Milwaukee Brewers pitcher Jacob Misiorowski continues to redefine pitching velocity after delivering another jaw-dropping fastball against the Chicago Cubs. Just weeks after setting a record with a 104.5 mph pitch to Kyle Schwarber, Misiorowski pushed the limits even further by throwing an officially recorded 105.5 mph fastball to Cubs leadoff hitter Pete Crow-Armstrong. The pitch came on an 0-2 count and resulted in a foul ball down the third-base line, but the velocity immediately became the center of attention.
Misiorowski’s latest effort ties him with Los Angeles Angels reliever Ben Joyce for the second-fastest pitch ever recorded in MLB history. Only Aroldis Chapman, who has reached 105.7 and 105.8 mph, has thrown harder. The Brewers’ young right-hander has now repeatedly shown the ability to sustain triple-digit velocity deep into at-bats, suggesting his earlier record-breaking outing was not a one-off.
Misiorowski’s Consistent Triple-Digit Velocity Raises Hopes of Breaking Pitching Records
What makes Misiorowski particularly striking is the consistency of his elite velocity. Earlier in the same at-bat against Schwarber, he repeatedly touched speeds above 103 mph and even surpassed 104 mph multiple times, signaling that his arm strength is not just occasional but repeatable. His latest outing against Chicago reinforced the idea that he may be pushing the boundaries of what is physically possible for a starting pitcher.
Analysts have noted that Misiorowski appears especially dominant when pitching early in games, when his arm is freshest. This has fueled speculation that his peak velocity could increase even further under optimal conditions, potentially challenging Chapman’s all-time record if he maintains his development trajectory.
While raw speed does not guarantee pitching success, Misiorowski’s unprecedented velocity has already made him one of the most closely watched young arms in baseball. As he continues to develop, the possibility of him rewriting the record books no longer feels like a question of “if,” but rather “when.”
