By Frankie Piliere
When you are the youngest pitcher in Major League Baseball and being touted as the future ace of the New York Yankees, I suppose that it is normal to be under the microscope at all times. And, boy has Phil Hughes been under the microscope.
What has come in question about Hughes the most is his velocity and its relationship to his mechanics. Has his delivery changed as so many have speculated? If so, what has changed? Why does he look so confused in the picture to the right?
Stick around and find out the answers to these questions and others after the jump…
(Phil Hughes Photo Credit: Hot Stove New York)
Hughes’ delivery has changed over the course of the last year or so: FACT
It is not as drastic a change as it’s being made out to be, as I’ll get to in a minute, but there is most definitely a change as far as I can tell.
Hughes’ current arm angle is higher than it was during his minor league career: FACT
This is very, very slight. I’m not even convinced that it is part of the problem. But, Hughes’ arm angle is just a tiny bit higher than it was a couple years ago. Check out the photos below and keep the slightly different camera angles in mind. ‘06 is on the left and ‘08 is on the right.
If you can really see a significant different then I give you all the credit in the world. But although I think he is maybe just a shade higher than he was in ‘06, I really don’t think there’s as much to it as people are making it out like it is.
Where’s The Difference?
Everyone seems to have an opinion of late about what is different about Phil Hughes mechanics. Surely, everyone is not wrong; there is something different as I established above. But, what no one has nailed down for sure is what exactly has changed. From what I’ve found after some excruciatingly long looks at video clips is something different than what’s previous been talked about. Take a look at these comparisons below. Again, ‘08 is on the right and ‘06 is on the left.
From balance point, to hands breaking, to the point where Hughes’ is about to begin his rear leg lift, there is nothing different worth noting. The top comparison may look slightly different but keep in mind the ‘08 angle is far more straight on. Again, there is nothing significantly changed at this point through his delivery.
The Real Change
I wish I had a better visual for this but stay with me. From the video analysis, it appears Hughes’ mechanic change begins after his rear leg lift. Before that, I don’t see anything that looks like a legitimate difference in his delivery. This, however, is. Check out the picture comparison.
See anything? If you look close I think you will. In ‘06, Hughes throwing right over that front leg. It was firming up beautifully and his rear leg was lifting straight up. I’ve been trying to think of the best way to describe this, but the only thing that keeps coming into my mind is that it looks like his right shoulder is pulling or leading the rest of his body here in ‘08. In ‘06 it was leg drive making his follow through work. Also take note that his head seems to get turned or snapped at the end of his arm action in ‘08. This was not the case in ‘06. His head in ‘06 was still upright and turned toward the plate. In ‘08, his head is being pulled down by his aggressive front shoulder pulling downward. Check out the clip of what I’m talking about.
Some analysts have said Hughes it “cutting himself off”. I think that in a way makes sense. After his release, his arm is snapping straight down to his side for the most part. There’s that and what and the rear leg lift/follow through. So, how do they correlate? Well, here is my theory:
The Phil Hughes delivery of 2006 shows him firming up his front leg, and driving over the top of it. The Phil Hughes delivery of 2008 shows him not quite getting that same drive over a stiff front leg. There is now some more bend in it as he plants and his weight is actually being somewhat resisted by the front leg. This forces his weight and his rear leg to come around his front leg and not so much over it. With his back leg having less work to do, it puts more pressure on his right shoulder to drive the ball downward. See the connection between this and “cutting himself off”? Here’s a good look at what I’m talking about in terms of his rear leg lift. In ‘08, his leg is bending, then dropping down his side. In comparison, in ‘06, his leg lifts up, stays fairly straight and is rotated forward by that firm front side.
My Final Theory
I’ve yet to weigh in on this and stood by while other analysts on the web have examined in. So, what’s my point in this article? A. Too much is being made of other supposed issues in his mechanics prior to his follow through. I hope I was able to ease some Yankee fans fears that there really is no other changes up this point in his delivery. The change I did touch on however, I do think could be a direct cause of his lessened velocity since over the past year. Is it because of the hamstring injury? I can’t say for sure either way, but considering much of my focus in this article has been on that front leg in question, it is certainly possible.
But, the bottom line is right now is that from what I can see, Hughes is pushing against that front leg and not driving over and through it. Hence, the reason for the less aggressive looking follow through with his leg that I pointed out above. The problem is not arm speed, nor is it arm angle or the way his hands are breaking, at least from what I can tell. Through 75% of his delivery, essentially nothing has changed. The leg lift and follow through certainly appear different, though.
Recommendation For Repair
Whether the Yankees want this repaired I don’t know. Perhaps they feel with his delivery his command will be better. What I see, however, besides effecting velocity, it is impacting command as well. With his shoulder pulling downwards towards his left side, it is essentially creating the same situation as pulling off his pitches. And, pulling off, typically causes pitches to leak arm side (In Hughes’ case, in on righty hitters). From watching most of Hughes’ starts, pitches leaking back towards the middle has gotten him in some trouble quite frequently.
So, what to do? I’d say the first step would be taking some pressure off of that right shoulder. And, to do that, Hughes would need to once again be aggressive with his legs and get that high rear leg lift. This will certainly make his bend at the waist much more smooth, rather being pulled down by his shoulder. In my opinion, he simply needs to get his weight transfer flowing smoothly right over and through his front side rather than his weight transfering into that front leg but not over it.
—————————–
I’d like to be clear that this is my opinion. I do not claim to be right at all times; in fact I know I’m not. People have differing mechanical philosophies and I applied mine in this article. I’m making this little disclaimer because I know what a hot topic Hughes’ mechanics have become. This is simply what I view to be the potential mechanical change/flaw behind Phil Hughes’ supposed loss off velocity. Enjoy the article.
21 responses so far ↓
1 River Ave. Blues | Once more unto the Phil Hughes breact // Apr 9, 2008 at 3:31 pm
[…] — the best new baseball blog out there — weighs in on the Phil Hughes velocity debate with a stellar piece dissecting Hughes’ mechanics. Frankie Piliere’s final words are […]
2 Mike R. // Apr 9, 2008 at 3:40 pm
You are the man Frankie! Great Article!
3 Eric // Apr 9, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Mike,
Isn’t Hughes standing straighter in the second set of pictures? use the angle of the knees and thigh if the camera angle isn’t right.
he also looks to be bending back at the waist in the 2006 photo where that isn’t quite the case in 08
4 fpiliere44 // Apr 9, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Eric….its definitely debatable but the difference isn’t really much if there at all. I don’t think it plays much of a part in his problems either way. I do some people that see that as being more of an issue but I just don’t feel it plays that large of a role.
FP
5 jscape2000 // Apr 9, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Nice work.
Do you think his current mechanics are an injury worry?
6 fpiliere44 // Apr 9, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I’m not a doctor but that shoulder movement and the way the arm cuts down to his side, it certainly looks awkward and not natural. Where its an injury concern, I’m not sure but I certainly don’t like how it looks.
7 The Girl Who Loved Andy Pettitte » Blog Archive » Early Irrational Freak Out Time // Apr 9, 2008 at 5:26 pm
[…] Saber Scouting had a bit about his mechanics today that makes me feel a little better. […]
8 CB // Apr 9, 2008 at 7:31 pm
I appreciate the analysis and also appreciate the disclaimer you guys put at the end of the article.
A question on methods however - how do you account for issues of small sample and variance / standard error given the limited video data?
There doesn’t seem to be that much video tape of Hughes from the minor leagues available.
I believe the video posted above is from the futures game - a day hughes threw poorly.
How do you know that his mechanics weren’t just out of whack on that particular day?
Perhaps your investigation went much further and you looked at much more minor league video of hughes that the public doesn’t have access to.
But I can’t imagine there are reams and reams of readily available video tapes of Phil Hughes pitching in the minors.
If you can’t look at extensive video, this seems to me to be an important limitation on the types of inferences that can be derived about mechanics/ performance.
If you don’t have enough baseline “before” data in terms of video tape how can you validly assess changes in delivery when looking at the “after” data of the video in the majors?
This appears to be the same video tape Carlos Gomez used in his assessment of the changes in Hughes mechanics in that article he wrote for The Hard Ball Times about the changes in Hughes mechanics that he claims to have spotted way back last year. At least both were video’s from the Future’s game.
On the you tube video Gomez links to Hughes throws 11 pitches. As I recall Hughes did not throw more than 30 pitches in the Futures Game total.
How can anyone make a definitive statement after looking at the video for 11 pitches? Or even 30? Maybe he was just wrong that day? That doesn’t seem implausible - particularly because he didn’t pitch very badly. He was overthrowing some that game, which is pretty common in the futures game.
Also, it was my understanding that having the lateral video view for a pitcher was fairly important for scouting purposes. I’d guess that when assessing weight transfer over the front leg and how a pitcher firms up his front side that lateral view would be important.
In addition it seems to me highly unlikely that the centerfield camera for two different games would be positioned in exactly the same spot. If the camera happened to be more towards the right field foul poll in the video from the majors couldn’t that make it look like his shoulder angle look different?
This isn’t a criticism. You guys have been very explicit in making your process open to people who read your site which is much appreciated.
It’s a question about the process of drawing inference and conclusions based on limited data.
9 fpiliere44 // Apr 9, 2008 at 7:41 pm
I should have specified this and glad you brought this up. My analysis is represented by these short video clips but they aren’t the sample size I’m working off of. I saw a ton of Hughes live and in person behind the plate when he was in Trenton and a game in the GCL. And, I’ve watched most of his big league starts.
Despite the fact that this is the only video available, I assure you that this is based mostly off what I’ve seen. The video is simply what was available to illustrate this.
I try to steer clear of evaluating guys I’ve only see video of. I can’t agree more with you about sample size. You CANNOT evaluate on short clips. That’s what I mean when i say these were my illustrations, not my references that I based the analysis on. I feel like I’m rambling, does that make sense? lol
Also, to clear up something that i read a lot on the web today. Phil Hughes throwing 95-96 MPH in regular season starts is no myth. I clocked him at that personally, on a standard stalker gun. The velocity decrease is real.
10 Rich // Apr 9, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Could you post a video clip of his 2006 delivery for comparative purposes?
11 fpiliere44 // Apr 9, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Here ya go Rich.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dCoGKkk_njg
It angers me that this is the only clip i can provide. Makes me wish I had taken my own video when watching him in 2006.
12 Top Posts « WordPress.com // Apr 9, 2008 at 8:02 pm
[…] Phil Hughes’ Mechanics: What’s The Deal? By Frankie Piliere[image] When you are the youngest pitcher in Major League Baseball and being touted as the future ace […] […]
13 CB // Apr 9, 2008 at 8:15 pm
“Despite the fact that this is the only video available, I assure you that this is based mostly off what I’ve seen. The video is simply what was available to illustrate this.”
fpiliere44
Thanks so much for the detailed explanation of your evaluation methodology. That makes a lot of sense and really puts my interpretation of what you wrote about Hughes in a very different light.
With the ease of the internet video tape analysis has gained a lot of momentum but issues of sample size and variation are rarely addressed.
Much of this “controversy” about Hughes’ mechanics actually started with that article by Gomez which spread very, very rapidly across the blogosphere and got many people in panic. That article planted the seeds that I think are still growing now.
This is what Gomez wrote in that article:
“I had briefly seen Hughes pitch before, but I needed a closer look. So I went to YouTube, found some video, broke it down and got back to him.”
The notion that in order to take a closer look you examined an 11 pitch video from the futures game when Hughes threw badly does not instill confidence that the conclusions being draw will be valid.
Despite that the analysis got a lot of play.
With the ease of the internet you can see how this type of video tape analysis would become more attractive.
It’s good to hear you guys are taking the methodology issues such analyses raise into account.
I also appreciate how you guys don’t try to be the be all and end all final word on the issues you address.
Great sight. Fun read. Thanks
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/if-it-aint-brokea-video-review-of-phil-hughes-mechanical-changes/
14 fpiliere44 // Apr 9, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Well I appreciate that CB. Before I started doing this, I was kinda miffed by the idea that this video analysis was being read as gospel. If someone had seen a player live but used a video to illustrate, I’d say ok let me check this out. Otherwise, it’s just something else on the internet that anyone can do.
I’ll make a vow right now that I should have already. I will never evaluate someone on here that I have not seen in person extensively. Otherwise, it’s a waste of everyone’s time. Video can lie, as can stills. What doesn’t lie though is something you see repeated over and over again.
I personally think some of the video analysis out there is skewed based on camera angles and sample size.
I’m actually glad you brought this up CB. I hesitated to do these video analysis because it seemed like the new vogue thing that was popping up on the web. But, I think it’s paying off that we decided to do them.
And you’re right; people will disagree and they are by no means wrong. Almost everything in baseball is up for interpretation in some form. This is no different.
FP
15 josh // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:21 am
seems like the first real good analysis on the topic. looks like he is timid and maybe fearful of stretching out the back of the front leg. this is obviously in relaton to the hamstring injury he got when coming over the leg last year. my questions are can he fix it? do you think dave eiland has picked up on this?
his pitches floating to his arm side has been a huge problem. he seems to have a problem keeping the ball in on lefties and as a result is having trouble getting them out.
do you think the leg injury could have caused such a psycological problem that a mechanical flaw like this is irreversible?
16 Travis G. // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:35 am
FP,
here are links to 2 other clips of Hughes from 2006 (from the same game):
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IekTIqjM3Mg
http://youtube.com/watch?v=UGplQomdSl0
does it look the closer to the Futures Game or the 2008 version?
when you say you clocked Hughes at 95-96, does that mean sitting there for the whole game or touching that on occasion?
could the cold weather have to do with his recent decreased velocity?
Thanks
17 claysol13 // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Good stuff! I’m a Pirates fan myself, but would give anything for Joba Chamberlin, love that dude.
http://www.clayton-nichols.com
18 Brad // Apr 10, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Good read - thank you for giving your view on a very topical issue. Posts like this are why I keep coming back - great blog!
19 EJ877 - florida // Apr 10, 2008 at 6:35 pm
I went to see both exhibition games at Dolphin Stadium.
Reviewing all of the pictures I had taken of Phil’s delivery, I thought I had some duplicates in the batch I had taken, but actually Hughes was so good at repeating his delivery, he fooled me into thinking it was the same picture.
In fact his velocity seemed to be just fine in this game, he was very effective.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24587317@N03/2377364259/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24587317@N03/2377360801/
20 justthefacts // May 22, 2008 at 7:00 am
Hughes’ problem is his “intent” with the lower body. Specifically, pelvic loading.
http://i25.tinypic.com/2ynmc20.gif
On the left he is “floating” his femur up into leg lift. Look at how “dead” and limp his lower leg is.
On the right he has a much more aggressive leg lift. Look at the pelvis tilt upward. You know that feeling when you have to urinate really bad and try to hold it in? Well that’s what Hughes is feeling on the right. He is engaging more of his hip flexors and groin muscles.
On the left, he feels like he had just let it all out and his groin region is very relaxed.
Again, about the one on the right. This upward pelvic tilt gets Hughes into his “sit” quicker and smoother. He doesn’t wait for gravity to get him into the sit as he does on the left.
21 Bergeneddi // Jun 4, 2008 at 7:26 am
To me, a shorter stride is the main difference-’06 to ‘08. Look at your 1st set of vids;even with camera slightly higher off grnd in ‘08 you can see Phil’s drag leg is parallel to the grnd in ‘06 but at an angle in ‘08 indicative of a shorter stride. Also, look at his follow thru. He is turned more to 1st base line in ‘08 and probably slightly off balance which would also explain his poorer command. This change may be the result fo his fear of re-injury.
Leave a Comment