Height in Relationship to Pitching

to the OP...

Correct mechanics is correct mechanics, so I don't think there are differences per se, but a player that is shorter has less room for mechanical inefficiencies because they don't have the advantage of the long levers. Some will say height doesn't matter, but the bottom line is there is a reason why pitchers are typically taller in both baseball and softball, it is not just a random accumulation of prejudices. Ueno aside, the shorter pitchers tend to not be the fastest throwers in the world, but they can be world class pitchers by just being efficient. So differences no, but more precise mechanics, yes.

sluggers said:

There you go guys...20 posts of useless information. Enjoy.

Here is a real gem:



Funny...I thought *every* pitcher had to maximize everything in order to be effective.

Click to expand...

Thanks for restoring the deleted posts.

Since you quote me above, I will respond. The point of that comment was that taller pitchers can get away with less than perfect mechanics and still be very effective (Hillhouse mentioned that several times about Jennie Finch). With smaller pitchers, there is less room for error in their mechanics and they need to be near perfect to "keep up" with their taller competitors. IMO, this is one of the reasons Amanda Scarborough (who isn't tall) was a great pitcher. Her mechanics are close to textbook at every stage of the pitch: great drive mechanics, big open stride, maximizes IR the last 1/3 of the circle, brush interference, and great front side resistance.

They don't need more core strength. In my experience most taller pitchers don't have the core strength that smaller girls do. You'll often find them struggling with control, especially at the younger ages, until they mature and build up muscle.

I wouldn't say a shorter girl has to do anything different. Good mechanics are good mechanics and a good pitcher is a good pitcher regardless of height.

I do get a kick out of the fallacies and steroetypes that always pop up when pitchers height is mentioned. A couple have already been covered in this thread. I added a few to the list to save time and space.

-Tall girls don't work as hard as shorter girls.
-Coaches only recruit them on the misguided belief that they'll amount to something someday.
-They don't throw as fast as a shorter girl because they can't generate the arm speed.
-"She's not any good, she's just tall"

When softball's version of Money Ball comes out, I suspect that we will read about short pitchers being an undervalued, overlooked commodity and the tables will be turned.

I thought the taller pitcher's only advantage was being closer to the plate when releasing the ball. I guess you could argue about longer levers but are they really that much longer to really make a difference? Hmm, I'm intrigued now.

Who has data on this? Someone has to have data right?

Being closer to the plate is the result of longer legs and a longer stride. In general that correlates to faster speeds.

I was actually able to find a chart that shows arm length and speeds. I can't verify the accuracy, but ti sounds reasonable.

Size, Arm Length, and Pitching Speed Great softball pitching hints and recommendations for girl softball pitchers

MNDad said:

Being closer to the plate is the result of longer legs and a longer stride. In general that correlates to faster speeds.

I was actually able to find a chart that shows arm length and speeds. I can't verify the accuracy, but ti sounds reasonable.

Size, Arm Length, and Pitching Speed Great softball pitching hints and recommendations for girl softball pitchers

Click to expand...

This chart is useless. It makes all sorts of stupid assumptions. It basically approaches speed from a constant angular velocity standpoint like it was a mass on a string instead of a linked lever system, it does not account for whip and does not take into account that most of the whip power comes from acceleration that happens in the last 90 degrees of the circle.

CoachScott said:

I thought the taller pitcher's only advantage was being closer to the plate when releasing the ball. I guess you could argue about longer levers but are they really that much longer to really make a difference? Hmm, I'm intrigued now.

Who has data on this? Someone has to have data right?

Click to expand...

Setting aside the linked lever part of the system (which just magnifies the effect). If you take two points on a rotating wheel, one say halfway out the radius and the other at the full radius, then the tangential velocity at the full radius is greater than at the halfway point for the same angular velocity. So in a nutshell, longer arm = faster throw if everything else is held constant.

JNew0872 said:

Rachel Fox at Texas A&M is 5'4;

Click to expand...

Maybe on paper

I guess you could argue about longer levers but are they really that much longer to really make a difference? Who has data on this? Someone has to have data right?

Click to expand...

Here we go down the rabbit hole...

From a purely mathematical/statistical point of view, what you are asking can't be proven one way or the other.

Why?

The average height of a woman in the US is 5'4". The vast majority (probably 80% to 90%) of collegiate softball players are taller than 5'4". Thus, collegiate softball player are already abnormally tall when compared to the general population. (Most parents and coaches don't even notice...they are used to being around softball players and don't even notice that their players are taller than "normal" kids.)

Almost all members of the group (college softball players) have a characteristic of being tall compared to the general population.

Since all softball players already have this characteristic (abnormal height), it is impossible to correlate height to performance within the group (college softball players).

This is the same problem as with ACT/SAT scores. ACT/SAT scores do not predict performance in college. Why? Because people with low scores don't go to college (unless they play football). The people in college already have higher ACT/SAT scores than the general population. So, since everyone in college already has high ACT/SAT scores, other factors end up being the differentiators.