Posted by: grc () on Fri Jul 13 16:43:52 2001

This thread is hilarious. Disappointing but hilarious. To sort of take Louy's side for a moment (I know, I'm sorry), for those using linear or perhaps hybrid mechanics, it probably is true that avg vs power is the choice you have to make. Even with Jack's mechanics, I suppose you could go overboard and sacrifice smoothness to effort and be counter productive? But what I hear Jack saying is that with proper mechanics, enough batspeed to hit the ball 400' is not that big of a deal? I watched Piazza (ESPN's goofy highlights show with clueless analysis) last night and he sure looked like he was using tht and he sure hit the ball far but he didn't look like he was muscling or straining or at maximum effort. The four guys they showed highlights of hitting behind him did not appear to be using tht and they sure looked like they were straining compared to Mike and as I recall they didn't hit the ball as well either.
>
> Mark
>
> So Louy, what changes would you recommend from Jack's mechanics to trade a some power for some avg if that is the way I should phrase the question?
>
> By the way, no analogy is perfect.
>
> Mark


> louy....i guess the discussion kind of got side-tracked there....i infer from your original post that this site favors homerun power over batting average, that is, mcgwire over gwynn, rotation over weight shift....actually, i think the site believes you can have both power AND average with rotation and that there is no trade-off of power and average....having said that, i believe there is a trade-off....i think mike schmidt's book comes the closest to analyzing the trade offs between average & home run power (which in turn, schmidt sees it as a trade off between rotation and weight shift)......but no one will discuss it here.....respectfully, grc.....