Under or Over Achievers

I think that this is a very interesting question.

IMO, talent is the key to winning, next is the chemistry the coach helps create for the players to adopt the team mentality and work towards the goal of winning collectively (not individual successes). Then comes the coaching factor(all these things may not be in the order I posted). That's where good recruiting comes in at teh college level, the coach looks for the right formula to make a winning team.

This scenerio reminds me of the Yankees, talent laden but having trouble getting to the WS. I understand that Giradi used team building all through the season, to help develop the chemistry needed anong the team to win and I guess it worked well for him.

If you see a very talented team not winning as they should, than that may be due to poor coaching on the field, in practice, etc. Or you may have too many personalities, too many chiefs and not enough indians, it hard to say. Leadershi among the team has a lot to do with it as well. I know that my son's coaches in college encouraged the team to be more like brothers than individual players, this meant a lot of time was spent together in all types of activities. I have seen some really good coaches take really young players, not as talented or experienced as other teams and be successful. Whether that has to do with their knowledge of how the game is played or building confidance for players to rely on each other, or good instruction, not sure, every coach has a formula, and without a doubt experience (home long the coach has been managing) is a big factor.

One more thing, winning also has to do with how a coach uses his staff, in other words players and the roles they accept play a big part in the winning equation.

Good stuff TPM. Another thought: could it be that the talented team is more concerned about trying to live up to expectations and trying “not to lose?” And the less talented team plays with a “what do we have to lose” mindset. I have seen over and over teams that have coaches that have the team so uptight and so afraid of making a mistake that they end up making mistakes all over the field. How do you combat that and maintain the intensity and focus you want? How do you get a talented team to have that “what do we have to lose” mentality or at least not play like they’re trying not to lose or make mistakes?

Everyone says that baseball is a game of mistakes/failures and it’s more important that you learn from the mistake and then move on…to not dwell on it. Are coaches actually implementing this or are they actually making the situation worse by yelling/punishing a player for making an error or striking out?

Nice topic and comments thus far! Wish this forum saw more activity.

I have many thoughts on this topic. I know the best "teams" are often the ones that win. That does not always translate to which teams have the most individual talent. The collective whole is often more than the sum of the individual parts.

If I were a coach, the one attribute I would try and foster would be unselfishness. Try to find leaders on the team and reward them more for thinking about the team than themselves. Get every guy focused on being worried about every other guy more than themselves and I think you can have magic. If you have a talented group playing unselfishly, you can win championships. If you don't have quite as much individual talent but you can get the group to sacrifice for the group, then you can indeed over-achieve.

There are plenty of examples out there that illustrate what I am talking about. College baseball saw it for three years in a row where the most unselfish team won the national championship. You saw Oregon State do it two years in a row and that was followed by an even more miraculous Fresno State team that won while some of their best pitchers were injured. The Fresno State team had talent no doubt but they went into the tournament as a #4 seed, were unranked, and had an RPI in the 50's. Nobody (except them) believed. It was one of the great team achievements I have ever seen in college sports.

Another example I would tell youngsters to follow is LeBron James. He is perhaps the most gifted athlete that any sport has ever produced. What sets him apart is his unselfishness. It is all about the team with that guy and he always makes sure his teammates are properly fed. His leadership qualities are off the charts. You might not see that on the nightly ESPN highlights but LeBron is the best team player on the planet imho.

Teamwork and unselfishness is the key to this whole topic imho.

Those are good examples, but I still think that talent has a lot to do with it, but so does the chemistry of the core group of players that make up the team. It's great to have a team of all super stars, but everyone going in their own direction isn't going to always work.

Unselfishness is a very big part of it, I agree, but you need to have players that will buy into that philsophy, you accept the role you have because it is the best for the team. If you have a HS superstar that has to take a supporting role and doesn't like it, you have one keg in the wheel not working towards the common goal. That's where good recruiting comes in as well.

FWIW, I remember the first time I met Mitch Canham in Omaha. He told us that as far as they (Oregon players) was concerned they were not getting the respect they felt they deserved for being there, the worst accomodations, the worst practice schedules, etc. That certainly fueled the desire to show everyone they were contenders and deserved to be there.

The most successful team my son played on had broadly dispersed talent - no superstars, but no glaring weak spots. My theory is that the kids knew they had to carry their own weight, but they didn't have to pick up the slack for another player, so no one pressed. Also, the team never quit, they just played on. The coach let the boys play the game. He was not a central figure that everyone noticed during the game. He usually did not call pitches. The boys played and the boys won, sometimes despite some coaching errors or errors on the field.

I notice a lot of coaches create a lot of distractions during the games, especially on travel teams. Seems to be all about them. It is hard enough to keep teenage boys focused without all the background noise.

Just one parent's observation.

twotex

I totally disagree with you with regard to your travel team aspect, particularly at the HS level--and I am not talking about my team--the teams we play against and see regularly do a great job with their kids and it is about the players not the coaches.

greemachine - I like debating but I question whether or not you are a player. There is an in your face quality about your post where you sound more like a big-ego parent who is hiding behind a screen name. If you are a player, what team do you play for? Stats are for losers by the way. What I mean by that, is if that is your only concern, then that disqualifies you by definition to play big time college baseball let alone succeed at it imho.

As a coach I want a team. A team is a group of individuals who decide to become a team. They decide to become a team in order to achieve things they can not as individuals. When you have a group of individuals more concerned with what they achieve as individuals instead of what they can achieve as a team you will never achieve what you could have or should have.

What happens when a player is 0-3 and he is so concerned with what he has done or in this case not done instead of what he can do next to help the team win? Now a team player is concerned with the score and his team and what he can do to help his team win. I simply depise and individual mentality in a team concept. It is a cancer and should be cut out as soon as it raises its head.

Do players care about how they are doing? Do they want to achieve great things as individuals? Of course they do. But the focus the #1 goal is to do whatever you can do to help your team win. And that is just as important when you are 0-3 or 3-3. Team players will sacrifice for their team. Team players will support and pull for their team mates regardless if they are playing or contributing that day.

Now thats my opinion. I coach to win. I coach a team. I want team players who want to win that game that day. Guys that want to win that practice that day. Individuals who are more concerned with being individuals destroy teams from within. Others will disagree thats fine. We all have our own opinion.

Coach May - I suspected that would be your take and that is what I was trying to say. I can give one hundred examples but here is one.

A hit and run is called and the hitter has two strikes. The pitch is thrown one foot outside the strike zone. The stats guys looks at it go by because he does not want to harm his average. The team guy swings at it to protect his teammate. He knows he has no chance to hit it but he does it anyway to send a message to his team. One guy is a winner and the other guy is a loser. I'll continue the theme as long as people want to go at this.

Yep that is one of many examples of what I was attempting to say CD. How about the guy that has a runner on 2nd with no outs and has a fastball outside up in the count? One guy see's it as a perfect opportunity to hit a gb to the right side and move the runner. Another guy takes it because he wants to wait on a better pitch so he can give HIMSELF a better chance to get a hit and pad his stats.

Many many examples can be given. And we have not even began to touch on the dugout and locker room issues that an individual guy brings to the table.

The team guy strikes out in a clutch situation but he does not throw his helmut or hang his head. He gets his glove and goes out and makes defensive plays in the field the very next inning that turn out to be the game winning plays.

The stats guy comes into the dugout acting like a baby. He goes out into the field and mopes. When the ball comes his way, he is not ready because he is still miffed at his strikeout. His error costs his team a win.

This is a pretty fun game now that I think about it Coach May.

After a big win the stat guy is poed because he went 0-3 and mopes into the locker room. His parents are standing outside the locker room with the other parents waiting to see their kid. They are standing by themselves poed as well. The team players are celebrating the big win together as a team. The team parents are as well.

The next day after a tough loss the stat guy comes into the locker room with a big smile on his face encouraging everyone to keep their heads up. He went 3-3 today. His parents are talking to all the other parents telling them it was a great game too bad we lost.

Its not very long before this act gets very old with everyone.

quote:

Originally posted by Coach_May:
After a big win the stat guy is poed because he went 0-3 and mopes into the locker room. His parents are standing outside the locker room with the other parents waiting to see their kid. They are standing by themselves poed as well. The team players are celebrating the big win together as a team. The team parents are as well.

The next day after a tough loss the stat guy comes into the locker room with a big smile on his face encouraging everyone to keep their heads up. He went 3-3 today. His parents are talking to all the other parents telling them it was a great game too bad we lost.

Its not very long before this act gets very old with everyone.

Coach May - great example - I call it the sh&t-eating grin! Stats guys are the best team players in the world when they get their stats. Great guys to be around. Picking everyone up and could give a sh&t that the team just lost - they got theirs. The only thing the team guys care about are wins.

The cool part is that the team guys are often the best stat guys anyways. What sets them apart is they realize only one stat matters - wins and losses.

Yep thats funny because I have always called it the same thing. The player is such a good team mate as long as he is playing and having a good game. The parents are so supportive of the staff , program and other players as long as their son is playing and having a good game. My oh my do things change in a hurry as soon as they have a poor game or do not play.

These players and parents are on a constant roller coaster of emotions. Very unstable individuals to say the least. And I avoid them at all costs.

To chime in with the theme you guys have started to go with of team guys versus individuals is how easily it is to slide into a selfish attitude (for some but obviously not everyone). The example I give is comparing the team we had last year versus this year. Last year we were a pretty darn good team with team oriented guys. It was fun to be around. We lose three guys from last year's team so in essence we got a lot of the same guys from that same attitude but this year had to re-teach the team concept.

Last Friday we were playing and our Senior 1B lays down a beautiful bunt to move a runner over. I mean this bunt was textbook. Me and another coach meet him at the dugout high fiving and telling him how good of a job he did - just like we did last year. I turn around and nobody has left their place to high five him. You get a couple of "good jobs" "atta boys" and things like that but no effort to show him. Ticks me off to no end. I look at the dugout and lay into them about not celebrating the success of a team mate. Here was a senior who gave up his at bat to help the team out and nobody can get off their rear ends to celebrate it but almost all the same guys did it last year.

Low and behold a couple of innings later exact same situation and the same guys lays down an even better bunt. Outs made at first and he heads to the dugout. I'm trying to do the same thing to meet him and high five him but I can't because our team is running over me to do the same thing. Couldn't have been more proud of them over it.

And I told them - if you're going to rip them for the bad stuff then you have to tell them when they do something good.

My point is that 99% of the time, achieving individual goals also helps the team win. There is no false choice between being a 'selfish' stats guy and an unselfish team player. If you play well, you help the team, and that is mostly reflected by your statistics, with your exceptions.

I don't like the 2 strike (but not 3-2) hit and run sign in the first place and heres why...this hypothetical team player who truly doesn't care that his coach asked him to give up an out just to give the guy stealing a better chance does not exist. Most every competitive player I know would be po'd that the bat was taken out of his hands. I'm not saying it is right, but I think it is reality. It would be great if you had 9 team players like that, but a lot of players would be insulted that the coach doesn't have confidence in him to let him hit.

I think that this kind of stuff is how coaches "lose" their team...how a coach can lose trust and yes, some respect from his players. Even if the guy at the plate is ok with throwing away his opportunity to help the team with a hit, you have 8 guys on the bench questioning the intelligence of giving a 2 strike hit and run sign.

Every at bat is important to a good 'selfish' player. A hit scores the run from second and keeps an inning alive, while giving up an at bat by unselfishly grounding out gets you runner at third and one out. Both situations are good. I would definitely want my teamate to hit behind the runner to get us in at least the second situation, but I wouldn't expect him to just give in to the pitcher and call a ground ball a success. I'd expect him to try to get a hit to the outfield to score the runner. And if he turns on a pitch and hits a double down the 3rd base line, thats even better.

I think we have a different picture in our minds when we picture a selfish player. I don't think I should have mentioned stats in my earlier post because I do agree that it is counterproductive to be chasing your numbers, I meant that the 'selfish' player will always want to help the team with his very best performance. A selfish player won't mope after a K; he will want to give his best in the field to show he belongs on the field.

I don't think letting the past affect the future is selfish, I think its good way to play bad baseball and hurt the team. If moping helped your performance in the field, I don't think coaches would have a problem with moping. And I'm sure players would mope all the time so they could improve their game and play better. It's easier to play well when you're feeling up. And its easier to be feeling up when you are playing well. Ballplayers know this and the good ones (both team guys and individual performers) do not let past failure affect future performance.

I have always had the attutude that I try to see the positives in the day when reflecting on a game. If I go 2-4 and the team loses, I make myself feel good by focusing on the 2 hits. If I go 0-4 but the team wins, I make myself feel good by focusing on the win. If that fits your definition of unselfish, then hey, maybe I'm coming around. I just believe that is how I get the best performance out of myself the next day--by staying positive no matter what happens. (The hard part is finding positives in the losses when I go 0-4...)

In my view, what greenmachine posted is true, if you are a fan of MLB and Barry Bonds type.
Only a player like Bonds can produce with that level of skill and confidence.
Take Bonds out of a lineup, and you end with an under-performing Giants lineup that gets their hitting coach, Carney Lansford, fired.
My view is we have to appreciate whether this question does relate to the level of play and whether it is HS, college or Milb or MLB. For the most part, it is easier to relate to HS and college although Joe Torre's book, The Yankee Years, shows it applies in MLB, also.
For HS and college, the issue is largely leadership.
For college, there are certain players who are there day one to greet the freshman, who acquaint them with what it means to be a champion, who are the first ones in the weight room at 6am to meet them and the last to leave. They are the first ones at practice and the last to leave.
Finally, they are the ones who breed a level of confidence, of humility, of challenge and acceptance. To "win" in college, freshman need either a huge amount of "Bonds" type talent or they need leaders who show them how to play the game and how to succeed and how they will succeed.
I will never forget a pitcher at Stanford in 2008 who took the ball every week, went 9 innings, competed with passion, I mean passion, and literally willed his team to Omaha. I am not sure he was an over achiever as opposed to making many on his team/in his line up over achievers. He sure made everyone better and made a team of winners.
In HS and college, good coaches coach each and every player to know his job, to know he has a job to do and to know he has the skills to "win" a battle when the opportunity arises.
The confidence they will "win" that battle begins in August and September in the weight room. It continues when that player, is in the classroom and does what they need to do to succeed for himself and to be on that field, and it continues when they arrive at practice until they leave.
It is easy for Bonds to be an over achiever.
He is the exception.
Most over achievers do it by leadership, by outworking everyone else, by creating a winning environment from the first day of classes, and by doing each and every job they are given by each and every sign the coach gives during the season.
Over achievers identify what needs to be done, in part because they know and in part because the coaches identify it for them.
Most importantly, they win each battle, whether it is getting a bunt down when required, hitting behind a runner to advance runners into scoring position, or having an AB that gives every other hitter confidence. Over achievers work an AB and elevate a pitch to the outfield to score a run when it is 1-2, 0-2 with a runner on 3rd. Over achievers do this so others see you don't need to be Bonds to succeed, you need to know your job, and do your job.
As I post many times, you don't have to be a great player to be in MLB, you have to be a good one everyday.
When you do your job everyday as a player or coach, and others know you do, you truly are an over achiever that can make a difference, whether you are playing, or coaching those who are playing.
The game of baseball is not an easy one to know your job and to win that battle.
Over achievers know their job and win the battles more than .333 and they create a level of confidence where the .250 guy knows he can be the .300 guy, and he does.
Good selfish players better be Bonds type players.
For everyone else, selfish players succeed as individuals but their teams often time suffer and underperform.

I enjoyed those last two posts.

greenmachine - thanks for the clarifications.

I am not at all as sure about Bonds. For starters, I don't see any rings on his fingers. A career .245 post season hitter although to his credit he hit .471 in his one World Series. For all the hoopla surrounding the guy, he underwhelmed in the post-season imho given the alleged "magnitude" of his talent. Moreover, we all know that steroids were involved so his talent was also distorted imho.

I remember Jim Leyeland famously getting in his face in spring training. I remember worst of all, a hard hit ball hit on astro turf no less in the 1992 ALCS in fairly shallow left field, I remember Sid Bream, I remember Sid Bream running on one leg from second base, I remember Barry failing to throw him out at home to keep his "team" in the game in the last meaningful game the Pirates would play. Was Barry a selfish guy? No doubt. Did Barry put up numbers? Arguably the best. Was he a winner? Obviously, winning is in part attributable to the team but in my book no. If Barry is going to take credit for all the great stats then he also needs to take credit for the losing. Of course, it is never Barry's fault when the team loses.

I go back to 1971 and remember the great Roberto Clemente showing all five tools as the unquestioned MVP of that series. I can do the following mental exercise because I was a Pirate fan, but I ask people to name one starting pitcher from the 1971 Pirate team? I'll bet it is at least difficult for most of you. Everyone remembers Clemente however.

After reading greenmachine's follow-on reply, I better understand what he was trying to say. A guy who is selfishly (in his own mind) trying to put up good numbers can help his team win. I think I was saying the same thing but from a different angle. Your best team guys imho are often the best stats guys. In Barry's case, he was the best stats guy, the worst team guy, and worse yet a loser imho - on the field and off.

One other thing, I think of Willie Mays and his attitude. I saw him interviewed by Bob Costas the other day. He talked about how he used to call pitches from the outfield. That way he knew where the ball would be hit and he knew he would catch it. Can anyone imagine Barry giving a sh&t which pitch is called in the outfield? Willie was one of the great stats guys of all time but by listening to him talk you could tell he was a winner because he did what was necessary to help his team win - offensively, defensively, and mentally.

I completely agree that there is a distinction between the different levels of play. As you go up, the players are more and more competitive. This is why I like how the "main guy" of a team is called a coach at lower levels and a manager at the higher levels. In the higher levels, his job is less about teaching the game and more about being the "invisible hand" that directs everyone's self-interest to the good of the team, allowing the team to overachieve.

infielddad hit it on the head...a big part of a team winning attitude (and overachieving) is the players setting high standards for themselves and holding eachother accountable to those standards. In my opinion that is where the true TEAM part of baseball comes in. He is right that it starts on day one with everyone giving everything they have during "hell week" in the fall. Every player has confidence in his teamates that they can carry their weight and contribute. That his how players earn their teammates' respect. That is how you get that magic Fresno State feeling that lifts everyone's performance.

And he is right that the leadership sets the tone for the rest of the team. A good leader (captain of the team) shows the freshmen what it takes to be a successful player in the program--in the weightroom, in the classroom, in the social scene, and of course on the field. A good leader (now I'm talking more about coaches) is always there to give extra bp or fungos to make his players better. From a distance (I'm not in the clubhouse) it doesn't look like Bonds was a good leader. Somehow I just can't see Bonds in the weight room with his teamates urging them to get that one last rep, or going out with his teamates after a big win. If the rest of the Pirates/Giants looked to him as a leader in the clubhouse, perhaps that is why his teams didn't win.

greenmachine,
Great input. Honestly, I think we are saying very close to the same thing but you are saying it in a way I had not heard before.
I took your comments more in the context of what players learn in Milb which is basically play for yourself and make sure you pay attention only to what you can control.
Bonds, in my view, took that to the ultimate and extreme.
If we vary in any way, it probably is on the importance of stats and an 0-4 when your team wins. Of course, I'm looking at this in a very big rear view mirror as a parent and fan and the mirror needs to be really big at my age. Easier for me to be objective and unemotional for sure.
When we talk about players of the type described in this thread, I agree with you those types are not going to ever be satisfied with an 0-4; they are churning to get to tomorrow.
From the teams I have seen, those coached by George Horton best typify on a consistent basis what I love about college baseball and over achieving. That is not to say he does not have talent, he sure does. But the way his teams play, the tenacity, the mental toughness and attitude and the consistent execution isn't lucky.
I have felt for a long time his teams have an advantage just because they play with an edge and every player executes, almost like they don't want to let their teammates down.

This is an excerpt from a person to person article on Gene Stephenson of Wichita State from Coach and Athletic Director, November 2007.

Question: How do you get your players to buy into the importance and relevance of fundamentals, especially when you look at professional baseball today and watch players who have no idea hot to sacrifice bunt or hit a cut-off man?

Answer: I don't know if we do it very well but I will say this, I think that we emphasize it all the time.
I believe it's more about the unselfish attitude and understanding how to be a ballplayer.
If you look at the minor leagues, what do all of the organizations always say when they bring guys in to talk to them?
They tell them that they don't care if they win, it's all about development.
The player rationalizes that and thinks, yeah, the development only matters in what my numbers are.
So the player has the immediate mindset to focus on his personal success and not winning and not team play.
To some extent that filters down to the lower levels.
Nobody really puts an emphasis on unselfish team play.
All that matters is, am I a ballplayer?
Meaning, do I work on the things that I don't do well so that I can become a moe complete ballplayer.
If you are a great athlete, you will work on the things for hours and hours on the things you do well over and over again.
But they won't work on the things they don't do well, in a public setting, in front of all your teammates, for fear they may get ridiculed.
What we need are more ballplayers.
Guys who are willing to understand the basics of the game and be willing to work on the game, even if it means coming out privately, to avoid embarrassment, to work on the things you don't do well.

Question: When you reflect on all that you have acomplished- turning what was afor all intent and purposes a sandlot program into a national powerhouse-what is your most vivid memory through all the trials and tribulations?

Answer: Honestly, I don't have time to reflect.
Someday I suppose I will.
But I think the most rewarding times are are always about specific people and specific instances.
And how they grew and matured as people and what they overcame to be something special and become successful.
It's all about the people and players we've had come through the program, and their families.
We recently had a 25 year reunion for the 1982 College World Series team.
The very first team from Wichita State to play in the CWS.
You reflect back and think that was just four years after the very first team and we're playing in the national championship game, on national television.
And that's when we had no seats, no bathroom, and no dressing rooms.
Guys were changing in their cars.
That's just unbelieveable. Phenomenal!

Question: What do you think your legacy at Wichita State will be when you finally retire?

Answer: It's simple.
The people that you leave behind, the people you have had some influence with, did you help them in some way become more successful?
Did you give them some guidance along the way, even if it was some anecdote that helped them in some small way to have a better life?
It's not rocket science.
It's just making a diference.

Just thought this article provides a little more insight froma coaches perspective. For what it's worth.

quote:

I believe it's more about the unselfish attitude and understanding how to be a ballplayer.

I think I posted something like this above and I had some disagreement. Thanks for posting. Coach Stephenson is one of the most successful college coaches of all time.

Here are a few more Q&A's froma Pat Casey at Oregon State taken from a published November 2008 interview from Coach and A.D.

Question: Your recipe for success has a definitive and proven blueprint: Stressing leadership, team chemistry, a desire to succeed, and a loyalty to playing baseball. What is the foundation of that methodology? How have you and your staff been able to instill these traits in your players?

Answer: Well I think first of all, it starts with with your staff.
I mean your work ethic is going to rub off on them: your loyalty, your dedication to what your doing.
I think it's hard to get a kid to perform for you if he doesn't fell like you have the same work ethic as you are demanding of him or your making the same sacrifices.
I think just us putting the same emphasis on the athlete himself and making sure he knows the program is about him and not us.
Together we can certainly succeed but without you giving us the dedication or us giving you the dedication, that's difficult to accomplish.
So I think it's a staff that's willing to work and put everything on the line for the player.
I think it's a staff that's willing to make sacrifices above and beyond the call at all times.
I just think it's a combination of them having a huge trust in their coaching staff and also be willing to make the sacrifices and pay the price to be good.

Question: What is the one fundamental or skill that today's young players lack when they reach college baseball?

Answer: Offensively, I would say bunting and sacrifice plays.
Defensively, it's relays and cutoffs-glove recognition.

This interview was very good in it's entirety.
I think this extraction provides a glimpse into similarities between all successful coaches and programs. First and foremost being the player coming first to the coach and the understanding by a player the dedication and accountability that is required of them to be successful on and off the field.

On a more personal note: I can include Frank Anderson and company at Oklahoma State in this same tier.
I have the opportunity to drop in at practices occassionally and I see the same dedication and loyalty this staff has to it's players as somewhat described in the previous articles cited.
Almost every worthwhile program will have common threads with any other program. In my opinion it boils down to trust, personalities and some occassional luck. Again I am just voicing my opinion.