Softball - Printable Version

Softball - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Softball (/thread-13507.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Re: Softball - d4cohn - 04-16-2017

(04-15-2017, 10:33 PM)Cred link Wrote:The quote you pulled from my post was my "interpretation" ofÂ terry's reply to paloalto's claim that "Stanford needs to recruit two elite (top 10) pitchers..." The term "elite" here refers specifically to "top 10" pitchers. None of the pitchers you mention qualifies (or even comes close). I find it next to impossible to conceive of this team going winless in 2017 Pac-12 play were it blessed with a pitching staff anchored by a single elite (top 10, as defined by paloalto) pitcher, not to mention a pair of them.

Therefore, I would reject the following claim:

"The latter two reasons explain why, barring a road win against Oregon State next weekend, we are likely headed toward a second consecutive 0-24 Pac-12 record, not the number of stars associated with our pitching staff."

I would add, however, that I doubt the quest to acquire a pitcher or pitchers of such caliber in recent years has been a whole lot more of a realistic goal than will be acquiring a top 10 coach this summer.

I first want to clarify that my comments were in response to the notion that our team "lacks elite pitching prospects", and as such, there would be nothing that our coaching staff could do to make up for those deficiencies to avoid a winless conference season; by quoting your interpretation, I was not attributing the notion described above to you, Cred. I also agree with you, Cred, that undoubtedly a team with two Top 10 pitchers would not go winless in conference year.

However, I also don't think that a team that does not have two Top 10 pitchers is doomed to a winless, or otherwise, bad conference season (all but a very small number of programs do not have two Top 10 pitchers). As such, in clarifying the final line from my previous post, I was basically saying that the coaching staff's inability to develop our pitchers and come up with a coherent offensive gameplan is the reason we may end up with no wins in Pac-12 play, as opposed to a non-zero number of wins. Stated another way, the raw talent and ability of our pitching staff should be good enough for at least one conference win, if not more. Therefore, I attribute any winless season solely to failures in development and strategy by the coaching staff. In essence, I intended, but failed to clearly re-state one of your earlier points that I wholehearted agree with:

"While I very much doubt the best coach in the nation could have squeezed double-digits conference wins out of this team this year, I also very much doubt that that coach would even have sniffed the stench of 0-24 last year. Tell me if you think a coach of at least microscopically detectable competence might have stood a chance of pulling a win out of the following game from last season's simply inexcusable 0-24 performance: A career sub-.200 hitter mired in a 5 for 45 slump finds herself starting in the "clean up" position. She goes 0 for 5 with 3 strikeouts in the heart of the lineup, as Stanford loses 3-2 in 10 innings."

I appreciate all of your contributions to this thread, Cred, and the contributions of everyone else to this thread too.

Re: Softball - Cred - 04-16-2017

(04-16-2017, 12:21 AM)d4cohn link Wrote:[quote author=Cred link=topic=16598.msg191780#msg191780 date=1492320795]

The quote you pulled from my post was my "interpretation" ofÂ terry's reply to paloalto's claim that "Stanford needs to recruit two elite (top 10) pitchers..." The term "elite" here refers specifically to "top 10" pitchers. None of the pitchers you mention qualifies (or even comes close). I find it next to impossible to conceive of this team going winless in 2017 Pac-12 play were it blessed with a pitching staff anchored by a single elite (top 10, as defined by paloalto) pitcher, not to mention a pair of them.

Therefore, I would reject the following claim:

"The latter two reasons explain why, barring a road win against Oregon State next weekend, we are likely headed toward a second consecutive 0-24 Pac-12 record, not the number of stars associated with our pitching staff."

I would add, however, that I doubt the quest to acquire a pitcher or pitchers of such caliber in recent years has been a whole lot more of a realistic goal than will be acquiring a top 10 coach this summer.

Re: Softball - BobK - 04-16-2017

I'm not to to look to see how many pitchers are ranked ahead of Dwyer but doubt more than 10.Â Therefore she is a top 10 pitcher.
Stanford has never had two top 10 pitchers at the same time

I wonder if any PAC 12 or 10 or 8 team has other than Maybe ucla

But maybe someone remembers Scheyer 's ranking.Â Hoover of course was about # 1.Â

Re: Softball - d4cohn - 04-16-2017

(04-16-2017, 09:33 AM)BobK link Wrote:Stanford has never had two top 10 pitchers at the same time

Stanford would have with Barnhill and Hoover if we still had Coach Rittman, but I digress. In fact, we would have had two No.1 pitchers, as Barnhill was the top pitcher in her class. We also would have had the No. 7 pitcher in that class, but that pitcher ended up at Northwestern after Coach Rittman left.

Bob, I roughly counted the number of pitchers relative to Maddy on the FloSoftball rankings. Some players were listed as a pitcher/position player, so if you include some of those players, she is definitively in the Top 15. The most important point, her ranking aside, is that she is going to be very good.

Re: Softball - BobK - 04-16-2017

Thanks D.Â
Completely put Barnhill out of my mind.Â Wow
Yes what could have been and that part I'll never forget.Â

Re: Softball - Cred - 04-16-2017

(04-16-2017, 10:12 AM)d4cohn link Wrote:I roughly counted the number of pitchers relative to Maddy on the FloSoftball rankings. Some players were listed as a pitcher/position player, so if you include some of those players, she is definitively in the Top 15.

Now it is I who must clarify himself. When I said none of the pitchers you mentioned were even close to "elite (top ten)" I had in mind pitchers with a top ten ranking among all players, not merely pitchers who are among the top ten at that particular position. I suspect I misread the meaning of "top ten" in the original post. Needless to say, I would consider a pitcher who is top 15 among pitchers to be close to top ten at that position.

It does surprise me, though, that at #52 Dwyer makes the top 15 at that position. As critical as top-flight pitching is, I would have thought at least half of the top 50 overall would be pitchers. (I'm assuming the rankings are based on overall value of the player?) I should probably re-subscribe to Flo.Â :)

Re: Softball - paloalto - 04-16-2017

I watched bits and pieces of the last televised game against ASU.Â When I was watching, I thought the defense was solid.Â There were simply too many well hit balls that will inevitably produce runs.Â The one area for improvement on defense while I was watching was the catcher's throws to pick off base runners.Â Of course, my data sampling is too small to make any conclusion about the season in general.

Re: Softball - Cred - 04-17-2017

(04-15-2017, 09:57 AM)Mick link Wrote:[quote author=Cred link=topic=16598.msg191724#msg191724 date=1492270603]
[quote author=Goose link=topic=16598.msg191713#msg191713 date=1492233247]
[quote author=BobK link=topic=16598.msg191706#msg191706 date=1492221680]
Mercy again

FWIW, I have always wondered about the "mercy" rule, even in little league. It seems to be saying that you are so bad you can't 59er up to "real" competition. It is kind of insulting in that sense. Then again, in this case, it may be true.
[/quote]

The "mercy" rule does serve a practical purpose in tournament play, as it helps keep the games on schedule.

Generally speaking, I'm pretty okay with the rule anyway. It not only spares the losing team from absorbing an unnecessarily prolonged beating but spares the losing team's fans further exposure to the slaughter.

Though this act of invoking "mercy" might seem a little insulting, the fact that the actual play on the field beats the "mercy" rule to the punch in suggesting that the losing team doesn't belong on the same field with the competition, I think, takes a lot of the sting out of the insult.Â :)
[/quote]

My youngest had played in a Little League tournament for 8 year olds representing our little area against Los Gatos, and our team wasn't very good.Â Theirs was terrific.Â At one point, we were behind 22-1.Â We got a player on first base, and he dances off the bag.Â The pitcher had taken the ball, but wasn't yet on the pitching rubber.Â He throws the ball into right field, our runner runs all the way around and scores.Â Umpire pronounces him safe.Â LG coach stops the game so he can find the tournament director and get him to remove the run scored, ensuring that it remains 22-1 and not 22-2.Â Makes a big stink, lots of yelling and arm waving.
[/quote]

I was 8 years old. Shortly before the start of my first season of Little League Baseball, my team, the Pups, played an informal preseason game (or "practice game," as we called such games) against the Cubs, another of the teams in our 6-team league. We beat them 41-0 (might have hit the half-century mark but, being the home team, we didn't get to bat in the bottom of the 6th).

Guess we played them a couple of times during the regular season but I've no recollection of how the games played out; however, I do recall meeting them again in the semifinals of the playoffs. We were down 5-4 and down to our last out in the 6th. I was standing on 3rd base as the potential tying run when our strikeout king stepped up to the plate and went down like Mighty Casey (minus the reputed might) for the game's final out. We then won the "consolation" game to finish 3rd, while the other team went on to win the championship. Cubs win! Cubs win! Cubs win!

Apparently that team's coach knew how to develop players.

Re: Softball - Mick - 04-17-2017

(04-17-2017, 01:07 AM)Cred link Wrote:I was 8 years old. Shortly before the start of my first season of Little League Baseball, my team, the Pups, played an informal preseason game (or "practice game," as we called such games) against the Cubs, another of the teams in our 6-team league. We beat them 41-0 (might have hit the half-century mark but, being the home team, we didn't get to bat in the bottom of the 6th).

Guess we played them a couple of times during the regular season but I've no recollection of how the games played out; however, I do recall meeting them again in the semifinals of the playoffs. We were down 5-4 and down to our last out in the 6th. I was standing on 3rd base as the potential tying run when our strikeout king stepped up to the plate and went down like Mighty Casey (minus the reputed might) for the game's final out. We then won the "consolation" game to finish 3rd, while the other team went on to win the championship. Cubs win! Cubs win! Cubs win!

Apparently that team's coach knew how to develop players.

Great story.Â I don't think that's uncommon at that level.Â I managed a team of nine and ten year olds in the Little League minors and had a strict policy of allowing boys to play different positions and bat in different orders.Â In our last game, we lost to a team that hadn't won all year because one of my players -- with some fairly severe ADHD, no less -- really wanted to pitch.Â I let him pitch for three innings, we got shelled.Â The other coach was a friend of mine, he was very thankful for it and he reminded me of it as much as fifteen years later.

One of the teams in our league was the Giants.Â Their coach was a red hot, had all the positions mapped out before the season started and played and practiced them all season.Â They were built to win, and they beat us all four times we played during the regular season, not by a lot, but by a little each time.

When the playoffs started, I positioned our team (the Yankees) in conventional positions in the field and batted them in a conventional order.Â We ended up winning the game 20-8.

Re: Softball - Cred - 04-21-2017

(04-13-2017, 01:15 PM)d4cohn link Wrote:I think Hannah [Howell] has the ability to be a great player, with a coaching staff that can help her develop on her offensive game (she is already great defensively, as she demonstrated last Sunday against UA). She was ranked #52 nationally, which as a point of comparison, is the same ranking that Maddy Dwyer has in this year's national player rankings. However, when you have a staff that generally doesn't believe in small ball, and Hannah's game in high school was predicated on slapping and power slapping, that is how you end up with a situation where Hannah is hitting 1-for-19. I feel so bad for her and other players on this team, as I feel the coaching philosophy is not bringing out the best in several players' game.

Interestingly, the other sub-.100 hitter for year 2017 that has seen some action in LF this year (update: Howell is now 2-20 and at .100) was described by Hanson in her initial introduction of the player as "a lefty slapper who has the potential to provide a great additional lefty-look in our lineup."

Perhaps those players who were primarily "slappers" upon their arrival at Stanford have all since been exorcised of the slap-happiness that brought them earlier success?

Re: Softball - d4cohn - 04-21-2017

Stanford loses first game of three game set to Oregon State 6-0. Pac-12 losing streak now at 40 consecutive games, dating back to 2015.

Re: Softball - d4cohn - 04-22-2017

Softball loses second game of three game set to OSU 4-3. Whitney Burks provided two hits, and Kylie Sorenson went deep for the Card.

Re: Softball - oldalum - 04-22-2017

by extrapolation, we should win the third game 6-2. Hey, a fan can dream, can't he?

Re: Softball - Cred - 04-23-2017

(04-22-2017, 02:51 PM)d4cohn link Wrote:Softball loses second game of three game set to OSU 4-3. Whitney Burks provided two hits, and Kylie Sorenson went deep for the Card.

Re: Softball - Mick - 04-23-2017

(04-23-2017, 06:35 AM)Cred link Wrote:[quote author=d4cohn link=topic=16598.msg192171#msg192171 date=1492897866]
Softball loses second game of three game set to OSU 4-3. Whitney Burks provided two hits, and Kylie Sorenson went deep for the Card.

And so The Big 6-0 arrives -- 2 wins, 60 losses in Pac-12 play under Hanson -- with The Big 7-0 looming on the horizon as a possible last-minute (of 2017 Pac-12 play) arrival.

Happy Milestone, Coach.
[/quote]

Bernard Muir must be proud.Â Has a Stanford coach failed so miserably on anyone's watch other than his?

Re: Softball - d4cohn - 04-23-2017

(04-22-2017, 07:28 PM)oldalum link Wrote:by extrapolation, we should win the third game 6-2. Hey, a fan can dream, can't he?

I hope we win today oldalum; otherwise, the probability of back to back 0-24 campaigns will be very high, given we close our conference season with 3 teams in the NCAA Softball Championship Committee's Top 10 ranking.

http://www.ncaa.com/news/softball/article/2017-04-22/ncaa-softball-championship-committee-announces-first-top-10-ranking

Re: Softball - Stymie - 04-23-2017

I've never seen LJSU play softball (in fact never seen women play softball, come to think of it...) but I am now, out of curiosity and/or boredom, watching the Oklahoma-Baylor game on ESPN2.Â In the first inning, the first three Baylor batters bunted and 2 of them got on 1st base.Â OK had NOBODY in left field when Baylor RH batters were up because none of them were capabable of pulling the ball against the OK pitcher.Â It was kinda like a reverse Ted Williams shift back in the day.....

I played baseball though American Legion and played some reasonably serious fast pitch softball in my twenties, and in the latter, good pitchers were game killers--even when pitching against good HS/College hitters.Â I had one really good one on one of my teams, and he was unhittable.Â From what I can see from the OK-BAY game(when not typing!), is that good pitching is a significantly greater factor in fast pitch softball than in even MLB.Â If we can't recruit any, we are doomed to continue to end upo in the PAC-12 cellar, ad infinitum.Â IMO.

Re: Softball - Cred - 04-23-2017

(04-23-2017, 09:51 AM)d4cohn link Wrote:I hope we win today oldalum; otherwise, the probability of back to back 0-24 campaigns will be very high, given we close our conference season with 3 teams in the NCAA Softball Championship Committee's Top 10 ranking.

You took the words right out of my mouth, D.

BTW, Oregon State's top pitcher (2.28 ERA) has started the last two games (seemed to be tiring in the 6th yesterday). Doubtful she'll start a third consecutive game, meaning they'll probably be starting a pitcher with an ERA of either 4.01 or 4.23.

Might actually have a fighting chance of recording a W today if our pitching doesn't get bombed and if some timely hitting happens to materialize along the way. Don't even want to think about what lies beyond today.

Re: Softball - BigEasyCard - 04-23-2017

Cardinal lead 6-5 in Corvallis, middle 3rd.

Geaux Cardinal!

Re: Softball - d4cohn - 04-23-2017

(04-23-2017, 01:10 PM)BigEasyCard link Wrote:Cardinal lead 6-5 in Corvallis, middle 3rd.

Geaux Cardinal!

You jinxed us, BigEasyCard!Â :)