"It's a simple game" - Sage, folly or just plain ignorance?

It's just coming from people who don't understand the game. I've seen knowledgeable baseball people make ignorant comments about other sports. If a person looks at any sport from a child's standpoint it is easy. In baseball all you do is throw it, hit it and catch it. What's the big deal? When I was a kid a majority of kids were at the field playing pickup ball. They didn't have trouble with these three things. 

I welcome and enjoy all the new technology, tools, measurement and metrics.  But they are just tools to assist a manager, scout, coach.  It is a simple game.  The team with the players that hit, throw, catch, run, think and execute better than the other team usually wins.

The fact of the matter is that most coaches, particularly at the HS or Travel Ball level, are not willing to put the time in to do these things & who can really blame them. Coaching, at this level, is not meant to be a full time analytics job.

However, if you did engage in these actions, you would certainly have an advantage. No doubt.

Steve A. posted:

The fact of the matter is that most coaches, particularly at the HS or Travel Ball level, are not willing to put the time in to do these things & who can really blame them. Coaching, at this level, is not meant to be a full time analytics job.

However, if you did engage in these actions, you would certainly have an advantage. No doubt.

I do understand your point.  I really do.  But coaching is supposed to be a passion not a job.  Your hourly rate of pay is supposed to be about a buck twenty!  That's when you know you are doing it right.  Now as a full timer like at an organization lets face it lessons is where you really make your money.  The age level you coach is then your passion project.  As a high school coach you make your living from teaching.  Problem comes when you have out of the building high school coaches.  

Go44dad posted:

I welcome and enjoy all the new technology, tools, measurement and metrics.  But they are just tools to assist a manager, scout, coach.  It is a simple game.  The team with the players that hit, throw, catch, run, think and execute better than the other team usually wins.

I love applying new technology, but I can see times when dabbling in technology can be counter-productive, if for no other reason than wasting one's time.  Things like pop times or time to plate are really only pieces of the puzzle.  As for knowing how hard the entire HS pitching staff throws - what difference does this make?  It might make some difference, but a coach will need to weave that specific information into a vast pot of information - or facts - when deciding how to proceed.  Gunning them doesn't make them throw harder or make them more effective.

Once you get to something like Trackman then you can probably start to collect some real live game information on how payers react and move, but these type measurements require great precision of multiple moving parts.  A high school coach is probably going to have to eyeball "reaction time" during scrimmages.  Pop times - outside of game situations - is another one of those "iffy" measurements (even in-game measurements are really hard to nail down with precision).  Pop times are good to see if a kid has the necessary skills (cannot be 3.0), but trying to decide between some random 2.2's versus 1.9's (via stopwatch) won't necessarily tell you whether they can get the runner out (how does one then introduce accuracy into this model).

High speed video is another thing altogether.  Is is a valid tool and will likely be the standard in pitching and batting instruction very soon.

Go44dad posted:

I welcome and enjoy all the new technology, tools, measurement and metrics.  But they are just tools to assist a manager, scout, coach.  It is a simple game.  The team with the players that hit, throw, catch, run, think and execute better than the other team usually wins.

Agreed, right up until you get to similar competition then the preparation will overcome.  Like in high school if you are any good you beat most of your conference by simply being better.  But what are your goals?  if it is to win state then you have to beat teams as good or better than you.  What then?  Hope for luck?  As John Wooden said "Luck is where preparation meets opportunity"

I do have to laugh at those who take money for lessons without the use of video technology.  I'm sure there are exceptions (such as perhaps Charley Manuel) but in general most humans cannot see every aspect of a swing in real time....

The biggest change from the standpoint of a parent of a 14 year old is the huge emphasis on speed & strength.  My kid has started training like a track athlete in many ways.  It is all about the 60 time, Exit Velo, and throwing velocity.  Those are his 3 "heats" that he will compete in during future "track meets" i.e. Showcases/Tryouts.  And it is never ending in terms of, once the 60 is below 7, can you get it lower?  

I'm not complaining about that, just stating a fact.  There is this other part of his developmental stage that involves hitting a pitched ball, fielding positions, and playing the game.  But reality is that is just part of his training.  

Will becoming faster/stronger make him a better overall Baseball player?  Absolutely!  It is just a much different path for a teenager than in previous eras.  

2017LHPscrewball posted:

Go44dad posted:

I welcome and enjoy all the new technology, tools, measurement and metrics.  But they are just tools to assist a manager, scout, coach.  It is a simple game.  The team with the players that hit, throw, catch, run, think and execute better than the other team usually wins.

I love applying new technology, but I can see times when dabbling in technology can be counter-productive, if for no other reason than wasting one's time.  Things like pop times or time to plate are really only pieces of the puzzle.  As for knowing how hard the entire HS pitching staff throws - what difference does this make?  It might make some difference, but a coach will need to weave that specific information into a vast pot of information - or facts - when deciding how to proceed.  Gunning them doesn't make them throw harder or make them more effective.

Once you get to something like Trackman then you can probably start to collect some real live game information on how payers react and move, but these type measurements require great precision of multiple moving parts.  A high school coach is probably going to have to eyeball "reaction time" during scrimmages.  Pop times - outside of game situations - is another one of those "iffy" measurements (even in-game measurements are really hard to nail down with precision).  Pop times are good to see if a kid has the necessary skills (cannot be 3.0), but trying to decide between some random 2.2's versus 1.9's (via stopwatch) won't necessarily tell you whether they can get the runner out (how does one then introduce accuracy into this model).

High speed video is another thing altogether.  Is is a valid tool and will likely be the standard in pitching and batting instruction very soon.

Well screwball let me give this a shot at least and you can decide!  Gunning them can do several things:

Confirm or deny your eye test.  Maybe make you give a guy another look.  maybe identifies a problem - kid is throwing hard enough so must be location or movement, and no you can't always judge subtle movement with the eye.  Gives them a baseline to measure improvent.  Lets you talk intelligently to scouts if the kid is lucky enough to be a prospect.  In game can let you know when pitcher is tiring.  And you are absolutely right it is just a piece woven into a larger fabric, but an important piece!  

And couldn't agree more about the high speed video!

So you're telling me that Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh was wrong when he said, "A good friend of mine used to say, 'This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains.' Think about that for a while."

I suppose your also gonna tell me that baseball isn't 90 percent mental, and the other half physical.  :-)

FWP - At times gunning them may make sense.  Things like baseline (as part of a pitching program) and maybe to a lesser degree scouts (but that can be done with some sporadic gunning or using baseline measurements).  I will say my comments are directed at high school baseball programs in general (including larger programs) and are not necessarily applicable to the highest performing individuals who may be working towards individual goals.

As for potential problems, I have been told repeatedly by son and his teammates that velocity alone means very little (until such time as velocity simply becomes dominant against the competition, starting at 90+).  So some kid throwing 83 may very well be more effective than some kid throwing 87, but the eye test would have both of them throwing in the 80's (one lower 80's - the other upper 80's) and the better pitcher would simply be the more effective pitcher however this gets measured.  Whether it is due to lack of breaking/off-speed pitches or whether the kid's fastball is arrow straight, the coach will have to be the final judge of effectiveness.  If there is too much focus to gunning, along with the constant "tracking" of speeds and "mining" for tidbits of information, then perhaps this can take away from some of the more important observations.  When the gunning can be automated and the "stats" are automatically compiled (and maybe some valid comparisons are generated), then the necessary time investment may be reduced such that it might be another tool.  I just would not invest significant time and effort at the expense of other areas given the current technology (unless the high school math team wants to take it on as a project).

As for tiring pitchers, some drop off should be expected from a large majority of kids if they are able to pitch deep into games.  Some kids are more effective than others when velocity starts to drop and coaches oftentimes need to manage their pitching staffs (i.e. they will often live with some drop off in effectiveness if they can buy another 1-2 innings and not put arm health in jeopardy) - so you once again have to be very careful in how you use this type of measurement in game situations and must have very good individual "curves" showing how individual kids perform over the course of an outing.  Not impossible, but extremely complex to do correctly.

Technology is great.  Knowing what to do with it is another thing.  The ideal scenario is an experienced coach who keeps an eye on technology and picks the tools that he can reasonably incorporate to enhance his already-solid practice plan, his game strategy, his instruction, etc.  All the information, stats and technology in the world put in the hands of someone without the practical experience of knowing what to do with it is rather useless.

Also, Screwball is absolutely correct in his assessment that there are real limitations at the HS level.  Video is a no-brainer, particularly with the ease of use, even with a smart phone.  Gamechanger provides another level of info that can be quite helpful but it is still very much dependent on accurate input by the user.   One of my assistants helps with spray charts and makes in-game adjustments.  He uses the short history that we have.  Problem is, he just uses the spray chart at face value and often doesn't consider the variances in pitcher, pitch type, situation, etc.  Drilling down to this extent is nearly impossible with the small sample size, limited time and resources and limited number of coaches of a typical HS program.  A good, experienced coach, on the other hand, can watch a guy take a few cuts in the on deck circle and know how he may match up against his pitcher and make more accurate defensive adjustments based on the eye test, as well as determine his pitching strategy for this hitter.  Then, observing a few in-game swings from that hitter with different pitch types and velo solidifies his "scouting analytics" as well as any spreadsheet, measurements or technology can.  

There is a regular poster here who frequently claims that most old school coaches think they can "tell by what they see" but in fact, he claims, their perception is often very wrong.  This is BS.  Most good coaches who have been around the game for a while can tell a whole lot by looking.  And their observations are usually correct.  There is no substitute for experience.

Yes, things are different today and there is more beneficial information and technology that helps in regards to conditioning, running times, exit velo, throwing velo, statistical tendencies and measurements.  But the drawback is that we are seeing more players focus on measurables and seemingly less and less players who develop pure baseball instinct.  

cabbagedad posted:

…There is a regular poster here who frequently claims that experienced coaches all think they can "tell by what they see" but in fact, their perception is often very wrong.  This is BS.  Most good coaches who have been around the game for a while can tell a whole lot by looking.  And their observations are usually correct.  There is no substitute for experience….

 I’ve never seen anyone claim that good coaches who have been around the game for a while can’t tell a whole lot by looking. However, I have seen someone who opines that coaches perceptions are often very wrong. Not ALL coaches are GOOD coaches.

FWP posted:

...there are things coaches can do right now that at least some highly successful programs have been doing for years.  If you as a coach/your organization is not doing the following I would have to ask why not?

FWP, we use many of the things you bring up but I will offer some of the realities that factor in...

1. using high speed video for analysis - this could even include transposing one outfielder over another to see who gets the better jump, better route etc.  Actually not hard to do with hudl technique.  If you are not doing this why?  Aren't you interested in which middle infielder actually has the most range?

We use video on hitters and pitchers - visual tends to be quite effective with most students.  We time OF transfers.  Other side of the coin - individual video analysis takes a lot of extra time and can slow the pace and effectiveness of a planned practice routine that must keep a large group of players moving and progressing.  Which MIF has the most range becomes glaringly evident when you are hitting hundreds of practice reps a day.

2. using radar and stop watches.  Seems like a no brainer right?  Well I guess not.  One of the leading candidates to win the state championship where I live has no Idea how hard anybody throws, pop times, exit velos etc.  No idea.  Now before you say 'well they are a top ranked team' it is lightning in a bottle.  Lucked out with a strong group of senior pitchers.  Historically the program is very mediocre.

We measure POP times and velo on occasion but really, it isn't that difficult to watch a guy throw and determine, within a one or two MPH, how hard he throws or how much variance there is with his off-speed stuff.  Nor is it difficult to determine if a P/C combo is going to be tough to run on or not.  We do spend time with some of these measurements and times but, as I said in my other post - often, the bigger issue is baseball instinct.  Do our runners have a feel for when they can go, reading balls in the dirt, picking up on pick moves, picking up on tells that P is coming over or going home, etc.?  Do they know how to make timing adjustments as hitters with different types of pitchers at different velo's?  Yes, velo progression is valuable.  

3. Scouting.  Even in travel ball you often play the same teams over and over.  Why would you not scout?  No not having a beer in the parking lot while looking over your shoulder at your next opponent. Or squatting down to make yourself look like a keen observer, but actually have scout sheets plotting pitches, recording results, spray chart, suggested positioning and general notes.  How can you not feel this would give you an advantage?

So, during the HS season, teams generally play games on the same days.  Non-game days are always practice days.  Most HS's don't have excess coach staff members and it is important that they are all there to maximize practices.  We do get to an occasional game but scouting with our schedule is usually not realistically practical.  Of course, we gather as much info as possible from posted stats, media information and even media pics.  In our area, it is not uncommon to see teams scouted during playoffs but, aside from that, it is not the norm..

4. Pay attention to science!!  No more hitting the top inside of the baseball.  Thats a ground ball to second.  No more "just meet the ball".  No more "level swing"

I welcome other insights.  I am just tired of the old "its a simple game".  The fact is it is not a simple game.  Its quite complex but those who do not want to put in the effort to recognize that just dismiss it as a simple game and act as if it is some sort of good old fashioned wisdom to do so.  As baseball people we should challenge ourselves to be better.  To never stop learning.  And most importantly give these kids the best chance for success that we possibly can!

So those that do say "its a simple game"...  Is it sage, folly or just plain ignorance?

Regarding your "simple game" statement...

In some instances, it is advantageous to break down the game in the commonly stated simple form.  It does often come down to good throws, good swings, good catches.  But each of those have infinite levels of complexities, many of which need to be introduced in order for a player to be able to excel at a competitive level.  Also, I don't know of another game that has as many situational variances.  It is often hard to remember with HS age and below that the players have not always been exposed to all of the various situations in actual games.  Practicing scenarios doesn't always prepare for when it actually happens in games.

Regarding your "age level you coach is supposed to be your passion project" comment...

Yes, most HS coaches are there in part because it is a passion but realistic limitations do come into play.  Again, I mentioned in another thread, we just ended our Spring season.  I put in 4-5 hours a day, five or six days a week for eight or nine months, will take a week off and then start the summer program.  During that "off" week, I will plan team banquet, deal with my exit interview, compile our equipment needs for next year, design our uni's and stew over our playoff loss.  In season, there is daily practice plans, coach staff hiring and coordination, JV oversight, field maintenance, player issues, parent issues, booster issues, administration issues, actual practice, equipment issues, game prep, actual games, travel coordination, tournament coordination, fundraising coordination, trainer and AD communication and paperwork, required safety certifications, coaching certifications, community service required activities with team, youth baseball connection, staying up on coaching/instructing trends, helping with recruiting efforts, media, team website and much more I'm sure I'm not thinking of at the moment.  My typical day (at least from mid-December thru May) is up at 6am to my real work, head straight to the field at 4pm, having changed clothes in my work office bathroom, practice, field maintenance, leave field between 8-9pm, go home, eat, plan the next day's practice and go to bed.  I will have dealt with maybe five or six baseball program issues during the course of my work day.  Much of my Saturdays is spent working a volunteer practice or individually with those who ask.  Diving deep into technology, stats, analytics, etc. is something I also enjoy but one could easily make that a very time consuming exercise on it's own.  Just not always practical.

I think it would be beneficial if enthusiastic parents were a little bit more aware of a coach's typical schedule.  

All I know is for my 14 year old we have a limited amount of extra money we can spend on lessons.   He has a lesson tonight.   Going to see a hitting instructor?  Nope.  Former MLB Shortstop in the area.  Gonna see him for defensive lessons?  Nope.   The lesson is with a track coach.  Sprinting Technique.   If it isn't too dark out afterwords I'll take him to a batting cage and we'll get some hitting in.

Baseball is a very simple game.  Hit, catch, throw.  It can be made as complex as you want.  I believe that often times, we use these "tools" to the excess and actually can make things worse than they were before.  I've seen many a good player get too many things in their heads from all the feedback from slow mo video and recording pop times and comparing a swing to a MLB player or the pitching motion of a MLB pitcher, that they go into a major slump or can't throw a strike to save their life.  Sometimes, we just need to keep it simple.

EXCELLENT post Cabbage! Most have no idea. Thank you for laying it out there.

I can only relate on a much smaller scale with coaching a travel team & when we needed someone to previously help keep the book (pre-gamechanger), 80% of our parents would disappear behind the nearest tree.  (these were the ones who complained the most, incidentally)

"But the drawback is that we are seeing more players focus on measurables and seemingly less and less players who develop pure baseball instinct." — Cabbagedad

I understand the appeal of sprinting lessons and so forth — probably should have done some because my kid is slow. But Monday night, he pitched. Four college coaches in the stands. When he's not pitching, he's at third. On this night, there are no runners on base. He throws a pitch, batter hits it weakly between pitcher and third base line. Third baseman stands there and looks at it.

I don't know who's ball it should have been. I just know that my kid ran over, grabbed the ball, and made a fairly mediocre throw from his knees to first — he knew someone had to do something. Third baseman never moved.

Third baseman is not a horrible player. He runs faster than my son and does a few other things better. But colleges aren't interested in him and I would argue that it's because he doesn't feel the game. He doesn't have the instinct for it. Part of the deal is knowing the game, understanding the whys and wherefores in your head, and then being able to execute those whys and wherefores on the field.

It's insinct.

Maybe you can learn it — you probably can if you start early enough. But if you don't have it by high school, I don't think it matters how fast you run.

Technology is great, but for most HS programs budgets are limited.  Yes, we spent a few $$$ on a radar gun this year, but could have used new netting for the tunnels, and some new balls.  In HS, you're limited to the kids who show up.  You can pretty much tell the hard throwers and the hard hitters.  So what good is putting a gun on them?  What are you going to do if you have a team full of 70 mph pitchers?  Not like you can go out and recruit a 90 mph guy. 

Golfman25 posted:

Technology is great, but for most HS programs budgets are limited.  Yes, we spent a few $$$ on a radar gun this year, but could have used new netting for the tunnels, and some new balls.  In HS, you're limited to the kids who show up.  You can pretty much tell the hard throwers and the hard hitters.  So what good is putting a gun on them?  What are you going to do if you have a team full of 70 mph pitchers?  Not like you can go out and recruit a 90 mph guy. 

 I don’t have a problem with radar guns per se. I see problems in how they’re used. I’ve scored for teams that had no gun, teams that gunned every pitch from every pitcher in the game, and teams that were in between, but never got a good explanation of what was being done with that information. As you’ve made abundantly clear, in HS you have who you have.

It is moving forward but in the end it will always be about physical talent.

In fact in the future it will be more about physical talent because MILB will become less terrible at developing players.

Right now players can still gain an edge by using science, swing knowledge (like jd martinez oder donaldson) and other stuff but in the future this will be available to anyone so that in the end it will come down to athletic talent again.

I guarantee (okay, maybe not) many Latino players, coaches don't have access to a lot of the stuff.  How come they're so good w/out it?  Because they go out and play for the FUN of it.  Sure they have God given talent, but they are not over-coached and over analyzed  like in the U.S.

At what point is it over-coaching, over-thinking, etc.?

 I get the training aspect, use all info available to become best player possible.

Latin players have always used uppercut swings because for them hitting homers is the way to get off the island. You don't need launch angle to know that you need to hit it high to hit a bomb.

The technology is more helping the overcoached american kids who were overly worried about getting long with their swing and missing.

Now the American kids know it is ok to swing big and strike out some to hit for more power.

CAMBOB2020 posted:

I guarantee (okay, maybe not) many Latino players, coaches don't have access to a lot of the stuff.  How come they're so good w/out it?  Because they go out and play for the FUN of it.  Sure they have God given talent, but they are not over-coached and over analyzed  like in the U.S.

 

 

 

I'm not sure I agree with that.  Especially in the Dominican Republic it is big business, the youth academies.  Those kids are practicing 5-8 hours a day and being analyzed to death.  Maybe without as much technology but with very huge emphasis on developing fundamentals. athleticism and speed.  While I'm sure many of those kids love the game they sure aren't doing it for the fun of it

Stats4Gnats posted:

Golfman25 posted:

Technology is great, but for most HS programs budgets are limited.  Yes, we spent a few $$$ on a radar gun this year, but could have used new netting for the tunnels, and some new balls.  In HS, you're limited to the kids who show up.  You can pretty much tell the hard throwers and the hard hitters.  So what good is putting a gun on them?  What are you going to do if you have a team full of 70 mph pitchers?  Not like you can go out and recruit a 90 mph guy. 

 I don’t have a problem with radar guns per se. I see problems in how they’re used. I’ve scored for teams that had no gun, teams that gunned every pitch from every pitcher in the game, and teams that were in between, but never got a good explanation of what was being done with that information. As you’ve made abundantly clear, in HS you have who you have.

My kid came back from the first day of tryouts and said they where using a radar gun on everyone.  New coach, new purchase.  I was like WTF.  I could tell you who throws and who doesn't.   Or who hits and who doesn't.  And then they put it away and never took it out again.  I figured they would have at least used it to monitor pitching velocity during a game and season.  Nope.  We really could have used those funds for something more useful, like more balls, extra turface, nets, screens, and the like. 

MLB embraced technology at the same time the NBA and NFL did, if not a year or two sooner.  MLB teams also have had access to advance stats for decades.  It has completely changed the game.  The NBA and NFL have also significantly changed in the way they run offense, but not so much for defense.  

Golfman25 posted:

My kid came back from the first day of tryouts and said they where using a radar gun on everyone.  New coach, new purchase.  I was like WTF.  I could tell you who throws and who doesn't.   Or who hits and who doesn't.  And then they put it away and never took it out again.  I figured they would have at least used it to monitor pitching velocity during a game and season.  Nope.  We really could have used those funds for something more useful, like more balls, extra turface, nets, screens, and the like. 

 I’m a great one for establishing base lines to use for different analyses. FI, I love to have everyone run a timed home to 1^st time. Then I use that and in-game H21st times on some of the reports I do, especially base running, infield hits, and hustle.

 Every season I also offer to track gun readings, but for the last 17 seasons no one has taken me up on it because they don’t know what to do with the information. I’d be glad if one of my teams gunned every pitcher at the beginning of the spring, summer, and fall seasons and gave me the information. I’d store it and give them at minimum a report on every pitcher to show how they’ve progress/regressed, even though I don’t believe that information has a lot of value to the team. What did your kid’s team do with the readings?

What did your kid’s team do with the readings?

They probably figured out they needed another $40 to go buy a bunch of notebooks to write down all the readings.  Since they splurged for the radar gun, they didn't have $40 so they simply packed it in.

2017LHPscrewball posted:

What did your kid’s team do with the readings?

They probably figured out they needed another $40 to go buy a bunch of notebooks to write down all the readings.  Since they splurged for the radar gun, they didn't have $40 so they simply packed it in.

Sounds like standard operating procedure.

Somehow this has gotten fixated just on the radar gun - only one of many things I mentioned.  But there are practical uses for gunning kids. What if you incorporate it with video and analyze why he threw 80 this day and 84 that day?  What was different?  There is a ton of evaluation that can be done. The eye test can take yo so far - but I get a lot of baseball people aren't ready to accept that yet. It's not an insult. It's just that we can be better with the eye test AND the technology.  But anyway thanks for the responses. I think we are still a ways from getting buy in from a lot of people. 

One of the things I look for when we do seek out hitting instructors is when they ask "can you send video of his swing?"  That is a good sign.  Even better is the coach who recently said "can you send a few game swings on video as well as a few BP or tee swings?  Most kids don't duplicate in games what they do on swings in practice.   We need to figure out which is working and what is missing in some of his game swings."

That is somebody who gets it.  The guy who just has your kid swing on a tee several times, then throws him front flips and make suggestions here and there?  That guy is mostly just taking your money.  Especially if he has a lot of clients and can't even remember what they had the kid working on the previous week

I agree FWP.  You get a gun reading and incorporate it with video and really analyze it, it will tell you plenty. 

Stats4Gnats posted:

Golfman25 posted:

My kid came back from the first day of tryouts and said they where using a radar gun on everyone.  New coach, new purchase.  I was like WTF.  I could tell you who throws and who doesn't.   Or who hits and who doesn't.  And then they put it away and never took it out again.  I figured they would have at least used it to monitor pitching velocity during a game and season.  Nope.  We really could have used those funds for something more useful, like more balls, extra turface, nets, screens, and the like. 

 I’m a great one for establishing base lines to use for different analyses. FI, I love to have everyone run a timed home to 1^st time. Then I use that and in-game H21st times on some of the reports I do, especially base running, infield hits, and hustle.

 Every season I also offer to track gun readings, but for the last 17 seasons no one has taken me up on it because they don’t know what to do with the information. I’d be glad if one of my teams gunned every pitcher at the beginning of the spring, summer, and fall seasons and gave me the information. I’d store it and give them at minimum a report on every pitcher to show how they’ve progress/regressed, even though I don’t believe that information has a lot of value to the team. What did your kid’s team do with the readings?

As far as I can figure, jack squat. 

In fact, I think it led the coaches to misjudge a few players.  A couple of kids who where able to register "good numbers" but couldn't duplicate that in a real baseball situation. 

Golfman25 posted:

Stats4Gnats posted:

Golfman25 posted:

Technology is great, but for most HS programs budgets are limited.  Yes, we spent a few $$$ on a radar gun this year, but could have used new netting for the tunnels, and some new balls.  In HS, you're limited to the kids who show up.  You can pretty much tell the hard throwers and the hard hitters.  So what good is putting a gun on them?  What are you going to do if you have a team full of 70 mph pitchers?  Not like you can go out and recruit a 90 mph guy. 

 I don’t have a problem with radar guns per se. I see problems in how they’re used. I’ve scored for teams that had no gun, teams that gunned every pitch from every pitcher in the game, and teams that were in between, but never got a good explanation of what was being done with that information. As you’ve made abundantly clear, in HS you have who you have.

My kid came back from the first day of tryouts and said they where using a radar gun on everyone.  New coach, new purchase.  I was like WTF.  I could tell you who throws and who doesn't.   Or who hits and who doesn't.  And then they put it away and never took it out again.  I figured they would have at least used it to monitor pitching velocity during a game and season.  Nope.  We really could have used those funds for something more useful, like more balls, extra turface, nets, screens, and the like. 

Batteries ran out.  Couldn't figure out how to get new batteries in it. 

FWP posted:

Somehow this has gotten fixated just on the radar gun - only one of many things I mentioned.  But there are practical uses for gunning kids. What if you incorporate it with video and analyze why he threw 80 this day and 84 that day?  What was different?  There is a ton of evaluation that can be done. The eye test can take yo so far - but I get a lot of baseball people aren't ready to accept that yet. It's not an insult. It's just that we can be better with the eye test AND the technology.  But anyway thanks for the responses. I think we are still a ways from getting buy in from a lot of people. 

I really don't mean to sound critical, but I would suggest that the 80/84 comparison mentioned above could be an example of where one puts in lots of time/effort with zero to show for it.  Some kid throws 84 on a Friday bullpen and comes back on Monday and throws 80.  Come to find out he had a big date planned for Friday night and was pumped.  Also come to find out Friday went really well and they went out again on Saturday night.  He got up Sunday and had chores backed up (mow lawn/wash car/etc) while catching up on homework (and trying to keep up with all the messages from the new girlfriend).  Drags in on Monday and, with identical mechanics but not too much in the tank, he throws 80.  Coach is perplexed after 2 hours of video analysis.

This might work for some longer term trending - was generally 84 coming into the season, now is lucky to hit 80.  Again, if you have student volunteers who run the radar gun and video and edit it for viewing, then perhaps you can do this daily, but I doubt too many high school programs have that much free, and technically savvy, folks just hanging around wanting to help.

Golfman25 posted:

As far as I can figure, jack squat. 

 In fact, I think it led the coaches to misjudge a few players.  A couple of kids who where able to register "good numbers" but couldn't duplicate that in a real baseball situation. 

And that’s the main reason there are so many who have a problem with radar guns. It isn’t the gun,  its what’s done with the information.

 What you’re saying about the difference between numbers generated in controlled situations and those created in game situations is something people misjudge and misuse all the time.

 I agree with 2017LHPSCREWBALL. A lot of sound evaluation can be done using a radar gun in conjunction with video, but what are the chances a HS program has the time and technically savvy people available?