Category Archives: Coaching
Coaching is a lot like doing improv
I have to admit I’m not real big on the whole comedy club improv thing. I tend to like my comedy a little more fully baked. Guess that’s the writer in me. Still, there is a parallel between improv and coaching.
One of the highlights of improv comedy shows is when the performers ask the audience to shout out a bunch of random stuff, or at least semi-random stuff, and then the performers act out the scene the audience has “put together.” It’s really living on the edge, because sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. But it does require quick thinking and an open mind either way.
What made me think of this was working with a student last night on pitching. Although she is 15 and has pitched for a few years, this is the first time she’s ever had lessons. She had a few habits that we had to break her of, one of which was a balance issue. I’ve tried a few different things that have worked in the past and there has been some improvement, but the issue was still there. So like the comics doing improv, I had to come up with something else, which turned out to be the magic formula.
The cue I gave her — drive your back hip toward your front hip as you come forward — wasn’t substantially different than others I’d given her in the past. But this one worked, where the others didn’t, or only did to a limited extent.
With the balance issue addressed, this girl started throwing harder than she ever has before. She was able to put more of herself into her pitches with the confidence that they would go where they were supposed to (more or less). She walked out of there feeling pretty good last night.
That’s the beauty and the challenge of coaching. You always have to be prepared to come up with a new explanation, or a new drill, or a new approach right there on the spot. There’s no one-size-fits-all approach. What’s worked 100 times before is useless if it doesn’t work this time, for this player. You have to be able to figure out what the problem is, then find an explanation that makes sense to the player. It can be a bit nerve-wracking at time. But the reward is definitely worth it.
The “big dog” system of measurement for aggressiveness
Tonight I was working with a pitcher, and while what she was doing was technically fine it just wasn’t very aggressive. I tried to get her to attack the pitch more but she wasn’t quite getting what I meant. So I came up with a new way of explaining it that had the advantage of being both fun and effective.
The new method is what I’m calling the “Big dog system of measurement” for aggressiveness. Essentially, you take how aggressive the pitcher (or hitter for that matter) is being and compare it to a dog. You then try to move her up the scale.
For example, with Alyssa I told her she was currently at Labrador. I have a Lab, and they are loving, happy dogs. They can get aggressive when pushed or angered, but it’s generally short-lived. By nature they’re sweet. When I told her she was at Lab level she understood what I meant. I then asked her to step it up to German Shepherd. Shepherds also tend to be nice dogs, but they are more aggressive than Labs, which is why they’re used in police work. She went for it, and darned if her pitches didn’t pick up a bit and start smacking her dad’s glove harder.
At this point, here is what I have on the scale: Basset Hound (you’re practically comatose), Lab, German Shepherd, German Shorthair (I had a girlfriend who had one of those and it scared the heck out of me), Doberman Pinscher, Rottweiler and Pit Bull.
As you might guess, the dogs are ranked from least aggressive to most. Since it’s the “big dog” scale I didn’t include Jack Russell Terriers, Dachshunds (which can be very aggressive on your ankles) and other small breeds. The object, of course, is to make it up to Pit Bull. That’s a competitor!
I am looking for additional suggestions to help round out the scale. They have to be well-known breeds so the players can relate; they’ll have no idea if an exotic dog is aggressive or not. And for you dog lovers out there, please don’t bother defending a particular breed. I know the really aggressive dogs are usually that way as a result of their owners. But in this case I’m going with the popular perception to get the point across.
Again, the beauty of the big dog system is it provides context for what you’re asking. At least it did for the pitchers tonight. Anytime you can be more specific you’re going to be more effective too.
What is the deal with all these injuries?
I don’t know what’s going on these days. Maybe there’s something in the air or maybe there’s a bad mojo working in this area. But it sure seems like I’m seeing a lot more injuries this year among my students than I’ve ever seen.
Now, let me first clarify. These are not injuries as the result of the pitching motion or any hitting technique. Heck, some of them aren’t even occuring on the softball field. But they are happening. I’ve heard of girls injuring their shoulders playing volleyball, breaking their legs running the bases, hurting their legs running into a fence, even breaking their arms falling off bicycles. The latest is a student (whose father reads this blog, by the way) who blew out her knee playing basketball.
I have actually always been a fan of the multi-sport athlete approach. I think there’s a lot of benefits from training for different sports. But after what’s been doing on this year I’m not so sure.
Is this just a local phenomenon or are folks outside my immediate area (North/Northwest suburbs of Chicago) seeing an uptick in injuries as well? And if so, are they on the softball field? And where or doing what? I hope it’s just a coincidence or bad luck and that it will stop soon. Otherwise there may not be any players left by spring!
Don’t let the pursuit of perfection stand in the way of execution
There is a tendency among coaches (me included) to place a lot of emphasis on having rock-solid mechanics. We know what we want to see, we know what the best players in the world look like, and we try to get our players to match that image we have in our minds. Our most dedicated players often know what they’re trying to achieve and work toward meeting that ideal, whether it’s hitting, pitching, fielding, throwing or any other aspect of the game.
Overall, that’s good. But sometimes this relentless pursuit of perfection can get in the way of player growth. How can that be? Simple. All those skills we’re working on with such passion require dynamic and often ballistic movements. Yet it can be difficult to be dynamic or ballistic if your focus is on being extremely precise with what you’re doing. A hitter trying to get an exact bat path, or a pitcher trying to throw a pitch “just so,” may wind themselves up too tight to get the kind of impact they need. So while they would look great in slow motion video — everything is exactly where it should be when it should be there — the result is less than explosive.
I don’t think this is something coaches build into what they’re teaching. In fact, I think it’s often something that’s more hard-wired into certain players. They have such desire for perfection and achievement that they let it get in the way of just going for it. Put another way, they are so focused on their mechanics they become, well, mechanical.
Pursuing perfection is a worthy goal, but it has to be tempered with a ballplayer’s attitude. We’ve all seen kids with terrible swings or terrible throwing form that still hit or throw the heck out of the ball because they approach it with such intent to hit or throw hard. That is something we all need to be sure we’re instilling in our players.
I would rather see more intent and less perfection in a player or student, particularly at this time of the year (fall). Yes, I want them to improve their mechanics and approach that ideal, but not at the cost of putting every ounce of themselves they have into it. It’s important to remind them every now and then that the intent to perform an action is every bit as critical as the mechanics themselves. After all, you can fix mechanics and make them better. It’s a lot tougher to fix intent if it isn’t there.
Where do coaches come up with this stuff?
I am often amazed by the things I hear from my students regarding what their team coaches tell them. Sometimes the statements are just jaw-droppingly stupid.
Last night was such a case. I was working on the changeup with one of my students. She threw a real nice one, about thigh-high and well-disguised. I complimented her on it, and she told me one of her team coaches told her that “a good changeup should hit the plate.” Huh? I was stunned.
Why in the world would you want to make your changeup hit the plate? If you are throwing it well, one of the good things that can happen is it causes the hitter to freeze. If that occurs and the pitch comes in for a strike, well, you get a strike. If it hits the plate, it’s a ball. Why in the world would you not want to get a free strike?
I can only think of a couple of reasons a coach might make that statement. One is he may never have seen a real changeup and thus doesn’t realize what it’s supposed to look like and what it can do. Even if a changeup gets hit, if it does its job and fools the hitter it’s usually for a weak ground ball or pop fly. Of course, if you’re just slowing your arm down and giving it away you might want it to hit the plate so it doesn’t hit the grass behind the fence.
Another reason would be if the pitchers are throwing it too high. Asking them to try to hit the plate might be a cue to help them bring it down. It’s mechanically unsound and unlikely to work, but at least it’s well-intentioned.
The third reason, of course, is that the coach is simply speaking of things which he knows not. As Mark Twain once said, “Better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you’re a fool than open it and prove it.” Apparently this coach didn’t watch Taryne Mowatt lead Arizona to a WCWS championship by throwing changeups for a strike. A change that hits the plate is what you would call a mistake.
For this pitcher, I gave her my standard instruction for dealing with this sort of thing: say “OK,” or “I’m trying,” then continue to throw it for a low strike. In other words, save this coach from himself. Maybe someday he’ll learn.
The wonders of life
Just started up the new season of lessons this week and was struck by something interesting.
One of the places I teach is about 30 to 45 minutes away from my house. Consequently, when I finish lessons at the end of April it’s usually the last time I see some of my students for a few months.
Tonight I saw a couple of them and was struck by how much they had changed in the intervening months. One girl in particular stood out. Not only did she look more mature in her face (at age 12), she was actually talking in a conversational way with me tonight.
At lessons I’m usually pretty chatty. Some of the girls will chat right back. Some will joke around with me and toss good-natured insults back and forth. But some will barely say a word. The one I’m thinking of was in that latter group. But tonight that changed. We had some good conversation, and she started calling out when she didn’t execute a technique the way I wanted her to. That’s awesome because I always tell my students that it’s important that I know what they should be doing, but it’s imperative that they know because they’re the ones who have to do it.
I’ve had a few over the years who didn’t talk to me (more than answering a hello and saying “ok”) for a couple of years. They were either shy or uncomfortable talking to an adult. But I think it’s really cool when that changes and you begin building a more personal relationship. It absolutely makes teaching more fun!
Team-supplied lessons
Had an interesting email discussion today with Coach Mike. It revolved around a local team that “supplies” its players with hitting lessons. The basics are that they charge each person in the organization an additional (non-optional) fee, then contract with a hitting instructor to provide lessons to everyone in the organization.
The free market advocate in me tends not to like that arrangement. I think parents should be free to take their kids anywhere they want to get lessons. I doubt as an instructor myself that I would be totally comfortable with an entire program being directed to me either.
But I can also see the other side. At least this program is sure that its players are receiving regular lessons throughout the year. Assuming the instructor they contract with is qualified (and I have no reason to think otherwise), it could certainly present an advantage. Of course, with any private instruction situation success or failure is 90 percent the player and 10 percent the coach. Still, receiving regular instruction versus sitting around watching TV or texting incessantly ought to produce some results.
I’d be interested in feedback from others as to how common a practice it is for teams or programs to hire out a single instructor on any aspect of the game for the entire program. If you are or have been in that situation, how did you feel? Did you have the option of opting out and working with your own coach, and if so was the fee refunded to you?
The most pressing question to me, though, is if you were in an organization that did that and suddenly they said “here’s that part of the fee back; use it to hire your own private coach” do you think families who didn’t already have a coach seek one out? Or would they just pocket the money and forget about lessons?
If you’re thinking too much you’re not practicing enough
There’s an old saying in softball (and baseball) that goes “Quite thinking, you’re hurting the ballclub.” While it’s usually said in good humor there is some truth to it. Especially when it comes to executing skills.
When you first learn a new skill there’s a lot of thinking involved. You’re trying to get the movements right and overcome old habits in the process. It takes a lot of thinking, checking and rechecking. As you become more successful with the skill you get to the point of conscious competence — the ability to do what you want to do as you think it through.
That’s not the goal, though. At the point of conscious competence you’re not able to give your maximum effort. There’s still a point of being careful involved when you’re thinking. The point you want to get to instead is unconscious competence — the point where you no longer have to think about what you’re doing, but instead just do it (as the billboards say). At that point you can give 100 percent effort — throw yourself into it entirely without any worries.
There’s only one way to get there — through repetition. How many reps varies by the skill and by the person. But it’s more than a few no matter who you are. You’ll know when it’s enough — because you no longer have to think about what you’re doing, You’re simply going out there and giving it your all. On the other hand, if you’re thinking too much, you’re not practicing enough. Time to get to work!
USSSA pitching distance moving to 43 feet
This morning I received an email from USSSA announcing that, effective immediately, the pitching distance for 15U and above is now 43 feet. The decision is a reaction to the National Federation, the high school sports ruling body, moving the pitching distance to 43 feet for varsity. I have a few thoughts about this move (as you might expect).
One is kudos to USSSA for sending an announcement out directly to coaches instead of making us hunt for it on their Web site — which is what ASA typically does. Nice to see an organization actually using more modern technology to disseminate their information.
The second is amusement that high school softball is essentially dictating what summer ball does. For all the talk everyone puts out about how high school ball is a joke, it’s not as important as summer ball, blah blah blah it seems that the summer folks actually do put a priority on high school ball. Actions speak louder than words, boys and girls.
I can also see where pitching coaches (including me) are going to have some dilemmas this off-season. The key one is what distance to use when working with your pitchers. If ASA, NSA, Pony, NAFA, AFA and whatever other sanctioning bodies out there don’t follow suit, it’s going to be tough to know how to practice. There are some adjustments that need to be made going from 40 feet to 43 feet, and some pitchers adjust better than others. It’s conceivable that a pitcher will pitch a tournament one weekend from 40, the next from 43, and so on. (Or maybe even from 46 feet like my pitchers did at one tournament where the umpire didn’t know how the field had been set and assumed that the far pitching rubber was the right one.)
Of course, that dilemma already exists for high school age kids. Should a freshman practice at 40 feet, which is likely to be the frosh/JV distance, or should she assume she’s going varsity and practice at 43 feet? The longer distance doesn’t become mandatory in high school until the 2010-2011 school year, but Illinois has already adopted it for varsity.
It’s all very confusing right now. I expect that eventually it will all be standardized, and the distance will be 43 feet from freshman/15U up for everyone. Then the 12U and 14U pitchers will get better and soon everyone will be there, except 10U pitchers who will move to 40 feet.
I say why not get it over with and just have all pitchers pitch from second base like Eddie Feigner used to? Then they won’t need to wear masks, and you’ll have fewer ground balls getting through the middle.
The quiet wheel gets the shaft
Heard this one from a friend the other day. His daughter was playing on a travel team this year, and despite her good performance she didn’t seem to be getting a lot of playing time. I don’t think this is the case of a father not evaluating his daughter’s capabilities fairly, because if anything he tends to be tough on her.
Anyway, as a former coach himself he didn’t want to cause any problems. But after a season of less than optimal playing time, particularly at her preferred position, he decided to ask the coach what his daughter needed to work on to increase her playing time. The coach’s response was that he thought she was a very good player, maybe the best at that position, but the other girl who plays it (and/or her father) would cause a lot of problems if he cut her playing time. Since my friend never complained it was easier for the coach to sit his daughter instead.
I can understand it in a way. No coach wants to put up with a lot of grief from parents so it’s tempting to take the easy way out. But it’s still wrong. All you’re doing by going that route is rewarding (and encouraging) bad behavior. Yes, the squeaky wheel often tends to get the grease. But in so doing you’re encouraging the players (and parents) you really want to go elsewhere.
As difficult as it can be in the short term, it’s important to act with integrity to support the long term. There are lots of criteria you can use to determine playing time — best nine players, even playing time, development of players at a position, etc. Who would complain the most if they don’t get their way shouldn’t be on the list.
Life in the Fastpitch Lane 