Post Game Hitter's Evaluation Form

Here is  a basic one I've seen used.  It has three areas.  One is for offense.

https://docs.google.com/docume..._eOUPEOTo/edit?pli=1

BaseballByTheYard.com

Originally Posted by meachrm:

Here is  a basic one I've seen used.  It has three areas.  One is for offense.

Having looked at that example, I’m curious. Its called a “Post game self evaluation sheet” which would seem to me to indicate hitters are supposed to fill it out and come up with a number of points. What is supposed to be done with that?

As for the OP, my impression is some kind of “sheet” was being looked for so each batter could have some “sit-down” time with the coach where his performance that day would be evaluated. I’m not seeing how the two concepts of self-evaluation and coach’s evaluation come together. Its not that I don’t think it would be good idea, its that I don’t see where there’s time to do it.

Ex: Assume we’re only talking about hitters. Its Monday and the game is over. The players have to fill out that sheet, I’m assuming at home sometime after the game prior to the next practice. Now its Tuesday and time for practice. 11 players hit the night before, so the coach has to sit down with each of them and discuss their performance the prior day.

Now we have a “situation”. Unless there’s some kind of rules set up so everyone scoring the performances the same way, the coach has to have a sheet on each hitter himself so he can make sure the players and he are on the same page as far as performance goes. Assuming it only takes 3 minutes per player, that’s still a half hour of practice spent, and I don’t see how that’s a good use of limited practice time.

I know that sheet is only 1 example, but I always find it troubling when everyone is being asked to come up with stats other than the statistician. I know after every game I send the coaches a number of things that show what transpired during the game, but as extensive as I keep the data, I’d have no way of knowing when a bunt was intended to be a hit rather than a sacrifice. I’d also have no way of knowing whether or not there was a green light or whether a player was studying the pitcher. I’m not sure if attacking a 1^st pitch FB only means if the pitch was in the strike zone, and I always have trouble figuring out whether a ball was hit hard.

The whole things sounds a lot like someone’s trying to come up with QABs again.

I think the way the example is used is to just get the players to think beyond "how many hits did I get today?" Same for the pitchers and the fielders.

Originally Posted by meachrm:

I think the way the example is used is to just get the players to think beyond "how many hits did I get today?" Same for the pitchers and the fielders.

If that’s what its all about, I’d be interested in knowing something else. Just how many players were only interested in how many hits they got, implying selfishness to such a level that it hurt the team. If it’s a lot of them, the coaching is lacking someplace. If its only one or two players, why not identify them and do something to get that attitude changed into something more positive?

For many years I’ve heard about players becoming cancers because they’re so self-absorbed in stats, but the truth is I’ve found it to be very rare. I’ve also heard over and over again that players lose heart because although they’re doing things that help the team or are hitting the ball hard, they aren’t seeing it reflected in the stats, then the stats get blamed or the players are made out to be selfish for thinking about the “wrong” things. So things like QABs are dreamed up to try to take some of the sting off of what’s nothing more than normal failure at a very difficult game to succeed at.

Now if a coach is looking for a way to identify those players, which is what I assumed the OP was about, then I can see a good use for some kind of “abnormal” stat to measure performance. The best I’ve ever seen is what Clint Hurdle came up with at Texas. These are the 8 categories.

1. Base hit
2. Walk
3. Get hit
4. Reach base on error
5. Advance a runner via out
6. Advance a runner via error
7. Sacrifice plays

8. 8 or more pitch at bats

Here’s our hitters from last season as an example.

http://www.infosports.com/scor...per/images/prod1.pdf

That’s a mainstay of the overall stat package, and I send one to the coaches after every game for just that game. That could very easily be used to “counsel” the hitters, and if a coach feels other things needed to be added, they can do just as I did, and add it. That’s how CIs got on mine, and I changed the advance any runner to advanced lead runner.

But the bottom line here is, there’s nothing on it that’s subjective and is therefore open to individual interpretation, other than a hit, and that’s gonna be a positive even if its an error because the batter reached.

The pitchers and fielders can be discussed too, but they’re very different as far as what’s productive and what isn’t.

I coach a high school freshman team and have been using Hurdle's approach/philosophy for three years now. When I first introduce it each year the players think I am crazy. When we do our hitting drills/BP, they are given a situation and must execute so that their result is a good team plate appearance. We really drill it into their heads that their approach must dictate what the team needs out of the at bat.

By the end of the season you will actually hear them cheering on their teammate at the plate by telling them to get a QTPA (quality team plate appearance) instead of getting a hit.

Throughout the season I will not post their traditional batting stats; such as batting average, RBIs, etc. I only post our quality plate appearance stats that looks similar to Stats4Gnats sheet. The only real difference is we do a percentage instead of points. We go into each game with the goal of 60% of our at bats being quality team plate appearances. The players do not see their traditional stats until the end of the year awards night.

As you can tell I am a big believer and supporter of Hurdle's ways. I mix in a little Steve Springer on them too.

Personally I would use video of the hitters swing as an evaluation method.

Thanks for the help guys.

Meachrm....Thanks for the post.  I took a lot of your stuff when I was creating the one I did.

Stats....What I am attempting to do is to get my guys to have a better feel for the game.  In Southern California we play every weekend and this is a great time to work on this.  I am not trying to attempt to have a heart to heart with every player.  However I am going to track the chart for a couple of weeks and if I notice that the same player is struggling in the same area I do plan to address it with him and see how we can fix it.  I am also asking the players to create a plan based on their evaluation of their performance.

Originally Posted by IEBSBL:

…Stats....What I am attempting to do is to get my guys to have a better feel for the game.  In Southern California we play every weekend and this is a great time to work on this.  I am not trying to attempt to have a heart to heart with every player.  However I am going to track the chart for a couple of weeks and if I notice that the same player is struggling in the same area I do plan to address it with him and see how we can fix it.  I am also asking the players to create a plan based on their evaluation of their performance.

I understand, but SoCal isn’t the only place where baseball is played every weekend.

I’m not quite sure how the approach you’re talking about will accomplish much if only done for a couple weeks. Too many times “plans” like that are begun, tried for a short time, then dropped, never to be heard from again. To me, if the plan is a worthwhile one, it should be explained very well so EVERYONE understands it and what’s trying to be accomplished, begun at the earliest opportunity, then tracked continuously all through the season. And, if the players are going to be participating in summer and fall ball too, it should also be a part of those programs as well, and all of the data should be available in order to track players as long as they’re in the program.

That’s why I always favor keeping the criteria simple enough so the scorer can make sure all the things necessary are on the scoresheet, and the statistician can accumulate and present the data to everyone in order to make sure everyone’s on the same page.

As far as the players evaluating their performance, I feel its very important that they all use the same standards, and that’s almost impossible if there’s subjective criteria. You keep the data and give it to them with an explanation of what you want. Don’t ask them to do that because they’ll all do it differently. KISS is a philosophy that’s seldom wrong.

Stats, you are misunderstanding what I said.  I never said I was only going to do it for a couple of weeks.  What I said was I was, "I am going to track the chart for a couple of weeks and if I notice that the same player is struggling in the same area I do plan to address it with him and see how we can fix it."

I never said I was going to stop doing them.  What I was saying is I am going to wait a couple of weeks before addressing them to see if there is a pattern.

Originally Posted by IEBSBL:

Stats, you are misunderstanding what I said.  I never said I was only going to do it for a couple of weeks.  What I said was I was, "I am going to track the chart for a couple of weeks and if I notice that the same player is struggling in the same area I do plan to address it with him and see how we can fix it."

I never said I was going to stop doing them.  What I was saying is I am going to wait a couple of weeks before addressing them to see if there is a pattern.

Well, I many not be the brightest bulb in the box, but I’m a fairly sharp cookie when it comes to analyzing stats and interpreting what people say. If I misinterpreted what you’re trying to do, think about some kid with little more than peach fuzz for a beard and nearly no experience in how to analyze or uses stats is going to think.

I understand why someone would want a larger sample than 1 week before they embark on a course of trying to make changes, but as far as analysis goes, even 1 game’s sample should be enough to analyze.

Here’s an example of how crazy going game by game can be as opposed to looking at an entire picture.

http://www.infosports.com/scor.../images/contact1.pdf

The 1^st 2 pages show the best hitter who’s ever been in our program. The 2^nd 2 are the current best hitter in the program, and the rest of it is all the hitters in the program being looked at at the same time. Trying to make much sense of anything game by game is a little nuts to say the least. But by looking at everyone, it’s a lot easier to see a bigger picture.

I’ve quit running those particular metrics because there was more time spent trying to find a meaningful trend than it was worth.

Your over thinking this because you hanging everything on stats.  To be honest there are no stats related questions on my sheet.  I don't need the players to tell me if they got a hit or had a Quality at Bat.  The sheet I put together is about what the did or did not do and how they feel.  For example I ask if they felt balanced during their at bats, if they were in time with the fastball, if they studied the pitcher from the dug out (Stuff like that).  I am not trying to pull out statistical information from them, that is why I have Game Changer. 

Originally Posted by IEBSBL:

Your over thinking this because you hanging everything on stats.  To be honest there are no stats related questions on my sheet.  I don't need the players to tell me if they got a hit or had a Quality at Bat.  The sheet I put together is about what the did or did not do and how they feel.  For example I ask if they felt balanced during their at bats, if they were in time with the fastball, if they studied the pitcher from the dug out (Stuff like that).  I am not trying to pull out statistical information from them, that is why I have Game Changer. 

Because I believe stats have value, it doesn’t mean I hang EVERYTHING on them.

I’m confused. If you already have an evaluation form, why wouldn’t you show it, then ask if anyone has something different they use, to try to get the best one possible? I took it as you not having anything and looking for something to put some theory to use. Now I’m really curious to see what you have, have you explain how you use it and explain how the players use it, and explain what triggers your “attention”.

Perhaps you don’t quite understand that anytime you gather data, collate it, and use it for some purpose, it is by definition STATISTICAL INFORMATION. A list of the players’ names and ages qualifies just as much as the results of the most complicated algorithm devised. If you’re using information from your form to try to “see if there is a pattern”, you are analyzing STATISTICAL INFORMATION.

If you believe GameChanger, a wonderful product by the way, tracks all the stats possible and therefore there’s nothing else to learn form any other source, I don’t think you could be further from the truth. And FWIW, what GC spits out is only as good as the person using it. Its not as though you just turn on the app and suddenly everything’s done.

UGGGG, I never said when I originally started this I had anything.  In fact when I started this whole process I did not have a thing.  Shortly after I made the OP I received the one from Meachrm and I received another on that was geared towards pitching.  Seeing the two of those I set out an made my own.  I have not been able to post it because it is at school and I am not.

I get that collecting anything is "statistical information" and can be broken down as such.  What I was saying is I am not look at numbers.  Yes, I know there is a lot you take from GC other than just what it gives you and we do use the program for a lot of things.  When I get back on Monday if you are interested I will post what I came up with.

Originally Posted by IEBSBL:

UGGGG, I never said when I originally started this I had anything.  In fact when I started this whole process I did not have a thing.  Shortly after I made the OP I received the one from Meachrm and I received another on that was geared towards pitching.  Seeing the two of those I set out an made my own.  I have not been able to post it because it is at school and I am not.

That’s perfectly understandable, but I’d still be interested in seeing it and hearing how you plan on using it.

I get that collecting anything is "statistical information" and can be broken down as such.  What I was saying is I am not look at numbers.  Yes, I know there is a lot you take from GC other than just what it gives you and we do use the program for a lot of things.  When I get back on Monday if you are interested I will post what I came up with.

Now I’m more interested than ever to hear how you’ll be using your form. I really don’t mean to be so picayune, but I don’t understand how a player “struggling” in an area would be identified without comparing his performances from game to game in whatever areas you were looking at.

Here is the post game evaluation I created.  I would like to know what people think.

IEBSBL, I tried opening it, and i am having no luck, i am interested in your chart.  I have multiple charts that we use. that we use for nothing other than the fact to get a point across that certain things are important in the game of baseball.  The STATS of it all mean nothing more than to get a point across.  It makes our players think a little rather than just do which i think IEBSBL is trying to do.  Stats4Gnats this was an interesting and entertaining read but IMO you are totally overblowing this thing WAYYYY out of whack.  I would like to see what you have IEBSBL and see if there is much difference in your chart than ours.  

Stats4Gnats the only real STATISTIC that our guys get from our sheet is percentage of overall good baseball being played which if we reach an overall percent as a team we usually win (which happens alot) and in this percentage they understand that there is more to the game other than a homerun or a fence banger.  

right arm,

if your screen looks like mine, click on the circle/arrow off to the right.  you'll get a drop-down with a file you can click and open.

... and good luck with your upcoming back-and-forth with STATS

IEBSBL,

I like it. 

Maybe some adds to consider...

Pitchers - Do you feel you worked ahead and threw 1st pitch strikes consistently.

Hitters - Did you have a clear plan every time stepping in the box.

Did you have a clear vision of your zone for each situation.

Infielders - Did you work through ground balls.

OF - Did you get a good read and take a good first step.

Just a maintenance piece but for pitchers, your #8, why limit to just with a runner at 1st base?

Cabage thanks for the advice.  In regards to #8 the reason being is because when there are runners at 2nd base the MIF controls the look sequence.

If you haven’t caught it already, #1 in pitchers should be “your fastball”, not “you fastball”. #9 in hitters should be “…, did you” instead of “…, Do you”. #6 in fielders should be “depth” not “dept”. #11 fielders should be “overthrew” not “overthrow”.

I’m still not quite sure what the purpose of this thing is, how you’re going to implement it, or how you’re going to evaluate it. I’m not saying I think its either good or bad, but I am trying to figure out what I’d say if my son came home with it. I know my 1^st reaction would be to ask “Why are you doing that?”, quickly followed by “How’s the coach going to measure your responses?”.

The reason I’d ask those things is because I’ve spent a lot of time trying to prove/disprove a lot of notions people have. So when someone says they feel they had command of their pitches, unless they give something to use as a reference, they’re not telling me a thing. And if they do give that reference, unless I have a standard of my own to measure them against, I don’t see that anything’s been accomplished other than taking up someone’s time. As I said, I’m not sure what’s trying to be accomplished, especially if there’s not going to be any measuring tools.

Let me TRY to come up with a situation to better understand what’s going on. ASSUME Johnny was the starter, threw 5 innings and then went to short. If he answered yes to every pitching, hitting, and fielding question, how would you evaluate that? I guess that’s where I’m confused. Unless you have evaluation of your own to compare theirs to, I don’t see how their responses can be evaluated.

What I am attempting to do is get the players to start having a feeling for what they are doing prior to our breakdown of our statistics.  I want them to start understanding what can be leading to failures or successes.  In discussing your comment on command of the fastball let me break it down and answer it like this.  In our program we ask that pitchers have a strike to ball ratio of 66% and we preach for the pitchers to throw off their fastball, especially in the fall.  As a coach, I can visually tell if they had command of their fastball.  When a player answers yes, other than just a gut feeling, I am going to check on Game Changer what they statistically did.  For Example...I have a player who threw on Saturday.  He answered that he felt he had command on his fastball and his secondary pitch but did not have command on his other pitch.  His line was as follows.  Fastball 71% strikes, Curve Ball 20%, Change up 33%.  Now with this information I can have a conversation with the pitcher and ask him why he felt he had command of his Curve Ball when he only threw 20% of his curve balls for a strike. 

Originally Posted by right arm of zeus:

I have multiple charts that we use. that we use for nothing other than the fact to get a point across that certain things are important in the game of baseball.  The STATS of it all mean nothing more than to get a point across.  It makes our players think a little rather than just do which i think IEBSBL is trying to do.  

That pretty much mirrors my feeling about what stats should be used for, but it means there has to be some kind of gathering of data, collating it into some kind of sequence, and presenting it for analysis. Without those things, just having forms or charts doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

Stats4Gnats this was an interesting and entertaining read but IMO you are totally overblowing this thing WAYYYY out of whack.  

Why? Because I simply questioned what someone was trying to do? I’ve never once said trying it was a bad idea. I’m just trying to find out what the idea is and how it will be executed. I’ve come across lots of coaches who do similar things, but I’ve never once found any who have anything more than a pile of papers in some folder or desk drawer after only a few games, let alone a whole season. IOW, the data becomes useless because its not in a form that can be readily accessed and/or analyzed.

Heck. If anyone’s in favor of accumulating data/information, its me! I love it and have offered to help anyone who’s asked for help, for free.  The trouble usually is, that data has got to be input to some kind of software somehow. It doesn’t matter if it’s a spreadsheet or something more sophisticated,  and that’s where the breakdown occurs.

I have a good friend who’s been the HC of one of the best private school baseball programs in the area for almost 15 years. He’s a stat wonk, not as wonky as me, but much more wonky than most other coaches at the HS level. He knows I have some expertise at data collection, and asked me if I’d help him with a project. He’s been charting pitchers in several things both in games and practices for well over 10 years, and wanted to be able to look at that data in some other way than going through reams of paper looking for certain things.

It took me a couple weeks, and I came up with a way to get the data into the computer that took less than 1 minute per sheet and having many validity checks to minimize keystroke errors, with 1 sheet representing 1 game or 1 bullpen. I was pretty proud of what I’d come up with, until I saw what he’d collected. He literally had a sea chest fill of paper! When we made a rough estimate about how long it would take to input the data, he gave up and threw it all away. He then proceeded to start from nothing and was intent on doing it going forward. That lasted less than 2 weeks. The reason was, it takes time to get that data input, and it was time he didn’t have personally.

That’s happened more than once, and its really sad because those guys saw what COULD be, but didn’t have the time to make it work. And that’s the reason scoring apps like GameChanger and IScore have gotten so popular! The data is gathered automatically and can be retrieved fairly easily. Well, I don’t know of any scoring app that will automatically grab the data of IEBSBL’s sheet because so much of it has nothing to do with scoring a game. To be sure some could, but sooner or later the coach is gonna have to do a little bit of work himself. The more complicated the sheet, the more work there’s gonna be. In the end, analysis just ain’t easy, and good analysis is really difficult and time consuming.

 Stats4Gnats the only real STATISTIC that our guys get from our sheet is percentage of overall good baseball being played which if we reach an overall percent as a team we usually win (which happens alot) and in this percentage they understand that there is more to the game other than a homerun or a fence banger.  

I’m extremely interested in seeing your sheet and how you compute your percentages because I’m always looking for a “better” mousetrap. If what you’re doing makes sense to me, I may be able to modify my program to pick up whatever additional data is needed to produce results. I did that with Clint Hurdle’s productivity, and as you can see I can spit out his productivity stat by player, by batting position, and by player within a batting position. If you have something I can add to that to improve it, I’ll do what I can.

http://www.infosports.com/scor...per/images/prod1.pdf

Originally Posted by IEBSBL:

What I am attempting to do is get the players to start having a feeling for what they are doing prior to our breakdown of our statistics.  I want them to start understanding what can be leading to failures or successes. 

Is that a widespread problem? Why do you think your players don’t have that “feeling”?

In discussing your comment on command of the fastball let me break it down and answer it like this.  In our program we ask that pitchers have a strike to ball ratio of 66% and we preach for the pitchers to throw off their fastball, especially in the fall.  As a coach, I can visually tell if they had command of their fastball.  When a player answers yes, other than just a gut feeling, I am going to check on Game Changer what they statistically did.  For Example...I have a player who threw on Saturday.  He answered that he felt he had command on his fastball and his secondary pitch but did not have command on his other pitch.  His line was as follows.  Fastball 71% strikes, Curve Ball 20%, Change up 33%.  Now with this information I can have a conversation with the pitcher and ask him why he felt he had command of his Curve Ball when he only threw 20% of his curve balls for a strike. 

You’ve mentioned something that I’ve always had a problems with, and in fact have discussed it with the GC people. Its gonna take a couple questions to get the answer, so please be patient.

Are you using GC as a scoring tool, a charting tool, or both at the same time?

Who’s making the determination of pitch type that goes into GC?

Take a guess at the accuracy of pitch identification.

What’s the overall strike percentage of your pitching staff, and how many of them hit that 66% mark. The reason I ask is, I’ve been doing this a looooong time, and while 66% is a great “goal”, I’ve come across only 2 regular starters who’ve averaged 66% or above. I’ve seen it in a game here or there, but overall 66% is pretty darn rare in my experience.

It sounds as though you’re doing pretty much what I was asking about. You’re using “real” numbers as the measuring stick.

Interesting... would like to hear more about that.

Pretty sure most teams do that. We would have the 2nd baseman, for a RH batter, give the pitcher a sign for 1, 2, or 3 looks (or  pickoff attempt) before each pitch.  Mixing up the looks keeps the runner a little more honest (NO, I don't have any statistical evidence to prove that), and having the MIF's call it gives the pitcher one less thing to worry about, and it helps everyone get into position for the pitch

Is that a widespread problem? Why do you think your players don’t have that “feeling”?

   Do I think it is a wide spread problem?  No I don't but I also believe that to many coaches tell the kid what they are doing wrong as opposed to get them to feel it for themselves.  You know give a man a fish, feed him for a day.  Teach a man to fish, feed him for life.

You’ve mentioned something that I’ve always had a problems with, and in fact have discussed it with the GC people. Its gonna take a couple questions to get the answer, so please be patient.

Are you using GC as a scoring tool, a charting tool, or both at the same time?

Who’s making the determination of pitch type that goes into GC?

Take a guess at the accuracy of pitch identification.

Both, last two seasons we have called all pitches from the dugout so their is no guess work involved, if there is a question my stat guy just asks.  In the fall we let the catchers call their own game.  If there is a question about whether it is a ball or a stike I ask the catcher. 

What’s the overall strike percentage of your pitching staff, and how many of them hit that 66% mark. The reason I ask is, I’ve been doing this a looooong time, and while 66% is a great “goal”, I’ve come across only 2 regular starters who’ve averaged 66% or above. I’ve seen it in a game here or there, but overall 66% is pretty darn rare in my experience.

I agree, that is why it is called a goal.  2013 Top 3 pitchers were 60%, 61, 63%  2012 62%, 61%, 60%.  2011 67%, 64%, 63%

It sounds as though you’re doing pretty much what I was asking about. You’re using “real” numbers as the measuring stick.

When it comes to number areas yes I am.  However there are a lot of questions that are based essentially on "feel".  My goal is to teach as many players as I can to look within the game itself and try to self correct.

Cabbage,  JCG is correct in what he stated about signs.  Our MIF gives a look sequence to the pitcher to tell him how many looks he is to give towards the runner. 

Originally Posted by IEBSBL:

Do I think it is a wide spread problem?  No I don't but I also believe that to many coaches tell the kid what they are doing wrong as opposed to get them to feel it for themselves.  You know give a man a fish, feed him for a day.  Teach a man to fish, feed him for life.

I agree, but I think that when you see a coach like that, chances are you’re seeing someone who doesn’t know how teach that, or is too lazy to do it. Either way its not a good situation.

Both, last two seasons we have called all pitches from the dugout so their is no guess work involved, if there is a question my stat guy just asks.  In the fall we let the catchers call their own game.  If there is a question about whether it is a ball or a stike I ask the catcher. 

I take it you’re saying the person using GC is also scoring the game and doing all the “charting”.

I noticed on the sheet that the catchers were asked about calling the game but didn’t want to get off-track. But since you mentioned it, …. Why only during the fall? Have you noticed a team performance difference, and if so, what was it?

Why would there ever be a question of whether a pitch was a ball or a strike?

I agree, that is why it is called a goal.  2013 Top 3 pitchers were 60%, 61, 63%  2012 62%, 61%, 60%.  2011 67%, 64%, 63%

Here’s the top 3 for our HSV

2013 – 67.7, 53.1, 59.7

2012 – 68.6, 67.6, 61.7

2011 – 64.0, 59.3, 57.4

2010 – 63.1, 62.7, 60.5,

2009 – 64.1, 62.2, 61.3

2008 – 65.3, 62.5, 61.0

2007 – 62.3, 62.0, 57.1

2004 – 64.8, 64.7, 56.3

2003 – 67.2, 60.9, 55.0

As you can see, out of 27 pitchers, 66+ only happened 4 times, so as I said, that’s quite a goal. Its certainly achievable, but I don’t think many people understand that 1% is really a big difference. Our coach has set the goal at 62.5 strike percentage and a 1^st pitch strike percentage of 58. Its not that your goals are any better or worse, but he feels more comfortable asking for a goal that isn’t so hard to attain that it happens only rarely. To each his own.

When it comes to number areas yes I am.  However there are a lot of questions that are based essentially on "feel".  My goal is to teach as many players as I can to look within the game itself and try to self correct.

That’s fine, as long as everyone is absolutely sure about the measurement. The nice thing about numbers is, they’re there for everyone to see, good or bad.

I noticed on the sheet that the catchers were asked about calling the game but didn’t want to get off-track. But since you mentioned it, …. Why only during the fall? Have you noticed a team performance difference, and if so, what was it?

We have the catchers call the game in the fall as a hope to get them to understand how to call their own game.  The last 2 years we had catchers that were 1st year catchers and to be honest I do not trust a first year varsity catcher to call his own game.  My hope is that our starting catcher who was a sophomore last year will be able to call his own game the next 2 years. 

Why would there ever be a question of whether a pitch was a ball or a strike?

There would not be.  I was speaking about what type of pitch was thrown.

Originally Posted by IEBSBL:

We have the catchers call the game in the fall as a hope to get them to understand how to call their own game.  The last 2 years we had catchers that were 1st year catchers and to be honest I do not trust a first year varsity catcher to call his own game.  My hope is that our starting catcher who was a sophomore last year will be able to call his own game the next 2 years. 

I can’t recall ever hearing about a HSV catcher who had no experience catching. How’d that happen?

Regardless, I’m still interested in finding out if you’ve ever noticed a performance difference and what it was. I can see how one called pitch might be picked out and pointed to as not good, but I don’t see any substantial difference over a game.

Ow’d that happen?

There would not be.  I was speaking about what type of pitch was thrown.

I think I get it.

I can’t recall ever hearing about a HSV catcher who had no experience catching. How’d that happen?

You are misunderstanding what I am saying to you.  I never said that they did not have catching experience.  They had caught in a back up roll or at the JV level, but it was their 1st year starting as a varsity catcher.

Regardless, I’m still interested in finding out if you’ve ever noticed a performance difference and what it was. I can see how one called pitch might be picked out and pointed to as not good, but I don’t see any substantial difference over a game.

To date I have had 6 catchers call games and I have seen minor differences and only 1 decision hurt us dearly.  We had a catcher that was told specifically not to pitch in on a specific player and he tried to sneak a fastball by him and the player snuck it past the OF fence.  Now if we are talking about younger players that do not have a real idea of how to call a game there is a difference.  They are way to predictable with their pitch calling.

Originally Posted by IEBSBL:

You are misunderstanding what I am saying to you.  I never said that they did not have catching experience.  They had caught in a back up roll or at the JV level, but it was their 1st year starting as a varsity catcher.

K.

To date I have had 6 catchers call games and I have seen minor differences and only 1 decision hurt us dearly.  We had a catcher that was told specifically not to pitch in on a specific player and he tried to sneak a fastball by him and the player snuck it past the OF fence.  Now if we are talking about younger players that do not have a real idea of how to call a game there is a difference.  They are way to predictable with their pitch calling.

As I noted, one pitch can easily be picked out, but that’s not the sole determiner of an entire game any more than one hitter striking out with the bases loaded or a fielder making an error.

But I can’t honestly understand how a catcher who’s been in the program for at least 1 year has such a poor idea about calling a game that he needs at least another year of having the coaches calling games for him. I’m not trying to cast aspersions on any coach, but why haven’t those catchers been taught how to not be predictable in calling pitches? What is so difficult about the concept of not being predictable that a HS student getting grades good enough to stay eligible can’t get in less than a year at minimum?

But I can’t honestly understand how a catcher who’s been in the program for at least 1 year has such a poor idea about calling a game that he needs at least another year of having the coaches calling games for him. I’m not trying to cast aspersions on any coach, but why haven’t those catchers been taught how to not be predictable in calling pitches? What is so difficult about the concept of not being predictable that a HS student getting grades good enough to stay eligible can’t get in less than a year at minimum?

If you can't understand this I don't know what to say.  Apparently you have the smartest kids in the world playing at your school.  They all apparently grasp all concepts being taught to them.  What do you want me to say.  Some kids get it and some kids don't.  It is not a hard concept to understand but some kids just don't get it.  Some players do not have the physical tools to bat 4th in the lineup.  Just like some players do not have the mental capacity to call their own game.  Maybe I should call UCLA and ask Coach Savage why their catcher does not have the mental capacity to call his own game and why their coaches are doing a crappy job of teaching it.

LOL.  If you feed the trolls don't be shocked when they come back and eat your Cheetos.

Originally Posted by IEBSBL:

If you can't understand this I don't know what to say.  Apparently you have the smartest kids in the world playing at your school.  They all apparently grasp all concepts being taught to them.  What do you want me to say.  Some kids get it and some kids don't.  It is not a hard concept to understand but some kids just don't get it.  Some players do not have the physical tools to bat 4th in the lineup.  Just like some players do not have the mental capacity to call their own game.  Maybe I should call UCLA and ask Coach Savage why their catcher does not have the mental capacity to call his own game and why their coaches are doing a crappy job of teaching it.

Why are you getting defensive over a simple question? In fact, I don’t know how smart our kids are about learning that concept because our coach NEVER allows catchers to call more than a few meaningless pitches in a game, spring, summer, or fall. I’ve asked him the same thing I asked you, and get much the same answer, and it makes no more sense coming from him than it does from you.

So I’ll try again. Why can’t catchers learn by making their own mistakes? I’m sorry if you’re offended, but I don’t see why they can’t be allowed to call the game and you discuss any mistakes with them between innings or after the game. Look, we’re not talking about brain surgery here. Its pretty simple in that someone has to call a type of pitch and a location. After that, it’s a matter of the pitcher being able to execute that pitch correctly, which at the HS level isn’t better than a 50-50 bet, and the hitter being able to hit the thing solidly, which in HS is also no better than a 50-50 bet no matter how the pitch is executed.

Not saying you do this or that you’re the only one because most amateur coaches everywhere do it, but my guess is, more often than not coaches can’t or won’t take the time to teach the catchers how to call pitches the way they teach hitters, fielders, or pitchers how to do their jobs because its just easier to do it themselves.

FWIW, there have been a lot of catchers who didn’t have great mental capacity but still managed to call a game very well. Perhaps I’m being too hard on upper level coaches on this issue. After all, if catchers were allowed early on to call games, by the time they got to HS the point would be moot, wouldn’t it?