Every offseason, coaches across the country collect data. Athletes jump on force plates, sprint through timing gates, complete movement screens, and lift impressive numbers in the weight room. Those metrics often end up in spreadsheets, reports, or presentations before quietly disappearing until the next testing date.

At Premier Pitching and Performance, we’ve always believed data should do something.

It should drive decisions.

That’s the foundation of the support we provide to colleges and organizations.

During the fall of 2025, our performance staff partnered with the University of Missouri-St. Louis Baseball program to do exactly that. Not to replace their coaches or dictate their training, but to provide another layer of objective information that could help connect physical preparation to on-field performance.

The process was simple.

Assess.

Interpret.

Implement.

Reassess.

The results tell a story much larger than a single vertical jump.

Months later, that same team captured its first GLVC Tournament Championship since 2003 and earned a berth in the Regional.

While championships are earned through countless hours of coaching, recruiting, player commitment, and competitive execution, this project provides a fascinating look at how objective performance testing can help support that process.

Step One: Establishing the Baseline

In late August, before the competitive season began, our staff conducted a comprehensive battery of Countermovement Jump (CMJ) assessments using dual force plates.

Many people think the CMJ is simply a measurement of how high an athlete jumps.

That is one of the least interesting things about it.

A force plate captures hundreds of data points every second, allowing us to evaluate how an athlete produces movement rather than simply measuring the final outcome.

Instead of asking:

“How high did he jump?”

we ask questions like:

• How quickly can he absorb force?
  
  

• How effectively does he brake his body?
  
  

• How rapidly can he reverse direction?
  
  

• How efficiently can he transfer force into movement?
  
  

• Where are the leaks in the force-time curve?
  
  

These qualities influence nearly every explosive movement in baseball.

Acceleration.

Throwing.

Swinging.

Changing direction.

Fielding.

First-step quickness.

Even though none of those movements are vertical jumps, they all rely on the same fundamental ability:

Produce force quickly.

That distinction matters.

Because two athletes can jump exactly the same height while possessing completely different athletic qualities.

One athlete may create tremendous force but require a long time to produce it.

Another may generate similar output in a much shorter window.

In baseball, the second athlete usually has the advantage.

The game simply doesn’t give players unlimited time to create force.

 

Turning Data Into Coaching Decisions

Collecting information is easy.

Using it effectively is much harder.

Following the assessment, our staff analyzed every athlete’s force-time profile and identified the physical qualities that presented the greatest opportunity for improvement.

Rather than prescribing identical training across the roster, athletes were grouped according to their individual needs.

Some required improvements in eccentric force absorption.

Others needed greater concentric force production.

Some lacked reactive ability.

Others simply needed better movement efficiency.

Instead of telling coaches exactly which exercises to perform, we provided a framework built around the objective adaptations each athlete needed to make.

This distinction is important.

Fortify is not an exercise library.

It is a decision-making system.

The weight room belongs to the strength coach.

The baseball field belongs to the baseball coach.

Our role is helping identify which physical qualities deserve attention and providing objective feedback throughout the process.

 

---

 

Twelve Weeks Later

In November, immediately before winter training began, the team returned for reassessment.

If someone had only looked at jump height, they might have concluded that very little changed.

Average jump height remained essentially unchanged.

Peak power also changed very little.

At first glance, that might appear disappointing.

Until you look beneath the surface.

The force-time curves told a completely different story.

 

The Story Hidden Inside the Force Plate

Across the paired testing group, the team demonstrated meaningful improvements in nearly every quality associated with explosive force production.

Eccentric Deceleration Rate of Force Development

Improved by approximately 13%.

Before an athlete can accelerate, they must first stop themselves.

Every sprint start.

Every swing.

Every pitching delivery.

Every change of direction.

The body first absorbs force before producing force.

By November, the team had become significantly better at rapidly accepting and controlling those forces.

 

---

 

Eccentric Peak Force

Improved by approximately 5%.

The athletes entered the braking phase stronger than they had been in August.

Greater eccentric force generally creates a larger opportunity for subsequent force production.

Think of compressing a spring.

A stronger spring stores more energy.

 

---

 

Early Concentric Impulse (First 100 milliseconds)

Improved by nearly 5%.

This may be one of the most important findings.

Most athletic movements occur extremely quickly.

The first 100 milliseconds often determine success.

The athletes became better at producing meaningful force immediately after changing direction.

Not eventually.

Immediately.

 

---

 

Force at Zero Velocity

Improved by approximately 4.5%.

Zero velocity represents the instant an athlete stops moving downward and begins moving upward.

It is one of the most important transition points within the entire movement.

The team became stronger precisely where explosive movement begins.

 

---

 

RSI-Modified

Improved nearly 4%.

Reactive Strength Index Modified combines jump performance with movement time.

This metric rewards athletes who produce similar output in less time.

In baseball, that matters.

Athletes rarely have additional time.

They need to express force quickly.

 

---

 

Contraction Time

Decreased by nearly 30 milliseconds.

This may be the single most meaningful adaptation observed.

The team produced essentially the same jump while spending less time doing it.

Same outcome.

Faster engine.

That represents improved athletic efficiency.

 

---

 

What Didn’t Improve?

Interestingly, several traditional metrics remained almost identical.

Jump height stayed relatively unchanged.

Peak power changed very little.

Body mass remained stable.

Some may interpret this as limited progress.

We see it differently.

Imagine two identical fastballs.

Both register 92 mph.

One pitcher reaches 92 by recruiting force more efficiently with better sequencing and less wasted movement.

The other reaches 92 through brute effort.

The radar gun sees identical velocity.

Biomechanics sees two completely different athletes.

The same principle applies here.

The outcome remained similar.

The process became substantially better.

 

Why This Matters for Baseball

Baseball is a sport played in fractions of a second.

Pitchers have roughly 150 milliseconds after front-foot strike to transfer force into the baseball.

Hitters have approximately 150 milliseconds to make swing decisions.

Infielders react almost instantly off contact.

Outfielders accelerate immediately after reading ball flight.

Success depends less on how much force an athlete can eventually create and more on how rapidly they can create it.

That is exactly where the largest improvements occurred.

The athletes became more explosive inside the time windows that baseball actually demands.

 

---

 

Connecting Physical Development to Team Performance

The following spring, the program experienced one of its most successful seasons in over two decades.

Compared to the previous year, the team improved dramatically in areas often associated with winning baseball:

• A significantly better conference record.
  
  

• More stolen bases and greater offensive pressure.
  
  

• Fewer offensive strikeouts.
  
  

• Improved run prevention.
  
  

• Lower team ERA.
  
  

• Fewer walks allowed.
  
  

• Better defensive efficiency.
  
  

• Fewer passed balls.
  
  

• Improved overall consistency.
  
  

Can we say improved CMJ profiles caused those outcomes?

Of course not.

Baseball is far too complex for that.

Championships are built through recruiting, coaching, player development, culture, health, execution, and countless variables that no single assessment can measure.

What we can say is this:

The physical profile of the team improved in ways that align with the demands of high-level baseball.

The objective testing confirmed those improvements.

The season that followed reflected a team capable of applying those physical qualities at a high level.

That is exactly what performance testing is supposed to accomplish.

 

 

The Fortify Philosophy

Our goal is to help coaches make better decisions.

Testing without implementation is entertainment.

Training without assessment is guessing.

The best player development systems connect objective information to practical coaching decisions, then return to measure whether those decisions produced meaningful change.

That is the PPP way.

Assess. Prescribe. Train. WIN.

Because the objective isn’t collecting data.

The objective is building better baseball players.

And occasionally, when enough small improvements accumulate across an entire roster, those marginal gains become something much bigger.

Sometimes, they become championship seasons.