Ga Southern

YoungSting

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
317
Bunting for hits is a completely different animal from sacrifice bunts.

The problem with sac bunting stats is that it reflects results, not intention. I could try to lay down a bunt for a hit and get out, but just because guys were on base, it counts as a sac.
 

L41k18

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
177
The problem with sac bunting stats is that it reflects results, not intention. I could try to lay down a bunt for a hit and get out, but just because guys were on base, it counts as a sac.

Usually it's pretty easy to tell the difference. A sacrifice bunt is just that; you're squared away very early & the absolute most important thing is deadening the ball in fair territory..... you are giving yourself up.

When bunting for a hit you square later, are immediately running out of the box and are trying to get the ball past the pitcher, generally down one baseline or the other.

The official scorer has the discretion on the ruling, if there is any doubt.... most of the time it's obvious.
 

YoungSting

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
317
Usually it's pretty easy to tell the difference. A sacrifice bunt is just that; you're squared away very early & the absolute most important thing is deadening the ball in fair territory..... you are giving yourself up.

When bunting for a hit you square later, are immediately running out of the box and are trying to get the ball past the pitcher, generally down one baseline or the other.

The official scorer has the discretion on the ruling, if there is any doubt.... most of the time it's obvious.

Yes, those are the definitions and ideas behind the 2. But even if I try to bunt for a hit with runners on, but get out, it’s still a sac. And even if I’m trying to sac, get a perfect bunt, safe first, it goes down as a hit.

But the bigger argument is that are specific and a small amount of times where a sac bunt is actually the correct play
 

Techcaster572

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
296
Weekend starters are as follows:
Friday Night- Camron Hill
Saturday - Aeden Finateri
Sunday- Mason Patel

I'm thinking Busse is more comfortable coming in to close.

Just speculation but I look towards mid season when Logan takes over the Sunday role
 

orientalnc

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
10,051
Location
Oriental, NC
A fun reality for the to ponder and why Cornell is happy to be in Atlanta this weekend.

Ithaca, NY weather:

Friday...Mostly cloudy. A chance of rain showers in the afternoon. Highs in the upper 40s. Northwest winds 5 to 10 mph. Chance of rain 30 percent.

Friday Night...A chance of rain showers in the evening. Mostly cloudy with a chance of snow showers. Lows 10 to 15. Northwest winds 15 to 20 mph. Chance of precipitation 50 percent.

Saturday...Mostly cloudy in the morning, then clearing. A 50 percent chance of snow showers. Highs in the lower 20s. Northwest winds 15 to 20 mph.

Saturday Night...Mostly clear. Lows 10 to 15. Northwest winds 10 to 15 mph.

Sunday...Partly sunny. Highs in the lower 40s.

Sunday Night...Mostly cloudy with a chance of snow and rain showers. Lows in the upper 20s. Chance of precipitation 30 percent
 

FittedJacket

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
514
Weekend starters are as follows:
Friday Night- Camron Hill
Saturday - Aeden Finateri
Sunday- Mason Patel

I'm thinking Busse is more comfortable coming in to close.

Just speculation but I look towards mid season when Logan takes over the Sunday role
You spelled Friday wrong
 

GTNavyNuke

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
10,075
Location
Williamsburg Virginia
No problem with your points but I wasn't thinking or talking about winning the CWS, just advancing out of regionals (top 16) or even more regularly making the NCAAs (~top 45). Winning the CWS or WS takes being very good and somewhat lucky.

In the last 15 years (not counting 2020 COVID year) here's how we've done in post season:
  • Haven't made NCAAs 4 times (27%). We had the talent last year overall to go, just not the pitching. Other 3 years I'd contend we should have been able to go.
  • Lost in someone else's regional 7 times (47%), here's where @FredJacket point is valid that we get tough regional matchups in the SouthEast. But when you aren't in the top 16 teams, you should expect to be a distinct underdog and #2 seed only advances like maybe 25% of the time.
  • Lost in our own regional 4 times (27%). We were distinct favorite and should have won. No excuses here about luck I hope.

Now this is the 15 year record I would expect with our talent:
  • Don't make NCAA 2 times
  • Lose in other people regionals 6 times
  • Lose in own regional once
  • Advance past regionals 6 times, 3 of which went to CWS.
Same coach, in first 15 years.
 

LargeFO

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,470
Now this is the 15 year record I would expect with our talent:
  • Don't make NCAA 2 times
  • Lose in other people regionals 6 times
  • Lose in own regional once
  • Advance past regionals 6 times, 3 of which went to CWS.
Same coach, in first 15 years.

Sounds about right and don't think that would've been asking for the world.
 

FredJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,292
Location
Fredericksburg, Virginia
Thoughts on tonight's game 1 versus Cornell.

Overall, I thought that Cornell has some good hitters who had good ab's.

Anyone concerned about tonight's close game and 5-2 deficit heading into the 7th inning, see below.

I'd point out the Kennesaw State destroyed # 10 Clemson 18-1 in Clemson. Stony Brook beat #3 LSU at home 5-2. #4 Florida started the year off losing its first game at home to St Johns. # 6 Vandy has lost to Dayton & FAU so far this year. # 1 Wake loses midweek to UNC Greensboro.

My point is just like Al Davis used to say "Just win baby". Winning today is RPI neutral. A loss could've stung the team RPI. I'll take it!

I never thought the game was in jeopardy even down 5-2. This team just keeps battling offensively.

I like that CDH & CMT were trying to get pitchers experience in key situation.
Cam Hill- Tough 1st but not cause he got hit. Just finding his groove. Once he found it, he looked outstanding in the 2nd, 3rd, & 4th.
Camron Landry- Struggled a bit but good to see him get some pt to see what we have in the transfer.
Brett Thomas- Transfer pitcher from USC looked good overall. Cornell hit him where they ain't.
Riley Stanford- So good to see this kid on the bump. He's got a mid 90's fastball that is lively.
Terry Busse- Good to see no runs given up. He just seems more comfortable coming in to close or relief.
Michael Kovala- His first ncaa appearance. Pitched for his home country in the world baseball classic.

Offense:
They just keep grinding. Just relentless.
Drew Burress- What more needs to be said. So far against this level of competition, he's a freshmen all american. It'll be interesting to see what he does the next couple of weekends against Uga and Nc State.

Payton Green- This kid hit the brock building and still not certain it landed yet.

Matthew Ellis- I really like this kid and what he did at Indiana. Just feel like he's pressing a bit. His 2nd ab he hit a rope up the middle. Other ab's rolled over on the ball. Just seems to be wanting to live up to transfer expectations imo vs just going out there and playing ball. I think a move to 5th or 6th in the batting order may help. He's a huge presence in our lineup and I just think the 2 hole is better suited for Beccheti or Yunger.

Speaking of Yunger...I hope he is okay. I was down the 3rd base line and saw him crash into the wall making a nice play but i watched him and he kept trying to move his arm and shoulder.

Carson Kerce got the call at 3rd tonight after Yunger got hurt. Made some nice plays at 3rd. Seems like the two freshmen are battling for the backup spot at 3rd in Jaros and Kerce.

Good to see Giesler hit that moonshot in the 8th.

All in all. I'll take the 9-6 win and 5-0 overall.

Look forward to being back at it at the Rusty C tomorrow (I Know it's Mcnease but it's always the Rusty C to me)!

Go Jackets!!!
Good stuff. FYI ... there is a Cornell thread that's fabulous 🙂
 

Squints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,255
I am not a baseball fan but the topic of "luck" in any sports is fascinating to me. After a quick Google, the fact that there is a coach who has won 10 MNC's and another who has 5 (at two different schools no less) suggests that "luck" appears to be within one's control a bit.

Most of those championships came in a different universe of college sports so I don't think it's a useful comparison but to have extended success like that you have to be both good and lucky. Particularly in baseball where the variance of outcomes is a lot higher than pretty much any other sport. The sport is inherently random. And that is amplified when compressed to a small number of games in a tournament setting. This is true all the way from little league to MLB. It has been examined and dissected over and over and over again. It is what it is.

It's rarely all luck one way or the other but I don't think anyone is saying that. It's just a straw man the same half dozen people trot out when they want to complain. But pretending like it doesn't play a role or hand waving it away just tells me you don't understand the sport.
 

Squints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,255
Ehh there’s always going to be room for bunting (a very small room). Im with you on modernity, but modernity is OBP, and getting on base does not discriminate in how you do it. In college ball, we are not going to have 9 guys starting that can mash every pitcher. But if you have bat control and speed, bunting should be in your arsenal.

However, I will put myself back on the fence by saying one of the reasons binging doesn’t work is because it’s just not practiced enough. But it’s hard to argue for more practice time for bunting when it’s realistically such a small part.

Of course there's room for it! It's just a tool you should have in your toolbox like anything else you can ask your players do. The problem is when you reach for that tool too often. which, in my opinion, we do. And to be clear I am referring to sacrifice bunting. It sounds like you're referring to bunting for a hit. Not the same thing and I'm way more on board with that. The two should not be conflated.
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
5,141
It's rarely all luck one way or the other but I don't think anyone is saying that. It's just a straw man the same half dozen people trot out when they want to complain. But pretending like it doesn't play a role or hand waving it away just tells me you don't understand the sport.
I admitted to not being a huge baseball fan but played it as a young man. In golf the phrase "rub of the green" applies to the random odd things that can happen like a perfect approach shot that should have been close to the cup but instead hits the flagstick and bounces into a hazard (happened to Tom Lehman iirc as he was in contention on the last few hole of a major years ago). However it is widely assumed in golf that luck evens out over time and that Woods or Nicklaus were not just "luckier" than their peers. IIRC, in the modern era, the guy at Vandy has won at least two MNC's under the current format. Is he lucky or are there other answers at play? I am a bit surprised that people with our training believe so readily in "luck" as a valid root cause for anything, although I am aware that not everyone here has an engineering background.
 

FredJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,292
Location
Fredericksburg, Virginia
I admitted to not being a huge baseball fan but played it as a young man. In golf the phrase "rub of the green" applies to the random odd things that can happen like a perfect approach shot that should have been close to the cup but instead hits the flagstick and bounces into a hazard (happened to Tom Lehman iirc as he was in contention on the last few hole of a major years ago). However it is widely assumed in golf that luck evens out over time and that Woods or Nicklaus were not just "luckier" than their peers. IIRC, in the modern era, the guy at Vandy has won at least two MNC's under the current format. Is he lucky or are there other answers at play? I am a bit surprised that people with our training believe so readily in "luck" as a valid root cause for anything, although I am aware that not everyone here has an engineering background.
This all started (as usual) with a general debate over whether CDH is a good coach (or not)? Has his time passed (or not)? Could we have done better with someone different (or not) over the last 15 years or so? There is a spectrum of opinions and no consensus; but for sake of the discussion, I'll generalize that there seem to be 2 groups that engage on this.

Group 1: CDH's record speaks for itself. He's the winningest active head coach in D1 baseball because he WINS. Period. The lack of post-season success can be attributed to lots of things.
And assuming "anybody" could have his regular season record (and get to post-season)... and that his post-season record is clear evidence he's not 'good enough'... well, those ideas flies in the face of his actual record as a coach. [I happen to be of this mindset ..Group 1]

Group 2: The post-season is what really matters...or needs the scrutiny. After ALL these years, CDH and Ga Tech baseball should have been more consistent in getting out of regionals/supers. He's achieved the minimum expectations over the years on that front; and that isn't good enough. Omaha only twice... and 1st time was his 1st season... (minimal credit for that)

I agree with @Squints ... nobody is suggesting "luck" is the main factor or even a significant one. His word "variance" (compared to other sports) is a much better word. Baseball ... and particularly college baseball's postseason... generates a lot of outcomes that are not aligned with a statistical expectation.

I happen to believe 2 things are true. 1) CDH is all I'd want in a coach. His record and success speak for themselves. An unknown "other option" (for me) could easily have resulted in a much worse record and fan experience for me. 2) The lack of success in the post-season is a result of the variance of college baseball and other factors less in his control than others seem to think.

Entering 2024, his record at Ga Tech was 1170-632 (.650)

Ga Tech has consistently won [1.95] out of 3 games under Coach Hall. I suppose some may think that does not make him a good coach. I can't help you there. So... assuming that IS a good/great job coaching baseball in the ACC for 30 years... let's continue. :)

In order to advance out of a regional, you need a better winning % over that weekend than 65%. You have to go 3-0 (1.000), 3-1 (.750), or 4-1 (.800)... depending on how it plays out.

In order to advance to the CWS from the SR, you don't actually need to be that good compared to regional, just 2-0 or 2-1... still greater than 65%.

My only point there is in order to advance in the post-season, a team MUST win at a high rate... its not a coin flip.

I understand how some would say this makes Group 2's point for them... HOW is it possible for Ga Tech to fail to advance as much as it has? I just don't see it that way. While I hate it and I "want it to be different" ... with college baseball the way it is... it is not CRAZY for a very good team and a very good coach to have the outcomes Ga Tech has. It is frustrating and difficult to accept but not (imo) obvious evidence the problem is CDH.

ETA... not asking people to pick sides. My generalizing on "camps" was to make my points... nothing more.
 
Last edited:

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
5,141
This all started (as usual) with a general debate over whether CDH is a good coach (or not)? Has his time passed (or not)? Could we have done better with someone different (or not) over the last 15 years or so? There is a spectrum of opinions and no consensus; but for sake of the discussion, I'll generalize that there seem to be 2 groups that engage on this.

Group 1: CDH's record speaks for itself. He's the winningest active head coach in D1 baseball because he WINS. Period. The lack of post-season success can be attributed to lots of things.
And assuming "anybody" could have his regular season record (and get to post-season)... and that his post-season record is clear evidence he's not 'good enough'... well, those ideas flies in the face of his actual record as a coach. [I happen to be of this mindset ..Group 1]

Group 2: The post-season is what really matters...or needs the scrutiny. After ALL these years, CDH and Ga Tech baseball should have been more consistent in getting out of regionals/supers. He's achieved the minimum expectations over the years on that front; and that isn't good enough. Omaha only twice... and 1st time was his 1st season... (minimal credit for that)

I agree with @Squints ... nobody is suggesting "luck" is the main factor or even a significant one. His word "variance" (compared to other sports) is a much better word. Baseball ... and particularly college baseball's postseason... generates a lot of outcomes that are not aligned with a statistical expectation.

I happen to believe 2 things are true. 1) CDH is all I'd want in a coach. His record and success speak for themselves. An unknown "other option" (for me) could easily have resulted in a much worse record and fan experience for me. 2) The lack of success in the post-season is a result of the variance of college baseball and other factors less in his control than others seem to think.

Entering 2024, his record at Ga Tech was 1170-632 (.650)

Ga Tech has consistently won [1.95] out of 3 games under Coach Hall. I suppose some may think that does not make him a good coach. I can't help you there. So... assuming that IS a good/great job coaching baseball in the ACC for 30 years... let's continue. :)

In order to advance out of a regional, you need a better winning % over that weekend than 65%. You have to go 3-0 (1.000), 3-1 (.750), or 4-1 (.800)... depending on how it plays out.

In order to advance to the CWS from the SR, you don't actually need to be that good compared to regional, just 2-0 or 2-1... still greater than 65%.

My only point there is in order to advance in the post-season, a team MUST win at a high rate... its not a coin flip.

I understand how some would say this makes Group 2's point for them... HOW is it possible for Ga Tech to fail to advance as much as it has? I just don't see it that way. While I hate it and I "want it to be different" ... with college baseball the way it is... it is not CRAZY for a very good team and a very good coach to have the outcomes Ga Tech has. It is frustrating and difficult to accept but not (imo) obvious evidence the problem is CDH.

ETA... not asking people to pick sides. My generalizing on "camps" was to make my points... nothing more.
Well thought out post. And, fwiw, I am not knowledgeable enough to even pretend to be in a "camp" on this topic one way or the other. I may have 6 posts in the baseball forum in my entire time on GT Swarm. I only weighed in because I am intrigued by the topic of luck and its use in sports. Especially when 9or because) none of us (assumption being made here of course) have ever used that word or even thought to use that word in our own professional settings.
 
Top