Posted by: Jimmy () on Tue Feb 13 12:06:12 2007

Sam,

There is a difference between strictly linear and strictly rotational mechanics. Neither of
them are the desired approach by Major League hitters because they are both too extreem
for what a hitter is trying to accomplish. Just because someone lables a good swing as
linear or rotational doesn't mean that the lable itself is good. And to say that a hitter is
rotational when they feel that they are linear is hitting my point right on the head.

Jimmy

> Jimmy,
>
> I have read your post and while you seem to agree with Chris you still don't see a
distinct difference in teaching rotational mechanics verses linear. I agree with you if you
agree with Chris "different" terms and even different methodologies can be used to teach
the rotational swing but...you still seem sold on teaching linear AND rotational. If so, a
coach that opts to teach and profess linear isn't doing anything to help that player get to
the next level.
> It doesn't make them a bad coach either.
>
> Be that level HS, College or beyond. Aside from a handful of successful linear labelled
hitters in the Majors,(Ichiro) who also happen to have great foot speed and other tools-
you won't find many others who aren't rotational in swings. That includes those who "say"
they are linear but their swings are pure rotational.
>
> Labeling coaches who believe differently than you as "bad coaches" doesn't help your
argument either.
>
>
> > > "The facts are that every hitter is programed differently in terms of feel and swing-
> > thoughts. So if anyone thinks that we as coaches should clone hitters to swing one
way,
> > then they are not a very good example of a good coach."
> > >
> > > I agree that different cues work with different people.
> > >
> > > However, the goal should be the same swing. That is, the swing that is used by
virtually
> > every major leaguer (and especially the good hitters).
> >
> > Chris,
> >
> > At least we agree that the goal is reached in many different ways. That was my point.
So
> > do we really have to debate what the "goal" or "best mechanics" should be labeled or
> > called? If I were to name the "best mechanics" that the best Big Leaguers use it would
be
> > called "Efficient". I just feel that the terms linear and rotational are too far to each
extreem
> > of what the goal is. This can mislead and confuse young hitters into executing poor
> > mechanics across the board.
> >
> > Jimmy