Notice: Trying to get property 'display_name' of non-object in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-seo/src/generators/schema/article.php on line 52
keyboard_arrow_uptop
BP360 is back! Pick up a yearly subscription, 2025 Annual, and t-shirt for one great price!

The classic Greek sabermetrician Plato said that necessity is the mother of invention.True to form, the slide step was borne from the need to suppress stolen bases at a time when the game was experiencing a record surge of thievery, but I submit that the strategy carries heavy costs that fail to outweigh the perceived benefits. The slide step invention is in dire need of an intervention.

The slide step is an artifact of the 1980s, a time when players such as Rickey Henderson and Vince Coleman were surpassing 100 stolen bases with regularity, terrorizing pitchers with constant distractions on the base paths. Since the Dead Ball Era, there have been 18 player-seasons that surpassed the 80-steal threshold, and 15 of those performances occurred in the 10-year stretch from 1979—1988. Henderson and Coleman were the last players to accomplish the feat, having tallied 174 steals between them in the '88 season, and were responsible for 10 of the 80-steal seasons between them, but the base-swiping explosion was hardly a two-man show (see accompanying chart). Today's top rogues of the base paths typically top out around 60 to 70 steals, with Jose Reyes' 78-steal tally of 2007 sticking out like a hitchhiker's thumb on the decade's SB leaderboard. For example, Michael Bourn has led the National League in stolen bases for three straight seasons, though his career-high is “just” 61 steals (accomplished twice). As Henderson told Harold Reynolds after the Mariner second baseman stole 60 bags in the 1987 season, “Rickey stole 60 at the break!”

The above chart covers the past 40 years of base-stealing, detailing the ascension of the steal throughout the 1970s that precipitated the spike of the 1980s. The steal lost momentum as focus turned to the long ball, and league-wide rates have stayed below one steal attempt per game since 2000. Even at the peak of the Speed Era, teams maxed out at just 1.21 steal attempts per contest, yet major-league pitching coaches opted to have their pitchers alter their mechanics for dozens of deliveries per game in order to create an advantage on a single pitch.

The typical big-league pitcher spends about two-fifths of his time in the stretch. In 2012, pitchers have registered 43.6 percent of opponent plate appearances with men on base, with 36 percent coming in typical slide-step situations—with runners on first and/or second base, or with runners at the corners. These situations will often comprise the most crucial pitches of a ball game, with runners on the bags threatening to score, and the first question that comes to mind is why a coach would want to undermine his pitcher's core skills under such critical circumstances.

The cost of a misplaced pitch skyrockets with men on base, where a homer puts crooked numbers on the scoreboard, yet the commonly accepted practice is to sacrifice pitcher mechanics in order to give the runner a lower chance of success on a steal attempt that may never materialize. A pitcher can shave one- to two-tenths of a second with a slide step, which is a significant distinction, as the same time frame separates a catcher with outstanding “pop” times from one who is merely average. Of course, a quick delivery can be mitigated by poor execution by the catcher, a misplay by the infielder, or a great jump by the base runner. Further, all of that effort can go for naught when a player has the raw speed of a demon like Billy Hamilton*, where the guy can beat a throw under ideal conditions.

*In this case I refer to Billy the Younger, who plays in the Reds' minor-league system and is currently running like a man possessed. He is not to be confused with Billy the Elder, whose 914 career steals place him third on the all-time list, due in part to six seasons of 80-plus thefts during the late 1800s.

Two-tenths of a second may not sound like much, but it represents a substantial adjustment with respect to pitcher timing. The entire pitch cycle takes place in less than two seconds, and the average MLB pitcher will reach foot strike between 0.95 and 1.05 seconds. A slide step can shave up to 20 percent of the time off of a pitcher’s delivery into foot strike, wreaking havoc on the timing and sequencing of the related links in the kinetic chain. It is common to see slide-stepping pitchers who fail to find their release point on the first few deliveries from the stretch, as the lower body reaches position before the upper body is ready to fire. The result is often an under-rotated pitch that misses high and to the arm-side of the intended target, which is a sure-fire recipe for falling behind in the count or hanging a hittable pitch. I shake my head when a pitcher uses a slide step with late rotation, only to watch the base runner score on a slow trot thanks to a two-run bomb on an elevated fastball; I then wonder how many runners the pitcher will have to personally catch stealing in order to compensate for the mistake pitch.

I spill a lot of digital ink on the subject of pitcher timing and its importance in pitch execution, and the difference between the stretch and the windup is one of the biggest obstacles in the developmental pathway. Many major-league pitchers are excellent from the stretch, with some exhibiting even better mechanics than when pitching from the windup, including greater momentum and earlier initiation of forward movement. There are hurlers whose timing is better from the stretch as well, though such is rarely the case for those who employ the slide step. The technique does not ensure a quick delivery, as I have seen some slide steps that were slow to the plate as well as some chest-high leg lifts that were exceptionally fast.

A consistent pitcher will display very similar timing from both windup and stretch, with early initiation of solid momentum and the appropriate pace into foot-strike to allow the shoulders to fire in sequence. A player will struggle to harness his stretch mechanics when there is a blatant timing disparity from his windup, particularly for low-momentum hurlers who utilize a slide step. We studied the issue extensively in our research for Arm Action, conducting experiments with individual players to study the functional implications of the slide step, and the results underscored the relative costs of rushing the delivery with runners on base.

There are pitchers who have mastered the slide step to the point of reaping the time-based advantages without sacrificing effectiveness. These are typically veteran hurlers who have learned how to effectively employ a second time signature, though a developing player will have a much harder time adapting his motion to two drastically disparate deliveries. Some crafty vets will use the slide step selectively from the stretch, mixing in various techniques from pitch to pitch to keep a runner guessing. I applaud those pitchers who have harnessed the slide step without sacrificing pitch command or stuff, though I question the utility of spending valuable development time on such an archaic tactic.

This line of thinking does not absolve pitchers of the responsibility of restricting the running game, but there are other ways for pitchers to have an impact in that area without screwing with their mechanics. Rather than disrupt the crucial element of pitch execution, a pitcher can help to thwart would-be base-stealers by keeping them chained to the bag through an effective pick-off move. A pitcher does not necessarily have to generate outs with his pick-off, because a good move can shrink the baserunner's lead and potentially delay the jump, creating similar ramifications as a slide step.

The physical delivery of a pitch is the most fundamental aspect of the game, and everything that follows on the field is an extension of that one event. One would need a damn good reason to intentionally alter a pitcher's delivery in a way that could suppress his skills, and it occurs to me that preventing one player per game from gaining one extra base falls far short of the cost-benefit threshold that would be necessary to justify such a modification.

The success rate of stolen-base attempts is higher over the past five years than at any other time in the 40-year span that we have under the microscope, and rates have been increasing steadily since the early 1970s. 20th-century sabermetrician Albert Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results,” and pitching coaches would have to be crazy to perpetuate the slide step in the face of such data. It is my contention that most pitchers would do better if they both A) went faster from the windup, and B) kept their natural leg lift from the stretch. Pitch execution is the single-most important facet of every play on the diamond and the epitome of the phrase, “baseball is a game of inches.” It is therefore insane to continue throwing a wrench into 40 percent of a pitcher's deliveries in an attempt to stop a once-per-game occurrence for which the pitcher is only fractionally responsible.

Thank you for reading

This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.

Subscribe now
You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe
jimoneill
6/22
Amen. There are other strategies to be employed to retard the running game. Simply holding the ball will frequently disrupt a base stealer's timing. Even the well executed pitchout has, at minimum, a cautionary effect on indiscriminate running.

But good amateur coaches need to understand the danger in tinkering with the timing of a young pitcher's delivery, indeed, all teaching energy should be expended to develop that elusive part of the delivery.

I am 67 yrs old and coached for over 40 years and I still can't get enough of learning when the teachers are like Doug. Utterly brilliant stuff every week and so wonderfully written.

Keep up the fabulous work
SaberTJ
6/22
Doug,

Are there MLB teams out there that tell their pitchers to ditch the slide-step?
tombores99
6/22
The A's are way ahead with respect to biomechanics, and none of their starters bothers with the slide step. A's starters also have great balance & posture across the board, FWIW.
SaberTJ
6/22
Shouldn't be surprised. Billy Beane at his best.
BillJohnson
6/22
"It is common to see slide-stepping pitchers who fail to find their release point on the first few deliveries from the stretch... The result is often an under-rotated pitch that misses high and to the arm-side of the intended target, which is a sure-fire recipe for falling behind in the count or hanging a hittable pitch." Okay, I buy this, as one who has wondered about the slide step for a long time (and also one who loves the running game). However, saying something is a common result doesn't automatically make it true. I was hoping this article would show some actual evidence that the slide step results in less effective pitches, which obviously are what the pitcher is out there for, not shutting down the running game. No such data are in evidence, merely sweeping statement like this one. Got anything more concrete (e.g. HR/pitch rates for slide step versus kick) to back your position, Doug? If so, I'd love to see it.
tombores99
6/22
I hear ya, Bill, though data collection is extremely difficult - one would need to break down each pitcher's individual slide-step context and measure the HR rates from there. It would require classifying every pitcher in the league as a slide stepper or non, and not everyone employs the slide step to the same degree - the crafty vets that mix in the slide step selectively would require pitch-by-pitch tracking from the stretch. The effect is also more pronounced on the first few pitches from the stretch, before a pitcher can make adjustments, which further complicates the target sample. There are also confounding variables when parsing pitchFX data that make it tough to isolate an effect, such as the findings by our own Max Marchi regarding fastball velocity that increases in critical situations: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=17352

I have mentioned some specific examples in Raising Aces, and in fact I showed a visual comparison of Stephen Strasburg's new slide step here: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=17146

I encourage you to look for this phenomenon when watching games, rather than take my word for it. I think that you will notice that many pitchers lack command from the stretch, particularly those who employ the slide step, and that the command issues are more often manifested as under-rotation.

I will say that, in general, if pitchers were equally effective with a slide step, then the obvious solution would be to pitch that way all the time. Why harness two timing patterns when one will suffice? Coaches know that they are sacrificing something to achieve a quicker release, and the degree of impact is very much player-dependent, with wide variance across the league.
leleutd
6/22
Doug,

Where did you find the pitch timing data, that a slide step knocks of .1 to .2 seconds from the delivery? Seems like it could be a bit higher than that, essentially giving the base away to a runner.

Your suggestion that pitchers would be more effective if they ditched the slide step could be examined by looking at pre-1980s pitcher data compared to 1990s pitcher data (before the slide step was common, and then once it was common). You could compare effectiveness with runners on base (maybe even narrow it down to runner-on-first situations so as to even out the data a bit more; pitchers don't always use the slide step w/ a runner on third, or second).

It would also be interesting to look at PitchFX data for the years we have it, to compare if movement, location, or velocity are significantly different for a pitcher when he's in the stretch.

Instead, you focused on the assertion that pitch delivery is important, and the slide step harms his ability to pitch. I don't see the necessary analysis to agree with you, although I do agree that it is possible this could be an improvement. However, I don't think you did much to advance the conversation or to give good reason why this should be so.

Other interesting questions: which pitchers are better/worse out of the slide step? What type of pitchers (sinkerballers often get more movement with a slower fastball)? Are there more common outcomes b/c of the slide step (i.e., more walks from postural instability, or maybe more homers from pitches being left up in the zone)?

A very long piece full of conjecture and hypothesis, it is just begging to be analyzed more closely.
tombores99
6/22
The .1-.2 seconds comes via research that we did for "Arm Action," in addition to measurements that we made regularly at the National Pitching Association. Keep in mind that the .1-.2 seconds is compared to a regular stretch delivery (not the windup).

I agree that there is more to be mined here, however I feel that the philosophical exercise underscores the "insanity" - why would we create any obstacle to pitch execution in order to thwart such a rare occurrence, particularly when the methods employed only have a marginal impact on the end-goal?

There are many examples that can be observed in the numbers. For example, Brandon Morrow was a mess with the slide step for the last two years, and the impact to his line is clear. I would watch games where he just could not get the ball down due to constantly early rotation, which helps to explain why he was so "unlucky" to get only one GIDP in 2011. But he has addressed the issue in 2012 and is finally finding his release point with the slide step, which is a factor underlying his improved numbers. In fact, if you watch the mlb.tv feed from the game on June 6, the announcers discuss these exact improvements (2nd inning, after Pierzynski's single). Someone studying the numbers might look at the 2012 to '11 disparity and scream "noise" and "small sample size," but watching the game with a mechanical bent will often reveal why the numbers are what they are.

To be fair, there are other pitchers who will struggle from the stretch with a more standard leg kick - just watch any Tim Linececum start from the last month to see what I mean.
SaberTJ
6/22
Doug,

In the article you say "It is my contention that most pitchers would do better if they both A) went faster from the windup."

In your time at NPA, did they ever help a pitcher deliver the the ball more quickly from the windup? Did/could these mechanical tweaks help increase or decrease the pitchers torque/kinetic energy? Meaning, are there some pitchers whose windups, if quickened, have more or less velocity or movement at release?

tombores99
6/22
Yes. Yes. Yes.

In general, generating strong early momentum is a good thing, and it often results in a shorter time into foot strike. This will increase the kinetic energy in the system, though the torque will be more reliant on timing and sequencing. Both momentum and torque contribute to velocity, but torque plays a much bigger role.
SaberTJ
6/22
Ok, one final inquiry. What in a pitcher's windup generates strong early momentum? Is there an MLB pitcher whom I can watch that generates strong early momentum?

I ask because just throwing a few pitches myself, it seems like something difficult to detect whether or not I am doing.

tombores99
6/22
Good question.

Strong early momentum involves a first movement that is triggered toward the target, as opposed to straight up or back toward 2B. Most pitchers have 2 gears, with momentum that picks up after max leg lift, and good early momentum refers to the 1st gear, from first movement to max lift. An indicator for a good first gear is a pitcher who leads with the hip, thrusting toward the target immediately from setup.

Lincecum is a good example of a guy with strong momentum throughout, as is top draft pick Kyle Zimmer.
Oleoay
6/24
I look at this from a slightly different angle. Sure, there aren't many Rickey Henderson types running around but the slide step also holds runners a bit closer to the bag and make it easier to turn double plays. With the increased emphasis on OBP, while the slide step might not be worth the ability to thwart a stolen base attempt, shouldn't it help the ability to turn a double play, especially for ground-ball oriented pitching staffs?
SaberTJ
6/24
Do runners that aren't attempting to steal a base get bigger leads because a pitcher uses a slide step instead of a normal leg kick? I'm not sure that is true. How often are base runners watching the pitchers front leg when not planning on getting a good jump to steal?

I can see the argument during 3-2 counts.
Oleoay
6/25
I would think that pitchers that are considered "slower" to the plate because they don't use a slide step would allow runners to get a bigger secondary lead. That secondary lead would definitely make it harder to turn a double play since it gives more opportunity for the runner to either beat the force at 2nd or to disrupt the pivot to first base.

Just a guess though.