High School coach

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

Feb 20, 2020
377
63
In terms of judging how good their kid is in comparison to another player? Not from what I have seen. I also think most parent don't know much about the game..Which is fine. If my kid played field hockey I would just keep my mouth shut because I would have no clue..

That's an interesting point. How do you judge who is better on a softball field. Sometimes it's easy -- one player makes errors, the other doesn't. One player his .350, the other .200. But in lot of cases it comes down to the eye test, and the eye test of who happens to be watching or judging. For example, a girl might make a great dive at SS to stop a ball getting through. Another girl might have positioned herself better for that hit off the bat and make the play with ease. Which is better? A catcher who has a cannon and throws it every time even if she's got a 2nd who misses it, or a catcher without a cannon who doesn't want to sacrifice the base on the off chance the tag gets made? A girl who's got sprinter's speed to first but not great instincts or a girl who always watches the ball in the field and coaches so she knows what to do when she gets to first?

Or even in the example you gave. A girl throwing strikes shouldn't get pulled. A girl who walks can/should be, but just because a pitcher is getting hit doesn't mean she's failing, at least not at most levels. Would a coach rather have a pitcher who's walking more but not getting hit, or a pitcher who is getting hit but not walking anyone? That's a subjective decision, isn't it?

That's one of the problems wiht being a parent in this game. In basketball, you can see a kid missing, shots, not blocking out, committing dumb fouls. In football you can see someone miss block or tackles. But in this game and baseball, a lot of what is "good" is in the eye of the beholder.
 
Jun 8, 2016
16,118
113
That's an interesting point. How do you judge who is better on a softball field. Sometimes it's easy -- one player makes errors, the other doesn't. One player his .350, the other .200. But in lot of cases it comes down to the eye test, and the eye test of who happens to be watching or judging. For example, a girl might make a great dive at SS to stop a ball getting through. Another girl might have positioned herself better for that hit off the bat and make the play with ease. Which is better? A catcher who has a cannon and throws it every time even if she's got a 2nd who misses it, or a catcher without a cannon who doesn't want to sacrifice the base on the off chance the tag gets made? A girl who's got sprinter's speed to first but not great instincts or a girl who always watches the ball in the field and coaches so she knows what to do when she gets to first?
If it isn't obvious by the eye test (in which case the stats will likely line up with a sufficient sample size) who is better, when judged by somebody who isn't biased and knows what they are doing, then both players should be play. Not that hard.

For fielding, at high levels of play, errors/fielding % are usually a lousy way of determining how good a fielder is (which is why I was suspicious of the OP in terms of how she was describing OF play...). Cal Ripken and Ozzie Smith had essentially the same fielding % over their career. I don't think anybody would take Cal over Ozzie if we were talking purely fielding..
 
Last edited:
Sep 19, 2018
928
93
how often is it not totally about winning games? My oldest (in HS now), is not into sports but theater. Her freshman year, the director team was focused on putting out the best possible show. She has a major part. Her sophomore year, a new director team basically said, no underclassmen get major roles.

Is it possible that there might be some this going on? The coach feels like this is the last chance for upper classmen to play ball.
 
May 6, 2015
2,397
113
how often is it not totally about winning games? My oldest (in HS now), is not into sports but theater. Her freshman year, the director team was focused on putting out the best possible show. She has a major part. Her sophomore year, a new director team basically said, no underclassmen get major roles.

Is it possible that there might be some this going on? The coach feels like this is the last chance for upper classmen to play ball.
I was not saying the upperclassmen shouldnt play, but just because someone is one year ahead means those behind get no opportunities, not even a look? just plain dumb, no matter how you slice it. situation is more like the director saying every speaking part is to be handled by a seniors only , even if some seniors have to handle multiple roles, just because seniors are ahead of juniors, soph, frosh, etc.

or how about if a senior in a key role is just absolutely lousy one night. shouldnt the understudy get a chance (in a lot of productions I have seen, they have one night in the run where understudies get to perform, which makes them diligent in being prepared, and gets them experience).
 
Apr 20, 2015
961
93
If it isn't obvious by the eye test (in which case the stats will likely line up with a sufficient sample size) who is better, when judged by somebody who isn't biased and knows what they are doing, then both players should be play. Not that hard.

For fielding, at high levels of play, errors/fielding % are usually a lousy way of determining how good a fielder is (which is why I was suspicious of the OP in terms of how she was describing OF play...). Cal Ripken and Ozzie Smith had essentially the same fielding % over their career. I don't think anybody would take Cal over Ozzie if we were talking purely fielding..
This my DD is a high level SS with tremendous range who makes so many plays look easy that are actually really hard and not routine/reasonable effort plays but because she is so smooth she gets tagged with errors on balls other kids wouldn't get near. I'm fine with it but you're absolutely right fielding % doesn't tell the whole story

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 
Jun 8, 2016
16,118
113
This my DD is a high level SS with tremendous range who makes so many plays look easy that are actually really hard and not routine/reasonable effort plays but because she is so smooth she gets tagged with errors on balls other kids wouldn't get near. I'm fine with it but you're absolutely right fielding % doesn't tell the whole story

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Right that is why MLB uses advanced metrics to grade fielding now.
 
Mar 8, 2016
313
63
Parents almost always only see the the game through the viewpoint of their DD. When DD was a freshman she started the season in the #5 spot in the lineup. She proceeded to hit for the 3rd highest average on the team and 3rd highest slugging percentage. A junior was the returning clean-up hitter. DD out hit her by 150 points and out slugged her by 250 points. DD was frustrated by the fact that she never moved into the 4 hole. I tried to explain to her that the coach had to look at the impact of that move on the team as a whole. In the coaches judgement he may have thought moving the upperclassman out of the clean up spot may have damaged her confidence and caused her to hit worse. In his judgement the team was better off with her hitting 4th and dd hitting 5th. He may or not have been right but it was his decision to make and his judgement. DD was a better hitter by the numbers but it is a team game involving lots of teenage girls. There are often other factors that weigh into the decision making process that we are blind to with regard to our dds
 
Feb 10, 2018
496
93
NoVA
On our current travel team, the girls that have the highest fielding percentages--two of them perfect--are the girls that are defensively limited if not outright defensive liabilities. It's a combination of fewer chances and not being able to range far enough to make plays that most likely would be made by a higher caliber defender. Fielding percentage tells you something (our last travel team had a fielding percentage in the mid-800s and it was a weak defensive team), but maybe not so much about an individual player. Still, it is the only defensive stat that is tracked in GC.
 
Aug 10, 2016
686
63
Georgia
I actually went through all of our HS games and tallied up how many flyballs, line drives and pop ups were hit to the OF and compared to the number of actual catches just to see the diff in where the ball goes. I wish GC had a stat similar to that. Though it really depends on the scorer to determine which fielder might have been able to catch it.

For our 6 OFs the % caught was between 45% and 60% but CF had the most chances as you would expect. And that's another thing is that the CF has more room to cover so they also get a ton of easier catches that boost their #s. A ball hit on the line to RF or LF is always going to be a problem unless you're already playing on the line.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,469
Members
21,443
Latest member
sstop28
Top