It was the at bat against Dotel.
quote:Originally posted by NDD:
It was the at bat against Dotel.
Dotel said he got lucky with the last pitch to Braun, in other words he made a mistake and Braun didn't pick up on it, which might just be telling you enough that most of the time that's what happens. Pujols is the master of picking up on mistakes.
GBM,
What case are you resting one that you are giving your opinion about?
How would you know actually what transpired unless you were the pitcher throwing that pitch?
These guys are where they are and getting paid what they do because they have control, but as you can see (using last nights game) perfect doesn't happen every outing for them. Take Grienke, he was not on his game last night. His off speed obviously wasn't working for sure. Now for Garcia, he was stellar for almost 4 innings and things began to unravel, looked to me like he lost his mechanics, the true reason why things go south quickly or never begin in the first place.
Again, you cannot compare what happens in a HS game to what happens in a ML game, let alone a playoff one with facing probably the best in the game. You cannot think that a HS pitcher pitching low 80 hitting his spots is the same as a ML pitcher facing Pujols, Holiday, Braun, Fielder, Berkman? Come on now, be REAL.
There is so much more to this than reading charts, and FWIW, I completely expected you to respond as you did. I find it funny that you have added a slant to your argument, I don't think that ANYONE here ever said that pitchers don't throw down the middle to pitchers, I got a kick how you have changed your study to practicing this to be prepared to do so in a game to
some may have been mistakes. That is so typical GBM, and FWIW, I am not the only one that feels that way. I do give you credit though, instead of pulling stuff out of a hat you are using legit charts.
At least it shows that you are expanding your horizons.
Yeah, I think the mistake was he didn't go high enough. Also, you've got to take that with a grain of salt, they may be looking at doing it again on Sunday. Dotel also said he hopes he's lucky again like that. LOL
quote:Originally posted by Coach_May:
Great information PG. There are so many unknown factors here. How many times was he in a 3-0 count because he was being pitched around? How many times was it an rbi situation and they were simply pitching around him? Is it better to pitch around him and give up a walk and force the next batter to beat you? Was the BB a win for the other team? The numbers are staggering no doubt.
And those are the answers that the “Sabers” are giving people. More and more people are beginning to understand that in order to give true enlightenment, a metric must be looked at much more deeply than just the gross numbers taken from the score sheet totals.
The thing is, that’s only been possible for all but the elite, for less than a decade. So on top of everything else a coach has to learn, in order to stay ahead or just even with his most fierce competition, he’s also got to learn how to analyze numbers far more deeply than his predecessors.
What’s helping immensely, is the explosion of software that will score games and generate numbers while doing it. Up until now, the bulk of the usefulness of the numbers has been piled on 30 teams out of the hundreds of thousands out there, but times are a’changin’. Slowly to be sure, but changin’ none-the-less.
Prior to 2010, how many HS or even college teams could tell how many times all of their hitters were in 3-0 counts, let alone a specific hitter? There were a few, but not many. Now-a-days, anyone with a smart phone and someone willing to touch the screen with his/her finger can get numbers like that, fairly easily.
I think its one of the most exciting times in baseball’s history, and one that will change forever, much of baseball’s conventional thinking.
quote:Originally posted by NDD:
Yeah, I think the mistake was he didn't go high enough. Also, you've got to take that with a grain of salt, they may be looking at doing it again on Sunday. Dotel also said he hopes he's lucky again like that. LOL
I don't know what the mistake was, but he did get lucky. And let's not forget that the catcher did a great job. Yadi rocks!
One last time, I am sorry but one more time, as it seems that GBM keeps beating it as well.
I noticed that GBM did not challenge the bull pen model given by the milb manager but has spent lot of time trying to make his argument credible. GBM stats on many occassions in topics that HS, college pro all the same. Then why not follow that model? Why spend all of this time in this topic trying to prove you have credibility. JMO, a parent of a HS pitcher has none, in comparison to someone who makes his living coaching and managing pro ball (notice I didn't even USE playing).
I rest MY case.
TPM
I am deeply hurt---I thought all that venom was reserved for me
I am deeply hurt---I thought all that venom was reserved for me
quote:Originally posted by TPM:
One last time, I am sorry but one more time, as it seems that GBM keeps beating it as well.
I noticed that GBM did not challenge the bull pen model given by the milb manager but has spent lot of time trying to make his argument credible. GBM stats on may occassions that HS, college pro all the same. Then why not follow that model? Why spend all of this time in this topic trying to prove you have credibility. JMO, a parent of a HS pitcher has none, in comparison to someone who makes his living coaching and managing pro ball (notice I didn't even USE playing).
I rest MY case.
Which argument are you speaking of? We are discussing several sub-topics to the original topic.
I have found a bullpen model that works well for my son. If games are somewhat the end result of what at least partially happens in the bullpen, then I would have to say that the bullpen model we designed is working rather well. What do you care anyway? I teach my kid to hit his target wherever the target is set up. Is that a bad philosophy?
The argument about pitchers at all levels being the same has to do with "location". We have already discussed this to no end. A good HS pitcher can place his pitches with relatively the same control as those above him. I have shown with several charts and my own that pitchers at the MLB level can't locate their pitches with the precision we think they have. Does this make them bad? NO, it just shows that our perception of the game is clouded in the face of reality.
You made the claim that no one pitches or should pitch down the middle to Pujols and again I showed where the charts show otherwise. Your reality is clouded. Look at the facts would you.
You think pitchers don't throw down the middle in 3-0 counts and again I showed you that even the best pitchers with the lowest ERA tend to throw down the middle in those counts. Again, your reality is clouded.
J H made irrational statements and attacked my philosophy all the while showing off his credentials and then ran like a chicken when faced with the fatcs. I don't suspect you will do the same. I just reckon you will continue to live in your cloud of illusions.
quote:Originally posted by TPM:quote:Originally posted by NDD:
Yeah, I think the mistake was he didn't go high enough. Also, you've got to take that with a grain of salt, they may be looking at doing it again on Sunday. Dotel also said he hopes he's lucky again like that. LOL
I don't know what the mistake was, but he did get lucky. And let's not forget that the catcher did a great job. Yadi rocks!
One last time, I am sorry but one more time, as it seems that GBM keeps beating it as well.
I noticed that GBM did not challenge the bull pen model given by the milb manager but has spent lot of time trying to make his argument credible. GBM stats on many occassions in topics that HS, college pro all the same. Then why not follow that model? Why spend all of this time in this topic trying to prove you have credibility. JMO, a parent of a HS pitcher has none, in comparison to someone who makes his living coaching and managing pro ball (notice I didn't even USE playing).
I rest MY case.
Molina is, IMO, the best catcher in baseball right now. As always, it was a collaborative effort - coaches, catcher, pitcher, etc.
Here are the pitchf/x stats for 2011 for Pujols,broken down by count, showing Pujols gets 4 seam fast balls less than 50% of the time in 3 ball counts and someplace under 10% of the 4 seam are in the middle of the plate:
This is 3-2:
http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.c...11&to=10%2F14%2F2011
This is 3-1:
http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.c...11&to=10%2F14%2F2011
And this is 3-0, where Pujols is now 5-9 this year:
http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.c...11&to=10%2F14%2F2011
MLB pitchers cannot succeed in 3 ball counts throwing straight 4 seam fastballs down the center to Pujols and they clearly don't. The pitchers know it, Pujols does, the catchers do, the managers do, and just about everyone on this thread does..just about.
This is 3-2:
http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.c...11&to=10%2F14%2F2011
This is 3-1:
http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.c...11&to=10%2F14%2F2011
And this is 3-0, where Pujols is now 5-9 this year:
http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.c...11&to=10%2F14%2F2011
MLB pitchers cannot succeed in 3 ball counts throwing straight 4 seam fastballs down the center to Pujols and they clearly don't. The pitchers know it, Pujols does, the catchers do, the managers do, and just about everyone on this thread does..just about.
GBM,
You need to go back to your statement about the 3-0 count to PUJOLS. That is all I said, you have been the one trying to prove otherwise and FWIW, you are the one proving your own credibility not being credible.
This is just not about location, you have stated on many occasions in many discussions about what young players should work on should be close to what profesional pitchers work on. Then you turn around and make up up own stuff, so which is it?
This is not just about location, but many topics such as the frequent use of the breaking ball (remember that discussion about HS players bb's vs. milbers), ML pitchers using multiple different (don't forget how good your son was when young throwing from different slots) the velo generates from the arm (your take), the use of the gyroball in ML baseball. Oh and don't forget the discussion of getting the sinker to sink more as well. You have even gone on to tell us how you are able to define elbow problems for pitchers, this is just incredible when those trained at the highest level send their pitchers to bona fide doctors and don't make educated (or in your case uneducated) guesses.
These are many topics that have been discussed with you always taking the opposite view and it's always the right one as well, in your opinion, usually only.
But then after all, you watch a lot of the milb channel so you do KNOW your stuff for sure (you did say that correct).
I also don't appreciate what you stated about JH who IMO has a lot more credibiilty here than you EVER will.
You need to go back to your statement about the 3-0 count to PUJOLS. That is all I said, you have been the one trying to prove otherwise and FWIW, you are the one proving your own credibility not being credible.
This is just not about location, you have stated on many occasions in many discussions about what young players should work on should be close to what profesional pitchers work on. Then you turn around and make up up own stuff, so which is it?
This is not just about location, but many topics such as the frequent use of the breaking ball (remember that discussion about HS players bb's vs. milbers), ML pitchers using multiple different (don't forget how good your son was when young throwing from different slots) the velo generates from the arm (your take), the use of the gyroball in ML baseball. Oh and don't forget the discussion of getting the sinker to sink more as well. You have even gone on to tell us how you are able to define elbow problems for pitchers, this is just incredible when those trained at the highest level send their pitchers to bona fide doctors and don't make educated (or in your case uneducated) guesses.
These are many topics that have been discussed with you always taking the opposite view and it's always the right one as well, in your opinion, usually only.
But then after all, you watch a lot of the milb channel so you do KNOW your stuff for sure (you did say that correct).
I also don't appreciate what you stated about JH who IMO has a lot more credibiilty here than you EVER will.
quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
Here are the pitchf/x stats for 2011 for Pujols,broken down by count, showing Pujols gets 4 seam fast balls less than 50% of the time in 3 ball counts and someplace under 10% of the 4 seam are in the middle of the plate:
This is 3-2:
http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.c...11&to=10%2F14%2F2011
This is 3-1:
http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.c...11&to=10%2F14%2F2011
And this is 3-0, where Pujols is now 5-9 this year:
http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.c...11&to=10%2F14%2F2011
MLB pitchers cannot succeed in 3 ball counts throwing straight 4 seam fastballs down the center to Pujols and they clearly don't. The pitchers know it, Pujols does, the catchers do, the managers do, and just about everyone on this thread does..just about.
The above still doesn't matter, he still will be right.
TPM,
To be honest, speaking with you is insane. I wish we could honestly discuss things but it is awfully hard when you are such a jacka$$.
It's been good to discuss this issue with the others on this board and I think everyone besides a few have been shown some things that have opened our horizons.
But I can't deal with your jacka$$ attitude any longer. If you take this as a win, go ahead and think it. Thefacts on the other hand speak for themselves.
Have a nice day.
To be honest, speaking with you is insane. I wish we could honestly discuss things but it is awfully hard when you are such a jacka$$.
It's been good to discuss this issue with the others on this board and I think everyone besides a few have been shown some things that have opened our horizons.
But I can't deal with your jacka$$ attitude any longer. If you take this as a win, go ahead and think it. Thefacts on the other hand speak for themselves.
Have a nice day.
quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
…And this is 3-0, where Pujols is now 5-9 this year:
MLB pitchers cannot succeed in 3 ball counts throwing straight 4 seam fastballs down the center to Pujols and they clearly don't. The pitchers know it, Pujols does, the catchers do, the managers do, and just about everyone on this thread does..just about.
Hmmm. Its funny how easily people manipulate words to serve themselves.
Looks to me on just the 3-0 count alone they SUCCEEDED 4 times, which clearly refutes the thought that they “CANNOT SUCCEED in 3 ball counts throwing straight 4 seam fastballs down the center to Pujols and they clearly don't”. Clearly they’ve done it, and clearly some have succeeded.
Is it a good idea to do that? Depends on the situation.
quote:Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
…And this is 3-0, where Pujols is now 5-9 this year:
MLB pitchers cannot succeed in 3 ball counts throwing straight 4 seam fastballs down the center to Pujols and they clearly don't. The pitchers know it, Pujols does, the catchers do, the managers do, and just about everyone on this thread does..just about.
Hmmm. Its funny how easily people manipulate words to serve themselves.
Looks to me on just the 3-0 count alone they SUCCEEDED 4 times, which clearly refutes the thought that they “CANNOT SUCCEED in 3 ball counts throwing straight 4 seam fastballs down the center to Pujols and they clearly don't”. Clearly they’ve done it, and clearly some have succeeded.
Is it a good idea to do that? Depends on the situation.
Yup, it sure appears manipulation of words is becoming a theme in this thread, Stats.
To what appears to be your view on "manipulation,"I would not consider, and think most MLB pitchers would not consider, having a hitter go 5-9 success.
That was my point. MLB pitchers do not "succeed" throwing 4 seam fast balls in the middle of the plate to Pujols in those counts.
I guess if the question(not the one I considered in my post) is can they they throw a 4 seamer in 3-0 counts to the middle of the hitting area, and we consider they do that something less than 10% to be the measure that "clearly some have succeeded," then it appears you would be correct.
If you think getting an out 4 of 9 times to be your "clear definition of success," who am I to differ with your definition since it is different than mine when it comes to baseball.
If your definition of success is 4 pitchers got Pujols out in 9 AB's with 3 ball counts when they threw a 4 seamer, wonderful. I would love to be one pitchers agent and negotiate their MLB contract with you. In contrast, most pitchers are not going to do well arguing in arbitration they got Pujols out in this situation as their measure of "success."
As to your point about "depends on the situation," I made that point more than a few times beginning on page 2 of this thread. I guess I didn't anticipate you would bounce up and suggest "manipulation" because I don't include those thoughts in every single post.
I find this whole thread has been manipulated quite a bit. This whole deal about Pujols in 3-0 counts stems from my original content from page two of this thing. Here is what I said-
Somehow that scenerio balooned out of control into whether or not we should even pitch close to the heart of the plate to Pujols in a 3-0 count in "any situation".
Now that others have brought data to the table (Thanks PG), it has shown us a new angle. Think about it- if a pitcher, catcher and manager are up on their stats they should know that in 3-0 counts, Pujols will end up walking about 80% of the time versus if he hits it there is a 50/50 chance that he will be put out. Now my original scenerio was about being in the bottom of the 14 inning, bases loaded and no outs. If Pujols is smart and has done his research he knows he alway has the green light in 3-0 counts, but, he should also know that his statistics for reaching at least first base safely, in 3-0 counts are 500% more likely by walking rather than hitting. Now, we are speaking of the very next pitch in a 3-0 count here, with bases loaded and the world title on the line- hero or zero time. If Pujols is smart, and I think he is because he walks 80% of the time in 3-0 situations, he will more than likely will take a pitch.
But, let's say he doesn't. Let's say he does swing. Chances are it is going to be because he has one over the heart of the plate. But, even if he does swing he still only has a 50/50 chance of being hero versus not swinging in this situation and perhaps working his magic of drawing a game winning base on balls.
On any account, my intent originally was from the pitcher and catcher's perspective. In this situation involving Pujols (note that I didn't give any other situation involving Pujols such as- Pujols in any situation with a 3-0 count) I was trying to show why there are some situations when a pitcher and catcher will want one down the middle. And, as it was also my original intent, we were discussing whether or not in HS ball there are situations where a pitcher and catcher set up down the middle...
Anyway, it is interesting how all this has been manipulated over the following pages and turned into a pi$$ing contest that misses the original intent of what it was all about to begin with in the first place.
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
I was thinking of this situation- Suppose it was game seven of the world series, bottom of the 14th inning, in a 1-1 tied game, bases loaded, no out, a 3-0 count and Pujols in the box. What is the liklihood that Pujols will swing on the next pitch? I would say that even with Pujols up, he is more than likely not going to swing even if it is a fastball piped right down the middle.
Ok, now the pitcher- in this same situation, does he believe that Pujols will be swinging on the very next pitch? Probably knows he has the green light but chances are in this situation he isn't going to swing- he is going to take a pitch and see if he can induce a game winning rbi walk that wins the world series. So, what do you think the pitcher and catcher are going to call in this situation- more than likely the catcher will call for a fastball over the heart of the plate. This is battle for your life situation to throw and nail a strike. Your best odds of getting a pitch that is a strike is a target right down the middle. Just think- if the catcher sets up on the outside corner in a 3-0 count in this situation and the pitcher misses it by two inches to the outside and he loses the world series, he and the catcher and even manager are all going to look like idiots.
This is why I believe that a bullpen should include throwing strikes wherever the catcher sets up the target, even if it is right down the middle.
Somehow that scenerio balooned out of control into whether or not we should even pitch close to the heart of the plate to Pujols in a 3-0 count in "any situation".
Now that others have brought data to the table (Thanks PG), it has shown us a new angle. Think about it- if a pitcher, catcher and manager are up on their stats they should know that in 3-0 counts, Pujols will end up walking about 80% of the time versus if he hits it there is a 50/50 chance that he will be put out. Now my original scenerio was about being in the bottom of the 14 inning, bases loaded and no outs. If Pujols is smart and has done his research he knows he alway has the green light in 3-0 counts, but, he should also know that his statistics for reaching at least first base safely, in 3-0 counts are 500% more likely by walking rather than hitting. Now, we are speaking of the very next pitch in a 3-0 count here, with bases loaded and the world title on the line- hero or zero time. If Pujols is smart, and I think he is because he walks 80% of the time in 3-0 situations, he will more than likely will take a pitch.
But, let's say he doesn't. Let's say he does swing. Chances are it is going to be because he has one over the heart of the plate. But, even if he does swing he still only has a 50/50 chance of being hero versus not swinging in this situation and perhaps working his magic of drawing a game winning base on balls.
On any account, my intent originally was from the pitcher and catcher's perspective. In this situation involving Pujols (note that I didn't give any other situation involving Pujols such as- Pujols in any situation with a 3-0 count) I was trying to show why there are some situations when a pitcher and catcher will want one down the middle. And, as it was also my original intent, we were discussing whether or not in HS ball there are situations where a pitcher and catcher set up down the middle...
Anyway, it is interesting how all this has been manipulated over the following pages and turned into a pi$$ing contest that misses the original intent of what it was all about to begin with in the first place.
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
TPM,
To be honest, speaking with you is insane. I wish we could honestly discuss things but it is awfully hard when you are such a jacka$$.
Do you say that because it's easier to talk that way to a woman? Or how you spoke to JH because he's young? In case you haven't noticed there are some others that have vehemently opposed your posts, but you won't address them as you have above. Kind of puts you on the same plane as some others here that have absolutely no respect from others here.
Infielddad,
The way I see it and others do as well, stats is just another troller looking to start some type of negative debate with everyone, as evident in many of his replies.
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
I find this whole thread has been manipulated quite a bit. This whole deal about Pujols in 3-0 counts stems from my original content from page two of this thing. Here is what I said-quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
I was thinking of this situation- Suppose it was game seven of the world series, bottom of the 14th inning, in a 1-1 tied game, bases loaded, no out, a 3-0 count and Pujols in the box. What is the liklihood that Pujols will swing on the next pitch? I would say that even with Pujols up, he is more than likely not going to swing even if it is a fastball piped right down the middle.
Ok, now the pitcher- in this same situation, does he believe that Pujols will be swinging on the very next pitch? Probably knows he has the green light but chances are in this situation he isn't going to swing- he is going to take a pitch and see if he can induce a game winning rbi walk that wins the world series. So, what do you think the pitcher and catcher are going to call in this situation- more than likely the catcher will call for a fastball over the heart of the plate. This is battle for your life situation to throw and nail a strike. Your best odds of getting a pitch that is a strike is a target right down the middle. Just think- if the catcher sets up on the outside corner in a 3-0 count in this situation and the pitcher misses it by two inches to the outside and he loses the world series, he and the catcher and even manager are all going to look like idiots.
This is why I believe that a bullpen should include throwing strikes wherever the catcher sets up the target, even if it is right down the middle.
The way I see it, you set up a scenerio and you were challenged, and then you began to manipulate your responses based on the reaction to your scenerio (which was ridicualous to begin with).
What did you expect?
I find it very interesting that YOU keep bringing it up, why? If you have something to say and say it with convixtion than why keep defending what a jacka$$ has to say?
quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
Yup, it sure appears manipulation of words is becoming a theme in this thread, Stats.
To what appears to be your view on "manipulation,"I would not consider, and think most MLB pitchers would not consider, having a hitter go 5-9 success.
Well, it shore ain’t AP having 100% success, so someone has to be failing someplace. It looks like 5 times it was AP and 4 times it was the pitchers.
quote:That was my point. MLB pitchers do not "succeed" throwing 4 seam fast balls in the middle of the plate to Pujols in those counts.
And my point was, it all depends on one’s definition of SUCCESS.
quote:I guess if the question(not the one I considered in my post) is can they they throw a 4 seamer in 3-0 counts to the middle of the hitting area, and we consider they do that something less than 10% to be the measure that "clearly some have succeeded," then it appears you would be correct.
If you think getting an out 4 of 9 times to be your "clear definition of success," who am I to differ with your definition since it is different than mine when it comes to baseball.
It doesn’t matter what the definition is. What matters is that the definition is stated so the person trying to evaluate what’s being said has something to reference it by.
quote:If your definition of success is 4 pitchers got Pujols out in 9 AB's with 3 ball counts when they threw a 4 seamer, wonderful. I would love to be one pitchers agent and negotiate their MLB contract with you. In contrast, most pitchers are not going to do well arguing in arbitration they got Pujols out in this situation as their measure of "success."
You don’t think it’s a positive thing to get AP out on 4 of 9 situations where he’s ahead in the count 3-0?
quote:As to your point about "depends on the situation," I made that point more than a few times beginning on page 2 of this thread. I guess I didn't anticipate you would bounce up and suggest "manipulation" because I don't include those thoughts in every single post.
Well, evidently you have a much better memory than I do, if you expect everyone to remember every little thing one person wrote in a thread that’s been going on for over 18 days, and I don’t know how many posts by I don’t know how many different posters. I’ll admit I don’t even try to remember every single thing every person write, so if you intended that and I missed it or forgot it, I apologize.
quote:Originally posted by TPM:
…Infielddad,
The way I see it and others do as well, stats is just another troller looking to start some type of negative debate with everyone, as evident in many of his replies.
That’s what people often say when they’ve been challenged and don’t have a convincing argument. Yeah TPM, I’m just out here trolling for a way to make everyone look like a liar and an a$$. JEEZ! I tried very hard to point out that both you and GBM made both good and weak points, but that’s not good enough for you is it? You want everyone to lick your toes because you think your status as a woman and a long time poster here make you special. But here’s the truth. You are neither any more or less special than anyone else, including GBM or me. Your opinion is equal to mine, and mine to yours, but neither is superior, so please, argue if you want, but when you get frustrated, don’t start playing the troll card because you’ve run out of good arguments?
quote:Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:
I’ll admit I don’t even try to remember every single thing every person write, so if you intended that and I missed it or forgot it, I apologize.
That's because people like you can't get over themselves and the knowledge that you think that you bring, which IMO hasn't been helpful in any discussion. If I am wrong about that, someone give me a shout out that they have learned something, from your endless rambling.
I even noticed that after you post in stats and scorekeeping (either correcting someone or challenging them negatively) no one answers. So I must be missing something.....
quote:Originally posted by TPM:quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
TPM,
To be honest, speaking with you is insane. I wish we could honestly discuss things but it is awfully hard when you are such a jacka$$.
Do you say that because it's easier to talk that way to a woman? Or how you spoke to JH because he's young? In case you haven't noticed there are some others that have vehemently opposed your posts, but you won't address them as you have above. Kind of puts you on the same plane as some others here that have absolutely no respect from others here.
Infielddad,
The way I see it and others do as well, stats is just another troller looking to start some type of negative debate with everyone, as evident in many of his replies.
It doesn't matter if it is a man or a woman. Get real. JH was all over me, trash talking me, saying nothing but garbage about me. If you dish it out then you have toi be able to take it. I always show others respect when they show me respect. Between the two of you, you deserve everything I have dished out your way. It is only the response you guys deserve. Sorry but if you want to trash talk and spill garbage from your mouth then get ready to take the same treatment back.
Do I respect you? What have you shown to me to respect?
quote:Originally posted by TPM:quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
I find this whole thread has been manipulated quite a bit. This whole deal about Pujols in 3-0 counts stems from my original content from page two of this thing. Here is what I said-quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
I was thinking of this situation- Suppose it was game seven of the world series, bottom of the 14th inning, in a 1-1 tied game, bases loaded, no out, a 3-0 count and Pujols in the box. What is the liklihood that Pujols will swing on the next pitch? I would say that even with Pujols up, he is more than likely not going to swing even if it is a fastball piped right down the middle.
Ok, now the pitcher- in this same situation, does he believe that Pujols will be swinging on the very next pitch? Probably knows he has the green light but chances are in this situation he isn't going to swing- he is going to take a pitch and see if he can induce a game winning rbi walk that wins the world series. So, what do you think the pitcher and catcher are going to call in this situation- more than likely the catcher will call for a fastball over the heart of the plate. This is battle for your life situation to throw and nail a strike. Your best odds of getting a pitch that is a strike is a target right down the middle. Just think- if the catcher sets up on the outside corner in a 3-0 count in this situation and the pitcher misses it by two inches to the outside and he loses the world series, he and the catcher and even manager are all going to look like idiots.
This is why I believe that a bullpen should include throwing strikes wherever the catcher sets up the target, even if it is right down the middle.
The way I see it, you set up a scenerio and you were challenged, and then you began to manipulate your responses based on the reaction to your scenerio (which was ridicualous to begin with).
What did you expect?
I find it very interesting that YOU keep bringing it up, why? If you have something to say and say it with convixtion than why keep defending what a jacka$$ has to say?
That's funny, I thought it was the other way around.
Anyways, you can have the last word. I will let you.
Have a pleasent evening
quote:Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
JH was all over me, trash talking me, saying nothing but garbage about me.
You might want to go back to page one and start from the beginning. I do believe with JH you cast the first stone. The day you bring as much to this site as he does, you might earn some respect.
I have a huge problem with grown men trying to discredit young men in their 20's.
Actually it was, IMO, infielddad who really was all over you at first, but you either missed that or you just knew not to argue with a lawyer, for you it was easier to go after JH.
TPM,
I showed J H complete respect until he posted a few pages back. It was actually him that challenged my bullpen philosophy from the get-go and so I defended it respectfully until he just shoots off with the mouth. His loss for not sticking around I guess.
BTW, how is the weather there in Florida?
I showed J H complete respect until he posted a few pages back. It was actually him that challenged my bullpen philosophy from the get-go and so I defended it respectfully until he just shoots off with the mouth. His loss for not sticking around I guess.
BTW, how is the weather there in Florida?
Folks, I am gonna bow out of this match- throwin in the towel on this one.
I am sorry if I offended anyone (including you TPM). I get pretty strong minded from time to time on my beliefs and philosophy. I did learn a few things through all of this so it hasn't been all bad. Does this mean i will change anything about how I teach my son in our bullpens? Not really. I am still gonna have son throw a small percentage of strikes with a target down the middle. After all- why fix something that isn't broke?
Y'all have a great weekend and great success. It's been an up and down ride on this one and my turn is over. See y'all in another post.
PS; now is the time when you give the title belt
I am sorry if I offended anyone (including you TPM). I get pretty strong minded from time to time on my beliefs and philosophy. I did learn a few things through all of this so it hasn't been all bad. Does this mean i will change anything about how I teach my son in our bullpens? Not really. I am still gonna have son throw a small percentage of strikes with a target down the middle. After all- why fix something that isn't broke?
Y'all have a great weekend and great success. It's been an up and down ride on this one and my turn is over. See y'all in another post.
PS; now is the time when you give the title belt
quote:Originally posted by TPM:
That's because people like you can't get over themselves and the knowledge that you think that you bring, which IMO hasn't been helpful in any discussion. If I am wrong about that, someone give me a shout out that they have learned something, from your endless rambling.
I even noticed that after you post in stats and scorekeeping (either correcting someone or challenging them negatively) no one answers. So I must be missing something.....
I don’t THINK I bring anything. I KNOW what I bring, and frankly, your opinion of me isn’t one I have much consideration for. Not because you’re a woman, not a coach, not been around the game as long as others, or a whole raft of things. But because you’ve made everything about me personal. You don’t try to discuss or even argue your position with me, but rather just like to go about bashing me with silly vindictiveness that leaves me, and I assure you, many others(even if they won‘t say so in public) less than enamored with you or anything you may have to say.
And why is it that you suppose “no one answers”, which is at best stretching the truth, a lot, and at worst a total lie to do nothing but make me look bad. Again, another purely personal attack.
Use facts to challenge people, and the good ones will generally take that new knowledge and grow, while the fools will posture and argue, all the while screaming about what an arrogant jerk the person challenging them is. Where do you suppose you fit into that paradigm? ROTFLMAO!
GBM we never throw a single pitch in bull pens down the middle. Never. Why? Because our goal is to throw a bull with the same intentions we want to throw in a game. In a game we are going to work the corners , in out up down. We are going to throw three four balls off the plate so we work three four balls off the plate. We throw breaking balls in the dirt and off the plate because thats a spot we will try and hit during games. In other words we practice what we want to do in a game.
There will be times in a game when we challenge and set up right down the middle. But I figure we can hit some part of the plate if we set up down the middle. The goal for every pitcher is to hit his spot. To change speeds and hit his spots. Sometimes thats for a strike and sometimes its for a ball. But the goal is to hit your spots to the best of your ability. Sometimes you hit your spot and the hitter just beats you. Sometimes you miss your spot and you still beat him. Thats baseball.
The better your stuff the more mistakes you will get away with. The better the hitters the better stuff you have to have and the better your location needs to be. Here is the deal imo. The catcher sets up and gives a target. The pitcher tries to hit that target given. It really is that simple.
There will be times in a game when we challenge and set up right down the middle. But I figure we can hit some part of the plate if we set up down the middle. The goal for every pitcher is to hit his spot. To change speeds and hit his spots. Sometimes thats for a strike and sometimes its for a ball. But the goal is to hit your spots to the best of your ability. Sometimes you hit your spot and the hitter just beats you. Sometimes you miss your spot and you still beat him. Thats baseball.
The better your stuff the more mistakes you will get away with. The better the hitters the better stuff you have to have and the better your location needs to be. Here is the deal imo. The catcher sets up and gives a target. The pitcher tries to hit that target given. It really is that simple.
quote:Originally posted by Coach_May:
GBM we never throw a single pitch in bull pens down the middle. Never. Why? Because our goal is to throw a bull with the same intentions we want to throw in a game. In a game we are going to work the corners , in out up down. We are going to throw three four balls off the plate so we work three four balls off the plate. We throw breaking balls in the dirt and off the plate because thats a spot we will try and hit during games. In other words we practice what we want to do in a game.
There will be times in a game when we challenge and set up right down the middle. But I figure we can hit some part of the plate if we set up down the middle. The goal for every pitcher is to hit his spot. To change speeds and hit his spots. Sometimes thats for a strike and sometimes its for a ball. But the goal is to hit your spots to the best of your ability. Sometimes you hit your spot and the hitter just beats you. Sometimes you miss your spot and you still beat him. Thats baseball.
The better your stuff the more mistakes you will get away with. The better the hitters the better stuff you have to have and the better your location needs to be. Here is the deal imo. The catcher sets up and gives a target. The pitcher tries to hit that target given. It really is that simple.
I never thought this thread would go 16 pages?! It's pretty crazy, it is time to close the book on this one. I agree with Coach May's viewpoint on bullpen goals (high school level on up), it really is that simple.
quote:Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:
I KNOW what I bring, and frankly, your opinion of me isn’t one I have much consideration for. Not because you’re a woman, not a coach, not been around the game as long as others, or a whole raft of things.
---
Use facts to challenge people, and the good ones will generally take that new knowledge and grow, while the fools will posture and argue, all the while screaming about what an arrogant jerk the person challenging them is. Where do you suppose you fit into that paradigm? ROTFLMAO!
These two paragraphs sum up your nature, Stats, and let me tell you it isn't pretty.
What do you "KNOW"?
What facts?
Who are the "good" ones?
Who are the fools?
Who are the screamers?
Who is the woman who can't understand baseball?
Who hasn't been around the game as much as you?
Do you see the pattern here? And while TPM may have her detractors, frankly sir, I can't think of ANY poster who likes you in the least. You are a self-absorbed bafoon. How's that for bashing?
Man, that's all you guys have? That's some pretty weak bashing right there. You can do better.
Good post CM, and good response by bsbl247. It should be very simple on the HS level, I think that is probably what is most lost here at times by one, HS players are not and probably never will be pro bb players. Keep it simple.
I posted a few months ago in another heated debate that teaching young players to pitch should be very simplistic. The simpler the better, but that didn't sink in way back then either. Also, that in youth/adolescant bb, results (not wins) should always be the goal. Perhaps as GBM player moves from level to level, he will understand the points being made by most here. I know that some may not agree, but HS baseball (especially JV) is what it is, most players do not go onto play at the pro level, why treat it that way.
Stats,
I tolerated and ignored you until the little hairs on the back of my neck began to stand up as probably did for others, not just in this post but in other topics. I think that Bum pretty much hit the nail on the head.
I posted a few months ago in another heated debate that teaching young players to pitch should be very simplistic. The simpler the better, but that didn't sink in way back then either. Also, that in youth/adolescant bb, results (not wins) should always be the goal. Perhaps as GBM player moves from level to level, he will understand the points being made by most here. I know that some may not agree, but HS baseball (especially JV) is what it is, most players do not go onto play at the pro level, why treat it that way.
Stats,
I tolerated and ignored you until the little hairs on the back of my neck began to stand up as probably did for others, not just in this post but in other topics. I think that Bum pretty much hit the nail on the head.
Coach_May,
The operative word in that wisdom, and I mean that in the best way possible, is “WE”. I’m sure that way works for you, and I’m sure it works for many others as well. But when you say “WE”, I don’t for one second believe you mean that’s what every single coach does in every single bullpen with every single pitcher. I think you mean it in a general way, but the words you’re using don’t convey that, and the problems begin when someone takes you literally.
But the whole thing is, there are a few folks so dang dead set on making someone else look foolish, they push and push, using the real words as weapons because they were used by taking a few liberties with good, solid communication techniques, and instead used as though it were casual conversation among friends who knew each other really well. IOW, it’s a communication problem.
So, while I understand you are using a bit of hyperbole when you say “NEVER”, and then emphasize it again immediately, it really isn’t something you should say if you’re trying to accurately describe what’s going on. I wonder why it is that people are so afraid to use descriptive words and phrases like: “Hardly ever”, “More often than not”, “Most of the time”, or even “Almost always”. It gets the message across but still leaves a little leeway for the possibility of something different happening. In this case, I’d bet my life that sometime in the recent past, one of your pitchers has thrown a pitch dead center in a bull pen. It may have been unintentional, but no one in his right mind would say its NEVER happened.
Just to be sure what I’m saying is taken as trolling, I’ll say again that in general everything you said makes good common sense, and would serve just about anyone in the game at any level, very well.
I’m not gonna look for it, but I could swear someone said much the same thing, and was pretty well beaten up by folks saying pretty much that catcher’s don’t necessarily use the mitt as a target, and therefore using the mitt as a way to judge where the ball was intended to be thrown was bogus. Now me, I agree with you 100%. The mitt is the target, and pitchers are trying to hit it.
The operative word in that wisdom, and I mean that in the best way possible, is “WE”. I’m sure that way works for you, and I’m sure it works for many others as well. But when you say “WE”, I don’t for one second believe you mean that’s what every single coach does in every single bullpen with every single pitcher. I think you mean it in a general way, but the words you’re using don’t convey that, and the problems begin when someone takes you literally.
But the whole thing is, there are a few folks so dang dead set on making someone else look foolish, they push and push, using the real words as weapons because they were used by taking a few liberties with good, solid communication techniques, and instead used as though it were casual conversation among friends who knew each other really well. IOW, it’s a communication problem.
So, while I understand you are using a bit of hyperbole when you say “NEVER”, and then emphasize it again immediately, it really isn’t something you should say if you’re trying to accurately describe what’s going on. I wonder why it is that people are so afraid to use descriptive words and phrases like: “Hardly ever”, “More often than not”, “Most of the time”, or even “Almost always”. It gets the message across but still leaves a little leeway for the possibility of something different happening. In this case, I’d bet my life that sometime in the recent past, one of your pitchers has thrown a pitch dead center in a bull pen. It may have been unintentional, but no one in his right mind would say its NEVER happened.
Just to be sure what I’m saying is taken as trolling, I’ll say again that in general everything you said makes good common sense, and would serve just about anyone in the game at any level, very well.
quote:…Here is the deal imo. The catcher sets up and gives a target. The pitcher tries to hit that target given. It really is that simple.
I’m not gonna look for it, but I could swear someone said much the same thing, and was pretty well beaten up by folks saying pretty much that catcher’s don’t necessarily use the mitt as a target, and therefore using the mitt as a way to judge where the ball was intended to be thrown was bogus. Now me, I agree with you 100%. The mitt is the target, and pitchers are trying to hit it.
Well Bum, may you know what you’re talking about, but I sure don’t. I wasn’t saying those things were true about her at all, but rather that they played no part in anything I thought about her one way or the other.
You’ve gone and taken it totally out of context and assume I was saying those things about her, when the opposite was true.
The pattern I see is, there’s a lot of folks who have posted here for a long time who don’t feel anyone not in their little clique has the right or the intelligence to challenge them on anything. Because they believe it however, doesn’t make it so.
I know you don’t think anything I say has any merit or any value, let alone any truth, but I assure you that I get a enough private communications from folks who use this forum supporting me, to prove to me that you’re very much in error.
Why don’t you just once give me the courtesy of admitting when I MAY be correct about something, that you give to people like TPM who ARE in error about something and you fail to call BS? So where am I wrong about her making darn near everything I post anywhere personal? Even when I’ve acknowledged she made a good point I get attacked.
I’ll repeat, “use facts to challenge people, and the good ones will generally take that new knowledge and grow, while the fools will posture and argue, all the while screaming about what an arrogant jerk the person challenging them is.” And you proved my point precisely.
You’ve gone and taken it totally out of context and assume I was saying those things about her, when the opposite was true.
The pattern I see is, there’s a lot of folks who have posted here for a long time who don’t feel anyone not in their little clique has the right or the intelligence to challenge them on anything. Because they believe it however, doesn’t make it so.
I know you don’t think anything I say has any merit or any value, let alone any truth, but I assure you that I get a enough private communications from folks who use this forum supporting me, to prove to me that you’re very much in error.
Why don’t you just once give me the courtesy of admitting when I MAY be correct about something, that you give to people like TPM who ARE in error about something and you fail to call BS? So where am I wrong about her making darn near everything I post anywhere personal? Even when I’ve acknowledged she made a good point I get attacked.
I’ll repeat, “use facts to challenge people, and the good ones will generally take that new knowledge and grow, while the fools will posture and argue, all the while screaming about what an arrogant jerk the person challenging them is.” And you proved my point precisely.
I can see why so many think that you are so full of yourself.
And once again, remember that you came through the back door this time, don't you recall the reasons why scorekeeper is no longer here?
Let people speak up for themselves if they got an issue with me, I am still wondering who really enjoys your posts, they can send a private pm if they wish, if not I am going to assume they probably don't exist. It's so easy to talk about those people who post "behind the scenes" yet never show up. Huh? Where are they?
To get to what you have responded back to CM, was the original question about the game at the HS level or on the pro level? I am going to assume it was on the HS level and once someone says, "that's how they do it in MLB", without ever being in that situation you have set yourself up for criticism. Unless you know what you are talking about without learning in on MLB network.
Yadi Molina leaves his glove in the same place 90% of the time. I am going to assume that most likely, unless you know otherwise, the intended target in ML is not always where the pitch is called for, for obvious reasons. Of course that may change depending on the experience of the pitcher. Something that is really simple becomes a bit more complicated as you go up the ladder. That's a big part of the problem here, HS baseball IS NOT prfessional ball. It IS different.
And once again, remember that you came through the back door this time, don't you recall the reasons why scorekeeper is no longer here?
Let people speak up for themselves if they got an issue with me, I am still wondering who really enjoys your posts, they can send a private pm if they wish, if not I am going to assume they probably don't exist. It's so easy to talk about those people who post "behind the scenes" yet never show up. Huh? Where are they?
To get to what you have responded back to CM, was the original question about the game at the HS level or on the pro level? I am going to assume it was on the HS level and once someone says, "that's how they do it in MLB", without ever being in that situation you have set yourself up for criticism. Unless you know what you are talking about without learning in on MLB network.
Yadi Molina leaves his glove in the same place 90% of the time. I am going to assume that most likely, unless you know otherwise, the intended target in ML is not always where the pitch is called for, for obvious reasons. Of course that may change depending on the experience of the pitcher. Something that is really simple becomes a bit more complicated as you go up the ladder. That's a big part of the problem here, HS baseball IS NOT prfessional ball. It IS different.
quote:Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:
Why don’t you just once give me the courtesy of admitting when I MAY be correct about something
Absolutely. But this may take some patience.
quote:Originally posted by Bum:
Absolutely. But this may take some patience.
No problem. I’m old, I’m retired, and I have lots of time to spend trying to get rid of misunderstandings and animosity. Life’s it far too short to get one’s blood press up over a game.
OOOOLLLLLLLMMMMMM.
…
The “original question? What original question was that, and how does that make any difference to what I responded to him about? I gave him credit for some very nice words of wisdom, and noted that they would help almost anyone at any level. The only thing at all negative was that I think it would aid the communication if it wasn’t stated in such absolute terms.
I know very well that HS baseball is not college or professional baseball. But, this is supposed to be the HSBBW, and I ASSUME that every thread should at lead try to keep HS ball in mind.
But be that as it may, let me see if I can draw you into a conversation about baseball, and keep you away from throwing knives at me.
I’m sorry I don’t work well with generalizations, or trying to guess what people mean. It’s the way I’m wired I guess. So, with that understanding in mind, where did you get that 90% number from? [u]I’m not saying it isn’t true![/u] I just would like to know how you came up with it? Is it something you’ve tracked with a paper and pencil, or is it you’re perception?
I can’t honestly say because I don’t watch him catch much at all. But, I did watch over 150 ML games on TV this season, and can say that my PERCEPTIONS is, ML catchers move the mitt all over the place. How does he set up for pitches outside, inside, high, or low without ever moving the mitt? BTW, I’m not trying to make you look silly about calling the catcher’s mitt a glove. I had some very good professional catchers work with me back in the day, and to a man they’d jump down a catcher’s throat if he called a mitt a glove. So its just a habit learned 40 years ago, not a dig at anyone.
I agree, the intended target is not ALWAYS the mitt. Its not as though something else is targeted more than a very small percentage of the time, but for sure it happens.
quote:To get to what you have responded back to CM, was the original question about the game at the HS level or on the pro level? I am going to assume it was on the HS level and once someone says, "that's how they do it in MLB", without ever being in that situation you have set yourself up for criticism. Unless you know what you are talking about without learning in on MLB network.
The “original question? What original question was that, and how does that make any difference to what I responded to him about? I gave him credit for some very nice words of wisdom, and noted that they would help almost anyone at any level. The only thing at all negative was that I think it would aid the communication if it wasn’t stated in such absolute terms.
quote:Yadi Molina leaves his glove in the same place 90% of the time. I am going to assume that most likely, unless you know otherwise, the intended target in ML is not always where the pitch is called for, for obvious reasons. Of course that may change depending on the experience of the pitcher. Something that is really simple becomes a bit more complicated as you go up the ladder. That's a big part of the problem here, HS baseball IS NOT prfessional ball. It IS different.
I know very well that HS baseball is not college or professional baseball. But, this is supposed to be the HSBBW, and I ASSUME that every thread should at lead try to keep HS ball in mind.
But be that as it may, let me see if I can draw you into a conversation about baseball, and keep you away from throwing knives at me.
I’m sorry I don’t work well with generalizations, or trying to guess what people mean. It’s the way I’m wired I guess. So, with that understanding in mind, where did you get that 90% number from? [u]I’m not saying it isn’t true![/u] I just would like to know how you came up with it? Is it something you’ve tracked with a paper and pencil, or is it you’re perception?
I can’t honestly say because I don’t watch him catch much at all. But, I did watch over 150 ML games on TV this season, and can say that my PERCEPTIONS is, ML catchers move the mitt all over the place. How does he set up for pitches outside, inside, high, or low without ever moving the mitt? BTW, I’m not trying to make you look silly about calling the catcher’s mitt a glove. I had some very good professional catchers work with me back in the day, and to a man they’d jump down a catcher’s throat if he called a mitt a glove. So its just a habit learned 40 years ago, not a dig at anyone.
I agree, the intended target is not ALWAYS the mitt. Its not as though something else is targeted more than a very small percentage of the time, but for sure it happens.
quote:Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:quote:Originally posted by Bum:
Absolutely. But this may take some patience.
No problem. I’m old, I’m retired, and I have lots of time to spend trying to get rid of misunderstandings and animosity. Life’s it far too short to get one’s blood press up over a game.
OOOOLLLLLLLMMMMMM.
Really I saw a ballistic post by you directed to Bum so you don't believe that at all.
As far as bringing up the glove/mitt comment, that's why you are so popular around here. My son refers to (what you refer to as a mitt) as his glove, so great example to prove why you are perceived as a bafoon.
BTW, where are all of your buddies who KNOW how much you add to this site?
quote:Originally posted by TPM:
Really I saw a ballistic post by you directed to Bum so you don't believe that at all.
As far as bringing up the glove/mitt comment, that's why you are so popular around here. My son refers to (what you refer to as a mitt) as his glove, so great example to prove why you are perceived as a bafoon.
BTW, where are all of your buddies who KNOW how much you add to this site?
Here you go again, getting personal over what? A post I directed at someone else, about something you won’t even mention. Then you go on to tell everyone what I believe. JEEZ! Get a life.
Let’s talk about the glove/mitt for a second.
OBR - 1.12 The catcher may wear a leather mitt not more than thirty-eight inches in circumference, nor more than fifteen and one-half inches from top to bottom. Such limits shall include all lacing and any leather band or facing attached to the outer edge of the mitt. The space between the thumb section and the finger section of the mitt shall not exceed six inches at the top of the mitt and four inches at the base of the thumb crotch. The web shall measure not more than seven inches across the top or more than six inches from its top to the base of the thumb crotch. The web may be either a lacing or lacing through leather tunnels, or a center piece of leather which may be an extension of the palm, connected to the mitt with lacing and constructed so that it will not exceed any of the above mentioned measurements.
Do you see anything in there that says it’s a glove? What I said comes from the fact that people used to take the rule book much more seriously than they do now. Rules mattered, and using the correct terminology allowed you at least an entrance into that world. If your son wants to call a mitt a glove, so be it. But the fact remains, in the rules, it’s a mitt, never a glove.
Good communications is all about precision of language, and using words and phrases understood in the same way by both sides. Just because you and your son want to call a catcher’s mitt a glove, doesn’t make it so. Ask him if he’s ever read that rule, and understand the differences between a glove and a mitt. It has to do with the meaning of words when the rule was written. In the end it doesn’t make a bit of difference, but that’s exactly how the traditions in the game get lost.
