2009 Hoffman Et Al., MLB Paper Anthropometric - and - Performance - Comparisons - In. JSCR 2009
2009 Hoffman Et Al., MLB Paper Anthropometric - and - Performance - Comparisons - In. JSCR 2009
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
2173
METHODS
Performance Assessments
Statistical Analyses
Subjects
2174
the
TM
the
TM
| 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.
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.
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
2175
2176
the
TM
the
TM
| 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
Slugging percentage
p
Stolen bases
b
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,
2177
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.
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.
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.
2178
the
TM