And you have guy in the middle of your lineup that is one of those kids in Little Leauge that hits like .700 or something like that, are you letting him swing away on a 3 and 0 count?
rifle if you were coaching Little League
- Thread starter i am herdman
- Start date
Not rifle but my answer was yes the vast majority of the time when I was coaching. Exceptions maybe being a playoff game where a walk would help more than normal.
I was also the coach who let the kids on the spectrum play an inning of infield and probably lost us a few games doing that...but it's freaking little league (and not travel ball, etc). So maybe I"m not the best judge here.
As a kid I probably would've hated coach me (was die hard win/live and die by sports kid), but as a parent of an above average athlete but usually not the best on the team and cancer doctor your perspective changes.
Last edited:
Not rifle here, but can you clarify whether the .700 hitter 11 year old guy has been indoctrinated yet, and is competing against little league softball girls? Makes a difference how this question can be addressed in today's sickening mush brains country.
I have seen it when a pitcher is struggling and you say take it until he throws a strike.
Agree with this, but also agree that it’s situational. If you have a 3-0 count, you basically know the pitcher is going to try his hardest to throw a strike. At that point, you have a home run pitch floating right down the middle. Take the swing.
Runner on? Swing away, chase that RBI.
Bases empty, my hitters behind him aren’t the gimpy kids? Ehhhh take the pitch.
Bases empty, my hitters behind him aren’t the gimpy kids? Ehhhh take the pitch.
But you can keep hoping.
This is a question that's probably better suited for Big Country. He is the official stastician for four year old t-ball with both teams in his league.
I have a sports complex a few blocks from my house. It's high-end and very nicely maintained, so on a monthly basis, they have former stars like Rod Carew, Adam Kennedy, Bobby Grich (three weeks ago), and two guys who recently retired from MLB and live in the neighborhood spend time with a team. I may have mentioned it before, but they have a couple of travel teams that are as serious as I have ever seen youth teams. Their practice gear is all top-of-the-line and matching. They have a huge roster. Their drill work and practices are extremely organized and structured. They travel all over the country to face other elite teams. One of their fathers told me that the majority of the kids are home-schooled so they can travel nationally for games and have frequent practices . . . oh, and did I mention they are 12 years old? How absurd is it to remove children from school so they can play baseball more often?
Those are the type of kids/families who I expect to be keeping track of stats at such young ages.
From somebody who should know statistics and risk, this is a bad take.
I don't have data to support it, but my guess is that people get on base (and score) at a much higher rate by taking on 3-0 than they do on swinging on 3-0. I'd guess that 75% of hitters who take end up getting on base while probably 35% who swing eventually get on base. Sure, swinging on 3-0 may lead to more extra base hits than other counts, but I highly doubt the difference is enough to offset the much higher chance of getting on base by taking.
And yes, outlier examples may change this: Pete Alonso? Green light. Vince Coleman (huge stolen base threat with little to no power)? Taking. But overall, excluding the rare exception, you should be taking.
Last edited:
Ive seen this phenomenon now at club soccer.
====
We could have endless threads on the youth sports problems.
I have seen in my kid how more intensive practices/expert coaching can skyrocket output/skill development...but still, at the end of the day I still swear you can pick out the kids who have the freak athleticism or un-teachable skill that will make it and those that will just be good high school players pretty early on. I'm becoming more convinced that superior coaching/"travel ball" can turn a bench player into a starter, or maybe a solid starter into all state, but it's not making anyone a pro. The genetic/inherent talent IMO still plays the bigger part.
The money/time invested isn't worth it a lot of time.
What I have seen it be helpful in my son is discipline, time management, pushing limits, making friends outside of school, team building, etc on top of being a better player. Of course you can often get these things outside of club/"travel ball" sports, but I am seeing that as a benefit of our club soccer experience. Though the coaches look at your like there's something wrong with you when you tell them "oh we just want him to be a good high school player" when they ask about goals. These people are nuts so you've got to use it as a tool IMO.
Last edited:
Is girls flag football big where any of you are?
High schools where I grew up now have full leagues. Younger girls (10-14 years old) here have numerous teams (and surprisingly are athletic and pretty good at it). I think that could be the next hot sport - girl flag football.
High schools where I grew up now have full leagues. Younger girls (10-14 years old) here have numerous teams (and surprisingly are athletic and pretty good at it). I think that could be the next hot sport - girl flag football.
I guess you will be getting back jnto coaching soon.
Yep, and I won't be coaching the shotgun snap. I want everything directly under center, and I will make sure that every girl is coached (by me) on how to snap the ball.
I'm also starting a petition to get rid of those plastic flags that are bad for the environment. Two-hand touch is far better than continuing to produce unfriendly environmental plastic flags. I will coach a league-wide seminar on the best way to use two hands to touch somebody down.
My youngest son's coaches got in a parking lot pushing fight after his game last night, in a rec league. They lost 14-3, only one run was scored by either team on a hit. All the other runs came on the runner on 3rd advancing after a passed ball/wild pitch. It was asinine to watch, but that's what daddy ball gets you when moron #1 is convinced his son is the next Johnny Bench, and moron #2 is certain his boy is Steve Carlton reincarnated. My youngest loves playing ball, but he has the worst luck with coaches. He's basically the Boog Powell of 12U level.
Yes.
That and lacrosse is taking off in my area.
Though the latter I think is just a manifestation of white kids not being able to compete with more athletic black kids in football and basketball but still wanting to play a competitive contact sport.
Baseball life is insane in Hurricane. The dads here have delusions of grandeur, and the tribalism is awful. Dads get mad at a travel ball coach and go start their own travel team. I’m happy that my son doesn’t want to play travel, but it will probably affect his ability to make the Middle School team because they only focus on the travel players. If he chooses to not even try out, it won’t bother me. He is a really good pitcher, but he also likes cross country and may want to focus on that. I’m fine either way he chooses.
It's crazy that it's come to this.
The "travel ball" really does impact school sports in many ways - both objectively in their performance but also with politics, etc. The kids that play really do get better faster in my experience, but to what end? I swear all it's doing is making higher quality high school players but to what end? It's part jobs-program/grift, part making B+ players into A players...but it just seems like a rat race...little johnny isn't going pro.
That's when the umpire goes and tells the coach get another catcher in here. Then he tells both coaches your boys better start swinging the bat because the strike zone just got real big.
Here in Clover the middle school coach also owns/runs one of the local travel ball teams. We don't do travel for all kinds of different reasons, and my oldest son is constantly getting recruited to play travel. However, everyone in the district knows that you cannot make the Middle School team, and you especially can't pitch, unless you play for the coach's travel team. The school board has been notified and they refuse to get involved in "the coach's decisions on who plays where".
What it has caused is the re-emergence of what was called when I was growing up "Babe Ruth" league in Rec, basically 15U. We scrimmage travel teams and routinely beat them. It's all a big joke and is ruining talented kids from moving on because their parents can't afford all the nonsense.
What, moron? I need somebody else to laugh at other than Kitty and 1988. Explain how you came up with that number.
As you said, "if 75% of hitters take, and 35% of hitters swing," that adds up to 110% of your hitters. At least, that's the way I was taught in WV. That's kind of like your number 14,0000. How much is that?
Rifle, read this article and give me your take. It’s an analysis of all at-bats for the 2019 college baseball season. It shows that 3-0 is the best BA count and slugging percentage count. Also notes that 71% of all 3-0 counts end up as 3-2 counts. You go from a .400+ average on 3-0 to a .218 average on a 3-2.
I understand the difference in OBP, but I said “if you are a good hitter” you shouldn’t take 3-0. Sure, if you hit .250 or less, take.
This article is about 100% my view on the topic.
www.swingangry.com
I understand the difference in OBP, but I said “if you are a good hitter” you shouldn’t take 3-0. Sure, if you hit .250 or less, take.
This article is about 100% my view on the topic.
The 3-0 Count: It's Not an Automatic Take!
You see it all the time in baseball. The batter has a 3-0 count and the pitcher grooves the next pitch down the heart of the plate for strike one as the batter simply watches it go by. It is one of the "unwritten rules" of baseball - don't swing 3-0 when you are one more ball away from achieving...
Geezez dude, I know you're old as fvck, but reread what rifle wrote, maybe a dozen times if needed. Stop embarrassing yourself time and time again. This forum, and perhaps all forums probably aren't in your best interest participating in. Do your self a favor and be a read only member.
I think the article fails in logic. If the question is if a player should hit or take on a 3-0 count, you need to look at what happens after taking on 3-0 (or later) and what happens after swinging on 3-0 (or later).
Stating that 71% of all 3-0 counts end up as 3-2 counts is meaningless without knowing what happens later in the count between swinging vs. taking. If 100% of all 3-0 counts resulted in the hitter swinging and missing at two bad pitches or having two foul balls, thus always going to 3-2, then would you still argue to swing on 3-0? Nope. That’s why the important data is to look at the end result of the at bat of people swinging on 3-0 vs. the end result of the at bat for taking on 3-0.
You’re also misinterpreting the data. You aren’t a .400+ hitter on 3-0. If you swing and miss or foul a ball, you aren’t a .400+ hitter on 3-0.
Cmon man. If you are on our team, you need to step up your game.
You have to better explain your last paragraph. The article says that batters had a .400 average putting the ball in play on 3-0. Obviously, if you don’t hit the ball, or foul it off, you go then to look at the 3-1 stats. So are you just stating this obvious point and calling it misinterpretation or do you have another point?
The better question is what percentage of 3-0 pitches are called strikes when a batter doesn’t swing? The article didn’t give that exact info unless I missed it. It does talk about a generally more liberal zone and the fact that pitcher’s tendency to take a little off to throw a strike.
That is pathetic. Hopefully most of the kids didn't see it.
Rifle, read this article and give me your take. It’s an analysis of all at-bats for the 2019 college baseball season. It shows that 3-0 is the best BA count and slugging percentage count. Also notes that 71% of all 3-0 counts end up as 3-2 counts. You go from a .400+ average on 3-0 to a .218 average on a 3-2.
I understand the difference in OBP, but I said “if you are a good hitter” you shouldn’t take 3-0. Sure, if you hit .250 or less, take.
This article is about 100% my view on the topic.
The 3-0 Count: It's Not an Automatic Take!
You see it all the time in baseball. The batter has a 3-0 count and the pitcher grooves the next pitch down the heart of the plate for strike one as the batter simply watches it go by. It is one of the "unwritten rules" of baseball - don't swing 3-0 when you are one more ball away from achieving...
I didn’t read it but there will be major selection bias present.
Who gets the green light at 3-0? Your best hitter. So your sample of people hitting at 3-0 are the best hitters, so likely not able to extrapolate to your whole roster.
