Bat Speed -- Baseball Hitting Forum

Posted by: Brian - BatSpeed.com (support@batspeed.com) on Thu Apr 22 08:27:26 2004

<< >
> Doug>>>

Doug,

You have identified two hitters out of thousands who qualify as a good batting coach. As such, I think my statement that "most" good hitters do not necessarily teach good batting mechanics was right on.

Moreover, you must understand that my post primarily related to teachings in the early 1990s and prior. As I indicated, players and coaches are now reviewing videos of themselves and other great hitters, as well as the interent and speaking with others who have reviewed video and the interent, and are now understanding the swing.

I surmise that you believe in the "juiced ball theory" or you have not compared the incredible rise in offensive stats over the last 10 years. This was not done by magic. The transformation occurred because most players now understand how to execute swing mechanics because players and coaches are now understanding rotational swing mechanics. However, as I indicated, for decades and decades, the good hitters to which you referred taught weak linear mechanics. While I could probably identify 5-10 hitters today who are primarily linear, I could have named 50-100 in 1980s and 25-50 in the 1990s. This again is no coincidence. Linear mechanics are not effective and the understanding of this fact has drastically changed over the last 10 years. Prior to the 1990s, many good hitters and coaches advocated that you had to be born with good swing mechanics because they did not understand how to teach good batting mechanics. Whether you want to believe that the change occurred because the good hitters/coaches suddenly figured it out in the 1990s or for some other reason is up to you, but I believe that the change began with individuals who devoted time and effort to understanding the swing with the assistance of video analysis, and then applying that understanding on the ball fields. And I am certainly not trying to defend Jack Mankin - his theories stand on their own - even though many like to diminish his credibility by suggesting that he has not played professional ball. In fact, I was responding to your post to BHL, suggesting that we should not give any credance to his thoughts because he is a paper nerd. I do not agree with BHL's new theory, but I think that we should find stronger arguments than claiming that non-pro players who are trying to develop an idea are nerds.

Brian
BatSpeed.com

Followups:

Re: Re: Re: Good Advice Rarely Comes From Good Hitters Doug [ Thu Apr 22 20:06:49 2004 ]
In short, what is linear and what is rotational
Newbie Newbie New [ Thu Apr 22 11:13:13 2004 ]
- Re: In short, what is linear and what is rotational
  JJA [ Thu Apr 22 14:50:36 2004 ]
  - A Thought for JJA BHL [ Thu Apr 22 20:49:06 2004 ]

Post a followup:

Name:

E-mail:

Subject:

Text:

> <<<Brian, You talk about good hitters not being good coaches. Williams and Epstein were both major leaguers, and were/are fine hitting coaches. You talk about the good hitters teaching a linear swing.......name me a major league hitter who has a linear swing. You talk about the linear mechanics being taught by the pros, but I can't think of any linear swings in the big leagues......can you? Who taught the pros? Another thing.......you don't need to stick up for Jack Mankin. He is a fine hitting coach and people can figure that out on their own without your help. Before you pick on the pro coaches, you should check into more of them and what they teach. Not all hitting coaches have internet sites or write books. You ever talk to Bobby Bonds about hitting? AS far as good hitters figuring things out in the batters box......that is what they do. 
> > 
> >                      Doug>>>
> 
> Doug, 
> 
> You have identified two hitters out of thousands who qualify as a good batting coach.  As such, I think my statement that "most" good hitters do not necessarily teach good batting mechanics was right on.  
> 
> Moreover, you must understand that my post primarily related to teachings in the early 1990s and prior.  As I indicated, players and coaches are now reviewing videos of themselves and other great hitters, as well as the interent and speaking with others who have reviewed video and the interent, and are now understanding the swing.  
> 
> I surmise that you believe in the "juiced ball theory" or you have not compared the incredible rise in offensive stats over the last 10 years.  This was not done by magic.  The transformation occurred because most players now understand how to execute swing mechanics because players and coaches are now understanding rotational swing mechanics.  However, as I indicated, for decades and decades, the good hitters to which you referred taught weak linear mechanics.  While I could probably identify 5-10 hitters today who are primarily linear, I could have named 50-100 in 1980s and 25-50 in the 1990s.  This again is no coincidence.  Linear mechanics are not effective and the understanding of this fact has drastically changed over the last 10 years.  Prior to the 1990s, many good hitters and coaches advocated that you had to be born with good swing mechanics because they did not understand how to teach good batting mechanics.  Whether you want to believe that the change occurred because the good hitters/coaches suddenly figured it out in the 1990s or for some other reason is up to you, but I believe that the change began with individuals who devoted time and effort to understanding the swing with the assistance of video analysis, and then applying that understanding on the ball fields.  And I am certainly not trying to defend Jack Mankin - his theories stand on their own - even though many like to diminish his credibility by suggesting that he has not played professional ball.  In fact, I was responding to your post to BHL, suggesting that we should not give any credance to his thoughts because he is a paper nerd.  I do not agree with BHL's new theory, but I think that we should find stronger arguments than claiming that non-pro players who are trying to develop an idea are nerds.
> 
> Brian
> BatSpeed.com

Anti-Spambot Question:

How many innings in an MLB game?
   4
   3
   9
   2