Catchers calling the game....is it a lost art?

My sons (2013)summer team lets both of their catchers call the game. I've only seen the coach overule the called pitch a few times. Even in game changing situations they pretty much let the catcher and pitcher handle it. The coaches consider it part of the learning curve.

High school coach calls every pitch. Could be that there's more riding on the high school games, don't know.

I think they should and aren't allowed to often enough.

I agree with NDD - I want my guys to call their own game but I also want a system in place that if I do want a certain pitch called in a certain situation it will get called. But overall that might be 5% of the whole season. I want my guys to call their own games.

Here is what I've done in the past which seems to work - if I have a younger or inexperienced catcher then I'm going to call the majority of the game early on. While this is going on I'm going to try and teach / talk to my catcher about why certain pitches were called. I'm going to teach him how to call pitches.

Once he's got experience and we've had chance to talk then I'm going to turn certain games over to him. If he does well then he will get more games. Hopefully by the end of the season he's doing the whole game. Then the next year he can do the whole season.

You can't just turn a high school kid loose with calling a game. You have to teach them how to do it unless they already know coming in - which is rare.

I find that it becoming even more rare. There are very few high school catcher that I have seen that have the mental ability to call a game. Thats a shame but it seems that they are not being taught that aspect coming up thur the younger ranks. My 2 yrs in JUCO I called every pitch. I would like to see more cathers taught that part of the game.

My son is in the youth program (14U) of one of our area's top travel organizations. They have teams from 12U on up (youth program limited travel). They let all their catchers call pitches and my son loves it.

Coach might come by before each inning and say something like "hey next three guys hit the fastball well" or along those lines and then after the inning talk some more about pitch selection if necessary.

Funny thing is myself and other dad coached last year with other dad calling pitches. Drove me nuts. Slows the game down getting pitch into the catcher. Makes the focus on the coach more than kids.

Couple times he got mad when I would suggest something and he would say fine you do it. I would just point to my son or the other catcher and say you call them. We were just as successful that way and our pitchers worked a heck of a lot faster.

My son's HS (varsity) coach calls almost all of the pitches.

Son called the pitches on JV and on his summer/fall teams. As you can imagine, he much prefers calling the pitches.

My observation is that the coach calling the pitches disrupts the rhythm of the game. It diverts the catcher's attention before every pitch when he has to look to see the signs.

I suspect the only people who think it is a good idea are the coaches who want to call all of the pitches themselves.

My son's HS coach, former college and Minor league pitcher, also calls all pitches. He gets very upset when they don't throw what he calls.

I think that all catchers should at least be allowed to call some pitches, it will help them develop much better for the mental aspect of the game.

Personally I think catchers call better games than pitchers. IJS

I see it differently.... I think a catcher needs to UNDERSTAND the reason for calling particular pitches and locations .... and what better way than to have a coach coaching you. My son's HS coach called all the pitches and locations (99% of the time). His college coach called the pitches as a freshman in college then as a sophomore he turned that over to him. As a college junior he called most of the games. In pro ball he called all the games and only looked to the dugout in certain situations. So is it a lost art? No, calling a game isn't a lost art (or an art at all in my opinion) but a learned responsibility. I had no problem with my son learning the why what when and and where of effectively calling pitches from his coaches. The more they told him .... the more he learned.

Fungo

My son calls all the pitches for his summer/fall team. After the inning he and the coach would go over his calls. HS coach on the other hand calls the pitches, but that could have been because it was son's first year at the school. He may get more freedom this year.

quote:

Originally posted by Fungo:
I see it differently.... I think a catcher needs to UNDERSTAND the reason for calling particular pitches and locations .... and what better way than to have a coach coaching you. My son's HS coach called all the pitches and locations (99% of the time). His college coach called the pitches as a freshman in college then as a sophomore he turned that over to him. As a college junior he called most of the games. In pro ball he called all the games and only looked to the dugout in certain situations. So is it a lost art? No, calling a game isn't a lost art (or an art at all in my opinion) but a learned responsibility. I had no problem with my son learning the why what when and and where of effectively calling pitches from his coaches. The more they told him .... the more he learned.

Fungo

Absolutely it is a learned responsibility. And the sooner we get them started the sooner they will learn it. What I have seen is coaches that think they can win the game from the dugout or coaches box (offense) and zero tolerance for "mistakes". First good knock they will take away the catcher call. And yet very seldom do I see a coach that called a pitch take responsibility for that same knock - a lot of them will claim the pitcher didn't execute.

Not everybody of course.

Year before last, coach calling pitches, kid went yard three times on us including the Salami. I walked by and just casually said, "We might want to consider getting low and away from him the next 3 times he comes up in this game, he seems to be locked in on that FB you're calling up and in."

we alloww our catchers to call the game but we talk sll thru the game so they get an understanding of what is happening---the catcher has a much better fell regarding what is working for the pitcher than a coach on the bench

Son called the game as a catcher in high school for 3 of his 4 years on varsity but he was coached by 2 ret. MLB pitchers. Then in college also called pitches his freshman, soph, and JR year until he was injured. Again coached by retired MLB pitcher. He was fortunate to be taught and work with successful coaches and was mentored by an older teammate catcher. I think it really takes a deep understanding of the game to be successful calling your own game at any level.

First of all there are some coaches who can call great games and there are coaches who are horrible at it. There are catchers who need a coach to call a game and there are catchers who can do it on their own. The key thing between the coach and catcher who can call a game is they were taught how to do it at some point. You can't just put a catcher behind the plate and expect them to know how to call a game - it has to be taught.

I don't buy into the whole catcher losing focus looking over to the dugout for a sign. If taking a few seconds to look at the dugout (and possibly looking down at a wristband) and put some fingers down makes you lose focus then you're probably not a very good catcher in the first place. I agree it can slow a game down slightly if a coach takes too long but come on it's just going to add a few minutes to a game - not hours.

If a coach is calling a game and the pitcher and / or catcher don't throw what's called then that better be addressed quickly. Even if it means some people are going to the bench. There's a reason for a chain of command even if the ones in the field don't like the orders from above. It's truly a dictatorship and not a democracy but a smart dictator will listen to his people and let them have a small say in what goes on.

Coaches do make dumb calls when calling pitches but as a former catcher who did call his own game I would guess that pitchers fail to execute more than coaches make dumb calls. Pitchers miss and pitches don't break when what was called would have worked - it happens. But it also opens up the door for criticism as well. It is what it is you just have to focus on the next pitch.

It doesn't matter what sport it is the vast majority of success and failure comes down to the players. Either they get it done or they don't but it's a coaches job to teach them in practice. For the past two years I've been the offensive coordinator for our football team. I truly believe that is the most criticized coaching position in all of sports and I've been a head baseball coach and defensive coordinator. I have made some really dumb playcalls in games but the vast majority of time it comes down to execution by the players.

My philosophy in coaching any sport is I want to teach the hell out of them in practice so I can be a spectator during games. I want to make the least amount of decisions possible in a game but I can't do that if I don't teach. Even in football I'm trying to teach my guys to be able to make play calls at line of scrimmage that go against what I've called. We're not there yet but the reason is when they break out of a huddle and line up they know should know right away if a play will work or not. So why stick with a play that won't work? Same with baseball - I don't need to call every pitch in a game to be successful but I can't expect my guys to be successful if I don't teach them first.

Fungo,

What is it that so difficult about calling pitches that your son couldn’t learn how to do it in what I can see is at least 5 years? Assuming your boy is at least of average intelligence, either something was extremely difficult, or no one was “teaching” him squat.

I’ve been around the game for quite some time now, and I’ll tell ya I don’t see where calling pitches is that big of a deal. Now if you’ve got MLB like data at your fingertips, and a staff to wade through it, I can see calling pitches from the dugout, but for the levels that don’t have that, what’s the worst that could possibly happen?

I’d feel a lot different if I knew that every pitcher would throw a well-executed pitch in exactly the location desired, and there was no chance of it being hit with any kind of authority. But that’s dog rockets, and everyone knows it, even if they won’t admit it, even to themselves.

How do you suppose the “great” catchers learned to call games? The same way the great pitchers learned to pitch, and the great hitters learned to hit. They learned their craft by doing, no having some guy in the dugout do it for them.

As for your son, are you saying that if he had been allowed to call games on his own from the time he started catching, unless someone explained the outcome of every call he made, he wouldn’t have learned how to call a game?

quote:

Originally posted by coach2709:
… Either they get it done or they don't but it's a coaches job to teach them in practice. …

Couldn’t agree more! So then why does it happen to such a large degree in games?

Give me some help here. Let’s say it’s the 1st day of the HSV season, you have 2 full time catchers who transferred in, and neither of them has ever called a pitch by himself in his life, but they’re the best you have.

Give me an idea about how you go about “teaching” them the art of calling pitches in practice.

quote:

If a coach is calling a game and the pitcher and / or catcher don't throw what's called then that better be addressed quickly. Even if it means some people are going to the bench. There's a reason for a chain of command even if the ones in the field don't like the orders from above. It's truly a dictatorship and not a democracy but a smart dictator will listen to his people and let them have a small say in what goes on.

I know what you're trying to say coach, but doggone! A baseball game is not the military and there is no comparison between sports and war. Perhaps the execution rate goes up when the executers are bought in to plan?

I was in the army a long time. In the conventional army, it is a dictatorship. They do what they are told and usually reluctantly. In Special Ops units, the executers are part of the planning process and buy into it. Yes, I've been in both. I don't know about you, but I want my team to be more like a SF team than a bunch of privates reacting to a Drill Sergeant. Just me.

I wonder NDD, is it possible that the old saying, “You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar” just doesn’t apply to baseball?

I can certainly understand when a player does something that puts himself of someone else in real danger of injury, like throwing a bat on purpose or throwing at someone’s head. But other than things like that, its supposed to be a freakin’ game for Pete’s sake. Thankfully, the once popular philosophy of “Its my way or the highway”, is slowly being replaced, and is now much more the exception than the rule.

I'll go berserk over throwing equipment or anything else that puts a player at risk of injury through misconduct.

I don't mean any offense to anybody, but I often wonder how much of this is due to the differences in the game between say football and baseball? It seems that often a coach that does both will use the same philosophy for both - and I don't think that works real well.

I read somewhere a player said that baseball was like golf, that it would help if they would hush the crowd while the hitter was in the box. I laughed, but it makes sense.

Again, I see a lot of coaches that think they can "call a play" to win in baseball. Baseball isn't about play calling. Just me.

I wonder how to train a catcher to call a game as well. I know how I do it. be interesting to hear others.

quote:

Originally posted by NDD:

quote:

If a coach is calling a game and the pitcher and / or catcher don't throw what's called then that better be addressed quickly. Even if it means some people are going to the bench. There's a reason for a chain of command even if the ones in the field don't like the orders from above. It's truly a dictatorship and not a democracy but a smart dictator will listen to his people and let them have a small say in what goes on.

I know what you're trying to say coach, but doggone! A baseball game is not the military and there is no comparison between sports and war. Perhaps the execution rate goes up when the executers are bought in to plan?

I was in the army a long time. In the conventional army, it is a dictatorship. They do what they are told and usually reluctantly. In Special Ops units, the executers are part of the planning process and buy into it. Yes, I've been in both. I don't know about you, but I want my team to be more like a SF team than a bunch of privates reacting to a Drill Sergeant. Just me.

No offense but if you know what I'm trying to say then why are you twisting what I said or did you really not know what I'm meaning?

Look I've never been in the military (thank you for your service by the way) so I'm not sure if I can really relate to your analogy. It doesn't surprise me that special forces have a say in mission preparation but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that while on the mission if they have to improvise there is a leader and what he says goes - no debating it. Plus the special forces are the best of the best, older, experienced and all those good things but the conventional army is a bunch of 18 - 20 year olds who don't know squat. Of course there is going to be more freedom to have a say so in mission prep than a young kid who doesn't know jack squat.

In all honesty you both have taken that statement in my post and turned it into a coach who doesn't listen or is flexible. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying a coach knows how to find that middle ground between being a dictator and allowing the guys a lot of freedom. You're not going to be very successful overall if you're at either end of the spectrum. A good coach will find a way to balance both ends. But in the pressure of a game there can only be one chief and whole bunch of indians. You can sit there and say "it's my way or the highway" is being replaced but it's not and should never be. There has to be a leader and that leader has to determine what's best for the team. But a smart leader will listen to the people under him. I actually already said that in my previous post.

You guys have no idea how many times my players have asked in the middle of practice to do something a certain way and we did it. If it makes sense then we're going to do it but if it doesn't make sense then we're not going to do it. But at the end of the day it's my decision which way we're going to do it. You have to have an open door and allow the players to talk to you but at the end of the day it's the head coaches decision - no argument.

As for how to teach a catcher to call signs.

First thing I'm going to do is just talk baseball with them. You would be amazed how many kids just don't know how to talk baseball. You can tell by how they talk about baseball if they have a clue or not. How much of a clue they have will determine how I approach teaching them.

Second I have to figure out if it's going to be me, my pitching coach or my catching coach (if I have one) who is going to do the teaching. Not all staffs are that deep and how deep your staff is will determine how you structure practice.

Overall during preseason bullpen sessions we're going to go into them with a plan and not just throw pitches to be throwing pitches. As they throw certain pitches (let's say fastball up and in) I'll ask them in what situations / counts would you want to use this pitch or I'll ask then how to set a pitch up with a certain type of hitter up - power hitter, fast guy, hits for average etc....

We'll do an intersquad scrimmage and what their level of knowledge will determine how we do it.

If we have a catcher who has a clue and seems to be picking up what we've been teaching they can call the game themselves. When we switch a catcher out then we will talk about why they called what pitches they called, what was their process for setting up one of our hitters. While the other catcher is in there (and the other guy isn't up to hit) we'll break down what's going on with the other catcher.

If we have a catcher who doesn't have a clue and isn't picking up on things we will call a couple of batters for them and then talk about it when they aren't catching / hitting. Get into more teaching mode.

In real games we take a fairly similar approach. If we're playing a pretty good team we will call the vast majority of pitches or we will turn them loose on their own if we have a lead of 5 runs or more. If it's a weaker team we will allow them to call more of their own game. Either way we're talking to them between innings about pitch calling and both catchers are involved in the discussions. These talks really aren't that long either because you probably don't have the staff deep enough to do it.

Hopefully we can ease them into calling more of the game themselves. But if we call a pitch from the dugout that pitch is going to be called - no discussion.

Yes I realize the argument against that is "what if the pitcher isn't confident in that pitch in that situation" but I don't believe in that. We develop a trust in our players through this freedom. If we're going to work on helping them take over the game to make their own decisions then they need to trust us that when we make a call then it's the right one. They need to trust us that we are making a call that will allow them to succeed. We were in the first round of a regional tournament game and it was very close. It was like 6th inning and we were up 1 run with the bases loaded. Two outs and two strikes on the hitter. My catcher kept calling fastballs and curves to the batter kept fouling them off (it was something like 5 or 6 foul balls). My pitcher's change up was horrible that day and after the first couple of innings it wasn't called. After the last foul ball I got my catcher's attention and signaled in change up. He and the pitcher both did a double take but they went with it. It was a horrible pitch but the change of speed was enough the batter swung through it and we got out of the jam and won the game. No it wasn't the best thrown pitch but it was the best effort he could put into that pitch because he trusted me. We met coming off the field and I told them the batter was one or two pitches away from duckfarting a ball over the IF to score two runs so I felt that any change of speed would get him. I was right and my guys executed it to the best of their ability. That's how you balance being a dictator while listening to your guys.

Ok coach, sorry I misunderstood. "Dictatorship" and "chain of command" are probably trigger words for me.

No thanks necessary by the way, I truly enjoyed the work...LOL

quote:

Originally posted by coach2709: …You can sit there and say "it's my way or the highway" is being replaced but it's not and should never be. There has to be a leader and that leader has to determine what's best for the team. But a smart leader will listen to the people under him. I actually already said that in my previous post.

This is a difficult thing to put into words because so much depends on much more than the words themselves. But one thing is for sure. There is absolutely no similarity between leading people into a life of death battle, and leading them on a baseball field, because the goals are so much different. In one, if there’s a mistake made that causes a total loss of the goal, there’s death. In the other one, there’s a loss of that one game, then everyone goes and has a slice of pizza and a drink.

quote:

You guys have no idea how many times my players have asked in the middle of practice to do something a certain way and we did it. If it makes sense then we're going to do it but if it doesn't make sense then we're not going to do it. But at the end of the day it's my decision which way we're going to do it. You have to have an open door and allow the players to talk to you but at the end of the day it's the head coaches decision - no argument.

And what if it only makes sense to the person suggesting it? Then its ok to ignore it? I’m sorry, but that’s the primary reason why institutional change is so cumbersome and takes such a long time, whether it makes sense or not.

quote:

As for how to teach a catcher to call signs.

First thing I'm going to do is just talk baseball with them. You would be amazed how many kids just don't know how to talk baseball. You can tell by how they talk about baseball if they have a clue or not. How much of a clue they have will determine how I approach teaching them.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all. There’s a mindset in youth baseball today that discourages thinking. Add to that the fact that players for the last 25 years or so haven’t had to think for themselves, and therefore don’t understand many of the concepts that it takes from top to bottom, and its easy to understand.

quote:

… Yes I realize the argument against that is "what if the pitcher isn't confident in that pitch in that situation" but I don't believe in that. We develop a trust in our players through this freedom. If we're going to work on helping them take over the game to make their own decisions then they need to trust us that when we make a call then it's the right one. They need to trust us that we are making a call that will allow them to succeed. …

Well, ya had me goin’ until I got to the above. What you’re saying in essence is, whatever you call is superior to what anyone else could call. I don’t doubt that your philosophy works at whatever level you coach, because you’re obviously one of the more successful coaches out there. But how well would that philosophy work if it was employed by every coach at every level, no matter what their knowledge or what situation was presented?

As I keep repeating, there are many ways to skin the baseball cat, so if your way works for you, good on ya. But people just aren’t the same, and there are many different coaching styles and philosophies, just like there are many different playing styles and philosophies. No one thing works equally well in every situation.

I do like the case of the CU. A lot of times people will abandon something instead of simply changing focus.

Pros do it too.

Stats

quote:

This is a difficult thing to put into words because so much depends on much more than the words themselves. But one thing is for sure. There is absolutely no similarity between leading people into a life of death battle, and leading them on a baseball field, because the goals are so much different. In one, if there’s a mistake made that causes a total loss of the goal, there’s death. In the other one, there’s a loss of that one game, then everyone goes and has a slice of pizza and a drink.

Not sure if you noticed but I didn't bring up the military comparison. I think it's pretty obvious that a baseball game is not the same as going into a battlezone.

quote:

And what if it only makes sense to the person suggesting it? Then its ok to ignore it? I’m sorry, but that’s the primary reason why institutional change is so cumbersome and takes such a long time, whether it makes sense or not.

Not really sure what you're getting at here.

quote:

Well, ya had me goin’ until I got to the above. What you’re saying in essence is, whatever you call is superior to what anyone else could call. I don’t doubt that your philosophy works at whatever level you coach, because you’re obviously one of the more successful coaches out there. But how well would that philosophy work if it was employed by every coach at every level, no matter what their knowledge or what situation was presented?

What is your solution and / or what would you do?

I'm really not following what you're saying in your post.

quote:

Originally posted by coach2709:
Not sure if you noticed but I didn't bring up the military comparison. I think it's pretty obvious that a baseball game is not the same as going into a battlezone.

I noticed who brought it up, but I also noticed who said: There's a reason for a chain of command even if the ones in the field don't like the orders from above. It's truly a dictatorship and not a democracy but a smart dictator will listen to his people and let them have a small say in what goes on.

To those of us who did serve, let me tell you that the phrase “chain of command” has a distinct connotation to those of us who have served, and quite often something different to those who haven’t. Also, its pretty difficult to separate good dictators and dictatorships from oppressive ones, mainly because I’ve never seen a good one. To me, a dictatorship is something that should always be resisted. So, while in your mind you may well not mean the things you say in the manner which folks like myself sometimes take them, the fact is, many things have many different meanings.

quote:

Not really sure what you're getting at here.

You said you’d be willing to try something different, but only if it made sense. The way you phrased it, I assumed that meant it made sense to you, because you are the benign dictator. All I was trying to point out, was that history is riddled with things that had they not been against the church, the king, or some other form of dictatorship, mankind would have advanced far faster and far further than it has.

quote:

What is your solution and / or what would you do?

I'm really not following what you're saying in your post.

My solution is the same as its been since the days I was young player. Knowledge, training, and an open mind. (At least as open as possible) Like my old friend says, no one has all the answers. He’s very proud of the fact that many people in game at the ML level credited him with being one of the most open minded and flexible people in the game, and he has many testimonials to that. He’s beat into my head, that everybody and every situation is different, even though they may look the same. And the trick isn’t so much to change for every person and situation, but just to keep an open mind and understand you can’t have the same degree of success in all situations by maintaining a rigid philosophy.

And I’m not at all saying your philosophy is a bad one, because I’m sure its different in practice than could ever be described on paper. Sorry if I came across as saying you were a bad coach or person, or that your philosophy was a bad one. That wasn’t my intention.

I'll be honest and tell you that I'm truly at a loss for words over how one word or phrase that I used could stir you up so much. Especially to the point that you truly try to nitpick everything I've said into something that you find negative. One thing I've discovered is that just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right. Ok so I used the word dictator and you didn't like it. You talk about having an open mind but yet you completely judged my post into saying / thinking that because I use the word dicator it's bad.

You're the one who is stretching everything that is getting you fired up. I never got the impression that you said I was a bad coach or person but the way I'm reading what you're putting is that by the fact I use the word dictator then I'm wrong in how I run a team.

You asked how I would teach a catcher to call a game and then to proceed to nitpick every little word that I use.

I truly believe you like to come on here and stir up trouble. That's what I I think you enjoy most - not to challenge thinking but to just start drama.

quote:

Originally posted by coach2709:
I'll be honest and tell you that I'm truly at a loss for words over how one word or phrase that I used could stir you up so much. Especially to the point that you truly try to nitpick everything I've said into something that you find negative. One thing I've discovered is that just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right. Ok so I used the word dictator and you didn't like it. You talk about having an open mind but yet you completely judged my post into saying / thinking that because I use the word dicator it's bad.

You're the one who is stretching everything that is getting you fired up. I never got the impression that you said I was a bad coach or person but the way I'm reading what you're putting is that by the fact I use the word dictator then I'm wrong in how I run a team.

You asked how I would teach a catcher to call a game and then to proceed to nitpick every little word that I use.

I truly believe you like to come on here and stir up trouble. That's what I I think you enjoy most - not to challenge thinking but to just start drama.

Don’t think that you caused me to get “stirred up”. I’ve been arguing with coaches in every sport about the same thing for a lot longer than you’ve known I exist. It’s a matter of communication. We all tend to think that since we know what we mean, everyone else must also, but that’s seldom true, and accentuated in this form of communication.

Chances are, if I were to watch you work with the team, I’d never think twice about anything you said or did because I’d have the context to frame it. In a venue like this one, the only framework one has, is what the person trying to communicate chooses to give. I went with what you gave. Nothing personal about it at all. Just a response based on what I saw.

I don’t know how many times you feel I should apologize for saying something you found offensive. I’ll do it once more, but that’s about my limit. I apologize. I wasn’t trying to say anything other than the kind of “old style harda$$ coach” that came across to me in how you described yourself, is the kind of coach who’s thankfully slowly fading from the game.

Now if I misunderstood, don’t blame me. You’re the one who wrote what you did. Consider this. If someone as old as I am, with the experience and education I have can so easily misunderstand what you meant, how might some 7YO kid or 30YO dad with absolutely no experience at all if you were to say the same thing on the practice field?

There were only a few things I lectured my son on before he took the job as the JV pitching coach. One was to never forget how he felt when a coach would say things that made him feel bad. Another was never to forget how he felt when a coach yelled or cursed at the players. Another one was to never forget that the players and parents were human beings just like him, and deserved his respect. A final one was told to him by my old friend, and that was to try to never give anyone the impression that you thought you had all the answers.

Now if you want to believe I have nothing better to do with my life than to try to make you look foolish or to try to stir up trouble, and not to cause people like yourself to challenge their own thinking, I’ve done a poor job of communicating myself, and that’s on me. Nothing personal intended, and nothing personal taken on this end of the WWW. I hope it’s the same on your end as well.

Whatever

I wonder if the Molina brothers high school coach called the pitches in their games?

For those who don't think it disrupts focus - heck, it eliminates the need for it. Just let the coach do the thinking. The catcher doesn't have to look at the feet of the hitter, no need to read the pitcher's demeanor or arm slot or anything else. Just be the mitt.

Try doing any task and keep looking for someone 20 feet away to tell you what to do. Don't make a move until someone tells you what to do. What are you focusing on? Getting the sign right, which by the way, is not always easy to see.

All that being said, no one will convince a coach who believes he needs to control the game by calling the pitches to take another approach.

In one game last season the team was picking up my son's coach's signs. He kept moving, and of course as it was more difficult for the other team to see, it became more difficult for my son to see. Finally, the coach told my son "you call the game". Nothing bad happened. Afterwards, the coach commented what a good job my son did. But next game, it was back to the coach calling pitches. He just can't help himself. And that's ok, it is his team.

Honestly I don't see any way it can't be distracting. The game is out on the field, not in the dugout.

And armbands are for football, not baseball. I hate them.

quote:

Originally posted by NDD:
...And armbands are for football, not baseball. I hate them.

Armbands are simply another way to communicate. The problem lies in the person giving the signals, most of the time.

quote:

Originally posted by redbird5:

Armbands are simply another way to communicate. The problem lies in the person giving the signals, most of the time.

I think they promote too much one way communicating, too much trying to win the game from the dugout. I'm not saying everybody does it, just what I've seen. Play calling in baseball on every down. And I love when coaches think they need two or three different sets of signs in baseball. "They're stealing our signs!" So what?

How many people have actually been a catcher? How many of you have actually been head coaches of a high school team? It doesn't matter if the Molina's high school coach called their games or not - somebody somewhere taught them how to do it. Yes there are idiot coaches out there who don't need to call a game or should do more teaching or whatever. But you shouldn't just criticize the situation because you don't like it or something about it.

quote:

Originally posted by twotex: … Nothing bad happened. …

And that’s the sum and substance of the entire matter.

I don’t understand why it is that so many coaches below the pros actually FEAR that suddenly balls will start being hit like lasers in every conceivable place on the field where there’s no fielder, or majestically sail into the stratosphere like a Saturn rocket leaving the earth with a moon capsule on it. Maybe it’s a real mental condition and has a name like O****itsaslamaphobia.

It probably wouldn’t bother me at all if a coach actually made an effort to see how much his calling the pitches worked out better than if he just allowed the catchers to do it. FI, flip a coin to see if the 1st time through the lineup the coach would call the pitches or the catcher. Then reverse it the 2nd time through, all the while keeping meticulous records so there could be some kind of comparison done. If not that, at least something that attempted to find out if one way were truly superior.

And heck, maybe I’m just nuts and all pitchers really like being forced to throw what they’re told, even if they have absolutely no confidence in that particular pitch at that particular time. Or I suppose it could be that all catchers quiver in their shin guards when they just think about all the disasters that might befall them if they have to actually call a game.

I suppose its possible that I just have more faith in a human being being able to learn more from making his own mistakes and having to take responsibility for them, not to mention that to me its just a lot more fun to be the guy who’s in charge, even if its only in charge of such a small thing. I think that’s how leaders are made, but there’s nothing that says I’m right.

quote:

But you shouldn't just criticize the situation because you don't like it or something about it.

I'm sorry coach, but that's funny.

quote:

FI, flip a coin to see if the 1st time through the lineup the coach would call the pitches or the catcher. Then reverse it the 2nd time through

I'm not doing that...

quote:

Originally posted by NDD:

quote:

But you shouldn't just criticize the situation because you don't like it or something about it.

I'm sorry coach, but that's funny.

Why is it funny?

When should one criticize a situation if not when they don't like it or something about it?

quote:

Originally posted by NDD:
I think they promote too much one way communicating, too much trying to win the game from the dugout. I'm not saying everybody does it, just what I've seen. Play calling in baseball on every down. And I love when coaches think they need two or three different sets of signs in baseball. "They're stealing our signs!" So what?

We have a team in our league that uses armbands, and they were very successful last season. I got the chance to talk to the HC before one of our games, and I asked him what prompted him to go that route. Turns out he was only in his 2nd year at that school, and when he 1st came and had meetings with the players he inherited, it was painfully obvious that the majority of them didn’t have much of a clue about what they should be doing in many situations.

It would have been very difficult for him to have formal classes in baseball because he taught 40 miles from the school he coached at, He barely able to make it for games and practices, let alone trying to teach the 60 kids in his program things they should already know about baseball. Turns out, this is a very “privileged” area with lots of $$$ floating around, and almost all the players played in one of the two local “academy” programs, taking loads of private lessons and playing in lots of tournaments all over the country.

Trouble was, while they learned a lot baseball skills, no one bothered to teach them much about the game itself. He described it as having a bunch of guys who could build an Indy car from scratch, and fix anything wrong with it, but no one knew how to drive. So he instituted the arm bands, which by the way he wouldn’t show me, and replaced his Fr and JV coaches who were also part of those development programs. He says his hope is to be able to do away with the arm bands next year, and if not the year after, because the new coaches he has, are teaching the players to do more than jump through hoops in the lower levels of the program.