - mainly because they were serving up every pitch. I see this a lot ion high school - the kid who just throws it down the middle at 70mph and gets every other pitch drilled. For high school and below, it is, IMO, a useless statistic.
Based on Roothog66's responses, I would answer the OP's question as follows - "It depends."
I don't have exact numbers, but I will brag a little on my 2017. He generally has a high first pitch strike percentage - upwards of 50% - in part due to his control and his understanding that most hitters he faces are generally hesitant to swing on the initial pitch (he is a starter, not a reliever). I would guess his strike percentage goes down as the game progresses as he goes through the lineup for the second or third time (heaven forbid) as he he starts to work the edges a little harder and maybe throws more breaking balls to try to get swing and miss instead of continuing to try to simply throw it past them down the middle.
That said, if I were a college coach recruiting a pitcher, I would love to get ahold of as many games off of Trackman as I could and see if the pitcher has any tendencies that might be much more insightful than strike percentage. If the OP's question is more focused on a reliever type, then I'm still not sure if 50% versus 65% is that big of a gap that you would pas on the added MPH all other things being equal (which we all know is never the case).
RJM, I'm going to disagree with you on that one. Asking a pitcher to "ease up" is a great way to foul him up completely.
When you see a guy willingly trade velo for control, you're typically talking about switching from 4-seamer to 2-seamer for movement. The control is not enhanced by the loss of 2-3 mph, though; that has to be there either way. (Greg Maddux is of course the paradigm.)
Now, if you see a guy straining and yanking his head and shoulder around trying to throw harder, yes, stopping that will help his control. But it'll also help his velocity, because those things also are actually counterproductive to velocity.
roothog66 posted:Honestly, I don't think recruiters know or care about the strike % statistic of any pitcher they are looking at. They may form some general opinion of his ability to control an at bat, but they could care less what the actual percentage is. They look at measurable numbers - not statistics. Additionally, throwing that stat out there can be deceptive. Simply being able to throw consistent strikes is not the same as useful "control."
There was a kid at our high school who threw strikes at 85-87. He was quickly removed from the rotation for getting lit up. I would say he threw 85-90% strikes. He never walked hitters. He gave up screaming liners.
Midlo Dad posted:RJM, I'm going to disagree with you on that one. Asking a pitcher to "ease up" is a great way to foul him up completely.
When you see a guy willingly trade velo for control, you're typically talking about switching from 4-seamer to 2-seamer for movement. The control is not enhanced by the loss of 2-3 mph, though; that has to be there either way. (Greg Maddux is of course the paradigm.)
Now, if you see a guy straining and yanking his head and shoulder around trying to throw harder, yes, stopping that will help his control. But it'll also help his velocity, because those things also are actually counterproductive to velocity.
You touched on what I was referring to. There are pitchers overthrowing at high velocities with poor mechanics. Smoothing them out often reduces their velocity. But they are still throwing hard enough to be effective. I'm not talking about telling a kid to do what you do at a lower velocity.
mdschert posted:Dominik85 posted:mdschert posted:Ok so it seems the consensus is that coaches would prefer the 50% S% 90 mph player over the 65% S% 87 mph player. I would bet my house payment that the 87 mph pitcher would beat the 90 mph player 8 out of 10 games. I have never seen a 50% S% pitcher be successful.
Well mlb pitchers only throw 45 percent in the zone and 60 percent overall strikes, so 50 percent is not that far off.
87 to 90 is not far off either. So doing the math a 50% overall S% pitcher is throwing about 35% in the zone. Have you ever seen a wild pitcher suddenly have command? I think it is easier to get a pitcher from 87 to 90 than it is for one to go 50% S% to 65% S%
there is certainly something to it. coaches think they can teach command (or plate discipline for hitters) but those things are not easy to learn and many never learn it. I believe command is partly dependend on mechanics and practice but also partly due to natural Talent.
some can learn it to some degree (for example Randy Johnson - he still was never good at command by MLB Standards but good enough to ride his stuff into being one of the best ever) but many also don't.
ability to improve command also gets projected. for example scouts say that well coordinated natural athletes have more ability to improve than some big klutz who happens to have a good arm.
Velo can be improved too (actually we know now more about Velo developement than command developement) but that also depends on the Body (a filled out strong 5"11 guy won't gain that much vs a thin 6"4 guy).
mdschert posted:Ok so it seems the consensus is that coaches would prefer the 50% S% 90 mph player over the 65% S% 87 mph player. I would bet my house payment that the 87 mph pitcher would beat the 90 mph player 8 out of 10 games. I have never seen a 50% S% pitcher be successful.
I have lots of times. Don't know why you think that is so bad??
And P.S. Three mph is a huge difference. Very visible if you are in the box! 87 and 90 are not close. Just as 92 and 95 are not close. And of course at the lower levels the 3mph difference is even more noticeable. 77 vs 80.
2020dad posted:mdschert posted:Ok so it seems the consensus is that coaches would prefer the 50% S% 90 mph player over the 65% S% 87 mph player. I would bet my house payment that the 87 mph pitcher would beat the 90 mph player 8 out of 10 games. I have never seen a 50% S% pitcher be successful.
I have lots of times. Don't know why you think that is so bad??
I am very surprised you see this. A pitcher that has a 50% S% is throwing about 35% in the zone. Theoretically the pitcher can be beat with using a manikin at the plate. Since college stats do not include S%, look at MLB to prove my point. All of the good pitchers are > 60% S%
MLB also has more disciplined hitters so that strike % is necessary. You give me a kid throwing 90mph at 50% strikes and I'll win some games over good teams; not great disciplined teams at the plate, but good teams.
And if you put a mannequin at the plate, just like if you "take till you get a strike," that strike % will skyrocket with a fat 88mph fastball making it 0-1 to every hitter.
"Three mph is a huge difference. Very visible if you are in the box! 87 and 90 are not close. Just as 92 and 95 are not close. And of course at the lower levels the 3mph difference is even more noticeable. 77 vs 80."
This is true ONLY if all other things are exactly equal mechanically. For example, if the pitcher shows the ball to the batter in the "back window," and the batter is savvy enough to pick it up, both pitchers will be smashed. Conversely, if the lower velo pitcher's ball is seen first upon release (no back window glimpse) he would tend to have the advantage when compared to the higher velo pitcher who shows the back window.
Every kid will develop differently - mental, physical, coaching - all contribute. So, coaches use their experience to figure out how to take whatever clay they choose and sculpt a zone pounding, big movement, 95 from that.
I have seen guys gain velo and gain command after HS; and I have seen guys plateau, and I have seen guys who have "regressed." (At our local D1 power, the joke has always been amongst scouts: "know how he got this guy sitting 90? He recruited him when he sat 92.")
So, for parents one important facet in deciding where to go is the track record of the PC. Of course, one major problem with that is the successful PCs may not be there when junior arrives.
I didnt read the entire thread, but I don't think coaches are interested in strike percentages, etc at the HS level during recruitment. Of course a lot depends on the program, division, 2 year, 4 year etc.
Colleges coaches are looking at tangibles, more than metrics. Height, weight, build, grades, toughness, is he coachable, willingness to work hard, financial situation, pitches for strikes health issues and put that all together with velocity and projection. They also like " projects".
Putting two players together asking which is more appealing to a coach depends on the coach and which he feels is the best fit for his program.
JMO
I think what matters is not so much strike percentage but the ability to pitch mostly near the strike Zone. if you have a lot of Close misses the Scouts won't care much but if the batters jump out of the box every third pitch to avoid getting hit that is probably a red flag.
there is a difference between having a control that Needs refinement and just being wild.
2020dad posted:And P.S. Three mph is a huge difference. Very visible if you are in the box! 87 and 90 are not close. Just as 92 and 95 are not close. And of course at the lower levels the 3mph difference is even more noticeable. 77 vs 80.
With the title of this thread asking about the perspective of college coaches, it probably also can involve looking through perspective and experience of college hitters.
In the experience of our son (both playing and coaching in college), good college hitters could care less about an 87mph fastball or a 90mph fastball. Absent somebody pitching in that range with extraordinary command (think Eshelman from Fullerton), good college hitters are likely to be very successful against either pitcher.
As I mentioned earlier, with those velocities, a college coach will look at which pitcher gives up free bases and which does not and which can command their fb at those numbers and who does not. Free bases in college bases too often equate to runs..
Either of those velocities in college may have limited success unless combined with, at least, the ability to change speeds. A c/u for instance, thrown with the exact same motion as the fb, and with command, can make either 87 or 90 successful in the eyes of a college coach and hitter.
Again, I am taking someone like Eshelman out of the equation because he was 82-83 when I saw him as a freshman, threw mostly fastballs, had incredible command up, down, in, out and the corners. He would also be a perfect example of the pitching type mentioned in this thread of gaining velocity and was 90/91 as a junior