Jump to content

Swing at Strikes


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Texsox said:

I agree with everything you are saying but can't figure out how it translates to actual coaching. Using the Ryan and Maddux examples, what are you aligning? The coach has those two guys in a bullpen session what should they have aligned? 

What makes sense to me is you have those two in AA, evaluate each individually and prioritize x number of things they need to work on to reach the MLB team. Each player's list will be different. Let's say there are six items. At some point there is enough progress that the player advances to AAA. 

In AA items 1, 3, 5, and 6 were the main concerns. Now they are in AAA and 2 and 4 move to the top. They still have the other four to continue to work on but the priority changes. 

A quality system to me should be able to develop a power pitcher and a control pitcher. It shouldn't have only one type of player they can develop. You need to develop guys that can hit for average and guys that hit for power. 

 

 

I agree with everything you say as well, especially the bolded two paragraphs. That's essentially a way more simple and elegant way of expressing what i was trying to describe with roving instructors, etc.
As for your question on alignment between the Ryan and Maddux examples, the alignment happens between the coaches at the different levels. Your third paragraph is exactly spot on to my thinking, only the specific items that each player would have the opportunity to maximize / develop at each level would likely change based on competition, coaching, physical maturity, etc., and that's where the serious thinking has to happen within the org.

Again, my key point is in alignment and buy-in at the org / coaching level. Having a "type" of pitcher that your organization specializes in helps to simplify the coaches' jobs, but at the end of the day, it's up to the farm system to maximize any assets.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

 

Once you are a professional getting paid in an organization if you have a coach trying to force his way on you then you must decide for yourself eventually your course of action for yourself. 

Would you say then a good organization would or wouldn't have one consistent approach throughout the organization?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Texsox said:

Would you say then a good organization would or wouldn't have one consistent approach throughout the organization?

 One consistent approach can mean many things to many people. I think there are certain ways to play the game that should be consistently taught such as patience . It is a team game and part of your job as a batter is to make the  pitcher work harder.  Part of your job as a starting pitcher is to get outs as efficiently as possible thus you stay in the game longer and you save the pen. Just as with hitting ,game situations may require a different approach. SO manly a lot of focus should be on how baseball  is a team game and always will be. It's important to take your teammates into consideration too when you hit. They want as many looks as they can get at how the pitcher is throwing that day.

But  changing swing mechanics ,arm angles and things of that nature you can only make suggestions when something isn't working for someone. I'd suggest small changes 1st , such as choking up, moving farther away or closer to the plate. stance , hand position before you start to change whole swings.

Plus you have to give an individual a certain amount of time to fail and be willing to try something new. Athletes do not like to change things that have been successful for them so some failure has to be involved to perhaps change their thinking on what could be done to get them to the next level. I don't think its wise to come right at a guy and say you'll never make it if you keep doing things your way. Patience works for coaches too.

Swinging a bat and throwing a ball where you want it to go has so many different movements involved. It's more of a science now with bio mechanics involved to see how stressful certain movements are to your body. Plus there are certainly many scientists who do not agree .

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you. I really enjoyed thinking about this. Whenever something seems so obvious and easy to me yet people don't seem to be doing it, I ask why? As much as we want to think so, we didn't corner the market on stupid baseball people. 

We know the system needs to be better. I think we all also know the answers can't be that easy or every system would be pumping out championship caliber players. We usually point to the same couple of franchises. Their coaches and front office people have left but haven't been able to replicate that same success elsewhere.

Another thought here. 

The goal is the system should be to produce a MLB players. So using 2nd base as an example. I really don't care if any of the current group of potential 2nd baseman ever put on a Sox uniform in Chicago. If they get traded for someone who does, or even if we trade 2nd for left and left for center and center for 2nd, we have someone on the roster. So I can't rank home grown roster fillers very highly as a yardstick. I'll trade most prospects for MLB ready. 

(I'm willing to change my mind on this next part), the first yardstick I think is valid is how well is the MLB roster? I can understand a strong roster at the top and thin below. 

A strong system but weak MLB team might sell some tickets and build fan support but do we really need to watch more guys falter between AAA and MLB before we suspect fools gold over 24 carat? 

BRING HIM UP!! BRING HIM UP!!

SEND HIM DOWN!! 

Of course the best of the best franchises have both. It won't happen in my lifetime. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sox OBP is 29th in MLB at .297, better only than Kansas City.

If you're thinking these numbers were skewed by the horrible April, they are also 29th over the past 30 days, with an even worse .284.

26th in launch angle, 30th in O-Swing

Pitching can't hold up long term enough to overcome this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Texsox said:

Thank you. I really enjoyed thinking about this. Whenever something seems so obvious and easy to me yet people don't seem to be doing it, I ask why? As much as we want to think so, we didn't corner the market on stupid baseball people. 

We know the system needs to be better. I think we all also know the answers can't be that easy or every system would be pumping out championship caliber players. We usually point to the same couple of franchises. Their coaches and front office people have left but haven't been able to replicate that same success elsewhere.

Another thought here. 

The goal is the system should be to produce a MLB players. So using 2nd base as an example. I really don't care if any of the current group of potential 2nd baseman ever put on a Sox uniform in Chicago. If they get traded for someone who does, or even if we trade 2nd for left and left for center and center for 2nd, we have someone on the roster. So I can't rank home grown roster fillers very highly as a yardstick. I'll trade most prospects for MLB ready. 

(I'm willing to change my mind on this next part), the first yardstick I think is valid is how well is the MLB roster? I can understand a strong roster at the top and thin below. 

A strong system but weak MLB team might sell some tickets and build fan support but do we really need to watch more guys falter between AAA and MLB before we suspect fools gold over 24 carat? 

BRING HIM UP!! BRING HIM UP!!

SEND HIM DOWN!! 

Of course the best of the best franchises have both. It won't happen in my lifetime. 

Just live healthy and outlast the POS loser owner! Hopefully the new billionaire owner will hire from the outside and steal the top executives from the elite winning teams.

I know it's been bad for awhile now, but I'm keeping my hopes up that some day with the new owner, we could actually be like the Dodgers or Rays and have both a great team and farm system at the same time.

We just need Reinsdorf gone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Kids Can Play said:

Just live healthy and outlast the POS loser owner! Hopefully the new billionaire owner will hire from the outside and steal the top executives from the elite winning teams.

I know it's been bad for awhile now, but I'm keeping my hopes up that some day with the new owner, we could actually be like the Dodgers or Rays and have both a great team and farm system at the same time.

We just need Reinsdorf gone!

While it's a step in the right direction let's look at Mark Cuban and the Mavs. In 23 years of ownership one championship and it took about 15 years to get there. And that's in basketball where fortunes seem to shift a lot quicker than other sports. 

There is so much wrong with this franchise that needs working on that it will take a long time to really fix it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Texsox said:

While it's a step in the right direction let's look at Mark Cuban and the Mavs. In 23 years of ownership one championship and it took about 15 years to get there. And that's in basketball where fortunes seem to shift a lot quicker than other sports. 

There is so much wrong with this franchise that needs working on that it will take a long time to really fix it. 

Having a new owner who is a rich billionaire like Cuban is not my point. Being a rich owner doesn't mean you will be successful, but its a start. 

My point all along...and I will use the Dodgers ownership again. Yes they are rich. However they are also very smart. They went out and recruited the best GM in baseball in 2015 in Andrew Friedman and made him president of baseball operations for the Dodgers with not only a bigger title and responsibility, but also a hefty salary increase. Look what Friedman has done to improve the Dodgers. They not only have won a WS, but went to a second WS under him. Plus if you look at the farm system rankings since Friedman came to the Dodgers, he has made them one of the best farm systems in the league yearly. This is not by luck, because he did exactly that with the Rays. He did that with the Rays because they didn't have the money to spend on free agents and always had one of the lowest payrolls in baseball. As a result, to be competitive, Friedman had to build a strong scouting, drafting and development system in the TB organization. He did that as well as any GM in baseball.

Keep in mind, if any new owner buys the Sox, it will be because they have made billions from their business operations to be able to afford owning a baseball team. It's also safe to say that most successful owners are usually successful because they understood how to build and grow their company. They commonly use "Best Practices" to get the best sales people, executives and other key personnel in their company.

My point all along has been, I am hoping and assuming the new owner will do like the Dodgers did...and apply "Best Practices" to go recruit the best front office baseball executives that money can buy. 

To your point on Mark Cuban, regardless of how rich or smart he is, maybe he didn't go find yet the Andrew Friedman of basketball for his Mavericks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Texsox said:

While it's a step in the right direction let's look at Mark Cuban and the Mavs. In 23 years of ownership one championship and it took about 15 years to get there. And that's in basketball where fortunes seem to shift a lot quicker than other sports. 

There is so much wrong with this franchise that needs working on that it will take a long time to really fix it. 

Cuban can't spend all his money on the Mavs because there's a salary cap. He can't offer players any more than any other owner. He does have the advantage of no state income tax in Texas, but he also has the disadvantage of trying to convince superstars, who are almost entirely black or European, to live in Dallas instead of New York, LA or Miami.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Texsox said:

Thank you. I really enjoyed thinking about this. Whenever something seems so obvious and easy to me yet people don't seem to be doing it, I ask why? As much as we want to think so, we didn't corner the market on stupid baseball people. 

We know the system needs to be better. I think we all also know the answers can't be that easy or every system would be pumping out championship caliber players. We usually point to the same couple of franchises. Their coaches and front office people have left but haven't been able to replicate that same success elsewhere.

Another thought here. 

The goal is the system should be to produce a MLB players. So using 2nd base as an example. I really don't care if any of the current group of potential 2nd baseman ever put on a Sox uniform in Chicago. If they get traded for someone who does, or even if we trade 2nd for left and left for center and center for 2nd, we have someone on the roster. So I can't rank home grown roster fillers very highly as a yardstick. I'll trade most prospects for MLB ready. 

(I'm willing to change my mind on this next part), the first yardstick I think is valid is how well is the MLB roster? I can understand a strong roster at the top and thin below. 

A strong system but weak MLB team might sell some tickets and build fan support but do we really need to watch more guys falter between AAA and MLB before we suspect fools gold over 24 carat? 

BRING HIM UP!! BRING HIM UP!!

SEND HIM DOWN!! 

Of course the best of the best franchises have both. It won't happen in my lifetime. 

Definitely has been a really good conversation, and I appreciate your challenging my thoughts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, The Kids Can Play said:

Having a new owner who is a rich billionaire like Cuban is not my point. Being a rich owner doesn't mean you will be successful, but its a start. 

My point all along...and I will use the Dodgers ownership again. Yes they are rich. However they are also very smart. They went out and recruited the best GM in baseball in 2015 in Andrew Friedman and made him president of baseball operations for the Dodgers with not only a bigger title and responsibility, but also a hefty salary increase. Look what Friedman has done to improve the Dodgers. They not only have won a WS, but went to a second WS under him. Plus if you look at the farm system rankings since Friedman came to the Dodgers, he has made them one of the best farm systems in the league yearly. This is not by luck, because he did exactly that with the Rays. He did that with the Rays because they didn't have the money to spend on free agents and always had one of the lowest payrolls in baseball. As a result, to be competitive, Friedman had to build a strong scouting, drafting and development system in the TB organization. He did that as well as any GM in baseball.

Keep in mind, if any new owner buys the Sox, it will be because they have made billions from their business operations to be able to afford owning a baseball team. It's also safe to say that most successful owners are usually successful because they understood how to build and grow their company. They commonly use "Best Practices" to get the best sales people, executives and other key personnel in their company.

My point all along has been, I am hoping and assuming the new owner will do like the Dodgers did...and apply "Best Practices" to go recruit the best front office baseball executives that money can buy. 

To your point on Mark Cuban, regardless of how rich or smart he is, maybe he didn't go find yet the Andrew Friedman of basketball for his Mavericks.

Basketball is such a crap shoot as you are drafting players that are 4 years away from what they will be as players then you have to recruit via free agency and have a development system in place.  It's really hard to spend your way to NBA success.

 

MLB is the outlier you can spend to build a team but then the outcome is still 100% random.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, JoeC said:

Definitely has been a really good conversation, and I appreciate your challenging my thoughts.

I'm sorry it came off as challenging, I was trying to challenge my own. I think this intersects the area of a coach's experience and growth. My philosophy in business was hire good people, support them, and get out of their way. I recognized my way wasn't the only way. Forcing a unified approach sounds good but my experience tells me there are unintended consequences.

Coaching golf I'm continually looking for new ideas to give my teams an edge. I have an analogous situation to the Sox in that my best players have outside professionals they work with on their swings then I get them. I focus on their mental game, shot selection, and practice focus.

Ten years ago I would see things that they were doing and thinking that's not going to work and try to force my philosophy on them. I quickly realized that was wrong. Now I look at those moments as a chance to learn. 

Example, one of my best players pulled out her range finder for a pitch of about 20 yards. I've taught that shot is pure touch, you have to feel the shot, not use a formula. But her pro is a friend of mine and someone I really respect. A five minute chat with him and I'm a believer in shooting the distance as a way to develop feel. I'll encourage all my players to do that. 

By the way the pitch was 18 yards. Just a little less than her dead hands waist to waist shot. Tap in to save par. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Texsox said:

I'm sorry it came off as challenging, I was trying to challenge my own. I think this intersects the area of a coach's experience and growth. My philosophy in business was hire good people, support them, and get out of their way. I recognized my way wasn't the only way. Forcing a unified approach sounds good but my experience tells me there are unintended consequences.

 

No worries and no need to apologize. Again, it's been one of the more thought-provoking discussions I've had in awhile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/3/2023 at 7:38 PM, Lip Man 1 said:

The White Sox have cornered the market on "baseball stupid" players both offensively, defensively and situational. 

And the stupidity negates the skill!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Harry Chappas said:

Basketball is such a crap shoot as you are drafting players that are 4 years away from what they will be as players then you have to recruit via free agency and have a development system in place.  It's really hard to spend your way to NBA success.

 

MLB is the outlier you can spend to build a team but then the outcome is still 100% random.

I semi agree with you that in baseball that might be the case for many teams. However if you find the right front office people like the Dodgers have, then its not a crap shoot. The Dodgers have ridiculous endless money to spend, but also have a really smart front office, that apparently knows how to build a consistently high ranked farm system. They seem to win and make the playoffs way too often for it to be random. 

Then you have the Rays. They lost Friedman and still haven't missed a beat. The Rays do not have the endless money to spend like most rich baseball teams with the 27th highest payroll. Yet they still keep winning and building a strong farm system. Keep in mind they have done this in arguably the strongest baseball division in baseball for several years now. 

It's all about owners hiring successful front office executives. These executives usually have a strong blueprint in how to succeed. These winning FO people have a detailed organizational plan in every single aspect of the organization from top to bottom. This is why they take the randomness out of the equation and win so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TheKidsCanPlay 

Now let's think how the Sox could have a top five GM. I see the first question is will they attract someone with that resume or will they need to sit on an acorn and grow them? 

My guess is they will need to grow them. Unless we want to gamble on billionaire new owner hires the best at any price. I'm not holding my breath. 

So we now can merge this with every fire and sell thread. 

I think Hahn deserves another shot, with another franchise. But it's time for a change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...