Auburn, Baseball

[GT33]

still think that ump changed the course of the game. 7-1 B3 with 2 out. King makes a perfect pitch to end the inning. Should have been out of it with a low 50s pitch count. That blown call not only handed them 3 runs but ended King’s day. He probably goes another inning or 2 without that and we bridge to Busse before they can catch up.

Ump did ok for the most part but fell asleep 3 or 4 times at fairly crucial moments at the end of the day, the end result were massive momentum shifts. If any of those did not happen, well we’re looking at a convincing road win. He must have ADD because he was staring straight at most of those calls and flat out botched them.

 

[senoiajacket]

The game was lost for want of getting a third out in three of the middle innings. Auburn scored seven two-out runs, four in the third, two in the fifth and five in the sixth to tie the game.

Carwile really did pitch well this time around, despite giving up the loss.

Next up on the road this weekend: no. 3 Louisville.

How much does it hurt a guy not to have a 92-94 MPH fastball, all other things equal? If a pitcher has good secondary pitches and decent control, can they generally be successful with a 88-89MPH fastball?

If someone has good movement on an 89MPH FB, does it hurt them that much that it might be 3-4MPH slower than harder throwers?

I know this is a complicated question with a ton of variables (secondary pitches, command, movement, RH vs LH, etc.). I ask it because it seemed like our guys (with the exception of King and Busse) were all 87-89 MPH and seemed to struggle putting people away (except for Carwile, who was outstanding last night). It just "seems" like for most other top D1 baseball schools, 92-94MPH is the norm and 87-89 is the exception and its the opposite for us. I was listening to a D1 podcast earlier this week and when they discussed programs in their top 25 they seemed to mention multiple pitchers (starter and bullpen) they could bring in throwing 92-97. Maybe I am just grasping at straws here trying to make sense of our struggles??

I know personally, for a closer, I have always felt a lot more comfortable with a guy who could come in and throw 97-98 that was slightly erratic but just could blow guys away than a guy who throws in the high 80s and tricks people.

 

[Lone Star Jacket]

Ump did ok for the most part but fell asleep 3 or 4 times at fairly crucial moments at the end of the day, the end result were massive momentum shifts. If any of those did not happen, well we’re looking at a convincing road win. He must have ADD because he was staring straight at most of those calls and flat out botched them.

Didn’t he ump the Mississippi Valley State - New Orleans game just a couple days ago?

 

[LargeFO]

All of that Danny Borell hype. Never understood it. Why? Just because he was part of the Yankees. So what?

 

[FredJacket]

All of that Danny Borell hype. Never understood it. Why? Just because he was part of the Yankees. So what?

When you're starving... everything looks more tasty.

 

[GT33]

Didn’t he ump the Mississippi Valley State - New Orleans game just a couple days ago?

No where near as bad as that guy. He was off the charts.

 

[augustabuzz]

How much does it hurt a guy not to have a 92-94 MPH fastball, all other things equal? If a pitcher has good secondary pitches and decent control, can they generally be successful with a 88-89MPH fastball?

If someone has good movement on an 89MPH FB, does it hurt them that much that it might be 3-4MPH slower than harder throwers?

I know this is a complicated question with a ton of variables (secondary pitches, command, movement, RH vs LH, etc.). I ask it because it seemed like our guys (with the exception of King and Busse) were all 87-89 MPH and seemed to struggle putting people away (except for Carwile, who was outstanding last night). It just "seems" like for most other top D1 baseball schools, 92-94MPH is the norm and 87-89 is the exception and its the opposite for us. I was listening to a D1 podcast earlier this week and when they discussed programs in their top 25 they seemed to mention multiple pitchers (starter and bullpen) they could bring in throwing 92-97. Maybe I am just grasping at straws here trying to make sense of our struggles??

I know personally, for a closer, I have always felt a lot more comfortable with a guy who could come in and throw 97-98 that was slightly erratic but just could blow guys away than a guy who throws in the high 80s and tricks people.

Greg Maddux got by with 88-89.

 

[senoiajacket]

Greg Maddux got by with 88-89.

Yes he did, so it can be done. I think he might have been a little faster than that in his early days, but not sure. Not too many like him.

 

[GTJackets]

Greg Maddux got by with 88-89.

Admittedly this was back in my college days of the mid-to-late-90's.

One of my roommates was a pitcher on our college team. One of the tops in NAIA at the time. "Junk pitcher" that lived off a nasty curve. Made many batters look silly. He got a look from a few scouts his senior year. But they all told the coach the same thing, his fastball wasn't fast enough. Coach said he had many of them tell him that if Maddux were coming up through the system at that time he wouldn't have even gotten a look.

I remember thinking how ridiculous it was to think we could have been only a few years from being robbed of the chance to witness Maddux greatness because scouts no longer valued control.

 

[eokerholm]

Everyone touts "Command over Velo", but they recruit via Velo. It's a fact!
Depends if you want someone that can paint the corners and hit spots, get weak contact for outs or you're going for someone a little more wild and get more swing and misses.
Common theme is people prefer the weak contact to keep the fielders engaged, vs sitting around in high K games. I see both view points.
If your guy is shoving, let him shove. Defense should be elite enough to wake up if the ball is hit in their direction, but agree, more engagement better for less errors.... but with weak contact you run the risk of a blooper sneaking through, etc.

When teams would come to PG and play east cobb, they would throw their slowest guys and the elite hitters would have issues re-timing it. So closers just need a change of velo or stuff to be something "different" to the batters. One isn't necessarily better than the other.

Maxwell sold more Pepto Bismol with all the anxiety induced and walks, effective but couldn't paint.

Outs are outs. Just get outs!

 

[senoiajacket]

Everyone touts "Command over Velo", but they recruit via Velo. It's a fact!
Depends if you want someone that can paint the corners and hit spots, get weak contact for outs or you're going for someone a little more wild and get more swing and misses.

It's really quite simple. I prefer a pitcher that has both ...... I can get lobster with my steak, why not command and velo (TIC).

 

[Squints]

Wow.....this comment really struck a nerve with me. I never thought I would EVER hear this comparison in my lifetime. Or maybe I merely hoped for it. As one who strives to be optimistic, as least Coach Burrell accomplishes this away from the public eye and isn't in the media as much. There's that to be thankful for anyways!

Truthfully I don't know that I actually believe that but it's relative to expectations for me. It was pretty clear to me early on that Collins was way out of his depth and the bottom had a good chance of falling out of the football program. I was expecting Borrell to put up some solid staffs and it just has not happened. Not even close.

 

[Squints]

Greg Maddux got by with 88-89.

We gotta stop bringing up Greg Maddux in these conversations whenever velocity comes up. Greg Maddux is a freak of nature and arguably the greatest modern pitcher of all time. That's why he was able to get by. He had 80 grade control, command, and movement. We're not working with anyone like that here. It's not a fair comparison.