quote:Originally posted by cabbagedad:
That said, I am glad you brought up your question again regarding "nobody on" stance. We had one of our varsity catchers allowing the ump to take a beating the other day. When he was letting balls past him, he was sort of lifting before dropping because he was in the "nobody on" stance. I told him he still needed to protect the ump but he had some merit to his argument regarding stance/situation. I would love for Xan and/or another experienced catcher to re-address this question specific to stance. I think it could be very insightful.
Guys get in secondary stance (runners on base), to make it easier to block and throw, not to make it possible. So is it a little more difficult to block from a primary stance (no one on base, less than 2 Ks)? Sure, but it's not impossible! I'm not sure where the notion came from that it can't be done, but the blocking mechanics really don't change...it's just easier to do when you're in your secondary stance.
For example, let's imagine we're at the Olympics and we're watching the 100M. All the runners will start using the blocks, right? They do this because it makes it easier to start the sprint. It's not impossible to start running without using blocks, but using the blocks helps the runners out so they do it. The same thing with blocking is true. We use our secondary stance to help us block, but that doesn't mean that we can't block if we're not in our secondary stance.
The secondary stance just makes it a little easier, that's all.
I hope that makes sense and everyone understands the point I'm trying to get across.