| SOFTBALL TIPS |
|
|
|
| SITE STUFF |
|
|
|
|
ARCHIVES
|
| • |
June 26, 2005 |
| • |
July 03, 2005 |
| • |
July 10, 2005 |
| • |
July 17, 2005 |
| • |
July 24, 2005 |
| • |
July 31, 2005 |
| • |
August 07, 2005 |
| • |
August 14, 2005 |
| • |
August 21, 2005 |
| • |
August 28, 2005 |
| • |
September 11, 2005 |
| • |
October 02, 2005 |
| • |
October 09, 2005 |
| • |
October 23, 2005 |
| • |
October 30, 2005 |
| • |
November 06, 2005 |
| • |
November 13, 2005 |
| • |
December 04, 2005 |
| • |
December 18, 2005 |
| • |
December 25, 2005 |
| • |
January 08, 2006 |
| • |
January 15, 2006 |
| • |
January 29, 2006 |
| • |
February 05, 2006 |
| • |
February 12, 2006 |
| • |
February 19, 2006 |
| • |
February 26, 2006 |
| • |
March 05, 2006 |
| • |
March 12, 2006 |
| • |
March 19, 2006 |
| • |
March 26, 2006 |
| • |
April 02, 2006 |
| • |
April 09, 2006 |
| • |
April 16, 2006 |
| • |
April 23, 2006 |
| • |
April 30, 2006 |
| • |
May 07, 2006 |
| • |
May 14, 2006 |
| • |
May 21, 2006 |
| • |
May 28, 2006 |
| • |
June 04, 2006 |
| • |
June 11, 2006 |
| • |
June 18, 2006 |
| • |
June 25, 2006 |
| • |
July 09, 2006 |
| • |
July 16, 2006 |
| • |
July 23, 2006 |
| • |
July 30, 2006 |
| • |
August 13, 2006 |
| • |
August 20, 2006 |
| • |
September 03, 2006 |
| • |
September 10, 2006 |
| • |
September 17, 2006 |
| • |
September 24, 2006 |
| • |
October 01, 2006 |
| • |
October 08, 2006 |
| • |
October 15, 2006 |
| • |
October 22, 2006 |
| • |
November 12, 2006 |
| • |
November 26, 2006 |
| • |
December 31, 2006 |
| • |
January 14, 2007 |
| • |
January 21, 2007 |
| • |
January 28, 2007 |
| • |
February 04, 2007 |
| • |
February 11, 2007 |
| • |
February 18, 2007 |
| • |
February 25, 2007 |
| • |
March 04, 2007 |
| • |
March 11, 2007 |
| • |
March 18, 2007 |
| • |
April 01, 2007 |
| • |
April 08, 2007 |
| • |
April 15, 2007 |
| • |
April 22, 2007 |
| • |
April 29, 2007 |
| • |
May 06, 2007 |
| • |
May 13, 2007 |
| • |
May 20, 2007 |
| • |
May 27, 2007 |
| • |
June 03, 2007 |
| • |
June 10, 2007 |
| • |
June 17, 2007 |
| • |
June 24, 2007 |
| • |
July 01, 2007 |
| • |
July 22, 2007 |
| • |
July 29, 2007 |
| • |
August 12, 2007 |
| • |
August 19, 2007 |
| • |
September 02, 2007 |
| • |
September 16, 2007 |
| • |
September 30, 2007 |
| • |
October 07, 2007 |
| • |
October 14, 2007 |
| • |
October 21, 2007 |
| • |
November 04, 2007 |
| • |
November 18, 2007 |
| • |
November 25, 2007 |
| • |
December 02, 2007 |
| • |
December 09, 2007 |
| • |
December 16, 2007 |
| • |
January 13, 2008 |
| • |
February 17, 2008 |
| • |
February 24, 2008 |
| • |
March 02, 2008 |
| • |
March 09, 2008 |
| • |
March 30, 2008 |
| • |
April 06, 2008 |
| • |
April 13, 2008 |
| • |
April 20, 2008 |
| • |
April 27, 2008 |
| • |
May 04, 2008 |
| • |
May 11, 2008 |
| • |
May 18, 2008 |
| • |
May 25, 2008 |
| • |
June 01, 2008 |
| • |
June 15, 2008 |
| • |
June 22, 2008 |
| • |
June 29, 2008 |
| • |
July 06, 2008 |
| • |
July 13, 2008 |
| • |
July 20, 2008 |
| • |
August 03, 2008 |
| • |
August 10, 2008 |
| • |
August 17, 2008 |
| • |
August 24, 2008 |
| • |
August 31, 2008 |
| • |
September 07, 2008 |
| • |
September 14, 2008 |
| • |
September 21, 2008 |
| • |
September 28, 2008 |
| • |
October 05, 2008 |
| • |
October 12, 2008 |
| • |
October 19, 2008 |
| • |
October 26, 2008 |
| • |
November 02, 2008 |
| • |
November 09, 2008 |
| • |
November 16, 2008 |
| • |
November 30, 2008 |
| • |
December 07, 2008 |
| • |
December 21, 2008 |
| • |
December 28, 2008 |
| • |
February 15, 2009 |
| • |
February 22, 2009 |
| • |
April 12, 2009 |
| • |
April 19, 2009 |
| • |
April 26, 2009 |
| • |
May 03, 2009 |
| • |
May 10, 2009 |
| • |
May 17, 2009 |
| • |
May 24, 2009 |
| • |
May 31, 2009 |
| • |
June 07, 2009 |
| • |
June 14, 2009 |
| • |
June 21, 2009 |
| • |
July 05, 2009 |
| • |
July 12, 2009 |
| • |
July 19, 2009 |
| • |
August 02, 2009 |
| • |
August 30, 2009 |
| • |
September 06, 2009 |
| • |
September 20, 2009 |
| • |
October 04, 2009 |
| • |
October 11, 2009 |
| • |
October 18, 2009 |
| • |
November 08, 2009 |
| • |
November 15, 2009 |
| • |
November 22, 2009 |
| • |
November 29, 2009 |
| • |
December 27, 2009 |
| • |
January 03, 2010 |
| • |
January 10, 2010 |
| • |
January 17, 2010 |
| • |
January 24, 2010 |
| • |
January 31, 2010 |
| • |
March 14, 2010 |
| • |
March 21, 2010 |
| • |
March 28, 2010 |
| • |
April 04, 2010 |
| • |
April 18, 2010 |
| • |
April 25, 2010 |
|
|
| SOFTBALL LINKS |
|
|
|
43 Thoughts
by Dave
Thursday, April 22, 2010
I think I have already told you that my state has made the leap (bad joke) to the new 43 foot pitching distance this year, one year ahead of the mandated change. Hopefully, yours has too. It has changed the game in at least 43 ways. I like it. I have too many thoughts about this to write about in one article so I'll stick with the most important reasons I think the change is really good for the game. It now takes 9 players to make a good high school softball team.
There is a girl out there (actually, I can think of many) who is playing varsity ball for the 4th straight year. She's an outfielder. From the day she made varsity, her team has had an outstanding ace pitcher. That pitcher mows down hitters in her sleep. I don't know about her average number of K's, but let's say it is almost 10-12 a game. (Our state's career strikeout record was around 1,300 at the end of the 40 foot period. In a career filled with 20-30 game seasons, that means the average number for the record holder was something like 10-15 per game.) That means, on our girl's team, less than half the outs were recorded in the field.
The particular girl we are talking about played every inning at one of the outfield positions. During a 30 game year, she made a play on exactly one ball. If we were to extrapolate that one year, she made 4 plays in 120 games, about 820 innings, or about 2,500 outs. FOUR PLAYS! She made up 11 percent of her team's defense and participated in point-one percent of the outs!
This kid is a marvelous athlete. She trains year round. She does strength work, flexibility stuff, and speed and agility. She loves to track down fly balls and has someone hitting them to her whenever she can find a partner. In practices, she might see 4 balls hit to her inside of one minute, often for 20 minutes at a time. Before each and every game, she'll generally warm up with more than four balls being hit to her. She works hard to be the best outfielder she can be. And for what? One stinkin' ball hit to her in the thirteenth game of the year? 4 lousy balls hit to her during her entire career?
That was then, this is now. I've been to see many games pitched from 43 feet. The number of strikeouts has been cut by more than half. There are still strikeouts. Sometimes there are a lot of them. Some pitchers remain dominant to a large degree. : But even dominant pitchers are not experiencing the number of strikeouts they have in the past. They get hit, sometimes fairly hard. Pressure has been put on the defenses and, for the most part, they are enjoying that!
A kid who works hard for four years can expect to see maybe one ball, maybe more, every game. If an outfielder cannot field a fly, a line drive, etc., she should maybe look for work elsewhere. Good fielders are shining. Poor ones are making errors.
I would say that in a fictional specimen game which might have ended 1-0 in 10 innings last year, that same game probably ends 4-2 or something like that today. The TEAM that is better often wins. The TEAM which has less defensive ability, is maybe not coached as well, or which does not have that mental toughness to make the plays when the pressure is on, often loses. The team which last year might have won all its games because they possessed the best pitcher, catcher, and shortstop while trying to merely hide lesser players at other positions, this year is suffering unexpected losses. That's not to say they lose a lot but they do need their whole team to play well in order to pull out games aga9inst good competition.
Of course, the other side of that is the all star pitcher who does not have anyone behind her is struggling. But on the other hand, the very good, well coached team that has merely an above average pitcher can compete. It boils down to what it should boil down to. High school softball teams need some talent, to be well prepared, and to play hard in order to win. It is much more enjoyable to watch but not because scores are higher. It is more enjoyable to watch because there is so much more action. I'll take a 1-0 game in which there are no strikeouts over one 8-7 in which most outs come from the K.
I am one of those purists who still loves an old fashioned pitchers duel in either baseball or softball. But the value of that experience is very much diminished when every game I go to watch is a duel. I don't mind when I happen to be watching two of the best pitchers in the area, state or country plow down hitters. But when some run of the mill pitcher throwing 50-55 with little movement and no change of speed is doing it just like the girl throwing UFOs at 60-65, something is wrong.
It was bad when varsity softball players were sometimes required to react to pitches faster than MLB batters and always much faster than the boys on varsity baseball. The girls may still have to have quicker reactions than the boys but right now, I'd have to say that they are hitting the pitches, even fast ones into play. This is good for developing the hitters but it is far better for developing the fielders. And, truth be told, it really helps the pitchers to develop too!
When a pitcher can throw a plain vanilla fastball past 7 out of 9 hitters, she does not have to work, either physically or mentally. When she must hit her spots, move the ball around, change speeds, and out-think the opposition, well, then she is pitching. When a pitcher has to pitch, she gets better.
It seemed odd to me, before I gave it much thought, that there were so many strikeouts in fastpitch softball. I guess I convinced myself that this had to do with the ability of pitchers. But when I saw kids who were apparently nothing special throw pitches of the same speed to approximately the same spots, over and over again, I started wondering what was wrong with softball hitting. Actually, a bunch of baseball hitting instructors have said the same over the years. Now it seems a little more clear to me that the hitters are not nearly as bad as I once thought. It also is clear to me that many pitchers are not nearly as good as I once thought they were.
As I alluded to earlier, the evaluation of the move to 43 feet cannot really be done based on the scores of games. They are up but that is not the issue. It must be looked at with an eye towards how many defensive players are actually involved in the game. I'[d have to say that more girls than ever before are having their performances contribute to final results. In short, the quality of our sport, its ability to entertain, is about the number of balls hit into play. The best way to evaluate that is based upon the number of strikeouts. That has been drastically reduced. And the corresponding quality of our game has been drastically increased. At least, that's my opinion.
Permanent Link: 43 Thoughts
 
Bunt & Run or Run & Bunt
by Dave
Thursday, April 22, 2010
I've been away from the blog for a while. I know it has been too long but I am in observation mode. There are a ton of games around now as age group travel ball gets into full gear and the school ball season rolls along towards championship season. In all levels of play, I am aware that "baserunning" often decides games. But "baserunning" is an overly broad topic. It really encompasses almost everything on the offensive side of the game including and especially the short game. While the high school games I have observed are beginning to demonstrate a decreased value to the short game due to the increased pitching distance, it is still an important tool. While it used to determine the outcome of most competitive games, it still can determine such. In age group play at 14U and lower ages, the short game is still absolutely key. And within this aspect of the game, I have often seen what I think is a critical fundamental mistake.
When a team finds itself in a sacrifice situation, usually it looks something like this: The game is close, say 0-0, 1-0, 2-0, 2-1. One run will put one team up, tie the game or maybe expand the lead to 3 so as to force the opponent into different choices when it is on offense. A batter walks or gets a hit with one or no outs. The next batter comes up and is signaled to bunt. Sometimes she gets it down, sometimes she does not.
We have discussed the subject of bunting at length. Every single player ought to be able to put down a bunt when needed. It doesn't matter if you are hitting .500 with mostly extra-base hits or loads of home runs. At some point, your team is going to face a tight situation and need you to get one down. But we've been over and over that and it is not the fundamental issue of the day.
Many girls will be told to sacrifice and come out with a drag bunt. Generally, when male coaches see that, they go nuts. Often they are right to complain at the batter that "you were supposed to sacrifice, not bunt for a hit." I, too, see that as a fundamental mistake but I have to admit that not everyone would agree. Jessica Mendoza, for one, notes that she always felt more comfortable dragging. She was not good at bunting in the conventional sacrifice manner. She was a very good drag bunter and very often had successful sacrifices on drag bunts. So I suppose there is some room for disagreement on this fundamental issue. And, again, this is not the fundamental of the day.
The fundamental of the day involves the actions of the baserunner who is being moved. Most often, I see a girl, say at first, get off the bag like she would on any other play, freeze, and then watch to see what happens on the bunt. If the ball is popped into the air, she may even take a step back towards the bag before waiting to see what actually happens to the ball. If the bunt is done "angle down," obviously going to hit the dirt, she may turn tail and run all out. She watches the fielder covering the bag to see if there is an incoming throw and slides if she thinks there is. The real fun occurs when the ball is struck fairly solid and, for a tenth of a second, the baserunner is not sure whether it will go up or down. She holds for that one tenth and then acts in accordance with what the ball does.
This sort of baserunning play is really what should be called "bunt and run" because it involves no particular unusual act on the part of the baserunner until the bunt takes place, until ball and bat collide. 99 times out of 100 pure sacrifices, this is what happens, at least in the games I have watched. They are "bunt and run" plays, bunt first, run second.
If a squeeze is the play of the moment, it seems like about 50/50 between the bunt and run, and the run and bunt. A squeeze with bunt and run is a "safety squeeze." A squeeze with run and bunt is a "suicide squeeze." A third kind of play happens when a team does what I'll call a "double safety squeeze" which involves the runner getting off third, waiting for the bunt, and then waiting for the fielder to attempt to throw out the bunter at first. This is really not a squeeze at all and is a somewhat unaggresive play. It often works in 12U travel ball, sometimes backfires in 14U, works only against poorly prepared 16U or 18U teams, and shouldn't happen much beyond that, although, quite often, a weak throwing, poorly drilled first or second baseman is incapable of making the play to home as it should be executed.
What troubles me at the moment is the tendency of most teams to use run and bunt only on suicide squeezes. The team that aggressively squeezes whenever the opportunity presents, many times does not play so aggressively on sacrifice situations when the run first, bunt second approach is highly advisable and successful every time your bunters have been well prepared. This seems insane to me. You've just got to run before the bunt against some teams despite the risks.
It occurs to me that nobody wants to be doubled up at any time. But this is almost unavoidable. I can't count the number of times when some baserunner got off the bag, then took off on a very hard hit, stopped as everybody in the place yelled because the SS made a diving catch and now has an opportunity for the DP, and then looked as if she would like to die as the throw was made, doubling her off. Then her parents (maybe a few others!) started screaming at her from the sidelines.
This dynamic occurs very often in my world, whether it is my team getting doubled up, my team making the DP, or some game I am watching for the heck of it. I just don't understand why people get so upset when some kid makes a great play which allows her to double the runner. It just happens and it is nobody's fault, not the base coach, not the runner, nobody. But every time it happens, it produces an even greater aversion to being doubled off for that k9id, her coach, for everyone. The coaches, all of the kids in the dugout of the team at bat, and everybody else in the place watching or participating in the game thinks, "I'm glad that wasn't me." The kid who gets doubled up vows that this will never happen again, assuming I live through the day.
This avoidance of being doubled off at all costs seems to make sense, doesn't it? It is a rally killer. It seems like it can make you lose. We're at 0-0 in the 4th and finally get a runner on base. Somebody finally hits a good shot but it gets caught. The runner at first is doubled off. Those are our last baserunners in that game and we go on to lose 1 zip. That play lost us the game, right? No it didn't. Lots of other plays and at bats lost us the game. That was just an unfortunate accident.
Worse still is when a sacrifice is called and the baserunner misjudges the ball off the bat. She gets off, waits for contact, sees it and runs. The only problem is the balled was popped right at the 3B! Double play, get off the bases, you!
I get weirded out when I see people getting upset on plays like this. Oh, my first reaction is something like "how did you get doubled off? Weren't you paying attention?" But then my better nature kicks in as I remember all the people I have seen doubled off. I also recognize that if the SS or 3B hadn't made a good play and instead merely knocked the ball down and then got the runner moving from first to second because she got a late jump, I would be just as upset and so would everyone else.
What bearing does this have on bunt and run, run and bunt? Is that not obvious?
Any very good team, one you are hopefully going to see as you make your way through better tournaments, is going to have practiced getting the lead runner on sacrifices. If they have significant talent on defense, they are going to kill some of the lead runners you tried to move and make your team's sacrifice attempt into an out you handed them on a platter. You'll be left thinking, "gee whiz, we haven't had many baserunners and even when we do, we can't move them!" You'll be mentally defeated.
Some teams will attempt to play things in a manner they see as aggressive. The coach at third will signal the baserunner to steal and the batter to sacrifice. The thought is, this is basically the same thing as a run and bunt. But you have still left your baserunner with her natural aversion to being doubled off. She is only going to have .5 of a second to get off the base and then she'll see or hear the contact. That makes her just over 10 feet from the bag as your bunter taps the ball. If she is one of those good kids, she is going to put her head down and steal like you envisioned. But as soon as she hears or sees the ball hit bat, she is going to freeze in near panic. What if the bunt goes into the air and is caught? I am going to get doubled off. I don't want that to happen! And that is exactly what you do not want her to be thinking.
As a coach, you really need to explain the difference between a bunt and run, and a run and bunt. You need to explain that the run and bunt is a deliberate strategy which is being practiced because there are going to be times when we cannot bunt and run, when we cannot count on being able to steal a base, when the likelihood of a passed ball or wild pitch is about as likely as the snack bar serving sushi. Sometimes, we are going to get into a tight game and we will need the runner at first or second to run and not worry about the bunt being a bad one, popped into the air. When this happens and the runner is doubled off, it is the fault of the play call, not of the baserunner.
Does this make sense to you? If not, I'm not explaining it correctly. There are going to be times when, maybe you are playing a top 10 or 50 (on a national basis) team and they are able to almost completely shut down bunt and run because they are that good. They have great pitchers. But so do you. You get only a handful of baserunners in the game but your kids are playing this thing to a stalemate. If you can get a runner to second or third, the next kid just might get that critical base hit and provide you the 1-0 lead you may be able to hold onto. But if you try to bunt and run, all you will end up with is another out and a runner at the same base.
Sometimes, when you are playing very good teams, they do not even look to make sure they can get the lead runner. Instead, they are so confident of their ability that they simply always try to get her. Sometimes such a team has a play which requires the fielders to go after the lead runner on sacrifices. If a coach gets overly confident in his or her team's ability to nail the lead runner, he or she may be in a bad habit of automatically calling that play. It has worked the last 20 times, why not now?
There is a very good possible outcome when you go with run and bunt against such teams. It is entirely possible that your runner will beat the throw because she has that slight edge of not waiting to see ball hit ground. If you are in a sacrifice situation, you run and bunt, the play is made on the lead runner, and she is safe, you may just demoralize your opponent. Like I said, maybe they have gotten the lead out the last 20 times, maybe every time they have tried it this year. Your team beats them at their own game. Now they might just think, "oh no! We have finally met a team which is better than us!!"
Of course, let's not forget that by using run and bunt, we are taking a risk. I hope that your bunters can get one down. If they tend to pop it into the air, well, your risk goes up. But that is neither the fault of the runner nor the fault of the play. That is the fault of your bunting instruction and preparation.
It is important to note that, just like the suicide squeeze, assuming your opponent has a very good catcher on whom you cannot steal, the batter must get the bat on the ball when you run and bunt. She can foul it off. She cannot pop it up to the catcher or another fielder. She must make every attempt to protect the runner.
Your batters should be taught that if your team does a run and bunt, and the hitter absolutely cannot so much as tap the ball, she still needs to make that bunt attempt with the bat and make sure that the bat crosses within the receiving view of the catcher. You are not looking for out and out interference but rather a healthy amount of distraction. If the pitch is eye high and the hitter cannot possibly get it down, remember, the catcher is going to catch that ball in just about the perfect position to throw out our runner. We have to foul it off and, if we cannot, we have to at least have our bat cross the catcher's field of view. This may be enough to cause her to miss the ball, however slightly, or perhaps make a poor throw. But we cannot allow the catcher to merely experience an iteration of throw-out the runner practice.
Batters cannot feel as if they are able to return to the dugout innocent of any charges because "there was no way I could bunt that pitch." If they do not even put their bats in front of the catcher and get a strike on them because they went, they have failed. It wasn't the baserunner's fault that she got thrown out on a failed steal attempt. It was the batter's fault for not protecting the runner.
Well, that's pretty much it. This is an easy fundamental concept. But unfortunately, I seldom see run and bunt utilized. Everybody seems to use it only in suicide situations. When they do use it for sacrifices, they typically do so by invoking a steal and bunt simultaneously without ever cluing in their players. That is not the best of all possible situations because your baserunners still have the natural aversion to being doubled off which may cause the momentary hesitation that gets her thrown out. Instead, explain to your team what the difference between bunt and run, and run and bunt is. Then you'll be able to execute it when necessary. It may win you a critical game. You may also want to explain this to the parents so they don't yell at their kids should they be the ones who get doubled up every once in a while!Labels: baserunning, Bunt, coaching, game strategy
Permanent Link: Bunt & Run or Run & Bunt
|
|
|
