Category Archives: Coaching
What you teach
In each case the rationale is that the umpires rarely call it. In other words, get away with as much as you can because you’re unlikely to get caught. “If you ain’t cheatin’ you ain’t trying” they like to say.
The problem with that line of thinking is they never take it to its logical conclusion. They don’t see where it could lead. So allow me to late it out for you.
Coaches who teach those things shouldn’t be surprised when their players lie to them about their schoolwork, their whereabouts during the last practice, or what time they went to sleep before the tournament games. After all, they thought they could get away with it.
Coaches who teach those things shouldn’t be surprised when their star athlete gets caught cheating during an exam. They were just trying to get an edge in order to “win.”
Coaches who teach those things shouldn’t be surprised when their players are arrested for underage drinking or drugs. They figured they wouldn’t be caught, so it was ok. After all, that’s what the coach taught them.
What we teach impacts our players much more than in their on-field conducted. Many have trouble separating the two. As coaches, we need to make sure we’re holding our players to a higher standard, not a lower one. It’s the right thing to do. And if you can’t win without cheating, maybe you’re not the coach you thought you were.
Choosing a private instructor
Of course, one of the big factors in private instruction is the instructor him/herself. In many areas there is no lack of instructors around. The problem is some are good, and some are not. It’s often difficult to tell the difference, especially if your knowledge base about the particular skill is limited. In other words, if you don’t know much about pitching, it can be tough to pick a pitching coach. Same with hitting. If you don’t understand the mechanics of hitting, just about anything said with confidence sounds good.
So how do you determine whether a particular coach will be good or bad for you/your child? One thing you can do is use the Internet to read up on the skill you’re looking to learn. Not the forums so much, where anyone with an opinion and an Internet connection can post whatever they want, but Web sites of top-level coaches and players. Someone like Michele Smith, Bill Hillhouse, or Cindy Bristow is a great place to start. They’ve been there and done that, but just as important they’ve spent a fair amount of time teaching it to others. You may need to purchase a book or DVD or two, but when you consider the cost of lessons it’s well worth $19.95 or $29.95 to make sure the thousands you’re investing are being well-spent.
Once you at least have a general idea of what should be being taught, it’s time to get out and check out instructors. Listen to what they’re teaching someone else, and compare it to what you’ve learned. If it seems to line up you’re ready to take the next step. If not, you may want to go elsewhere. Or at least ask a few questions to determine why it’s not lining up.
Often times you’ll hear that you should look at how much success the instructor’s students have had. That’s true to an extent, but you have to be realistic. There are some players who are just flat out more gifted than others, and some who just have an extraordinary will and dedication to succeed. Then there are others who show up to lessons but make no effort to apply what they’re being taught. They never practice, and they never progress despite the instructor’s best efforts. If that sounds like you/your child, private lessons are really not a good investment. Although Woody Allen once said “90 percent of life is just showing up” when it comes to lessons showing up is more like 10 percent.
I really think you need to honestly look at yourself/your child and see where she fits on that scale. The scale itself is a steep bell curve, with the majority falling somewhere in the middle. Unless you know yourself/your child to be one of the extremes, you’re probably best off knocking off the results of the top students and the bottom students, and then evaluating the success of the rest. That will probably give you a better approximation as to what you can expect. I once commented to Ernie Parker that it must be nice to be him, where you only attract the top-level, dedicated students. His reply? “I wish that were true.” (Pardon me while I pick up that name off the floor.)
Another criterion people like to use is how successful the instructor was as a player. Again, that can be misleading. Some formerly great players become great instructors. Others do not. In fact, if you look at the general coaching world it seems like the best players rarely become the most successful instructors. The best guess I’ve seen on that is that great players are largely instinctive or gifted. Things come more easily to them than they do to the average player, so they don’t have to put the same kind of work in to learn the skills. This is not to say they don’t work hard — they probably work harder than anyone. But they work on certain subtleties that allow them to become elite players. Often they have trouble understanding why a player can’t “just do it.” If you can find a top-level player who has become an excellent instructor you’ve really hit the jackpot. But I wouldn’t make the instructor’s playing record the main decision point. Very few Hall of Fame coaches in any sport were also Hall of Fame players. Most were journeymen who worked hard just to stay on the team.
One last aspect to consider is personality. Everyone is different, and a coach who has a great rapport with other students may not have it with you/your player. In order for learning to take place the student has to feel comfortable with the instructor. If there’s no chemistry there, and lessons are dreaded like a trip to the dentist, that instructor is not a good fit no matter what his/her other qualifications may be.
When it comes to choosing an instructor the old rule of “caveat emptor” (buyer beware) definitely applies. A little due diligence up front can save you a lot of wasted time and money in the long run. It will also help make sure you achieve the results you want when gametime rolls around.
Teaching players to think
The topic turned to the way some coaches like to be the center of attention. Their primary goal seems to be making sure everyone thinks they’re brilliant. They like to control every aspect of the game, call every pitch, play and player movement, and generally treat the game as a big chess match between themselves and the other coach.
The trouble with that is the players never learn to think for themselves. They are simply the chess pieces waiting to be shuffled around the board (field). They don’t really know why they’re being told to move here or lay down this bunt or steal this base. They just know when the sign comes they do it. So now the team is only as smart as the head coach. There’s no additive effect of the players contributing thoughts, and if a situation comes up they haven’t been told about they may not be prepared.
I think that’s a poor way to go. I much prefer my players having their heads in the game, and so does Rich. Much of what goes on in the field A) occurs in split seconds and/or
requires a certain level of confidence to pull off. If it’s all about the head coach, you won’t be able to handle either.A good example of how it pays off is with our third baseman Hillary. I’ve been coaching her since she was 9 or 10 years old. About the time she was 11 we put in a play that calls for the third baseman to do a pump fake when she gets a ground ball with a runner on third to try to draw the runner off and get the out on the lead runner. It started as a called play from the bench.
About the time she was 14, Hillary started calling the play herself. By “calling the play” I don’t mean that she just did the pump fake. She would also tell our shortstop that she was running the play so she could cover the bag in case of a snap throw. This past season she ran it five or six times herself, and if I recall correctly got the runner at third every time. Not just because of the design of the play, but because she knows how to sell the pump fake and believes in her ability to make the play.
Don’t get me wrong. We still call certain defensive sets from the dugout, move fielders around and determine where a throw might go. We also call steals and bunts. But we do it less and less. If we’re in a tight game the infielders will often move themselves in to cut off a runner at the plate, before we have to call. Catchers throw the pickoff to first on their own when they see opportunity. The list goes on. What we’re seeing is the girls are understanding the subtleties of how the game is played and taking their rightful place of controlling their own destinies.
Believe me, I have as much ego about coaching as anybody. I certainly hope I’m thought of as a good coach. But part of the job of the coach of an older team is to make sure his/her players understand the game. It’s the only way they’ll ever discover just how good they can be.
I’ve always said the coaches’ time is during practice. The players’ time is during the game. Seeing our girls use the strategies we’ve taught them means we’ve done a good job teaching them.
No shortcuts on the road to success
During the tryouts I was observing a pitching tryout. The girl was someone new, a 12U. I was chatting with her mom and bit and she told me where she’d been taking lessons and from whom. As I sat there, the girl seemed to go through an elaborate (to me) warm-up, beginning with some wrist snaps and then staging her throwing arm through about four or five starting locations. At no time did her feet move during these. Finally, her last drill was from full distance; she did what is usually called the “stork” drill, where she stood on one leg and then launched herself and pitched. So one leg at least got involved.
I guess different people have different philosophies or ideas or whatever, but it didn’t make much sense to me. I subscribe to the Bill Hillhouse school on warm-ups and drills — the more you make it like the actual pitching motion and get the whole body involved, the better off you’ll be. It looked like the girl was practicing to be an arm pitcher. When she went to full motion that’s exactly what happened. No leg drive, no body drive, just an arm thrower. It was too bad, because she looked pretty athletic and it seemed like she could get a lot more out of her body than she was getting.
I mentioned all this to another of our coaches, and he said that maybe she was being taught that way because it would be easier to throw strikes if she wasn’t going fully into it. I suppose that’s true. If you’re only using one body part there’s less to go wrong. But that seems like a shortcut to a dead end. Sooner or later if she wants to compete she’ll have to learn to throw her body into it, at least if she wants to develop speed. At that point she’ll probably have some setbacks and will have to relearn how to pitch. By then she’ll be behind the other 14Us who started out learning a more dynamic way of pitching and who were willing to walk a few more batters early to become better later.
Of course, that’s only one assumption. For all I know her pitching coach may be telling her to use her legs and she just doesn’t like to do it. But again, based on the warm-up drills I saw, that doesn’t appear to be the case. It seems like the arm is the focus, and the weak muscles in the wrist, and nothing else matters much.
There are no shortcuts on the road to success. It takes a lot of the proper work to learn to do things right. Parents, before you go shelling out for lessons, see if what your daughter is being taught is what you see from the players in the NPF or the Women’s College World Series. If it doesn’t match up, you may want to find another coach.
What’s not to love
I called a girl named Kathleen who had played for me the year before, and who I had worked with on her hitting during the high school and travel season. (Kathleen had left due as much to a political issue with her high school as anything. Things happen, ya know?)
In any case, I knew her summer team wasn’t going anywhere for Nationals since I’d already snagged one girl back, so three days before it was time to leave I asked if she’d like to go with us. She jumped at the chance. She rearranged her work schedule, her parents got vacation time, and she joined us for the tournament.
That would be pretty cool by itself. What I just found out, though, is that not only did she do all of that, she played with a finger that was either badly bruised or broken. I never knew it, she never complained or said “I can’t do that.” She was just happy to have the chance to be there, and willing to do whatever it took.
That kind of thing doesn’t show up in a stat sheet. You can’t measure it with a stopwatch or a tape measure. But any coach should be thrilled to have someone with that kind of heart and dedication. In this self-centered day and age those qualities seem to be few and far between.
Conditioning without conditioning
As I watch and hear about various practices, it’s amazing to me how much practice time gets wasted on pure conditioning. For example, coaches will have their players line up on a foul line, then have them run endless rounds of 60′ sprints. In the meantime, the clock is ticking and you’re not solving any of your other softball-related concerns, such as throwing and catching.
Now don’t get me wrong. It’s not that I don’t see the value of conditioning. I do. I wouldn’t be checking out the Softball Performance web site all the time if I didn’t. But when you’re in-season, or even preparing for the season, running to run is just wasting time. Don’t even get me started on distance running!
Last night we ran a drill that on the surface is aimed at improving our ability to throw and catch on the run. It’s a variation of the four corners drill, where you set a player on each base and throw the ball around. Normally when this drill is run you stack two or three players at each base and alternate. Sometimes you throw to the left and run to the right, or throw right and run left to the next base to get a little movement in. But with two or three players waiting at the next base there’s no sense of urgency to get there, and the running is more of a job.
So we took it down to its bare essentials. One player on each base, throw left and run right. Now it’s a sprint, because that ball can get thrown around the bases a lot faster than anyone can jog. Depending on where you are, you barely have enough time to get there.
We ran the drill three times with each group. Do the math. Four sprints, three times each, equals 12 sprints. To make sure they were full sprints, we timed each set with a stopwatch, and on the third go-’round we offered a prize (a page of coupons to Dick’s Sporting Goods that I’d gotten for free) to each participant on the winning team. Later we used different people for baserunners in a fielding drill, which increased the amount of running considerably. But never, at any time, did we say “now it’s time for conditioning.” Everything was done within a softball context.
Imagine trying to motivate your team to run 20, 25, 30 sprints just for the sake of conditioning. You could find yourself mightily challenged. But put it into the right context and you won’t have to motivate them. They will motivate themselves and each other. And you’ll improve the conditioning of your athletes.
It’s about time to end the time limits
Over the weekend the Mundelein Thunder 16U team I coached played in an NSA World Series qualifier. The rules for the tournament stated that no new inning could start after one hour and fifteen minutes. Not just in pool play but in bracket play too.
That is just insane. The time elapsed to play one fastpitch softball game from beginning to end was less than that for a youth soccer, hockey, or basketball game. That’s just not right. All of those sports by nature have a clock, with natural breaks (quarters or halves) to reset strategy and make substitutions. They’re oriented toward a clock, and cutting out a little time per period doesn’t have a huge impact on the game.
Putting a clock on softball does. After all, as George Carlin says, it’s a pastoral sport played in a park. Or as Yogi Berra said, it ain’t over ’til it’s over. When you put a time limit on softball, especially one as short as 75 minutes, you have changed the essential nature of the game.
If you are dedicated to giving your players the opportunity to play (as I am), rather than the opportunity to watch their friends win trophies, a 75 minute time limit is particularly tough to deal with. You have to be ready to make substitutions around the 35 minute mark. Not so bad if you’re the home team. But if you’re the visitors and want to sub when you go on defense, some kids aren’t going to play very much. I find that managing the time is far more stressful than managing the game.
But even if you’re not trying to squeeze in all your players it can still be rough. Some teams, for whatever reason, take a little while to get going. By they time they’re hitting on all cylinders the game is over or nearly so. They never get a chance to establish their rhythm, wear down their opponents, or get the feel of the game. It’s wham, bam, thank you ma’am, clear the dugouts so the next team can get in. It definitely favors the team with the biggest, strongest pitcher since hitters sometimes need a couple of at bats before they can zone in on the pitcher. Hey, it took Arizona three full games to figure out Monica Abbott.
This is a phenomenon peculiar to summer ball. High school games can (and sometimes do) go on forever, as two worthy opponents slug it out. College games are the same, as is youth league play.
It’s tempting to say the time limit is driven by greedy tournament directors trying to squeeze 10 lbs. of teams in a 5 lb. facility. But that’s not necessarily true, at least in the majority of cases. What it probably points to more is a lack of adequate facilities to host these summer tournaments.
Not sure what the answer is, but after experiencing it this weekend I think all tournament directors should be required to post what the time limits will be where they have the entry information. That way coaches can at least make an informed decision BEFORE they’ve committed their teams and their budgets. As a postscipt, I once took a team to a tournament where the 1:15 time limit was cut to an hour because of rain the day before. Needless to say I’ve never gone back there.
At the high school level and above, two solid teams can complete a game in 1:30 to 1:45. If you have to have a time limit, use one of those. An hour and fifteen minutes doesn’t serve anyone well.
Sacrificing speed for control
Here’s another one that’s said a lot that drives me crazy. A pitcher will be in pitching a game. Apparently couldn’t find the plate if it was made uranium and she had a Geiger counter, so her coach advises her to “slow it down and throw strikes” or something to that effect.
I understand why it’s being said. If your pitcher keeps walking everyone it’s going to be tough to win the game. But having your pitcher slow down her motion in order to gain control is extremely counter-productive, both for her and for the team. If she has been working very hard to learn to be an effective pitcher, asking her to completely change what she’s doing is going to set her back. You’d actually be better off taking her out and putting someone else in there. After all, if speed doesn’t matter and you just want strikes, that isn’t that tough of a goal. You can put pretty much anyone in there to lob meatballs in order to avoid the almighty walk.
What got me thinking about this one is an article that re-ran recently in a business newspaper called Investors Business Daily, or IBD for short. In addition to the usual business articles about corporations and such they like to run articles about leadership and success. It just so happened that I picked up the issue where they were talking about a particular major league baseball pitcher who had the very same problem we’re discussing. He threw hard, but he was wild.
According to the article, when the pitcher had been in the league a couple of years “He’d go six or seven innings, throw 160 pitches, walk seven guys, strike out 15.” His strikeout-to-walk ratio ran close to 1:1 for several years, starting in the minors and continuing to the majors. He could chuck his fastball in the high 90s, which helped keep his ERA low (and kept him in the majors) but it could go anywhere. Think Nuke Lalouche in Bull Durham. He was also advised to slow down and get the ball over, ut he kept working at it, making changes in his mechanics to improve his control instead. It took a while, but he eventually harnessed his speed, and in six years made four All-Star teams, finished in the top 10 in Cy Young award voting five times (winning one) and dominated the game. The pitcher’s name? Randy Johnson.
In the same article, pitching coach Brent Strom is quoted as saying “With a pitcher like Johnson, who throws very hard but wild, you’re better off letting him be wild for a while. There’s a saying: ‘The best way to ruin a pitcher is to try and make him a pitcher.’ We take these guys who are a little wild, and we immediately want to slow them down to get more control. Invariably guys go from throwing 98-99 mph and wild to 91 and still wild. Taking away what a pitcher does best is the wrong thing to do.”
Yes, it can be hard to watch the girl you thought would be your ace walking half the Western world in a single game. But assuming she is practicing and taking lessons to learn her craft, you’re not doing her any favors by telling her to slow down. All you’re doing is taking away the one thing in her that made you want her in the first place.
Control is not a goal. It’s not something you have to work at separately. It is a result of good mechanics plain and simple. Encourage your pitchers to use their bodies properly to throw the ball and you’ll see plenty of strikes. Maybe not today, but it will happen if they work at it properly.
And don’t even bother telling her to “just throw strikes.” That’s a waste of breath, because unless she’s just emerged from a cave for the first time ever she knows she’s supposed to be throwing strikes. It’s just a lot harder than it looks.
You are what you practice
There is a warm-up drill I’ve seen many teams use that I just don’t get. Basically, two lines of players stand facing each other, their feet firmly planted in the ground. They then throw the ball back and forth between partners, rotating their trunks and shoulders. Generally speaking, they also chit-chat with one another as they perform this drill.
Now, I get what the drill is supposed to accomplish. It’s supposed to stretch the trunk muscles and get the shoulders involved in throwing. What it is actually doing, though, is teaching players to throw face-on and flat-footed — often times with their weight on their heels. Then coaches wonder why, at a critical moment in the game, their players try to make a quick throw flat-footed from their heels.
Think about it. What do we coaches always stress in working with our players? Muscle memory. It’s how we justify making them do boring reptitions of the same skills. “You have to build muscle memory” we say as they hit their 100th ball off a tee or throw their 100th pitch in a practice session. With enough proper repetitions, they no longer have to think about the skill. They just execute it automatically.
Well, muscle memory doesn’t know a good drill from a bad drill. So if players stand flat-footed facing each other and throw by only moving their trunks and shoulders, what are they building? That’s right — muscle memory. And that’s what they’ll call on when they need to make a throw.
It makes a lot more sense to practice a skill the way you want it executed in a game. Especially if you’re warming up to play one. For throwing, that means shuffling your feet to put your body into a sideways position so you know how to find it when you need it. Players should be practicing quick footwork during warmups, not no footwork, so they have the skills they need. Doing anything else, especially before a game, just doesn’t make sense.
This is not to say this drill has no value at all. It’s a good beginner drill to teach young players to rotate their upper bodies — although I prefer they do it from their knees to separate the drill from the standard throwing motion. But once they understand how to use their shoulders you’re a lot better off having them start sideways and throw through with a proper motion.
The other reason teams sometimes use this drill is for a dynamic warmup of the upper body. But that’s something you can also accomplish with standard stretching. When it’s time to throw, then throw — the way you expect it to be done in a game. You will be what you practice. Practice for success.
Kudos where they are due
In my opinion, one of the toughest things to do is keep your cool in the middle of an important game, especially when your season is on the line. A couple of key errors, a bad pitch, hitting into an untimely double play, or any of a dozen other things can cause even the best coaches to melt down, lose faith, or hang their heads. Not that I’m putting myself into the “best coaches” category, but I know I’ve had that meltdown.
That potential was there in the HS game I was watching today. A couple of throwing errors in the top of the 13th inning that led to two runs could’ve caused the wheels to come off the wagon. But they didn’t. Instead, I watched the coaches keep the girls in the game, and believe they could come back. Which they did, plating three runs on three hits in the bottom of the inning to earn the victory. Two of the hits were by players who made the throwing errors, and a two-run double came from the #8 hitter. That’s what makes it so impressive.
I readily admit I can be a bit(?) judgmental on other coaches from time to time. But I can also recognize a job well done. Tonight I saw a textbook example of the difference a coaching staff can make in the toughest part of the game – the mental game. Kudos to both coaches for helping their team do what it takes to win.
Life in the Fastpitch Lane 