Chien Ming Wang?


#1

We all know about Dick Mills and the explosive energy,no hestiations, and long strides but has anyone really put his methods to the test.

In a way he is right but can be proven wrong.

For example.
Chien Ming Wang, the New York Yankees ace pitcher.

His delivery is very slow with the step back and arms lifting with the slight pause. To the slow leg lift and extension.

94 MPH SINKING FASTBALL.

Someone explain it to me please. If you put Mills methods to Wangs windup, it just doesnt add up.

Anyone feel free to answer.


#2

Well I mean AJ burnett and Josh Beckett both have slow deliveries as well but all three of the pitchers are able to generated incredible arm speeds with their delivery and thats why it works for them and without having to throw the body.


#3

Mills doesn’t say you can’t throw hard if you pause. He, and every other “guru”, put out their contentions that their way is more efficient. Mills’ “Momentum Pitching” is supposed to allow for high velocities with better control and less stress on the arm, the same as the other guys claim. There are many examples of high velocity with differing mechanics. Some rely on the arm more than others. So, remember, he’s not saying it can’t be done. He’s saying his way is more efficient. And, just because an example can be found of other mechanics working doesn’t mean his theory is wrong. The question really should be, is he right?


#4

DM, thanks for posting that I needed that explained to me.

Also, I was thinking something about that while reading it. I’m not sure if Mills is right lord knows he knows way more about pitching than I do but I mean from what I’ve read and what you just said he may have a legitimate point. With that being said since I was about 10 years old all the coaching I have gotten is to be fluent on the mound and ALWAYS make sure you get a good balance point then explode from there. It seems as if Mills style isn’t too far off from what I was taught he is just incorporating builindg up more momentum and not losing it by making sure you are slow and fluid at and right before then balance point. I may be wrong with this and feel free to correct me but his ideas seem to be pretty interesting.


#5

[quote=“alanshadow22”]…he is just incorporating building up more momentum and not losing it by making sure you are slow and fluid at and right before then balance point. I may be wrong with this and feel free to correct me but his ideas seem to be pretty interesting.[/quote]Actually, lately he’s strongly recommending against anything slow, whether at the beginning or elsewhere. He’s also speaking out vehemently against the idea of a “balance point” at all. His new mechanic is to “fly past the balance point” in efforts to not inhibit momentum generation.


#6

[quote=“RawTalent”]We all know about Dick Mills and the explosive energy,no hestiations, and long strides but has anyone really put his methods to the test.

In a way he is right but can be proven wrong.

For example.
Chien Ming Wang, the New York Yankees ace pitcher.

His delivery is very slow with the step back and arms lifting with the slight pause. To the slow leg lift and extension.

94 MPH SINKING FASTBALL.

Someone explain it to me please. If you put Mills methods to Wangs windup, it just doesnt add up.

Anyone feel free to answer.[/quote]

He would probably say Wang would throw 97-100 if he used Mills’s mechanics. Maybe he would, but 94 isn’t that shabby anyway.

Some guys can just generate incredible velocity despite slow deliveries. Thats not to say that if they moved faster, they couldn’t throw harder, i’m sure they could. BUt a guy like Burnett has probably been throwing like that since he was a kid, and most aren’t willing to revamp their motion in order to gain 2 or 3 mph, when there throwing 96+ already.


#7

House also teaches the idea of getting going sooner and faster (though Mills seems to be pushing the idea to more of an extreme). However, I think there is one difference (DM, correct me if I’m wrong). Mills’ focus is on velocity while House believes there is also an element of timing that is aided by “getting a move on”. And, while proper timing will help with velocity, it will also help avoid injury. House seems to have more of a focus on injury prevention than does Mills.


#8

Actually, Mills claims that, by using momentum generated in the stride, you will have these benefits:

  1. Increased velo
  2. Less reliance on the arm to get the same velo, therefore less injury risk
  3. Better control because of the linear nature of things directed at the target

Regarding injury prevention, he hangs everything on being “fit to pitch”, which includes both overall fitness and a lot of throwing off a mound.

So, I wouldn’t say he’s all about, or more about, velocity. His claim is that it’s more holistic than that.


#9

I don’t disagree with him but i think hes making it seem like those weight loss commercials like oh i lost 100 pounds in 10 weeks and this pill is 100% safe and always works. kinda like that.


#10

Okay, now I don’t disagree, I mean it’s a great concept to be quicker with most pitchers. Being a knuckleballer I’ve learned though that everyone has their own style and what works for some (or most in this case) doesn’t work for another.

I’ve especially noticed slower deliveries with the oriental and off-speed pitchers.


#11

[quote=“dm59”]Actually, Mills claims that, by using momentum generated in the stride, you will have these benefits:

  1. Increased velo
  2. Less reliance on the arm to get the same velo, therefore less injury risk
  3. Better control because of the linear nature of things directed at the target[/quote]
    Thanks for clarifying, DM. House also makes the same claims as 1. and 2. But he also claims it helps you maintain good timing thereby eliminating flaws which he categorizes as precursors to injury (e.g. opening up early). I’m still waiting to see the entire injury prevention model in which he supposedly identifies a whole set of precursors to injury. Maybe I’ll get to see that when I re-certify with the NPA in November.

This is good. House likes to use the term “functional strength” but he would definitely agree with being fit to pitch. Are you aware “Fit to Pitch” is the title of one of House’s books? :o

Excellent.


#12

don’t underestimate genetics … just as you can’t underestmate mechanics either