[TonyLima]

Looks like it's going to be a long season. Not enough pitching, not enough hitting.

We knew it was going to be a rebuilding year.  But most of us didn't expect the hole to be quite this deep.  On a positive note, the freshmen will improve during the season.  So will Matt Scott and Nick Dugan.  Our two best pitchers are sophomores iirc.

I wonder if it is time to look what is available at the end of the season for a new pitching coach??

GMAB. The pitchers are mostly freshmen and sophomores. I’ve watched many young pitchers develop under Mr. Eager.  I say give him a few more years.

[TonyLima]

Looks like it's going to be a long season. Not enough pitching, not enough hitting.

We knew it was going to be a rebuilding year.  But most of us didn't expect the hole to be quite this deep.  On a positive note, the freshmen will improve during the season.  So will Matt Scott and Nick Dugan.  Our two best pitchers are sophomores iirc.

I wonder if it is time to look what is available at the end of the season for a new pitching coach??

GMAB. The pitchers are mostly freshmen and sophomores. I’ve watched many young pitchers develop under Mr. Eager.  I say give him a few more years.

[CTcard]

Looks like it's going to be a long season. Not enough pitching, not enough hitting.

We knew it was going to be a rebuilding year.  But most of us didn't expect the hole to be quite this deep.  On a positive note, the freshmen will improve during the season.  So will Matt Scott and Nick Dugan.  Our two best pitchers are sophomores iirc.

I wonder if it is time to look what is available at the end of the season for a new pitching coach??

GMAB. The pitchers are mostly freshmen and sophomores. I’ve watched many young pitchers develop under Mr. Eager.  I say give him a few more years.

I can see his point. Eager has only coached the Pac-12 pitcher of the year for three straight years (3 different guys). That leaves two years he's coached at Stanford where somebody else has won it. Lots of room for improvement. 

[Stanford's overall ERA was up a bit last year, (5.72), though runs were up across the board. It was an interesting year as the team ERA was dropping as the year went on which is a bit unusual as typically ERA rises as the competition gets better and the weather warms up. In the tournament Stanford had a good 4.2 ERA.]
[Maybe it's Eager's fault that Uber and O'Rourke are (still) injured, but I haven't heard anything directly.]

[CTcard]

Looks like it's going to be a long season. Not enough pitching, not enough hitting.

We knew it was going to be a rebuilding year.  But most of us didn't expect the hole to be quite this deep.  On a positive note, the freshmen will improve during the season.  So will Matt Scott and Nick Dugan.  Our two best pitchers are sophomores iirc.

I wonder if it is time to look what is available at the end of the season for a new pitching coach??

GMAB. The pitchers are mostly freshmen and sophomores. I’ve watched many young pitchers develop under Mr. Eager.  I say give him a few more years.

I can see his point. Eager has only coached the Pac-12 pitcher of the year for three straight years (3 different guys). That leaves two years he's coached at Stanford where somebody else has won it. Lots of room for improvement. 

[Stanford's overall ERA was up a bit last year, (5.72), though runs were up across the board. It was an interesting year as the team ERA was dropping as the year went on which is a bit unusual as typically ERA rises as the competition gets better and the weather warms up. In the tournament Stanford had a good 4.2 ERA.]
[Maybe it's Eager's fault that Uber and O'Rourke are (still) injured, but I haven't heard anything directly.]

[TonyLima]

Looks like it's going to be a long season. Not enough pitching, not enough hitting.

We knew it was going to be a rebuilding year.  But most of us didn't expect the hole to be quite this deep.  On a positive note, the freshmen will improve during the season.  So will Matt Scott and Nick Dugan.  Our two best pitchers are sophomores iirc.

I wonder if it is time to look what is available at the end of the season for a new pitching coach??

GMAB. The pitchers are mostly freshmen and sophomores. I’ve watched many young pitchers develop under Mr. Eager.  I say give him a few more years.

I can see his point. Eager has only coached the Pac-12 pitcher of the year for three straight years (3 different guys). That leaves two years he's coached at Stanford where somebody else has won it. Lots of room for improvement. 

[Stanford's overall ERA was up a bit last year, (5.72), though runs were up across the board. It was an interesting year as the team ERA was dropping as the year went on which is a bit unusual as typically ERA rises as the competition gets better and the weather warms up. In the tournament Stanford had a good 4.2 ERA.]
[Maybe it's Eager's fault that Uber and O'Rourke are (still) injured, but I haven't heard anything directly.]

Forgot the <sarc> tag, otherwise outstanding.

[TonyLima]

Looks like it's going to be a long season. Not enough pitching, not enough hitting.

We knew it was going to be a rebuilding year.  But most of us didn't expect the hole to be quite this deep.  On a positive note, the freshmen will improve during the season.  So will Matt Scott and Nick Dugan.  Our two best pitchers are sophomores iirc.

I wonder if it is time to look what is available at the end of the season for a new pitching coach??

GMAB. The pitchers are mostly freshmen and sophomores. I’ve watched many young pitchers develop under Mr. Eager.  I say give him a few more years.

I can see his point. Eager has only coached the Pac-12 pitcher of the year for three straight years (3 different guys). That leaves two years he's coached at Stanford where somebody else has won it. Lots of room for improvement. 

[Stanford's overall ERA was up a bit last year, (5.72), though runs were up across the board. It was an interesting year as the team ERA was dropping as the year went on which is a bit unusual as typically ERA rises as the competition gets better and the weather warms up. In the tournament Stanford had a good 4.2 ERA.]
[Maybe it's Eager's fault that Uber and O'Rourke are (still) injured, but I haven't heard anything directly.]

Forgot the <sarc> tag, otherwise outstanding.

[82lsju]

Diamond in the rough: Champ Hampton shines in baseball and football
...
Despite being far from home, Champ holds Tennessee close to his heart and wants to give back to Ooltewah by creating his own foundation.
“A lot of my friends lost the love of playing baseball and football because their families couldn’t afford to pay for it,” Hampton said. “I want to bridge that gap and give children the opportunity to pursue their dreams for the sport they love.”

https://stanforddaily.com/2024/02/26/me-...d-diamond/

[82lsju]

Diamond in the rough: Champ Hampton shines in baseball and football
...
Despite being far from home, Champ holds Tennessee close to his heart and wants to give back to Ooltewah by creating his own foundation.
“A lot of my friends lost the love of playing baseball and football because their families couldn’t afford to pay for it,” Hampton said. “I want to bridge that gap and give children the opportunity to pursue their dreams for the sport they love.”

https://stanforddaily.com/2024/02/26/me-...d-diamond/

[StanfordMatt]

Calls for a new pitching coach are nothing new. The team's three trips to the CWS have been anchored by big bats that can go deep and a Friday night stud. Whether its Quinn Mathews, Alex Williams or the Beck brothers, no one has ever questioned Eager when it comes to having a staff ace. Part of the problem has been an overreliance on these guys because of a lack of depth. B. Beck and Williams both hit a wall at the end of their final seasons and Mathews threw 156 pitches in a game last year because there were limited reliable options behind them. That falls squarely on Eager. The staff's walk rate has also been atrocious under his watch. I recall it being in the 100's among D1 teams the last couple years.

Yes, a surface glance that looks at team success and top of the rotation arms makes Eager look great. Take a closer look, though, and the numbers tell a different story.

[StanfordMatt]

Calls for a new pitching coach are nothing new. The team's three trips to the CWS have been anchored by big bats that can go deep and a Friday night stud. Whether its Quinn Mathews, Alex Williams or the Beck brothers, no one has ever questioned Eager when it comes to having a staff ace. Part of the problem has been an overreliance on these guys because of a lack of depth. B. Beck and Williams both hit a wall at the end of their final seasons and Mathews threw 156 pitches in a game last year because there were limited reliable options behind them. That falls squarely on Eager. The staff's walk rate has also been atrocious under his watch. I recall it being in the 100's among D1 teams the last couple years.

Yes, a surface glance that looks at team success and top of the rotation arms makes Eager look great. Take a closer look, though, and the numbers tell a different story.

[StanfordMatt]

Update:

I tried searching the NCAA website but had a hard time finding old baseball stats. In any event, hat tip to CTCard for posting these stats in a thread late last season that I'm pasting below:

"Eager came to Stanford with Esquer prior to the 2018 season.
Stanford pitching cumulative ERA:
2017: 3.35  (pre-Eager)
2018: 2.83
2019: 3.62
2020: 3.50  (shortened season, only 16 games)
2021: 4.64
2022: 4.23
2023: 5.83  (so far)"

Around the time of that post, we ranked 142nd in ERA and 189th nationally in BB/9.

[StanfordMatt]

Update:

I tried searching the NCAA website but had a hard time finding old baseball stats. In any event, hat tip to CTCard for posting these stats in a thread late last season that I'm pasting below:

"Eager came to Stanford with Esquer prior to the 2018 season.
Stanford pitching cumulative ERA:
2017: 3.35  (pre-Eager)
2018: 2.83
2019: 3.62
2020: 3.50  (shortened season, only 16 games)
2021: 4.64
2022: 4.23
2023: 5.83  (so far)"

Around the time of that post, we ranked 142nd in ERA and 189th nationally in BB/9.

[Baller4]

Update:

I tried searching the NCAA website but had a hard time finding old baseball stats. In any event, hat tip to CTCard for posting these stats in a thread late last season that I'm pasting below:

"Eager came to Stanford with Esquer prior to the 2018 season.
Stanford pitching cumulative ERA:
2017: 3.35  (pre-Eager)
2018: 2.83
2019: 3.62
2020: 3.50  (shortened season, only 16 games)
2021: 4.64
2022: 4.23
2023: 5.83  (so far)"

Around the time of that post, we ranked 142nd in ERA and 189th nationally in BB/9.

Yes, Eager came with Esquer, but also look at what was happening at Cal when he was pitching coach there as well. I know this is a pipe dream, but Esquer played with Black Jack McDowell. Bring him back to the farm to coach this staff!! Pitching has broken down in the CWS. At this level, if you are good enough to be in uniform, you are good enough to get better by your coach!

[Baller4]

Update:

I tried searching the NCAA website but had a hard time finding old baseball stats. In any event, hat tip to CTCard for posting these stats in a thread late last season that I'm pasting below:

"Eager came to Stanford with Esquer prior to the 2018 season.
Stanford pitching cumulative ERA:
2017: 3.35  (pre-Eager)
2018: 2.83
2019: 3.62
2020: 3.50  (shortened season, only 16 games)
2021: 4.64
2022: 4.23
2023: 5.83  (so far)"

Around the time of that post, we ranked 142nd in ERA and 189th nationally in BB/9.

Yes, Eager came with Esquer, but also look at what was happening at Cal when he was pitching coach there as well. I know this is a pipe dream, but Esquer played with Black Jack McDowell. Bring him back to the farm to coach this staff!! Pitching has broken down in the CWS. At this level, if you are good enough to be in uniform, you are good enough to get better by your coach!

[terry]

So far this year, Stanford's pitchers have given up 44 walks and 19 HBPs. That's 63 free passes in 8 games, or roughly 8 per game.

[terry]

So far this year, Stanford's pitchers have given up 44 walks and 19 HBPs. That's 63 free passes in 8 games, or roughly 8 per game.

[Jamesy]

Update:

I tried searching the NCAA website but had a hard time finding old baseball stats. In any event, hat tip to CTCard for posting these stats in a thread late last season that I'm pasting below:

"Eager came to Stanford with Esquer prior to the 2018 season.
Stanford pitching cumulative ERA:
2017: 3.35  (pre-Eager)
2018: 2.83
2019: 3.62
2020: 3.50  (shortened season, only 16 games)
2021: 4.64
2022: 4.23
2023: 5.83  (so far)"

Around the time of that post, we ranked 142nd in ERA and 189th nationally in BB/9.

So his success has come thanks to the previous coaching staff's recruits? Shaw 2.0? j/k

[Jamesy]

Update:

I tried searching the NCAA website but had a hard time finding old baseball stats. In any event, hat tip to CTCard for posting these stats in a thread late last season that I'm pasting below:

"Eager came to Stanford with Esquer prior to the 2018 season.
Stanford pitching cumulative ERA:
2017: 3.35  (pre-Eager)
2018: 2.83
2019: 3.62
2020: 3.50  (shortened season, only 16 games)
2021: 4.64
2022: 4.23
2023: 5.83  (so far)"

Around the time of that post, we ranked 142nd in ERA and 189th nationally in BB/9.

So his success has come thanks to the previous coaching staff's recruits? Shaw 2.0? j/k

[BobK]

Hate to say but not that long ago in college baseball they changed the bat. They changed the ball Hitting went up.

[BobK]

Hate to say but not that long ago in college baseball they changed the bat. They changed the ball Hitting went up.

[TonyLima]

Hate to say but not that long ago in college baseball they changed the bat. They changed the ball  Hitting went up.

Bats were changed quite a few years ago iirc.  Too many home runs, bats made with less recoil power (or something like that).  Again iirc balls changed in the last few years to get ... more home runs.  NCAA has never been accused of consistency.

[TonyLima]

Hate to say but not that long ago in college baseball they changed the bat. They changed the ball  Hitting went up.

Bats were changed quite a few years ago iirc.  Too many home runs, bats made with less recoil power (or something like that).  Again iirc balls changed in the last few years to get ... more home runs.  NCAA has never been accused of consistency.

[CTcard]

Update:

I tried searching the NCAA website but had a hard time finding old baseball stats. In any event, hat tip to CTCard for posting these stats in a thread late last season that I'm pasting below:

"Eager came to Stanford with Esquer prior to the 2018 season.
Stanford pitching cumulative ERA:
2017: 3.35  (pre-Eager)
2018: 2.83
2019: 3.62
2020: 3.50  (shortened season, only 16 games)
2021: 4.64
2022: 4.23
2023: 5.83  (so far)"

Around the time of that post, we ranked 142nd in ERA and 189th nationally in BB/9.

There's quite a bit to think/discuss about Stanford pitching over the past few years. It's had significant strengths and significant weaknesses. 
I rather appreciate serious discussion of the issues. My sarcastic side comes out when the level of discussion appears to approximate "the pitching was bad today - fire the coach". (and when I'm a little grumpy)

At the moment Stanford seems to be dealing with injuries to what should have been their two most veteran arms (O'Rourke and Uber) plus a lot of pretty live arms that are having control issues. That doesn't seem all that surprising for hard throwing frosh, but it's a little more worrisome in sophomores. 

But mostly it's too early to tell anything much. Esquer said in his preseason interview that the team would take time to come together. At least the starting slow part is right. By youth and results, the current team looks something like 2020 (though with a better start over 8 games). I'm hoping the next three years are as good as 2021-23.

[CTcard]

Update:

I tried searching the NCAA website but had a hard time finding old baseball stats. In any event, hat tip to CTCard for posting these stats in a thread late last season that I'm pasting below:

"Eager came to Stanford with Esquer prior to the 2018 season.
Stanford pitching cumulative ERA:
2017: 3.35  (pre-Eager)
2018: 2.83
2019: 3.62
2020: 3.50  (shortened season, only 16 games)
2021: 4.64
2022: 4.23
2023: 5.83  (so far)"

Around the time of that post, we ranked 142nd in ERA and 189th nationally in BB/9.

There's quite a bit to think/discuss about Stanford pitching over the past few years. It's had significant strengths and significant weaknesses. 
I rather appreciate serious discussion of the issues. My sarcastic side comes out when the level of discussion appears to approximate "the pitching was bad today - fire the coach". (and when I'm a little grumpy)

At the moment Stanford seems to be dealing with injuries to what should have been their two most veteran arms (O'Rourke and Uber) plus a lot of pretty live arms that are having control issues. That doesn't seem all that surprising for hard throwing frosh, but it's a little more worrisome in sophomores. 

But mostly it's too early to tell anything much. Esquer said in his preseason interview that the team would take time to come together. At least the starting slow part is right. By youth and results, the current team looks something like 2020 (though with a better start over 8 games). I'm hoping the next three years are as good as 2021-23.

[StanfordMatt]

I found the historical statistical rankings for Division 1. Yes, the bats and balls change but everyone is using the same ones. With the exception of a team ERA that ranked 27th nationally in 2022, the pitching numbers are pretty ugly for the past few years despite having some Friday night studs.

2024: ERA - 231; BB/9 - 187 (through 8 gms)
2023: ERA - 124; BB/9 - 184
2022: ERA - 27; BB/9 - 89
2021: ERA - 84; BB/9 - 112
2020: ERA - 78; BB/9 - 136 (only 16 games)
2019: ERA - 20; BB/9 - 14
2018: ERA - 2; BB/9 - 22

[StanfordMatt]

I found the historical statistical rankings for Division 1. Yes, the bats and balls change but everyone is using the same ones. With the exception of a team ERA that ranked 27th nationally in 2022, the pitching numbers are pretty ugly for the past few years despite having some Friday night studs.

2024: ERA - 231; BB/9 - 187 (through 8 gms)
2023: ERA - 124; BB/9 - 184
2022: ERA - 27; BB/9 - 89
2021: ERA - 84; BB/9 - 112
2020: ERA - 78; BB/9 - 136 (only 16 games)
2019: ERA - 20; BB/9 - 14
2018: ERA - 2; BB/9 - 22

[CTcard]

I found the historical statistical rankings for Division 1. Yes, the bats and balls change but everyone is using the same ones. With the exception of a team ERA that ranked 27th nationally in 2022, the pitching numbers are pretty ugly for the past few years despite having some Friday night studs.

2024: ERA - 231; BB/9 - 187 (through 8 gms)
2023: ERA - 124; BB/9 - 184
2022: ERA - 27; BB/9 - 89
2021: ERA - 84; BB/9 - 112
2020: ERA - 78; BB/9 - 136 (only 16 games)
2019: ERA - 20; BB/9 - 14
2018: ERA - 2; BB/9 - 22

Those numbers look pretty good to me overall. Better than I would have guessed. 
They range from very good to okay except for last year (and this year, but the season has barely started). 

Last year was obviously pretty rough while watching.  
But even there it's mixed and a complicated story. 
Stanford was a high strikeout/high walk pitching staff (I see Stanford at #6 in Ks last year) 
More broadly, the pitching got better as the season went on. During the tournament, against the best competition, the team ERA was 4.24 which if they had done so on the season would have tied them for 14th. 
Something similar in 2022. They started out 1-5 in conference with an ERA of 7.1. They finished #2 in the Pac 12 in conference ERA at 3.90. 

Bad = slow starts, high # walks, depth
Good = improvement during season, strike outs, individual development

[CTcard]

I found the historical statistical rankings for Division 1. Yes, the bats and balls change but everyone is using the same ones. With the exception of a team ERA that ranked 27th nationally in 2022, the pitching numbers are pretty ugly for the past few years despite having some Friday night studs.

2024: ERA - 231; BB/9 - 187 (through 8 gms)
2023: ERA - 124; BB/9 - 184
2022: ERA - 27; BB/9 - 89
2021: ERA - 84; BB/9 - 112
2020: ERA - 78; BB/9 - 136 (only 16 games)
2019: ERA - 20; BB/9 - 14
2018: ERA - 2; BB/9 - 22

Those numbers look pretty good to me overall. Better than I would have guessed. 
They range from very good to okay except for last year (and this year, but the season has barely started). 

Last year was obviously pretty rough while watching.  
But even there it's mixed and a complicated story. 
Stanford was a high strikeout/high walk pitching staff (I see Stanford at #6 in Ks last year) 
More broadly, the pitching got better as the season went on. During the tournament, against the best competition, the team ERA was 4.24 which if they had done so on the season would have tied them for 14th. 
Something similar in 2022. They started out 1-5 in conference with an ERA of 7.1. They finished #2 in the Pac 12 in conference ERA at 3.90. 

Bad = slow starts, high # walks, depth
Good = improvement during season, strike outs, individual development

[TonyLima]

if you’re not watching the Stanford-Rice game, you might want to switch it on. Matt Scott has nine strikeouts and has given up no hits through five innings.

[TonyLima]

if you’re not watching the Stanford-Rice game, you might want to switch it on. Matt Scott has nine strikeouts and has given up no hits through five innings.

[BobK]

Thanks Tony I forget it might be on tv

[BobK]

Thanks Tony I forget it might be on tv

[TonyLima]

Thanks Tony I forget it might be on tv

With any luck, I’ll post it tomorrow.

[TonyLima]

Thanks Tony I forget it might be on tv

With any luck, I’ll post it tomorrow.

[BobK]

I watched on espn+

[BobK]

I watched on espn+

[JJJ]

Frosh southpaw Christian Lim nearly repeated Matt Scott’s feat (10K 1BB!) while being masterful today, pitching 6 innings of 3-hit ball. We win 8-2 to take the series.
Dugan is due to pitch tomorrow and hasn’t lost yet this season. Let’s do this!

https://x.com/stanfordbsb/status/1764096...i4Tu_ztWqw

[JJJ]

Frosh southpaw Christian Lim nearly repeated Matt Scott’s feat (10K 1BB!) while being masterful today, pitching 6 innings of 3-hit ball. We win 8-2 to take the series.
Dugan is due to pitch tomorrow and hasn’t lost yet this season. Let’s do this!

https://x.com/stanfordbsb/status/1764096...i4Tu_ztWqw

[BobK]

Now 5-5 on the season. Looks like the pitching can be what I thought.

[BobK]

Now 5-5 on the season. Looks like the pitching can be what I thought.