<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Jason Motte: the Mechanics Behind the Fury</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/</link>
	<description>Baseball&#039;s Future in the Gateway City</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:11:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris O'Leary</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6568</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris O'Leary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 18:27:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6568</guid>
		<description>&quot;Second, you are arguing by assertion, rather than evidence, which is basically just bellowing in text.&quot;

Read my piece and you&#039;ll get all the evidence you need.

The fact is that Eisenberg&#039;s analysis of Motte is generally quite bad in many cases simply wrong. His understanding of pitching mechanics is also lacking.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Second, you are arguing by assertion, rather than evidence, which is basically just bellowing in text.&#8221;</p>
<p>Read my piece and you&#8217;ll get all the evidence you need.</p>
<p>The fact is that Eisenberg&#8217;s analysis of Motte is generally quite bad in many cases simply wrong. His understanding of pitching mechanics is also lacking.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RedC</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6559</link>
		<dc:creator>RedC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 06:04:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6559</guid>
		<description>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: &lt;i&gt;&quot;I don&#039;t know what Alex Eisenberg&#039;s been smoking. His analysis of Motte&#039;s mechanics is way off and in many cases simply wrong.&quot;&lt;/i&gt; First, it&#039;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&#039;Leary, have your own biases that are well known. You don&#039;t like the Tom House School of Pitching. You think the &quot;Flying W&quot; and the &quot;Inverted L&quot; 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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris&#8211;</p>
<p>I am generally a fan of your website, and have read many of your write-ups and watched your video clip analysis.</p>
<p>I think it is incredibly rude of you to come on here and write: <i>&#8220;I don&#8217;t know what Alex Eisenberg&#8217;s been smoking. His analysis of Motte&#8217;s mechanics is way off and in many cases simply wrong.&#8221;</i> First, it&#8217;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.</p>
<p>Finally, you, Mr. O&#8217;Leary, have your own biases that are well known. You don&#8217;t like the Tom House School of Pitching. You think the &#8220;Flying W&#8221; and the &#8220;Inverted L&#8221; 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.</p>
<p>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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris O'Leary</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6419</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris O'Leary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 15:08:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6419</guid>
		<description>For those who are interested, I just completed an analysis of Jason Motte&#039;s pitching mechanics using some HD footage I shot a couple of weeks ago at ST...

- &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/Baseball/Pitching/ProfessionalPitcherAnalyses/JasonMotte_001.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Analysis of the Pitching Mechanics of Jason Motte&lt;/a&gt;

The bottom line is that I&#039;m not a fan (and I think he needs to develop a change-up).

P.S. I don&#039;t know what Alex Eisenberg&#039;s been smoking. His analysis of Motte&#039;s mechanics is way off and in many cases simply wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For those who are interested, I just completed an analysis of Jason Motte&#8217;s pitching mechanics using some HD footage I shot a couple of weeks ago at ST&#8230;</p>
<p>- <a href="http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/Baseball/Pitching/ProfessionalPitcherAnalyses/JasonMotte_001.html" rel="nofollow">Analysis of the Pitching Mechanics of Jason Motte</a></p>
<p>The bottom line is that I&#8217;m not a fan (and I think he needs to develop a change-up).</p>
<p>P.S. I don&#8217;t know what Alex Eisenberg&#8217;s been smoking. His analysis of Motte&#8217;s mechanics is way off and in many cases simply wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: arch support</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6413</link>
		<dc:creator>arch support</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:27:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6413</guid>
		<description>@ philskill:

I don&#039;t think you have to steal signs to know that Motte&#039;s going to throw a fastball most of the time, especially as his out pitch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ philskill:</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think you have to steal signs to know that Motte&#8217;s going to throw a fastball most of the time, especially as his out pitch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PJ</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6412</link>
		<dc:creator>PJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:54:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6412</guid>
		<description>Oh God! Blaming Tony for Motte&#039;s failings....wow. Skip didn&#039;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&#039;t coming back!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh God! Blaming Tony for Motte&#8217;s failings&#8230;.wow. Skip didn&#8217;t forget how to play the OF. He is still a + defender out there.</p>
<p>Some fans simply will not embrace Tony. News flash&#8212;-Whitey ain&#8217;t coming back!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6411</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:45:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6411</guid>
		<description>+1 to Phil.  If that was Motte&#039;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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>+1 to Phil.  If that was Motte&#8217;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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: philskill</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6409</link>
		<dc:creator>philskill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 06:17:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6409</guid>
		<description>I watched that opening day 9th inning two or three times all together, and while Motte was shaky (mostly because he didn&#039;t throw enough &quot;non fastballs&quot;, 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&#039;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&#039;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&#039;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 &quot;Oh nice, he mixed in a changeup&quot;. 

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 &quot;non-fastballs&quot; up to about 50 percent or even higher. At one point Motte shook off Molina&#039;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&#039;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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I watched that opening day 9th inning two or three times all together, and while Motte was shaky (mostly because he didn&#8217;t throw enough &#8220;non fastballs&#8221;, 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&#8217;t throw a meat pitch. </p>
<p>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&#8217;t played much outfield at all since 2008, that that ball gets caught and game over. </p>
<p>I personally believe Motte just needs a little bit of time to develop more confidence in the slider. I heard somewhere (can&#8217;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 &#8220;Oh nice, he mixed in a changeup&#8221;. </p>
<p>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 &#8220;non-fastballs&#8221; up to about 50 percent or even higher. At one point Motte shook off Molina&#8217;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. </p>
<p>One other issue is that it was very cold outside and Motte&#8217;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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: azruavatar</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6407</link>
		<dc:creator>azruavatar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 03:11:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6407</guid>
		<description>It used to be reallly bad.  Unless the pitch breaks more, I&#039;m just not sure it&#039;s going to be viable.  Maybe it will throw their timing off if he can throw it for strikes but I still have concerns.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It used to be reallly bad.  Unless the pitch breaks more, I&#8217;m just not sure it&#8217;s going to be viable.  Maybe it will throw their timing off if he can throw it for strikes but I still have concerns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sportsman</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6406</link>
		<dc:creator>Sportsman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 02:29:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6406</guid>
		<description>the hoople, good or bad last night, would benefit from being &quot;the closer&quot; 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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the hoople, good or bad last night, would benefit from being &#8220;the closer&#8221; 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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Eisenberg</title>
		<link>http://www.futureredbirds.net/2009/04/07/jason-motte-mechanics-fury/comment-page-1/#comment-6405</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Eisenberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:46:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futureredbirds.net/?p=2670#comment-6405</guid>
		<description>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&#039;s with a 9&quot; break and a 0 or 1 p-f/x.  The change-up was 84 with a 7&quot; 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&#039;t mix his pitches well enough yesterday, nor did he command them.  His slider didn&#039;t actually hurt him, other than he didn&#039;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&#039;s arm action for both his slider and fastball and though it&#039;s a very small sample size, the difference was much more negligible than last year--the only real difference was Motte&#039;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&#039;t really see that this year, so that should help play the pitch up somewhat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks everybody for the kind words.</p>
<p>I went ahead and looked through gameday and there was one pitch labeled a change-up&#8230;his slider traditionally was in the mid-80&#8242;s with a 9&#8243; break and a 0 or 1 p-f/x.  The change-up was 84 with a 7&#8243; break and a 5 p-f/x.  It was thrown for a strike and he threw it on a 2-0 pitch.</p>
<p>He obviously didn&#8217;t mix his pitches well enough yesterday, nor did he command them.  His slider didn&#8217;t actually hurt him, other than he didn&#8217;t throw enough of them for strikes&#8230;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.</p>
<p>BTW, Azru, I went to look at Motte&#8217;s arm action for both his slider and fastball and though it&#8217;s a very small sample size, the difference was much more negligible than last year&#8211;the only real difference was Motte&#8217;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&#8217;t really see that this year, so that should help play the pitch up somewhat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

