Dave Eiland Interview on Sirus Radio
I have audio streaming block so I am not sure the exact details, but the website has the following description:
Dave Eiland, new Royals Pitching Coach, discusses his approach with his new pitching staff and facing Prince Fielder and Miguel Cabrera in the same lineup on First Pitch.
4 months ago
Jeff Zimmerman
50 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
If he didn't say anything about long-toss in this interview, I want him fired immediately
That goes double for “pitching downhill.”
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 25, 2012 11:51 AM EST reply actions
Scott
You need to go talk to your local colleges pitching coach. Ask him what he thinks of pitching downhill and long toss.
You know what I'd like to do? (if this were realistic)
I’d like to ask all MLB pitching coaches, 100 minor league pitching coaches and 100 college pitching coaches the following questions:
1. What long-toss program do your pitchers follow?
2. How important do you think that long toss program is?
3. Do you think a long toss program which involves throws from longer distances improves pitcher control?
Then after I’d made them watch hours of Royals pitchers pitching over the last few years, I’d ask:
4. Do you think these pitchers are sufficiently pitching downhill?
So far I have your personal opinion that Royals pitchers and prospects don’t do enough long toss or do it from sufficient distances. And I’ve read that some others agree that more intense long ross programs are a good thing. Clearly some others disagree. Which side is right? Am I just to assume that you and those agree with you are right and the Royals are wrong? I’m perfectly willing to conclude that the Royals are or have been wrong with their LT program, but I don’t think there’s nearly enough information out there to prove one way or another.
I also have your opinion that Royals pitchers don’t pitch downhill enough. There’s also nothing to support that other than your opinion. You may well be right, but I can’t just assume this is true.
I joke about your long toss and pitching downhill fixations because you a) repeat them very frequently, and b) jump to pretty grand conclusions about both.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 25, 2012 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I seriously can not rec this enough...
Science can prove over and over again that human error exists in many forms.
I am the one who knocks.
I think I can tell when someone is pitching downhill and not pitching downhill.
But when it’s somewhere in between, I’m not sure I could evaluate that. For example, I always think of Chris Young as a good example of a big, tall pitcher who doesn’t pitch downhill—which apparently makes his fastball straight. The opposite of this would be Lincecum, who is smaller, but pitches downhill, therefore getting a downward angle on his pitches. What I see when pitchers don’t pitch downhill is probably mostly timing. It seems that they don’t stay tall long enough, so that when their release point comes, they’re already too low/too far along in their delivery.
This is just my layman’s understanding, and I have to admit, it’s partly based on a segment I saw on MLB Network with Dan Plesac a while back. It really resonated with me.
Also, is pitching downhill always better?
If pitching downhill means that the pitcher has a higher armslot, do we always want pitchers to pitch from high armslots? If pitching downhill is necessary (or at least extremely important) for pitcher success does that mean that we shouldn’t let any pitcher pitch from a 3/4 armslot, or sidearm? Is a high 3/4 armslot necessarily worse than an over-the-top armslot? This “maximize downhill pitching” idea seems overly simplistic.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 25, 2012 2:27 PM EST up reply actions
Guys who throw from low three quarters and below
do so mostly because they get more sink on the ball and that is what keeps them alive. A guy like Ziegler. A guy like Bradford. The reason they got to the bigs is because they throw from there and have tremendous sink. The data over the last 10 years suggests that an average MLB hitter will hit around .220 when the ball is 4 inches above the knee and below. That doesn’t matter if it’s inside or outside or middle. That in itself tells you to pound the bottom of the zone. Now, there are a few (less than 10%) hitters that feast on that pitch. You pitch those guys different. But ever then, 1 out of 9 in the lineup is going to hit .300 and the rest hit .220? You will be successful. What pitch do guys wait for? Something they can get leverage on and elevate.
Now, I’ve sent Scott info on both sides of the argument, I’ve given you personal testimony and testimony of others including your favorite pitching coach™ Bob McClure, you just have to read the data and do the work to find out more. If other people want info, I’ll mail it to you too.
Long toss helps to develop the arm and should be started in the teenage years. The arm is like any other muscle group. You work it out, it’ll get stronger. My bench max is 335. If i go and lift reps at 120 and do it until I get tired, am I going to get stronger or am I going to have more endurance? That’s a similar question to this. If my LT max is 300 feet and I only throw in a 120 foot program, what’s going to happen to my 300 feet? It’s going to get shorter? Right? And when that happens I start to lose velocity, just a little at a time. Then all the sudden I’m maxing my velo out at 88 and everyone is talking about me on the internet.
Come spend a week with me this summer Scott. We’ll work through this downhill angle vs. long toss vs. 120 vs what teams are doing and what they aren’t.
Another interesting topic in the pitching world these days is do you anchor the foot on the rubber? And by that I mean, do you put one spike on the rubber and allow the foot to tilt forward to help generate power or do you use the traditional foot flat and in front of the rubber? Something to watch on MLB pitchers this year….
by 306008 on Jan 25, 2012 3:26 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I've got several articles on it
But I can’t send you links because they are protected. I’d have to send you snail mail copies or scan them.
doesn't playing snooker make your better at playing pool?
I don’t know that the muscle analogy works here…
wait, are you for or against long-toss?
I am the one who knocks.
Now, I’ve sent Scott info on both sides of the argument, I’ve given you personal testimony and testimony of others including your favorite pitching coach™ Bob McClure, you just have to read the data and do the work to find out more.
It seems like there are a good deal of people on both sides of both the argument. I didn’t find either argument so compelling that it appeared clearly to carry the day. So how am I to come to the conclusion that one side is clearly right and the other is clearly wrong? My gut feeling? Your gut feeling?
Obviously long toss is important. Every pitching coach is in favor of it. The question is how long the LT should be and perhaps the duration or reps. Is it clear what length and duration/reps is just right? You think it is X. Many MLB organizations think it is more like 75% of X or maybe even 50% of X. Again, the available information doesn’t show me that clearly one or the other is the right way or best way.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 25, 2012 5:04 PM EST up reply actions
It's clear to me that there's no simple answer.
People have different bodies and different arms. The important thing is to find a routine that works—which is why we can probably all agree that drafting a pitcher that does long toss and then changing his routine is ill-advised.
Unless, perhaps, his particular LT program involves such long distances and number of reps that it’s dangerous in that it risks injury because of the strain it puts on the arm.
In general, I can’t say I agree with the assertion that when a pitcher is drafted, he should be allowed to stick with whatever strength and conditioning program he’s been doing.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 25, 2012 5:25 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think most LT programs involve specific distances
But it does involve reps. Kinda of like lifting weights.
You start out at a comfortable distance (i.e. 150 ft) until you can do 10 throws in a row on-target and on-the-fly. Then you move up 10-20 feet until you can do 10 reps there. Repeat until you hit your limit.
That’s the way all my coaches did it anyway, and they all stressed that it was not a one-size-fits-all system.
you're looking at like 800 throws to get up to 300 feet
which is what most consider ‘long toss’
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jan 25, 2012 10:48 PM EST up reply actions
Part of what the Royals and Monty had their big long toss disagreement about
…was the distances. Monty was used to a very long distance, which some support as the best LT program. The Royals like shorter distances.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 25, 2012 11:21 PM EST up reply actions
Liked 120 ft.
Which is in no way long toss, that’s shorter than the distance from home to 2nd base.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk
They say if you can throw 300 feet you can hit 90
it’s a poor mans radar gun. I’m not sure how much truth is in that statement, but it’s fairly close which is more than nothing.
That sounds like a terrible idea
Why would they think that one program is the right fit for each player? It’d be like forcing Alex Gordon and Alcides Escobar to lift the same weights.
Why would anyone think that a given program is the best?
306008 and others think that a given long toss program is the best. That’s what pitchers should do, period. If those people ran a MLB organization and they drafted a pitcher who did much less LT and from shorter distances than the organization prescribed, they’d tell him to scrap his program and do their LT program.
If you think a given program is the right way, then do you just scrap that and let a player do whatever he’s been doing? Why would you do that? Clearly they didn’t think his program was best for him, so they made him do the program that they like best.
It’s not like Monty’s program made him a MLB-ready pitcher. It made him a great HS pitcher who got drafted by a MLB team. At that point, the question was what program is going to help him make the many improvements necessary to make him a good MLB pitcher. The organization chose the program for him that they thought was best. That’s what a MLB organization should do. At least for use during the season, they should direct the player’s strength and conditioning program.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 26, 2012 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
To clarify
306008 and others think that a given long toss program is the best.
This is where you have to listen to your body. You need to go as far as you can as often as you can, especially in the off season. During season you do it twice between starts at least. Not the day before you pitch. And you listen to your body. Your arm will tell you what to do. I use the “300 foot” mark because math is easy off of it. That doesn’t mean each pitcher throws that or he’s done.
That makes sense
But my point is that if you ran a MLB organization, you would set the same general program for all drafted pitchers. Yes, you tweak it a bit and you don’t have them each do LT for exactly the same number of reps if their arms are getting fatigued. But you wouldn’t just let the pitcher do whatever he wanted to do. If he didn’t want to do long toss because he’s been doing something else or because he and his agent and the trainers that work for his agent wanted to do something else, you’d still make him follow your general program.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 26, 2012 3:45 PM EST up reply actions
That's a tough thing to think through
I don’t make my HS kids do my LT program if they don’t want too. But what I find is that the kids who don’t seem to get left behind because all the other guys get stronger and they realize that. So they join in.
I think I would treat it like that, let them decide if they want too. Give them the information available and let them make their choice.
I also think I wouldn’t draft a pitcher if he didn’t like my program. I think it’s something the scout would have to let me know about before we drafted him. And I think it was something they discussed with Monty before they drafted him and he told them he would do it anyway and they still drafted him. If I had two pitchers of similar skill and one used LT and the other said he never would, I’d draft the LT guy because he’s open to reaching his full potential and will probably (if there are no injuries to either) last longer with less of a chance of injury.
I should also
mention that when I coached college pitchers I let them decide if they wanted to use the LT or not. Half did, half didn’t…. the guys who LT’d did the best for us.
wait...so we should take this to mean...
that you assume that the local college coach knows more than say half or so of the organizations in major league baseball about how to develop arms?
i think college coaches might be the worst guys to ask…how many arms do these guys just absolutely shred? what program does the guy at rice use?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jan 25, 2012 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, college coaches don't have a good track record for keeping pitchers healthy.
I don’t know whether they know better or not—but whatever their beliefs, winning is the highest priority. I think a lot of college pitchers are groomed and used to get college hitters out, rather than being groomed for professional baseball.
there is a difference
College coaches know how to develop arms but most of the time they don’t care about the athlete because they don’t think he has a future in pro ball and wins here is what keeps me hired.
And just for the record, I asked Dr. Tim Galbraith (orthopedic surgeon out of Columbia, MO) about Long Toss the other day after he concluded a clinic on Throwing Injuries and Care. He said that Long Toss is one of the best things you can do for your arm and it’s been proven in medical journals. I need to get more info from him on that and plan to in the coming days, but he put his name on it and said it’s already been proven.
i'll be interested to read what you have to say....
i loved long tossing when i pitched and felt much stronger when i was doing it. however, my arm was shot by 20 or so. i just think that it cant be as cut and dry as you make it seem though. if it was this obvious, every team would be doing it just as every team does strength training.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jan 25, 2012 3:43 PM EST up reply actions
which is precisely why a one size fits all method...
be it 120 or LT is likely not the best thing
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jan 25, 2012 3:53 PM EST up reply actions
Is there any debate in the baseball community about whether long toss is important or if pitchers should do it?
Isn’t there a consensus that it is important for pitchers? Isn’t the debate about how long the LT should be and how much of it pitchers should do?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 25, 2012 5:06 PM EST up reply actions
120 Feet Is Not Long
It’s barely even toss. Your average JV catcher can make that throw from his knees. The 10-11 Boys Punt Pass and Kick winner threw a football 122 feet.
This is the answer
Long toss principals deal with your body and how far you can throw. You go to your max distance, not a prescribed number of feet. I should be more clear on that. The whole 120 argument is that it changes your mechanics. Again, referencing Dr. Gilbraith he addressed this and stated that you have a hard time staying directional when you try to increase distance without increasing arc (or angle of throw). The body tenses up and does not stay relaxed through the throwing motion. When you long toss with the arc your body is able to stay relaxed through the motion making it much safer. As you know, a body in a relaxed state performs better at speed, agility, balance, and strength. So the argument was why would you put your body in a position of higher stress to throw the ball farther if you aren’t compensating through your bodies natural ability to compensate and not using your body how it was created to be used.
Sirius XM Radio guy: How’s this starting rotation gonna step it up a little bit this year and make the Kansas City Royals even better than they were last year?
Eiland: I’ll get to the rotation in a minute, but I’ll start with the back of the bullpen with Soria, and then you’ve got Broxton and Holland in front of him. You’ve got Riveras down there, and Blake Wood, and Aaron Crow if he’s not in the rotation and Duffy and Collins. The bullpen is as strong as anybody’s. I’ll argue that point with anybody. You get around to the rotation, and it’s not bad either.
Patron: How’s the mutton?
Innkeeper: I’ll tell you about the mutton in a minute, but first let say that the lobster is as good as anyone’s. The mutton is….not bad.
I'm puzzled.
Duffy in the bullpen? Not sure I like that idea.
If you don't expect too much from me, you might not be let down
-Gin Blossoms
by royaldaddy on Jan 25, 2012 1:39 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Just.Plain.Stupid.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Jan 26, 2012 12:15 AM EST up reply actions
Maybe the Royals like developing starters in the bullpen
I'm sure it will work wonders with Crow.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 26, 2012 1:15 AM EST up reply actions
I think he is engaging in a bit of PR spin
Politicians do this all the time. Ask a politician a hard question about something they don’t want to talk about and they’ll pivot to an issue they do want to talk about. That’s what Eiland did here. The rotation is the biggest weakness on the team, so when asked about it, he pivots to the bullpen, which should be a strength. I don’t think it was the most graceful sidestep I’ve ever heard, but as you said, he’s a pitching coach not an interview master. BTW, this isn’t an indictment of Eiland; I think it’s a wise, minor diplomatic move.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jan 25, 2012 2:39 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, he also probably has little or nothing to say about how to make the rotation better.
He hasn’t worked with the pitchers yet. Probably only seen video, and even if he had a plan, that’s not something that he would talk about in an interview.
If it was me I'd say
I’m trying to get Dayton to sign Edwin Jackson, Roy Oswalt, or acquire another solid MLB pitcher. he knows we don’t have what we need in the rotation. But he also knows we need to make good decisions on how to get it.
It just struck me as amusing
that he answered the question in that way. In fact I wouldn’t have wanted him to handle it any more smoothly, because the undeft way he handled it makes it clear that he’s genuinely enthused about the bullpen. Can’t wait to talk about it, in fact.
Also, I’m definitely not ordering the mutton.
Sounds like a guy who hasn't reported to camp yet
Here’s the next bit after the bit I transcribed above, starting with the continuation of his comments on the starting rotation:
Eiland: Those guys have to trust their stuff, they have to trust their defense, let their natural abilities take over and attack the hitters. If we do that, we’re going to make some noise and we going to surprise some people.
Sirius XM: What is the one thing you want to work on with that rotation heading into 2012?
Eiland: Well, we’re going to work in favorable counts. We cannot afford — nobody can, no matter who you are, what staff you are — working behind in the counts. We have to work in the count — we have to get strike 1 and go from there.
And another big thing we have to do is we have to make hitters uncomfortable. It’s not going to be the lowly Royals anymore where people roll into Kansas City and then — and just assume they’re going to win a series or sweep a series. When the Royals come to town they can just kind of kick back and throw their gloves out there and they’re going to win the series. So we’re gonna make hitters uncomfortable. We’re gonna get a reputation of moving some feet and knocking some guys off the plate. We’re going to work ahead in the count, we’re going to work in favorable counts, and we’re going to let our defense work for us behind us as well.
After that there was a question about what Eiland to work on with Jonathan Sanchez. He said nothing especially deep: “There’s a couple of little things in his delivery that I see that we’re gonna work on, we’re gonna tinker with a little bit and see if we can get him a little bit more consistent with his arm slot, which — in turn is gonna have a little better command in the strike zone.” He also reiterated his earlier comments about how Sanchez has to trust his stuff and trust his defense behind him.
There’s only one more question and response in the excerpt of the interview that was posted, and that was about how the Royals would attack Cabrera and Fielder in the Tigers’ lineup. Eiland said it depended on the situation. “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it and we’ll be ready for whatever situation arises.”
Nothing about training methods or anything like that. But that’s probably not meat and potatoes for that kind of radio programming anyway.
I love that he said he wants a reputation
I would expect them to set the tone early in the season so there is a little cred to his statements. But he also said he doesn’t want people to think they’ll just come in to KC and win 2 of 3. Great comments. He’s hard nosed it sounds like, and it sounds like he’ll back it up ala Clemens style.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
