Jason Motte has been a hot topic of discussion amongst Cardinals fans lately and with good reason, as he used a sensational spring training performance to beat out Chris Perez for the team’s role of closer. Opinions are fairly a split on Motte and I’m sure his four-run blown save in his first appearance as the team’s closer has intensified things a bit.
Mostly a one-pitch pitcher, there are some that feel Motte won’t be able to translate his minor league success to the major league level because you need more than one pitch to succeed in the majors, no matter how good that pitch is — and that pitch is really good: an upper 90′s fastball that explodes out of his hand. It’s straight as an arrow, but it’s sneaky and gets on hitters quick because he short-arms the ball, which dates back to his days as a catcher. When he’s able to command the pitch, it’s virtually unhittable.
Motte’s No. 2 pitch is a fringy slider that he’s able to use when hitters start cheating on his fastball or when he wants to throw off a hitter’s balance at the plate. By the way, I know there are some that suggested he develop a splitter partly because it would be easier for him to maintain a more consistent arm slot and I agree with that completely.
Now, I’m not here to give a traditional scouting report on Motte. That’s been done before by Azruavatar and you can read both of those excellent reports by clicking here and clicking here. You can also read Erik’s rundown of Motte’s pitch f/x data by clicking here.
I’m going to actually take a deeper look at Motte’s mechanics — how he generates his velocity and what changes he’s made between this year and last that I think has helped improve his overall command. My hope is that everybody will take away some knowledge about the velocity generating process and some of the more subtle changes a pitcher can make to improve themselves.
The big change Motte made this season was that he simplified his wind-up by lowering his hands and centering everything closer to his core. The 2008 version is on the top and the 2009 Motte is on the bottom:
This year, Motte is in a more athletic, more compact position. Instead of bringing his hands up by his head, he brings them closer to his upper chest area. This change took place partly because of the timing difference between Motte’s high leg kick from 2008 and his smaller leg kick in 2009.
Motte pauses once his knee reaches the pinnacle of its lift before punching the glove, which acts as his timing mechanics to unleash all hell. The difference between the two versions is that the 2008 version pauses for a longer period of time, while the 2009 version gets going much more quickly. This results in a wind-up with better flow — much smoother than before and without any pauses that have the potential to throw off his timing.
Now let’s talk velocity…Motte is obviously blessed with tremendous arm speed and the genetics to throw hard. But he’s also extremely efficient from a velocity standpoint and his arm action is excellent. He lets the elbow pick up the ball, meaning no hook in the wrist, like you see with Rich Harden. He also efficiently loads the scapula, which I’ll try to explain below:
The loading of the scapula is the pinching of the shoulder blades together. The arm is loaded horizontally rather than straight back toward second base. Might it put more stress on the shoulder? Perhaps…but it’s an essential component of velocity.
Watch how Motte’s chest sorta puffs out in the clips above…this is a symptom of the shoulder blades pinching together. Also take note of Motte’s hip/torso separation. I pause the graphic at the key frame. The belt buckle is pointed toward home plate, while the torso is facing the third base direction. Just before his front foot lands, the hips start to rotate and the torso is subsequently unloaded, bringing the arm with it.
The arm’s power is generated from the torso unloading. There is a kinetic chain of events and to generate the kind of velocity Motte does, you have to have a precisely efficient kinetic chain. It’s also important to throw with intent, which Motte certainly does.
One thing I quibble with are Motte’s front side mechanics. The glove generally should be kept firm out in front of the chest. While Motte does firm up to keep his front shoulder from flying open, he leaves the glove down by his side when it ideally should be left out in front of the chest. There are numerous reasons for why it should be kept firm out in front of the chest — lower injury risk, better control, more consistent release point, and better command of one’s breaking pitches to name a few.
Final Thoughts
Nobody should overreact to Motte’s Monday debacle. One game doesn’t make a player. Consider how dominant he was last season at the MLB level even though his dominance occurred in a limited amount of innings.
The jury’s still out on whether he’s a closer-level reliever. That’s probably a best case outcome unless he can develop a consistent secondary pitch that he can go to when the command of his fastball deserts him. Can he make it happen? Only time will tell.
This article is apart of Baseball-Intellect’s Cardinals top prospect list, which you can read below:
Prospects 1 – 5
Prospects 6 – 15
Alex breaks down major and minor league players by using sabermetric and video analysis at the website Baseball Intellect. He’s also done regular work for the Hardball Times and Baseball Digest Daily. You can contact him at baseballintellect@gmail.com





Entries (RSS)
Great work Alex. This is awesome.
Nice piece. I thought I saw a curve mixed in with the slider. The slider was coming in at 90-91 but he threw one or two pitches yesterday that were 87. That had little more break than what I had seen from the slider. Assume it was a curve. Al called it a slider. Did anyone else think Motte threw a curve yesterday?
I noticed it, too, but I took it for a “good” slider, as opposed to those that went faster with less movement. Inconsistent pitch and such.
I thought he was also working on a change earlier in the Spring. I think a splitter could make him filthy.
I read at some point last fall that Motte was working on the grip for the slider so that he could alter it a little if he needed to to speed it up and tighten the break (cutter), leave it as the traditional slider, or slow it down and increase the break (slurve).
Call it the Dave Duncan factor?
Listening to the game yesterday, there was one pitch that Shannon (and maybe even GameDay, can’t remember) called a change up. If the Moon Man was right, that would jibe with what PJ is saying above.
I think that GameDay doesn’t have a pitch called “bad slider”
I’m highly skeptical that Motte is aware of how to throw something other than a slider. His slider varies widely because he’s so inconsistent with it. I’m still not sure you even want to call it anything more than “non-fastball”.
To say that scap loading is required for velocity is pretty misleading. Will scap loading *give* you velocity? Yes, but at the expense of damaging your shoulder. (See: Mark Prior) Upper body torque and a long lower body stride are much safer at generating velocity than scap loading.
Thanks everybody for the kind words.
I went ahead and looked through gameday and there was one pitch labeled a change-up…his slider traditionally was in the mid-80′s with a 9″ break and a 0 or 1 p-f/x. The change-up was 84 with a 7″ break and a 5 p-f/x. It was thrown for a strike and he threw it on a 2-0 pitch.
He obviously didn’t mix his pitches well enough yesterday, nor did he command them. His slider didn’t actually hurt him, other than he didn’t throw enough of them for strikes…2 of his 3 outs came in at bats where he threw a first pitch slider. The one slider hit in play was a ground out.
BTW, Azru, I went to look at Motte’s arm action for both his slider and fastball and though it’s a very small sample size, the difference was much more negligible than last year–the only real difference was Motte’s wrist had a bit more hook in it when he was throwing his fastball before his arm rotated. Last year the difference was obvious, and the slots were different. I don’t really see that this year, so that should help play the pitch up somewhat.
It used to be reallly bad. Unless the pitch breaks more, I’m just not sure it’s going to be viable. Maybe it will throw their timing off if he can throw it for strikes but I still have concerns.
the hoople, good or bad last night, would benefit from being “the closer” at memphis. i thought this was going to happen till the prez got hurt and behind in his work. interesting to see how it works out.
I watched that opening day 9th inning two or three times all together, and while Motte was shaky (mostly because he didn’t throw enough “non fastballs”, I thought the pitch that lost us the game was not a bad pitch. 96-97 MPH up and in fastball. My guess is that Pitt was stealing signs because Wilson certainly seemed to know that one was coming. No way he hits that as well as he does not knowing that the fastball is coming inside and likely up. It was out of the zone even. Motte knows as well as anyone that 0-2 you don’t throw a meat pitch.
Anyway, I thought that if TLR had enough sense to have Rasmus in the outfield in the 9th instead of a 2nd basemen who hasn’t played much outfield at all since 2008, that that ball gets caught and game over.
I personally believe Motte just needs a little bit of time to develop more confidence in the slider. I heard somewhere (can’t remember where as I was drinking) that Motte does indeed mix in the occasional change up and was learning it this spring. Therefor the pitch that was called a changeup probably was a changeup. I remember seeing it on TV and thinking “Oh nice, he mixed in a changeup”.
I think Motte will be just fine. Pittsburgh was sitting dead red, which is why they barely made contact on the slider. I think teams are going to sit dead red against Motte which is why he needs to up his percentage of throwing “non-fastballs” up to about 50 percent or even higher. At one point Motte shook off Molina’s slider then Molina came to the mound. Motte threw the slider than and got the batter out. That was the groundout I believe. Motte just needs to instantly gain more confidence in the slider/changeup or whatever and he will perform a lot better.
One other issue is that it was very cold outside and Motte’s fastball was 95-97. Thats different than throwin 97-101. Broxton was hitting 100 on the gun yesterday. I certainly believe Motte can do the same thing in better conditions.
+1 to Phil. If that was Motte’s changeup coming @ 85-87 with more drop than the slider, then I think he needs to throw it more often. It has a completely different look than the slider. Motte is going to be a beast in the near future. This is not the same guy we saw last season.
Oh God! Blaming Tony for Motte’s failings….wow. Skip didn’t forget how to play the OF. He is still a + defender out there.
Some fans simply will not embrace Tony. News flash—-Whitey ain’t coming back!
@ philskill:
I don’t think you have to steal signs to know that Motte’s going to throw a fastball most of the time, especially as his out pitch.
For those who are interested, I just completed an analysis of Jason Motte’s pitching mechanics using some HD footage I shot a couple of weeks ago at ST…
- Analysis of the Pitching Mechanics of Jason Motte
The bottom line is that I’m not a fan (and I think he needs to develop a change-up).
P.S. I don’t know what Alex Eisenberg’s been smoking. His analysis of Motte’s mechanics is way off and in many cases simply wrong.
Chris–
I am generally a fan of your website, and have read many of your write-ups and watched your video clip analysis.
I think it is incredibly rude of you to come on here and write: “I don’t know what Alex Eisenberg’s been smoking. His analysis of Motte’s mechanics is way off and in many cases simply wrong.” First, it’s an obnoxious comment to make. Second, you are arguing by assertion, rather than evidence, which is basically just bellowing in text. Third, you are shamelessly trolling for traffic to your own site, rather than giving the summary of your analysis here, where Mr. Eisenberg can at least defend himself.
Finally, you, Mr. O’Leary, have your own biases that are well known. You don’t like the Tom House School of Pitching. You think the “Flying W” and the “Inverted L” are death-knells for pitchers. And while there is certainly ample support that many House pitchers, like Prior and Harden, are injury-prone, you have not conclusively demonstrated or, as far as I am aware, even attempted to show with any kind of scientific rigor why your brand of mechanics is right and the others are wrong.
You have really lowered yourself in my eyes with your commentary here, and I will always bear that in mind when I read things from you in the future.
“Second, you are arguing by assertion, rather than evidence, which is basically just bellowing in text.”
Read my piece and you’ll get all the evidence you need.
The fact is that Eisenberg’s analysis of Motte is generally quite bad in many cases simply wrong. His understanding of pitching mechanics is also lacking.