A-Rod's Mechanics

[Comm]

Is he Linear or Rotational?

[jalbert]

I think he is Rotinear

when will this debate end?

on second thought, maybe he is lineational

[swingbuster]

linear with a great upper body loading pattern and lots of hand torque and leverage

[Comm]

linear with a great upper body loading pattern and lots of hand torque and leverage


Linear? What about in this pic?

http://i.cnn.net/si/2003/baseball/mlb/12/17/arod.contract.ap/p1_arod_ap.jpg

How could he Generate Enough power using Linear Mechanics?

[swingbuster]

A still doesn't show his head over belt buckle stride length...his back side release...he has a strong linear move

we all know he rotates to ....

that still doesn't show what his hands do either prior to contact

[hellborn]

Is he Linear or Rotational?
I think that these terms roughly correspond to "front foot" and "back foot" hitters...and I would definitely call ARod a front foot hitter. There are plenty of tremendous power hitters who have used this style, such as Gehrig, Foxx, Juan Gone, and Big Hurt. These guys tend to bring their upper bodies over the front leg as they swing, as opposed to pushing back off the front leg during the stride and having a more stationary upper body, like Ruth, Hack Wilson, Williams, Bagwell, etc. If you have access to a copy of "Babe Ruth's Own Book of Baseball", there are some good photos of Ruth and Gehrig that illustrate the distinction well. Clearly, both types of hitter are using their legs and trunk to bring the bat around with authority, just in slightly different ways.
I know that the real hitting experts here can probably tear my simpleton statements apart in detail, but this is how I understand things. I have heard some experts suggest that the "linear" or "front foot" style might tend to develop at an early age from kids using adult bats that are very heavy for them, as they need to throw their whole bodies forward to get the bat going, as opposed to whipping a lighter bat around.

[Chris O'Leary]

When judging whether someone is linear or rotational, you have to look at the pitch. Their mechanics will change slightly depending on whether they get fooled by the pitch. You also have to know if a picture is pre or post-contact.

In other words, a guy who is rotational on fastballs can look linear if he gets fooled by a change-up. Of course, that is the point of off-speed pitches; to screw up hitters and take them out of their comfort zone.

To turn a rotational hitter into a linear (arm-y, ground ball) hitter.

I try to evaluate guys based on the same pitch in the same general location.

[GFK]

Jeff, what about curvelinear (sp)? :laugh

[Mark H]

Front foot back foot linear rotational. And I've been steering others to this board as the best hitting discussion on the net. :noidea


How about you guys pick out some clips that illustrate what you are trying to use these terms to mean? And do a search on here for those terms as well.

http://imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro

http://www.youthbaseballcoaching.com/swings.html

[Chris O'Leary]

I think that these terms roughly correspond to "front foot" and "back foot" hitters...and I would definitely call ARod a front foot hitter.


Wouldn't a pure rotational hitter look like a front foot hitter if he got fooled by the pitch? Wouldn't his mechanics break down?

[Mark H]

All of you. Stop it. Just stop it. Quit mucking things up and confusing newbies with baffling bs and pointless picky boring questions and go back and read everything on here, on setpro and get Englishbey's DVD's.

[Chris O'Leary]

How about you guys pick out some clips that illustrate what you are trying to use these terms to mean? And do a search on here for those terms as well.


I think this clip of Aaron illustrates what some could describe as a front foot (or even a linear) swing...

http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro//AAron1.gif

The main difference seems to be that, while his front leg is stiffening, his torso is relatively more upright than the other clips on those pages. He's also more arm-y than most.

However, I believe that this could be due to the pitch being a change-up rather than a fundamental characteristic of his swing. I have seen lots of photos of Albert Pujols and while he generally looks really good, if he gets fooled by a pitch his swing starts to resemble my standard swing. ;-)

I would have to see more clips to get a sense of anyone's general tendency.

[Mark H]

"Wouldn't a pure rotational hitter look like a front foot hitter if he got fooled by the pitch? Wouldn't his mechanics break down?"


Aaarrgghh. Maybe I need to take a vacation from these discussions. I'm out of patience and even Scott is beginning to fray. The anwer to your question is maybe but so what. Front foot back foot are bs marketing terms Lau came up with to sell his stuff.

[Mark H]

I think this clip of Aaron illustrates what some could describe as a front foot (or even a linear) swing...

http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro//AAron1.gif

The main difference seems to be that, while his front leg is stiffening, his torso is relatively more upright than the other clips on those pages. He's also more arm-y than most.

However, I believe that this could be due to the pitch being a change-up rather than a fundamental characteristic of his swing. I have seen lots of photos of Albert Pujols and why he generally looks really good, if he gets fooled by a pitch his swing starts to resemble my standard swing. ;-)

I would have to see more clips to get a sense of his general tendency.

OK, good effort. You posted while I was posting the preceding. I feel much better now. Now, how about a MLB clip where a hitter doesn't unweight the back foot.

[Chris O'Leary]

Now, how about a MLB clip where a hitter doesn't unweight the back foot.

I've never seen one (in a pro), which goes to your point that the idea of front foot hitters and back foot hitters is a largely meaningless distinction.

[swingbuster]

Front foot back foot are bs marketing terms Lau came up with to sell his stuff.

and scap loading, move the middle, and forward by turning are ???

Highly descriptive terms use by the a new generation of teachers that will revolutionize hitting as we know it with absolutely no profit motive surrounding them ....

That Lau was a scoundrel for sure....

[wogdoggy]

last time i checked dixon loved lau's techniques?????

[ssarge]

OK, good effort. You posted while I was posting the preceding. I feel much better now. Now, how about a MLB clip where a hitter doesn't unweight the back foot.

THE key question.

NO elite hitter has weight on the back foot at contact. Unless maybe they were fooled and did something funky.

The above fact DOES NOT change just because Lau is describing the swing. or Epstein or Williams is.


Forget the descriptors. What do elite itters DO?The vats majoruty of what they do, they do in common. And understanding this means looking very deep and very early in the swing.

Most of the discussion seems to be about things that are the RESULT of precipitate early action. Instead of talking about that stuff, it is far more useful to talk about the early actions that CAUSE that stuff.

Best regards,

Scott

[Ohfor]

And they don't BHUT or HBH, which are simply other marketing gimmicks. One, is actually a toy.

[Mark H]

I've never seen one (in a pro), which goes to your point that the idea of front foot hitters and back foot hitters is a largely meaningless distinction.

Agreed. :)

[Mark H]

That Lau was a scoundrel for sure....

Considering Chris's point, maybe just a little. Marketing zing is marketing zing. I think Lau knew Ted wasn't on his back foot but he needed some catch phrase to differentiate himself from Ted.

[swingbuster]

everybody has a theme sort of..........

[hellborn]

I've never seen one (in a pro), which goes to your point that the idea of front foot hitters and back foot hitters is a largely meaningless distinction.
I agree that any decent swing will not have weight on the back foot at contact...I'm saying that there is a broad distinction between hitters who end up over their front foot and hitters who end up with some or most weight on the back foot. Even Ford Frick noticed this distinction back in the '20s when he wrote Babe's book for him, and found photos of Ruth and Gehrig to illustrate it...I think that it's obvious to anybody with eyes. You can argue that the difference is not meaningful in the broader context of total swing mechanics, and that the same player can show elements of both types depending upon the particular pitch he's offering at, and I would probably agree with you.
I guess I take the "rotational" vs "linear" distinction to be that a "front foot" hitter has a significant forward "linear" motion to his upper body combined with his trunk turn, whereas a "rotational" hitter's upper body does not have as much "linear" motion. It's crude, but, again, I think that there is a real distinction there.
When Jaramillo got his hands on ARod, he decided that Alex's forward motion was working against him and tried to minimize it...make him more of a rotational hitter than a (partly) linear one. At the time, I thought that it was pretentious, bizarre, and outrageous that he was messing with a talent like ARod, but, again, a pro hitting coach explained his observations to the media in basically these terms.
At least I'm glad that my prediction that I would be shredded was correct. I'll try to post some visuals later on. I know that I don't speak advanced hitting analyst language, but I wonder if some of you guys are glossing over some distinctions that I think are obvious in an attempt to show that all good hitters have significant common elements.

[Chris O'Leary]

I'm saying that there is a broad distinction between hitters who end up over their front foot and hitters who end up with some or most weight on the back foot. Even Ford Frick noticed this distinction back in the '20s when he wrote Babe's book for him, and found photos of Ruth and Gehrig to illustrate it

Just because they did it once in a while (if they did it at all) doesn't mean that that is the swing to copy (or the swing that they wanted to use at the moment). It could be that...

1. Those were posed photos.

2. Those were pictures of them getting fooled (and using non-standard hitting mechanics).

I believe that to really classify a hitter you have to look at how they swing at a ball that they are not fooled on. I believe that will reveal their true mechanics. You also have to know where in the swing they are (e.g. pre or post contact).

[Mark H]

I guess I take the "rotational" vs "linear" distinction to be that a "front foot" hitter has a significant forward "linear" motion to his upper body combined with his trunk turn, whereas a "rotational" hitter's upper body does not have as much "linear" motion. It's crude, but, again, I think that there is a real distinction there.
.

If you have a clip of a MLB elite hitter, as defined by slg%, moving forward DURING rotation toward contact, I'd love to see it. I would call that hip slide and tell you no elite hitter does it unless perhaps fooled on the pitch. If you have contrary video evidence I would very much appreciate your sharing it. OTOH, if you are saying some hitters hit with a more upright axis, that's a different thing.

[Chris O'Leary]

OTOH, if you are saying some hitters hit with a more upright axis, that's a different thing.

I saw another clip of Aaron (video of #755 on MLB.com) and his torso does seem to be consistently more upright than most.

What are the implications of this (if any)? Swing plane?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

If you have a clip of a MLB elite hitter, as defined by slg%, moving forward DURING rotation toward contact, I'd love to see it. I would call that hip slide and tell you no elite hitter does it unless perhaps fooled on the pitch. If you have contrary video evidence I would very much appreciate your sharing it. OTOH, if you are saying some hitters hit with a more upright axis, that's a different thing.

There won't be a clip of that, cause most of them hit against a firm front leg at rotation, unless, like you said, they are fooled. Which is when the hands become important, but that's another argument for another time.

I think the distinction that Hellborn is making, comes down to different batting stances. Take a hitter like Edmonds, Pujols, or even Andruw Jones now, after he widened up. Their whole things is to eliminate the stride and stay balanced. From their approach, to the "stride and hitting against a firm front leg," there is a great distinction. I think that's what Hellborn was gettin' at?

[hellborn]

Front foot back foot linear rotational. And I've been steering others to this board as the best hitting discussion on the net. :noidea


How about you guys pick out some clips that illustrate what you are trying to use these terms to mean? And do a search on here for those terms as well.

http://imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro

http://www.youthbaseballcoaching.com/swings.html
OK, on the first website, compare Derrek Lee (#7) to the videos of Aaron and Clemente (16, 17, and 18). At the completion of the swing, Lee's weight is clearly on his back foot...he'd break his ankle if it were on his front foot, the way it's twisted. His head is not moving very much despite a powerful stride, even comes back a little at the end. Aaron and Clemente both show a quite substantial forward motion of the head and upper body and end up with a lot of weight on the front foot.
I'm not saying the mechanics of getting the bat going with authority are totally different, but I see definite distinctions between the swings that I believe other people must see, too.
I don't know what "do a search on here for those terms" means. One of the websites given, or baseball fever, or what.

[Ohfor]

You think Aaron has both feet on the ground right now?

I bet he does because it's after, long after, the last time he made contact.

So is Derek Lee's rear foot.........on the ground...........after contact.

[hellborn]

If you have a clip of a MLB elite hitter, as defined by slg%, moving forward DURING rotation toward contact, I'd love to see it. I would call that hip slide and tell you no elite hitter does it unless perhaps fooled on the pitch. If you have contrary video evidence I would very much appreciate your sharing it. OTOH, if you are saying some hitters hit with a more upright axis, that's a different thing.
The clip of Clemente I referred to before clearly shows him moving forward through the entire swing, to my eyes. It may be that he was fooled, but I've seen other photos that suggest to me that it may be close to his normal swing.
Again, my main distinction depends a lot upon what happens after contact...Lee is clearly rocking back at little at the end of the swing, Aaron and Clemente are moving forward. But, they are all generating power by rotating the trunk, the guys that are moving their heads and trunks forward substantially are not relying on just that to really get the bat moving. I definitely am not trying to say the "linear" guys do not rotate, just that they ALSO have a substantial linear motion that some hitters typically do not.

[hellborn]

There won't be a clip of that, cause most of them hit against a firm front leg at rotation, unless, like you said, they are fooled. Which is when the hands become important, but that's another argument for another time.

I think the distinction that Hellborn is making, comes down to different batting stances. Take a hitter like Edmonds, Pujols, or even Andruw Jones now, after he widened up. Their whole things is to eliminate the stride and stay balanced. From their approach, to the "stride and hitting against a firm front leg," there is a great distinction. I think that's what Hellborn was gettin' at?
No, Derrek Lee takes a powerful stride in the video I refer to, but still does not have much linear motion of his upper body. I would agree that a no-stride hitter really CANNOT have much linear motion, but a stride hitter can go either way.
Your Ruth clip shows an interesting mix...he moves forward a fair amount due to an incredibly strong stride, but he still rocks back at the end of the swing.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

No, Derrek Lee takes a powerful stride in the video I refer to, but still does not have much linear motion of his upper body. I would agree that a no-stride hitter really CANNOT have much linear motion, but a stride hitter can go either way.
Your Ruth clip shows an interesting mix...he moves forward a fair amount due to an incredibly strong stride, but he still rocks back at the end of the swing.

Well, I that site is cool as hell, hellborn, but I have dialup and it's a complete nightmare. So I'm not able to look at D. Lee's swing. Can you post it in this website somehow so I can see it?

What Babe does after the point of contact shouldn't be a focal point. Look where he is at contact. He's hitting against a firm front leg, with little to no weight on his back foot at all, much like Sheffield does I think.

[hellborn]

You think Aaron has both feet on the ground right now?

I bet he does because it's after, long after, the last time he made contact.

So is Derek Lee's rear foot.........on the ground...........after contact.
I don't quite understand the "right now", but I agree that both men end up with both feet on the ground, and that Lee is not weighting his rear foot right at contact.
My distinction is between how much their bodies move forward during the swing and how their weight is distributed after the swing. Lee cannot have much weight on the front after contact because his foot is so twisted that it cannot be supporting weight. Aaron and Clemente could not have their front feet in such a position for a swing anything like what is shown in the video because they have weight on the front and their ankles would snap.
If somebody wants to tell me that my distinctions are not important in explaining how an elite batter hits the ball with authority, please do so and tell me why. I'll probably agree with you, or admit that I don't understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that there are physical distinctions in these swings that I think are quite noticeable.
BTW, Mauer is even more of a rotational hitter than Lee in his video.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

agree with you, or admit that I don't understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that there are physical distinctions in these swings that I think are quite noticeable.
.

I do too.

Let's say there are three groups.

The widened apart group with absolutely no stride; just a heel lift timing mechanism. The Pujols, Edmonds, A. Jones, and you could even include Bagwell with his funky "reverse" stride.

Then you have the guys like Arod who basically just pick up their front foot for timing and fall forward back to where they picked their foot up from. It's not really a "stride" in the natural sense of the word. Maybe Kirby Puckett would be a member, Eric Davis, ManRam, Mac, Sosa.... this seems like it would be the majority group, although with hitters being so strong today, and the pitchers throwing hard, it seems more and more hitters are going to the widened apart approach, to see the ball longer and remain more balanced in case they get fooled.

Then you have the extreme stride/front foot hitters like Aaron/Sheffield.