Connect with us

Sports

NBA Player Tiers: Kevin Durant, Steph Curry hang on in Tier 1, but how much longer?

Published

on

NBA Player Tiers: Kevin Durant, Steph Curry hang on in Tier 1, but how much longer?

This is the fifth annual NBA Player Tiers project, in which Seth Partnow names the top 125 players in the league after each season and then separates them into five distinct categories of value, each with their sub-categories to further delineate them. These are not meant to be read as firm 1-125 player rankings. Rather, they’re meant to separate solid starters from the very best superstars, and every level in between. This is how NBA front offices assess player value across the league when building their teams.


NBA Player Tiers: ’20 | ’21 | ’22 | ‘23 | ’24 pre-playoffs | ’24: T5 | T4| T3 | T2


The NBA is undergoing a changing of the guard. While Tier 1 has been relatively stable during the five seasons I’ve done this exercise — only nine players have been in Tier 1 at least once, with the six below plus LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard and James Harden — many of the stalwarts are facing the ticking of the clock, while the next wave, such as Jayson Tatum, Anthony Edwards and, of course, Victor Wembanyama, are knocking on the door.

I could have gone several ways with this group, from having only a super select top three or four making up the entirety of the tier to rewarding some of those up-and-comers at the expense of the old warhorses, and I wouldn’t much argue with those who saw it that way.

But for now, here are the cream of the crop.

Advertisement

Tier 1B (4-6)

Remarkably, a 62.6 true shooting percentage on 29.0 usage represents a down year for Kevin Durant, even compared to just the post-Achilles tear section of his career. The poorly constructed and extremely top-heavy Phoenix Suns roster did him few favors, which raises a question that has only factored tangentially into the tiers over the years: How much should player influence on roster decisions and coaching hires be factored in?

It’s a challenge to do so systematically. At least from the outside, who advocated for what move or how much weight an organization gives to a star’s wishes are difficult to determine. But the balance of reporting indicates that Brooklyn/Phoenix era Durant has demanded many things and received most of them, including the hiring and firing of coaches.

It is often said that coaches shouldn’t be GMs because there isn’t enough time in the day to do both jobs well. This holds even more true for players. But how much is it on the players when it happens? It’s a hard one to judge, but it’s something that likely needs to enter the calculus when considering later career superstars such as Durant, LeBron James or one or two others.

All of this is to note that Durant barely maintained his spot in Tier 1 this year and will need a strong performance — including the playoffs — in 2024-25 to be worthy of staying here.

Another former MVP somewhere on the back nine of his career is Stephen Curry. With the Golden State Warriors missing the playoffs, has Curry’s ability to drag indifferent teammates to success waned, or did Golden State find the bottom edge of overall roster ability at which he could do so? Or was it perhaps some combination of both?

Advertisement

Make no mistake, Curry is still a great, great player. But there are subtle signs of decline. His rim-attempt rate was the lowest of his career by a decent margin. His ability to impact the game as a team defender has dropped off considerably — over the last two seasons, he has averaged 1.2 steals per 100 possessions, precisely half of the 2.4/100 he maintained over the first 13 years of his career.

For the first time other than 2019-20, when he appeared in only five games, 2023-24 was the first time the Warriors were superior in terms of net rating with Curry off the floor than on, with Golden State 0.6 points per 100 possessions better when Curry was on the bench, compared to 14.5 per 100 better with Curry on the floor from his first MVP season in 2014-15 through 2022-23. At 35, there is no shame in acknowledging that Curry is not quite the automatic driver of elite offense that he has been for most of his career, but that dip does move him down from 1A to 1B.

For Joel Embiid, it is seemingly always something: Bad health, be it either his health or his teammates’; a ball bouncing four times on the rim and then dropping to eliminate the Sixers from the playoffs; star players falling out with the organization, requiring trades or other reshuffling of the lineup. All of these and more have conspired to keep Embiid from ever reaching the conference finals, which is unfortunate because by several impact metrics, Embiid has been the second-most-effective regular-season player in the league across the last four seasons, behind only Nikola Jokić’s all-time great run.

This past season, you couldn’t have asked for more from Embiid himself, either in the regular season or in the Sixers’ short playoff run. But he still hasn’t truly stamped his authority on a postseason and has never consistently hit the same level of dominance. His playoff shortcomings have probably been overblown, with a career 58.0 percent true shooting on 31.6 percent usage. But ignoring his abbreviated rookie year, he has 61.6 percent true shooting on 35.5 percent usage. The latter is otherworldly, while the former is merely damn good.

There have been myriad reasons for the lack of extended playoff success, many of them completely outside Embiid’s control. But it has always been something, and that’s enough to keep him in Tier 1B for now.

Advertisement

Tier 1A (1-3)

For all the complexity the NBA game offers, basketball can be pretty simple. Pair an offensive force with the size, vision and ability to draw extra defenders with a dynamic rim threat (or two!) and surround them with shooters, and that’s a hard formula to stop. While Luka Dončić was good all year, the midseason trades that brought in Daniel Gafford and P.J. Washington helped both Dončić and the Mavericks reach exit velocity and launch into orbit.

It wasn’t just a more favorable context. Dončić made some subtle but telling improvements, becoming a more active off-ball participant — a higher percentage of his made 3s were assisted than any season since his rookie year — while also upping his defensive contributions.

The defense was an unsung part of the Mavs’ run to the NBA Finals. While Dončić was rarely if ever tasked with the primary matchup against the opposition’s top weapons, he made more effective use of his size and game-reading ability, particularly against the Oklahoma City Thunder and Minnesota Timberwolves.

While our lasting memory might be the disappointment of Dallas losing the finals, that is as much an illustration of how even top superstars need a bit of good fortune to reach the pinnacle. Not only did the Celtics significantly out-talent Dallas top to bottom, but Boston was as well-equipped to deal with Dončić on its own defensive end while having the range and volume of on-ball creators to attack him in ways other teams couldn’t on defense.

Advertisement

There is still some room for improvement, as Dončić’s conditioning could probably use an upgrade, while his penchant for engaging with officials — occasionally picking up some silly fouls such as in Game 3 of the finals series — could stand to be scaled back significantly. But using those quibbles to keep him out of Tier 1A would be setting a near impossible standard that few players in NBA history, let alone current day, could match.

Giannis Antetokounmpo is the only player who has resided in Tier 1A in every year-end edition of the Tiers. For the first time, I had some slight doubts putting him here. He has missed time in four of the last five postseasons, including the entirety of the Bucks’ stay this year. During that stretch, Milwaukee has lost its first-round series as a higher seed twice, something definitely held against other players, though, of course, his dominance through the 2021 playoffs has and will continue to buy Antetokounmpo good will on that front.

There is also worry about how robust his impact will be as he approaches 30, which he will reach in early December. Some of it was surely because of Milwaukee’s rather disheveled start to the season from a schematic and coaching standpoint, but Antetokounmpo’s struggle to find synergy with Damian Lillard could reflect a degree of inflexibility or stubbornness that could prove challenging as he begins to age and lose some of his athleticism.

There have been suggestions that the Bucks have been somewhat limited in their ability to be tactically versatile; considering how important adjusting and iterating has become in the postseason, limiting those options is a drawback. Antetokounmpo enters next season on the bubble for dropping out of Tier 1A for the first time.

Having gone through 124 players, we are left with the reigning (and should be four-time consecutive, but why relitigate that particularly noxious debate?) MVP Nikola Jokić at the top of the heap. Even though the Nuggets ultimately fell to Minnesota in seven games in what was the best series of this past postseason, Jokić left some indelible memories. His third quarter in Game 5 against the Wolves defies description, for example.

Advertisement

During his three-in-four MVP run, Jokić has averaged a combined 26.1 points, 12.2 rebounds, 8.7 assists, 1.4 steals and 0.8 blocks per game. Even lowering those thresholds to 25/10/7.5/1/0.5, no other player has hit those heights even once.

And he has done it while scoring efficiently enough to lead the league twice and finish second twice in “TS Add” — a metric created by Basketball-Reference indicating the number of points above (or below) a player scores than he would have had he scored at league average on the same number of attempts.

To repeat one last time, these tiers are not rankings.

But if they were, the Joker would be No. 1.

NBA Player Tiers: ’20 | ’21 | ’22 | ‘23 | ’24 pre-playoffs | ’24: T5 | T4| T3 | T2

Advertisement

Loading

Try changing or resetting your filters to see more.

Advertisement

Tier 1

Tier 2

Tier 3

Tier 4

Tier 5

(Illustration: Dan Goldfarb / The Athletic: Photos: Sean Gardner, Noah Graham / NBAE, Jesse D. Garrabrant / NBAE via Getty Images)

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Sports

Trevor Lawrence, wife announce they are expecting first child after $275 million contract extension

Published

on

Trevor Lawrence, wife announce they are expecting first child after $275 million contract extension

It’s been a fun few weeks for Trevor Lawrence.

Earlier this month, he inked a $275 million deal, making him tied with Joe Burrow for the second-highest paid player in NFL history.

Well, he and his wife, Marissa, announced on Instagram that they are expecting their first child.

Trevor Lawrence is shown with wife Marissa last year. (James Gilbert/Getty Images)

Advertisement

“A little Lawrence on the way,” the couple wrote in a joint post.

In the post, the couple shared 10 photos of a sonogram and of Marissa showing off her baby bump.

Lawrence’s deal includes $142 million guaranteed. He became the sixth QB making more than $50 million a year, joining Burrow, Jared Goff, Justin Herbert, Lamar Jackson and Jalen Hurts. Lawrence is the 14th to top $40 million annually, and he’s the youngest on the list.

Lawrences kiss

Trevor Lawrence of the Jacksonville Jaguars kisses his wife, Marissa, after his team’s playoff-clinching win against the Tennessee Titans at then-TIAA Bank Field in Jacksonville, Florida, on Jan. 7, 2023. (Mike Carlson/Getty Images)

12 SETS OF RECENT BROTHERS PART OF THE NFL: THE KELCES, BOSAS AND MORE

Lawrence has already added his name to the Jacksonville Jaguars’ history books. He is fourth on the franchise’s all-time passing yards list. His 58 career touchdown passes rank fourth in franchise history.

Advertisement

Lawrence finished the past two NFL seasons with more than 4,000 passing yards; he and the Jags won the AFC South in 2022 and were in terrific shape to repeat, but a second half collapse saw them miss the playoffs.

Last season, he threw for 4,016 yards with 21 touchdowns and 14 interceptions. He also ran for four scores, lost seven fumbles and was sacked a career-high 35 times.

Jacksonville Jaguars runs with the football

Jacksonville Jaguars quarterback Trevor Lawrence runs with the ball during the game against the Baltimore Ravens at EverBank Stadium in Jacksonville, Florida, on Dec. 17, 2023. (David Rosenblum/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)

The 24-year-old is 21-31 as a starter in three seasons, including 1-1 in the playoffs, and he has a whopping 60 turnovers in three seasons, which is a number he needs to trim to become the player the Jags believe he can be.

Fox News’ Chantz Martin contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

Continue Reading

Sports

NFL ordered to pay billions in damages for 'overcharged' Sunday Ticket

Published

on

NFL ordered to pay billions in damages for 'overcharged' Sunday Ticket

The NFL suffered a huge setback Thursday and was ordered to pay nearly $4.8 billion in damages for violating antitrust law in a class-action suit over pricing of DirecTV’s “Sunday Ticket” packages.

A Los Angeles jury voted unanimously that the league colluded with DirecTV, along with CBS and Fox, to drive up pricing of the premium product.

The jury deliberated for roughly five hours over two days. If the verdict stands, the jury said the league owes $4.7 billion in damages to the residential class and $96 million in damages to the commercial class.

The NFL could be liable up to $12.3 billion under federal laws that triple the amount won in antitrust cases.

Said a spokesman for the NFL: “We are disappointed with the jury’s verdict today in the NFL Sunday Ticket class action lawsuit. We continue to believe that our media distribution strategy, which features all NFL games broadcast on free over-the-air television in the markets of the participating teams and national distribution of our most popular games, supplemented by many additional choices including RedZone, Sunday Ticket and NFL+, is by far the most fan friendly distribution model in all of sports and entertainment. We will certainly contest this decision as we believe that the class action claims in this case are baseless and without merit. We thank the jury for their time and service and for the guidance and oversight from Judge Gutierrez throughout the trial.”

Advertisement

The lawsuit covered 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses who paid for the package of out-of-market games from the 2011 through 2022 seasons on DirecTV.

The trial lasted three weeks and included testimony from NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, among others.

Said Bill Carmody, lead attorney for the plaintiff: “It’s a great verdict for consumers around America that this jury, despite the star power of the defendants, upheld the antitrust laws which are geared to protect consumers from overcharges.

“Justice was served.”

The next likely steps for the dispute will be the filing of post-trial motions, which will be heard by the trial judge on July 31.

Advertisement

If the verdict is not set aside, the judge is likely to be asked to consider possible structural changes in the Sunday Ticket package, as well as plaintiff’s lawyers request for an award of legal fees.

Once those issues are resolved, the league will appeal any adverse rulings to the Ninth Circuit. The NFL expects the payment of any damages and imposition of any structural changes to the Sunday Ticket package would be stayed until all appeals have been concluded.

Fans cheer at a bar in Santa Monica while watching NFL games.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

The jury began deliberations Wednesday afternoon in the wake of closing arguments from the sides and jury instructions from U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez. Jury deliberations continued Thursday.

It took nearly a decade for the case to wind its way through the legal ecosystem, beginning in 2015 when a San Francisco pub called the Mucky Duck filed a complaint about how the NFL handles its out-of-market broadcasts.

The class action was filed on behalf of more than 2.4 million residential subscribers and more than 48,000 restaurants, bars and other commercial establishments that show the games. It centered on the “Sunday Ticket” package — now sold through YouTube TV — which allows subscribers access to the broadcasts of all out-of-market Sunday games that air on CBS and Fox.

They are not special broadcasts but identical to what people are seeing in those various home markets. By the league’s estimate, a mere 3% of fans subscribe to “Sunday Ticket,” which this season costs $449 absent any discounts or promotions.

The plaintiffs alleged the NFL colluded with network partners CBS and Fox, along with DirecTV, to ensure the pricing of “Sunday Ticket” remained high, thereby violating antitrust law.

Advertisement

The plaintiffs were seeking $7 billion in damages for the period between 2011 and 2022, and those are tripled in antitrust cases. That $21 billion is enough to buy an entire four-team division.

The NFL argued that it was not in control of “Sunday Ticket” pricing but DirecTV was, and often gave away the premium product for free to attract subscribers. Attorneys representing the league frequently pointed out the NFL is the only major sports league that provides fans 100% of local games on free, over-the-air TV.

“It’s a valuable, premium product, and the prices were reasonable,” Beth Wilkinson, representing the NFL, said in her opening statement. “Fans don’t have to buy Sunday Ticket… The league wants as many people as possible to watch the free broadcasts.”

Wilkinson said that after promotions and giveaways, the average price of Sunday Ticket during the period in question was $102.70 per season.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Sports

Missing Bats, Part 3: Before the strikeout craze, baseball's 'Galileos' fought to change the game

Published

on

Missing Bats, Part 3: Before the strikeout craze, baseball's 'Galileos' fought to change the game

Missing Bats, a special series this week in The Athletic, explores how baseball’s profound metamorphosis over the last two decades traces back to one simple idea — maximizing strikeouts at all costs — that became an industry-wide obsession. Explore the entire series here.


The San Diego School of Baseball was backed by hitting stars such as Tony Gwynn and Alan Trammell, but it was the pitching minds that gave the early 1980s baseball camp its charm — and its legacy.

Brent Strom and Tom House had been teammates at the University of Southern California and then, later, journeyman pitchers in the major leagues. Aside from lineage, they also shared deep-seated hunches that there was more to learn about baseball than previous generations had taught.

So when the day’s instruction was over, they sat in the dugouts of Grossmont College or ventured to a local watering hole, tossing ideas back and forth: the things they loved about the game, the things they thought were wrong, the things they wanted to change.

Once, during a baby shower for another coach’s wife, the men were scolded when they were found in the corner of a room, playing back film of pitchers. They were all obsessives, and the San Diego School of Baseball was their offseason oasis — a place where they could gather and discuss, without judgment and scorn, some of the very concepts that decades later would alter the balance of baseball.

Advertisement

“A summit,” House called it, “of smart baseball minds.”

Before PITCHf/x and Statcast could measure progress, before internet message boards and social media could create converts that would spread the new gospel, before there were gleaming pitching labs and think tanks like Driveline, before the likes of the Rays, the Astros and the Guardians embraced the primacy of missing bats and advanced the science of pitching from the dark ages, there were only tiny pockets like the San Diego School of Baseball.

They were havens for the small band of devoted contrarians that flocked to these safe spaces decades before the baseball world could even begin to reckon with their ideas. While the game regurgitated tried-and-true principles — keep the ball down, pitch to contact, throw over the top — these men wondered if there could be a better way.

“The generation that was my pitching coach really resisted anything new,” House said. “They wanted to have it be exactly like it was since Babe Ruth’s time.”

Yet there was a price to pay for those who dared to challenge convention. They were mocked. They were ostracized. They were cast aside, their careers hampered.

Advertisement

They were also proven right.

“The same stuff I was teaching years back that got me fired,” Strom said, “now it’s the norm.”

Today, Strom is regarded as one of baseball’s best coaches and a key figure in modern pitching history. When most pitching coaches harped on sinkers and sliders and dotting the outside corner, Strom saw the effectiveness of the elevated fastball and preached the novel concept that pitchers should use their best weapons as often as possible.

Strom had a kindred spirit in House, the eccentric coach who would soon be among the first to introduce technology to the world of baseball. He believed there was more to know about pitching mechanics and the human body as it relates to baseball than previous generations had cared to know.

“What motion analysis did in the mid-80s was show us that most of what we were actually teaching and learning as pitchers and pitching coaches, our eyes were lying to us,” House said.

Advertisement

House and Strom would gain disciples outside the mainstream, such as Ron Wolforth, the founder of Texas Baseball Ranch, where instructors would use new methods to train pitchers to throw harder than they’d ever thought possible.

“When we started,” Wolforth said, “the overall thought process in professional baseball was that velo was something that cannot be taught. You either had it or you didn’t.”

That combination — Strom’s tactics, House’s use of technology and Wolforth’s harness of velocity — became the basis for methods Ivy Leaguers in baseball’s front offices would one day use to transform pitchers into optimized strikeout machines.

But before these ideas became the norm, the men who fostered new ways of thinking about pitching were baseball’s versions of Galileo. When the 17th-century astronomer postulated the theory of a heliocentric universe, his ideas were labeled foolish and absurd. The Catholic Church considered him a heretic. His works were banned and he was punished with confinement. Now, he is considered the father of modern science.

Advertisement

“Are you telling me,” Wolforth joked recently, “I’m going to be put under house arrest for the rest of my life?”


After his middling pitching career was over, Strom entered the coaching ranks, working for the Dodgers organization in the 1980s. It was there his beliefs on pitching began to coalesce. He had grown up a devoted fan of Sandy Koufax, and one spring, when the Dodgers great was in camp, he said something that stuck with Strom.

“You know who throws sinkers?” Koufax asked. “People who can’t throw fastballs.”

In those days with the Dodgers, Strom would soak up the stories told by former players such as catcher Johnny Roseboro, who often talked of Koufax’s dazzling performance in Game 7 of the 1965 World Series. Koufax was pitching on two days’ rest. Arm pain had zapped the life from his curveball. In the first inning, after Koufax kept shaking when Rosoboro called for the curve, the catcher went to the mound and pivoted the game plan. “We’ll blow ’em away,” he told the pitcher.


A chart of Sandy Koufax’s pitching performance in Game 7 of the 1965 World Series. (Courtesy of Brent Strom)

Koufax threw almost entirely fastballs that day, almost exclusively up in the zone, and dominated. But throughout the game, what Koufax did was considered an anomaly — a function of his unique talent, not something that could be learned.

Advertisement

Strom didn’t see it that way. He began to theorize that many pitchers had an arsenal that would play better atop the strike zone, using four-seam fastballs that could appear as if they were rising to bowl over the bats of hitters. Those pitches could come out of the same tunnel as a power curveball or slider. And if a pitcher was effective with that elevated fastball or that power breaking ball, he should use it as much as possible. Strom’s ideas were ahead of their time. But baseball wasn’t quite ready for them yet, and he languished in the minors.

“I think,” Strom said, “I was a little too far out on the gangplank a little too early.”

In Texas, House ran into much the same problem. In 1985, Rangers general manager Tom Grieve hired House as pitching coach for manager Bobby Valentine. Grieve was 37, and Valentine was 35. They were swashbucklers working with a limited budget. They knew they needed to be different.

By the mid-1980s, House had sold his stake in the San Diego School of Baseball and taken out a second mortgage on his home to invest in the Ariel System, a set of high-speed cameras that could detect movements the naked eye could not.

Soon, House had converted a closet in the bowels of Arlington Stadium into a video room with VHS players and two small TVs. They put a satellite atop the clubhouse so they could tape-record opponents’ games. House devoured the film. He compared his pitcher’s deliveries to tennis players and javelin throwers — stiff front legs, firm front sides. When he would set up cameras along the first- and third-base lines before games, most people ignored him simply because they had no idea what he was doing or dismissed him because of his mediocre track record as a pitcher.

Advertisement

“My problem early on was I knew, because I saw the science, but I wasn’t enough of a profile guy,” House said. “If I had been a Sandy Koufax, a Tom Seaver in that era, they probably would have listened a little bit more.”


Today, Tom House is recognized as a guru in both baseball and football circles. That wasn’t always the case. (Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

House first used his motion analysis to rethink the basis of pitching mechanics. Pitchers, for example, had long been taught to throw straight overhead. Through his video analysis, House realized that many of the game’s best threw from a natural three-quarters delivery. But because the methodology was odd, few bought into his discoveries.

The Rangers would set up a “calibration cube” made of PVC pipes in their bullpen before pitchers would perform their motion in front of Ariel System cameras. House believed the analysis that came in the form of computer-generated stick figures could help pitchers throw the ball harder, command the ball better or make their arms last longer.

“There weren’t many people coming over and saying, ‘What are you guys doing over there in the bullpen? We want to do that, too,’” Valentine said. “It was more like seeing what we were doing and then gathering with their buddies. ‘Hey, look at what these idiots are doing.’”

House kept pitch counts as well as nutrition logs. Everything was documented and analyzed. Soon, he was having his pitchers throw footballs as a training method. The tightness of a football’s spiral served as a way to iron out mechanical deficiencies. House believed the football’s weight helped build functional strength. But when opposing coaches saw Rangers pitchers doing Joe Montana impressions in the outfield before games, they labeled the coach a wild eccentric. And when an opposing lineup would pummel another Rangers pitcher, media pundits had an easy target: How did that look on video?

Advertisement

“I was frustrated at times,” House said. “I had my feelings hurt. And I got angry at people. But I never didn’t trust the value of my information.”

The problem was that House’s pitching staffs never amounted to much. They led the league in walks every year from 1986-89. Their quirky coach may have focused more on processes and ideas than on tangible results. Not all players fully grasped his concepts.

“I used to think that that was the only flaw that Tom ever had, is that he was so convinced that he was so correct that he wasn’t going to let much else get in the way of his thought,” Valentine said. “His thought was what was filling the air. It wasn’t really a conversation.”

Advertisement

Midway through the 1992 season, the Rangers fired Valentine. By the next year, House was reassigned to a position in the minor leagues. He never coached another day in the majors.

His ideas, however, were starting to spread.

In 1999, Ron Wolforth, a former journeyman college pitcher who had coached softball at Nebraska, published a book with an incredibly boring title: “Improving Your Pitching Mechanics IQ: The 36 Positional Relationships That Effect Performance.”

An avid fan of House, Wolforth traveled to a function in Madison, Wisc., where House was speaking. His goal was to hand House his book and have the famed coach put a face with the name. He succeeded, and soon House was giving a demonstration and using the book as a makeshift home plate.

House later returned home and flipped through Wolforth’s tome. He called soon after. “Hey,” House told Wolforth, “you have some interesting ideas.”

Advertisement

Wolforth soon joined House’s National Pitching Association — a kind of think tank dedicated to sharing information and working to standardize training methods to keep young athletes healthy.

Wolforth became one of its most omnivorous thinkers, looking far and wide to find new methods of building up pitchers’ bodies. He studied the teachings of a Connecticut engineer named Paul Nyman, who believed velocity could be trained through intent, and that sent Wolforth towards weight training and the benefits of throwing weighted balls. He studied Dr. James Andrews and prioritized doing rehab-like training before injuries occurred. He investigated the ideas of Mike Marshall, the 1974 Cy Young winner who was attuned to concepts like spin axis and seam-shifted wake before almost anyone else. He was fascinated by the training methods of the Soviet military. He began to formulate his own pitching dogma, one that tapped all these sources and posited that velocity was not set in stone.

Eventually, Wolforth started taking some of his ideas to NPA colleagues. And even among the game’s more progressive thinkers, he was rejected.

“The pure faith was, ‘Get on the mound, find your way to have a repeatable delivery, and if you threw it harder, it was because God touched your arm and you were just genetically gifted,’” Wolforth said. “And I said, ‘That’s crap.’”

To Wolforth, velocity was not something solely distributed by the almighty. He never expected to make every pitcher into Nolan Ryan, but he believed pitchers could gain a few more miles per hour on their fastballs, if only they could strengthen their engines and organize their bodies in the correct way.

Advertisement

In 2003, Wolforth and his wife Jill emptied their savings and transformed a 20-acre plot outside of Montgomery, Texas, into a facility with a glorified barn and a steel hut with arched ceilings.

Pupils who endured Wolforth’s summer program at Texas Baseball Ranch studied connected movements and drilled with one-legged squats, weighted balls, weighted gloves, shoulder tubes and other unusual tools. Most pitchers indeed gained velocity. Actually pitching was a different matter.

“Early on, we had a lot of guys get a lot of interest, then go into pro ball and get released within a year or two because they couldn’t throw it over the white thing,” Wolforth said. “So it was slowly modified. I said, ‘OK, we are going to have to add in a lot of other stuff to this.’”

Yet Wolforth was on to something. He was proving velocity could be a teachable skill.

While the Ranch was churning out its first graduates, Strom was confronting the reality that his career had stalled; after leaving the Dodgers, he went on to a long list of coaching positions, including stints as the major-league pitching coach with the Astros in 1996 and the Kansas City Royals in 2000-01. In 2002, he became the minor-league pitching coordinator for the Montreal Expos.

Advertisement

In Houston, Strom was fired after one season. With the Royals, he was fired after two seasons. With the Expos, who became the Nationals, he was fired after his fourth year.

“I was out of the game for a couple years,” Strom said. “Got a lot of sideways glances. That kind of stuff. It wasn’t easy.”

Strom eventually found himself out of work. For more than a year, he helped his wife run a dog grooming business in Arizona.

He was finally brought back into the game by the Cardinals, where a relatively new employee thought he saw something in the longtime coach’s philosophies. Still, Strom says he was only allowed to work with the team’s low-level prospects. Stubborn in his convictions, he challenged the organization’s sinker-slider obsession and occasionally clashed with the Cardinals’ brass, including major-league manager Tony La Russa and pitching coach Dave Duncan.


Brent Strom was allowed to work with Cardinals minor leaguers, but his influence in the organization didn’t extend much further than that. (AP Photo)

Strom often thinks back to a meeting in 2008. The Cardinals were an organization built on old-school, fundamentalist beliefs. Sinkers and sliders meant to be put in play. Low and away, low and away, low and away.

Advertisement

No team threw more sinkers at the bottom of the strike zone. Only two teams that season generated fewer swinging strikes.

In this meeting, a Cardinals official stood in front of a room full of coaches. “Does anybody know the batting average on fly balls?” the official asked. “Does anybody know the batting average on groundballs?”

As Strom remembers it, the official informed the room that major-league batters hit .222 on groundballs but .417 on fly balls.

Strom, ever the contrarian, raised his hand.

“That’s bulls—,” he said.

Advertisement

Strom asked whether a line drive should count as a fly ball. The official said yes. And here, Strom realized, was one of the game’s prevailing logical fallacies. In 2008, major-league batters actually hit only .222 on fly balls and pop-ups. On groundballs, they hit .241. On line drives, they hit an eye-popping .728.

Pitchers, Strom then theorized, should not fear fly balls. They should not pitch solely to the lower third of the strike zone. They should not devise their entire arsenals in hopes of inducing contact and generating outs on the ground. There could be another method, one that involved identifying the pitches hitters struggle to put in play and attacking with these pitches relentlessly.

“When I brought this concept to the Cardinals, it was completely adverse to what they were teaching,” Strom said. “You know what happens when you try to induce soft contact? You get hard contact. … If you don’t strike out enough people, every ball that’s hit has the potential to be a base hit. I’ve yet to see a guy reach first base on a strikeout.”

As Strom stirred up trouble, the Cardinals employee who originally hired him saw increasing value in his innovative ideas and the data that seemed to support them. When he got his own team to run, he would remember the outspoken coach with the bold new ideas.

“Thank God,” Strom said, “for Jeff Luhnow. He saved my ass.”

Advertisement

By 2008, word was spreading that the pupils at Wolforth’s ranch were seeing their velocity numbers rise, and Wolforth was contracted by a major-league club to speak at spring training. He was standing in a hallway before his speech when he overheard two members of the organization talking, oblivious to who Wolforth was.

One man asked the other: “Do you want to go golf?”

“No,” the other said. “I can’t. I gotta go listen to Johnny f—in’ Guru.”

At the time, most of the baseball establishment still thought that way — that those preaching these new ideas were outsiders who had little understanding of how the game worked. But a few organizations were starting to see the possibilities.

Luhnow had left the Cardinals to take over baseball operations for the Astros in 2011. Soon, he brought Strom on board and empowered him to spread his teachings throughout the organization. In Houston, Strom finally had a home for his ideas.

Advertisement

“Brent Strom was the first pitching coach that came to me and was preaching high targets, was preaching high in the strike zone and high out of the strike zone,” said A.J. Hinch, then the manager of the Astros.

Strom’s teachings were embraced and even furthered by the team’s data-driven front office. Before they were villains mired in a historic cheating scandal, the Astros were innovators who invested in technology throughout their system like no other team.

“Their analytics department just enlightened me to no end,” Strom said.

Edgertronic cameras allowed people like Strom to review mechanics, grips and release points in more granular detail. The Astros obsessed over TrackMan data. Houston stationed developmental coaches at each minor-league affiliate to help translate the numbers to players. It was a system House would have salivated over in 1986.

The Astros, too, were among MLB clubs that formed a relationship with Texas Baseball Ranch. Wolforth’s business took off around the time one pupil, a UCLA pitcher named Trevor Bauer, proved how much a thrower’s stuff could improve by training the right way and embracing science. A Sports Illustrated article catapulted the facility to fame.

Advertisement

“A lot of people thought it was just a one-off, like we just happened to catch lightning in a bottle,” Wolforth said.

The industry soon decided otherwise. All-Star pitcher C.J. Wilson was among those who read the story. Wilson was another man ahead of his time, a pitcher who asked teams for TrackMan data before it was readily available to players and was rejected.

“It was crazy at the beginning,” Wilson said, “because I literally had front office people and coaches go, ‘Stop asking about this because we’re not going to give it to you.’”

After the 2011 season, Wilson sought out the Texas Baseball Ranch because he was drawn to Wolforth’s intellectual view on pitching. Wilson stayed in a hotel down the road and went through Wolforth’s program, seeking mainly to improve the spin efficiency on his changeup and searching for drills to help keep his lower half healthy. He took some of what he learned into his 2012 season with the Angels, where he made his second All-Star Game.


C.J. Wilson saw the benefits of Texas Baseball Ranch, and his example spurred on others. (Jeff Gross / Getty Images)

Scott Kazmir was a two-time All-Star, but at age 27, he found himself nearly out of baseball. With his fastball velocity zapped down into the 80s, Kazmir trekked to Wolforth’s ranch in search of a resurrection. He returned to the major leagues touching 95 and was an All-Star again in 2014 at age 30. The Astros traded for him the next summer.

Advertisement

Stories of successes like these began to spread. In 2008, when Wolforth spoke to that team during spring training, he began his speech by introducing himself. “I’m Ron Wolforth,” he said. “But some of you know me by my other name, ‘Johnny f—in’ Guru.’”

The joke disarmed the skeptical audience. Within a few years, such tactics were no longer necessary.

“Now, all of a sudden, I’m not just some arrogant prick that’s telling them that I’m smart and they’re dumb,” Wolforth said. “That was around 2008. But by 2011, 2012, 2013, I had no such problems. People were anxious to hear what I was going to say.”

With word-of-mouth spreading and forward-thinking teams like the Astros, Guardians, Yankees, Dodgers, and Rays beginning to invest in pitching development, ideas traveled at warp speed. The internet provided an outlet for tinkerers to research and swap ideas like never before.

“I think it happened like the Big Bang Theory,” House said. “It happened at once. There were bits and pieces that everybody contributed to.”

Advertisement

Now, the Texas Baseball Ranch website boasts of 121 MLB draft picks and 20 pupils who have reached the 100-mph threshold. By the mid-2010s, major-league teams used TBR instructors as consultants. Strom and Wolforth are close friends. Managers such as Hinch and Cleveland’s Terry Francona were among those who traveled to the facilities and learned more about the training methods. The Ranch was a precursor to Driveline, the performance lab founded by Kyle Boddy, a poker player who once frequented baseball message boards and soon represented the next wave of outside disruption. When Wolforth gave his Johnny F’n Guru speech, the average velocity for a four-seam fastball in the major leagues was 91.9 mph. By 2023, it was 94.2 mph.

All this led to validation for the type of men who had long sought to change the game.

House, once labeled a flake, went on to use his methods to tutor pitchers and quarterbacks alike. He became famous for his work with Randy Johnson and NFL stars such as Tom Brady and Drew Brees. His set of high-speed cameras represented an ancestor to programs like TrackMan, Hawk-Eye and KinaTrax that today measure every movement and dominate our understanding of the game. House’s academic interpretations of pitching mechanics and his heady technical explanations showed how pitchers could move their bodies more efficiently.

Frowned upon at the time by the baseball establishment, House had actually laid the groundwork for how pitching coaches would one day do their jobs. Many of the ideas he preached with the Rangers are now core values in MLB training programs.

“It took someone either as stubborn as me or as lucky as me or maybe as dumb as I was to continue to push the envelope,” House said. “Even when I was getting booed or yelled at.”

Advertisement

Places like Wake Forest now have constructed innovative pitching labs filled with technology and motion analysis. An understanding of the body’s kinetic chain has become an avenue into the world of baseball. Two years ago, the Detroit Tigers hired a former college kinesiology professor named Robin Lund as one of their pitching coaches.

“As science and technology have been creeping into the new-school instructors, everything we were talking about way back when has turned out to be true,” House said.

That has left these former iconoclasts in constant demand. By 2021, the Astros fell in Game 6 of the 2021 World Series, and Strom was looking forward to enjoying retirement at his beachfront condo in Mexico. He had helped Houston to three World Series appearances, and at 73, he thought it was time to move on. But when the Arizona Diamondbacks called and offered him a job, he could not resist.

When Strom came to Arizona before the 2022 season, the Diamondbacks threw the league’s lowest percentage of what Strom considered an elevated fastball — a pitch at least 3 feet and 3 inches off the ground. The next year, the average height of D-Backs’ fastballs went from 2.5 feet off the ground to 2.6. The Diamondbacks staff threw fewer fastballs but began elevating them more. The batting average against those pitches, in turn, dropped 46 points.

In Arizona, Strom mentored pitchers such as Zac Gallen, who began throwing his fastball up in the zone more often but also nearly doubled his curveball usage. “He’s stressed throwing your best pitch as much as possible,” Gallen said.

Advertisement

Last October, Strom’s Diamondbacks reached the World Series. Gallen finished third in voting for the National League’s Cy Young Award. Once a pariah, the 75-year-old pitching coach became a fixture at the sport’s apex.

“For all the credit I seemingly get now,” Strom deadpanned this winter, “I’m doing the same s— I did back then.”

(Illustration: Eamonn Dalton / The Athletic; Images: John G. Zimmerman / Sports Illustrated via Getty Images; Sarah Crabill / Getty Images)

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending