I don’t blame Ripken here, a lot of these guys don’t understand video and frames, and he was probably watching side-by-sides initially when he had that idea, and when asking his video analyst to match frames and he watched it, it made total sense to him. Not his fault, it’s just that he doesn’t understand frames and such.
@@rudinah8547 A fastball that leaves the pitcher’s hand at 95mph could drop to 86mph once it reaches the plate, so depending on where the radar gun is aimed, you could get a different result. Nowadays of course, it’s standardized across all ballparks at all levels so no problem.
@@floridaman6281 you're right, I get that radar guns could have inconsistencies too. Seems like he didn't realise he was just picking one inconsistency over another
lmao the Musina Ohtani one Moose released it so much sooner then Ohtani. this whole segment was probably inspired by a bunch of guys doing coke in a room watching film
@@adrnaline He had a better pitching career than Cal too. Billy came in during the time the O's lost like 29-2 against the Rangers and didnt do any worse than anyone else.
I can’t believe MLB Network thought this segment made sense. Have we gotten to the point where we are now rejecting mph because it “looks the same” when we’re watching it on TV?? It is an absolute fact that one guy is throwing faster than another. Sure there’s something to be said about arm angles, stride, height, etc. but it’s absolutely ridiculous that they would just ignore the mph difference. I can’t even.
i mean this is kind of disingenuous, the whole thing that lots of old guys say is that "oh the radar guns are different now, they're not actually throwing harder, we can just measure more accurately now" whether or not there's any merit to that argument, idk if we'll ever know for certain; we can't go back into the past. but oldheads like Ripken and the guys at the Network keep wanting to try and prove it, and this was just a really dumb attempt and proving themselves right. very very dumb, actually, but not because they're arguing MPH; that's the entire point they're making, that the MPHs of the ball aren't different, but the radar gun spits out a different reading of MPH nowadays
What they did is like having 6'0" person stand next to a 6'2" person, then having a person 100 feet away say who is taller. "Oh they look the same height to me" lol.
One thing that is stupid...why use miles per hour? Feet per second would make so much more sense. Miles per hour on a pitch that will travel the length of a driveway in 1 second.
@@swirvinbirds1971 But how many of us routinely drive 90+ mph? Little league pitchers can throw the ball at highway speeds. And it's not like we have an understanding of what mph means over short distances. We know things like "it takes 15 minutes to get to the store going 30mph" or "it takes 2 hours to get to the beach going 60mph". But how long does it take to drive to your neighbor's house at 100mph? It's basically instantaneous. Doesn't really provide much intuitive understanding even if you can mathematically understand that going 100mph will get you there faster than going 95mph. But if you tell someone that a pitcher throws 150 feet per second, they could understand that at that speed they could walk to their neighbor's house in under half a second, and that is very intuitive.
And this is why teams use high speed cameras for pitchers you need insane FPS to pick up actual info. Maybe someone in MLB networks film room should inform their host
Baseball’s media strategy of intentionally belittling its players and their accomplishments is mind-boggling to me. How the hell is any of that stuff helping grow interest in any aspect of the game? It’s infuriating
Tom Koehler who was a pitcher for the Marlins for years said the same thing. He said why does MLB constantly hate on new players while glorifying old players? It's insane. I stopped watching MLB network.
That is a huuuge problem with media covering baseball and the MLB itself not promoting they players and products properly, all that said it is even worst from guys such as Billy Ripken and Steven A Wright , I most of the time take what either one of them say with a ton of salt and scepticism, now with "Baldy" it goes further than egregious with some of the things he says and presents, keep in mind he is on payroll for a Network that covers ONLY baseball, most people are already aware that the ESPN coverage of baseball is appalling and do not fret about it that much but..... Ripken... and some other guys over there. Some comments already here on point: "Sometimes when Billy Ripken talks I zone out" TL:DR ESPN sucks, so does some MLB network content, stick/switch to independent creators/commentators.
What I really like about you Bailey is your reluctance to try and go for the home run with your analysis and instead give a balanced and rational view of the game while still maintaining a clear enthusiasm. Honestly so many guys in your role would feel such pressure to bow to the standard form of analysis but you’re doing your thing and I’m here for it all the way. Great video.
Each mph is said to be 3-4 inches by batters sometimes. For instance, missing a changeup by a foot means you swung at an 89 mph pitch instead of an 85 mph pitch. Randy Johnson's pitches would look 2mph faster based on his release point.
@@maxgreineder9867 they are easily better tenfold. Guardians has no roots, spiders and rocks (rockers, just something with rock and roll HOF) would’ve made so much sense
@@pohorex6834 I'm guessing that they wanted to keep a theme with Native American people, because I think the guardian mascot will be a Native American, but I don't know. Rockers is awesome, but I will always want spiders
@@maxgreineder9867 they won’t keep Native American at all, that’s the issue, is that some culture presumes that any sort of representation of a minority culture is derogatory, even though it was meant to represent the first ever Native American player in the MLB. They aren’t keeping anything Native American, nothing close to it
I feel bad for Billy Ripken sometimes. To him, big bro was always the better of the brothers. His brother got their dad's name, he got the star shortstop role that Billy wanted, he got the HOF plaque. Billy Ripken pulled off a Mathis twice in his career while being an average defender, he probably wanted to "earn" his spot in the majors, but always felt like it was being handed to him simply because of his brothers prowess and not his performance. Meanwhile fans were pointing that out even when he was doing great. In 1987 for the entirety of the season, 22 yr old piss poor player Billy Ripken started at 2B, 27 yr old superstar Cal Ripken Jr. started at SS, and up and coming manager Cal Ripken Sr. managed the Orioles. Billy Ripken was always behind in life, but Billy, this segment doesn't prove that you won't be behind another fastball.
When I was watching this I was saying how inaccurate it was bc of your Willie Mays catch vid where you talked about the inaccuracies of video from years ago and how it’s impossible to tell how much time passed bc of that.
Did Ripken even imagine how insulting he was to the engineers and the courts (for speeding tickets) that created and rely on the speed measuring technologies? To him: they’ve been making up the results the WHOLE TIME.
Except they do make up the results the whole time for legal measurements. Just look at the difference in breathalyzers, and how cops are allowed to "estimate" your speed and then put their estimate down on the ticket saying it was gunned. Its kind of offensive to the most basic level of thought that you trust these people to actually do a good job.
LOVE THIS ENERGY. The way you end it is so important. We should be building each other up. The only reason there are kids in high school throwing 95 now is because of the advancements made by people before them. Jack Leiter, great example. His dad learned a LOT about pitching he was one of the best for his time. The information his dad learned was passed on to him, plus all the technological advancements make it possible for him to be throwing mid 90's consistently before ever even leaving college ball. Truthfully retired players should be proud of how the game is evolving. Their efforts, growth and knowledge made improvements to the game possible.
I was pulling my damn hair out watching this segment live. This segment came off as a big hit piece against new era players to me. God bless you Foolish
It's wonderful to see this guy's passion for the sport. So smart too. Articulate. Why isn't this guy on MLB? As far as a faster fastball=better pitcher. It's one metric. See Adam Wainwright pitch. You probably won't see more than a few pitches over 90 MPH but damn...that's a whole other kind of better pitcher. This is why such a "boring" sport like baseball is infinitely and enduringly interesting.
Absolutely. One of the last true control freaks. You definitely have to give some small part of that credit to Yadi as his batterymate, making sure the ump sees things their way.
Baseball is only boring because only 10 minutes worth of stuff happens in a 3 hour game. Unless you're the kind of psycho that likes watching the 3 true outcomes.
@@bubba200874426 If the only things you considered to be "stuff" are home runs and run scoring hits then yeah. But there's a lot more going on than that. Every single pitch is part of a battle between the hitter and pitcher. If you learn to appreciate good pitching and the deeper strategy of the game it becomes very entertaining. The same can be said on the hitting side, a lot is going on with every pitch if you look past the surface level. Baseball isn't boring, it's just slow paced and we live in a world today where everything is about instant gratification. For me the slow pace makes baseball more tense than any other sport.
Asking for merch like that kinda goes against the whole point of this video. He’s saying Babe Ruth was great in his time, just like all the pitchers shown were. There’s no reason to compare them to today’s players, any player today could go and crush any pitcher back then, but none of Babe Ruth’s contemporaries could do what he did.
Great video! One point I think you could have hit on harder was the Jeff Frye tweet about the radar guns being "juiced". There has been extensive progress in the technology used in baseball (hence the statcast era). How would anyone benefit from the radar guns or cameras being off and giving higher readings? The technology itself just improves and gets better which we can also see from the increase of video frame rates, but he thinks MLB would rather implement stadium-wide hardware that's somehow worse than the technology available 20 years ago when he was still an active player... (had to edit 15 years to 20 years because his last year was 2001)
If you watch the full clip Darling explains that the radar guns they used back in the day measured when it reached the plate not out of the hand like they do today, so when it actually reaches the plate it’s a little slower
Assuming the pitcher throws the ball exactly 60.5 feet away from home, a ball traveling 100mph would need 6050 frames of video available to make an accurate judgement. This means, you'd need approximately 18000 frames of video to correctly judge this (100mph takes about 400ms to reach home plate in baseball). Basically, this segment is working with a margin of error equivalent to that of using a pound of butter when the recipe calls for a teaspoon.
Okay, so let's say hypothetically, the segment is right (which it's not), how do you explain the aveage bullpen throwing harder, now? They only showed ELITE pitchers. The average bullpen back in the 90s threw 80s to low 90s.
What? It’s the same thing dummy. The radar guns used to measure velocity is different. Either that or Barry Bonds was only great because he was facing beer leaguers.
Kyle Hendricks has a sub-90 fastball and was 9th in Cy Young voting last year. Jamie Moyer was throwing mid-80s when he was young and there are guys in the MLB throwing similar velocity today. If you throw mid-80s with extremely good control, you absolutely can still get drafted
I think you made an excellent point when you brought up the fact this segment was on *MLB* Network by someone who played professionally. As you said, if I saw something like this done by espn or somebody not as invested in the sport, it would be easier to give them the benefit of the doubt for their flawed breakdown. If the MLB really wishes to drive interest, they would better off investing in people & personalities that offer fun and thought provoking takes on the sport with statistics & evidence to back them up. You've proven on your channels, that these new age metrics don't have to be weird or confusing to everyday fans if they're presented in a fun & entertaining way.
This really shows the difference between your everyday video editor and a true cinematographer or videographer, the understanding of how the optics and physics work!
Before your analysis, my immediate reaction was thinking, "TV frame rate does not allow us to accurately capture the exact timing that the ball reaches the glove" so glad to see that my brain cells do not get fooled by something like this
The real head scratcher is how they don’t talk about the difference in how radar guns were used to measure velocity. Back in the day they’d clock speed at the plate, now it’s speed out of hand. Don’t remember off the top of my head but I think it’s about 5-7 mph difference. I would imagine this changed sometime in the 90s, so it wouldn’t effect the clips they used, but if you’re going to use video why not use ones from before the change, talk about it to back your point, and then do the dumb ass video line up. It’s like nobody did any kind of homework on this goofy narrative they’re trying to push
Have you ever watched the baseball documentary, "Fastball"? They actually calculated how fast someone like Nolan Ryan was throwing. SInce it was measured in front of home plate, they estimated he was throwing about 108.5 MPH out of the hand. Bob Feller threw about 107.6 MPH. I'm not sure when they started measuring out of the hand rather than about 10 FT in front of home plate, but if Johnson's fastball was being measured close to home plate, he was probably throwing 99-101 MPH rather than 94 MPH.
I recall this difference to be 2-3 mph. Whether it is 2-3 mph or 5-7 mph, the general point still stands. I still agree with Bailey that this "analysis" by mlb network is very bad.
They didn't say Walter Johnson threw harder. In fact looking back on the documentary they said Johnson threw a couple mph slower. But Johnson still threw hard. Clocked at 99.7 mph in 1914
They did say Feller and Ryan threw harder, with Ryan up at 108 -- I can **maybe** believe Ryan threw that hard, since he avoided bats about as well as anyone ever (his issue was the walks), but if Bob Feller was throwing above 105 nobody would have ever hit him.
@@krolik1157 Feller probably topped at 105. The question is what he was averaging. Feller HAD to throw 9 innings. In those days anything but a complete game was considered bad. Feller obviously because of this, couldn't max out. He probably was humming 98 or 99 on average.
@@tjjanosko133 Even that in his prime (1939-1947, with 3 years taken out for military service) -- I mean he led the league in Ks and Ks/9 those years, but he was at like 7.8 K/9 -- He definitely was throwing gas, but if he was really pumping 98-99 on average against pre-WW2 hitting he would have struck out 15 a game. Definitely best fastball of his era, but I thought that "Fastball" doc tried a little too hard to make it seem like Feller and Ryan were throwing at what would be ungodly speeds.
@@krolik1157 he would not have struck out 15 a game and there's a reason for that: I think your forgetting the approach hitters had back then. They'd do anything to not strike out. Unlike today's guys, hitters would actually have a two strike approach and choke up and poke the ball. I think his k rate speaks more to the approach of the hitters than the speed of the pitcher.
13 frames/(30 frames per second) = .43s Ball traveling 60ft / 0.43s = 138 ft/s or 94.4 miles/hr 12 frames/(30 frames per second) = .40 s Ball traveling 60ft / 0.40= 150 ft/s or 102.3 miles/hr 14 frames/(30 frames per second) = .47 s Ball traveling 60ft / 0.47= 127.6 ft/s or 87.0 miles/hr If Billy Ripken fudged the frames it by even 1 frame he could have made 87 look like 102
How the fuck did none of the producers or media guys working at MLB network not pull Billy aside and go “hey, btw, this is stupid as fuck,” and explain how frame rates work to him? You would think someone on set of a multi million dollar media production would have some idea how camera frame rates work.
I could be completely wrong here but I’ve read about how differences in tech in speed guns over the years can affect readings and that a few mile per hour difference comparing pitches 20-30 years apart is pretty difficult
I actually saw this segment before i saw your video and thats why I clicked! While I was watching it i knew there was something off about what he was trying to portray. I kept saying to myself. But the numbers are there! 99 does not look like 94 even if a guy is an inch or two taller. It didnt make sense when I was watching it and i didnt know why! Appreciate the video!
I’m not a video guy so I didn’t even think about the flaws of frame rates. But it was clear as day to me that they weren’t synced. He compared their windups not their actual releases
Very well said and eloquently explained. I also don’t blame Ripken for his misunderstandings about video frames and technology. But MLB Network airing this segment doesn’t surprise me. So many American sports thrive on a promise of nostalgia. NFL Films and 30 for 30 and the like all push this narrative that the sports they’re promoting were great - if not better - in the “good old days.” So it doesn’t surprise me that MLB Network would air a segment with the thesis statement that the new era of pitching isn’t “better” and that we’re freaking out over nothing.
This is so good, Bailey! Also, to your last point, that’s exactly why it drives me insane when people compare Michael Jordan and LeBron James. They played in different eras and should be compared to their peers, not each other. Perfect assessment.
Before I say anything, this video got me to do maths. I hate maths. But I do love Foolish Bailey/Baseball videos. Now, on to maths with a ton of universal constants: 1) Each man throws the ball at 100mph 2) Each is throwing in a vacuum 3) Each pitcher releases the ball at a height equivalent to their maximum height via some miraculous pitching motion which allows them to throw 100mph while standing straight. 4) Each pitch travels in a perfectly straight line from a point at the center of the mound (minus each pitcher's extension) to a point at the center of the plate. 5) The plate is 60.5 feet (726 inches) away from the pitcher and the mound is at a height of exactly 10 inches. 6) A lot of other stuff I'm not smart enough to figure out. Tyler Glassnow - Height (including pitcher's mound): 90 inches - Extension: 88.8 inches - Distance between release point and plate: 643.3578 - Time between ball's release and arrival at plate: .3655s Gerrit Cole - Height (including pitcher's mount): 86 inches - Extension: 79.2 inches - Distance between release point and plate: 652.4900 - Time between ball's release and arrival at plate: .3707s Formulas a= Mound height + Pitcher height b= Distance between mound and plate - extension c= Distance ball has to travel (c=sq. root of (a (squared) + b (squared))) Time between ball's release and arrival at plate, t=c (distance) / 100mph If my maths are right in a vacuum this means Cole's pitch arrives at the plate five hundredths of a second slower than Cole's despite their throwing the same pitch at the same speed. On even the best high-speed over-the-shoulder camera this would give Cole the appearance of being the "slower" pitcher because, remember, their release point is "the same," something Ripken repeatedly emphasizes, as the ball has to travel nearly an extra 1ft to reach the designated point on the plate. After that start factoring in things like elevation, humidity, the ball's release point relative to the center of the mound, the position of the catcher's glove relative to the center of the plate, wind speed and direction, and that butterfly that flapped its swings twenty blocks over. Then add in things like video quality and fps. Oh, and guys throw different pitches To quote the great Phil Rizzuto, "Holy Cow!" Note: Comments on my math are (un)welcome. Mostly because I'm well out of school but still hate getting my homework graded lolz.
I agree with part of your analysis, but I don’t agree players are better than they were before. For example, Jacob deGrom can throw 99.2 MPH on average, but can do so for only 90-100 pitches and 180-200 innings. Do you think deGrom’s and other pitchers’ velocity would be that high if he had to carry Randy Johnson’s workload, let alone Bob Gibson’s? Players play the game in different eras. There are advantages and disadvantages that come with every era. You could say that players from the ‘60’s or ‘80’s couldn’t catch up to deGrom or Cole. Let’s see how fast they would throw if they had to start 35 games and complete 28 of them. Players from past eras would struggle in today’s game. But players used to today’s game wouldn’t last a full season if they played the style they played in 1965 or 1992.
Hey man, you created a new baseball fan during this here pandemic. I've never played baseball in my life since MLB the Show on the PS2, and I've been having a great time getting into it. I just wanted to ask what baseball publications, youtube channels, or news sites do you frequent for decent analysis/mlb news? That could be a solid Foolish Bailey video, but I just want to know for selfish reasons.
Disney just picked up the kid who fixed the Mark Hamill de-age for Mandalorian and MLB would be smart to follow suit and pick up people like you. Really enjoy the balanced take and fair analyses. Keep it up!
100 percent agree, this is the epitome of an old man yelling at his cloud, however, I think there are 2 more things to support your argument. 1) look at the first comparison, especially where the ball ends up for each pitcher (dead center compared to High and inside), even as a C- Geometry student in High School I understand that the Hypotenuse of each pitch is different, and that the adjusted difference of each will not effect the velocity of the pitch, but rather the time it takes to cross the plate (like a car racing on flat ground against a car going up or down a hill trying to reach the same place). 2) there seems to be no evidence or argument that these guys are even throwing the same pitches, totally throwing out the scientific method the segment wants to manipulate to get people to buy in.
the difference in catcher setup is also a factor. some catchers are further back from home plate and some catchers reach more to frame the ball. simply put its hard to use video to measure distance covered of a baseball
Honestly, as a 21 year old, I’m super excited to see where the MLB will be at 10, 20, 30 years from now ability wise. Like how crazy good can pitchers get?
Apparently it takes a 90, 95 and 100 MPH pitch all 400 milliseconds to travel the distance to get to the plate? That based on googled myriad of answers to three distinct questions. That can’t be right though, can someone math that for me?
i watched the segment live and just found it ludicrous that they all took it seriously and never questioned the frames per second or possible errors in the comparison process!
I feel like the main reason that sort of "pitchers throw the same velo as back in the good ol days" is because they have a confirmation bias as to how they used to play the game was the "right way" to play. Ripken is essentially saying "the velo is the same yet all these batters have bad avgs, but we faced the same velo and had great avgs. Guys now days just have a bad approach" to confirm that the way the old guys played baseball is the right way by using misleading evidence and a terrible narrative. I remember initially watching this video and thinking "huh that's weird? and also doesn't make any sense" it just didn't add up, but this video definitely cleared the air.
Ok he says that it’s from the release point, but it’s not the release point, u can clearly see in the Cole vs Johnson that Johnson releases it slightly earlier giving him an advantage, and in Degrom vs Pedro the catcher clearly has to reach for the ball instead of pedros which hit the spot perfect which may make a difference, overall this expierment is impossible to do unless you truly slow it down times 1000, find a catcher set up in the same spot, and pitchers relatively at the same height, because for example the one where it said Pedro threw 97 and Degrom threw 99, from that close a thousandth of a second miscue on the editing can give either guy an advantage.
