1
Mays and Aaron were both about 180 in their prime. Frank Robinson was a relatively porky 183.
Just saying, you know. :)
moe
Nick Franklin at the AFL
You Underestimate Me (making me hit like I did in high school)
.
From BJOL:
Is there any way to determine whether switch-hitting is actually an advantage? Of the top 25 or so hitters in the history of baseball, only Mantle was a switch-hitter. That suggests that either switch-hitting is not a great advantage, or that a lot of great hitters passed up the opportunity to be even greater. If the latter, then Ty Cobb, Ted Williams, and Rickey Henderson would seem to have been prime candidates to switch hit, since they were already batting opposite the way they threw. What was up with Henderson batting righty anyway?Asked by: Hank GilletteAnswered: 11/11/2012Batting "right" or "left" is just a figure of speech; all hitters are using both hands in a co-ordinated manner.I used to argue that switch hitting was generally a mistake, because in the 1970s/1980s a great many switch hitters had huge platoon differentials. If the purpose of the tactic is to eliminate the platoon differential and the players who are doing it have larger-than-normal platoon differentials, obviously it ain't workin'.But this is no longer true; many (and I think most) switch hitters today have very small platoon differentials. I don't know that this resolves the larger issue.
.
James' global impression of baseball, some years ago, was that switch-hitting was "generally a mistake." Nowadays, switch hitters seem to have gained on the game.
Switch-hitting is basically a defensive reaction; it arises out of the fear that a batter won't be able to cope with a LH-on-LH situation. We remember years ago, the M's radio crew asking Julio Cruz "have you ever considered just hitting right handed?" Cruz was incredulous. "Can you imagine me up there against Goose Gossage? He'd blow me away!"
Defensive reactions CAN (c-a-n) very EASILY become defensive OVERREACTIONS. Fear is a powerful emotion. Dr. D has long argued that in Nick Franklin's case, switch-hitting arose out of a fundamental miscalculation. People underestimated Nick Franklin's powers.
..................
From the CF camera, by the way, Franklin:
(1) Is kind of smaller than you'd think.
(2) He gets the Ackley bat wrap, but with too-fast-for-the-human-eye quickness. The old SSI take on his swing .... we'll double down. Franklin truly is blessed with a Ken Griffey Jr "natural" swing. From the left side, of course; from the right side he is just as static, and lifeless as ever, no acceleration to speak of.
He's totally sudden from the left side. He's more able to cope with LH-on-LH than other players. Why, for the love of all that was Billy Williams, is anybody still recommending a Nick Franklin LH/RH rearguard action?
(3) He sits back over the rear leg in Adrian Gonzalez style, reads the pitch studiously, and then ATTACKS to drive the ball hard to the pull field. The ball sounds like a rifle shot off his bat.
(4) He naturally gets on top of the ball. His Joe DiMaggio swing shape -- a little loft but not as much as many hitters take -- forms a nice check-and-balance to his extreme weight transfer and torque.
This swing shape looks to make Nicky a pull hitter in the very best sense of the word - a DiMaggio pull hitter, as opposed to a Jose Lopez pull hitter.
...............
I dunno how much power a 180-lb. player can demonstrate on a baseball field, but baseball's about to find out.
Cheers,
Dr D
.
Comments
2
I always wonder about that. Mays and Aaron were quite small by today's standards. They were cranking out 40, 45, 50 homers with regularity. Something in the game seems to have changed, but I'm not sure what.
The strike zone doesn't seem to quite cover it, because nobody weighing 180 hits gobs of HR's any more ... I dunno, maybe Utley?
3
in specific ways since the 60's/70's? It seems to me that the modern strike zone places a premium on low breaking pitches, which require more upper body to generate power on.
High fastballs are the easiest pitches to put over the wall, in my understanding/experience. Low pitches take a lot of shoulder strengh and 'arm' power. Smaller, whippy guys can hit the high pitches for power almost as well as the big Konerko/Dunn types, but my observations seem to tell me it's harder for little guys to golf pitches at the knees as well as the bruisers.
I would guess there were fewer quality breaking pitches in yesteryear, and that high cheese was the coin of the realm. When talking about guys like Aaron or Mays, you're obviously talking about athletic prodigies, guys who could crush your hand with a firm shake, but I don't think we have fewer of those guys today.
Just occurred to me: maybe the 180lb whippy guys 'disappeared' because of an increased premium placed on maximizing muscle mass on young players with natural power. They are probably all still here...they just bulk up over 200lbs via 'protein shakes' and intense body building regimens.
4
How much did Junior weigh when he came up? Couldn't have been much more than 175. The guy could crank 'em though. The youthful, pre-juice Bonds was a whippit of a thing.
Bulk is now all the rage. So is swing hard. I suspect bats are heavier, too (although Bonds used a very light bat).
"Smallish" guys like Aaron and Mays used to hit homers off of Sudden Sam McDowell and Sandy Koufax, who threw hot heat. But they beat up the Bert Bylevins of their day, too. Actually Jonez, I would suspect there are more hard throwers today than their used to be, just the reverse of your supposition.
In golf there is a number called "Smash Factor." It is driver distance/swing speed. A guy with a 100 MPH SS who hits it 245 yards has a Smash Factor of 1.45. Anything above 1.4 is pretty good. Anything above 1.5 is unbelieveable good, bordering on perfect efficiency. It is a measure of the quality of contact and the proper launch angle, as well.
I wonder if a Mays and an Aaron were more focused on hitting the ball solidly, squishing it, as it were, rather than hitting it far. Perhaps their bat speeds were slower than an Adam Dunn's, but there were more efficient in that they hit it very solidly more often. You don't hear much talk of the "moon shots" that Mays and Aaron hit, just the huge total of homers.
At 180, you can certainly squish the ball. Geet the right launch angle and you'll punish the 1st few rows of OF seats.
In golf, hitting it more solidly at 105 MPH is better than hitting it on the toe at 115. A 180 guy who hits it solidly often, can ring up some serious homer numbers.
moe
5
I remember some research on Pujols' power not being truly elite, just very good with incredible consistency in his ability to square up the ball. This is something I think is underdiscussed on the 'net.
Buhner had as much raw power as anyone, but obviously squaring the ball consistently was a bit of an issue for him compared to our other great hitters. Junior was great, but maybe a tick below Bone in the raw power department, and Edgar never hit any 500' shots, did he? So accuracy and 'squaring the ball' is absolutely one way the whippy, stringy athletic types could compete in the HR totals. Naturally this would be predicated on superior pitch recognition and/or reflexes.
6
Finally, someone with an intelligent fact on weight for baseball players. i'm not sure what started the issue of franklin's weight. maybe the after affects of a concussion and mono? EVERY young TOP ss in the minors is thin in my opinion. what top ss fits the profile? Not hamilton, before he was moved to the outfield at the afl, looks just a thin or thinner. baez is short, profar is just a thin as hamilton.
I heard franklin played in AA with a broken toe and jammed thumbs and still led the league in BA. just worry about stats (which he has plenty of them). let franklin determine what weight he thinks he needs.