Over the course of my career, it became abundantly clear to me that I was really passionate about helping the next generation of athletes. Watch this video. 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 It will explain everything…

Of all the Brewers RBI hits in game 3... ZERO WERE PULLED IN THE AIR!

In the history of the least shocking information of all time - people that baseball good are good at playing baseball

Soon they’ll stop calling them upsets… when I got to visit Coach Ches this past spring, I told the donor he was having lunch with: “it’s not a matter of IF he wins, it’s just a matter of WHEN.” That WHEN - is now!

Haha please elaborate… What part of the plot am I missing… I will try to summarize. 1. The initial tweet was about the optimization of bat path accounting for both horizontal attack angle and horizontal bat angle 2. That path is singularly based off the predisposition that the optimal outcome is a ball pulled in the air, and that the corresponding late misses would lead to a fly ball/line drive to center and a low line drive/ground ball to the opposite field. 3. Greg asked you if the bat path was accounting for pitches with different shapes and locations. 4. You said no, then told me that I’m insecure and have a tiny brain. 5. I expanded on what I think is missing. 6. You told me I was wrong and that I’m missing the plot and/or not operating in good faith. I’m trying to understand… 1. If air pull is not the insinuated optimal outcome, based off that visual, then what is? 2. How can we build a swing path model that doesn’t account for the number one consideration - the variations in pitch, speed, type, location, and not to mention. Hitter’s perception of all those things? 3. How can anyone describe what is deemed to be “good” without understanding any of the above? 4. My friend asked you to define conditions… you have yet to provide any. Door is still open…

The fact that is the only thing you took from that post is the primary issue with social media. You talked about strawman arguments in you original tweets and yet that is the singular thing that you could comment on from a fairly in depth note, so you jumped all over it. And yes, Driveline would argue that Ichiro “should have been better than he was,” the same way they would claim that every current Big Leaguer could benefit from more bat speed and air pull. If you’re denying that, then we can’t even have a conversation. The concepts behind everything in their modeling are predicated off the fact that every hitter ever will encounter the same pitch circumstances throughout the course of their season/career. In the history of arguments that lack context, I can think of any singular one that lacks more… The reason Driveline was able to help so many pitchers (and I give them credit for that) was because they were able to affect the player who was controlling the ball (aka the input). Hitters don’t control their circumstances. Any data model that is built off that is wildly incomplete.

To argue that I didn’t get paid to use my brain speaks volumes to the lack of awareness you have to what I went through in my career. 1. I was at the forefront of the swing revolution with @TewksHitting and it is well documented. 2. I’m the co-founder of a sports tech company that’s trying to solve similar problems to the ones that are being discussed. 3. I graduated Cum Laude from College after graduating 7th in my high school class of over 300 students. (I can’t believe I had to write this in a tweet) So now that my “brain’s credentials” are out of the way… Implying that I don’t understand the argument that is being made is wildly incorrect. What I have a problem with is how cavalier people are in discussing hitting. The implications behind how simple this all is and should be for hitters are astonishing. What I believe Greg (and every other professional hitter that jumps into these dialogues knows) was alluding to, is how this can all possibly be concluded, without truly understanding how the hitter will be, or is being attacked. The amount of variance possible, plausible, and highly likely to happen in any given at bat, diminish any given player’s ability to create the “intended ideal bat path” at incredibly high clips. Without speaking for anyone else, what irritates me incredibly is how short sighted it is to start off of the premise of air pull being the thing that all hitters should strive for, and building a swing path entirely off that concept. Hitters who do that are wildly susceptible to pitch variation and timing disruption. Every hitter that has played past high school baseball knows that and doesn’t need a data model to validate it. But I can certainly go scrounge one up if that’s what’s necessary to validate the size of my brain. So, in conclusion… I very clearly understand what the model is implying. I think it is absolutely criminal to try and condition a generation full of hitters that “air pull and bat speed” are the conclusion that every hitter should arrive at independent of a swarm of other things being considered. This model literally implies that Ichiro wasn’t good and that he should have done things differently in his career.

No Greg. Not in real life. But in this skeleton, computer driven world where actual humans don’t play baseball, then yes.

The amount of people arguing over swing mechanics in 2026 is fascinating to me. 16 years ago “Hitting Twitter” became a thing. Anyone that thinks that concepts or drills that are being replayed - over and over again - are novel, has clearly just not been paying attention. The fact that people are still arguing over this stuff is baffling to me. There are differences between cues/feels/thoughts, and what is actually happening. The fact that most people are still intentionally talking about them like they are one and the same makes me scratch my head.

It seems like lots of people are interested in complaining about the state of the game at the amateur level… If that isn’t obvious at this point, then you’re probably not breathing in air. The real question is though: How many people are willing to do something about it? We’ve identified the problem… let’s start doing things to fix it. If you’re interested, just let us know…

It's hard to be honest with a player about how good they are. What's even harder is watching that player get broken by the system that has lied to him since he was a little kid. People who care about you will tell you what you NEED to hear. People who don't will you what you want to hear.

The Yankees are playing Championship baseball…

OBP makes sense in regards to the zone being smaller, and the ability to challenge (i.e. likelihood of more walks). So net/net, with slug remaining about the same, more walks leading to more runs per game. I don't think that was the intent, of MLB trying to "spark more offense" with the moves they have made over the last few years (DH, shift ban, challenge system). You might also argue that the type of player the game values is different now. IMO, they don't care if you can hit as long as you can play 3 positions at league average.

What stands out to me JJ, is that the zone is now smaller, the shift has been removed, and by and large more and more things are being done to increase offense, and the league is still hitting .244. Based on that premise, and the whole "pitching got really nasty..." according to this - pitching in theory, "is getting even nastier" (which I'm hard pressed to believe). I'm more of the school of thought that the way hitters are being trained, isn't conducive to hitting well.

I actually just think it takes eyeballs…