Drungo's Blog About Pitchers Throwing Harder Today - Question?

After reading you blog about pitchers today throwing much harder than the one's in the olden days, what you say makes perfect sense as they threw more innings and indeed did have to pace themselves. So that part I agree with. I also agree that relievers were essentially "broken down starters." That I am well aware of. However, one thing I would like you to explain is a pitcher named Robert "Bob" Feller, who by most accounts I have read was the first pitcher measured as clocking 100 mph on his fastball. So indeed, pitchers back then were just as "capable" as throwing a ball every bit as fast as today's pitchers if they wanted to.

After reading you blog about pitchers today throwing much harder than the one's in the olden days, what you say makes perfect sense as they threw more innings and indeed did have to pace themselves. So that part I agree with. I also agree that relievers were essentially "broken down starters." That I am well aware of. However, one thing I would like you to explain is a pitcher named Robert "Bob" Feller, who by most accounts I have read was the first pitcher measured as clocking 100 mph on his fastball. So indeed, pitchers back then were just as "capable" as throwing a ball every bit as fast as today's pitchers if they wanted to.

The existence of a singular entity capable of feats beyond his peers does not change what was possible for the group as a whole.

But of course you already know this.

The existence of a singular entity capable of feats beyond his peers does not change what was possible for the group as a whole.

But of course you already know this.

Actually what I know is pitchers back then could throw just as hard as those today, it is simply the game was different back then and they paced themselves to go more innings.

Actually what I know is pitchers back then could throw just as hard as those today, it is simply the game was different back then and they paced themselves to go more innings.

Do you not understand averages? How about outliers?

Most households in the 60s probably only had 1 TV. That doesn't mean that you couldn't find a household with multiple TVs.

Actually what I know is pitchers back then could throw just as hard as those today, it is simply the game was different back then and they paced themselves to go more innings.

You ever read Weaver on Strategy?

The existence of a singular entity capable of feats beyond his peers does not change what was possible for the group as a whole.

But of course you already know this.

Actually what I know is pitchers back then could throw just as hard as those today, it is simply the game was different back then and they paced themselves to go more innings.

Maybe our ways of measuring speed when we used stone tools were less accurate. And 100 is such a nice round number. I am certain that some folks wanted that to be someone's number.

You ever read Weaver on Strategy?

I miss Earl.

Do you not understand averages? How about outliers?

Most households in the 60s probably only had 1 TV. That doesn't mean that you couldn't find a household with multiple TVs.

TVs also had terrible reception and picture quality then but the quality of many shows was as good or better than many today.

Maybe our ways of measuring speed when we used stone tools were less accurate. And 100 is such a nice round number. I am certain that some folks wanted that to be someone's number.

I actually read or heard that feller may have thrown 101 or so but you are rig the was the first they ever tried to clock his speed. I thing they had a car speed by as he threw.!

The quality of many shows was as good or better than many today.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/s9YKUuYMh0w" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Word...

TVs also had terrible reception and picture quality then but the quality of many shows was as good or better than many today.

Huh?!

After reading you blog about pitchers today throwing much harder than the one's in the olden days, what you say makes perfect sense as they threw more innings and indeed did have to pace themselves. So that part I agree with. I also agree that relievers were essentially "broken down starters." That I am well aware of. However, one thing I would like you to explain is a pitcher named Robert "Bob" Feller, who by most accounts I have read was the first pitcher measured as clocking 100 mph on his fastball. So indeed, pitchers back then were just as "capable" as throwing a ball every bit as fast as today's pitchers if they wanted to.

There is a (fairly convincing) train of thought that says that the max velocity you see from a pitcher now (or ever) is pretty much the max velocity you'll ever see.

http://www.efastball.com/baseball/stats/fastest-pitch-speed-in-major-leagues/

According to that chart, Nolan Ryan's Guinness record fastball had a max velocity over 108, and Feller is 2nd on that list at 107.6. Guys with that sort of velocity are rare enough that even today they have no comparables. Even Chapman a couple MPH slower than they were.

edit to add: I don't think that is to say that the average Major Leaguer from 1950 could throw as hard as the average Major Leaguer now. The objective evidence all points to pitchers throwing harder on average now. The reasons for this are numerous, between better training, better understanding of mechanics, larger talent pool, etc. Guys like Feller and Nolan Ryan are obviously unique.

I think it is quite possible that there have been a couple of outliers who have thrown a ball as fast as anyone can throw today. But the average velocity is up considerably, and I think there are two causes: (1) pitchers don't try to pace themselves as much, and (2) pitchers today on average are bigger, stronger, and better conditioned.

Pitch f/x data has only been collected since 2007, but look how the average velocity of qualified starting pitchers has increased just in that short time:

#1 - 96.3 to 96.4

#11 - 93.7 to 93.7

#21 - 92.4 to 93.0

#31 - 91.8 to 92.4

#41 - 91.1 to 92.0

#51 - 90.0 to 91.5

The speed of the very top guys hasn't changed a lot, but the "middle class" has increased a lot.

Just watch a video of the 1970 World Series some time, and the difference in velocity from today's game is very obvious.

Maybe our ways of measuring speed when we used stone tools were less accurate. And 100 is such a nice round number. I am certain that some folks wanted that to be someone's number.

Prior to the 1970s and the advent of modern radar technology the techniques for measuring speed were suspect, at best. I'd take anything prior 1970ish with a huge grain of salt. With Walter Johnson and Bob Feller they were often trying to measure with some kind of weighted pendulum devices and eyeballing how far they'd deflect after being impacted with the ball, then hand-calculating a velocity. They were probably doing well to get within +/- 10 mph.

And then you get the aprocyphal stories of Steve Dalkowski or other minor/Negro leaguers throwing 110 or 115 mph... totally unverifable and almost certainly exaggerated.

I also think that today's pitchers actually have the physical capability to throw harder than those of the past. Absolutely on average, even if there were a handful of outliers in the past who could occasionally approach 100 mph. Better training, knowledge of biomechanics, nutrition, workouts, etc. There are a lot more players today who can throw 95 mph on a regular basis than there were in the past. A lot. The farther back in time you go the more true that is. In 1890 there probaby weren't many pitchers who could even hit 90 mph. When the NL started in the 1870s everyone had to, by rule, throw underhanded from a flat surface and there was a lot of carry-over from the old cricket rules about not snapping your wrist or bending your elbow. And an average adult male was probably 5' 5", 140 pounds. It would be amazing if anyone from that era threw 85.

Prior to the 1970s and the advent of modern radar technology the techniques for measuring speed were suspect, at best. I'd take anything prior 1970ish with a huge grain of salt. With Walter Johnson and Bob Feller they were often trying to measure with some kind of weighted pendulum devices and eyeballing how far they'd deflect after being impacted with the ball, then hand-calculating a velocity. They were probably doing well to get within +/- 10 mph.

And then you get the aprocyphal stories of Steve Dalkowski or other minor/Negro leaguers throwing 110 or 115 mph... totally unverifable and almost certainly exaggerated.

I also think that today's pitchers actually have the physical capability to throw harder than those of the past. Absolutely on average, even if there were a handful of outliers in the past who could occasionally approach 100 mph. Better training, knowledge of biomechanics, nutrition, workouts, etc. There are a lot more players today who can throw 95 mph on a regular basis than there were in the past. A lot. The farther back in time you go the more true that is. In 1890 there probaby weren't many pitchers who could even hit 90 mph. When the NL started in the 1870s everyone had to, by rule, throw underhanded from a flat surface and there was a lot of carry-over from the old cricket rules about not snapping your wrist or bending your elbow. And an average adult male was probably 5' 5", 140 pounds. It would be amazing if anyone from that era threw 85.

Interesting but not gospel in your size interpretation. Ron Guidry wasn't a big guy but he could really bring it and Tom Phoebus who I saw pitch in person was only about 5'7'' and though I don't believe there were radar guns then, I believe could throw in the upper 90's on a regular basis. He is one of the handful of Orioles to throw a no-hitter. Also, Moe Drabowski was very much a flame thrower yet not that big a guy. In the modern era, Tim Lithicum isn't a big guy either and he also can bring it.