For years now, it seems that major league ball clubs and fans have associated pitching with height. The common belief is that the taller a pitcher is, the better that pitcher performs and the more durable he is. If you believe this theory, you won’t find many people who disagree with you, and you would have plenty of examples: Randy Johnson, Nolan Ryan, Clayton Kershaw, David Price the list goes on and on. Many GM’s around Major League Baseball believe that taller pitchers are also more durable, therefore worth the long term investment. So does height really make a pitcher more effective? Are pitchers like Pedro Martinez, Tim Lincecum, Billy Wagner, and Whitney Ford; who are all under 6 foot tall, flukes? Or should scouts focus less on the pitchers height and more on his statistics? Recent studies have shown that there is no correlation between size and pitching. While many taller pitchers are very successful and durable recent studies, from credible organizations such as SABR, have shown that size doesn’t matter when it comes to pitching. Recent findings now suggest that, contrary to popular belief, height has no affect on a pitcher’s effectiveness or durability.
A recent study conducted by SABR, or The Society For Baseball Research, showed that there is no direct correlation between the height of a pitcher and his ability and subsequent durability. In an article written by Glenn P. Greenberg, the height of pitcher’s and its affect on different facets of the game is debated. Greenberg states that many baseball minds believe taller pitchers are just better than their shorter counterparts, “One common baseball theory is that taller pitchers are more durable and just intrinsically better than shorter pitchers.” (Greenberg) Greenberg continues the study by only selecting players that were good enough to be drafted by baseball clubs, and formulated his experiment from there. Linear regressions and chi-square tests were used to determine the answer to this complicated question, which Greenberg soon found the answer to, “As a result, the most this paper can say is that, when it comes to players who are good enough to be drafted in the Rule 4 amateur draft, the correlation between height and a player’s effectiveness or durability is not statistically significant.” (Greenberg) So Greenberg set out to prove that size wasn’t a factor in effectiveness of a pitcher. Greenberg studied relief pitchers and starters from the years 1990-2007, and what he found was contrary to popular belief. “The data show no evidence of a statistically significant correlation, for starting pitchers, between height (in inches) and any of the customary measures of pitching effectiveness. These include strikeouts per nine innings, walks per nine innings, strikeouts per walk, home runs per nine innings, WHIP (walks plus hits divided by innings pitched), and earned run average. The highest r-square was .5 percent for a nonlinear regression for strikeouts per nine innings pitched. An r-square of .5 percent is extraordinarily small. It means that height has little ability to predict the number of strikeouts per nine innings a pitcher would throw. In addition, the p-values are all very high, the lowest being .14—almost three times greater than the maximum p-value indicating statistical significance.” (Greenberg). You can see this data by clicking HERE. Lincoln Hamilton of Scouting Science seems to agree with Greenberg and his findings. Hamilton studied every pitcher in 2007 and focused on their VORP (Victory Over Replacement Player, which is similar to WAR) and he found that, “The correlation for all 2007 pitchers’ VORP and height is just 0.086, which straddles the line between very small positive correlation and statistically insignificant.” (Hamilton) among other findings. So what does this all mean to Hamilton? “As you step back from the numbers you see that height has very little to do with VORP for major league pitchers.” (Hamilton) and “My research suggests that height has very little to do with a pitcher’s value.” (Hamilton) Jeff Zimmerman of Hard Ball Times agrees with the other two gentlemen. While he sees a small difference in the minor leagues, Zimmerman sees no correlation between height and effectiveness of pitchers in the majors, “The difference in ERA begins to lessen among the three levels, but is still noticeable. Once starting pitchers get to Triple-A (4.53 vs 4.50 vs 4.49) and the majors (4.22 vs 4.27 vs 4.21), the differences have all but vanished.” (Zimmerman) Zimmerman uses many data tables to explain his point and they show that the ERA of pitcher’s is essentially on the same plane whether they are short or tall (If you want to view those data tables click HERE).
So in conclusion, should major league clubs draft pitchers based on their size, or is it all a false presumption? Glenn Greenberg seems to think it’s all a false presumption, “The data speak for themselves. Baseball organizations have been scouting, signing, and developing players based on a fallacious assumption. Shorter pitchers are just as effective and durable as taller pitchers. If a player has the ability to get drafted, then he should be drafted in the round that fits his talent.” (Greenberg). Green also says that taller players are often times given more opportunities to start in the majors, while smaller guys get relegated to the bullpen and that contributes to the false assumption that major league starters must be tall (Greenberg). So there you have it, contrary to popular belief the height of a pitcher actually has nothing to do with their effectiveness and durability; sorry for shattering that belief baseball historians.
Greenberg, Glenn P. “SABR.” Does a Pitcher’s Height Matter? 2010 Baseball Research Journal, 10 June 2010. Web. 08 Sept. 2015. <http://sabr.org/research/does-pitcher-s-height-matter>.
Hamilton, Lincoln. “Scouting Science: Does Height Matter for MLB Pitchers?” Scouting Science: Does Height Matter for MLB Pitchers? Project Prospect, 7 Feb. 2008. Web. 08 Sept. 2015. <http:// projectprospect.com/article/2008/02/07/scouting-science-does-height-matter-for-mlb-pitchers>.
Zimmerman, Jeff. “Should Short Pitchers Still Get Short Shrift?” The Hardball Times. The Hardball Times, 6 Oct. 2014. Web. 08 Sept. 2015. <http://www.hardballtimes.com/short-pitchers-still- getting-short-shrift/>.
Pedro Martinez sitting next to Randy Johnson at 2015 HOF induction
It seems as though taller pitchers do have longer careers and more successful careers, but this is not always the case. Whenever I watch a game, I hear announcers talk about the ball coming at the hitter on a downhill plane, which makes it harder to hit. I’m not sure why this is. I never thought of the intimidation factor of it though. That’s pretty interesting.
I believe a taller pitcher actually has more of a psychological effect on the batter rather than a physical one. Speaking from experience, I played baseball until I was about 15 years old. I always remember saying to myself when I saw a taller kid pitching “This kid might tough to hit.” It was almost like I was doubting myself before I even got a chance to hit. I think when general managers draft players is, if they see a six foot seven pitcher vs. a six foot pitcher with the same potential, a general manager might be more inclined to pick the bigger pitcher for more of an “intimidation” factor toward the batter