CWS Champion's approach

cabbagedad,

I have known Coach Peters of UCLA for a few years. I am not sure there is anything new or too surprising about the UCLA offensive approach. Rex Peters has taught that approach for a number of years...in relative anonymity. Amazing what exposure captures. Coach Peters is a marvelous college baseball coach and a terrific offensive mind for college hitters.

They were EXTREMELY intelligent...

TD Ameritrade's dimensions were designed for BESR and even with the better-designed 3rd and 4th revs of BBCOR, First-Rounders STILL cannot hit it out...

As great an event as this is, I can see how it can be ridiculously boring for spectators and TV it can be by totally eliminating the power game in OMAHA...

They NEED to pull the fences in by next year.

I do not know if that is entirely accurate, I am not disputing what you said, because I heard it to, but the story changed a bit.  Earlier in the CWS, the sideline reporter was talking about the TD played into the hands of UCLA because it was similar to UCLA's home field in regards to being a big ballpark and that the ball does not travel.  They were discussing the fact that UCLA's offense ranked near the bottom of the entire NCAA in runs and batting average and how UCLA as a whole does not even spend a lot of time hitting that they know who they are and are comfortable with it.  Now the one thing they did say during this piece that I was impressed with is that Savage went from being highly on tilt over their lack of hitting to being ok with and comfortable with it and stayed focused on the pitching and defense.

3 HRs in the CWS is boring, and I think, not in spirit with the game. That is, the reasonable chance to hit a gamechanging HR should be part of the game. Just my opinion.

Wasn't it just 52 weeks ago when the topic was the UofA offense and how they dominated every team with their tremendous approaches at the plate and an offense which pounded the ball.

While that might be better for the TV audience, the precision execution by UCLA is a beautiful part of the game, also.  Unless something changed dramatically in his approach, Rex Peters has his teams practice offense/defense to the degree of precision everyone could see.  His 3 hour practices are timed and executed to the second, which is pretty much created the no mistake/pressure approach we watched over the last month.  Coach Savage did a brilliant job with the pitching but UCLA has an equally talented assistant head coach running most everything which does not take place on the mound.

UCLA executed West Coast baseball as well as it has ever been done in Omaha.

It's not just that park, it's the bats in general across the board in college and hs ball. Either return to the old bats, or go to the lower seamed ball. Something's got to give.

Just as pitchers used to never throw inside in college games due to the bats, they also shouldn't be encouraged to throw high strikes for fly balls. That's wrong too.

Home run numbers and total runs scored will continue to go down if something doesn't change. Coaches will search for slap hitters with speed, play to move the runner over and pick up one run. YAWN. More and more emphasis will be placed on recruiting speed, athleticism and defensive players for the batting order, and less emphasis on guys who can hit for average with some extra base hits, or for power. Since fewer runs are being scored, colleges will recruit with that in mind. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for playing for one run.... in the 9th inning, or if you're batting order is over matched and you've got to scrap for runs. But, not as an everyday, every inning, course of action. I don't like that version of baseball. JMO.

I get your point with regard to the standard viewer or the general population as a whole, but I probably enjoyed watching the Bruin games more than any others in recent memory.  Seeing a gameplan executed to perfection is great entertainment value, IMHO.

No, it IS the park...

You do realize that in the 3-year history of TDA, not a single ball has cleared the CF fence...?!? No player in three years — during the regular season or the CWS — has hit a home run between the 375 signs in left-center and right-center. Ever.

In 2011 and '12 at TD Ameritrade, the average dropped to 0.64 and 0.67. This year, three balls have cleared the wall — 0.25 per game. That's 43 percent fewer homers than the regular season.

CWS teams are 21-0 at TD Ameritrade when scoring five runs or more. That means there has never been a game in which both teams scored five.

There's a HUGE problem with the park....

Well stated.

Well, what some people find boring, other like myself find quite exciting.

No, I agree that TDA is an exception, as I watched and listened too.  However, I'm also referring to the entire landscape of college baseball.

But, if you only look at that park, and your goal is to make it there, do well when you get there, and your ultimate goal is to win there, then you need to play to that park. And if that park is an exaggeration of what is happening everywhere, with HR totals and total runs scored down, then small ball is the key. Recruit athletes, speedsters, and gloves. Bunt, and play for 1 run. Yuk. Outs are precious commodities. Why give one away every time a guy reaches first with no outs.

Or look at it like this.... If the teams that get there play that style of small ball game, it will seem (rightfully so) that the best teams play that style. Everyone will follow suit. So, when Prince Fielder's son graduates high school, no college will want a base clogger on their roster, and he'll have to go ahead and take the signing bonus.

I'm not against small ball at certain times. But I despise it as the governing principle of any team's offense. I just don't like it. But that's me. I know others love it.

On a somewhat related note, this link will take you to an interesting article on the link between MLB park size, offensive production, and game times.  

http://www.duluthnewstribune.c...270636/group/Sports/

I'm for baseball games where all offensive options can be/are used and I'm all for home runs but I think of them as special aspects of the game that have become "expected" in many cases, diluting the uniqueness of that particular offensive weapon. I see offense as a smorgasbord of offerings and like to see as many as possible during a game. But based on the numbers below I'd say the fences should be brought in 10-15 feet all the way around.

TD Ameritrade Park Dimensions

Left Field line- 335 feet Center Field- 408 feet Right Field Line- 335 feet

where does it say that in order to win you must hit home runs? If a team can hit then it should be capable of going gap to gap and scoring a fair amount of runs. If the park is so big that it cant be beat by going over it then there should be plenty of room to double and triple and single teams to death. But that takes an ability to HIT. Not just power a ball out of the ballpark. That field should be a paradise for a pure hitter, not a Dave Kingman clone who just swings from his heels but a true hitter.

Amen, truer words were never spoken.

I agree, however, this is not the case if playing for one run in small ball. Teams bunt the guy over and try to single him in.  If you can hit doubles and triples, hit them. You're not giving up an out on purpose and an extra base hit is a good thing to see in person and on television.

I mean, really, once a guy gets on 1st base with no outs, things start to shift in favor of the batter. There's a big gap between 1st and 2nd now, the pitcher is in the stretch, and he needs to throw strikes. Hit the ball. At this point, I'm just ranting. Some football teams run the ball and play defense, others air it out. There are different philosophies in all sports and they all have a place.

And for the record.... I'm not a fan of base stealing either. However, I love seeing guys get thrown out trying to steal.

When a team only gives up 4 runs in the entire CWS.   I don't think its the offensive coach or strategy that you should be discussing.....

I don't think  MSU, UNC or any other staffs were out there giving away baserunners or AB's or runs. UCLA did what other teams did not, in terms of playing great defense and using the field in their AB's. They also did a great job of playing pressure offensive baseball forcing mistakes.  This was a complete team in most every way, in terms of the way college ball can be played on the West Coast. UCLA did it better than Fullerton, OSU and UO. Their offense scored runs against a Fullerton staff that gave up next to none for 59 games. It was not a lot of runs but it was more than Fullerton was able to counter and those runs combined with defense and pitching to beat a very, very good team, just like they did in Omaha.

I dislike extremes in a sport: so a park where HRs are almost impossible to hit and small ball is king, like TDA, I did not enjoy the games overall as much as a park where all offensive strategies are viable. That stated, I dislike HR-fests because the fences are too close in, bats too hot, etc.

My hat's off to UCLA. They won, and deserved to win. I can appreciate good pitching,defense and playing to the field. Doesn't mean that I like watching those kind of games. Once UCLA got up by a couple of runs, I went to bed.

I like offense, homeruns, and extra base hits. The offense in college ball needs to open back up. Seems like the game is more popular on television (where it really matters $$$ wise) now more than ever. But, low scoring games will kill any momentum that college baseball has going forward.

But what I like doesn't matter, it's more about the casual fan that tunes in. The casual fan wants offense, homeruns, and the ball hit around the yard. There are too many choices that people have to attend and watch. I mean, really, lacrosse seems to be taking off in the south, and Crossfit is televised.

In a best of three a cumulative score of 11-1 over two games is only low scoring for one team. It's humorous the team that scored 11 is the one being criticized for style of play. The big hitting team scored one run. The championship round wasn't about lack of hitting. It was about one ream's superior pitching and defense. But they did score plenty of runs.

CSF, LSU, UNC, and MSU had no problems generating offense and scoring runs in the current landscape while leading up to the CWS.  They just ran into a team with superb pitching and defense and a gameplan executed to perfection.

Others might think differently on this but my view is CSF had the best pitching in the nation for 59 games.  UCLA got enough runs off two starters to combine with wonderful defense and pitching to take them out in two.  CSF plays the pressure West Coast offense with the best. They bunt the 3 guy, 4 guy and pressure every chance they get.

UCLA played that same offensive approach one level better and the CSF defense ended up looking very much like the MSU defense.  It might be coincidence but it might also be the precise execution and pressure it creates.

UCLA clearly deserved to win the CWS; their pitching and defense were superb and their hitting was clearly able to score runs. All of that stated, the park is...too...big. Makes the game less dynamic and less interesting to watch. Saying the park is too big does not = slamming on UCLA.

Well stated too, sir!

well put RJM.  Didnt UCLA win 2nd game 10-0? Thats plenty of runs in my book. Not so for MSU. MSU has 2 legitamate power hitters and couldnt do it. Dont blame the park people. Sons high school fields dimensions were left-345 center-396 right-340. No one complained and legitamate power guys,like Eric Hosmer put the ball out in high school. I think some people have cut their baseball teeth during the steroid/ped/besr era and their outlook is colored by that fact. I for one dont want to see anymore of the Dave Kingmanization of baseball where it is nothing but a home run derby with 3 outs in  an inning.If i want to watch that i will turn on some old black and white re-runs from the 60's.

Congratulations to John Savage. He was our 1st player in the 1983 Goodwill Series with the Japan National HS Team. Matt Williams and 5 future ML players were also on our American Team. His brother Pete is a respected HS coach in Reno.

These early events + many more college coaching experiences has shaped John's ability to change strategy to fit the situation. He has surrounded himself with capable coaches.

Bob

PS: when I played in the College World Series, we used wood and drove to the park in

horseless carriages.

".If i want to watch that i will turn on some old black and white re-runs from the 60's."

If I recall, in the 1960s  the Dodgers, Koufax, Drysdale, Maury Wills, Willie Davis, Tommy Davis, Gilliam, Fairly, Roseboro was the epitome of small ball....

Then St Louis and Bob Gibson, Brock, Flood, etc  

Congrats to UCLA they adapted and excelled and the other teams did not. There is a real lesson here. 

My son was sitting on the couch and kept saying over and over that MSU needed to adjust to the situation and their top hitters needed to set an example and if necessary ground balls to the infield to set an example for the rest of the team and they kept swinging from their heels hitting fly balls to the warning track. While I agree that the OF fences need to be pulled in, in the end UCLA adjusted and MSU did not. Granted UCLA pitching worked up in the zone, but their hitters did what was needed to win. I certainly don't want to criticize MSU too much, as they had a wonderful season and should be very proud of what they accomplished, but you have to be very impressed with UCLA's approach.