How much discretion should a varsity head coach have in picking his "winners and losers" ? Are they expected to be as objective as possible when it comes to positioning and play time, or is it acceptable to stick with certain players even though they are statistically not performing?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Not sure exactly what you're asking....but I think I have a good idea why. It's pretty simple. The head coach is really the only one who picks who plays what position and how much playing time they get...and he really doesn't have to have any reason other than it's his name on the line that says "head coach".
Yep. It's "His" team. It's not all about "statistically performing". It's what he sees in practice and match ups.
Yep... that's what I thought, just needed to hear it again.
Agreed. And, look, maybe he's wrong (after all, it would be weird if coaches, alone amongst human beings, didn't make mistakes). But it's his call, right or wrong.
If you ask a question with more specific background/scenario, you will get far more specific responses. Meanwhile, of course the HC has full discretion and has to answer only to the AD and Principal.
I have three grown kids who all participated in multiple HS (and some beyond) sports. So, I totally get the position of the parent when seeing statistics that open coach decisions up to question. But as a coach, I can tell you a million stories where the coach decisions are warranted in spite of what a parent wants to read into with statistics. And, while coaches are certainly not always right, they are with the players at least three hours a day, five or six days a week, four months of the year, spending time exclusively on the specific sport. The strongest bias they have is to win games. They are sitting in a pretty good seat to make the smartest choices between who plays, where, when, etc.
Also, on my team, we don't pick "winners and losers". Some winners are chosen as starters and some winners have other roles. Often, those roles reverse or change.
SargeEmm posted:How much discretion should a varsity head coach have in picking his "winners and losers" ? Are they expected to be as objective as possible when it comes to positioning and play time, or is it acceptable to stick with certain players even though they are statistically not performing?
I think you can answer your own question. If not the coach, who? how?
The coach is in charge. He takes input from his assistants depending on how much he values their perceptions. I saw kids start opening day based on potential. In a couple of weeks they had played themselves to the bench.
I saw one kid get the benefit of the doubt two years and play himself to the bench. He didn't try out senior year. His dad said the coach screwed him for two years.
Chances are by mid season you will see the best team on the field. If you don't it's probably a team with a losing record giving younger players experience for next year.
If you think it's only done in high school look up the 1988 Braves.
They went 54-108. They had a bunch of terrible starting pitchers with ERAs in the high 4s and 5s including a couple of young pitchers named Glavine and Smoltz. Zane and Pete Smith were a couple of big time prospects that didn't pan out. They followed the next season with a young stiff with an ERA in the high 5s named Avery. Don't you think the Braves could have run other pitchers to the mound and finished 70-92? What would it accomplish? In Glavine and Smoltz's third season (Avery's second) the Braves won 94 games.
When my son was a soph he started 1-9. Four of the outs were hard hit balls. But the coach went by stats. He DHed for my son for five games. His glove at short was valuable. My son went to the coach. He informed him the players DHing for him were 0-16 with 7 K's. The coach got pissed and benched my son. After a one game benching my son started and hit. He went 4-6 with 4 rbi's the next two games. He ended up hitting .340 and batting second.
The coach took all the credit for his success due to the benching to wake him up. Wake up a hitter crushing the ball right at fielders? The reality is my son didn't let what happened get him down. He worked hard and stayed prepared physically and mentally. When he got his second shot he was ready and produced.
One at bat, a pinch running appearance, a defensive replacement or facing one hitter on the mound can change a player's destiny. But he has to be physically and mentally ready for it. Unfortunately too many parents reinforce the "woe is me" attitude for their kids. Their kids sit on the bench and sulk rather than prepare.
I think the OP knew the answer to his question before posting. I'm not sure why parents post such questions.
Ha, I was really just curious how they went about their business in general and what the mindset was especially since stats are posted online. Same as 30 years ago, I remember it now - Coach is always right. At our HS my son plays, but so does every kid that plays on the coach's summer & fall teams which leaves a lot of good players on the bench. Through a dozen or so games, those guys for the most part are hitting at or below .200. So I was just wondering how long he might stick with them... which led to my poorly asked question... sorry about that. always in a hurry.
Haha I gotcha. I thought it was another parent asking if the coach had the right to start who he wanted to. Makes more sense now!
I wouldn't necessarily say the coach is always right but he definitely has right to say who plays and where. He should also be held accountable for how successful his team is. If his decisions don't lead to a successful season he won't be around for long.
How about this way of doing things.Senior pitcher.4yr. v. pitcher/starter.Finishes Jr. yr. 1 complete game SO from tieing state record.Do you munipulate your games/his first start to give best chance of tieing state record?
I don't think I would, but that doesn't mean I'd jump up and down if another coach did. It's hard to say how you would handle a situation until you are put there I guess.
SargeEmm posted:
How much discretion should a varsity head coach have in picking his "winners and losers" ? Are they expected to be as objective as possible when it comes to positioning and play time, or is it acceptable to stick with certain players even though they are statistically not performing?
I think people get the wrong idea about the use of statistics in the process of making team decisions. Most folks look at it as an absolute like whoever has the best OBP should be in the lineup or who has the lowest ERA should be on bump, but it’s very very seldom anyone making the decisions does them blindly on the number alone. On the other hand not even the most anti stat coach is really against using the numbers.
The problems come because the folks sitting in the stands may well see all the numbers, but they very seldom are aware of all the other things that bear on a baseball decision. What that does is make the perspective of the coach and everyone else different. So what you see as being underperforming statistically and what the decision maker sees are most often 2 different things.
All I'm talking about is.Do you let the kid pitch 1st game or say 3rd or 4th.Do you take weather into consideration knowing the kid needs complete game.Do you pitch him against the best of your first few games?The worst?This is your 3yr.#1 pitcher. Starting out senior year.
proudhesmine posted:
All I'm talking about is.Do you let the kid pitch 1st game or say 3rd or 4th.Do you take weather into consideration knowing the kid needs complete game.Do you pitch him against the best of your first few games?The worst?This is your 3yr.#1 pitcher. Starting out senior year
Your question seems really to be asking whether it’s OK for the coach to make decisions to help a player get some record. Personally I wouldn’t give it more than a few seconds thought. If the kid is that close to a record the opposition isn’t going to change all that much from the previous 3 years so unless he gets hurt or goes completely in the tank he’s gonna get that record given an entire season to get it.
So let me see if I read this right stats.You would take no consideration other than a few seconds.To help your pitcher out to start a season.While I don't always agree with some of your posts I really find that hard to believe.So what your saying is at start of season knowing above and the only factor you have with your pitchers at beginning of season is they pitch.along with getting them stretched out and staying healthy You would take no consideration in which 1st game a pitcher pitches?
proudhesmine posted:
So let me see if I read this right stats.You would take no consideration other than a few seconds.To help your pitcher out to start a season.While I don't always agree with some of your posts I really find that hard to believe.So what your saying is at start of season knowing above and the only factor you have with your pitchers at beginning of season is they pitch.along with getting them stretched out and staying healthy You would take no consideration in which 1st game a pitcher pitches?
To be honest, I’m not sure what the heck it is you’re asking here. If it’s whether I’d give much consideration at the beginning of a season to helping a pitcher get a complete game to get some kind of record, I wouldn’t. My reason was, there’s an entire season ahead against virtually the same opposition he’d proven for 3 years he could succeed against, so barring later injury or ineligibility it’s more than likely he’ll get that record. So why would I even consider being in some big rush to have that kid get a record?
I’m just not a big fan of tinkering with HS games for the sake of a record and even less of a fan of complete games in HS unless the pitcher can do it with a minimum chance of incurring injury. If a record falls I’ll be the 1st one to clap and congratulate a player but that’s different than manipulating things to help make the record fall.
Stats4Gnats posted:SargeEmm posted:
How much discretion should a varsity head coach have in picking his "winners and losers" ? Are they expected to be as objective as possible when it comes to positioning and play time, or is it acceptable to stick with certain players even though they are statistically not performing?
I think people get the wrong idea about the use of statistics in the process of making team decisions. Most folks look at it as an absolute like whoever has the best OBP should be in the lineup or who has the lowest ERA should be on bump, but it’s very very seldom anyone making the decisions does them blindly on the number alone. On the other hand not even the most anti stat coach is really against using the numbers.
The problems come because the folks sitting in the stands may well see all the numbers, but they very seldom are aware of all the other things that bear on a baseball decision. What that does is make the perspective of the coach and everyone else different. So what you see as being underperforming statistically and what the decision maker sees are most often 2 different things.
Assuming everything else is equal, I agree with what you are saying here Stats. But, this coach put a spotlight on himself by playing ALL of his off-season kids. I don't blame the benched-parents for watching the stats, how else are they supposed to make their case. Or is the point that there is no case to be made, coach can do whatever he wants?
The HS I'm talking about is a D1 in a very competitive area in California. So these benched parents' kids mostly all come from top travel programs - no slouches here. Some have written the year off and will hold their noses until the season is over, others are preparing for HC meetings in which they will make their case against his decision making.
Again, maybe there is no case to be made - what do you think? Or, if you're going to make the case - then what else do you have except stats?
Baseball is different down here in south Alabama so I'm not sure if I understand what is going on. Are you saying that the school has an off season program that every kid on the varsity team is expected to be a part of? Or is this HC coaching a travel or showcase team that isn't affiliated with the school? I guess what I'm saying is I wouldnt be surprised that the players that are involved with the off season program the HC has instituted would get more playing time. We do the same thing here. We aren't allowed to play as much as some states allow, but every player is expected to buy into the program or risk playing time or not making the team. Same thing in football and basketball here.
Are they winning with the "coaches players"? If so it's hard to make any case at all. If they are really struggling I'd say he won't be around long anyway.
PW posted:Baseball is different down here in south Alabama so I'm not sure if I understand what is going on. Are you saying that the school has an off season program that every kid on the varsity team is expected to be a part of? Or is this HC coaching a travel or showcase team that isn't affiliated with the school? I guess what I'm saying is I wouldnt be surprised that the players that are involved with the off season program the HC has instituted would get more playing time. We do the same thing here. We aren't allowed to play as much as some states allow, but every player is expected to buy into the program or risk playing time or not making the team. Same thing in football and basketball here.
Are they winning with the "coaches players"? If so it's hard to make any case at all. If they are really struggling I'd say he won't be around long anyway.
By off-season teams I mean nothing more than a regular travel team that he takes to local tournaments. No tryouts, no cuts... just pay dues. He STRONGLY recommends that all players play on these teams, but the form said "it would have no bearing on HS playtime..." (Ha!).
We are winning, but we haven't played anyone yet. Upcoming league play will be our first test. But yeah, we're winning.
Yeah even though I'm a coach (and I usually side with the coaches) I can see where you could have an issue with this. I'm not sure if making a case will do any good or not. If the HC is approachable, I would talk to him at the right time with the right attitude and see what happens. Just be careful not to "attack" him or his decisions. That usually has an adverse effect as I'm sure you know! In the end it's his decision without a doubt.
I don't blame the benched-parents for watching the stats, how else are they supposed to make their case.
What case are they making? Who are they making it to? Other parents who don't want to hear it? The only person who needs to make a case is a player. He does it on the field in games and practice. For school ball he also has to make a case in the classroom and citizenship.
My daughter played high school softball with a marginally academic player. The parents whined and whined and whined to anyone who would listen that their daughter was better than the girl she sat behind. They just didn't get the starting shortstop wasn't a week to week academically eligible issue. Their daughter was.
My son wasn't called up to varsity freshman year despite having a great JV season. The coach told him he couldn't reward a player who decked one of his teammate's in the school hallway.
If anyone deserved to be decked it was this kid. My son ignored his taunting for five years. To the best of my knowledge it's the only fight my son ever had. Wrong place. Wrong time. Bad decision. It kept him off the varsity field until the following season.
Trying to figure out what high school coaches are thinking/doing is an exercise in futility. I have seen some real head shakers. But here's the thing - you can't fool the kids.
RJM posted:I don't blame the benched-parents for watching the stats, how else are they supposed to make their case.
What case are they making? Who are they making it to? Other parents who don't want to hear it? The only person who needs to make a case is a player. He does it on the field in games and practice. For school ball he also has to make a case in the classroom and citizenship.
My daughter played high school softball with a marginally academic player. The parents whined and whined and whined to anyone who would listen that their daughter was better than the girl she sat behind. They just didn't get the starting shortstop wasn't a week to week academically eligible issue. Their daughter was.
My son wasn't called up to varsity freshman year despite having a great JV season. The coach told him he couldn't reward a player who decked one of his teammate's in the school hallway.
If anyone deserved to be decked it was this kid. My son ignored his taunting for five years. To the best of my knowledge it's the only fight my son ever had. Wrong place. Wrong time. Bad decision. It kept him off the varsity field until the following season.
Maybe I'm just pointing out a location anomaly, but it sounds like your experience is with coaches that I see in the movies. Heck as I can remember, the ones I grew up with were great men to respect as well. But this is a 20-something with little playing experience and no HS coaching experience at all. He got the job just like the last HC, he had a youth travel team that included one or more of the board members' kids that were just entering HS. So as it turns out we get a new head coach every 2 years or so as the board turns over. So yes, making a case to the parents makes a big deal around here.
But the case I'm talking about is "why isn't Johnny playing?". That conversation parents and kids are encouraged to have with the HC when home and grades are affected. Do you not mention the only real information that you have ... his stats vs. his?
Just musing at this point. I work a lot and my son is happy, so I've gone with the flow. But I do get why some of these families are pissed.
SargeEmm posted:
Assuming everything else is equal, I agree with what you are saying here Stats. But, this coach put a spotlight on himself by playing ALL of his off-season kids. I don't blame the benched-parents for watching the stats, how else are they supposed to make their case. Or is the point that there is no case to be made, coach can do whatever he wants?
The HS I'm talking about is a D1 in a very competitive area in California. So these benched parents' kids mostly all come from top travel programs - no slouches here. Some have written the year off and will hold their noses until the season is over, others are preparing for HC meetings in which they will make their case against his decision making.
Again, maybe there is no case to be made - what do you think? Or, if you're going to make the case - then what else do you have except stats?
Mebbe I’ve been around HS baseball too long to get worked up when it’s early in the year and the HC plays kids who won’t likely be in the starting mix when the games actually mean something. I won’t say it happens all the time in my experience, but I will say it isn’t at all unusual.
As for what actually took place, if I was the scorer I’d have a much better idea about what had gone on. As it is, does it make any kind of sense at all that a HC would play only players from his off-season teams and neglect returning players, especially ones who had proven themselves over the previous 3 years?
I don’t blame the “benched-parents” for looking at the stats either. What I do blame them for is very likely not knowing how the coach is making his decisions. What I’m saying here is what these things almost always break down to. LOUSY COMMUNICATION! It’s pretty standard to believe parents should never discuss PT with the coach, and that’s where the lousy communication begins. If you can’t/won’t talk about it, how in the world can you be expected to understand it? And with that mentality you answered the question “…Or is the point that there is no case to be made, coach can do whatever he wants?” If PT can’t be discussed there is no case to be made and the coach can pretty much do whatever he wants.
For 8 years I scored for a DI team in one of the most competitive leagues in Ca so I know what kind of kids play there. But I don’t understand why anyone would “write the year off and hold their noses” so early in the season. Until the league games get going the games are virtually meaningless.
What would I have except stats? It wouldn’t be a problem because I’d have broken the taboos right off the bat and made sure I understood the coach’s process. It’s the rare coach who won’t take the time to help parents understand what’s going on if they’re approached correctly.
Stats4Gnats posted:SargeEmm posted:
Assuming everything else is equal, I agree with what you are saying here Stats. But, this coach put a spotlight on himself by playing ALL of his off-season kids. I don't blame the benched-parents for watching the stats, how else are they supposed to make their case. Or is the point that there is no case to be made, coach can do whatever he wants?
The HS I'm talking about is a D1 in a very competitive area in California. So these benched parents' kids mostly all come from top travel programs - no slouches here. Some have written the year off and will hold their noses until the season is over, others are preparing for HC meetings in which they will make their case against his decision making.
Again, maybe there is no case to be made - what do you think? Or, if you're going to make the case - then what else do you have except stats?
Mebbe I’ve been around HS baseball too long to get worked up when it’s early in the year and the HC plays kids who won’t likely be in the starting mix when the games actually mean something. I won’t say it happens all the time in my experience, but I will say it isn’t at all unusual.
As for what actually took place, if I was the scorer I’d have a much better idea about what had gone on. As it is, does it make any kind of sense at all that a HC would play only players from his off-season teams and neglect returning players, especially ones who had proven themselves over the previous 3 years?
I don’t blame the “benched-parents” for looking at the stats either. What I do blame them for is very likely not knowing how the coach is making his decisions. What I’m saying here is what these things almost always break down to. LOUSY COMMUNICATION! It’s pretty standard to believe parents should never discuss PT with the coach, and that’s where the lousy communication begins. If you can’t/won’t talk about it, how in the world can you be expected to understand it? And with that mentality you answered the question “…Or is the point that there is no case to be made, coach can do whatever he wants?” If PT can’t be discussed there is no case to be made and the coach can pretty much do whatever he wants.
For 8 years I scored for a DI team in one of the most competitive leagues in Ca so I know what kind of kids play there. But I don’t understand why anyone would “write the year off and hold their noses” so early in the season. Until the league games get going the games are virtually meaningless.
What would I have except stats? It wouldn’t be a problem because I’d have broken the taboos right off the bat and made sure I understood the coach’s process. It’s the rare coach who won’t take the time to help parents understand what’s going on if they’re approached correctly.
It's big money around here, so we tend to see 2 types of coaches in our area. These 2 coaches have different motivations as well. I love coach 1's, but the coach 2's are taking over it seems.
1) Coach 1 -This guy has been around forever. He was likely a teacher at one time. He is either retired or has another job that isn't baseball. He doesn't have a "hitting facility" but is more than happy to show you something. This coach draws on the same talent pool as its neighbors, but they are always higher ranked than coach 2 teams.
2) Coach 2s - These guys are young and looking for a career. They make their living off of baseball exclusively. Most have "hitting facilities", but all sell their lessons on the side and they all have side travel teams. Where I'm at the median income is $100k+. I'm guessing with booster money, the HC probably gets less than $10k from the school. So these guys have to hustle to try and make a living. These guys never last very long. Unfortunately we tend to hire coach 2s... which is probably why we can never beat coach 1 in our division.
I'll be honest I've picked a few losers in my life as a head coach. They tend to be lazy, be excuse makers and selfish. Sometimes they were one of the top 9 and played a lot and sometimes they weren't. Sometimes they played and most of the time they didn't.
Reading your follow up posts and taking them at face value it doesn't matter. If the board members are the driving force behind hiring guys who coached their kids on some sort of travel team then you'll never have the foundation to be good. You need someone (sounds like your coach 1) to come in and clean house and rebuild from scratch but if the higher ups don't support them then you'll never change anything. The problem isn't just the coach - it's the coach and pretty much everyone above him.
There is some great advice here - thanks guys for the time and education, I really appreciate it.
