Novice stats question

[MTK91]

I wouldn't worry about where she is compared to teammates. If you're going to use the stats for something, use them to judge how she is doing. You already know she needs to get better. Use your stats to judge how she's improving. Does it really matter is she has the 8th or 9th best BA when she has lots of room to improve?

No, just want to make sure she is not in over her head and/or dragging the team down.

 

[MTK91]

How many PAs or ABs until you really have a good sample? This is a summer team. 4 tournaments. 16 games.
Feel like sample is still small but probably about right, nonetheless.

 

[Sweet Lou]

No, just want to make sure she is not in over her head and/or dragging the team down.

A little bit of all. Pops to the infield and outfield. Ground balls to the infield. However, when she does hit it well, it a powerful hit. Not only is it strong but it is fast. I see some of the bigger girls with big hits but there is almost a slowness to the ball. She has a real strong and fast hit in there. That is upside…see if we can find that more.

Based on this I wouldn't worry. Just sounds like she need more reps to get her confidence and consistency. This goes to the other thread of her getting more reps at home outside of practice.

 

[MTK91]

Based on this I wouldn't worry. Just sounds like she need more reps to get her confidence and consistency. This goes to the other thread of her getting more reps at home outside of practice.

Thanks! If her confidence doesn't get shot, think she will keep trying.

 

[coachjwb]

Sample size is very important ... had you said it was based on 5 games, there is a lot of luck/randomness involved and stats are almost meaningless at that point. 16 games is a bigger sample no doubt, though I have still seen players that can't seem to catch a break. Another thing to track would be the trend ... like how have they done in the last 10 games. It can be hard to dig yourself out of a hole, and it can be misleading even to a coach is someone is doing much better or worse now than they did earlier.

 

[SoAZDad]

Sample size is very important ... had you said it was based on 5 games, there is a lot of luck/randomness involved and stats are almost meaningless at that point. 16 games is a bigger sample no doubt, though I have still seen players that can't seem to catch a break. Another thing to track would be the trend ... like how have they done in the last 10 games. It can be hard to dig yourself out of a hole, and it can be misleading even to a coach is someone is doing much better or worse now than they did earlier.

^^^^+1

And I have seen several teams where the stronger girls in the first half of the rec season slump in the second half, and some sleepers in the first half really came on strong in the second half and tourney.

 

[Little Angels Softball]

Stats are OK for some things but they are dirty little liars, as well. For example, I coach a very strong 12U "A" team that has a team batting average of .355. I have a hitter who is batting .377 and another who is hitting .338. If you were to look just at the averages, you might be tempted to say that the first player is a better hitter. But add in these stats:

Player #1 is hitting a paltry .114 against legit Class A 12U pitchers.
Player #2 is hitting .357 against bonafide #1 pitchers.

Player #1 has driven in 13 runs in 46 games.
Player #2 has driven in 38 runs in 48 games, with 17 of those RBI coming with two outs.

Player #1 has ROE 3 times.
Player #2 has ROE 14 times (translation: she hits the ball hard!).

Player #1 gets to play against the weakest teams when we happen to draw one.
Player #2 gets those games off.

How many runs have the ROEs alone accounted for by player #2? Player #2 has more two-out RBI than player #1 has total RBI. Player #2 is in against the top pitchers, all the time. Player #1 never faces them. Player #2 is never in against the weakest teams. Player #1 is always in against weak teams.

So, which do you think is the better hitter?

 

[CoogansBluff]

I'm skeptical of the significance of two-out, clutch, big-game kinda stats. Just think the sample is generally too small. While I didn't keep the numbers, it seemed my daughter didn't play well in big games last summer/fall, and this spring/summer, she's constantly getting big hits in big situations. But I honestly think it's largely random. That's just me, though. I know that the kinda folks who study this sort of thing in MLB generally conclude that there's no conclusive evidence of the existence of good clutch hitters.

 

[SCDad]

I used to focus on statistics when my DD was young.

Now, when older and the games more important, I focus on whether or not my DD had a positive influence on the outcome of the game. How many games has she "won".

There are plenty of players who go 3 for 4 against lessor teams in a 12-2 rout. Means very. very little. There are few players who have the game winning hit in a 2-1 dogfight.

Focus on her influence. In general, if you DD gets on base every game ... she is doing something right. If she gets on base twice a game ... great ... do that every game and you have a stud.

If DD goes 0-fer ... that sucks. Don't want that. To me, in softball, especially at the higher levels, it does not matter HOW she got on base. Just that she did. Sometimes statistics lie. Getting on base, having runs scored, getting RBI's is the gauge I use.

 

[NVfishing]

No, just want to make sure she is not in over her head and/or dragging the team down.

Does she look likes she belongs or is she a step slower than everyone around her?

My DD has a good obp. She doesn't hit hard but she's fast to first. She also has a good eye and doesn't swing at stuff out of the zone.