Wearing wrist bands with signals on them.

Stats4Gnats posted:

Does wearing wrist bands with the signals on them cut down on the missed signals? 5 years ago I’d see 1 or 2 teams a season who did it, but now I’m guessing a third of them do.

 

yes. Both ways have pros and cons, but the biggest benefit we got was that there was zero learning curve. So the kids coming in late from basketball and soccer got a card and were good to go.

2019Dad posted:  Yeah, but he's used to pitching for his HS program where pitchers don't shake off. So it had to get really, really egregious before he shook off a pitch. And coach did change for all remaining games (took over the pitch calling). In any event, I thought it was funny, in a mind-boggling way.

My son pitched for a HS coach who removed him more than once for simply shaking off a sign, and he threw a couple hundred innings in that program. But every time he pitched for a team he was allowed to shake off pitches, he did.

P.S. -- just to clarify, it was 35 pitches over two innings. The same pitch was called every time but with two shakeoffs it ended up as 33 fastballs, 2 breaking balls. 

Thanx for the clarification. Before I just assumed he was getting pounded all over the place and didn’t ask how he did, but now I’d like to know how the other team did, keeping in mind they were a far above average team playing for a far above average coach.

ironhorse posted: I guess superiority could be debated in some cases, but in cases with coaches who have been coaching awhile I would argue that the people in the dugout are going to be "superior" compared to the teenage catcher.

More important to me though is knowledge of opponent and access to information. I'm the head coach. I have a pitching coach who calls pitches. We'll have a chart on every hitter we've faced in district over the last few years. We'll talk about hitters before the game, and have that book on hand throughout the game, charting pitches thrown and results.

It would be extremely rare for a kid to be able to match that, all while dealing with all kinds of other stimuli that he has to process throughout a game, armed only with a teenage brain.

A question. I’m sure you play teams other than district opponents, and if it’s like us, it’s about half. So for those players and teams you don’t have good info on, what’s the advantage to not allowing the catchers to learn their trade?

I have to say, while I admire what you do for preparation, you certainly aren’t the “average” HS coach I’ve run into, and I’ve run into a lot of them. In fact, you’re prolly at worst among the top 5 as far as game prep that I’ve come in any kind of contact with.

I understand the reluctance to give the reins to some inexperienced kid. But there’s a big difference between a 14YO Soph catcher just called up to the V, and an 18 YO Sr who’s been the starting catcher for 3 years. What I’m saying is, every situation is different.

Maybe I oversimplify the game some times, but calling pitches is like calling plays in football.....they are all designed to work if you execute.  I try to teach pitchers and catchers what to look for in hitter's swing, stance, charts, etc. and pitch accordingly. I may call 5 or 6 pitches out of a hundred during a game. 

Stats4Gnats posted:

 

 

I have to say, while I admire what you do for preparation, you certainly aren’t the “average” HS coach I’ve run into, and I’ve run into a lot of them. In fact, you’re prolly at worst among the top 5 as far as game prep that I’ve come in any kind of contact with.

Well then there are only about 3 left because we do the same thing.  Our entire staff spend time scouting opponents and have extensive charting system on all players we see.

Stats4Gnats posted:

2019Dad posted:  Yeah, but he's used to pitching for his HS program where pitchers don't shake off. So it had to get really, really egregious before he shook off a pitch. And coach did change for all remaining games (took over the pitch calling). In any event, I thought it was funny, in a mind-boggling way.

My son pitched for a HS coach who removed him more than once for simply shaking off a sign, and he threw a couple hundred innings in that program. But every time he pitched for a team he was allowed to shake off pitches, he did.

P.S. -- just to clarify, it was 35 pitches over two innings. The same pitch was called every time but with two shakeoffs it ended up as 33 fastballs, 2 breaking balls. 

Thanx for the clarification. Before I just assumed he was getting pounded all over the place and didn’t ask how he did, but now I’d like to know how the other team did, keeping in mind they were a far above average team playing for a far above average coach.

They won. IIRC, it was a 2 run game when he entered and he gave up 1 run, and got a K with a runner in scoring position to end the game. The catcher did have a CS, which helped.

And I got a chance to talk afterward for 15 minutes with the HSBBW member/coach, which was a bonus.

IEBSBL posted: Well then there are only about 3 left because we do the same thing.  Our entire staff spend time scouting opponents and have extensive charting system on all players we see.

 Well, maybe I’m wrong and of the 40,000 or so HS coaches out there, all but the couple hundred I’ve seen are doing it.

 You must have some great assistants and a voluminous database.

Stats4Gnats posted:

ironhorse posted: I guess superiority could be debated in some cases, but in cases with coaches who have been coaching awhile I would argue that the people in the dugout are going to be "superior" compared to the teenage catcher.

More important to me though is knowledge of opponent and access to information. I'm the head coach. I have a pitching coach who calls pitches. We'll have a chart on every hitter we've faced in district over the last few years. We'll talk about hitters before the game, and have that book on hand throughout the game, charting pitches thrown and results.

It would be extremely rare for a kid to be able to match that, all while dealing with all kinds of other stimuli that he has to process throughout a game, armed only with a teenage brain.

A question. I’m sure you play teams other than district opponents, and if it’s like us, it’s about half. So for those players and teams you don’t have good info on, what’s the advantage to not allowing the catchers to learn their trade?

I have to say, while I admire what you do for preparation, you certainly aren’t the “average” HS coach I’ve run into, and I’ve run into a lot of them. In fact, you’re prolly at worst among the top 5 as far as game prep that I’ve come in any kind of contact with.

I understand the reluctance to give the reins to some inexperienced kid. But there’s a big difference between a 14YO Soph catcher just called up to the V, and an 18 YO Sr who’s been the starting catcher for 3 years. What I’m saying is, every situation is different.

We have 16 district games, but before that we'll have 8-10 tournament games, etc., where at times we'll definitely let the catcher call some innings. Early in the year it can depend on the pitcher and what we're trying to see from him. If there's something we're working on that isn't easily communicated to the catcher (example of easy being "call a lot of changeups"), we may still call them, just depends on several factors.

Our catcher this year will be in his 3rd year starting, although his baseball IQ is lower than that, so we'll give him a little more free reign. 

Stats4Gnats posted:

IEBSBL posted: Well then there are only about 3 left because we do the same thing.  Our entire staff spend time scouting opponents and have extensive charting system on all players we see.

 Well, maybe I’m wrong and of the 40,000 or so HS coaches out there, all but the couple hundred I’ve seen are doing it.

 You must have some great assistants and a voluminous database.

I have Manilla Envelopes full of old charts.  I usually purge them after 4 years and yes I have great assistants.  

IEBSBL posted: You must have some great assistants and a voluminous database.

I have Manilla Envelopes full of old charts.  I usually purge them after 4 years and yes I have great assistants.  

Gosh! Why haven’t you “automated” you’re data? You’re throwing away a treasure of information, not to mention playing with paper is infinitely less efficient than being able to press a button on a computer.

Stats4Gnats posted:

tomated” you’re data? You’re throwing away a treasure of information, not to mention playing with paper is infinitely less efficient than being able to press a button on a computer.

But paper never malfunctions during a game!! 

Stats4Gnats posted:

Gosh! Why haven’t you “automated” you’re data? You’re throwing away a treasure of information, not to mention playing with paper is infinitely less efficient than being able to press a button on a computer.

These are all spray charts and pitch sequencing charts.  When I am doing charts I need the information now and in a certain manner and dealing with a computer takes to long and can't give it to me in the manner that I need it in.  If you know of a way to change this I would be willing to listen.

PS...IronHorse is right.  My charts have never crashed. (HAHAHA)

IEBSBL posted: These are all spray charts and pitch sequencing charts.  When I am doing charts I need the information now and in a certain manner and dealing with a computer takes to long and can't give it to me in the manner that I need it in.  If you know of a way to change this I would be willing to listen.

 All I can say is, if you can do it with a paper and pencil and can define what you want, a computer can do it faster.

 Spray charts are pretty simple. Pitch sequencing charts are something else again because I don’t know what you’re talking about. Can you give an example?

PS...IronHorse is right.  My charts have never crashed. (HAHAHA)

No doubt. There’s certainly something to be said for having real pieces of paper with real writing on them. But there’s also something to be said for being able to find something in milliseconds.

Stats4Gnats posted:

 All I can say is, if you can do it with a paper and pencil and can define what you want, a computer can do it faster.

 Spray charts are pretty simple. Pitch sequencing charts are something else again because I don’t know what you’re talking about. Can you give an example?

In other words what pitch gets thrown in what counts and what happened on the pitch. 

No doubt. There’s certainly something to be said for having real pieces of paper with real writing on them. But there’s also something to be said for being able to find something in milliseconds.

I don't disagree with your assessment but all I am doing is drawing a line with a pen, and writing in what happened in a column. 

My apologies if the spirited debate has gone away from the OP question.  I was just curious for a number of reasons.  I know there are pitchers who are ready to go with their next pitch before the batter is even back in the box.  Having signals come in, catcher's translate and then present the signal seems to be a hurdle for a pitcher who enjoys working fast.  I would presume the catcher would still have to work with an indicator to keep base runners off balance...

When talking with my 2020 and why he prefers to call the games he said that when he gets to batters or situations where he wants to work backwards, the coach would seldom do that.  He knows what pitches are truly working for the pitcher, knows what the ump is giving or not giving.  And in the end he wants the responsibility to be 50-50.  He has to call the pitch and then receive/frame and block and the pitcher has to throw the right pitch and hit his target.

Since the higher up you go , the responsibility is greater, guess that is why coaches leave the decision making with themselves if their job can be on the line.

We have played with teams where the coaches are clueless (nothing more than a well intentioned father) and then played for a coach who made it to AAA and was a AA HOF for the Phils.  He was a catcher too and he felt his job was to teach his catchers how to handle pitchers.  He really trusted his catchers. 

There has been a few where the coach, for the most part, isn't skilled and we have had issues with my son having a negative reaction.  Essentially if he thinks your full of crap, he does what he has to do.  And YES , I know its something that needs to change......Nothing new you can advise on that..

IEBSBL posted: In other words what pitch gets thrown in what counts and what happened on the pitch. 

 Mebbe it’s because I’m thinking more in terms of what happens for the group rather than what happens for an individual player, but I honestly don’t see much of a use for how to pitch an individual hitter from that information. However, I can see a use for evaluating pitchers using it.

 Please see attachment.

I don't disagree with your assessment but all I am doing is drawing a line with a pen, and writing in what happened in a column. 

I understand that, and it’s what most people would do. My point is, it’s really an inefficient way to store or retrieve data.

I your attachments there were 6 outs recorded.  Where were the outs recorded at i.e. 4-3, F6, L8?  Did the hitter swing at a Breaking Ball in the dirt, or a elevated fastball?  Did he take a first pitch fastball or swing at it?  All this is information we use to A) Position our fielders and B) Call pitches.  Yes you can compose raw data and number on a spread sheet and there is a lot of value in that.  We do some data base work at the end of every season.  Game to game though I don't know if your data base can replicate what I can do on in game basis.  If it can I would love to know how.

Kevin A posted:

My apologies if the spirited debate has gone away from the OP question.  I was just curious for a number of reasons.  I know there are pitchers who are ready to go with their next pitch before the batter is even back in the box.  Having signals come in, catcher's translate and then present the signal seems to be a hurdle for a pitcher who enjoys working fast.  I would presume the catcher would still have to work with an indicator to keep base runners off balance...

When talking with my 2020 and why he prefers to call the games he said that when he gets to batters or situations where he wants to work backwards, the coach would seldom do that.  He knows what pitches are truly working for the pitcher, knows what the ump is giving or not giving.  And in the end he wants the responsibility to be 50-50.  He has to call the pitch and then receive/frame and block and the pitcher has to throw the right pitch and hit his target.

Since the higher up you go , the responsibility is greater, guess that is why coaches leave the decision making with themselves if their job can be on the line.

We have played with teams where the coaches are clueless (nothing more than a well intentioned father) and then played for a coach who made it to AAA and was a AA HOF for the Phils.  He was a catcher too and he felt his job was to teach his catchers how to handle pitchers.  He really trusted his catchers. 

There has been a few where the coach, for the most part, isn't skilled and we have had issues with my son having a negative reaction.  Essentially if he thinks your full of crap, he does what he has to do.  And YES , I know its something that needs to change......Nothing new you can advise on that..

 

This makes me think.  Why isn't anyone advocating for the pitcher to call his own pitches?  Everyone is debating the pitching coach and catcher.  Why isn't there conversation about the guy who is actually throwing the pitch?

Kevin A posted:My apologies if the spirited debate has gone away from the OP question.  I was just curious for a number of reasons.  I know there are pitchers who are ready to go with their next pitch before the batter is even back in the box.  Having signals come in, catcher's translate and then present the signal seems to be a hurdle for a pitcher who enjoys working fast.  I would presume the catcher would still have to work with an indicator to keep base runners off balance...

When talking with my 2020 and why he prefers to call the games he said that when he gets to batters or situations where he wants to work backwards, the coach would seldom do that.  He knows what pitches are truly working for the pitcher, knows what the ump is giving or not giving.  And in the end he wants the responsibility to be 50-50.  He has to call the pitch and then receive/frame and block and the pitcher has to throw the right pitch and hit his target.

Since the higher up you go , the responsibility is greater, guess that is why coaches leave the decision making with themselves if their job can be on the line.

We have played with teams where the coaches are clueless (nothing more than a well intentioned father) and then played for a coach who made it to AAA and was a AA HOF for the Phils.  He was a catcher too and he felt his job was to teach his catchers how to handle pitchers.  He really trusted his catchers. 

There has been a few where the coach, for the most part, isn't skilled and we have had issues with my son having a negative reaction.  Essentially if he thinks your full of crap, he does what he has to do.  And YES , I know its something that needs to change......Nothing new you can advise on that..

No need to apologize. A thread that morphs shows the readers are thinking.

Truth is, there are strong opinions about calling pitches, and not much proof substantiating any of them. That makes it frustrating for players like your boy and parents like yourself because it seems a lot like luck and hoping that whoever’s calling pitches in the system you’re in, knows what they’re doing.

Personally, I don’t think it makes all that much difference, but I’d like to see the pitcher throwing pitches he has confidence in.

I also keep a book of every team we play.  Before the game, I put the former pitching stats and results on my sheet.  I talk to my pitcher and catcher after each inning.  I would rather my catcher use his spare time becoming a better hitter or student than having to memorize the batters for the other team.  I give them a little ability to shake off but not much.  I tell them talk to me and you won't have to shake me off much.  Plus I know very few college catchers who call their own pitches so why prepare them for something they are probably not going to do.  They have a job and I have a job. 

PitchingFan posted: I also keep a book of every team we play.  Before the game, I put the former pitching stats and results on my sheet.  …

 What “pitching stats” and “results” do you put on your sheet? I keep some fairly detailed stats myself our HC might find it useful to have.

Stats4Gnats posted:

PitchingFan posted: I also keep a book of every team we play.  Before the game, I put the former pitching stats and results on my sheet.  …

 What “pitching stats” and “results” do you put on your sheet? I keep some fairly detailed stats myself our HC might find it useful to have.

We do something very similar if not the same.  We are looking specifically looking at the following counts.....0-0, 1-1, 2-2, 0-2.  We also look at the following situations when the pitcher throws a FB for strike 1/Ball 1, what does he follow it up with.  When the pitcher throws BB for strike 1/ball1 what does he follow that up with.

A good handout on pitch calling I've had for a while. I was too lazy to re-type it so I hope it's readable.

IEBSBL posted: We do something very similar if not the same.  We are looking specifically looking at the following counts.....0-0, 1-1, 2-2, 0-2.  We also look at the following situations when the pitcher throws a FB for strike 1/Ball 1, what does he follow it up with.  When the pitcher throws BB for strike 1/ball1 what does he follow that up with.

 We are talking about the opponent pitchers aren’t we? Do you track the pitchers as individuals, team, or both?

 What’s significant about those 4 counts out of the 12 possible counts?

 Let’s see if I have this right. One of your hitters is up and the 1^st pitch he gets is a FB for ball 1. Now you look at your “chart” and see in that situation, that pitcher follows up with a FB 70% of the time. What do you do with that information?

Sit fastball and piss on it if it's a strike.

Stats4Gnats posted:

IEBSBL posted: We do something very similar if not the same.  We are looking specifically looking at the following counts.....0-0, 1-1, 2-2, 0-2.  We also look at the following situations when the pitcher throws a FB for strike 1/Ball 1, what does he follow it up with.  When the pitcher throws BB for strike 1/ball1 what does he follow that up with.

 We are talking about the opponent pitchers aren’t we? Do you track the pitchers as individuals, team, or both?

 What’s significant about those 4 counts out of the 12 possible counts?

 Let’s see if I have this right. One of your hitters is up and the 1^st pitch he gets is a FB for ball 1. Now you look at your “chart” and see in that situation, that pitcher follows up with a FB 70% of the time. What do you do with that information?

Out of the 12 possible we know that a lot of them are specific pitch counts, i.e. 3-0, 3-1, 2-0 are fastball counts.  These specific counts are counts in which multiple pitches can be thrown based of the pitcher himself or the pitching coach.  A hitter can not have 12 counts rolling around in his head so we try to drop it down.  0-2 we include just so we identify those pitchers that like to elevate a fastball or bury pitchers consistently in a 0-2 count.  

In regards to your scenario Ironhorse beat me to it.  Sit Fastball and piss on it.  

We track every pitch as to the pitch and location called and whether the pitcher hit his spot.  We then track what the batter did.  I use this information to call the pitch and location.  No way I would ask a high school kid or expect him to keep this information.  I put on the sheet who was pitching and then transfer it over before the next game so I have a starting point and keep it in mind with what happens during that game.

Some times it is useless if you pitched a slow righty the last game and are now pitching a lefty with movement and speed but it does give you tendencies like if they swing at first pitches or don't like pitches outside or inside or hate curveballs.  it will also give you tendencies such as some coaches do not allow their hitters to swing at offspeed until they get two strikes called on them.  We will use that to our advantage and pitch a kid who has good offspeed and can throw it consistently for strikes. 

Tracking your pitcher and the opponents pitchers helps you understand tendencies and provides information for helping make decisions.

IEBSBL posted: Out of the 12 possible we know that a lot of them are specific pitch counts, i.e. 3-0, 3-1, 2-0 are fastball counts.  These specific counts are counts in which multiple pitches can be thrown based of the pitcher himself or the pitching coach.  A hitter can not have 12 counts rolling around in his head so we try to drop it down.  0-2 we include just so we identify those pitchers that like to elevate a fastball or bury pitchers consistently in a 0-2 count.  

In regards to your scenario Ironhorse beat me to it.  Sit Fastball and piss on it.  

Since I don’t chart pitches I have no idea about what’s really taking place on supposed FB counts. Can you say what percentage of pitches are FBs on each count?

I’m not seein’ how logically multiple pitches might be thrown on those counts more than counts where the pitcher is ahead rather than the hitter. It seems to me just the opposite would be true.

Rather than to deal with counts, why not just say counts where the pitcher is behind by 2 or more is a FB count?

From the sounds of it, you’re keeping track by individual pitchers. WHEW! We faced 56 different pitchers last season. That’s a lot of paper when you look at 3-4 years. And then all that info needs to be collated somehow. I can’t imagine how difficult it is to pull useful data from all that paper.

With all due respect you are over complicated this.  It super easy to gather and pull the information I need.  

IEBSBL posted: Ever pitcher is different but if I had to break down and individual pitcher, yes I could tell you the percentages of pitches he threw on any given day.  If you are asking me an in general.  When I say what is happening on supposed FB counts I am sure you understand and agree that on 3-0, 3-1, 2-0 counts the vast majority of pitches thrown are FB's.  I would venture to guess that 90% plus are FB's.

Well, I’d certainly agree if I had any idea that it was true, but the truth is I don’t know. I’ve never had the luxury of being able to concentrate on what type of pitch was being delivered more than a few pitches a game. Logic dictates that on whole HS pitchers throw more FBs than anything else regardless of the count though because in general only the best of them have the capacity to control anything else very well.

From a coaching standpoint the more a pitcher tips the count in his favor the more pitchers throw off speed.  

The way you wrote it, I interpreted as you saying “3-0, 3-1, and 2-0 were the counts in the pitcher’s favor.

I don't want my players to have to stop and do math during an AB.  LOL

I don’t mean to sound like an old poop, but it sure seems like not a lot of credit is being given to players for being able to walk and chew gum at the same time.

It is 1 sheet per game and we indicate on it when the pitcher has been changed so we played 30 games last year and its 30 pages.  To be honest it is super easy for me to break down a pitching chart.  I can do a full count percentage scenario in under 5 minutes.  if we are are talking about what I give my hitters its less.  Keep in mind that the only guaranteed count that a pitcher will throw every AB is 0-0.  After that the counts begin to dwindle down.  

With all due respect you are over complicated this.  It super easy to gather and pull the information I need.

I guess it’s difficult because the only reference I have is looking at pitching charts I’ve seen. Can you put up an example of one of your filled out sheets?

Here are a few examples. The first is the pitch tendency chart we use in game. Kids look at it in game and pick out tendencies as they become apparent. We use different colors for LHH and RHH. We track the 3 and 4 hitters as well as a lot of times in HS they get pitched differently.

The other 2 are examples of how we compile it to show kids. We have some more detailed compilations as well, that talk about the previous pitch, etc., but a lot of the time the simpler the better with 80% of the players.

This is the best I can do, there is something wrong with my scanner.  Here is the sheet we keep on opposing pitchers.  However if you look at Ironhorse's break down of pitchers you will see what I am talking about.  I do not present it in the same manner but it is the same thing.

Iron Horse,  I am going to guess on the columns.  First two are obviously count.  Column 2: Fastball / Column 3: Off Speed / Column 4: Batters faced in those counts.  Am I correct?

Correct. Sorry it cut off on the one with 4 pitchers. Didn't realize that.

Thanks

ironhorse posted: Here are a few examples. The first is the pitch tendency chart we use in game. Kids look at it in game and pick out tendencies as they become apparent. We use different colors for LHH and RHH. We track the 3 and 4 hitters as well as a lot of times in HS they get pitched differently.

The other 2 are examples of how we compile it to show kids. We have some more detailed compilations as well, that talk about the previous pitch, etc., but a lot of the time the simpler the better with 80% of the players.

How are pitches logged on the 1^st one? For every pitch on every different count, is the pitch type logged?

On the “Ball Pitching” docx, I’m trying to figger out what I’m looking at. Tell me where I’m off track.

There were 19 batters. 1 PA was over on the 1^st pitch. There were 73 pitches thrown.

IEBSBL posted: This is the best I can do, there is something wrong with my scanner.  Here is the sheet we keep on opposing pitchers.  However if you look at Ironhorse's break down of pitchers you will see what I am talking about.  I do not present it in the same manner but it is the same thing.

 Don’t worry about the presentation. I’ll do my best to get it figgered out.

 See if I get what I’m seeing in the picture right. 35 total PAs. There were 99 pitches. Using the key at the bottom of the page, it looks like every pitch was either a FB in or a FB away.

 I realize you’re very familiar with the chart and I’ve only seen it once and have never used it, but how you can break all the data in that chart in just 5 minutes is mind numbing to me.

 But if it really is that simple for you to do, I strongly suggest you find a way to get that data into some kind of electronic database. The amount of information you’d have available would amaze you.

I'll be honest and say that I haven't kept up with this topic as I only get to peruse occasionally now a days but what I've read the question is from stats is where is data / empirical evidence showing that coaches calling the game is more successful.  Well when I read that what pops in my mind is where is the data / empirical evidence showing catcher / pitcher calling their own game and their success rate?  That data is about as abundant as the data showing coaches calling games success rate.  This is literally something nobody at the HS level is going to track.  Plus there are SOOOO many factors to consider that it makes it impossible to track.  I would guess it would take several years to compile this data.  It's just not worth it.  Come up with a system you like and are comfortable with that you can teach and run with it.

This spring I'm back in the saddle after being out for 9 years and I have a completely new staff with a bunch of guys that due to me coaching softball I haven't got a chance to watch play much.  There's a lot of unknowns going on here.  My pitching coach and I have talked extensively about philosophy and how we want to approach hitters.  While he and I are on the same page there is still going to be a learning curve.  My catcher is a senior and has started for 3 years.  My PC is going to call the game early in the season and turn that duty over to him as the season progresses.  With all the newness going on I'm not going to trust games to him until he shows he understands what we want.  So first 2 or 3 games PC calls the game.  Next few games we will let him call certain innings / batters but the entire time we are going to talk to him.  If he doesn't get what we want then PC will call the games.

Stats4Gnats posted:

How are pitches logged on the 1^st one? For every pitch on every different count, is the pitch type logged?

All we log on that chart is fastball or offspeed. We breakdown type of offspeed on a different chart, but that's more for coaches honestly. We're not seeing guys with 3 or 4 plus pitches very often, so FB or offspeed works well for hitters timing for us. The only pitches we don't track are what is thrown after a 2-strike foul ball. Count stays the same and it can jack up tendencies,

On the “Ball Pitching” docx, I’m trying to figger out what I’m looking at. Tell me where I’m off track.

That basically just shows hitters what he has thrown in certain counts when we've seen him throw. If we know he throws 1-0 fastballs 90% of the time we gear up for it. If we know he's a 1-1 CB guy, same story.

Our basic hitting philosophy is to pick a pitch (most often fastball) and drive it. If we can find a tendency it helps. Remember, as we've established, most often it's coaches calling pitches, and most coaches have fairly clear tendencies if you pay attention long enough.

ironhorse posted:

Stats4Gnats posted:

How are pitches logged on the 1^st one? For every pitch on every different count, is the pitch type logged?

All we log on that chart is fastball or offspeed. We breakdown type of offspeed on a different chart, but that's more for coaches honestly. We're not seeing guys with 3 or 4 plus pitches very often, so FB or offspeed works well for hitters timing for us. The only pitches we don't track are what is thrown after a 2-strike foul ball. Count stays the same and it can jack up tendencies,

On the “Ball Pitching” docx, I’m trying to figger out what I’m looking at. Tell me where I’m off track.

That basically just shows hitters what he has thrown in certain counts when we've seen him throw. If we know he throws 1-0 fastballs 90% of the time we gear up for it. If we know he's a 1-1 CB guy, same story.

Our basic hitting philosophy is to pick a pitch (most often fastball) and drive it. If we can find a tendency it helps. Remember, as we've established, most often it's coaches calling pitches, and most coaches have fairly clear tendencies if you pay attention long enough.

 

All coaches have tendencies except for Ed Henry.