Former catcher, Dan Wilson of the Mariners, has to be one of the best I have watched in the last 20 years. The guy was textbook with blocks.
The one thing I have heard from catching coaches is that blocking is the least thing a catcher will do, but it is the thing they are judged on the most.
The one thing I have heard from catching coaches is that blocking is the least thing a catcher will do, but it is the thing they are judged on the most.
I think YOCOACH and I see things very similar. There are 6 critical skills I use to rate catchers. Times are relative to age. These are not in order of importance:
1. Blocking - technique and attitude towards blocking. Ability to keep ball in front and close for opportunities to knee throw down or just keep runners at bay.
2. Receiving/Framing - the catchers responsibility is to get strikes for their pitcher through excellent framing within their body frame, their arm straight by meeting the ball, eyes level as possible and steady. Catching the outside of the ball and turning it in. Flexible enough to Froggie and get the low pitches and bring them up into the zone, yet athletic enough to pop up with no hands and catch a short popup, field a bunt, or throw down to any base from knees or feet athletically.
2. Speed to bunts - indicated by the 3 cone 5x10x5 shuttle and speed from stance and knees to the ball.
3. Pop-to-Pop - time is relative to age, but from knees and feet.
4. Field Presence - directing and controlling the game with their voice. Are they the Gladiator everyone comes to see? Do they win the crowd? Can they make game changing plays? Be intimidating to base runners?
5. Game Intelligence - what is his/her IQ and EI. Decision making speed and accuracy.
6. Leadership - do they have the ability to raise everyones kevel of play through their presence. Do they connect mentally with the pitcher? Other teammates (infielders)?
And while I agree with you wholeheartedly, let's be realistic when it comes to SB. Many coaches, even at the D3 level, are loathe to let their catchers call the game because their jobs depend upon a successful season or, at a minimum, a series of them. This is not MLB where the catchers spend countless hours studying "film" because it's part of their job description (because a college SB catcher, when not practicing is too busy trying to maintain grades, eat or shower) nor does a college SB season consist of 140+ games. Also, it's not TB where many coaches do it on the fly after looking at a few practice swings. By the same token, I wonder how many of the "Top level" TB coaches that we perennially see in the top 10 PGF/ASA finals each year let their catchers actually call the game as far as pitches go.
Pet Peeve Warning
If you've called games from the behind the plate, you understand how much less effective calling from the bench is. For those coaches who don't have the experience to make that comparison, I've still yet to hear any claim that THEY, with the benefit of all their notes/scouting reports/game plans, could not do a better job if they sat in the catcher's spot v. any spot in the dugout. IMO/IME, a serious freshman catcher who has been entrusted with calling pitches since age 12U (when for the most part it doesn't even matter what the hell you call because the pitcher can't consistently deliver it) and is provided with a wristband game plan for each hitter, will be more effective calling pitches than 95% of ALL college coaches from Day 1. And if the other 5% worked with the catcher to pass on their knowledge and experience, that catcher would be at least their equal before the end of year 1.
The $100M question I have is where and how did these college coaches (let alone travel coaches) develop their pitch calling expertise? Even if they pitched, most simply don't know what they don't know. Very unfortunate and myopic IMO.
I wonder how many of the "Top level" TB coaches that we perennially see in the top 10 PGF/ASA finals each year let their catchers actually call the game as far as pitches go.