Author Topic: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis  (Read 12886 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33783
  • Hell yes!
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #25: January 12, 2009, 09:18:25 AM »
I wasn't referring to that sort of toughness tomterp. If you had read my other post you would've known that I was talking about not being brittle as I believe some people's body makeup isn't as tough as others and are therefore more prone to getting injured and staying injured.


Thank you for your clarification, I read what you said but interpreted it differently.

Offline wisefan11

  • Posts: 1240
  • This is Nat Country
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #26: January 18, 2009, 12:55:03 PM »
I believe some people's body makeup isn't as tough as others and are therefore more prone to getting injured and staying injured.


Anyone?




Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #27: January 18, 2009, 01:47:29 PM »
What the hell is the trainer doing in that picture? That's a goofy facial expression.

Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #28: January 18, 2009, 01:53:01 PM »
What the hell is the trainer doing in that picture? That's a goofy facial expression.

Probably signaling to the stretcher people that they have a possible "break".

The face...I have no idea...God gave him that face.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37394
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #29: January 18, 2009, 02:33:40 PM »


Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 18063
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #30: January 18, 2009, 03:05:32 PM »
actually he's celebrating a punt return touchdown dante hall style


Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #31: January 18, 2009, 03:27:17 PM »
No, the trainer is just reminding us that while we all have adamantium skeletons, NJ does not and he thinks we shouldn't be making fun of him or anything.


Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15551
  • Future
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #32: January 18, 2009, 03:42:50 PM »
:rofl: all good pictures

MrMadison

  • Guest
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #33: January 19, 2009, 02:17:08 AM »
*dead* @ the last like 5 posts.

Offline R-Zim#11

  • Posts: 1740
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #34: January 22, 2009, 10:50:25 AM »
I stumbled across this, and it's kind of discouraging:

http://www.drivelinemechanics.com/2008/11/18/665018/quick-note-stephen-strasbu

The conclusion is pretty depressing:
 :|

However, what isn't mentioned is Prior (and Wood for that matter) were killed by Dusty Baker in 2003. Both had outstanding years, but I distinctly recall Baker leaving them in for 120, 130, even 140 pitches. Neither were the same after that year.

The same happened with Dallas Green and the Big-3 Flameouts in New York: Wilson, Isringhausen, Pusipher of the mid-90's.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21642
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #35: January 22, 2009, 10:51:37 AM »
New York: Wilson, Isringhausen, Pusipher of the mid-90's.

Generation K - that worked out well.

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 18487
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #36: January 22, 2009, 11:01:39 AM »
Generation K - that worked out well.

Paul Wilson what a shame he blew out his shoulder. Torn labrum if I remember correctly.

Offline R-Zim#11

  • Posts: 1740
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #37: January 22, 2009, 01:36:53 PM »
Generation K - that worked out well.

Poor management -- leaving young starters in for extended pitch counts can irrevocably damage their careers. Acta doesn't have that problem :)

Offline JMUalumni

  • Posts: 7787
Re: Stephen Strasburg mechanics analysis
« Reply #38: February 10, 2009, 01:42:40 PM »
What I know about Strasburg is from what I have seen of him in the Olympics and read about him online, but I feel like I can at least adequately address a few concerns about his mechanics.  First of all, the comparison to Mark Prior is loose at best.  Sure, there are certain points of the delivery that appear to be the same in the side by side, but there are some major differences.  Strasburg has been credited by some 'experts' as having a smooth pitching motion that flows.  This is very good for a pitcher, as any hitches in the motion are red flags for injuries.  You can notice this "smoothness" in a.) his picking up of the ball (elbow movement before forward momentum) and b.)his ability to almost separate his hips unnoticeably.  Prior takes a much higher step before he begins, which ultimately leads to timing issues throughout his motion.  When he changed that, he lost a lot of velocity (you can notice Strasburg takes a good size step, but does not have any timing issues throughout).

Another thing with mechanics (and this pertains to Lincecum as well) is that there is no universal perfect mechanic for pitching, there is however a such thing as almost perfect mechanics for an individual.  Lincecum's father basically tailored his son's mechanics to fit his body, thus increasing the efficiency and reducing the chance of injury of the mechanics.  If I recall correctly, Strasburg used to be a bit more heavier.  Maybe, he is just settling into his mechanics and we could still see further improvement on what he is showing now.  Either way I am sure we all get more than our fair shares of expert advice over the next couple months, along with some opportunities to check out the kid for ourselves.  One thing Strasburg is not, though, is Mark Prior.

*Does anyone know why new posts in "The Farm" no longer appear under my "Show Unread Posts since Last Visit" link?