Exit velocity vs distance

[frankbmd]

We all agree that if the ball goes over the fence without bouncing it is a home run. The inside the park home run never goes over the fence. Now the question.

Regarding computer generated home run distance and measured exit velocity, does anyone really give a rat’s ass about either one or both? And if you do, I suspect that you are a fan of launch angles as well.

Do you really think that the distance for a home run that lands in San Francisco Bay is accurate?

If Boomer Wombat has a launch angle of 60 degrees and the ball goes over the fence in a hurricane, should he get a ticket to Cooperstown based on his launch angle?

And if Line Drive Larry has an exit velocity of 150mph and the ball breaks three fingers in the gloved hand of the reputed best fielding secondbaseman in the league, should an X-ray of the fingers and the glove become an exhibit enshrined in Cooperstown?

I’m not trying to influence your response to the first question with my examples.

[ClementeFanOh]

Frankb- I think we are on the same team here. "He crushed it" is sufficient!

Trent King

[G1911]

I don’t think I understand what the objection really is.

Do people object to any new stat or data point because it is new?

Do they think velocities and angles are just irrelevant to outcomes and future probabilities and these particular figures are junk false data?

Do they think it may be mathematically valid but find these particular stats obnoxious to hear in a broadcast?

Is it something else?

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by G1911

I don’t think I understand what the objection really is.

Do people object to any new stat or data point because it is new?

Do they think velocities and angles are just irrelevant to outcomes and future probabilities and these particular figures are junk false data?

Do they think it may be mathematically valid but find these particular stats obnoxious to hear in a broadcast?

Is it something else?

For me, the issue is the overreliance on new data points during broadcasts. Was watching a Fox broadcast of the Mets vs. Padres (the Musgrove ear-check game) a week ago, and found it pretty unbearable. Every other word was about how many feet someone had covered to catch a ball, how many feet on average Brandon Nimmo has stood from home plate in the outfield, etc.

I usually like David Cone as a broadcaster, but it was tough to listen to his comments on spinrates. He was throwing out spinrate numbers without giving any context. If he had just said "Musgrove's spinrate is 20% higher today) that would have been fine. But saying his spinrate is 300 means nothing by itself.

However, in defense of the spinrate comments--it did prove influential, as that is probably why Buck Showalter had the umps check Joe Musgrove's ears. He couldn't believe the increased spinrate was natural.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If these metrics sustain the interest of a newer generation of fans, I am all in favor.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If these metrics sustain the interest of a newer generation of fans, I am all in favor.

Is there any evidence that they do?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

For me, the issue is the overreliance on new data points during broadcasts. Was watching a Fox broadcast of the Mets vs. Padres (the Musgrove ear-check game) a week ago, and found it pretty unbearable. Every other word was about how many feet someone had covered to catch a ball, how many feet on average Brandon Nimmo has stood from home plate in the outfield, etc.

I usually like David Cone as a broadcaster, but it was tough to listen to his comments on spinrates. He was throwing out spinrate numbers without giving any context. If he had just said "Musgrove's spinrate is 20% higher today) that would have been fine. But saying his spinrate is 300 means nothing by itself.

However, in defense of the spinrate comments--it did prove influential, as that is probably why Buck Showalter had the umps check Joe Musgrove's ears. He couldn't believe the increased spinrate was natural.

I tend to agree with this. I think these metrics do actually matter and make a big difference in what we see on the field. But it’s also a little boring and doesn’t mesh with the pastoral mystique.

[BobC]

What I've always found interesting is that people often tout these exit velocities by some hitters, but they never seem to discuss them in conjunction with, nor really take it into consideration with, the type of pitch they hit and its velocity, as a significant contributing factor. One would think Newton's 3rd Law of Motion would be an integral part and factor into the determination of exit velocities, no?

[BCauley]

I don’t know when they actually started talking about and highlighting the exit velocity or launch angle but every time I see it I say to myself “Why does this even matter? It’s a home run regardless.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BobC]

Originally Posted by BCauley

I don’t know when they actually started talking about and highlighting the exit velocity or launch angle but every time I see it I say to myself “Why does this even matter? It’s a home run regardless.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For the exact same reason they do things like clock a pitcher to see how fast he throws...........to be better able to find, sign, and develop the talent that will hopefully lead to them becoming a great MLB player.

Scouts hear about two supposedly great high school pitching prospects and run out to see them. They clock them both and find one of them has a fastball that tops out at 82 MPH, while the other's tops out at 90 MPH. Guess which prospect they are more likely to continue looking at and pursue. Now switch out "pitching prospects" and substitute in "hitting prospects", for whom they'll clock the exit velocities on balls they hit.

And then combine that with the naturally competitive and inquisitive nature of most people who not only want their team to be the best, but they also want their pitcher to be the one to throw the fastest, or their clean-up slugger to be the one to hit the hardest. These are simply more measures that people have developed to be able to compare one player against another, and allow them to supposedly determine who is better then.

Think of it like this. When collecting pioneers like Burdick and Carter were in their heyday, they were more concerned with identifying and acquiring examples of every card, and completing every set, they could. Nowadays that isn't always enough for many people. They need to have their cards/sets measured (grading) and compared (Registry) so they can say my card/set is better than yours, and be able to brag about it. Not necessarily the case, or need, for everyone, but certainly for enough people where it becomes "a thing".