Balls and strikes

It is far more important for a 9 year-old to learn which pitches he can hit rather than which pitches will be called strikes or balls. Little kids should swing at everything they can reach. They have much more fun when the ball gets put in play and everyone has something to do.

Amen brother...

A walkfest does nothing for anyone.

Dash,
Do you really think we should be teaching our players to swing at everything they can reach or are you trying to be funny? That would be like you telling new umpires to call everything they see a strike. But I agree with you that they shouldn't be up there waiting for "their pitch" at a young age because this leads to the walkfest and frustration by all.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:
It is far more important for a 9 year-old to learn which pitches he can hit rather than which pitches will be called strikes or balls. Little kids should swing at everything they can reach. They have much more fun when the ball gets put in play and everyone has something to do.

That is a valid point, as is avoiding walkfests, but contrasts to my observation is that a lot of the kids feel like they playing for keeps, not scrimmaging/learning, and are really embarrassed and upset to strike out on unhittable pitches they can't do anything about.

It also occurs to me that this approach runs contrary to the kids' frame of reference, school. Sure baseball is a game of failure, but all the kids know is that they better hit .950 on the spelling tests and math tests rather than .300 as on the diamond. For some of the guys, the distinction between the sides of their lives is lost.

quote:

Originally posted by Gold Glove:
Dash,
Do you really think we should be teaching our players to swing at everything they can reach or are you trying to be funny? That would be like you telling new umpires to call everything they see a strike. But I agree with you that they shouldn't be up there waiting for "their pitch" at a young age because this leads to the walkfest and frustration by all.

In my experience, which is limited because I have only done little boy ball as a fill in when the assigned umpire didn't show up, it has been the coaches who have asked for an expanded strike zone.

Personal opinion, at nine years old, swing to hit what one can reach, at 11 learn the strike zone.

Remember it isn't only the batters that are 9, so are the pitchers.

quote:

Originally posted by Gold Glove:
Dash,
Do you really think we should be teaching our players to swing at everything they can reach or are you trying to be funny? That would be like you telling new umpires to call everything they see a strike. But I agree with you that they shouldn't be up there waiting for "their pitch" at a young age because this leads to the walkfest and frustration by all.

No humor intended at all. Swinging at everything they can reach teaches them how to hit, including how to hit bad pitches. It teaches them to foul off pitches that otherwise would sit them down (extremely valuable at higher levels of play).

It also teaches THEM to control the at-bat rather than the umpire, who is very likely a kid himself. You can't really develop an eye for the strike zone if the umpire is all over the place and the pitcher can't throw it in the ocean.

It takes five minutes to teach a kid to work deep counts. It takes years for them to learn how to handle all kinds of pitches in all kinds of situations like protecting a stealing runner, hitting behind the runner to move him up, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by dash_riprock:

No humor intended at all. Swinging at everything they can reach teaches them how to hit, including how to hit bad pitches. It teaches them to foul off pitches that otherwise would sit them down (extremely valuable at higher levels of play).

It also teaches THEM to control the at-bat rather than the umpire, who is very likely a kid himself. You can't really develop an eye for the strike zone if the umpire is all over the place and the pitcher can't throw it in the ocean.

It takes five minutes to teach a kid to work deep counts. It takes years for them to learn how to handle all kinds of pitches in all kinds of situations like protecting a stealing runner, hitting behind the runner to move him up, etc.

Really Dash? A kid can reach a ball 12 inches above his head, a ball nearly on the ground, 6-12 inches inside and 2-4 inches outside, and you think he needs to swing at those pitches? If I came on here to tell your umpires to learn the game by not calling it by the book you would blast me like there is no tomorrow. "He was close to 2B, it's a force out" "He had it in his glove for a second, it's a catch" "He's only nine, he doesn't need to come to stop on his stretch" I'll continue to coach my players to swing at strikes and watch balls go by and accept the umpires strike zone. If the zone is expanded then the players and coaches will need to deal with it.

quote:

Originally posted by Gold Glove:


Really Dash? A kid can reach a ball 12 inches above his head, a ball nearly on the ground, 6-12 inches inside and 2-4 inches outside, and you think he needs to swing at those pitches?

Now you're being ridiculous. Of course I don't expect a kid to swing at a pitch a foot over his head.

BTW: A pitch 2-4 inches outside is a strike in D1 college baseball. If he can't learn to take that pitch the opposite way, he is going to have a very short career.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy03:
Remember it isn't only the batters that are 9, so are the pitchers.

I have no problem if having an oversize strike zone is really designed to help the pitchers learn and gain confidence, even at if it is at the expense of the hitters learning of the strike zone.

At the same time, it seems to me, if that's the policy, then there should also be a plan to deal with the fragile psyches of the hitters who are at the short end of the deal, ie, encouragement for going down swinging even if it happens on a bad pitch. But not every dad/coach is so inclined.

There's also the side issue that there's tension between a game/scrimmage as a learning experience and the fact that even the 9's have playoffs and All-Star teams that make games pressure packed and put emphasis on result rather than technique. My kid's hoop league has the other philosophy; no standings, no playoffs, no hardware, and maybe that's good too.

Yet I also don't think that 9 is too early to tell kids to work a count by "zoning" a first pitch or 2-0 or 3-0 pitch so they don't get themselves out swinging wildly and at anything like they might have to on 0-2. At some point they have to get some basic strategy and the notion that patience is a virtue.

quote:

I have no problem if having an oversize strike zone is really designed to help the pitchers learn and gain confidence, even at if it is at the expense of the hitters learning of the strike zone.
At the same time, it seems to me, if that's the policy, then there should also be a plan to deal with the fragile psyches of the hitters who are at the short end of the deal, ie, encouragement for going down swinging even if it happens on a bad pitch. But not every dad/coach is so inclined.

It's hard to say who is actually getting the short end of the deal, but to be blunt, worrying about which position is disadvantaged, or imagining that the size of the strike zone is designed to help a pitcher's confidence is typical parent-think. The real reason for the big strike zone is to avoid a huge number of walks, in which no player learns much of anything.

Based on what I've seen and experienced, having 9 year-olds pitch is not a good idea. Better to have machine pitch or (less desirable) coach pitch. Hitters get to learn how to hit pitches throughout a reasonable strike zone, and with some minor variation in speed. Kids who have promise as pitchers should play catch or pitch to imaginary batters.

The more athletic players can do a serviceable job of pitching at 10, but the game will still need a nose to toes zone.

quote:

Originally posted by 3FingeredGlove:

It's hard to say who is actually getting the short end of the deal, but to be blunt, worrying about which position is disadvantaged, or imagining that the size of the strike zone is designed to help a pitcher's confidence is typical parent-think. The real reason for the big strike zone is to avoid a huge number of walks, in which no player learns much of anything.

Based on what I've seen and experienced, having 9 year-olds pitch is not a good idea. Better to have machine pitch or (less desirable) coach pitch. Hitters get to learn how to hit pitches throughout a reasonable strike zone, and with some minor variation in speed. Kids who have promise as pitchers should play catch or pitch to imaginary batters.

The more athletic players can do a serviceable job of pitching at 10, but the game will still need a nose to toes zone.

Agree with the sentiment, disagree with specific conclusions.

Speaking only for me, I'm not just parent-thinking about baseball when it comes to advantage/disadvantage/strategy, but about his disposition to all things.

There needs to be the right combination of inducements/encouragements and prevention of frustration and other kinds of balances so he has a great time now whether he goes on to be doctor, lawyer, Indian chief.

My intent in starting the thread was to find what underlies the issue that I see so I can (if I can) adapt and counter across the board and keep his behavior right.

Also, speaking for me only, I disagree that 9 year olds or even 8's and 7's shouldn't pitch.

There were 6 teams in my kid's third grade Little League, and each had at least two pitchers that have good pitching form and have over the course of spring and fall seaons regularly got the ball over the plate with real strikes, and a subset of these have some good zip on it, and there's one guy (a lefty!) not more than 4 foot 3 who can go "good morning, good afternoon, good night" a good 40 or 50% of the time on the other team's best -- and I've seen him cover first on a grounder to first base.

Perhaps it is just a case of them learning from each other in our town; the travel league doesn't have too much pitching and I wonder what goes on in those Little Leagues.

The consensus seems to be that a big strike zone exists to avoid the tedious and unhelpful walkfest; that makes sense, but I'm wondering if that's enough to justification or if we should take more strides to complement that policy with others to reduce the frustration that goes along with striking out.

Thanks everybody, this is very enlightening.

I will disagree with the umpires according to the level of play. We were in a 9U USSSA World series last week and we had umpires calling knees to chest and 6-8 inches off plate. It worked well for pitchers and batters. But we had 2 umpires call plate wide top of knees to mid chest and we had walk-a-thons. Tournament ball should be called with what I would call an exaggerated high school zone, maybe a little wider than high school regular but only about 1 ball wider. The problem with rec ball is that there are few pitchers who can throw strikes and leagues are limiting more and more the number of pitches these kids can throw. THere is no answer because the only way to get rec ball games over is to open the strike zone. The problem is that many of these have been opened too wide and too high.

expanding the strike zone is a great thing for everyone, not just pitchers. we used to have 17/18 walks a game before our ll did it.

9 yr olds need to hit the ball. we played pick up ball with no catcher, you learned to hit bad pitches well. or everything hit to left was an out,little did we know it was a great teaching tool.

todays youth doesn't have that luxury. a 9 yr old would gain much more by having practice 3 or 4 times a week rather than games.

I personally believe going that high or wide is ****. If need to use a larger zone but it has to be hittable. Teaching kids to swing at garbage does nothing for them. Not making the pitcher learn to throw to a zone does nothing for them. If a batter is standing there waiting for a perfect pitch then throw in a few extra strikes to get him swinging. As an umpire if ou follow that criterea then don't work that level.

Sorry 20Dad I would disagree on the 9 year old statement. If you do not believe that there are 9 year olds that can hit the strike zone, then come south to the USSSA tournaments we play in and see the pitching at 9 and even 8 year old. The technique of the better pitchers is as good as or better than most high schoolers. They know what a balk is and how to keep from doing it. Those who say that they can't throw strikes must be talking about rec ball and not upper level travel. I will agree the problem in LL and rec ball is bad. But don't lump all the players at this age together.

i'm sure there are great 9 yr olds everywhere.

what i said was 9 yr olds need to hit. they'll have to do that all the way up, but they don't need to pitch.great that they can though.

from 9 to 13 put the fun, in fundamentals.

a 9 yr old would gain much more by having practice 3 or 4 times a week rather than games.