Author Topic: Stephen Strasburg Watch  (Read 65958 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JMUalumni

  • Posts: 7786
Re: Stephen Strasburg Watch
« Reply #100: February 26, 2009, 06:32:46 PM »
The understanding of pitching mechanics is probably in the dark ages.  I bet that 20 years from now, there will be an accepted "best method" that will have been scientifically developed to deliver the best pitches with the least chance for injury.  Then, this will be taught to every pitcher from the smallest little leagues on up.

Frankly I'm not sure this homogenization of the game is a good thing, in fact I'm pretty sure it isn't.

I totally agree.  I think creating a preferred or "best" method will ultimately limit or even injure other players that do not have body types matching to the specific method.  Lincecum is a perfect case, his mechanics are tailor made to fit his body.  The computer model sounds plausible and I would imagine it isolating various parts of the pitching motion ("picking up the ball", scapular loading, breaking the ball, arm slot, etc.) so that each part of the pitcher's motions are maximized to the specific physical characteristics.  This is probably a far way off, because like you have alluded to, the information on pitching mechanics is largely incomplete, unknown, or disputed.  As for now, it is useful when talking about young players, mainly because a lot talk surrounding a player that could spend the next 4+ seasons in the system is about their potential/projection.  Mechanics are useful in projecting if some guy is generating speed through a particularly risky arm motion, or maybe if there is a particularly high risk of injury due to a sub inverted arm motion.  Where they aren't useful is in predicting if a player will be definitively good or bad.