How would I sum up my approach to developing pitchers?
Starters, not relievers.
I'm interested in producing pitchers who are capable of starting, and lasting as starters, at the major league level. That stands in sharp contrast with the many pitching coaches who are teaching mechanics that have not been proven to produce major league starters.
They are turning out relievers.
Yes, those pitchers can often start at the high school or college level, but they haven't been able to last at the major league level.
From a money standpoint, the problem with producing relievers is that, unless they get a signing bonus, in many cases pitchers with reliever mechanics' careers are over before they reach arbitration, much less free agency.
But what about...
- Clayton Kershaw
- Zack Greinke
- Max Scherzer
- Jordan Zimmerman
...and other pitchers with problematic pitching mechanics who made it to free agency?
In each case, they employ a trick that keeps their Timing from being as bad as it seems. However, that comes at the trick of added complexity; you put in one trick to compromise their Timing and another trick to improve it.
But if the tricks cancel each other out, then why put them in in the first place?
I think simplicity can be taken too far, but in my experience a cleaner arm action is less likely to break than a complex arm action.