ANTHROPOMETRIC AND PERFORMANCE COMPARISONS

IN PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL PLAYERS

JAY R. HOFFMAN,1 JOSE VAZQUEZ,2 NAPOLEON PICHARDO,2

AND

GERSHON TENENBAUM3

Department of Health and Exercise Science, The College of New Jersey, Ewing, New Jersey; 2Texas Rangers Baseball Club,
Arlington, Texas; and 3Department of Educational Psychology and Learning Systems, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

Hoffman, JR, Vazquez, J, Pichardo, N, and Tenenbaum, G.

Anthropometric and performance comparisons in professional
baseball players. J Strength Cond Res 23(8): 21732178,
2009This study compared anthropometric and performance
variables in professional baseball players and examined the
relationship between these variables and baseball-specific
performance (i.e., home runs, total bases, slugging percentage,
and stolen bases). During a 2-year period, 343 professional
baseball players were assessed for height, weight, body
composition, grip strength, vertical jump power, 10-yard sprint
speed, and agility. Subject population consisted of players on
the rosters of one of the minor league affiliates (Rookie, A, AA,
AAA) or major league team (MLB). All testing occurred at the
beginning of spring training. Players in Rookie and A were
significantly (p , 0.05) leaner than players in MLB and AAA.
These same players had significantly lower lean body mass than
seen in MLB, AAA, and AA players. Greater grip strength (p ,
0.05) was seen in MLB and AAA than in Rookie and A. Players
in MLB were also faster (p , 0.05) than players in AA, A, and
Rookie. Vertical jump power measures were greater (p , 0.05)
in MLB than AA, A, and Rookie. Regression analysis revealed
that performance measures accounted for 2531% of the
variance in baseball-specific power performance. Anthropometric measures failed to add any additional explanation to the
variance in these baseball-specific performance variables.
Results indicated that both anthropometric and performance
variables differed between players of different levels of
competition in professional baseball. Agility, speed, and
lower-body power appeared to provide the greatest predictive
power of baseball-specific performance.

KEY WORDS fitness, assessment, sport, power, speed, agility

Address correspondence to Dr. Jay R. Hoffman, [email protected].

23(8)/21732178
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
2009 National Strength and Conditioning Association

n recent years, professional baseball has had to defend

itself that the upsurge in power numbers seen in the
sport is the direct result of performance enhancing
drugs, primarily the use of anabolic steroids (17). The
belief is that the increase in muscle size, strength, and power
associated with these drugs have led to improvements in
baseball power numbers (e.g., home runs, total bases, and
slugging percentage). However, during this same time period,
professional baseball teams have also invested in the hiring
of strength and conditioning professionals to develop and
monitor player development. On the basis of the report from
Senator George Mitchell on anabolic steroid use in Major
League Baseball (17), professional teams were directed to
hire strength and conditioning coaches certified from the
National Strength and Conditioning Association. This
directive was based upon the understanding that the strength
and conditioning professional would be able to achieve the
desired performance outcomes based upon sound scientific
principles and minimize the use and reliance of illegal
performance enhancing drugs.
Despite the tremendous popularity of professional baseball
and the measures taken to maximize athletic performance,
little is known regarding the importance of various fitness
components impact on baseball-specific performance. Several articles were published in the 1980s on the physiologic
characteristics and preseason assessment programs of professional baseball players (3,7). However, these investigations
did not examine how these factors impacted sport-specific
performance. Potteiger and colleagues (20) in 1992 examined
the physiological responses to a single baseball game in
pitchers but failed to investigate which physiological
components were predictive of baseball performance.
Subsequent studies have examined the positive benefit of
various resistance training programs on reductions in
shoulder and elbow pain (14), enhancing throwing velocity
in pitchers (16,18), and enhancing bat velocity in position
players (4,11,24). The role that these specific fitness
components have on specific baseball performance, however,
is not clear. Pedegana and colleagues (19) suggested that
improvement in upper-extremity strength (specifically in
elbow and wrist extensors) may enhance throwing velocity,
whereas Spaniol (23) has suggested that leg power is
VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 8 | NOVEMBER 2009 |

2173

Performance Characteristics in Professional Baseball

positively related to throwing speed, bat speed, and battedball velocity. Recently, Kohmura and colleagues (12)
reported that strength, power, and agility were significantly
correlated to the subjective evaluation of batting and fielding
performance in Japanese college baseball players. However,
the comparisons between subjective measures of evaluation
by the coaches were moderately correlated, suggesting
a potential large variability in the rating scales among the
coaches. The potential of fitness variables to differentiate
between different levels of play and their relationship with
objective baseball performance variables has not been
investigated. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare
anthropometric and performance variables across different
levels of professional baseball and to examine the predictive
power that these variables have on baseball-specific power
performance.

(pro-agility) tests. All testing sessions (10-yd spring) were

supervised by certified strength and conditioning specialists.
Anthropometric (height, body mass, and body composition)
and isometric strength measures were taken and performed
initially, followed by vertical jump, speed, and agility testing.
Test-retest reliabilities for all assessments were R . 0.90.
Isometric Handgrip Testing

METHODS

Isometric grip strength was assessed with a Jamar Handgrip

Dynamometer (Sammons Preston, Bolingbrook, IL, USA).
All measurements were assessed with the subjects dominant
and nondominant hands. Isometric handgrip assessments
were performed as previously described (9). Each subject was
seated with back straight, arm resting on the arm rest, and the
elbow at 90. Subjects were instructed to maintain the arm in
that position while performing a maximal effort attempt.
After 2 maximal effort attempts, the highest score in
kilograms was recorded.

Experimental Approach to the Problem

Vertical Jump and Anaerobic Power Measures

All subjects were professional baseball players that were under

contract to play for the Texas Rangers baseball franchise.
Players were examined before the onset of preseason training
for 2 consecutive seasons. During the preseason training camp,
players were assigned to either the major league team (MLB)
or one of the ballclubs affiliate minor league teams (Rookie, A,
AA, or AAA). For players that competed for more than 1 team
(e.g., AAA and AA), all baseball statistics were summed for the
entire season. For comparing fitness variables among leagues,
players were placed in the category (level of play) that they
played the most games in. Field assessments were used to
analyze lower-body power, speed, agility, grip strength, and
body composition. Baseball statistics (home runs, total bases,
slugging percentage, and stolen bases) were completed at the
end of each season. All testing sessions were supervised by
certified strength and conditioning specialists.

Countermovement vertical jump height was measured using

a Vertec (Sports Imports, Columbus, OH, USA). Before
testing, each athletes standing vertical reach height was
determined. Vertical jump height was calculated by subtracting the standing reach height from the jump height. Subjects
performed 3 attempts. The highest vertical jump height
achieved was recorded. To determine power output, vertical
jump heights were converted to watts using the Harman
formula (8).
Speed and Agility Assessments

Three hundred forty-three professional baseball players from

the Texas Rangers professional baseball organization were
examined during the course of 2 separate seasons. Players
were either on the roster of the ballclubs minor league
affiliates (Rookie, A, AA, or AAA) or on the major league
roster. Minor league affiliates differ on baseball performance
ability. As players move from Rookie, A, to AAA, the level of
baseball performance is assumed to improve. All performance
assessments were part of the athletes normal training camp
routine. Players gave their informed consent as part of their
sport requirements, which is consistent with the institutions
policies of our institutional review board for use of human
subjects in research.

Speed was determined by a timed 10-yard (9-m) sprint. Sprint

times were measured using an infrared testing device (Speed
Trap II; Brower Timing Systems, Draper, UT, USA) as
performed on an Astroturf field. Timing began on the
subjects movement out of a 2-point (base-running) stance.
The best of 3 attempts was recorded as the subjects best time.
Agility was determined by a pro-agility test on an Astroturf
field. The protocol was conducted as previously described (9).
Three lines with 5 yards (4.5 m) between each line were
marked on the field. The subject straddled a middle line and
sprinted to one line (4.5-m away) and touched the line.
He then changed direction and sprinted to the far opposite
line (9-m away), touched the line with the same hand used
to touch the first line, reversed direction, and returned to the
starting point. Subjects were instructed to sprint through
the finish line. Agility times were measured using a handheld
stopwatch. The timer began upon the athletes initial movement and stopped as the athlete crossed the finish line. The
same investigator conducted all agility tests. Each subject performed 3 maximal attempts, and the fastest time was recorded.

Performance Assessments

Statistical Analyses

Subjects anthropometric measurements were taken (height,

body mass, and body composition), and they performed
isometric strength (hand-grip dynamometer), vertical jump
and anaerobic power measures, speed (10-yd sprint), and agility

Statistical comparisons among different levels of professional

baseball were accomplished using a one-way analysis of
variance (ANOVA). In the event of a significant F-ratio, LSD
post-hoc tests were used for pair-wise comparisons. Pearson

Subjects

2174

the

TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

the

TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

| www.nsca-jscr.org

TABLE 1. Anthropometric and performance comparisons among levels of play in professional baseball.
Variable

Rookie (n = 90)

A (n = 84)

AA (n = 50)

AAA (n = 52)

MLB (n = 62)

Age (yr)
21.3 6 2.5
22.9 6 2.1
24.9 6 2.2
26.8 6 2.7
28.7 6 4.2
Height (cm)
185.2 6 5.8
185.4 6 6.1
185.5 6 5.8
187.5 6 6.9
186.7 6 6.1
Body mass (kg)
92.0 6 9.8
92.0 6 9.6
96.0 6 7.9
99.5 6 12.0 101.2 6 10.5{
Body fat (%)
12.0 6 3.5
12.4 6 3.6
12.8 6 2.9
13.7 6 3.4
13.8 6 3.0
Lean body mass (kg)
80.8 6 7.0
80.4 6 6.5
83.6 6 5.8
85.7 6 9.3
87.1 6 7.9 {
Vertical jump (cm)
70.1 6 7.6
70.1 6 7.1
69.1 6 7.1
71.1 6 8.4
71.9 6 8.2
Vertical jump peak
10,798 6 791 10,823 6 737 11,127 6 622 11,435 6 957 11,542 6 849{
power (w)
Vertical jump mean
3835 6 499
3850 6 475
4052 6 393
4235 6 605
4298 6 539{
power (w)
Grip strength (kg)
103.5 6 12.5 105.2 6 12.6 111.6 6 12.7 115.6 6 12.6 111.0 6 16.0
10-yard sprint (s)
1.57 6 0.09
1.59 6 0.07
1.58 6 0.07
1.55 6 0.09
1.52 6 0.10{
Pro-agility (s)
4.54 6 0.19
4.48 6 0.54
4.42 6 0.68
4.53 6 0.20
4.42 6 0.90
*p # 0.05 compared with rookie league, p # 0.05 compared with A league; {p # 0.05 compared with AA league.
p # 0.05 compared with all other groups.

product-moment correlations were used to examine selected

bivariate correlations between physical fitness assessments
and baseball-specific performance variables. A hierarchical
linear regression was performed using 2 clusters. The first
cluster comprised fitness components (i.e., vertical jump
power, grip strength, 10-yd sprint, pro-agility), and the
second cluster comprised the anthropometric measures (i.e.,
height, body mass, body fat percent, lean body mass). A
2-model procedure was performed using baseball-specific
performance variables (i.e., home runs, total bases, slugging
percentage, and stolen bases) as dependent variables
separately. For each model, standardized regression

coefficients (b) were determined along with the respective

examination for 0-difference using a paired t-test. Percent
variance for each model and added and total variance
were determined, and an ANOVA was used to assess the
significance of each model. A criterion alpha level of p # 0.05
was used to determine statistical significance. All data are
reported as mean 6 SD.

RESULTS
Anthropometric and performance comparisons among the
different levels of play in professional baseball are shown in
Table 1. At each level of play, the age of the players was

TABLE 2. Selected bivariate correlations between fitness components and baseball performance.

Lean body mass

Grip strength
10-yard sprint
Pro-agility
VJ PP
VJ MP

Home
runs (r, r2)

Total bases
(r, r2)

Slugging
percentage (r, r2)

Stolen
bases (r, r2)

0.478
0.228
0.317
0.100
20.089
0.008
0.001
0.000
0.481
0.231
0.476
0.227

0.292
0.085
0.213
0.045
20.251
0.063
20.153
0.023
0.281
0.079
0.270
0.073

0.474
0.225
0.273
0.074
20.064
0.004
0.033
0.001
0.471
0.222
0.465
0.216

20.188
0.035
0.099
0.010
20.422
0.178
20.482
0.232
20.216
0.047
20.246
0.061

*VJ PP = vertical jump peak power; VJ MP = vertical jump mean power.

p # 0.05.

VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 8 | NOVEMBER 2009 |

2175

Performance Characteristics in Professional Baseball

significantly greater peak and
mean jump power than players
in the A and Rookie league.
Grip strength was significantly
greater for players in MLB,
AAA, and AA leagues compared with players in A and
Rookie leagues. No differences
were seen in time for the proagility test between players at
any level of competition, but
players in MLB were significantly faster in the 10-yard
sprint than players in AA, A,
and Rookie leagues. No other
significant differences in 10Figure 1. Scatter plot examining bivariate correlation between peak power and slugging percentage.
yard sprint speed were noted
among players of any of the
other professional leagues.
significantly different than all other levels. MLB players were
Table 2 provides selected bivariate correlations between
significantly heavier than Rookie, A, and AA players,
fitness components and baseball performance. Correlations
whereas AAA and AA players were significantly heavier
revealed significant positive relations between lower-body
than players in Rookie and A leagues. Significantly higher
power performance and home runs, total bases, and slugging
body fat percentages were seen between MLB and AAA level
percentage. Figures 1 and 2 depict the relationship between
players compared with Rookie and A level players. However,
vertical jump peak and mean power to slugging percentage,
MLB players still had significantly greater lean body mass
respectively. Significant correlations were also obtained
than players in Rookie, A, and AA, whereas AAA and AA
between grip strength and home runs (r = 0.317), total
players had significantly greater lean body mass than players
bases (r = 0.213), and slugging percentage (r = 0.273).
in both Rookie and A leagues.
Lean body mass was also significantly correlated to home
No differences were noted in vertical jump height between
runs, total bases, and slugging percentage. Significant negathe players at any of the levels of professional baseball.
tive correlations were observed between 10-yard sprint
However, significant differences were observed in vertical
times and stolen bases (r = 20.422) and between agility
jump power. Players in MLB had significantly greater peak
times and stolen bases (r = 20.482).
and mean jump power than players in the AA, A, and Rookie
Regression results for the anthropometric and performance
leagues. In addition, players in the AAA and AA leagues had
measures are presented in Table 3. The correlation between
vertical jump mean and peak
power was r = 0.99, and thus all
regression analyses were performed using vertical jump
mean power only. The physical
fitness measures (model 1)
accounted for 25%, 29%, 31%,
and 29% of the total bases,
home runs, slugging percentage, and stolen bases variance,
respectively. Model 1 was
found to be significant (p ,
0.05) for all dependent variables. Vertical jump mean power,
pro-agility, and 10-yard sprint
were significant predictors of
total bases. Vertical jump mean
power was the only significant
predictor of home runs and
Figure 2. Scatter plot examining bivariate correlation between mean power and slugging percentage.
slugging percentage, whereas

2176

the

TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

the

TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

| www.nsca-jscr.org

TABLE 3. Regression statistics for 2-model procedure predicting total bases, home runs, slugging %, and stolen bases by
physical fitness and anthropometric measures in baseball players.
Total bases
Model
1

Pro-agility
Sprint 10-yard
Grip strength
VJMP
Pro-agility
Sprint 10-yard
Grip strength
VJMP
Height
LBM
Body mass
Body fat percent
df = 4,66

df = 8,62

Home runs
p

2.31 22.18 0.03

2.24 21.94 0.05
2.02
2.14 0.89
.37
2.48 0.02
2.38 22.43 0.02
2.29 22.19 0.03
.03
.20 0.84
2.40
2.36 0.72
.08
.57 0.57
.44
.34 0.74
.05
.05 0.96
.43
.76 0.45
F = 5.44, p = 0.001;
R = 0.50, R2 = 0.25
F = 3.07, p = 0.006;
R = 0.53, R2= 0.28

Slugging percentage
p

2.26 21.91 0.06

2.04
2.36 0.72
.18
.13 0.89
.59
4.13 0.00
2.26 21.74 0.09
2.06
2.50 0.62
.03
.23 0.82
.78
.71 0.48
.04
.28 0.78
2.29
2.23 0.82
.07
.06 0.95
2.01
2.02 0.98
F = 6.68, p = 0.000;
R = 0.54, R2 = 0.29
F = 3.20, p = 0.004;
R = 0.54, R2 = 0.29

2.22 21.63 0.11

2.07
2.56 0.58
2.06
2.46 0.65
.63
4.39 0.00
2.24 21.57 0.12
2.07
2.55 0.59
2.05
2.36 0.72
.31
.28 0.78
2.06
2.45 0.66
.14
.11 0.91
.21
.20 0.85
.03
.05 0.96
F = 7.49, p = 0.000;
R = 0.56, R2 = 0.31
F = 3.58, p = 0.002;
R = 0.56, R2 = 0.32

Stolen bases
b

2.24 21.77 0.08

2.23 21.92 0.05
.18
1.31 0.20
2.24 21.61 0.11
2.24 21.54 0.13
2.23 21.75 0.08
.18
1.21 0.23
2.21
2.19 0.85
2.07
2.48 0.64
2.17
2.13 0.90
.27
.25 0.81
2.15
2.26 0.79
F = 6.68, p = 0.000;
R = 0.54, R2 = 0.29
F = 3.20, p = 0.004;
R = 0.54, R2 = 0.29

*VJMP = vertical jump mean power.

the pro-agility measure tended (p = 0.06) toward significance

in home runs. The 10-yard sprint was the only significant
predictor of stolen bases, whereas the pro-agility measure
again tended (p = 0.08) toward significance as a predictor for
stolen bases as well. Adding anthropometric measures
(model 2) to the analysis added only 3% and 1% to the
variability of total bases and slugging percentage, respectively. However, it did not provide any additional explanation
to the variance for home runs and stolen bases. Although
model 2 was found to be significant for all dependent
variables, none of the anthropometric measures were found
to be a significant predictor for any of the dependent
variables.

DISCUSSION
Results of this study indicate that both anthropometric and
performance variables are able to differentiate professional
baseball players at different levels of competition. Lean body
mass, speed, lower-body power, and grip strength were also
shown to be significantly correlated with baseball-specific
performance variables. Although this appears to be the first
study to examine the relationship between various components of fitness and baseball performance, previous studies
examining strength/power in athletes have shown that
physical ability can be an effective predictor of success in
college basketball (10), college football (1,2,5,6), and professional football (13,16,22).
Physical performance characteristics have been shown to
differentiate between starters and nonstarters, playing time,

and different divisions of play. A 4-year study of an elite

NCAA Division I college basketball team, using playing time
as the dependent variable, reported that lower-body strength,
speed, and power contributed to greater playing time (10).
Strength, power, and speed have also been shown to
differentiate starters from nonstarters in 11 NCAA Division
I football teams (2). Similarly, Schmidt (21) demonstrated
that strength and power can differentiate starters from
nonstarters in NCAA Division III football players. Fry and
Kraemer (5) have also reported that these performance
attributes can also differentiate between different levels of
competitive play in college football. Power, speed, and
strength also appear to differentiate drafted and undrafted
players entering the NFL draft (22) and accurately predict
draft status (16). However, of these measures, only speed
appears to be the best predictor of continued success (based
upon salary and football-specific performance) during the
athletes professional football career (13).
There are a number of factors that contribute to successful
sports performance. Although all athletes and coaches desire
greater strength, power, and speed, the critical component for
success in athletic endeavors is the athletes sport-specific
skill. This appears to be the most critical component that
determines playing time (10) and is what likely contributed to
the overall low to moderate correlations seen between
anthropometric and performance measures and baseballspecific outcomes. However, once this variable is factored
out, then the relative importance of physical factors relating
to athleticism appear to become more important. A recent
VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 8 | NOVEMBER 2009 |

2177

Performance Characteristics in Professional Baseball

study has suggested that strength, power, and agility are
related to the subjective evaluation of batting and fielding
performance (12). The present investigation provides
additional support to these findings by showing that
lower-body power, speed, and agility account significantly
and substantially for objective baseball performance. Although grip strength was significantly correlated to several
baseball-specific performance variables, it did not significantly add to the regression analysis predicting performance
outcomes. It is likely that the more powerful athletes were
also the stronger athletes, and most of the variance relating to
grip strength could be explained by the variance relating
to vertical jump power (r range 0.540.51, between grip
strength and mean and peak power, respectively).

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
Focus on strength, power, and speed improvements in
baseball players appears to be highly desirable in the
development of their training programs. The use of
performance testing in player selection, especially in regard
to the amateur draft, may potentially provide valuable
information to general managers and scouting professionals
in making a more educated decision in the signing and
drafting of perspective professional baseball players.

REFERENCES
1. Berg, K, Latin, RW, and Baechle, T. Physical and performance
characteristics of NCAA Division I football players. Res Quart
61: 395401, 1990.
2. Black, W and Roundy, E. Comparisons of size, strength, speed
and power in NCAA division I-A football players. J Strength Cond
Res 8: 8085, 1994.

8. Harman, EA, Rosenstein, MT, Frykman, PN, Rosenstein, RM, and

Kraemer, WJ. Estimation of human power output from vertical
jump. J Appl Sport Sci Res 5: 116120, 1991.
9. Hoffman, JR. Norms for Fitness, Performance and Health. Human
Kinetics: Champaign, IL, 2006. pp. 2739.
10. Hoffman, JR, Tennenbaum, G, Maresh, CM, and Kraemer, WJ.
Relationship between athletic performance tests and playing time in
elite college basketball players. J Strength Cond Res 10: 6771, 1996.
11. Hughes, SS, Lyons, BC, and Mayo, JJ. Effect of grip strength and grip
strengthening exercises on instantaneous bat velocity of collegiate
baseball players. J Strength Cond Res 18: 298301, 2004.
12. Kohmura, Y, Aoki, K, Yoshigi, H, Sakuraba, K, and Yanagiya, T.
Development of a baseball-specific battery of tests and a testing
protocol for college baseball players. J Strength Cond Res 22:
10511058, 2008.
13. Kuzmits, FE and Adams, AJ. The NFL combine: does it predict
performance in the National Football League? J Strength and Cond
Res 22: 17211727, 2008.
14. Lachewetz, T, Drury, D, Elliot, R, Evon, J, and Pastiglione, J. The
effect of intercollegiate baseball strength program on the reduction
of shoulder and elbow pain. J Strength Cond Res 12: 4651, 1998.
15. Mckee, KJ and Burkett, LN. The National Football League combine:
a reliable predictor of draft status? J Strength Cond Res 17: 611, 2003.
16. Mcevoy, KP and Newton, RU. Baseball throwing speed and base
running speed: The effects of ballistic resistance training. J Strength
Cond Res 12: 216221, 1998.
17. Mitchell, GJ. Report to the Commissioner of Baseball of an Independent
Investigation into the Illegal Use of Steroids and Other Performance
Substances by Players in Major League Baseball Office of the Commissioner
of Major League Baseball. New York, NY: 2007.
18. Newton, RU and Mcevoy, KP. Baseball throwing velocity: A
comparison of medicine ball training and weight training. J Strength
Cond Res 8: 198203, 1994.
19. Pedegna, LR, Elsner, RC, Roberts, D, Lang, J, and Farewell, V. The
relationship of upper extremity strength to throwing speed. Am J
Sports Med 10: 352354, 1982.

3. Coleman, AE. Physiological characteristics of major league baseball

players. Physician Sportsmed 10: 5157, 1982.

20. Potteiger, JA, Blessing, DL, and Wilson, GD. The physiological
responses to a single game of baseball pitching. J Appl Sport Sci Re
6: 1118, 1992.

4. Derenne, C, Buxton, BP, Hetzler, RK, and Ho, KW. Effects of

weighted bat implement training on bat swing velocity. J Strength
Cond Res 9: 247250, 1995.

21. Schmidt, WD. Strength and physiological characteristics of

NCAA Division III American football players. J Strength Cond Res
13: 210213, 1999.

5. Fry, AC and Kraemer, WJ. Physical performance characteristics of

American collegiate football players. J Appl Sport Sci Res 5: 126138,
1991.

22. Sierer, SP, Battaglini, CL, Mihalik, JP, Shields, EW, and Tomasini, NT.
The National Football League Combine: performance differences
between drafted and nondrafted players entering the 2004 and 2005
drafts. J Strength Cond Res 22: 612, 2008.

6. Garstecki, MA, Latin, RW, and Cuppett, MM. Comparison of

selected physical fitness and performance variables between NCAA
Division I and II football players. J Strength Cond Assoc 18: 292297,
2004.
7. Hagerman, FC, Starr, LM, and Murray, TF. Effects of a longterm
fitness program on professional baseball players. Physician Sportsmed
17: 101119, 1989.

2178

the

TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

23. Spaniol, FJ. Baseball athletic test: a baseball-specific test battery.

Strength Cond J 31: 2629, 2009.
24. Szymanski, DJ, Mcintyre, JS, Szymanski, JM, Bradford, TJ, Schade, RL,
Madsen, NH, and Pascoe, DD. Effect of torso rotational strength on
angular hip, angular shoulder, and linear bat velocities of high school
baseball players. J Strength Cond Res 21: 11171125, 2007.