Creating an off-season "academy" for learning a new pitch or grip

[Greg Pappas]

I've brought this topic up once before, but after doing a search could not locate it.

I think it would be interesting to explore creating an off-season teaching environment where struggling/stalled pitchers that could use a new grip or pitch to improve their odds of success, from big leaguers to minor leaguers making their way up, could get help from outstanding retired veterans or pitching coaches.  These are just examples, but imagine learning a knuckle ball from Tim Wakefield, or a knuckle-curve from Mike Mussina, or a curveball from Gregg Olson, or a slider from John Smoltz, or a changeup from Tom Glavine/Trevor Hoffman.  Naturally we'd have to pay these type of guys to teach, but learning that new pitch can be potentially career altering.  More often than not it won't work, but you're not creating this for the failures, but for the ones that become better.  That makes it all worth it.  I don't know who to mention regarding grips, but maybe some guys are known as great teachers of a specific grip.  Bring them in if you're able.  And, BTW, this is not meant to discount what our pitching coaches do, but to potentially have even more refined experts available.

Having this as an official thing we do every Winter may intrigue certain guys to give it a try, that otherwise would not look much into it. 

I know all pitchers work on improving their crafts and specifically their weaknesses to try to stick, and I do hear on occasion that Pitcher X is working on a new pitch or grip, but the latter is not as often as I'd suspect.

Naturally there are cases where a pitcher's stuff is not the issue, but rather control (capable of throwing strikes when wanted) and/or command (placing the ball more precisely where you want).  In those cases a new grip or pitch may not be a solution. Yet if I had average or better stuff ( FB, CH, CB, SL, etc...) and could throw strikes with decent command, but was just not getting to that goal of being an established, quality big leaguer, then something new may be what the doctor ordered.  We've seen successes before, but most often that pitcher cannot quite make it work.  But, again, we would only need a success or two to really make this work.

Do you like the concept? What are your thoughts?

Edited February 13 by Greg Pappas
Realized the part that specifies pitchers that could use something new was missing LOL

[Can_of_corn]

Sounds like the cost of insurance would be significant.

[emmett16]

29 minutes ago, Greg Pappas said:

I've brought this topic up once before, but after doing a search could not locate it.

I think it would be interesting to explore creating an off-season teaching environment where pitchers in our system, from big leaguers to minor leaguers making their way up, can learn new grips and/or pitches from retired veterans or pitching coaches.  These are just examples, but imagine learning a knuckle ball from Tim Wakefield, or a knuckle-curve from Mike Mussina, or a curveball from Gregg Olson, or a slider from John Smoltz, or a changeup from Tom Glavine/Trevor Hoffman.  Naturally we'd have to pay these type of guys to teach, but learning that new pitch can be potentially career altering.  More often than not it won't work, but you're not creating this for the failures, but for the ones that become better.  That makes it all worth it.  I don't know who to mention regarding grips, but maybe some guys are known as great teachers of a specific grip.  Bring them in if you're able.  And, BTW, this is not meant to discount what our pitching coaches do, but to have even more refined experts available.

Having this as an official thing we do every Winter may intrigue certain guys to give it a try, that otherwise would not look much into it. 

I know all pitchers work on improving their crafts and specifically their weaknesses to try to stick, and I do hear on occasion that Pitcher X is working on a new pitch or grip, but the latter is not as often as I'd suspect.

Naturally there are cases where a pitcher's stuff is not the issue, but rather control (capable of throwing strikes when wanted) and/or command (placing the ball more precisely where you want).  In those cases a new grip or pitch may not be a solution. Yet if I had average or better stuff ( FB, CH, CB, SL, etc...) and could throw strikes with decent command, but was just not getting to that goal of being an established, quality big leaguer, then something new may be what the doctor ordered.  We've seen successes before, but most often that pitcher cannot quite make it work.  But, again, we would only need a success or two to really make this work.

Do you like the concept? What are your thoughts?

They don’t need to do that.  They have images from edgertronic cameras of the best pitchers in the league throwing their best pitches and can study the exact grip and sequence it comes off their fingers.  But you have to match the release, arm angle, spin & velocity profiles first before the grip even comes in to play.  Rest assured they are doing this on a regular basis.  
 

Some players use third party training facilities, but the Orioles are doing similar stuff. https://www.drivelinebaseball.com/2017/04/basics-pitch-design-using-rapsodo/

Edited February 11 by emmett16

[owknows]

12 hours ago, Greg Pappas said:

I've brought this topic up once before, but after doing a search could not locate it.

I think it would be interesting to explore creating an off-season teaching environment where pitchers in our system, from big leaguers to minor leaguers making their way up, can learn new grips and/or pitches from retired veterans or pitching coaches.  These are just examples, but imagine learning a knuckle ball from Tim Wakefield, or a knuckle-curve from Mike Mussina, or a curveball from Gregg Olson, or a slider from John Smoltz, or a changeup from Tom Glavine/Trevor Hoffman.  Naturally we'd have to pay these type of guys to teach, but learning that new pitch can be potentially career altering.  More often than not it won't work, but you're not creating this for the failures, but for the ones that become better.  That makes it all worth it.  I don't know who to mention regarding grips, but maybe some guys are known as great teachers of a specific grip.  Bring them in if you're able.  And, BTW, this is not meant to discount what our pitching coaches do, but to have even more refined experts available.

Having this as an official thing we do every Winter may intrigue certain guys to give it a try, that otherwise would not look much into it. 

I know all pitchers work on improving their crafts and specifically their weaknesses to try to stick, and I do hear on occasion that Pitcher X is working on a new pitch or grip, but the latter is not as often as I'd suspect.

Naturally there are cases where a pitcher's stuff is not the issue, but rather control (capable of throwing strikes when wanted) and/or command (placing the ball more precisely where you want).  In those cases a new grip or pitch may not be a solution. Yet if I had average or better stuff ( FB, CH, CB, SL, etc...) and could throw strikes with decent command, but was just not getting to that goal of being an established, quality big leaguer, then something new may be what the doctor ordered.  We've seen successes before, but most often that pitcher cannot quite make it work.  But, again, we would only need a success or two to really make this work.

Do you like the concept? What are your thoughts?

I like this idea. There's a lot of nuance to this stuff. What to do, and what not to do.

How to add lateral snap without raising a blister.

How to time the release in a changeup, to keep the appearance of arm speed.

How to work delivery from side to top and keep control

There's a lot of value in conveyed experience.

[Roll Tide]

13 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sounds like the cost of insurance would be significant.

Probably a reason it never happens at a team affiliated facility. Driveline is a homerun for owners in that regard. 

[Aristotelian]

I would guess they already do this, we just don't hear about it and it might not be famous guys. 

[Greg Pappas]

1 hour ago, Aristotelian said:

I would guess they already do this, we just don't hear about it and it might not be famous guys. 

That's certainly possible, but I'd think we'd have read about something like this throughout the years.  

[Greg Pappas]

13 hours ago, emmett16 said:

They don’t need to do that.  They have images from edgertronic cameras of the best pitchers in the league throwing their best pitches and can study the exact grip and sequence it comes off their fingers.  But you have to match the release, arm angle, spin & velocity profiles first before the grip even comes in to play.  Rest assured they are doing this on a regular basis.  
 

Some players use third party training facilities, but the Orioles are doing similar stuff. https://www.drivelinebaseball.com/2017/04/basics-pitch-design-using-rapsodo/

I appreciate this, though I suspect there are real differences between watching videos of current major leaguers and learning first hand from the best guys how to throw a particular pitch. It just seems like such a good idea, in general.  I'd LOVE to chat with Elias about such things to hear what he thinks.  

[emmett16]

3 minutes ago, Greg Pappas said:

I appreciate this, though I suspect there are real differences between watching videos of current major leaguers and learning first hand from the best guys how to throw a particular pitch. It just seems like such a good idea, in general.  I'd LOVE to chat with Elias about such things to hear what he thinks.  

Problem is, the old guys could show you the grip, but even they don’t know exactly how the ball came out of there hand.  With the new cameras you can “spy” on a guy with similar spin, velocity, arm slot, and release angle, who has an exceptional pitch, and see precisely what he’s doing to get that effect.  Thats a lot easier, inexpensive, accurate, and repeatable.  

[Greg Pappas]

9 minutes ago, emmett16 said:

Problem is, the old guys could show you the grip, but even they don’t know exactly how the ball came out of there hand.  With the new cameras you can “spy” on a guy with similar spin, velocity, arm slot, and release angle, who has an exceptional pitch, and see precisely what he’s doing to get that effect.  Thats a lot easier, inexpensive, accurate, and repeatable.  

How can you know what the older guys know?  That seems presumptive.  Maybe you're right, I don't know, but you say it as if it is a truth, rather than speculation. Maybe both things can be helpful to getting the desired results.  It shouldn't have to be an either/or.  Again, just a concept that seems worthwhile to explore.  I could be wrong.

Edited February 12 by Greg Pappas

[emmett16]

15 minutes ago, Greg Pappas said:

That's certainly possible, but I'd think we'd have read about something like this throughout the years.  

It’s what they are doing at “the pitching lab” in Bel Air.  I think there have been some articles on it. 

 

1 hour ago, owknows said:

I like this idea. There's a lot of nuance to this stuff. What to do, and what not to do.

How to add lateral snap without raising a blister.

How to time the release in a changeup, to keep the appearance of arm speed.

How to work delivery from side to top and keep control

There's a lot of value in conveyed experience.

Problem with conveyed experience is you are bringing in emotion, ego, and subjectivity.  It’s a lot more effective and efficient to work with accurate non-biased data when you are trying to solve a physics problem. 

[Greg Pappas]

Just now, emmett16 said:

It’s what they are doing at “the pitching lab” in Bel Air.  I think there have been some articles on it. 

 

Problem with conveyed experience is you are bringing in emotion, ego, and subjectivity.  It’s a lot more effective and efficient to work with accurate non-biased data when you are trying to solve a physics problem. 

I do like the current technologies that are really helping guys to be better.  Yet, to just outright dismiss a personal touch, and hands on learning of high quality conveyed experience, as problematic, seems way off-base.  

[emmett16]

1 minute ago, Greg Pappas said:

How do you know what the older guys know?  That seems presumptive.  Maybe you're right, I don't know, but you say it as if it is a truth, rather than speculation. Maybe both things can be helpful to getting the desired results.  It shouldn't have to be an either/or.  Again, just a concept that seems worthwhile to explore.  I could be wrong.

You think a guy that pitchers 5,10, 20 years ago knows what finger, what angle of that finger, came off the ball first, second, and third and with how much pressure was applied to each? 
 

If they could get the former pitcher in the lab to see exactly how he was creating the effect (assuming he still could) maybe that would be beneficial.  
 

What we are talking about right now is precisely why MLB coaching staffs have been turned over in the last 10 years with new & younger coaches who have never played.  
 

A former player could tell you exactly how they did something and be completely wrong and not even realize it.  All while causing more damage than good under the premise of good intentions. 

[emmett16]

8 minutes ago, Greg Pappas said:

I do like the current technologies that are really helping guys to be better.  Yet, to just outright dismiss a personal touch, and hands on learning of high quality conveyed experience, as problematic, seems way off-base.  

I do agree at first it’s counter intuitive.  The personal touch comes from the analyst figuring out exactly what a player does that makes him effective and then coaches acting as go betweens to make sure the player understands the recommendations.  I posted a few pages from a book I’m reading in the Minor League Coach new hire thread than explains the change going on with coaching staffs.  

[Greg Pappas]

10 minutes ago, emmett16 said:

You think a guy that pitchers 5,10, 20 years ago knows what finger, what angle of that finger, came off the ball first, second, and third and with how much pressure was applied to each? 
 

If they could get the former pitcher in the lab to see exactly how he was creating the effect (assuming he still could) maybe that would be beneficial.  
 

What we are talking about right now is precisely why MLB coaching staffs have been turned over in the last 10 years with new & younger coaches who have never played.  
 

A former player could tell you exactly how they did something and be completely wrong and not even realize it.  All while causing more damage than good under the premise of good intentions. 

Again, I understand the major changes that have taken place in coaching, analytics, and the use of video and other technologies, and they've been super effective.  We agree on that.  It's your dismissal of hands on teaching from the type of guys I mentioned that I disagree with.   No need to continue the back and forth.   I honestly do, however, appreciate your thoughts on this.  You make some good points.

Edited February 12 by Greg Pappas