| Re: Re: barrel time in the zone 
 
 Posted by: Patriot ( ) on Thu May 23 10:36:59 2002 
 
 I'm relatively new to this site.> >
 > > However, I've got some pro baseball
 > > experience(Angels organization) and I'd like to
 > > think I'm a little knowledgeable about the
 > > swing.
 > >
 > > I'm interested in some opinions on this topic.
 > >
 > > Would you say it's fair to say that rotational
 > > mechanics maximize bat speed but minimize
 > > the amount of time the barrel of the bat stays
 > > in the hitting zone? Therefore, rotational hitters
 > > will hit for more power but will often strike out
 > > much more.
 >
 ==================================================
 ==
 > Actually the opposite is the case, and its one of the primary
 reasons I've changed from a "Linear" (LM) to "Rotational" (RM)
 mechanics coach.  We teach hitters to "swing down" to get the
 bat to the impact zone as soon as possible.  We emphasise
 using the wrists, taking the "knob of the bat to the ball", whipping
 the bat head, throwing the bat head at the ball, etc., all to develop
 batspeed, shorten the length of the swing, as well as to create
 some back spin to lift the ball.
 >
 > However, since a pitched ball descends at a downward angle
 (slight to sharp, depending on the type of pitch), and the bat head
 is descending at a downward angle, the bathead is only in the
 impact zone for about 3 inches or less.  If the path of the bat is
 adjusted to match the path of the ball, the potential impact zone
 is significantly greater, as long as perhaps 30 inches.  Generally
 speaking, this means that the path of the bat relative to the
 ground will be slightly upward (depending on pitch elevation).
 (This is not the same as the infamous "upper cut swing"
 problem, which is actually caused by a collapse of lower body
 mechanics, not because of dropping the rear shoulder, etc.).
 >
 > This appears to be true both in theory and in experience, as the
 kids I'm coaching now immediately started making better
 contact, even on marginal pitches.
 >
 > I think it's possible for very good hitters (e.g. Tony Gwynn) to
 use LM successfully, but RM has very clear advantages in terms
 of:
 >
 > * Lengthed contact zone (swing starts lower, and later)
 >
 > * Increased bat speed due to better communication of lower
 body torque up into the bat (rotational torque, hips to torso to
 shoulders to arms to hands to bat)
 >
 > * Increased time to react to movement of a pitched ball, due to
 the fact that the hands stay back longer (hitter opens his hips
 first with RM; with LM his hands move first, and hips rotate
 through last).
 >
 > Both Jack Mankin's documentation on this site, and Mike
 Epstein's (www.mikeepsteinhitting.com) address the specifics.
 >
 > Regards.. Scott B
 
 Scott,
 
 I teach a rotational swing for the most part.  I truly believe there
 need to be some linear aspects in the swing though.  Through
 my experience (playing and coaching), if you don't have a little
 linear action(I'm not talking hands here, I'm talking feet) you are
 going to have a hard time handling breaking balls and
 changeups.
 
 I believe rotational mechanics are unrivaled when hitting
 fastballs.  And, if you can't hit a fastball you can't play well.
 However, at some higher levels there needs to be a touch of
 linear mechanics to "stay on" the off speed pitches.
 
 Thoughts?
 
 
 Followups: 
 Post a followup: |