Roger Clemens Records Strikeout # 4,763

Who's advising you, Roger?

With your announced investigation of the Mitchell Report, you've taken a page from the Barry Bonds camp for damage control: attack the messenger, a variety of defense known as "ad hominem circumstantial."

Like Bonds, Clemens appears to not want this to go to court on a straight-up basis of defamation of character. Bonds' attempt at this type of defense was to sue the authors of the damning book, "Game of Shadows," not because the authors defamed Bonds, but because Bonds didn't like the fact that they were profiting from his name. The suit died quickly and quietly.

Again I ask, who is advising you, Roger? George Mitchell is, amongst other things, a former federal judge. Just a guess here, but I'm thinking that everything Mitchell did was in keeping with the law and appropriate legal procedure, regardless of the constraints he was operating under. Surely your attorneys aren't smarter or better connected than Mitchell.

This particular action aligns you even more closely with Bonds, Mr. Clemens, and can only end badly for you. Strike one was having your attorney speak in your behalf when first accused. Strike two is your announced plan to "defend" yourself on "60 Minutes" rather than face Brian McNamee in public, under oath, to refute his charges. And this lame investigation of the Mitchell Report makes for strike three, thereby, in my mind, increasing your career total to 4,763.

What a mess you are making of this sad affair.
____________________________________

(C) 2007 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Short quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Conditioning http://www.baseballfit.com/

Roger Clemens & "Sixty Minutes"

Trainer Brian McNamee (via the Mitchell Report) names Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens, both former clients of his, as users of performance enhancing drugs. While disappointed, I was not surprised to hear Clemen's name invoked. Did we really think that Clemens could get better with age, drug-free, while condemning the more obvious cheater, Barry Bonds, who also improved as he aged?

Each of these player’s differing responses has been interesting. Pettitte confessed, saying he only used HGH twice in an effort to aid his recovery from an elbow injury. Clemens initially said nothing, relying on his lawyer to issue a statement denying the charges. A few days later, he issues his own video statement denying the charges. So let me see if I’ve got this straight – McNamee is lying about Clemens, but not Pettitte. Why would he do that?

Click here for the Clemens video. For a more humorous look at the Rocket’s career, click here.

And how's this for blowhard statement of the year:

“I am disappointed that my 25 years in public life have not earned me the benefit of the doubt, but I understand that Senator Mitchell’s report has raised many serious questions.”

Excuse me? Mr. Clemens, you've been making a living playing a child's game. It's not like you've been working in some 3rd-world country for the welfare of the underprivileged all these years. Your employment as a ball player doesn't provide you a free pass with public opinion. Why would it?

In my opinion, Clemens isn’t conducting himself like an innocent man. It seems that few of these guys do. They all start out denying the charges, then, too often, the story ends up differently. (See Rafael Palmeiro and Marion Jones, et al). Why did Clemens take days to deny the charges, and then, at first, only through his attorney? You’d have to think he was informed ahead of time of his being named in the Mitchell Report, so he would have had plenty of time to formulate a response. Then again, how much time does one require to mount a defense in a situation like this?

Baseball has made Clemens very rich. If there is no basis to McNamee’s charges, I assume there is nothing keeping him from using every resource at his disposal, including those legal, to clear his name.

I have not taken steriods, so, with the assumption that I have the money Clemens does, here's how I would have handled things: "Thank you for attending this press conference. I just want to take a minute to say I have never taken performance enhancing drugs. My attorneys will bring suit today against those making these charges, and I will do everything possible to clear my good name." Pretty simple, isn't it?

So Roger, drop the contrived show you’re preparing with “60 Minutes.” You want to really convince us of your innocence? Then testify under oath, perhaps before Congress, and tell us what you did and didn't do. If you want your legacy to survive this mess to any degree, don’t expect thinking people to buy into a staged performance with a TV talking head. It will do nothing for you.

------------------------------------
(C) 2007 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Short quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Conditioning http://www.baseballfit.com/

A Baseball Strength Coach’s Take on The Mitchell Report

I have been speaking out against performance enhancing drugs for years. With the release of the Mitchell Report, I find it necessary to say a few more things. First, I am not pleased that my profession is being dragged through the mud by guys like Brian McNamee and Greg Anderson. These two, and some others like them, cast a shadow over the rest of us who are training ball players the right way.

McNamee appears to have some educational credentials to be a personal trainer, although he is not a CSCS or ATC. Anderson, on the other hand, is nothing more than your garden variety muscle head. His main credential was "friend of Barry."

According to the Mitchell Report, when Anderson met with Giants officials, he identified himself as a "strength weightlifting guru'' and later provided a one-page document showing he had graduated from high school, with additional information "pending.''

The report further stated that Anderson's resume did not reveal, and Giants officials were unaware of, any education or expertise that Anderson might have that would qualify him to train a professional athlete.

Both the National Athletic Trainers' Association and National Strength & Conditioning Association released statements this past week to clarify their roles both in the training of athletes and opposition to the use of illegal, performance enhancing drugs. Individuals holding either of these credentials are expected to uphold these standards.

If you were to visit either of these organization's web sites, http://www.bocatc.org/ (athletic trainers) or http://www.nsca-cc.org/ (strength coaches) you will learn much about the stringent requirements for obtaining, and retaining, certification. Included are professional standards of conduct. You will not find authority for either of these legitimate health care professionals to dispense medications. More on this later.

It is well-established that ball players can enhance their on-field performance with appropriate conditioning and nutrition. Drugs are not required for one to make excellent progress. Yet even while taking banned substances, hard training is required. What these drugs do (steroids, HGH, and the like) is essentially speed up the physical development process, often taking the human body beyond the bounds nature intended. Injuries, including some referred to as "steroid injuries" often result. Drugs are a short-cut that also introduce negative health consequences, to say nothing of the legal and moral issues involved.

I listened to a radio interview of C.J. Nitkowsky, a former Nationals pitcher who had hired McNamee for training. He defended McNamee, saying he’s not the kind of guy to suggest performance-enhancing drug use to players. But, if a player were determined to use them, McNamee would advise them on their use so “they could do it right.” The interviewer asked Nitkowsky why McNamee didn’t refuse to work with clients who wanted such drugs. Nitkowsky’s reply was something about how working with a guy like Clemens is a big deal career-wise for a strength coach, and he couldn’t turn down an opportunity like that.

Well, he could have. He could have insisted that his clients sign something like the following:

“I hereby state that I will not take any substance that is illegal or banned by my sport’s governing body (such as Major League Baseball). Doing so will be grounds for immediate termination of my working, professional relationship with ___________.”

Too bad he didn’t – he might still find employment in the profession. The New York Daily News reported last May that Clemens had fired McNamee. I wonder what McNamee thinks about his career options now.

ESPN columnist Buster Olney wrote a scathing denunciation of the Mitchell Report (click here). He states, “The report is almost wholly absent of a direct examination and assessment of how the decisions of Don Fehr and Bud Selig led us to where we are today.”

Among the questions Olney asks:

· Why did baseball not act decisively after the sport's first steroid scandal, around Jose Canseco, during the 1988 World Series? Why did the owners and union leaders do nothing?· In a 1995 article in the Los Angeles Times, Selig made reference to a meeting in which owners discussed steroids. What was said, specifically, in those meetings? What were owners saying about the change in size in bodies?

· Why was it that when Kevin Towers spoke out loud in the spring of 2005 about how executives in the game had known for years about steroid use, he was admonished by baseball executives? Why did Selig issue a public gag order on executives on the issue of steroids? In fact, there is no mention of Towers' statement in the report.

· There is virtually no information within the report about the players' union deliberations and conversations about steroids during the mid-'90s. Where was Fehr? Where was Orza? What were they saying and doing?

· The commissioner had full autonomy over the minor leagues and could have implemented drug testing at any time. So why did it take 13 years after the Canseco scandal to do so?

Olney’s pointed remarks demonstrate the substantive holes in the Mitchell Report. As Thoreau once said, “There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.” I submit Olney is closer to the root than is Mitchell.

But really folks, what did we expect? Mitchell is an attorney, former politician, Red Sox board member, and “friend of Bud.” What we got was fairly predictable.

HGH For Injuries?

To those players, such as the Yankees’ Andy Pettitte, who claim their HGH use was about trying anything possible to aid their re-hab from injury, I ask, “Why didn’t you go to your team physician for your HGH?” It is clearly inappropriate professionally, as well as illegal, for a strength coach to dispense medication.

These guys all know this, of course. Injured MLB players, particularly front-liners like Pettitte, have access to the best medical care available. Yet he chose to obtain HGH from a guy like McNamee. Then, when his name is exposed, and ONLY then, Pettitte fesses up with his weak “injury recovery” defense.

Frauds Beget Frauds

Selig and Fehr are both equally culpable in this steroids/HGH mess. Why? Because if they REALLY wanted to stop drug abuse in it’s tracks – I mean RIGHT NOW – among the things they could do is simply require all professional players to submit one or more of the following: a urine, blood, or hair sample. Whatever the experts, like WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency), recommend. Click here for WADA’s take on the Mitchell Report.

These samples could be properly stored for as long as they are viable (2 years? 3 years?) with players submitting new ones as required by current, state-of-the-art drug detection methods and procedures. Later on, when a reliable HGH test is developed, these samples could then be tested by a competent independent agency NOT affiliated with MLB.

The key, of course, is that any player who subsequently tests positive receives, retroactively, the maximum penalty, along the lines of what Olympic cheats undergo. A two year banishment from their sport with all of their records and awards stripped from them. Players who are clean will have nothing to worry about.

Of course, MLB might just have some worries using this approach, what with the potential of having a few dozen of its star players out of commission for a couple of years, probably playing in some foreign league to keep their skills intact for their expected return to MLB. Sort of like what the NFL’s Ricky Williams did.

This is hardly the ideal solution, of course. Are there “right to privacy” issues under such a system? Yes. Olympic style testing has not eliminated cheating, but it has, unquestionably, reduced it. Imagine the Olympics using MLB’s lame testing system. Now imagine MLB using the Olympic testing model. Until MLB institutes something with real bite, it will be business as usual with the cheaters. Word is that Selig and Fehr will be meeting in early ’08 to discuss “improvements” to the current testing system. We shall see.

What’s strange about all of this is that the MLB player’s union appears to think it is somehow serving their players by being so intransigent on the matter of testing. I wonder what Rafael Palmeiro and Mark McGwire think about how their union is working for them these days.

While the player’s union would be unlikely to go along with this approach (until forced to, by Congress?), Selig should be savvy enough to use that fact against the union. He could propose something like the above, and the minute the union opposes it, say, “See? We’re trying, but those guys are not cooperating!”

Such an approach can only increase pressure from the public and Congress on the union to make needed reforms – if that’s what’s really wanted. Selig’s failure to do something like this makes me question his motives. I heard Selig, on the radio, reply to a question about how the Mitchell Report might affect MLB. His reply was what I took as a dismissive comment about how this too, shall pass, and next year they’ll likely break the attendance records set this year.

If that’s the only point to MLB, making money, then Selig’s probably right. And if this is ownership's primary criteria in judging Selig's performance, we're in for more of the same, at least for the near term. Nothing substantive will change. MLB players will continue to produce inflated numbers, and its credibility will continue to suffer.

Many may ask, “What’s the big deal?” with all this attention to drugs and MLB. After all, it appears that no one much cares about the unnatural physical specimens routinely found on NFL playing fields. I say it’s a big deal for two reasons.

The first is because of the nature of the game of baseball. It is, essentially, a game of failure. It’s 9 players (defense, with the ball) against one (the batter). The team or player who fails the least generally wins. In what other sport will a success rate of only 30% qualify you for its Hall of Fame?

Because of this, baseball tracks its numbers carefully. With all of this “failure,” you’ve got to find something positive. So, as a baseball hitter, history tells us that failing 7 times out of 10 is actually a pretty good level of performance, and not many attain it. After all, we are told, hitting a 90 mph fastball is the single hardest thing to do in all of sports.

So baseball tracks its numbers, and these numbers are used to evaluate performance, more so than in any other sport. We fans ascribe a level of honor to the few players who attain certain standards. Standards that are perceived to be obtained naturally, not distorted by drug use. Even casual fans of baseball could probably tell me what some or all of the following numbers mean:

300 3,000 500 755 (admittedly, a number much in the news of late)

Still not sure about this? Then tell me - what are the equivalent numbers in football or basketball? What’s the NFL career record for rushing touchdowns? Who holds it? Same for basketball – who is the career NBA points leader? How many points did he score? It’s just not the same as with MLB’s numbers.

The second reason this matters is more obvious – it’s about enforcing rules. What’s the point of having rules if you’re going to look the other way when they’re broken? This only promotes more cheating, and certainly sends the wrong message to any player who aspires to become a big-leaguer some day. For the numbers to matter, and for the rules to matter, MLB has to do all that it can to foster a “level playing field” and those found to have violated the rules must be penalized in some meaningful way.

Time for An * ?

The well-intentioned, but essentially toothless Mitchell Report leaves some unresolved issues, not the least of which is, “What do we do about all of it?” My suggestion is this: an asterisk next to any player’s name who participated in what is considered to be “The Steroid Era.”

For baseball’s numbers to mean anything, some perspective has to be introduced. Without steroids, I highly doubt any player approaches 70 home runs in a season again. Alex Rodriguez, presumed to be un-enhanced by drugs, may break Barry Bond’s tainted career home run record, but he has never threatened the 70 in-a-season-mark, and probably never will.

So let the “records” stand, but with an asterisk. An asterisk perhaps penalizes innocent players, which is unfortunate, but it also introduces some perspective. This way, future generations can know more about how a bunch of guys distorted the record books with artificially inflated numbers of home runs hit, and how more players were able to perform at older ages than previously seen, enabling them to add to their career numbers and pad their bank accounts in the process.

Everyone will know why two particular guys had 70+ home run seasons, and it really wasn't because they were so much better than their peers.

With an asterisk next to their “records,” people can better understand how Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds improved their level of play as they got older, when such a thing had never happened before, in baseball or any other sport.

It could also make " clean" player's numbers that much more impressive - that they were accomplished during a time of rampant cheating. The problem, of course, is that we'll probably never know for sure who was clean and who wasn't, with a few obvious exceptions.

While there is evidence that drug use goes back to the 70s, I suggest an asterisk for the years 1988 (when Jose Canseco “came out” of the steroid closet) through at least 2007, or whenever MLB properly deals with the HGH issue. Until it does, pro baseball in this country has devolved into something akin to a goofy video game, with hulking super-heroes possessing amazing powers, performing incredible athletic feats mere mortals never could.

So ball players, coaches, and parents, don't let the few trainer "bad apples" spoil your view of the honorable professions of athletic training and strength & conditioning. Do your due diligence prior to selecting a professional to work with, and look for one in particular who is up-front about their opposition to the use of performance enhancing drugs.

-------------------------------
(C) 2007 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Short quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Conditioning http://www.baseballfit.com/

Ball Players & Creatine: Yes or No?

I recently received this question via email:

"Can/should athletes above the age of 16 safely use
Creatine supplements to enhance their workouts?"

They don't need to. Their body is naturally creating enough Creatine to serve them very well. I don't recommend the use of Creatine for anyone under the age of 25 or so. It is at approximately this age that endogenous Creatine levels begin to decline.

It's the same with testosterone and growth hormone. Teenagers have plenty of both hormones. Appropriate training, rest and nutrition will enable most any player to make excellent progress in their strength and conditioning without the use of any of these substances.

Creatine directly fuels the energy system used by ball players, so from a "scientific" standpoint, it can help. But younger players already have sufficient natural stores of this compound in their body, and cramming more in won't help. It could hurt.

For the record, I am not opposed to the judicious use of Creatine for older ball players and people in general. Our natural production of this nutrient declines with age, so reasonable supplementation can be a great benefit to this population. I'm 51, and take 5 gms/day. It makes a noticeable difference in my energy level in general, and weight workouts in particular.

Regards,
Steve

(C) 2007 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Short quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Conditioning - http://www.BaseballFit.com

Sore Arms: What You Need To Know*

“My son/daughter has a sore (elbow or shoulder).
What’s the best way to handle this?”

With more games being played, due, at least in part, to the expansion of travel ball and fall leagues, arm problems for young ball players are becoming more prevalent. According to Dr. Glenn Fleisig of the American Sports Medicine Institute (www.ASMI.org) there are two major “thresholds” where he sees more arm problems:

• With pitchers who play for 8 months per year, or more

• With pitchers throwing 85 mph or harder

Major League Baseball starts in mid-February (pitchers), and, except for teams in the playoffs, ends by October. A total of about 6 months. A LOT of games in those months, but a lot of downtime thereafter.

Are the number of games your kids are playing approaching that of these highly skilled, physically mature adults?

As for throwing 85+ mph, well, of course, we want pitchers to throw this hard, and harder. At this level of velocity, however, the structures of the arm undergo greater forces and stress. If not properly cared for, problems are inevitable.

There are three primary causes of arm pain/problems:

1) Overuse – too many practice sessions and games, too many innings pitched. All of which adds up to insufficient recovery time.

2) Improper mechanics - Overhand throwing is a bio-mechanically un-natural act, even when done with what are considered to be good mechanics. When things are not being done properly, problems increase dramatically.

3) Poor conditioning - Proper strength and flexibility work can help prevent arm problems by “toughening” the ligaments, tendons, and muscles thereby making them more injury resistant. Ultimately, though, excessive and incorrect use will overwhelm even the best conditioned arm.

Arm Injuries

There are a number of maladies that can afflict overhand throwers, especially pitchers. Listed here are several of the more common ones that many ball players will experience during the course of their career. For some good pictures of each of these conditions, go to: http://www.BaseballFit.com/sore-arm.htm

Bursitis - Bursae (plural; singular is bursa) are fluid-filled sacs that cushion areas of friction between tendon and bone or skin. Bursitis is the inflammation of one or more bursa.

Tendinopathy - Any disease or dysfunction of a tendon. Refers to two conditions that can occur together: tendon inflammation, known as tendinitis, and tiny tears in the connective tissue in or around the tendon, known as tendinosis.

Tendinitis – inflammation of a tendon. The white areas on each end of the muscle are its tendons, which connect muscle to bone. Considered to be a rare condition. [1]

Tendinosis – a more serious condition characterized by degeneration (not inflammation) of the collagen fibers in the tendon due to excessive wear and tear. More common, and more difficult to treat, than tendinitis.

Comparing Tendinosis To Tendinitis

Tendinosis Very Common	Tendinitis Very Rare
Takes longer to heal - months/years	Quick to heal - 14 days or less
Treated with therapeutic exercise	Aggravated by exercise
Irritated by NSAIDs	Helped by NSAIDs
Shows up black on a MRI (T1)	Shows up white on an MRI
Degenerative	Inflammatory
Usually feels better after proper training	Hurts to move at all
Responds well to electric stimulation and heat	Irritated by heat
Irritated by ice	Responds well to ice

Impingement Syndrome - the diagnosis given for shoulder pain that is the result of tissues that get "pinched" or "impinged." This pinching occurs when the shoulder joint no longer stays centered in the socket as the arm is raised, as in the overhead throwing motion of a baseball or softball player. Can be caused by imbalances of strength and flexibility between various muscles in the shoulder.

Medial epicondylitis – also known as pitcher’s elbow, golfer's elbow, and tennis elbow. Caused by damage to the tendons that bend the wrist toward the palm (flexion). The most common symptom of ME is pain along the palm side of the forearm, from the elbow to the wrist, on the same side as the little finger.

Can be caused by inflammation from too much repetitive activity, like throwing, or from a breakdown of tendon fibers known as tendonosis (see above).

Pain vs. Soreness

When is pain serious? When you can no longer perform your normal activity - like throwing - and/or the pain causes you to adjust from your normal mechanics to compensate for the pain.

Post-activity pain, such as that which is ordinarily felt after training or competition, should dissipate within 24-48 hours. Pain persisting beyond this time should be referred to appropriate medical authority. At this point, trying to "tough it out" can lead to more serious injury.

Basic Recovery Regimen

When arm problems occur, this is the course that will likely have to be followed:

1) Stop any activity causing pain. Recovery time will vary; can take weeks to months.

2) When pain is gone, begin appropriate strength and conditioning work to re-hab the structures involved.

3) After a minimum of 6-8 weeks of S & C work, begin activity (throwing) again.

There are NO shortcuts through this process. It is better to err on the side of extra recovery time rather than rushing back prematurely and risking re-injury. The good news is that appropriate strength and conditioning can help ball players to both prevent as well as recover from most throwing injuries.

1. Khan KM, Cook JL, Taunton JE, Bonar F. Overuse tendinosis, not tendonitis. The Physician & Sports Medicine 2000;28(5):38-48.

*This report is not intended to diagnose or treat a medical condition. It is presented for informational purposes only. If you are experiencing arm pain/problems, seek the advice of appropriate medical authority.

---

(C) 2007 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Short quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Conditioning www.BaseballFit.com

Review of the 2007 College World Series

PART FIRST

To me, college baseball is the best thing the sport of baseball has going right now. MLB has become a farce, and I have nothing against youth, high school, or international baseball (which I think has great promise). They're all great. I just think college baseball is the best game in town. And I'm sure many of you could make solid arguments against this premise of mine.

Yet on 6/25/07 at 6:30 PM CST, when I happened to visit ESPN.com's home page doing some research for this report, there was NOTHING to be found on the College World Series. Hardly 24 hours had passed since the Oregon State Beaver's completed their second straight conquest of the University of North Carolina.

As I scrolled down the page, carefully examining the various sports news offerings, I found links for college football and college basketball. One sport completed its season 3 months ago, with the other due to begin two months hence. But nothing about an event covered by ESPN TV itself, presumably a fairly prominent story, barely a day old.

I'm sure I don't know much about how the world really works. So forgive me for finding it hard to believe that the interest level in college basketball at this time of year is such that it requires several links on a major sports news venue, while college baseball doesn't rate even one, in the midst of baseball season. Go figure.

PART SECOND

So, in case you hadn't heard, Oregon State has just won their 2^nd consecutive College World Series. I have to admit that this is pretty impressive and amazing to me. Last year, I considered them an anomaly. Now they've accomplished something that has been done only 4 times previously in the 60 year history of the CWS: winning back-to-back titles.

In 2006, everything was in perfect alignment for them – the planets, the stars, the players and coaches, even their competition. This was OSU’s moment, and we would never hear much from that program again. I predicted to a few people that they would never again qualify for a college world series, let alone win another one. Certainly not in 2007, which appeared to be a re-building year for the Beavers. Order and tradition would once again prevail in college baseball.

I could not have been more wrong. Overcoming some serious mid-season adversity, OSU responded like warriors and champions, finishing off the formidable University of North Carolina – a basketball school, fer cryin’ out loud, in two straight games. What's next - the University of Indiana as the 2008 CWS champ? (No offense, IU fans!)

Here’s my quick take on the eight CWS teams:

· Arizona State – traditional baseball power, Pac 10 team

· CS Fullerton – traditional baseball power, California-based team

· UC Irvine – good baseball school, first CWS appearance, California based

· Mississippi State – traditional baseball power, from SEC, arguably the best baseball conference in the country

· U of Louisville – a football/basketball school, first CWS appearance. Not a baseball power; had a heck of season. After watching them destroy Oklahoma State in their Super-Regional, they were my “dark horse” team to win it all

· Rice University – traditional power, Texas based school

So the usual baseball power-house areas (AZ, CA and TX) and conferences (Pac 10 and SEC) were all represented. No big surprise.

But for the past two years now we've had two teams playing for the CWS title with the following line ups:

1) OSU had one starter from Northern CA. The rest were from the states of Oregon and Washington.

2) North Carolina, the basketball powerhouse, had a starting lineup composed of all North Carolina natives! No one from TX or Florida, states they are relatively close to.

I know nothing about the recruiting practices of either of these teams. I don’t know what priority they place on seeking players from the traditional power, warm-weather states. But two things are obvious – they place a great deal of emphasis on getting local players, and once they get them, they do an impressive job of developing their skills further. Pat Casey and Mike Fox can flat-out coach.

One (or both?) of them should be coach of the year. Last year it was Casey; maybe this will be Fox's year.

Note to players (and parents): regardless of where you live, if either of these two schools contacts you about playing for them, listen very carefully to what they have to say

The world, sports and baseball included, is changing, isn’t it? First, a minority rises to the top of professional golf. Now the seats of amateur baseball power appear to lie not in the deep south or on the west coast, but in both the Pacific Northwest and the state of North Carolina. What’s next – a white guy as the #1 selling rap musician?

---

(C) 2007 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Short quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Academy - www.BaseballFit.com

Has The Time Come For A MLB Combine?

Imagine you’re a baseball GM. Albert Pujols and Babe Ruth are available. Which of these two do you pick to build your team around?

It is interesting to me how the various professional leagues go about evaluating prospects for their draft days. Perhaps there is something for baseball, and MLB in particular, to learn from the NFL and their scouting combine approach.

Given the expense associated with the high “washout” rate for baseball draftees (above 50%) you’d think MLB would be interested in improving what is essentially a "crap shoot" of a system.

The NFL scouting combine has grown in scope and significance from its early days, allowing personnel directors to evaluate upcoming prospects in a standardized setting. Its origins have evolved from the National, Blesto and Quadra Scouting services in 1977, to the media frenzy it has become today.

In 1985 all 28 NFL teams decided they would participate in future National Invitational Camps with the goal of sharing costs for the medical examinations of draft eligible players. They also use this setting to evaluate prospects in a variety of tests, which include the following:

• 40 yard dash

• Bench press

• Vertical jump

• Broad jump (standing long jump)

• 20-yard shuttle

• three-cone drill

• 60-yard shuttle

• Position-specific drills

• Interviews

• Physical measurements

• Injury evaluation

• Drug screen

• The Cybex test

• The Wonderlic Test

Approximately 335 total athletes are selected to attend each year, by invitation only. Participants are determined annually by a Selection Committee. The directors of both National and BLESTO scouting services are joined by members of various NFL player personnel departments to form the committee.

The participating NFL executives can rotate on a yearly basis, and remain anonymous. ALL eligible players are reviewed and voted on by the committee members. Each athlete receiving the necessary number of votes, by position, is then extended an invitation.

The closest MLB has come to this "combine" concept occurred almost 100 years ago. In 1921, Popular Science Monthly published the results of a study they performed on Babe Ruth.

According to Marcus Elliot, MD of the Peak Performance Project in Santa Barbara, CA:

“… the Babe Ruth testing was more appropriate and more intensive than anything any professional team is doing now.”

As reported in the September 2006 issue of GQ, these experiments were replicated on the St. Louis Cardinals’ Albert Pujols. The results are very interesting.

These are the original tests the Babe went through, which Pujols performed at Washington University in St. Louis in the spring of 2006:

· Bat speed: Swinging a 54 oz bat, the Babe clocked in at 75 mph. Pujols, swinging a 31.5 oz bat, was at 86.99 mph.

· Letter cross-out: Pujols was given a sheet of jumbled text and told to cross out all the A’s as rapidly as possible. According to the author, the test was not “well normed” in Ruth’s day, making comparison’s with Pujols impossible. Pujols’ results indicated he possessed “extraordinary binocularity,” a key visual attribute for hitters.

· Pegboard: This test assesses fine motor control and speed. It involves inserting as quickly as possible 25 steel pegs into holes punched in a plain metal box. Ruth’s score was off the charts; Pujols’ was considered high average.

· Digit/symbol substitution: Involves converting weird symbols into numbers, as many as possible in one minute. Both Ruth & Pujols made average scores. On a separate part of the test, in which one simply copies the symbols, Pujols score was off the charts.

· Finger tapping: with your dominant index finger, you depress a tapper as many times as possible in 10 seconds. Both Ruth and Pujols scored in the 99th percentile.

There is a lot of valuable testing being done by various experts that is largely ignored by MLB. Still, might we someday see a MLB combine, similar to the NFL’s, which measures attributes such as the above? Surely it would benefit pro and college baseball to have a standardized setting in which medical and performance evaluations can be made.

Why might this not happen? Well, for one thing, it would take a good pile of $$. Yet to me, this concept appears to be a business waiting to happen. Top players could be invited, as with the NFL combine. They could choose to participate or not. When a particular player declines to participate, another can be selected. This would likely give players an opportunity to be "discovered" that they might not otherwise have.

Regardless, the structure would be fairly easy to develop. MLB and maybe the NCAA could assume the costs of the operation; participants could pay a modest fee. Or, the creators of the combine would collect their data and charge MLB and college teams for access to it.

Medical and relevant performance tests for ball players would be administered, just like the NFL combine. The baseball combine could continue to monitor the careers of participants, which would help determine the reliability and predictive value of the data collected.

Here’s my suggested list of what a MLB Combine might use in their player evaluations. I’m sure there are other useful tests that could be included:

• Most/all of the above Ruth/Pujols tests

• A test that measures emotional maturity

• Running speed, straight-line and on the base paths

• Throwing velocity, all positions

• Bat speed for all hitters

• Agility and quickness tests for IF and OF

• Visual acuity/depth perception

• Tests to measure body-core strength

• A drug screen

Can a greater number of prospects be identified this way, with more objective testing? Of course. This doesn’t mean that scouts are no longer needed. With the above information, scouts could have more objective tools at their disposal for player evaluation.

Developing a data base of norms for these tests could usher in Money Ball, Part 2. Each team would define the attributes most important to them, much as they do now, and select prospects accordingly

In any case, it would appear that you would do well in choosing either Pujols or Ruth!

________________________________________________________________________________________________

(C) 2007 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Conditioning - www.BaseballFit.com

The information contained herein is the opinion of the author based on his personal observations and years of experience. Neither Steve Zawrotny or Baseball Fit assume any liability whatsoever for the use of or inability to use any or all of the information presented on this website.

Why MLB Is Reluctant To Change

A question I occasionally hear is “If weighted baseball training is such a good idea, why aren’t more players and teams using this type of training? Why isn't professional baseball?” Well, I hear from pro ball players all the time that more players and teams ARE using weighted baseballs as part of their training. The process is slow, but progress is being made. At the NCAA D-1and other college divisions, they are more widely used.

Of the four major league sports, baseball is the slowest to adopt new methods in any aspect of the game. For evidence, read “Money Ball,” a book that has been largely ignored by MLB. This aversion to change is widely acknowledged. But why is this so? Here's my theory.

I’ll start by saying it has little to do with tradition. MLB will change its policies/procedures in a NY minute if it can make more money in the process.

It has everything to do with the people who run the system. MLB is the ultimate “good ol’ boys” club. While this may seem obvious, there are some deeper issues at work. To illustrate, let’s compare MLB with the NBA and the NFL.

Every player that enters the NBA and NFL has anywhere from 2-4 years of college education. In recent years, the NBA has been drafting more high school players, but these are a distinct minority. How diligent athletes are in becoming educated is perhaps debatable, but recent NCAA D-1 statistics indicate a graduation rate of 62% for all athletes vs. a 60% rate for non-athletes. The NFL, of course, does not draft high school players.

In the early years of the MLB draft, more high school than college players were selected. In recent decades, opportunities to attend college have greatly expanded, with more players going the college route. Therefore, more college players are being drafted (for several reasons). The number of high school players drafted now comprises about 30-35% of the total.

Question: Where do the coaches, managers, and executives who run professional sports come from? Overwhelmingly, from the ranks of former players. Money Ball notwithstanding, few decision makers in MLB are outsiders.

So what might we learn from all of this?

That the pool from which the future leaders and decision makers in MLB are coming from is not particularly well educated! These guys have not been much exposed to “higher order” thinking or the scientific process (as opposed to most every NBA and NFL player and coach).

If you want to be a head coach at most any level of college sports, a degree is required, often an advanced degree. It is not unusual for college head coaches to hold Master's and Doctoral degrees. You occasionally hear the TV talking heads discuss a college coach's educational background. When was the last time you heard a discussion on some MLB manager's academic achievements?

So, like all of us, baseball coaches and managers teach what they know. And, like most of us, they are slow to change their ways. Perhaps this will change as the trend of drafting more college baseball players continues.

Don’t misinterpret what I am saying. This is not about educational elitism. I’ve encountered enough “degreed” dimwits over the years to know that formal education has its limitations.

But you can’t teach what you don’t know. So, if

• Your educational background is limited, and

• You’re not really into SELF-education, and

• You don’t have the background to properly interpret scientific
  data,

and

• You have poor communication skills

Then you’re more likely to be suspicious of new ideas and techniques, and reluctant to adopt them, regardless of all the positive evidence that may exist for an idea. Such a person may also have limited teaching skills as well, further hampering the process of transferring new concepts.

So what we have with MLB is an entrenched, self-perpetuating mindset that is not particularly open to new ideas, unless there is obvious financial benefit.

Keep all of this in mind the next time you hear the question, “If (insert new idea here) is such a good idea, why isn’t professional baseball doing it?” Most certainly, DO NOT judge the value of an idea based on MLB’s view of it. Do your own independent research instead. You’ll be better served.

IMPORTANT DEFINITION:

Arm STRENGTH: A euphemism that denotes how hard a player throws, or how good his/her arm is. For baseball and softball skill evaluation purposes, it has nothing to do with muscle strength.

---

(C) 2006 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Conditioning - www.BaseballFit.com

The information contained herein is the opinion of the author based on his personal observations and years of experience. Neither Steve Zawrotny or Baseball Fit assume any liability whatsoever for the use of or inability to use any or all of the information presented on this website.