Do taller pitchers have more difficulty learning to repeat their delvery

[Kimmi]

Now you've got me interested in this. My question is what type of correlation exists between height and fastball velocity. I just went through FanGraphs list of hardest throwers in 2015 and there do seem to be a lot of guys 6-3 and taller.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=y&type=10&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

 

In an analysis published at Fangraphs, the r-squared for the correlation between height and velocity was 0.013. The correlation coefficient r is just .114.

 

An analysis done at Beyond the Box Score had an r-squared of 0.012.

[a700hitter]

And yet, studies have found no correlation between a pitcher's height and his velocity.

 

They have also found no correlation between a pitcher's height and performance.

 

So you can say as often as you want that height is an advantage to pitchers, but it's simply not true.

With everything else being equal that goes into athleticism, being taller with long limbs is an advantage. It's physics which trumps sabremetrics every time.

[Kimmi]

For instance, the thing about the eye color is very interesting. Intuitively, I would guess that blue-eyed people would be more sensitive to the sunlight. However, is there any evidence that blue-eyed pitchers perform worse than dark-eyed pitchers? I'm guessing not.

 

Note to self: Research that.

 

Interestingly enough, but not surprising, research has shown no correlation between eye color and day/night splits for hitters. In other words, blue-eyed hitters do not perform any worse playing in the sunlight than their dark-eyed counterparts.

[User Name]

I remember Josh Hamilton creating some controversy regarding that subject a couple years back.

[a700hitter]

From a Manual of Structural Kinesiology--Basic Biomechanical Factors & Concepts

 

 

http://www.kean.edu/~jeadams/docs/Kinesiology/Kines_Power_Points/Kines_PPT_PDF_Chap3.pdf

 

Torque and length of lever arms

• Human leverage for sport skills requires

several levers

– throwing a ball involves levers at shoulder,

elbow & wrist joints

• The longer the lever, the more effective

it is in imparting velocity

– A tennis player can hit a tennis ball harder

with a straight-arm drive than with a bent

elbow because the lever (including the

racket) is longer & moves at a faster speed

 

There is a lot in this manual about levers in the body. The longer the Lever (arm) the more efficient at producing velocity. A shorter lever is an advantage for a quick release, but a disadvantage for velocity.

 

Now, none of this precludes a shorter pitcher from being successful as we all know. But the advantage of being tall and long limbed is undeniable physical science.

[Kimmi]

From a Manual of Structural Kinesiology--Basic Biomechanical Factors & Concepts

 

 

http://www.kean.edu/~jeadams/docs/Kinesiology/Kines_Power_Points/Kines_PPT_PDF_Chap3.pdf

 

 

There is a lot in this manual about levers in the body. The longer the Lever (arm) the more efficient at producing velocity. A shorter lever is an advantage for a quick release, but a disadvantage for velocity.

 

Now, none of this precludes a shorter pitcher from being successful as we all know. But the advantage of being tall and long limbed is undeniable physical science.

 

And none of that precludes a shorter pitcher from throwing as hard as a taller pitcher. I will grant you that the physics behind being taller might give a taller pitcher a natural advantage to throw harder, but a shorter pitcher can make up that advantage in other ways. The blanket statement that taller pitchers throw harder or faster is false. More importantly, drafting or signing, or not drafting or signing, pitchers based on height is not wise.

[Kimmi]

I remember Josh Hamilton creating some controversy regarding that subject a couple years back.

 

There is a physical difference light colored eyes versus dark colored eyes that makes blue-eyed people more sensitive to sunlight. However, that has not translated into affecting performance in any way.

 

There are always exceptions to the rule, and I believe Hamilton was one of them.

[a700hitter]

And none of that precludes a shorter pitcher from throwing as hard as a taller pitcher. I will grant you that the physics behind being taller might give a taller pitcher a natural advantage to throw harder, but a shorter pitcher can make up that advantage in other ways. The blanket statement that taller pitchers throw harder or faster is false. More importantly, drafting or signing, or not drafting or signing, pitchers based on height is not wise.

That's why I have stated that "everything else being equal" taller guys have the physical advantage. The other things the scout can't see and doesn't know if those other things will develop. He can see height. Height more efficiently produces velocity. It is an advantage. It is a way of thinning through tens of thousands of kids.

 

I think in this discussion we have not gotten to the true bias in scouting that I think is a mistake. it isn't the bias against small pitchers. It is the bias in favor of velocity. Obviously, you need to have some heat, but you don't need to throw 95+ to be effective in the major leagues. There isn't enough emphasis put on command and movement of pitches. It doesn't matter how hard you throw. You will not succeed unless you have command and movement -- regardless of height.

[Bellhorn04]

OK, just for fun, here is a list of the top 30 average fastball speeds for the year 2015, with their heights. This includes any pitcher who had 60 innings pitched or more, so obviously it brings in a lot of relievers:

 

Aroldis Chapman 6 4

Arquimedes Caminero 6 4

Trevor Rosenthal 6 2

Kelvin Herrera 5 10

Dellin Betances 6 8

Jumbo Diaz 6 4

Nathan Eovaldi 6 2

Noah Syndergaard 6 6

Ken Giles 6 2

Blake Treinen 6 5

Jeurys Familia 6 3

Tommy Hunter 6 3

Hector Rondon 6 3

Daniel Hudson 6 3

Jose Fernandez 6 2

Wade Davis 6 5

Garrett Richards 6 3

Yordano Ventura 6 0

Jeremy Jeffress 6 0

Roberto Osuna 6 2

Gerrit Cole 6 4

Joe Kelly 6 1

Luis Garcia 6 2

Stephen Strasburg 6 4

Fernando Rodney 5 11

Kevin Gausman 6 3

Matt Harvey 6 4

Carlos Martinez 6 0

Justin Wilson 6 2

Luis Severino 6 0

 

The average height of the top 10 is about 6-3. The average height of the top 30 is just a shade over 6-2.

[Kimmi]

That's why I have stated that "everything else being equal" taller guys have the physical advantage. The other things the scout can't see and doesn't know if those other things will develop. He can see height. Height more efficiently produces velocity. It is an advantage. It is a way of thinning through tens of thousands of kids.

 

I think in this discussion we have not gotten to the true bias in scouting that I think is a mistake. it isn't the bias against small pitchers. It is the bias in favor of velocity. Obviously, you need to have some heat, but you don't need to throw 95+ to be effective in the major leagues. There isn't enough emphasis put on command and movement of pitches. It doesn't matter how hard you throw. You will not succeed unless you have command and movement -- regardless of height.

 

Exactly, the scouts can see height. They are drafting based on height (not solely, of course), which is a bias against shorter pitchers. There might be a bias for velocity, but that doesn't preclude there being a bias against short pitchers.

 

Not only in drafting, but in free agency and trading, there is a bias against short pitchers because of beliefs about velocity, performance, and durability.

 

I completely agree with you about command and movement.

[User Name]

The explanation from scouts is that you can coach command and movement, but not velocity.

[Dojji]

Taller pitchers may have a physical advantage, but that does not translate into a pitching advantage over shorter pitchers.

 

I think it's more accurate to say that it does necessarily translate. Basball is a game of skill over talent, raw physical prowess only fdactors in as, and when, the player can harness it.

[Dojji]

To elaborate a bit, physical advantages can play against a young athete as they can, at low levels, get away with bad fundamentals and rely on sheer talent to dominate. This sets up a player to be well behind the learning curve, when he reaches levels where phyaical talent on its own is no longer enough. We saw a sad example of that relatively recently with Will Middlebrooks. So this question in the OP is one that can be correctly answered yes and no at the same time based on how you frame it.

[a700hitter]

Exactly, the scouts can see height. They are drafting based on height (not solely, of course), which is a bias against shorter pitchers. There might be a bias for velocity, but that doesn't preclude there being a bias against short pitchers.

 

Not only in drafting, but in free agency and trading, there is a bias against short pitchers because of beliefs about velocity, performance, and durability.

 

I completely agree with you about command and movement.

I am on a different page than you on this. The bias is in favor of velocity, which science dictates that tall guys can generate more efficiently. That's just science not bias. The real question of bias is whether velocity should be the be all and end all of pitching skills that are scouted. I see it with my great nephew. Scouts and coaches don't seem to put any importance on commanding the strike zone or movement, but a 13 year old kid hitting 80 on the gun gets a lot of attention.

[Kimmi]

I am on a different page than you on this. The bias is in favor of velocity, which science dictates that tall guys can generate more efficiently. That's just science not bias. The real question of bias is whether velocity should be the be all and end all of pitching skills that are scouted. I see it with my great nephew. Scouts and coaches don't seem to put any importance on commanding the strike zone or movement, but a 13 year old kid hitting 80 on the gun gets a lot of attention.

 

There is a bias against short pitchers, especially right handed ones, because teams are not as willing to draft or sign these pitchers based on false asumptions. It's not just velocity. It's also durability and overall performance.

 

Science might say that taller pitchers have an advantage, but if it doesn't translate to baseball performance, then not drafting shorter pitchers because they're short is fallacious.

 

It's the same with the eye color thing. There is scientific proof that blue eyes are more sensitive to sunlight, but that sensitivity does not translate to baseball performance. Scouts were not drafting blue-eyed players because of fallacious assumptions.

[a700hitter]

There is a bias against short pitchers, especially right handed ones, because teams are not as willing to draft or sign these pitchers based on false asumptions. It's not just velocity. It's also durability and overall performance.

 

Science might say that taller pitchers have an advantage, but if it doesn't translate to baseball performance, then not drafting shorter pitchers because they're short is fallacious.

 

It's the same with the eye color thing. There is scientific proof that blue eyes are more sensitive to sunlight, but that sensitivity does not translate to baseball performance. Scouts were not drafting blue-eyed players because of fallacious assumptions.

The correlation between height and velocity is not a false assumption. Physical science is such that taller guys produce velocity more efficiently than shorter guys. Does that mean that short guys can't throw hard? No, but the percentages are heavily in favor of tall guys being able to throw at high velocity. Isn't sabremetrics about playing the percentages?

[Kimmi]

The correlation between height and velocity is not a false assumption. Physical science is such that taller guys produce velocity more efficiently than shorter guys. Does that mean that short guys can't throw hard? No, but the percentages are heavily in favor of tall guys being able to throw at high velocity. Isn't sabremetrics about playing the percentages?

 

Again, that does not translate to baseball. There is NO correlation between height and velocity at the major league level. Play the percentages by drafting the best pitchers regardless of height, rather than ruling someone out simply because he is short.

[a700hitter]

Again, that does not translate to baseball. There is NO correlation between height and velocity at the major league level. Play the percentages by drafting the best pitchers regardless of height, rather than ruling someone out simply because he is short.

There are far more 6'2" plus pitchers at the major league level because a higher percentage of tall kids throw harder than the shorter kids. The short kids that make the major leagues are the exception who have defied the odds. Give credit to the scouts who found them. There is not some great untapped pool of hard throwing little guys. That is some sort of fantasy land. If you want to promote more scouting, I am in favor of that, but scouting resources are always limited and very costly. Therefore, they need ways to narrow down the pool of kids that they spend time scouting. The height - velocity correlation is based in science and not a myth. You may not like it, but it is called physics. It's not opinion. Natural gifts do not always translate to success, but you do need the the natural gifts. There are no 5'5" 200lb pitchers because they do not have natural gifts, not because they are victim of bias.

[Dojji]

Again, that does not translate to baseball. There is NO correlation between height and velocity at the major league level. Play the percentages by drafting the best pitchers regardless of height, rather than ruling someone out simply because he is short.

 

Eh. The problem is that even when a short guy can get the velo up he frequently does it in a way that causes increased wear and tear compared to a longer pitcher who can throw harder with less effort. A lot of those short righthanders wind up profiling as relievers due to lack of durability, or else having short careers, and neither of those outcomes are optimal for scouts.

 

As for soft tossin' skills, there's a sense in baseball circles that these are skills that pitchers with power talent should also be developing, as they will need to rely on them as they age. Pitchers that start with that and nothing else tend to wind up with even shorter careers than short hard-throwers, as it is very hard to maintain a respectable arsenal if you top out at less than 92MPH. You're giving great hitters too much time to center in on your stuff, it's hard to come up with a combination that can counter that problem and keep it countered. Not many pull it off, and those that do, are pitchers who usually used to throw harder effectively and had to figure out how to do as much with less. Greg Maddux falls into this category.

[User Name]

You literally just made that up Dojji. Mechanics are the defining factor at play when talking about pitcher wear and tear. A 6'5 guy throwing with an inverted W is literally 3x more likely to go under the knife for TJS than a 5'10 guy with a clean motion.

 

And there are studies (Hell, Kimmi posted two of them in this very same thread!) that there is also no correlation between size and pitcher durability.

[Elktonnick]

I'm 6'6" and pitched in college at the University of Tennessee and when I was getting ready to sign the paperwork to commit, a pro scout from the Phillies came up to me and a couple of my buddies while we were taking fly balls in the outfield and asked us to remove our sunglasses so he could see our eye color. He looked and wrote down the other two guys. Then he looked at me and saw I had blue eyes and he said "damn son, that's a shame" I asked why he said that and he explained that a blue eyed boy has a harder time dealing with sunlight. I was like is that really a knock on me? He said absolutely because will all the talent across this county and abroad everything in under the microscope. He sat behind home plate for my next two AAU starts and then 1 for my high school and he came back up and asked if I thought I could play 3rd base or RF and I asked the coach and he slide me to those positions. After I signed with UT he asked if I thought I could add weight over my 1st year of college and fill out to gain velocity. Well long story short I walked onto to University of Tennessee campus 6'6 175lbs and after some hard work and a few questionable supplements I gained 30lbs during my freshman year during one game I was scheduled to pitch against AZ state JV team I was throwing balks with the outfielders and I had a sharp pain in my elbow and sure enough it was a torn UCL and my hopes a dreams were gone with it.

 

The point I'm trying to make is everything is judged on you from 6&7 yr old baseball all the way thru youth ball and then the microscope gets brighter in high school not to mention if you play AAU ball and then coaches or scouts try to mold you into the player they want you to be but most kids body can't handle that day in day out ware and tare. That's why only a select few make it to the show. It takes genetics, ability, drive, and just sheer luck in my opinion.

 

Seems the scout was right at least according to this. Just Google "Are blue yeyed people more sensitive to sunlight" and this is what you'll find.

 

Myth or fact: people with light eyes are more sensitive to sunlight

August 27, 2013

If you have blue, green, or gray eyes, you may have noticed yourself squinting into the sunlight more than your brown-eyed counterparts or needing a respite from the fluorescent lights at work. You may wonder if it’s all in your head -- or is there truth to the rumor that people with light eyes are more sensitive to sunlight?

 

According to Duke ophthalmologist Anupama Horne, MD, the answer is yes -- your baby blues are indeed likely contributing to your squinting and discomfort under bright lights.

Truth about light eyes and light sensitivity

Horne explains that photophobia -- the term used to describe light sensitivity -- typically affects people with light eyes because they have less pigmentation in multiple layers of the eye than those with darker eyes. Because of this, they are unable to block out the effects of harsh lights like sunlight and fluorescent lights.

Horne is careful to note that photophobia refers to light sensitivity, but does not refer to actual permanent loss of vision.

Photophobia may cause a person to have difficulty seeing or focusing in bright lights, or even cause pain around the eyes. So, squinting or rubbing your eyes often when you are in harsh light may be a clear sign that you have some level of photophobia.

Stay out of the sun

The good news is that photophobia resulting from light eye color is typically easy to remedy.

Simply avoiding prolonged time spent in harsh lighting or bright lights or wearing UV-blocking sunglasses and wide-brimmed hats when outside should alleviate symptoms associated with light sensitivity.

[Kimmi]

Seems the scout was right at least according to this. Just Google "Are blue yeyed people more sensitive to sunlight" and this is what you'll find.

 

Myth or fact: people with light eyes are more sensitive to sunlight

August 27, 2013

If you have blue, green, or gray eyes, you may have noticed yourself squinting into the sunlight more than your brown-eyed counterparts or needing a respite from the fluorescent lights at work. You may wonder if it’s all in your head -- or is there truth to the rumor that people with light eyes are more sensitive to sunlight?

 

According to Duke ophthalmologist Anupama Horne, MD, the answer is yes -- your baby blues are indeed likely contributing to your squinting and discomfort under bright lights.

Truth about light eyes and light sensitivity

Horne explains that photophobia -- the term used to describe light sensitivity -- typically affects people with light eyes because they have less pigmentation in multiple layers of the eye than those with darker eyes. Because of this, they are unable to block out the effects of harsh lights like sunlight and fluorescent lights.

Horne is careful to note that photophobia refers to light sensitivity, but does not refer to actual permanent loss of vision.

Photophobia may cause a person to have difficulty seeing or focusing in bright lights, or even cause pain around the eyes. So, squinting or rubbing your eyes often when you are in harsh light may be a clear sign that you have some level of photophobia.

Stay out of the sun

The good news is that photophobia resulting from light eye color is typically easy to remedy.

Simply avoiding prolonged time spent in harsh lighting or bright lights or wearing UV-blocking sunglasses and wide-brimmed hats when outside should alleviate symptoms associated with light sensitivity.

 

The scout was not right to rule out a blue-eyed player just because of the eye color, however. Just as is the case with height and velocity, blue-eyed players do not fare any worse at the major league level than dark-eyed players.

 

There might be a phyical disadvantage to players with light eyes, or shorter pitchers, but these players have found ways to overcome whatever physical disadvantage might have existed.

[a700hitter]

 

There might be a phyical disadvantage to players with light eyes, or shorter pitchers, but these players have found ways to overcome whatever physical disadvantage might have existed.

Sunglasses and a Lincoln Hat?