|
|
|
|
|
Support BBTF
Thanks to
Backlasher
for his generous support.
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: Maddon on Red Sox beaning Luke Scott: 'I think it's ridiculous, I think it's absurd, idiotic' (5 - 8:03am, May 26)Last: Obi One Kenobi NilNewsblog: YESNetwork: A look at five Yankees' cases for enshrinement in Monument Park (1 - 7:55am, May 26)Last: bjhankeNewsblog: HP: Baseball is leaving the human factor behind (60 - 7:55am, May 26)Last: Designated Sitter (GGC)Newsblog: Wilmoth: Nate McLouth Designated For Assignment (13 - 7:52am, May 26)Last: RussNewsblog: OT: NBA Monthly Thread, May 2012 (1835 - 7:45am, May 26)Last: thokNewsblog: The Hall of Very Good: Former Cards Slugger Critical of "LaRussa's Regime" (6 - 7:16am, May 26)Last: Shooty: Applying to be Fearless LeaderNewsblog: Matschulat: Did I Miss The "Paul Konerko Is So Overrated OMG" Bandwagon? (30 - 7:15am, May 26)Last: baudibNewsblog: CSN to host ‘Phillies at the Beach’ on Memorial Day (19 - 7:11am, May 26)Last: GodNewsblog: T.R. Sullivan: Of Frank Robinson, Milt Pappas and Jim Palmer (10 - 7:09am, May 26)Last: GodNewsblog: Bud Selig -- No need for more MLB replay for now - ESPN (88 - 6:12am, May 26)Last: LassusNewsblog: Himrich’s Top Ten Target Field Foods (8 - 2:43am, May 26)Last: Long John McCaine Mutiny on the Bounty (scott)Newsblog: Boston.com: Curt Schilling’s 38 Studios lays off all staff (119 - 1:28am, May 26)Last: Swedish ChefHall of Merit: Most Meritorious Player: 1973 Discussion (15 - 12:13am, May 26)Last: DanGHall of Merit: Most Meritorious Player: 1972 Ballot (28 - 11:25pm, May 25)Last: lieiamSox Therapy: A Winning Ballclub? (20 - 11:24pm, May 25)Last: Dan
|
|
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Enrico Pallazzo Posted: September 27, 2010 at 03:24 PM (#3649458)I clicked the link, and it was 105 mph.
Not a fan of suspense? ;)
That was a mistake on my part. I meant to put more than "Wow.", but I hit submit instead of preview.
I just wanted to make sure I had filled in all the link info correctly first.
Oh, wait.
(That's actually a semi-serious question. I've seen Chapman pitch a couple of times this year, and for a guy with an atomic fastball, he actually seems fairly hittable.)
should be fun.
I hope not, since center field is directly north of home plate at CBP. He could break a window in the Holiday Inn, however.
I believe RB was referring to the possibility that Howard would homer off Chapman in Cincinnati.
Yes, just like this gun was juiced too. I'm sure that pitch was over 100, but I seriously doubt it was actually 105.
I think it's time to get back to work...
I was going to say they might need a taller left field foul pole to be certain.
I'm wondering that too, being more of an American League guy. I mean, Billy Koch threw one of the fastest fastballs I've ever seen, but his was straight as a ruler and was anything but unhittable.
I would say Steve Blass Disease. Chapman doesn't strike me as a guy that will have injury problems. His build is pretty big and he doesn't seem to have a "max effort" delivery, just a nice fluid delivery every time out. Of course, Mark Prior had perfect mechanics, yadda yadda yadda.
Perhaps freeing the gang from IASIP who are trapped inside the tunnel between Holiday Inn and CBP?
Don't blink.
I assume every radar gun at the ballpark is measuring a pitch's speed nearest the point of release, as opposed to a position nearest home plate.
In the couple times I'd seen him before it seemed like he was only throwing the gas, which would be a problem eventually. Saturday he broke out an 86 change on Durango to strike him out. No chance. But then he lost the game that inning, so...
More significant question: Is there reason for me to believe that Chapman has not thrown a ball faster than any previous pitch in the big leagues?
Based on the video, it didn't seem to make it there that quickly.
Well, you're going to lose about 1 mph every six or seven feet. Pitch speed at home plate would be much less impressive, so of course they're going to try to measure velocity as close to release point as possible.
Based on the video, it didn't seem to make it there that quickly.
So, you can really tell the difference between 392.9 msec and 411.7 msec on video? Or am I missing yet another sublime bit of sarcasm?
Is there reason for me to believe that Chapman has not thrown a ball faster than any previous pitch in the big leagues?
That depends on how you feel about all the guys who pitched before there was any real way to even pretend to reliably measure velocity. But is there reason to disbelieve that Chapman has thrown a ball faster than any pitch in the big leagues in the last 40 years or so?
[EDIT: that was pretty poorly stated; it sounds like I'm disagreeing with you when I'm actually trying to more or less agree but add a caveat.]
I believe PitchFX corroborates the gun, at least according to the Brooksbaseball PitchFX tool.
Sure, but all other speed-type sporting achievements have been progressing forward for, well, ever, so why wouldn't the top fastball speed of 2010 be faster than the top fastball speed of 1979, 1949 or 1919?
Billy Koch had two fastballs - he had the over-the-top fastball that was about 100 mph, but perfectly straight, and he had the 95 mph fastball from the 3/4 slot that had a pile of movement (I might have the slots backward). During his time in Toronto, there was considerable debate between him and the coaching staff as to which angle he should be throwing from - Koch thought only in terms of speed, and never did seem to understand that any major league batter can hit a perfectly straight fastball.
Of course, Koch always came across as an idiot, so this isn't surprising.
Was thinking the same thing.
I'm guessing the thing was maybe 103 or 104 out of the hand. That's still pretty crazy.
i think the idea is that we know chapman hit 105 today, but we don't know if nolan ryan hit 105 in 79, or warren spahn in 49, or walter johnson did in 1919.
A lot of people have said a lot of things about Dalkowski's fastball, but I seriously doubt that he or anyone else ever threw 115 mph.
Me neither. By then, he will be as overpaid and as ineffective with the Yankees as Burnett, Pavano, Vazquez, Brown, Johnson, etc.
I know that's the idea. My question is why we would think the fastest fastball from 30 or 60 or 90 years ago would be as fast as the fastest fastball today, when records in every other sport (running, swimming, speedskating, etc.) are universally faster today than they were at any point in the distant past.
Well the equipment used in these sports has to be given some of the credit for any reductions in pure speed. I know we touched on the topic last week, but it isn't as if all the sprinters today are blowing past Jesse Owens' best times while wearing metal-spiked leather shoes and running on a cinder track without a starting block.
I guess the reason I'm not sure I buy that is how individual/non-scientific deliveries are. Running/swimming/speedskating are very much subject to training and conditioning, while pitching isn't exactly. Long-term health and maybe ability to sustain the load of pitching on a shoulder/elbow could certainly be conditioned, and maybe the radar gun mentality combined with health advances means the average fastball is faster today, but when we're talking about things limited by physiology and delivery rather than any sort of scientific training regimen, I find it hard to believe we've figured out a way to add a non-negligible amount of velocity. (Especially given that Chapman learned his delivery in Cuba, not in some cutting-edge lab or Pappa Lincecum's backyard.) He may well be the fastest ever, but if he is I would ascribe it to individual traits, not modern training.
And the swimmers aren't wearing drag suits anymore either. But to me, the real differences are that:
a) in pitching, velocity is a means to an end, not an end in itself; pitchers therefore do not dedicate themselves single-mindedly to the pursuit of the fastest possible fastball the way runners and swimmers strive to shave hundredths of a second off their times, and
b) the radar gun data we do have does not suggest a smooth progressive increase in fastball velocity of the population of elite pitchers over time, whereas there clearly is a relatively continuous improvement in times in track and swimming.
Based on improvements in human physique, my back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest Cy Young threw a 38 mph fastball. And Mickey Welch rolled it to the plate.
The work that's been done on the technical side has been more towards standardization of mechanics than anything else.
As for Dalkowski, his control was so rocky and the technology of his day was so limited that it's impossible to say just how fast he was. He was timed at 94. But that was without a mound and he'd thrown over 100 pitches befor he could get one in the area that they cuold time him in (and he was hung over at the time -- though that wasn't unusual).
He scared major league hitters and that's just not common.
Of course that's a single sample and just gives a general notion of their velocity. Johnson did time out faster than Smokey Joe Wood though he said Wood was faster.
Ryan was listed as the faster ever in the Guiness Book of World records. "Only" 100.8 in 1974. He's ofter attributed as throwing 104 or 106 but Guiness didn't accept either of those figures.
What seems to be different today is the number of guys who can bring serious heat. Before the 60s there were always just a handful of guys who could throw seriously hard.
This is why I kind of balk at the idea that Satchel Paige threw the hardest ever..
Owens was also the best in the world at 3 or 4 events and held world records in college. There are modern counterpoints with Usain Bolt being very young and Michael Phelps winning so many swimming medals but increased specialization and the upward creeping ages of record holders are highly suggestive of improved training methods, IMO. There arent technological advances aiding performances of weightlifters but those records are climbing over time as well.
I wouldn't be so flippant about PEDs not being "technological advances aiding performances of weightlifters" but regardless they aren't going to be equaling Sandow's 19th century lifts any time soon. Good thing they didn't let Louis Cyr get on the gas either, that would just embarrass everybody.
Not really good examples, swimming records was all about advances in pool construction until they started to make those super suits. Speedskating has had an equipment revolution as well.
I honestly believe they allow these continual improvements in equipment in order to make sure there are a few world records set every olympics. In another 30 years, they'll get to the point that skiers will get Jetpack assists. Of course, no one will watch diving anymore because the South Koreans will lead the charge to turn short-track speed skating into modern day chariot racing (one bloody death or your money back!).
All? I have no doubt that equipment and pool construction aids these things, but it seems odd that training techniques and other non-equipment advances don't explain a little of it.
I understand how fastball speed advancements would be limited compared to these other sports, but other factors (better training, wider talent pool from which to select players, etc.) lead me to believe the fastest fastball of the last 30 years should exceed the fastest fastball of previous generations.
It really was incredible. He threw 25 pitches: all fastballs, all triple digits. Everybody in attendance was getting into it; you could tell people were anticipating the speed gun reading showing up on the scoreboard, and people were oohing and ahhing at the big numbers.
Chapman has only thrown 19 sliders, so due for some regression, but .429 whiff rate is 95th percentile, and he's gotten swing and miss on 9 of 10 swings at his curve.
64% of FF for strikes, 63% of curves, which is better than average, but only 53% of sliders (so far)
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main