Q&A with Dr. John Bagonzi featured in the Baseball Time in Arlington, a Texas Rangers blog on the MVN network (Fall 2008)

PART I:  Dr. John Bagonzi, also known as the "Pitching Professor," is a very highly respected pitching instructor and the author of the book "The Act of Pitching" (http://pitchingprofessor.com/home.html).

Coach Bagonzi graciously agreed to answer a few questions on the subject of pitching, ranging from the importance of stride length to his thoughts on the quick fix pitch known as the slider.

Q: How do you define "arm fatigue" and what are the means/steps of restoring the arm to pre-fatigue levels?

Mike Hodson

Coach Bagonzi: I see this as a mental as well as physical event. Arm fatigue shows up when velocity is reduced, the fastball is not crisp, is flat and bland or dull, has little bite to it, and certainly no "afterburn." Pitches are usually high; mechanics suggest an incomplete followthrough, and there is a reluctance to throw the ball in the strike or hitting zone.

Pitches result in wild pitches and passed balls because of a reluctance to challenge the hitter and come into the strike zone, and batters are teeing off when the ball does eventually come into the strike zone. Rotation is not tight on the fastball, curveball or slider. Obviously throwing is improper.

Some possible cures:

1) Stop throwing - skip pitching batting practice (I always felt this caused problems by creating an unrealistic form of throwing).

2) See the trainer, be sure there is no arm injury; massage perhaps.

3) Continue to run and keep the cardiovascular going.

4) Check for mechanical flaws (i.e. low elbow).

5) If pitches are high, lengthen stride. You know, this whole business of fatigue could be from underthrowing as well as overthrowing. Look closely at the number of innings pitched. Check for burnout if there has been year-round throwing.

Q: What are some of the things you would look for when scouting high school/college pitchers, trying to project what they might become?

Jamey Newberg

Coach Bagonzi: I look for body type and build - what does it look like his size is going to be? I really treasure arm action (three junctures). Surely arm strength and always velocity (87-90 mph). The boy's attitude - does he like to pitch? Can he handle pressure? A live arm always impresses me. Is there tight rotation on the fastball? Is there good rotation on curveball, which I hope he has before the slider? Is he agile and can he field his position?

I really like fluid motion and long-armers, as I feel they have less arm problems. I want to see his attitude towards instruction and learning. Is he a gamer? Finally, is there movement on his fastball? With control? Do his mechanics allow for good control? Good physical health is a must - check family health and size.

Q: What are your thoughts on stride length and how increasing it could increase velocity as well as reduce stress on the arm?

Joey Matschulat

Coach Bagonzi: I make this perhaps the most important phase of the mechanical process. In my pitching camps, this is an area that gets a lot of precise attention. I'm a big believer in a long stride. Too many young pitchers have a short stride and throw high, and too many are inconsistent with their stride length and front foot alignment. Good pitchers are very uniform with their stride length and are very aware of small adjustments within it (the front foot should be slightly closed).

Lengthening stride makes the ball go lower and faster. All the big winners have solid repetition with strides and touch down consistently on their "right" spot. Stride is one of the very important components in optimal mechanics and consequently a stress-free and efficient pitching delivery.

Q: What are your thoughts on pitch counts and the possible negative effects on an arm? Myth or reality?

Adam Morris

Coach Bagonzi: Pitch counts have their purpose if the radar gun shows a trend after a certain number - say 100 pitches and velocity goes down, then there is a value - and pitches start going high after a certain number (elbow drops). Otherwise, I would use a subjective judgment, because it could easily be a placebo effect if the pitcher always knows his limit is 100, 110, or 120 pitches, and he expects to lose his efficiency then. In this business it is all or mostly mental, make no mistake about it!

I suspect I threw over 200 pitches sometimes. If someone is throwing real well after 130 pitches, and there seems to be no stress, I'd be tempted to let them continue if they are pitching well, but there is a different mentality today. It also depends on the type of pitcher. Fastballers have less tolerance for numbers. With today's salaries, and the "Grady Little" episode, everybody is a little gun-shy. I like to use my eyes.

Q: Why were more pitchers able to throw 200-plus innings a generation ago without the explosion of injuries that are so common in today"s players? Are today"s players soft?

Coach Bagonzi: I pitched 200-plus innings three years in a row, and during this time pitched a 14-inning game, two 13-inning games, two 11-inning games, one 10-inning game and a doubleheader at URI. A lot of innings were expected in my time (good or bad?). A nine-inning chore was routine and expected. I suspect we threw a lot more in general. It was the manly thing; pitchers ate up a lot of innings.

I'm not sure today's pitchers are soft - they are generally bigger, look stronger, make a lot more money, and they have become conditioned to throw five to six innings. We didn't use pitch counts; maybe we should have, but there didn't seem to be a lot of arm problems, so some of this is mental. I favor a lot of throwing, but constructive throwing. The hard or "power" slider has a lot to do with arm problems in my opinion, and the jury is still out on the splitter.

Q: What is your opinion regarding the development of breaking pitches in young players? I've had a front office person tell me that many of their scouts believe that if a young pitcher can't "spin" a breaking ball by the age of 19, that they will almost never get it.

Coach Bagonzi: If a young pitcher doesn't start to develop a curveball early in his career (age 15-plus), I don't think he will ever have a good one. So, I agree with your contact who says that if he can't spin it by age 19, forget it, and I think that is why there are so many sliders (the "devil's pitch") - it's the quick fix.

In fact, I talked with the pitching coach of the Rangers a few years back when they [still] trained in Port Charlotte, Florida, and asked him why there were so many sliders and so few curveballs among the Rangers' pitchers, and he quite emphatically stated that the young pitchers' "window of opportunity" was small and narrow, and the slider could be learned faster, and this became the "fix."

That is why before a young pitcher signs, it would be good if he had a curveball - a good, down-breaking 12-to-6 curveball with crispness thrown for strikes. This enhances the fastball and its effect multifold. Pitching up and down trajectory-wise is a devastating event, even for the good hitter; the trouble is that few pitchers do it well. Those that do are generally winners and high-strikeout guys. [Nolan] Ryan had a good curveball, and this made him electrifying.

Curveballs are less stressful on the arm than sliders because of the deceleration of the arm on release. However, one has to be aware of losing arm speed on their fastball if too many curveballs are thrown. A curveball should precede a slider in the learning business.

PART II:  A brief refresher: Dr. John Bagonzi, also known as the "Pitching Professor," is a very highly respected pitching instructor and the author of the book "The Act of Pitching" (http://pitchingprofessor.com/home.html).

In Part II of Baseball Time in Arlington's three-part Q&A series with Coach Bagonzi, the venerable pitching oracle weighs in on the ever-controversial Dr. Mike Marshall, velocity and the Magnus Effect, and the importance of training the lower body for pitchers of all ages, as well as several other topics of great interest.

Enjoy.

Q: Dr. Mike Marshall used a heavy dose of physics to develop his "new" delivery. Historically, physics and biomechanical force application seem overlooked when it comes to teaching and tweaking a pitcher"s mechanics (this is why Marshall"s teachings are considered to be "out there"). As a result, a lot of inefficient deliveries (those with wasted biomechanical force application) are incorrectly evaluated and described as efficient. Often, a single link in the biomechanical chain (typically the shoulder or elbow) is forced to compensate for this inefficiency, usually leading to a major injury.

Given the overwhelming number of Major League players with such mechanical flaws, there seems to be an amazing dearth of pitching coaches with this type of knowledge. Why?

Trip Somers

Coach Bagonzi: I have always had a high degree of respect, regard and admiration for Mike Marshall as a pitcher. He was unique and exceptional. His pronation curveball truly stunned me when I watched it. He ate up a lot of innings and was a great success as a reliever on his way to a Cy Young Award, so he truly had a great foundation for his beliefs - of which I really don"t disagree with, but don"t fully agree with. However, I, likely being a traditionalist, fall into a category he strongly disagrees with, and I can live with that. That"s where the dichotomy begins.

There are a lot of traditionalist-trained pitchers today doing well, free of arm problems, throwing with great velocity, and yet there are a substantial number who have encountered arm (elbow) and shoulder problems. Mike pitched a lot of innings without problems, so his system should be given a chance. But Major League Baseball has shut the door on him. As a result, we don"t see his prot"g"s exhibiting the "Marshall Plan" in action in the big leagues to see if this schematic works or not.

I strongly agree with him on the pronation concept on all fastball-type pitches - all those except the supination variety (curveballs, sliders, and slurves), although he has the pronation curveball to prove it can be thrown without supinating. I agree with him on the back leg drive off (Newton"s third law of motion), throwing in a straight line and overload training. I disagree with the idea that all traditional approaches destroy all arms. Good mechanics taught well with a reduction of sliders insures pitching longevity, and we have many examples of this.

Q: Pitchers of all levels constantly train their legs (jogging, sprinting, lifting), yet many of them never come close to properly leveraging this work in their deliveries. I know this is an indictment of most youth and amateur pitching coaches, but what"s the excuse for professional players and coaches? Do they have one?

Trip Somers

Coach Bagonzi: This is an art form and should be treated this way. If one is building his legs through running and weight training, and is not using his quadrant system, then there is no excuse! The legs are responsible for probably half of the power of a fastball. Try pitching a ball sitting in a chair or sitting on the ground, and it will become readily noticeable that the arm alone doesn"t carry the load.

You actually pitch with four quadrants: (1) the throwing arm, (2) the glove arm, (3) the back leg, (4) the lift leg, and then the core system (abdominal and lower back muscles, which are connectors and make up the fifth activated part of the pitching process).

Unite all of these in a smooth kinetic flow, and you have the delivery of an effective and integrated pitch. Some pitchers utilize the power of their arm and shoulder muscles (including the directional side) better than others, and therefore realize the power they have. But only those top-notch pitchers, who are extra sound because of their lower torsos, ever realize the full power of their pitching anatomy. This is an area that should be constantly refined to achieve maximum potential.

Q: Something I"ve been curious about for a long time: Occasionally, someone comes along with "natural movement" on a thrown ball, regardless of grip or arm angle; for instance, a right-handed pitcher whose ball movement is always right to left. Change of speeds only affects the amount of concurrent sink on the pitch.

The point at which the "break" occurs can be varied by putting different finger pressure on the ball, resulting in that pitcher effectively having three pitches using the same delivery. Examples from the past include Jim Maloney of the Cincinnati Reds, and, a long time ago, "Dazzy" Vance. Some called the pitch a screwball because it ran in on right-handed batters and away from left-handed batters. Don"t see it much anymore, although lots of right-handed pitchers' four-seam fastballs tend to take a similar trajectory.

What makes that pitch behave as it does?

Ed Coffin

Coach Bagonzi: This question is something I"ve always been interested in. In fact, I just wrote a blog entry related to this. Pitchers with natural movement are rare, particularly right-handers. Left-handers frequently have natural movement. Movement on the fastball certainly can be created.

Using a right-handed pitcher as a reference, we find creating a 1-to-7 spin direction can cause a tailing fastball (moving left to right). A 2-to-8 spin can cause a sinking fastball (left to right and down). These spins can be arrived at by tilting the hand (wrist) to one o"clock (1-to-7) for a tailing fastball and to two o"clock (2-to-8) for a sinking fastball. Pressure on the index finger can assist and by all means one should pronate (thumb turns to the right).

All the time spent on "doctoring" the fastball is well worth it, because movement is priceless and important to pitching success. Having three or four types of fastballs surely fortifies one"s pitching kit - a riser, a tailer, a sinker and perhaps a cutter makes four pitches all coming out of the same delivery slot. Spin direction and amount of spin would be something all pitchers would do well to completely understand and master, for this is responsible for critical fastball movement.

Q: It seems that many people grade pitchers based solely on the velocity of their fastball. Can you discuss the role of velocity and the possible negative results that can accompany excess velocity, in particular the role of velocity in relation to the Magnus Effect?

Bagonzi: The faster the ball goes, the straighter it gets - Magnus Effect is involved. Today"s hitters are highly capable of hitting a straight fastball, no matter what speed it is.

Ideally, one would want velocity and movement - particularly late movement. Guys like Pedro Martinez in his heyday threw 95 mph with movement, but not many get that. The ball is more likely to straighten out. A slower pitch might veer or sink, ala Greg Maddux or Derek Lowe, and there is likely a magic speed where this takes place (85-plus mph), while a pitcher like Nolan Ryan"s fastball would explode with great "afterburn".

This was a combination of velocity and rotation, giving the ball "late life," which is not exactly the same as movement (veer, sink or tail). This is more like a "booster" stage. Few pitchers have this. The direction of spin (1-to-7, 2-to-8, 3-to-9) is what gives a ball movement. Positioning of the fingers and pressure point variations causes a ball to move as well. Some have and do this naturally and are not even aware of it. Most pitchers can enhance movement by experimenting with grips, pressure points and wrist and arm angles. A worthy task!

Q: Why is it that some teams just can"t seem to develop quality pitching? What are some of the fundamental problems associated with this? It can"t all be luck...right?

Bagonzi: If an organization doesn"t think PITCHING from the get-go and from the top down, it"s difficult to conclude that they will be consistently successful. Pitching is probably 70-80 percent of the game. Good pitching beats good hitting and has for a long time. Championship teams can be identified with solid pitching as a rule. Defense seems to thrive and improve when quality pitchers are on the mound. A good pitcher often dominates a game, even with good hitters abound.

Starting with good pitching personnel, good pitching coaches, and scouts who understand pitching and recognize the "diamonds in the rough" should jump-start a team in the right direction. It surely isn"t luck that characterizes successful teams.

PART III:  A brief refresher: Dr. John Bagonzi, also known as the "Pitching Professor," is a very highly respected pitching instructor and the author of the book "The Act of Pitching" (http://pitchingprofessor.com/home.html).

In Part III of Baseball Time in Arlington's three-part Q&A series with Coach Bagonzi, the venerable pitching oracle weighs in on the pros and cons of tall pitchers, top Texas Rangers pitching prospect Derek Holland, and a plethora of questions from one similarly esteemed pitching mind.

Enjoy.

Q: Is it more difficult for taller pitchers to maintain mechanical consistency? Should, for instance, teams be more wary of drafting players who are over 6' 5"?

Matt Elmore

Coach Bagonzi: It probably is more difficult for really tall pitchers (6' 5" and up) to maintain the mechanical consistency and dexterity that smaller pitchers have, because corrections may inflate margins. However, I would never back away from signing a 6' 6", 220-pound pitcher, and I've seen more of this type lately - great leverage with tremendous potential.

A pitching technician may well have to recognize that refining and correcting flaws in the big guy may require a patient approach with steady and careful observation of results. The leverage factors, which are important in a sound delivery, are obviously enhanced with a 6' 5" pitcher.

Nonetheless, we are dealing with a relativity here, and while a 6' 1", 190-pound pitcher may be a prototype model to go by and easier to mold to a style or at least to adjust shortcomings with, we still have a similarity in delivery with all the same mechanics at work. It's that the areas of correction may be more delicate and precise and require extra time. Probably all worth it.

Q: Curious to hear what you think about the way Holland bends his back on his load that, as a result, causes his left hand to end up about a foot closer to third base than his right shoulder. Just going by the pictures, is Holland putting himself at a greater injury risk by rotating his arm so far behind his head?

[Editor's note: Pictures available here, here, here, and here.]

Mike Hindman

Coach Bagonzi: I really like Derek Holland. In the launch phase, he is letter perfect. I can hardly find anything to nit pick about.

The Trip Somers Section

Trip is a former NCAA pitcher, pitching instructor, and one of the most knowledgeable pitching minds I have had the privilege of knowing. This Q&A would lack technical proficiency if Trip were not involved. Many thanks to him.

Q: A lot of organizations handle their pitchers with an "If ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality when it comes to pitching mechanics, often waiting until an injured pitcher is rehabbing before making any serious mechanical adjustments with stride length, scapular load, poor hip/shoulder rotation, etc.

Are those organizations really concerned about such adjustments negatively impacting a pitcher's stuff, or do they just not know any better?

Coach Bagonzi: I suppose the mentality is that if they got this far, they must have the goods. Leo Mazzone, then the pitching coach for the Braves, did a lot of preventive work with pitchers by doing systematic pitching routines - certainly when he had [John] Smoltz, [Tom] Glavine, and [Greg] Maddux, and they are all in their forties and doing reasonably well. Of course, Smoltz (with really ideal mechanics) has had two arm surgeries (hard slider?) but should be coming back.

Realistically good throwing programs head injuries "off at the pass." Mechanical adjustments should be an ongoing thing, as refining and tweaking should be part of the overall pitching package. Waiting until it's broke might be too late, and probably doesn't have much value. On the other hand, overreacting may also have its drawbacks. Wisdom in the observation department may be the key.

Q: My favorite aspect of Dr. Mike Marshall's delivery is that his release, without fail, requires pronation that protects both the elbow and the shoulder. My second favorite aspect is the finger pressure "bonus" caused by the combination of pronation and the forward release point of his delivery. In the past few decades, many pitchers have chosen the slider as their breaking pitch of choice rather than the curveball, with the idea that it is easier to throw and command.

Unfortunately, an overwhelming majority of them, including some of the top pitching prospects in the country, throw the pitch completely the wrong way - with extreme supination (wrist turning up so that the hand and fingers move under the ball). This is usually allowed to continue in the college rand professional ranks until a pitcher hurts himself, with the exception being when he actually asks an intelligent pitching coach for help with his slider.

It seems like it would be good practice for Major League clubs to find out how their pitchers throw their pitches before something goes wrong. What is your opinion on this?

Coach Bagonzi: I agree that pronation is probably beneficial to throwing, and that it may protect the elbow and shoulder on many pitches. However, to throw the classic supinating pitches (i.e. curveball, slider, slurve, cutter) via the pronation effect stretches this concept.

While it can be done, as Dr. Marshall has shown, I feel most can probably not throw their breaking pitches that way (pronation) and that supinating here is more natural; granted, it certainly is traditional.

Fastballs and their cousins surely are pronating pitches, and any high-quality fastball should absolutely undergo pronation (early pronation as a sinker or late pronation as a four-seam, high-velocity fastball). Pitchers who throw sliders with fingers coming under the ball are asking for trouble. Throwing a spiral-type spin with fingers coming to side likely protects the arm some, but sliders can cause arm stress because of the high acceleration through the release point.

A well-thrown curveball (supination variety) creates some deceleration through the release point, relieving elbow stress and giving a good downward spin which creates an effective curveball. Umpires often don't give close calls on curves, but often do on sliders, because the entry porthole on curves is narrower. Hence, one throws sliders (easier to master).

I opt for the curve. I agree that clubs should intimately know what and how their pitchers throw, particularly their breaking pitches. This should not be a private secret.

Q: Why are there pitching coaches out there who honestly believe that active scapular loading is a tenet of solid mechanics?

Coach Bagonzi: Scapular loading is the brainchild of Paul Nyman, whom I'm quite familiar with. He and I have exchanged a lot of viewpoints on pitching, and I certainly recognize that Paul verifies his work scientifically. So my view and philosophy is that most pitchers who throw hard do this anyway to some extent and that verifies and accentuates the existence of such, but I don't give a lot of devotion to this phenomenon.

In utilizing the pectoral girdle and loading this part of the pitching system (upper quadrants), scapular adduction happens, and for some this may be vital for power. For others, it's the integration of the four quadrants in pitching, with scapular loading being a by-product of the upper-torso activity. Elbows during scapular loading need to be below the level of the shoulders.

Note: I do not teach scapular adduction in my pitching camps!

Q: I've long believed that swimming is among the best conditioning exercises a pitcher can do to protect his arm. With the intense shoulder rotation and pronation in a good stroke, a pitcher builds good habits while strengthening and conditioning what are typically the most injury-prone body parts for a pitcher - the shoulder and elbow.

Are you aware of any studies - past, present, and/or future - that put this idea to the test?

Coach Bagonzi: It seems to me that early on in my professional career, swimming was prohibited for pitchers. I don't exactly remember the "whys" involved - perhaps fatigue? I agree that swimming is a great muscle toner and relaxer. Swimming may create the flexibility in the athlete that transcends and overlaps into other sports. As long as one doesn't overdo the activity, swimming should be a pleasant adjunct to athletic fitness.