The other night on the MLB Network, resident expert, Mitch Williams was doing a quick segment on the latest outing from Stephen Strasburg. In the segment, Williams used video of one pitch (yes a total of one pitch) to completely breakdown Strasburg’s outing.
The pitch missed it’s location, but more importantly to Williams…
Strasburg threw the pitch using the dreaded slide step!
Oh the horror!
According to Mitchie-poo, the slide step is THE WORST way a pitcher can deliver the baseball to home plate.
His reasons:
- The slide step is a rushed move.
- The slide step doesn’t allow a pitcher to “get on his back side.” (i.e. balance point… I think?)
- The slide step doesn’t give the pitcher enough time to get his pitching arm up to where it normally gets to when using a leg lift.
- In the slide step, the pitching arm will get stuck behind the pitcher’s body, putting him in a very tough position to A.) maintain consistency, and B.) safely get his pitching arm to it’s driveline.
- The slide step reduces velocity.
Williams wrapped up his segment by saying:
You only get one arm kids. Take care of it.”
I for one am hoping (for the first time in my life) that no young ballplayer was watching the MLB channel at that time.
I’m sorry but the slide step is not responsible for any of what Williams said. Actually what I should say is that using a leg lift will not cure any of the “slide step flaws” the Wild Thing pointed out.
Here’s my take:
The slide step is NOT a rushed move. Is it quicker? Yes. But the slide step is basically the same thing EVERY player does when they have a catch. Is Williams suggesting that every player on the field is rushing their throws and in jeopardy of any one of his list of slide step-inducing flaws? I don’t think so. Actually, a pitcher has more time to get his arm in position, because he throws off a mound and not on flat ground.
No pitcher on the planet wants extra time to “get on their back side.” They want to drive towards home plate! First let me say that all pitchers do get on their back side when they throw. They have to. When they lift their front leg (even if it’s just an inch off the ground) to go towards the plate, their back leg is the only thing holding them up! Second, as I’ve said before (Click here to read that post) the balance point does nothing for a pitcher, and in many examples of pitchers (both past and present) a myth.
The slide step does not give the pitcher less time to get their arm in a proper throwing position. A long time ago, pitchers were taught to use their front leg to separate (break) their hands, so they would have more than enough time to get both arms in a “proper” throwing position. (Think Warren Spahn, but the most recent example I can think of is Rob Dibble and Dennis Eckersly.) Today’s pitcher doesn’t even come close to doing that. They don’t break their hands until they start their move toward the plate… in the wind up or stretch, much less the slide step! It can also be argued that more often than not, it’s what the pitcher does with his pitching arm after he breaks his hands, not necessarily when. Which leads to the next point:
The pitching arm doesn’t exclusively get “stuck behind a pitcher’s body in the slide step. Some of you might remember Rick Sutcliffe as a pitcher, but today’s best examples of getting stuck are Tim Lincecum, Ubaldo Jimenez, and Rick Porcello. All three of those pitchers “stick” their pitching arm whether they are throwing from the wind up or the stretch.
The slide step does NOT reduce velocity… and it doesn’t reduce consistency! I know from a personal stand point that I actually threw harder (I mean faster) from the slide step than any other time I threw from a mound. (If I was as smart as I claim to be, I should have told myself to throw that way all the time. Oh well…) I know several pitchers that make the same claim and have the ol’ radar gun to back them up.
In terms of reducing consistency, did you happen to catch a recent Lincecum’s last outing? All from the stretch… even with nobody on base. Now it may not have been all slide step, but the fact is, Lincecum made the decision based on reducing “excess movement.” Less movement makes things easier to repeat. If it’s easier to repeat, it’s easier to keep consistent.
It’s not just Williams. I heard two very well-respected former players-turned analysts say that the slide step was basically throwing all arm, with little to no involvement from the lower body. That’s just not true!
At the end of the day…
It appears that baseball is moving away from the base-to-base, wait-for-the-three-run-bomb philosophy, and back to the game that included small ball AND base stealing. When runners get on base, pitchers can’t get by with a long, slow leg lift. (The exception being left handers… but even they should know how to slide step, even if it’s only to throw a pitch out.)
Don’t be afraid to develop the slide step. It’s simple, and despite what some experts might say, very effective.
Coach Bones
P.S. – Funny Thing: Just before I started writing, I did a Google search, using the phrase “Mitch Williams slide step.” I suggest you type that in and see what comes up. I’m thinking Mitch is basing his hatred for the slide step on something other than his belief that is is mechanically flawed.
In reference to your article “Ground Balls are Good… For Hitters.”
I’d like to add a few tidbits I’ve observed through the years that support your premise.
Ground balls always produce more base runners than flies (for this discussion, we must treat line drives as not a fly ball). While true, there is controversy on this one, notably by http://www.bbtia.com/home/2009/8/22/ground-ballfly-ball-ratio-an-often-overlooked-pitching-metri.html“) which states :
“In a study published in The Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2007, Dave Studeman used batted ball information from 2006 to estimate the run values of strikeouts (-0.113), walks (0.30), ground balls (0.045), fly balls (0.192), and line drives (0.391). Studeman concluded that fly balls are more than four times as valuable as ground balls, even though the batting average on ground balls was slightly higher than fly balls. The discrepancy in value derives from the fact that fly balls are more likely to go for extra base hits and ground balls are more likely to produce double plays.”
This philosophy ignores two very important issues. First is that fly ball hitters still hit into their 20-40 double plays during the season (mostly because their ground ball outs tend to reach the infielders in a hurry). Second, the number of useless outs (ie. mostly strikeouts) that these hitters produce when attempting to produce a long fly ball. If you add K’s and useless fly ball outs, you will well exceed the number of DP’s produced by those who demonstrate good bat control and hit mostly grounders.
There is certainly some validity that ground balls too often become double plays, but MLB teams are not using the available tools to avoid these ground ball outs, namely bat control and speed. There are virtually no hitters in the majors with what I would consider good bat control. For example, the underrated Nellie Fox had 9232 at bats and only 175 GIDP (Cal Ripken, with a bit over 11000 at bats has 350). Notably Fox stuck out 216 times in his career and many modern hitters K that often in a season. Due to the modern philosophy of waiting for HR’s to be hit, runners/hitters tend to not use the speed available to avoid the DP (bunt, hit and run, steal, etc.).
Joe Dimaggio in 1941 struck out only 13 times and hit 31 HR’s. The best modern players with comparable HR totals, Beltre and Pujols k’d 53 and 58 times (which is exceptional for modern players, by the way) this season. The next best k’d 71 times, which is equal to 35 double plays (a high number by any standard).
There is, of course, that rare player – the Dave Kingman type who pretty much only hits flies (thus strikes out a TON – 1816 k’s in his career). He also hit into a comparatively low number of double plays for a modern power hitter- only 139). Note that Kingman’s DP totals still exceed Fox’s for his career, suggesting that bat control and ground outs are much more productive than the K.
Admittedly, Kingman was a monsterwho could not be stopped in Fenway (hit 13 HR’s in only 18 career games). Why the Red Sox had no interest in him is…well, baffling.
Sorry about the long rant, but I must say that the stats of modern players do not support the concept that swinging for the fences is significantly more productive, but since that is why they get paid the way they do, I don’t see much potential for change here.
Rick
Rick,
Thank you very much for your input. I appreciate the solid evidence you provided. In no way did I find your comment to be a long rant. I loved reading every word.