"Paul Nyman has an article on Phil Hughes' mechanics. Personally, I am very skeptical of all the analysis on mechanics out there...."  
   
   "More Hughes Mechanics Babble Because you know you want to read the 1000th inexplicable anatomical jargon-laden report on Phil Hughes' pitching mechanics....."  
  
   These comments appeared on various websites in response to my article "Phil Hughes and Mystery Meat Mechanics".  I can't find fault with this type of thinking/attitude. That's why I call it ....  Mystery Meat Mechanics?  
  
   Mechanics; The Root of All Evil?  
  
   Type in the words "pitching mechanics" into Google is all one has to do to see why mechanics could be referred to as "mechanical babble". Pages and pages of anything and everything from the art of pitching for the science of pitching to you shouldn't pitcher baseball until you 16 years old or have x-rays on both elbows to determine your physiological age.  
  
   15 years ago when I first began SETPRO I vowed I would never attempt to convince someone that I knew something about how the body throws a ball or swings the bat. Why? Because those seeking information on how the body swings a throws by the very fact that they're looking for that information almost assures they know little or nothing about which they seek and begs the question  "how does one who knows nothing about the thing they are seeking know when they find it?"  
  
   The universal (logical?) answer to this question (making a decision about any product or service which one knows nothing about) is "brand name". For baseball instruction "brand name" is Major-League Baseball. "Brand name" is a player or coach whose name implies baseball success. Instructionals/mechanics information may be the "alleged" product of the "brand name" OR someone else's product endorsed by "brand name".
  
   Examples of "Brand Naming"
    
   An unknown especially unknown with minimal baseball "credentials" (playing or coaching experience) has virtually no hope convincing the baseball establishment that you know something about how to swing or throw. 15 years ago I made the decision to rely on "hardware" (training equipment) as opposed to "software" (training/instructional information) because hardware can stand on its own (what it did).
    
   But its impossible to develop the best training equipment and player development systems for maximizing swing and throw capabilities if you don't understand (in great detail) exactly what it is you are developing equipment for i.e. how the body optimally swings and how the body optimally throws.
    
   Fortunately for me (and my sanity) the world 15 years ago was on the cusp of a huge informational change called the Internet. The availability of a low cost mass communication channel makes it possible to dispense information that parents, coaches instructors, the ones who wanted to do everything possible to improve their knowledge and capabilities do find valuable.
    
   I am happy to say today I was/am able to light a few small candles in what still is very long and very dark night called pitching and hitting mechanics analysis and instruction. These pinpoints of light are the identification and application of concepts from disciplines such as physics, I mechanics, physiology, kinesiology and motor learning and control to create a better understanding of how the body efficiently and maximally swings and throws. Specifics such as  Intent, scapula loading, throwing tempo, the importance of arm action, swing quickness versus bat speed. I have the good fortune of not only witnessing the successful implementation and use of these concepts by players, coaches and instructors but also making their way into mainstream baseball discussions.
    
   But as with almost things in life for a plus there is a potential minus.
    
   For example I recently saw an analysis where a number of concepts I developed as applied to throwing are inferred or discussed.  
    
     A Mechanics Analysis "Minus"
    
   The following is an excerpt from the above analysis:

          
            There are a quite a few minuses there but the most egregious ones (for me) are those that not only misrepresent someone else's work but also do nothing to help develop a better understanding how players optimally throw the baseball. It is this type of misrepresentation or misinformation that continues to plague baseball player development as a whole. It is this type of misinformation and misinterpretation that creates barriers between those who are responsible for developing players and those who are really attempting to contribute to a better understanding of what it takes to maximize a players abilities.
          
       This person exhibits at least two major flaws/fallacies with his analysis specific to his comments on the inverted W. First of all he really doesn't understand what the inverted W is which is typical of just about everyone who criticizes the inverted W, i.e. they don't know what it nor have they taken the time or made the effort (other than to criticize and find fault with)  to investigate it.

And secondly this personreally doesn't know much of anything about the actual biomechanics of throwing.
          
         First: about the inverted W
          
         The inverted W describes anatomically actions primarily of the scapula that initiate throwing action earlier than any other type of arm action.
          
         When I first began looking at pitchers such as Nolan Ryan, John Smoltz, Pedro Martinez pitchers who threw hard and were successful and based upon principles of development, conservation and transformation of momentum as part of the throwing process, I defined the initiation of the throw as beginning with separation of hands from the glove.         

I also observed that it is possible for a pitcher to be more efficient mechanically if he allows the momentum generated from the dropping of the hands to be recycled into the throwing arm. I noted this particularly in Pedro Martinez.  My premise being that the dropping of the hands arms was analogous to a roller coaster going down an incline developing momentum that could be then used to climb the next incline.
 
The motion/movement pattern I believe most efficient in achieving this is when the scapula becomes engaged to help separate the ball from the glove which creates a lifting of the elbows BY the scapula. The goal is to channel the momentum from the hand drop and separation into the scapula/upper torso.
 
Critics of scapula loading often referred to scapula loading as something that should be allowed to "naturally happen". Which to me is the same as the throwing of a 100 mph fastball should be allowed to "naturally happen". Neither a 100 mph fastball or scapula loading  will naturally happen unless the player makes it happen.
 
Another point of great confusion is the general lack anatomical and kinesthetic knowledge of how the body's muscles actually create movement. The scapula is one of the most mobile bones in the body. It is also the critical link between the torso and the arm. The scapula can be elevated, depressed, pinched, extended.
 
Critics of the inverted W do not understand that you can elevate the scapula which elevates the elbow without changing the geometry of the glenohumeral joint. Any time they see the elbow above the shoulder they immediately equate this to hyperextension or hyperflexion of the glenohumeral joint not realizing that the scapula can elevate the elbow without violating the range of motion of the glenohumeral joint.  
 
 
Second the biomechanics of throwing....
 
In this clip this person makes a statement that the inverted W. places undue stress on the elbow (UCL) and shoulder capsule to which I respond with the following article:
 
"Kinetics of Baseball Pitching with Implications About Injury Mechanisms
 
Glenn S. Fleisig, PhD, James R. Andrews, MD, Charles J. Dillman, PhD, Rafael F. Escamilla, MS, CSCS; American Sports Medicine Institute, Birmingham, Alabama
 
Elbow and shoulder kinetics for 26 highly skilled, healthy adult pitchers were  calculated using high-speed motion analysis. Two critical instants were 1)  shortly before the arm reached maximum external rotation, when 67 N-m of  shoulder internal rotation torque and 64 N-m of elbow varus torque were  generated, and 2) shortly after ball release, when 1090 N of shoulder com  pressive force was produced. Inability to generate suf ficient elbow varus  torque may result in medial tension, lateral compression, or posteromedial  impingement in jury. At the glenohumeral joint, compressive force, joint laxity,  and 380 N of anterior force during arm cocking can lead to anterior glenoid  labral tear. Rapid internal rotation in combination with these forces can  produce a grinding injury factor on the labrum. After ball release, 400 N of  posterior force, 1090 N of compressive force, and 97 N-m of horizontal abduction  torque are generated at the shoulder; contribution of rotator cuff muscles in  generating these loads may result in cuff tensile fail ure. Horizontal  adduction, internal rotation, and superior translation of the abducted humerus  may cause sub acromial impingement. Tension in the biceps tendon, due to muscle  contraction for both elbow flexion torque and shoulder compressive force, may  tear the antero superior labrum."
 
There are two critical  biomechanical issues...
 
 First maximal stresses on the shoulder and elbow do not occur until well into the delivery i.e. almost at the point of maximum external rotation of the throwing shoulder which is long after any "alleged" effects created by the inverted W.
  
 Second it must be also noted that all pitchers regardless of their arm action create external rotation of the throwing arm. A number of studies suggest that the amount of external rotation correlates to how hard the baseball is thrown. So it's not surprising that the harder a pitcher throws the gray the potential stress on both shoulder and elbow.
  
 Most who are involved in player development including just about all of professional baseball are skeptical of those who proclaim their pitching mechanics or hitting mechanics expertise. Even more so when they start performing analysis on players. As I said previously for everyplus there is a potential minus.

The plus of the Internet is the ability to disseminate information to wide audience.

The minus of the Internet is the ability to disseminate information to wide audience.

The key word here is "information"......