I've seen from personal experience pitchers step it up after they've had runners on base after walking them. If you remove a pitcher every time she walks a batter you will never know if she is capable of handling the tough situations that she will eventually face at some point in her career.I've seen it make some pitchers and break some. The ones that are able to work themselves out of a bind seem to mature right before your eyes.I like your analysis.
mental aspect
- Thread starter bigboyk
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
Heaven forbid that a child should experience disappointment. Her fragile world might fall apart to be taken out of a softball game.
Oh, sure...you pull your ace pitcher after she has retired 12 in a row because she is losing her cool (whatever that means).
In other words, you pull pitchers randomly, based upon some nebulous factors you can't articulate. So, your pitchers are clueless as to why they are getting pulled. The end result is that you end up with a bunch of confused, frustrated kids.
What happens when a coach follows a specific, well-known, reasonable standard for anything and then benches players for failing to meet the standards? The players start working on their own to meet the standard.
Nobody hits the ball where you play?
Last edited:
- Oct 22, 2009
- 1,779
- 0
Uh, what do you consider losing her cool? Would that be her body language?
If that is the case then my DD would have been pulled out many many games that she won.
I had a weird kid. When she was younger, everyone said she was a robot pitcher. You couldn't tell if she was happy or sad or mad. If she was winning, losing it didn't matter--emotionless--.
Sometime during her high school years, that changed. You still never saw her happy or sad, but oh yeah, you KNEW when she was MAD. And when she was mad, she NEVER lost control. It's when she was relaxed that mistakes were made.
During her soph yr in college her coach once asked her to chill the body language, stop showing so much emotion. So she did, then the coach said, nevermind, I realize now I can relax more when I can see how focused you are.
Slugger, I notice you are a super moderator. I got the condescension. I take it this is now the preferred way to disagree on this forum?
To address your misgivings, let me first say that I could and probably should have clarified that the disappointment was meant to be directed at the coach who sets expectations such as a walk limit. The last sentence of the paragraph speaks directly to the player: it puts them at a disadvantage.
“In other words, you pull pitchers randomly, based upon some nebulous factors you can't articulate. So, your pitchers are clueless as to why they are getting pulled. The end result is that you end up with a bunch of confused, frustrated kids.”
Did you read the last sentence in the paragraph? “A coach helps a player to understand why the decision was made and helps the player learn from the experience. “ That is the essence of coaching versus managing.
I agree up to a point with this statement. “What happens when a coach follows a specific, well-known, reasonable standard for anything and then benches players for failing to meet the standards? The players start working on their own to meet the standard.”
In fact, I would find a discussion of what that standard might be to be very interesting if conducted without sniping and contentious statements. I would continue to argue that concrete limits such as 4 walks and you’re pulled, hitting below .200 and you’re on the bench etc. would not be part of a reasonable standard. The difference is that a player who knows they will get pulled if they walk 4 batters is operating under a threat. All too often that means a pitcher will be under the threat of getting pulled if they walk 1 batter and that places the player at a disadvantage regardless of how they perform.
It is far better, in my opinion, to have general standards such as those for a quality at bat. A softball game, like a battlefield, is a fluid environment. Results happen because a player lives in the moment and follows a proven process. There is no developmental benefit in threatening players with absolute limits or expectations unless one is developing circus animals that only perform when threatened. But, having general standards means a coach may, from time to time appear to be making arbitrary decisions. That is when the coaching really begins.
To clarify a couple of additional points, I specifically used the words “lost her cool” as a general statement. It could mean throwing a temper tantrum; it could also mean no overt emotional outburst. For example, a pitcher abruptly starts falling behind in counts and is consistently shaking off pitches. A coach may deem these actions as the pitcher “losing her cool” and decide to pull her. A coach may be playing a hunch, it might have happened several times before with the pitcher, it may be something unique and out of character for the ace pitcher, the coach may determine that this is just not the time to let her work through it. Every one of these reasons for pulling a pitcher is an opinion that is to some degree arbitrary and hopefully based of the coach’s analysis of the situation and what is in the best interest of the team and the individual players.
Obviously it is unlikely that a coach will pull a pitcher who has retired 12 in row unless there is some glaringly obvious reason. Slugger, I’ll bet you understood that was not what I was suggesting. So, why the contentious statements?
The two examples I mentioned were to provide a contrast. If a coach sets an arbitrary walk limit, then the second pitcher has to be pulled because she walked 4 batters even though she was working through the situation while the ace pitcher may not have met the metric for being pulled even though the coach knew it was time. So, yes the decisions a coach makes may appear arbitrary at times. A manager executes policy, or threats as the case may be. A coach evaluates the fluid environment of a game, season, of the teams immediate needs, and of each individuals overall development – sometimes those decisions may appear arbitrary and that is where a true coach coaches.
In my original post I twice mentioned that a player that is worried about the consequences of walking another batter, or any other veiled threat to their future playing time, is playing at a disadvantage. That is the point. After a certain level of play everyone knows their position is performance based. Hopefully every player learns to tuck that thought away in the moment. Shoving a reminder in a pitcher’s face that they’ll get pulled if they walk another batter puts it front and center and will often take away some of the focus from right here, right now. It is every bit as dangerous as a hitter hoping they don’t strike out again like last time. It’s not coaching, it’s threatening. It probably works for some but it is not necessary for a player to learn how to be mentally tough.
Slugger, four out of five comments in your post were clearly condescending and contentious. I thought there had been strong suggestion that this was not to be tolerated on this forum. Super moderator, moderate thyself.
To address your misgivings, let me first say that I could and probably should have clarified that the disappointment was meant to be directed at the coach who sets expectations such as a walk limit. The last sentence of the paragraph speaks directly to the player: it puts them at a disadvantage.
“In other words, you pull pitchers randomly, based upon some nebulous factors you can't articulate. So, your pitchers are clueless as to why they are getting pulled. The end result is that you end up with a bunch of confused, frustrated kids.”
Did you read the last sentence in the paragraph? “A coach helps a player to understand why the decision was made and helps the player learn from the experience. “ That is the essence of coaching versus managing.
I agree up to a point with this statement. “What happens when a coach follows a specific, well-known, reasonable standard for anything and then benches players for failing to meet the standards? The players start working on their own to meet the standard.”
In fact, I would find a discussion of what that standard might be to be very interesting if conducted without sniping and contentious statements. I would continue to argue that concrete limits such as 4 walks and you’re pulled, hitting below .200 and you’re on the bench etc. would not be part of a reasonable standard. The difference is that a player who knows they will get pulled if they walk 4 batters is operating under a threat. All too often that means a pitcher will be under the threat of getting pulled if they walk 1 batter and that places the player at a disadvantage regardless of how they perform.
It is far better, in my opinion, to have general standards such as those for a quality at bat. A softball game, like a battlefield, is a fluid environment. Results happen because a player lives in the moment and follows a proven process. There is no developmental benefit in threatening players with absolute limits or expectations unless one is developing circus animals that only perform when threatened. But, having general standards means a coach may, from time to time appear to be making arbitrary decisions. That is when the coaching really begins.
To clarify a couple of additional points, I specifically used the words “lost her cool” as a general statement. It could mean throwing a temper tantrum; it could also mean no overt emotional outburst. For example, a pitcher abruptly starts falling behind in counts and is consistently shaking off pitches. A coach may deem these actions as the pitcher “losing her cool” and decide to pull her. A coach may be playing a hunch, it might have happened several times before with the pitcher, it may be something unique and out of character for the ace pitcher, the coach may determine that this is just not the time to let her work through it. Every one of these reasons for pulling a pitcher is an opinion that is to some degree arbitrary and hopefully based of the coach’s analysis of the situation and what is in the best interest of the team and the individual players.
Obviously it is unlikely that a coach will pull a pitcher who has retired 12 in row unless there is some glaringly obvious reason. Slugger, I’ll bet you understood that was not what I was suggesting. So, why the contentious statements?
The two examples I mentioned were to provide a contrast. If a coach sets an arbitrary walk limit, then the second pitcher has to be pulled because she walked 4 batters even though she was working through the situation while the ace pitcher may not have met the metric for being pulled even though the coach knew it was time. So, yes the decisions a coach makes may appear arbitrary at times. A manager executes policy, or threats as the case may be. A coach evaluates the fluid environment of a game, season, of the teams immediate needs, and of each individuals overall development – sometimes those decisions may appear arbitrary and that is where a true coach coaches.
In my original post I twice mentioned that a player that is worried about the consequences of walking another batter, or any other veiled threat to their future playing time, is playing at a disadvantage. That is the point. After a certain level of play everyone knows their position is performance based. Hopefully every player learns to tuck that thought away in the moment. Shoving a reminder in a pitcher’s face that they’ll get pulled if they walk another batter puts it front and center and will often take away some of the focus from right here, right now. It is every bit as dangerous as a hitter hoping they don’t strike out again like last time. It’s not coaching, it’s threatening. It probably works for some but it is not necessary for a player to learn how to be mentally tough.
Slugger, four out of five comments in your post were clearly condescending and contentious. I thought there had been strong suggestion that this was not to be tolerated on this forum. Super moderator, moderate thyself.
Batsics--just to clarify my earlier post--the reason I set a walk limit on my pitchers last year was that as first year pitchers I felt that it would be easier on them and their parents to know that there was a point beyond which they should not expect to continue ptiching in an inning. I use the 4 walks as a barometer, and a reminder to myself that this girl probably isn't getting it done. Four walks invariably means at least one run in without the offense having to do anything. I never stood on the side and reminded (or threatened, as you put it) a pitcher that she was getting close to her walk limit, and I'd say, most of the time, once a girl has walked 4 in an inning, she's looking for some help. Nobody on my team is trying to scare a player into performing. If anything, I tend to stay with pitchers too long--if they're getting the ball over the plate and getting hit, I'll leave them in so that they can learn to get out of the situation.
Travel ball isn't rec ball, either, even at the "B" level. The girls who play on my team are looking to compete and improve every game. They expect to perform, whatever position or situation they are in. When they don't, they should expect a consequence. Strike out looking four times in a game, and you're unlikely to lead off next game. Drop four balls at first, and expect that someone else may get a shot there next game. Walk a bunch of batters, and let someone else see if she can do better. Nobody's getting sent home or banished to the bench for the rest of the weekend. Nobody on my team is excoriating players on the field or off. I take some exception to your assumption that my approach must be threatening if it it includes any kind of consequence that might be in the back of the player's head when she's on the field. You seem to assume that there is no encouragement, support, or teaching going on. You're wrong. I didn't really think I needed to include all that in the original post, as I figured it was kind of a given for anyone who cares enough to spend time learning and discussing on this board. All I wanted to do in the original post was get a sense of how far most coaches will go with a pitcher who is struggling with control. I get your point that you don't agree with setting a definite number for walks. I didn't think it was necessary to villify the approach, though.
Travel ball isn't rec ball, either, even at the "B" level. The girls who play on my team are looking to compete and improve every game. They expect to perform, whatever position or situation they are in. When they don't, they should expect a consequence. Strike out looking four times in a game, and you're unlikely to lead off next game. Drop four balls at first, and expect that someone else may get a shot there next game. Walk a bunch of batters, and let someone else see if she can do better. Nobody's getting sent home or banished to the bench for the rest of the weekend. Nobody on my team is excoriating players on the field or off. I take some exception to your assumption that my approach must be threatening if it it includes any kind of consequence that might be in the back of the player's head when she's on the field. You seem to assume that there is no encouragement, support, or teaching going on. You're wrong. I didn't really think I needed to include all that in the original post, as I figured it was kind of a given for anyone who cares enough to spend time learning and discussing on this board. All I wanted to do in the original post was get a sense of how far most coaches will go with a pitcher who is struggling with control. I get your point that you don't agree with setting a definite number for walks. I didn't think it was necessary to villify the approach, though.
Having a 'walk' limit is perfectly normal. If a girl can't cope with having that limit, she'll never be a good pitcher.
Just wanted to post my own mental win from yesterday. Grand final, we had it won in the first dig (6 runs in) after four and a half digs we were up 11-1. Obviously we want to finish it on mercy rule. First two batter out. Next batter bunts to me and I just miss getting her out (though half our supporters thought I got her, the call went against me) The next batter puts a floating high ball up that our short-stop misses. (hard catch, it was windy as hell) So runners on third and second and the clean up batter walks up. To say my nerves were getting the best of me was an understatement! Finished the game with a K2! Very, very proud of myself for that (I've never been good with nerves) We would have won regardless but I was really happy that I was able to keep them pretty much scoreless the entire game. (should have been a shut out but my short stop made two errors in the first dig which let a run home. She's really bad with nerves every year. Such is the game though!)
Just wanted to post my own mental win from yesterday. Grand final, we had it won in the first dig (6 runs in) after four and a half digs we were up 11-1. Obviously we want to finish it on mercy rule. First two batter out. Next batter bunts to me and I just miss getting her out (though half our supporters thought I got her, the call went against me) The next batter puts a floating high ball up that our short-stop misses. (hard catch, it was windy as hell) So runners on third and second and the clean up batter walks up. To say my nerves were getting the best of me was an understatement! Finished the game with a K2! Very, very proud of myself for that (I've never been good with nerves) We would have won regardless but I was really happy that I was able to keep them pretty much scoreless the entire game. (should have been a shut out but my short stop made two errors in the first dig which let a run home. She's really bad with nerves every year. Such is the game though!)
Sluggers / ang4yanks, Agree with both of you but you are each talking about two different groups of players, HS and higher versus 12U which the tread was originally directed to. At the 12U level, and I coach a 12U and 14U travel team, the 12U have much more latitude on walks. My pitchers at that level are still pushing to find how hard they can throw, 14U still are but they are also working more on controlling their various pitches. I agree with and like ang4yanks take on handling players, especially the female athlete. They have my permission to fail as long as they are pushing the envelope, giving me "A" effort and failing spectacularly. We learn from mistakes. Amy in Arizona mentioned a reference, mine is Creative Coaching by Jerry Lynch. Good read.
Dave,
I apologize; I was using the 4 ball limit as a generic and didn’t mean to be challenging you specifically. I can understand how you would view it that way and again apologize. I don’t assume that you’re not encouraging or that you are standing in the dugout threatening your players. I don’t think you have an unreasonable guideline.
I do believe that the policy itself is a threat. It can also be a trap and a crutch for the coach and the player particularly at the younger ages. Standing in the dugout screaming at players certainly increases the threat, but the threat exists even if the coach never mentions it and only follows policy.
I believe the how is much more important than the number itself. You state, “They expect to perform, whatever position or situation they are in. When they don't, they should expect a consequence. Strike out looking four times in a game, and you're unlikely to lead off next game. Drop four balls at first, and expect that someone else may get a shot there next game. Walk a bunch of batters, and let someone else see if she can do better.”
I would ask, how did she strike out? Why did she drop four balls, etc.? I don’t think there needs to be a consequence for a player having a bad game. I do think there should be consequences for a lack of effort and/or a negative or indifferent attitude. If a player strikes out four times I don’t think she should expect to be dropped from the lead off position if she was battling and things didn’t go her way.
Dave, I don’t think you’re part of the evil empire, I am arguing against the mindset of consequences. Sure, a player who can’t seem to get the job done is going to play less than one who does. The results tell some of the story, but the effort and attitude tells the whole story.
During the early years a pitcher who bowls eight pitches in a row should probably be pulled, even if it is her first two walks. Giving up a run is not the end of the world even if it is on the fourth walk if the pitcher is just missing and battling. If she works out of the situation and only gives up one run that may be the spark that motivates her. OTOH, the fourth walk may be the exact time to pull her. A pitcher who is looking for help after walking four probably should have come out after the third. It all depends.
I believe a coach who learns to read attitude and effort will be far more beneficial to a player’s development than one who primarily looks at results. I think specific policies and consequences can be a trap and a crutch. I think players often view it as punishment no matter how a coach spins it – as such it is a threat - one more strike out and the coach is probably going to bench me. Ask a dozen kids why they are hitting eighth or ninth.
Sure, someone has to ride the bench, someone has to hit ninth, and even the best pitchers have to get pulled. A results driven policy such as a walk limit doesn’t allow for a variety of intangibles. Sometimes a pitcher who is struggling with walks needs to keep plugging away and will figure it out. Sometimes a pitcher hits the rubber and just isn’t all there and there is nothing a coach can do. Sometimes a batter who struck out four times in the last game needs to know the coaches recognize she was giving max effort and that they have confidence in her by putting her right back in the next game. Sometime the effort just isn’t there and she may need to sit one out.
I apologize; I was using the 4 ball limit as a generic and didn’t mean to be challenging you specifically. I can understand how you would view it that way and again apologize. I don’t assume that you’re not encouraging or that you are standing in the dugout threatening your players. I don’t think you have an unreasonable guideline.
I do believe that the policy itself is a threat. It can also be a trap and a crutch for the coach and the player particularly at the younger ages. Standing in the dugout screaming at players certainly increases the threat, but the threat exists even if the coach never mentions it and only follows policy.
I believe the how is much more important than the number itself. You state, “They expect to perform, whatever position or situation they are in. When they don't, they should expect a consequence. Strike out looking four times in a game, and you're unlikely to lead off next game. Drop four balls at first, and expect that someone else may get a shot there next game. Walk a bunch of batters, and let someone else see if she can do better.”
I would ask, how did she strike out? Why did she drop four balls, etc.? I don’t think there needs to be a consequence for a player having a bad game. I do think there should be consequences for a lack of effort and/or a negative or indifferent attitude. If a player strikes out four times I don’t think she should expect to be dropped from the lead off position if she was battling and things didn’t go her way.
Dave, I don’t think you’re part of the evil empire, I am arguing against the mindset of consequences. Sure, a player who can’t seem to get the job done is going to play less than one who does. The results tell some of the story, but the effort and attitude tells the whole story.
During the early years a pitcher who bowls eight pitches in a row should probably be pulled, even if it is her first two walks. Giving up a run is not the end of the world even if it is on the fourth walk if the pitcher is just missing and battling. If she works out of the situation and only gives up one run that may be the spark that motivates her. OTOH, the fourth walk may be the exact time to pull her. A pitcher who is looking for help after walking four probably should have come out after the third. It all depends.
I believe a coach who learns to read attitude and effort will be far more beneficial to a player’s development than one who primarily looks at results. I think specific policies and consequences can be a trap and a crutch. I think players often view it as punishment no matter how a coach spins it – as such it is a threat - one more strike out and the coach is probably going to bench me. Ask a dozen kids why they are hitting eighth or ninth.
Sure, someone has to ride the bench, someone has to hit ninth, and even the best pitchers have to get pulled. A results driven policy such as a walk limit doesn’t allow for a variety of intangibles. Sometimes a pitcher who is struggling with walks needs to keep plugging away and will figure it out. Sometimes a pitcher hits the rubber and just isn’t all there and there is nothing a coach can do. Sometimes a batter who struck out four times in the last game needs to know the coaches recognize she was giving max effort and that they have confidence in her by putting her right back in the next game. Sometime the effort just isn’t there and she may need to sit one out.
- May 7, 2008
- 234
- 0
I would like to add that walking a batter(s) and giving up run(s) are obviously different. Also, an infield error cannot be held against a pitcher. The best thing that can happen to my dd is for her to get angry with herself. The angrier she is, the better she plays. Her face doesn't show the anger, but the rise in her momentum does. She is at an age now where she can evaluate for herself where the problem lies.
Amy in AZ...have I mentioned how adorable that child is (perhaps a left hander??)...
Amy in AZ...have I mentioned how adorable that child is (perhaps a left hander??)...
We don't have a specific walk limit (14U Travel). The pitchers and I understand that different situations yield different results. A pitcher may be having the best game of the year, but Blue isn't giving corners, or the low ball, or whatever her pitching strength is. The pitcher knows that although she may be throwing the ball very well, that the team is suffering the "squeeze" being applied by the umpire. I let her try to work it out, but not to the detriment of the team. It could be a case that the umpire simply needs to see a different look. In that case, it is difficult to put into play an absolute. But, if you have the absolute, it HAS to be employed. You cannot apply an absolute rule, like a maximum number of walks in an inning/game, randomly. It has to be applied in EVERY situation. For that reason alone, I don't use it. Respectful coaching will give the players the confidence to perform. The girls know that if I pull someone from any position (I once pulled my DD from right field for chasing a ball that she obviously couldn't catch up to with her outstretched glove in the air - bad form. She's a far better pitcher than a fielder
No one did that again) there is always a reason. The one thing they all accept is that an effort less than 100% will get some time on the bench. We recognize that not all will achieve the desired result (shoot a .500 batting average is pretty good) every time, but we expect the effort every game, every pitch, every at bat, every fielding attempt. That is my absolute, and the girls respond to it.
No one did that again) there is always a reason. The one thing they all accept is that an effort less than 100% will get some time on the bench. We recognize that not all will achieve the desired result (shoot a .500 batting average is pretty good) every time, but we expect the effort every game, every pitch, every at bat, every fielding attempt. That is my absolute, and the girls respond to it.
