In a lot of ways, throwing live pitch is a metaphor for raising a child. I have a pitching machine for Logan, but for actual batting practice, you need to throw live pitch.
I don't have a very good arm. I don't have good control, but there are certain things I need to practice with him. Yesterday, I actually let one get away from me and it hit Logan in the head. Fortunately, he responded exactly the way he should: by turning his head so it glances off the helmet and doesn't crack him in the face.
I also have practiced deliberately throwing high and away and high to teach him to look for those pitches and lay off them.
I also work a lot with throwing inside because those pitches are probably the hardest to handle, but can be turned into great hits if you know how to deal with them.
Sort of like an innoculation, you do a little bit of nasty stuff to them in a somewhat controlled environment so the really nasty stuff won't hurt them, later.
As a parent, you have to expose your kids to some dangers (small ones, with minimal consequences, you hope) to make sure they can handle them in your absence. With that foundation, you hope they'll be able to handle bigger dangers later in life when you won't be there to watch.
I am not entirely comfortable with live pitch for a lot of reasons. One is that my control isn't that good. Much easier to load up the pitching machine and let it throw perfectly predictable balls to my boy.
Just like in real life, though, he needs something a bit more challenging and realistic to prepare him for the real world.
The reality is that even at his age (in the Under 9 league), he's facing pitching that's harder and nastier than what I throw in practice. Just as life will, at times, come at him harder and nastier than anything he's seen in the controlled conditions of living at home.
The best you can do is prepare them as best you can, but realize that once they leave the on-deck circle, they'll truly be on their own. You can cheer. You can support. However, you have to give them the chance to stand up and succeed or fail on their own merits.
I occassionally have to remind myself that I survived it with the benefit of far less preparation he did. He'll do just fine when the time comes.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Friday, April 30, 2010
Nature Versus Nurture... the Nurture folks are winning the day
There have been a lot of articles recently that suggest that high performers are made, not born. I have never agreed with this. So, I have taken a skeptical eye and reviewed the studies carefully to see what, if anything, can be drawn from them.
You'll hear a lot about "10,000 hours" in the press these days. The most famous person to bring up the number is Malcom Gladwell who discusses it in his book "Outliers". However, other researchers are coming up with the same number. Basically, the assertion is that it takes 10,000 to gain mastery at something.
Here's where I'm going to quibble a little bit. Folks who know my views on the subject know that I think that about 90% (or more) of success in life is determined at birth.
Forrest Gump may have been a multigozillionaire in the movie, but in real life, the prospects for a young person who is borderline mentally retarded are limited. They will be limited in education and opportunities for jobs. They will be limited in how they perform those jobs. All the effort in the world isn't going to take a person who is borderline mentally retarded and put them into a neurosurgery residency after med school.
Physically, I think the differences are even more stark. You can take the slowest kid in the school and put him through 10,000 hours of training and sorry, he'll still probably get absolutely annihilated by he most athletic kid in the school. It just works out that way.
Life isn't fair and the tools you're born with is one of the most unfair aspects of life.
Where I think the 10,000 hours comes in to play is when you already have the tools. For instance, Gladwell mentions the Beatles. As any Beatle freak knows, the Beatles were regarded as being a band that wasn't very good, even compared to the local bands in the Liverpool area. They went to Hamburg and became the house band at the Kieserkeller. There, they spent a few years playing 8, 10 or 12 hours a day. They got kicked out of Germany a couple of times (once for lighting a condom on fire, another time when it was found out that George Harrison was too young to legally work.) But they kept going over.
Eventually, they got so sharp that they played backup on a record by an artist named Tony Sherridan. ("Ain't She Sweet".) The record sold like hotcakes in Brian Epstein's family's furniture store (where Brian sold records in a corner.) Man (or men) met moment, and the rest is history.
Gladwell's assertion is that the Beatles weren't exceptional. They just had the benefit of putting in their 10,000 hours. Frankly, I think that's a bunch of crap. What this argument ignores is that a LOT of bands from Liverpool did house gigs in Hamburg. Only one of them became the Beatles. Other than a few die-hard Mersey-beats like me and a few of my friends, I doubt anybody today can tell you who Rory Storm or Gerry Marsden are.
They not only had the same incubation period as the Beatles, they actually were regarded as having been MUCH BETTER at the time.
What made the Beatles exceptional is that two of the best composers in Rock and Roll coincidentally joined forces in the same band. In fact, even after the band, McCartney went on to have over a dozen platinum albums without Lennon. Lennon went into quasi retirement, but charted every time he recorded and had, if memory serves, 3 or 4 platinum albums. Either career, in and of itself, would have made either artist sensationally successful.
There are other examples, and I would offer similar rebuttals to all of them. I agree that the 10,000 hour figure is informational. It may very well be axiomatic. Where I disagree is that it trumps innate talent. I believe it refines innate talent, but I don't believe for a minute that it trumps it.
Let me give an example that bears out my point. Folks who have little kids can tell you how much they develop in a single year. In feats of athleticism, one year is pretty much all it takes for one kid to be completely superior to another.
Our city holds open tryouts and tries to sponsor two travel teams for each age group. The top 12 players are selected for the "heavy travel" team. The next 12 are selected for the "light travel" team.
Before the season, my son's team, the U9 heavy ("9 and under") scrimmaged the U10 light team. This was our kids' first year of travel ball. The other team not only had the benefit of one more year of growth and physical development, they also had the benefit of having already done one year of travel baseball.
There should have been no contest, if experience were a factor. They had lots of experience and more than twice as much practice than our boys did. Our boys hadn't played a single actual game, yet. PLUS, they were a year older.
Instead, the U9s beat them rather handily. At no point during that game did it appear that the U10s were going to win.
THAT is what I mean by innate genetics. They're such a strong factor that it allowed a bunch of completely inexperienced 9 year olds to defeat a team of older, more seasoned, more practiced 10 year olds. The 10 year olds, by the way, were no slouches. They were hand-selected from a pool of kids who tried out.
Just that, to be the best, you gotta be born on the skinny part of the bell-curve.
If you're there, the 10,000 hours is what you need to function at your optimal level. However, if you're not there, my assertion is that 10,000 or a million hours of practice will never get you to perform at elite level.
You'll hear a lot about "10,000 hours" in the press these days. The most famous person to bring up the number is Malcom Gladwell who discusses it in his book "Outliers". However, other researchers are coming up with the same number. Basically, the assertion is that it takes 10,000 to gain mastery at something.
Here's where I'm going to quibble a little bit. Folks who know my views on the subject know that I think that about 90% (or more) of success in life is determined at birth.
Forrest Gump may have been a multigozillionaire in the movie, but in real life, the prospects for a young person who is borderline mentally retarded are limited. They will be limited in education and opportunities for jobs. They will be limited in how they perform those jobs. All the effort in the world isn't going to take a person who is borderline mentally retarded and put them into a neurosurgery residency after med school.
Physically, I think the differences are even more stark. You can take the slowest kid in the school and put him through 10,000 hours of training and sorry, he'll still probably get absolutely annihilated by he most athletic kid in the school. It just works out that way.
Life isn't fair and the tools you're born with is one of the most unfair aspects of life.
Where I think the 10,000 hours comes in to play is when you already have the tools. For instance, Gladwell mentions the Beatles. As any Beatle freak knows, the Beatles were regarded as being a band that wasn't very good, even compared to the local bands in the Liverpool area. They went to Hamburg and became the house band at the Kieserkeller. There, they spent a few years playing 8, 10 or 12 hours a day. They got kicked out of Germany a couple of times (once for lighting a condom on fire, another time when it was found out that George Harrison was too young to legally work.) But they kept going over.
Eventually, they got so sharp that they played backup on a record by an artist named Tony Sherridan. ("Ain't She Sweet".) The record sold like hotcakes in Brian Epstein's family's furniture store (where Brian sold records in a corner.) Man (or men) met moment, and the rest is history.
Gladwell's assertion is that the Beatles weren't exceptional. They just had the benefit of putting in their 10,000 hours. Frankly, I think that's a bunch of crap. What this argument ignores is that a LOT of bands from Liverpool did house gigs in Hamburg. Only one of them became the Beatles. Other than a few die-hard Mersey-beats like me and a few of my friends, I doubt anybody today can tell you who Rory Storm or Gerry Marsden are.
They not only had the same incubation period as the Beatles, they actually were regarded as having been MUCH BETTER at the time.
What made the Beatles exceptional is that two of the best composers in Rock and Roll coincidentally joined forces in the same band. In fact, even after the band, McCartney went on to have over a dozen platinum albums without Lennon. Lennon went into quasi retirement, but charted every time he recorded and had, if memory serves, 3 or 4 platinum albums. Either career, in and of itself, would have made either artist sensationally successful.
There are other examples, and I would offer similar rebuttals to all of them. I agree that the 10,000 hour figure is informational. It may very well be axiomatic. Where I disagree is that it trumps innate talent. I believe it refines innate talent, but I don't believe for a minute that it trumps it.
Let me give an example that bears out my point. Folks who have little kids can tell you how much they develop in a single year. In feats of athleticism, one year is pretty much all it takes for one kid to be completely superior to another.
Our city holds open tryouts and tries to sponsor two travel teams for each age group. The top 12 players are selected for the "heavy travel" team. The next 12 are selected for the "light travel" team.
Before the season, my son's team, the U9 heavy ("9 and under") scrimmaged the U10 light team. This was our kids' first year of travel ball. The other team not only had the benefit of one more year of growth and physical development, they also had the benefit of having already done one year of travel baseball.
There should have been no contest, if experience were a factor. They had lots of experience and more than twice as much practice than our boys did. Our boys hadn't played a single actual game, yet. PLUS, they were a year older.
Instead, the U9s beat them rather handily. At no point during that game did it appear that the U10s were going to win.
THAT is what I mean by innate genetics. They're such a strong factor that it allowed a bunch of completely inexperienced 9 year olds to defeat a team of older, more seasoned, more practiced 10 year olds. The 10 year olds, by the way, were no slouches. They were hand-selected from a pool of kids who tried out.
Just that, to be the best, you gotta be born on the skinny part of the bell-curve.
If you're there, the 10,000 hours is what you need to function at your optimal level. However, if you're not there, my assertion is that 10,000 or a million hours of practice will never get you to perform at elite level.
The love of the game / 8 year olds burned out on baseball...
Being the dad of a little kid playing baseball can be nerve wracking sometimes. Now that Logan plays travel ball, there's a few risks involved. One of them is that he won't get to enjoy a normal childhood like everybody else. The other is that he might get too much baseball, get burned out, and decide he doesn't like it anymore.
On the "normal childhood" angle, I've got quite a few thoughts. The first is that a lot of "normal childhoods" involve huge stretches of absolute boredom. Logan is an active kid and during months between seasons where he might only have practice a couple times a week, he gets bored.
He's got other kids to play with, but kids being what they are, half the time they're playing. The other half, they're on each other's nerves. So, playing with the neighborhood kids is great... but doing it 7 days a week may not be.
If anything, I've seen him get burned out on playing with other kids in the neighborhood. Sitting at home on the couch, watching TV and saying that he just got into a disagreement. One boy in particular spends so much time with Logan that the two are like brothers. Just like real brothers in real life, sometimes they're together so much that they rub each other the wrong way and really need some time apart.
So, as far as unstructured free-play, I still think he's getting enough of that. Yeah, sometimes the baseball schedule gets pretty intense, with games and practices 4 or 5 days a week. However, that still means 2 or 3 days of just goofing off.
Second, "normal childhood" these days involves a lot of video game playing. I'm not a big fan and neither is Logan's mother. It's one thing to play video games if it's 20 degrees out or there's a huge thunderstorm. However, kids today play video games way too much. I'm actually proud that Logan has never really gotten into them much.
In a nation where obesity is at epidemic proportions, I'd rather see Logan out on a baseball field than sitting on a couch playing video games any day.
This is not to say that there isn't a tradeoff. Logan will almost certainly miss out on a few things because of his baseball schedule. So, yeah, he's going to lose something here and there, but by participating in baseball, he'll get to miss out on a lot of things that aren't necessarily good for him, too.
On balance, I think baseball is a positive experience for Logan. The more he does it, the more positive I think it is. In addition to the physical benefits, there are social benefits and self-esteem benefits as well. As an only child, he also needs chances to interact with people and understand the push-and-pull of social situations.
I did get concerned that travel baseball was just too much at this age. I just saw his team rather lethargic on Tuesday, in a loss to a team they should have beaten easily. I think a little of it was fatigue. They had just finished a gruelling tournament and over the previous 2 weeks, I think they only got about 4 days off from baseball.
It was at that point that I figured Logan might not want to play travel next year. If he wanted to play rec league, that was fine with me.
Also, I work quite a bit with Logan on various things. The team's activities were so numerous that I didn't have time to work with him on skills. Right now, he needs a lot of work at catcher and he needed a tiny bit of work on hitting.
However, I wasn't going to make him do baseball workouts with me on his nights off.
Thursday was a day-off. The coach also made it a voluntary activity to attend the Northview-Southview game on Friday. (Most of the kids on the travel team will eventually attend one of those High Schools.)
So, last night he got to go to his buddy's birthday party. (The same kid who he's like a brother with). Once he got home, though, he was sitting around bored.
He asked if I would go throw the ball with him in the front yard. Well, the answer is almost always "yes" if I can do it, but I was concerned. I said maybe he might want to take the day off and give his arm some rest. He looked genuinely dejected.
I tried to steer him towards maybe throwing a football. Still dejected. I asked if he REALLY wanted to throw a ball, because he didn't have to. He REALLY wanted to throw a baseball.
After a little throwing, he asked if we could get the catcher's gear out so he could work on playing catcher. Sure, no problem.
After that, he asked if we could go down in the basement and fire up the pitching machine. Again, no problem.
The kid just loves baseball. I asked if he wanted to go to the Northview-Southview game and emphasized that he didn't HAVE to. He didn't even hesitate. He wanted to go.
The kid just loves baseball and always has. For as long as he's been able to throw a ball, he's done it constantly. When he was a pre-schooler, he'd take a tennis ball or wiffle ball and throw it against the front door and practice catching it. Over, and over and over again. Every night. For an hour or two every session.
You can't make a person show that kind of interest. You can't manipulate them into it. It just has to be something they love.
So, as his Dad, I have to help him walk the fine line between nurturing a personal passion and not getting to where he's burned out. Honestly, this travel season has been intense so far. I think when it's over, though, he'll really miss it.
On the "normal childhood" angle, I've got quite a few thoughts. The first is that a lot of "normal childhoods" involve huge stretches of absolute boredom. Logan is an active kid and during months between seasons where he might only have practice a couple times a week, he gets bored.
He's got other kids to play with, but kids being what they are, half the time they're playing. The other half, they're on each other's nerves. So, playing with the neighborhood kids is great... but doing it 7 days a week may not be.
If anything, I've seen him get burned out on playing with other kids in the neighborhood. Sitting at home on the couch, watching TV and saying that he just got into a disagreement. One boy in particular spends so much time with Logan that the two are like brothers. Just like real brothers in real life, sometimes they're together so much that they rub each other the wrong way and really need some time apart.
So, as far as unstructured free-play, I still think he's getting enough of that. Yeah, sometimes the baseball schedule gets pretty intense, with games and practices 4 or 5 days a week. However, that still means 2 or 3 days of just goofing off.
Second, "normal childhood" these days involves a lot of video game playing. I'm not a big fan and neither is Logan's mother. It's one thing to play video games if it's 20 degrees out or there's a huge thunderstorm. However, kids today play video games way too much. I'm actually proud that Logan has never really gotten into them much.
In a nation where obesity is at epidemic proportions, I'd rather see Logan out on a baseball field than sitting on a couch playing video games any day.
This is not to say that there isn't a tradeoff. Logan will almost certainly miss out on a few things because of his baseball schedule. So, yeah, he's going to lose something here and there, but by participating in baseball, he'll get to miss out on a lot of things that aren't necessarily good for him, too.
On balance, I think baseball is a positive experience for Logan. The more he does it, the more positive I think it is. In addition to the physical benefits, there are social benefits and self-esteem benefits as well. As an only child, he also needs chances to interact with people and understand the push-and-pull of social situations.
I did get concerned that travel baseball was just too much at this age. I just saw his team rather lethargic on Tuesday, in a loss to a team they should have beaten easily. I think a little of it was fatigue. They had just finished a gruelling tournament and over the previous 2 weeks, I think they only got about 4 days off from baseball.
It was at that point that I figured Logan might not want to play travel next year. If he wanted to play rec league, that was fine with me.
Also, I work quite a bit with Logan on various things. The team's activities were so numerous that I didn't have time to work with him on skills. Right now, he needs a lot of work at catcher and he needed a tiny bit of work on hitting.
However, I wasn't going to make him do baseball workouts with me on his nights off.
Thursday was a day-off. The coach also made it a voluntary activity to attend the Northview-Southview game on Friday. (Most of the kids on the travel team will eventually attend one of those High Schools.)
So, last night he got to go to his buddy's birthday party. (The same kid who he's like a brother with). Once he got home, though, he was sitting around bored.
He asked if I would go throw the ball with him in the front yard. Well, the answer is almost always "yes" if I can do it, but I was concerned. I said maybe he might want to take the day off and give his arm some rest. He looked genuinely dejected.
I tried to steer him towards maybe throwing a football. Still dejected. I asked if he REALLY wanted to throw a ball, because he didn't have to. He REALLY wanted to throw a baseball.
After a little throwing, he asked if we could get the catcher's gear out so he could work on playing catcher. Sure, no problem.
After that, he asked if we could go down in the basement and fire up the pitching machine. Again, no problem.
The kid just loves baseball. I asked if he wanted to go to the Northview-Southview game and emphasized that he didn't HAVE to. He didn't even hesitate. He wanted to go.
The kid just loves baseball and always has. For as long as he's been able to throw a ball, he's done it constantly. When he was a pre-schooler, he'd take a tennis ball or wiffle ball and throw it against the front door and practice catching it. Over, and over and over again. Every night. For an hour or two every session.
You can't make a person show that kind of interest. You can't manipulate them into it. It just has to be something they love.
So, as his Dad, I have to help him walk the fine line between nurturing a personal passion and not getting to where he's burned out. Honestly, this travel season has been intense so far. I think when it's over, though, he'll really miss it.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Baseball Bats for 8-9 year olds
This blog post will have very limited appeal outside of a few baseball dads who really are curious what to buy. Much to the chagrin of my wallet, I'm discovering pretty much everything there is to know about baseball bats for my 8 year old son. I thought I'd try to impart my lessons learned on others who might be looking for a bat to buy.
My son was hitting pretty well with a little cheapie Easton 16.5 once, 29" bat (Easton reflex). This is what is known as a -12.5, or "drop 12.5" bat. The drop is the difference between the length, in inches, and the weight, in ounces. The bat had the standard 2 1/4" barrel.
He switched to a similar 16/29 bat (Easton Reflex) and started hitting the ball even better. Trouble is, both of those Easton aluminum bats are pretty low-end. They're fine aluminum bats, but just like technology in golf clubs, the new, higher-tech stuff really is better and will produce a noticeable difference.
He went 3 for 3 with the thing one game, but in the very next game, he caught an inside pitch close to the hands and it rattled his hands so much it hurt him quite a bit. His hands were shaking and he was in pain. The bats with more technology reduce vibration a bit. After that episode, he wasn't willing to use his 16 ounce any more.
Hitting is as mental as it is physical and once a hitter believes something, it becomes truth. In this case, he believed that using that bat on inside pitches would hurt. He had a point. He didn't want to use that bat anymore.
In our already mammoth bat collection we already had a really good Easton 29/17 that was half composite (Easton Synergy Speed) with an aluminum hitting area. He felt that it was too heavy. Based on his performance with it in a few practices, it looked like it was.
So, I went bat shopping.
At the sporting goods store, they started talking to me about big barrel bats. They had an Easton 29/19 that was the complete top of the line. It's the Speed Stealth (model BSS13XL). They told me that I could take it home and try it out so long as I didn't take it out of the plastic. Went downstairs and hit some wiffle balls with it. Ran up the pitching machine pretty fast and my son was hitting really well.
It's possible to have a heavier bat that feels lighter due to the way the weight is distributed. I thought maybe that was the case, here.
Took the pastic off, making the bat non-returnable. Took my son to some outside cages and threw him live pitch, he hit pretty well. Went to a practice, the coach threw him BP and he hit well. Then, when he faced one of the pitchers on his team, he looked like he was swinging a log.
He started showing a big looping swing, instead of the compact swing he'd been doing so well with. So, I got the bat out of his hands, immediately.
One would have thought that increasing the weight by 3 ounces over what he feels most comfortable with was a dumb move and one would be right. I guess I was hoping that all the technology, increased composite materials and different weight distribution that it might work out. Until he faced live pitch from kids throwing hard, it looked like it might.
Easton makes a youth baseball model called the Speed II XL (LSS6XL) which is a drop 12. That way, Logan could have a 29" bat that was 17 ounces. Still, an ounce heavier, but hoping the balance and technology would offset that.
Unfortunately, when it arrived, I saw that it was a standard barrel bat. He didn't like the weight, and in 3 games where he used it, he did okay, but I've seen him hit better. We'll hang on to it for next year, but the lack of a big barrel is a big deal.
What I really wanted was a big barrel in 16 ounces. I don't know if they make one, but if they do, it'd only be 26" long since the big barrels all seem to come in drop 10 at the lightest. I thought that would just be way too short compared to the 29" bat he's using, now.
I got him an Easton SV12 27/17. It's a big barrel bat, but it is both shorter and heavier than the 29/16 he hits optimally with. I was hoping the shorter barrel would make up for the slightly heavier weight.
Bottom line: right out of the box, he hits better with this bat than any other he has ever swung. I've never seen him rip so many hits deep to the outfield. The big barrel is everything it's cracked up to be.
The weight, due to the shorter length, is not an issue at all. However, the bat has two downsides. The first is that the hitting area on the bat is very, very small. The second is that being 2 inches shorter is a huge deal. He won't be able to reach anything outside the plate and will have trouble reaching down and away strikes. He'll also have to stand a couple of inches closer to the plate, making it harder to turn on inside pitches.
This sort of thing is always a series of tradeoffs. I feel like he also needs a good 29/16 for umps with a big strike zone. So, I'm going to try a Demarini Voodoo 29/16. It should arrive any day now.
I also don't like the very small sweet spot on the SV12. So, we've also got a Demarini Vexxum 27/17 on the way. Really, I'd rather have a 27/17 in the Speed Stealth (model BSS13XL), but at the moment, those bats are going for $300. Easton just did a $50 price drop on the bat, but it will take a while to shake through the system. Probably won't be able to buy at much of a discount until my son is pretty much ready for a 28/18.
Until we can get him into a big barrel 29" bat (which seems like it won't happen until he can swing a 19 ounce bat), I am afraid we'll need to keep a 29" bat with a standard barrel on hand.
So, this year, we'll have a big barrel 27/17, and a standard barrel 29/16 in the bag. I think he needs two bats in the bag.
Next year or later this year, we'll want a 28/18 big barrel and it really won't be that important to have a bat that's 1" longer in the bag. We'll be able to get down to just one bat.
A final note on big barrel bats. The drop 12s, drop 13s, etc., are usually considered youth bats. The big barrels don't seem to come any lighter than a drop 10, and are considered "senior league" bats.
My son was hitting pretty well with a little cheapie Easton 16.5 once, 29" bat (Easton reflex). This is what is known as a -12.5, or "drop 12.5" bat. The drop is the difference between the length, in inches, and the weight, in ounces. The bat had the standard 2 1/4" barrel.
He switched to a similar 16/29 bat (Easton Reflex) and started hitting the ball even better. Trouble is, both of those Easton aluminum bats are pretty low-end. They're fine aluminum bats, but just like technology in golf clubs, the new, higher-tech stuff really is better and will produce a noticeable difference.
He went 3 for 3 with the thing one game, but in the very next game, he caught an inside pitch close to the hands and it rattled his hands so much it hurt him quite a bit. His hands were shaking and he was in pain. The bats with more technology reduce vibration a bit. After that episode, he wasn't willing to use his 16 ounce any more.
Hitting is as mental as it is physical and once a hitter believes something, it becomes truth. In this case, he believed that using that bat on inside pitches would hurt. He had a point. He didn't want to use that bat anymore.
In our already mammoth bat collection we already had a really good Easton 29/17 that was half composite (Easton Synergy Speed) with an aluminum hitting area. He felt that it was too heavy. Based on his performance with it in a few practices, it looked like it was.
So, I went bat shopping.
At the sporting goods store, they started talking to me about big barrel bats. They had an Easton 29/19 that was the complete top of the line. It's the Speed Stealth (model BSS13XL). They told me that I could take it home and try it out so long as I didn't take it out of the plastic. Went downstairs and hit some wiffle balls with it. Ran up the pitching machine pretty fast and my son was hitting really well.
It's possible to have a heavier bat that feels lighter due to the way the weight is distributed. I thought maybe that was the case, here.
Took the pastic off, making the bat non-returnable. Took my son to some outside cages and threw him live pitch, he hit pretty well. Went to a practice, the coach threw him BP and he hit well. Then, when he faced one of the pitchers on his team, he looked like he was swinging a log.
He started showing a big looping swing, instead of the compact swing he'd been doing so well with. So, I got the bat out of his hands, immediately.
One would have thought that increasing the weight by 3 ounces over what he feels most comfortable with was a dumb move and one would be right. I guess I was hoping that all the technology, increased composite materials and different weight distribution that it might work out. Until he faced live pitch from kids throwing hard, it looked like it might.
Easton makes a youth baseball model called the Speed II XL (LSS6XL) which is a drop 12. That way, Logan could have a 29" bat that was 17 ounces. Still, an ounce heavier, but hoping the balance and technology would offset that.
Unfortunately, when it arrived, I saw that it was a standard barrel bat. He didn't like the weight, and in 3 games where he used it, he did okay, but I've seen him hit better. We'll hang on to it for next year, but the lack of a big barrel is a big deal.
What I really wanted was a big barrel in 16 ounces. I don't know if they make one, but if they do, it'd only be 26" long since the big barrels all seem to come in drop 10 at the lightest. I thought that would just be way too short compared to the 29" bat he's using, now.
I got him an Easton SV12 27/17. It's a big barrel bat, but it is both shorter and heavier than the 29/16 he hits optimally with. I was hoping the shorter barrel would make up for the slightly heavier weight.
Bottom line: right out of the box, he hits better with this bat than any other he has ever swung. I've never seen him rip so many hits deep to the outfield. The big barrel is everything it's cracked up to be.
The weight, due to the shorter length, is not an issue at all. However, the bat has two downsides. The first is that the hitting area on the bat is very, very small. The second is that being 2 inches shorter is a huge deal. He won't be able to reach anything outside the plate and will have trouble reaching down and away strikes. He'll also have to stand a couple of inches closer to the plate, making it harder to turn on inside pitches.
This sort of thing is always a series of tradeoffs. I feel like he also needs a good 29/16 for umps with a big strike zone. So, I'm going to try a Demarini Voodoo 29/16. It should arrive any day now.
I also don't like the very small sweet spot on the SV12. So, we've also got a Demarini Vexxum 27/17 on the way. Really, I'd rather have a 27/17 in the Speed Stealth (model BSS13XL), but at the moment, those bats are going for $300. Easton just did a $50 price drop on the bat, but it will take a while to shake through the system. Probably won't be able to buy at much of a discount until my son is pretty much ready for a 28/18.
Until we can get him into a big barrel 29" bat (which seems like it won't happen until he can swing a 19 ounce bat), I am afraid we'll need to keep a 29" bat with a standard barrel on hand.
So, this year, we'll have a big barrel 27/17, and a standard barrel 29/16 in the bag. I think he needs two bats in the bag.
Next year or later this year, we'll want a 28/18 big barrel and it really won't be that important to have a bat that's 1" longer in the bag. We'll be able to get down to just one bat.
A final note on big barrel bats. The drop 12s, drop 13s, etc., are usually considered youth bats. The big barrels don't seem to come any lighter than a drop 10, and are considered "senior league" bats.
Monday, April 26, 2010
The Money Pit II: Monier and Pittier!
The house was really making progress. Mostly, two walls were removed and a bank of ugly flourescent lights was taken out of the kitchen. (Which required installing an actual ceiling and 3 recessed light fixtures.)
The removal of the walls opens the entire house up. Totally different feeling in there.
The wallpaper has mostly been stripped. The living room, other than flooring is mostly done except for paint and trim.
It was getting to the point I could envision myself moving in.
Then, got hit by yet another project that I knew had to be done... I just was hoping it didn't have to be done RIGHT NOW.
Unfortunately, so far, pretty much every project I had hoped to hold off on has had to be done right away.
The only things holding out are the smelly fridge and the garage door opener (which sounds about like a cement mixer.) The rest of the house? All the "someday" projects have become "better do them right now" projects.
This project? Right over the living room that I am having redone is a big flat roof. The previous owners tried to make it a big open patio deck type thing but it's pretty much the worst deck in the world. It's got "torch down" roofing material. The wrought iron railings are flimsy. You wouldn't dare have a party there or even let kids be up there unsupervised.
Worst of all, it's a flat roof. I knew it was going to be a problem sooner or later. Flat roofs always are. Anybody who has ever had a flat roof can tell you: they're an absolute nightmare. They will leak, and when they do, it's absolutely impossible to say for certain where the leak is coming from.
I was lost as to what to do until it dawned on me. When the roof caused me problems, I'd wall in the entire area and make a nice 2nd story sunroom. It'd be 17' x 35', so it'd be darned big. Like everywhere else in my house, the view would be magnificent, especially towards the back of the house. With windows, it would be well-ventilated and could be used on all but the coldest and hottest days of the year.
It was a perfect solution... and now it needs to be implemented right now because this weekend's hard rains have shown that the roof does, indeed, have a leak.
Trying to stay positive about this. As far as additions go, this will be the least expensive possible addition. It doesn't need HVAC, plumbing or even electricity. One of the walls is already built. I don't need the interior to be finished at all. If the studs are showing, that's fine until I can afford to finish off the inside. Eventually, it'll have windows pretty much all the way around, but for the time being, I can install one large-ish window per wall and that will suffice until a future date when I can afford yet more windows.
Basically, one giant (600 sq. ft.) room with bare floors, exposed studs on the walls... it'll just be weathertight, which the current roof isn't.
I am feeling a bit beaten down by this thing, which is characteristic for a money pit owner. It's not even like I have a good handle on everything in the house, though at this point, about the only thing I don't have a plan or money for is flooring. Might be living on bare floors for a few years while my wallet stops bleeding. I really can't afford this project right now, but I can't afford not to do it, either.
Like so much with updating / remodelling a house, you're in for a penny, in for a pound. A lot of times, you can't work incrementally.
So, like I said, we'll be living on bare floors for a while. Also, the kitchen and all the bathrooms will need to be updated. They're all at least functional. Just not particularly appealing.
So, still several more years of projects ahead. By the time I re-do the kitchen and bath, it'll be time for the furnace and A/C to blow. Lordy, please let the furnace and A/C last that long.
Okay, that's the depressing side. On the bright side, my furniture arrived. The walls are knocked out. The lights are slowly but surely being modernized. Got a great Whirlpool Duet front-loading washer and dryer. Some of the upstairs windows have arrived. I assembled the two beds I bought. The wallpaper has been stripped. The house is much, much nicer to be in, now, even though it's sorta torn up and needs paint. I figure the painting might be pretty well done this week.
Not sure what my exact battle plan is for the 3 season room. I have a friend who is a GC in Ohio. I will probably see if he can recommend an architect to draw up a simple plan, have him pull the permits. I'll see if he'll let my guys do everything except maybe the roof. See if he'll let me buy the materials. I just left him a message. Will see how/when he gets back to me.
This just blows. However, I have visions of enjoying my comfy home with the awesome creek and woods view sometime in the near future. I just may be wearing tennis shoes with my pajamas because the first floor will probably be all bare floors.
The removal of the walls opens the entire house up. Totally different feeling in there.
The wallpaper has mostly been stripped. The living room, other than flooring is mostly done except for paint and trim.
It was getting to the point I could envision myself moving in.
Then, got hit by yet another project that I knew had to be done... I just was hoping it didn't have to be done RIGHT NOW.
Unfortunately, so far, pretty much every project I had hoped to hold off on has had to be done right away.
The only things holding out are the smelly fridge and the garage door opener (which sounds about like a cement mixer.) The rest of the house? All the "someday" projects have become "better do them right now" projects.
This project? Right over the living room that I am having redone is a big flat roof. The previous owners tried to make it a big open patio deck type thing but it's pretty much the worst deck in the world. It's got "torch down" roofing material. The wrought iron railings are flimsy. You wouldn't dare have a party there or even let kids be up there unsupervised.
Worst of all, it's a flat roof. I knew it was going to be a problem sooner or later. Flat roofs always are. Anybody who has ever had a flat roof can tell you: they're an absolute nightmare. They will leak, and when they do, it's absolutely impossible to say for certain where the leak is coming from.
I was lost as to what to do until it dawned on me. When the roof caused me problems, I'd wall in the entire area and make a nice 2nd story sunroom. It'd be 17' x 35', so it'd be darned big. Like everywhere else in my house, the view would be magnificent, especially towards the back of the house. With windows, it would be well-ventilated and could be used on all but the coldest and hottest days of the year.
It was a perfect solution... and now it needs to be implemented right now because this weekend's hard rains have shown that the roof does, indeed, have a leak.
Trying to stay positive about this. As far as additions go, this will be the least expensive possible addition. It doesn't need HVAC, plumbing or even electricity. One of the walls is already built. I don't need the interior to be finished at all. If the studs are showing, that's fine until I can afford to finish off the inside. Eventually, it'll have windows pretty much all the way around, but for the time being, I can install one large-ish window per wall and that will suffice until a future date when I can afford yet more windows.
Basically, one giant (600 sq. ft.) room with bare floors, exposed studs on the walls... it'll just be weathertight, which the current roof isn't.
I am feeling a bit beaten down by this thing, which is characteristic for a money pit owner. It's not even like I have a good handle on everything in the house, though at this point, about the only thing I don't have a plan or money for is flooring. Might be living on bare floors for a few years while my wallet stops bleeding. I really can't afford this project right now, but I can't afford not to do it, either.
Like so much with updating / remodelling a house, you're in for a penny, in for a pound. A lot of times, you can't work incrementally.
So, like I said, we'll be living on bare floors for a while. Also, the kitchen and all the bathrooms will need to be updated. They're all at least functional. Just not particularly appealing.
So, still several more years of projects ahead. By the time I re-do the kitchen and bath, it'll be time for the furnace and A/C to blow. Lordy, please let the furnace and A/C last that long.
Okay, that's the depressing side. On the bright side, my furniture arrived. The walls are knocked out. The lights are slowly but surely being modernized. Got a great Whirlpool Duet front-loading washer and dryer. Some of the upstairs windows have arrived. I assembled the two beds I bought. The wallpaper has been stripped. The house is much, much nicer to be in, now, even though it's sorta torn up and needs paint. I figure the painting might be pretty well done this week.
Not sure what my exact battle plan is for the 3 season room. I have a friend who is a GC in Ohio. I will probably see if he can recommend an architect to draw up a simple plan, have him pull the permits. I'll see if he'll let my guys do everything except maybe the roof. See if he'll let me buy the materials. I just left him a message. Will see how/when he gets back to me.
This just blows. However, I have visions of enjoying my comfy home with the awesome creek and woods view sometime in the near future. I just may be wearing tennis shoes with my pajamas because the first floor will probably be all bare floors.
Bat Drama Continues
Couple of interesting things happened this weekend.
Logan actually went down to a 16 ounce bat to start off the tournament. Trouble is, the 16 and 16.5 ounce bats we have are the worst bats we own. No technology in them. Just aluminum bats.
Logan hit a ton with the 16 ounce in practice. So, whatever. He's not a kid who swings a big, heavy bat, anyway.
First game he went 3 for 3 and had one really impressive deep shot. Second game, though, he went 0-fer and hit one inside pitch that rattled the heck out of the bat and his hands.
One of the biggest differences in bats these days is that they have composite materials and there's usually a transition between the hitting area and the handle.
I told him that with one of the other bats, he couldn't get so much handle vibration and that inside shot probably would not have hurt so much.
He went with the 17 ounce Excalibur bat the rest of the tournament.
Second day, went 1 for 2 in the first game. Not bad.
Second game, they faced the best pitching team we've seen all year. Both pitchers we faced threw well and faster than anybody we've seen all year so far.
Logan only had 2 at bats. First one went down swinging. Second one, though, he went deep into the count and fouled off 2 pitches. He tipped his 3rd strike, but it was caught.
So, I don't think a 17 ounce bat is too heavy for him. If he can catch up to those kids, he can catch up to anything.
I really would like to see him transition to a big barrel bat. My cousin's husband (hitting instructor, multi-year pro player in the minors) says they're a huge advantage and he isn't the kind of guy to blow smoke about that sort of thing.
I've already got a 19/29 (19 ounce 29") bat for him to try, but it is too heavy. Logan's swing started getting big, slow and looping.
We've got probably the best 17/29 bat on the market. The only problem is it's not a big barrel. Logan was able to catch up to the fast pitcher with it. If he'd have had a big barrel bat, one of those foul balls might have been put in play. Probably would have been pounded into the dirt or popped up but it'd be in play.
The trouble with big barrels is that if I get a 17 ounce bat, it will come in a 27 ounce length. The manufacturers, for the most part, don't make anything lighter than a drop 10. (Drop is the difference between the length in inches and the weight. So, drop ten would be 27-17.)
Now, here's where the physics comes in. It's not necessarily true that a big barrel 17/27 would be the same swing-weight as a normal barrel 17/29.
There are two key differences. One, the big barrel would create more wind resistance. Two, the shorter bat would require less torque to start the swing and thus have lower MOI (moment of inertia.)
So, it's entirely possible that a big barrel 17/27 produce a faster swing than a standard 17/29. It's also possible that it would not. There's no real way to tell.
We're amassing a ridiculous bat collection. Sometimes the local stores will let you take one home if you keep the plastic on it and only hit wiffle balls or tennis balls with it. We did that with one bat: used the pitching machine and wiffle balls to see if my son could hit it. He did fine. Took it and threw some live pitch, he did fine. Did fine through his coach's batting practice. Then, when he had to face some live pitch from kids his age, I saw signs that the bat was too heavy.
So, frankly, there's just no way to tell how your kid will do with a bat until you've seen him swing it a lot. Great if you can borrow one before parting with the money, but sometimes that's just not possible.
I do think losing 2" is not great. However, I suspect that the additional benefit of the big barrel may help. He's got a big barrel 17/27 on the way. Because of the physics I described above, he will probably swing it about as well as he swings his current 17/29 and maybe a bit faster. He may be able to handle a 18/28, which I'd feel better about in regards to length.
I still haven't found an 18/28 that I feel good about. I paid full retail for a couple of bats this year, and just can't keep that up. So, unless it's a monster screamin' deal on e-bay, I will probably hold off.
He's got a bat he hits just fine with. I'm just trying to gain him a tiny bit of extra advantage.
Logan actually went down to a 16 ounce bat to start off the tournament. Trouble is, the 16 and 16.5 ounce bats we have are the worst bats we own. No technology in them. Just aluminum bats.
Logan hit a ton with the 16 ounce in practice. So, whatever. He's not a kid who swings a big, heavy bat, anyway.
First game he went 3 for 3 and had one really impressive deep shot. Second game, though, he went 0-fer and hit one inside pitch that rattled the heck out of the bat and his hands.
One of the biggest differences in bats these days is that they have composite materials and there's usually a transition between the hitting area and the handle.
I told him that with one of the other bats, he couldn't get so much handle vibration and that inside shot probably would not have hurt so much.
He went with the 17 ounce Excalibur bat the rest of the tournament.
Second day, went 1 for 2 in the first game. Not bad.
Second game, they faced the best pitching team we've seen all year. Both pitchers we faced threw well and faster than anybody we've seen all year so far.
Logan only had 2 at bats. First one went down swinging. Second one, though, he went deep into the count and fouled off 2 pitches. He tipped his 3rd strike, but it was caught.
So, I don't think a 17 ounce bat is too heavy for him. If he can catch up to those kids, he can catch up to anything.
I really would like to see him transition to a big barrel bat. My cousin's husband (hitting instructor, multi-year pro player in the minors) says they're a huge advantage and he isn't the kind of guy to blow smoke about that sort of thing.
I've already got a 19/29 (19 ounce 29") bat for him to try, but it is too heavy. Logan's swing started getting big, slow and looping.
We've got probably the best 17/29 bat on the market. The only problem is it's not a big barrel. Logan was able to catch up to the fast pitcher with it. If he'd have had a big barrel bat, one of those foul balls might have been put in play. Probably would have been pounded into the dirt or popped up but it'd be in play.
The trouble with big barrels is that if I get a 17 ounce bat, it will come in a 27 ounce length. The manufacturers, for the most part, don't make anything lighter than a drop 10. (Drop is the difference between the length in inches and the weight. So, drop ten would be 27-17.)
Now, here's where the physics comes in. It's not necessarily true that a big barrel 17/27 would be the same swing-weight as a normal barrel 17/29.
There are two key differences. One, the big barrel would create more wind resistance. Two, the shorter bat would require less torque to start the swing and thus have lower MOI (moment of inertia.)
So, it's entirely possible that a big barrel 17/27 produce a faster swing than a standard 17/29. It's also possible that it would not. There's no real way to tell.
We're amassing a ridiculous bat collection. Sometimes the local stores will let you take one home if you keep the plastic on it and only hit wiffle balls or tennis balls with it. We did that with one bat: used the pitching machine and wiffle balls to see if my son could hit it. He did fine. Took it and threw some live pitch, he did fine. Did fine through his coach's batting practice. Then, when he had to face some live pitch from kids his age, I saw signs that the bat was too heavy.
So, frankly, there's just no way to tell how your kid will do with a bat until you've seen him swing it a lot. Great if you can borrow one before parting with the money, but sometimes that's just not possible.
I do think losing 2" is not great. However, I suspect that the additional benefit of the big barrel may help. He's got a big barrel 17/27 on the way. Because of the physics I described above, he will probably swing it about as well as he swings his current 17/29 and maybe a bit faster. He may be able to handle a 18/28, which I'd feel better about in regards to length.
I still haven't found an 18/28 that I feel good about. I paid full retail for a couple of bats this year, and just can't keep that up. So, unless it's a monster screamin' deal on e-bay, I will probably hold off.
He's got a bat he hits just fine with. I'm just trying to gain him a tiny bit of extra advantage.
Friday, April 23, 2010
My Boy is "Streb"
Much like Neo in the Matrix, or Muhammed Ali, there's a special significance attached to names that we select for ourselves, versus the ones we are given at birth. I've been called a lot of names in my life, some of them not very complimentary. The one name that has almost always been used in a positive light is "Streb", which is, of course, an abbreviation of my last name. (It is also, coincidentally, the actual last name of some people. So is "Streby".)
My son is almost 9 years old, but he already surpasses me in some areas. He has been able to, for the past 2 years, run a mile faster than I can. He is a far better baseball player than I am.
It is the natural order of things. As I age and decline, he is continuing on his trajectory towards the height of his powers. As I must increasingly rely on maturity and perspective for my place in the world, he is approaching the zenith of his days of strength, speed and fiesty spirit.
There will be a day when I retire to a rocking chair to look back on a lifetime of whatever achievements I have managed to assemble. At that time, he will be in the prime of his life.
On Logan's baseball team, there are two Logans. It is the only name on the team for which there are two kids. Ironic given that the name Logan was chosen, among many reasons, because I detested the idea that he would have a common name shared by a handful of other kids his age.
(He can thank his mother that I didn't have my way and name him "Wolfgang" or "Tristan".)
It causes some confusion during the game because the coaches are frequently shouting out instructions. If they say "Logan, move back 3 steps", all of a sudden we've got two kids moving back. You get the idea.
I started calling him "Streb", which feels wierd to me. That's MY name, not his. He's Logan. I'm Streb. It works, though, and it will probably stick.
To me, the passing of my chosen name is significant in that it symbolizes a passing of the torch. He's the ballplayer, now. I'm just the guy on the bench with the stats book. He'll be the kid in High School, then college. As his father, I'm completely objective when I say he'll be the handsomest and most charming young man the world has ever seen. I'll be the unremarkable small business owner who writes the checks.
I know that it is the dawning of an era where he is embarking on all the dreams in the universe. Everything is open to him. His possibilities are endless.
My life? It's an awesome life, but the dreams I haven't accomplished by now have a time-limit and many of the will expire unfulfilled.
So, as I give him my name, I pass the torch. The years of your youth are a marvelous time. I enjoyed them tremendously. I accomplished more and did more and experienced more than I ever thought was possible. I envy you that you have so much adventure ahead of you.
I have 9 more years to shape you into young manhood. At least so far, it's been nothing short of an absolute joy for me. Just as quickly as the past 9 years have passed, the next 9 will fly by as well. I'll do all I can to cherish every moment, just as I've cherished every moment so far.
Go get 'em, Streb.
My son is almost 9 years old, but he already surpasses me in some areas. He has been able to, for the past 2 years, run a mile faster than I can. He is a far better baseball player than I am.
It is the natural order of things. As I age and decline, he is continuing on his trajectory towards the height of his powers. As I must increasingly rely on maturity and perspective for my place in the world, he is approaching the zenith of his days of strength, speed and fiesty spirit.
There will be a day when I retire to a rocking chair to look back on a lifetime of whatever achievements I have managed to assemble. At that time, he will be in the prime of his life.
On Logan's baseball team, there are two Logans. It is the only name on the team for which there are two kids. Ironic given that the name Logan was chosen, among many reasons, because I detested the idea that he would have a common name shared by a handful of other kids his age.
(He can thank his mother that I didn't have my way and name him "Wolfgang" or "Tristan".)
It causes some confusion during the game because the coaches are frequently shouting out instructions. If they say "Logan, move back 3 steps", all of a sudden we've got two kids moving back. You get the idea.
I started calling him "Streb", which feels wierd to me. That's MY name, not his. He's Logan. I'm Streb. It works, though, and it will probably stick.
To me, the passing of my chosen name is significant in that it symbolizes a passing of the torch. He's the ballplayer, now. I'm just the guy on the bench with the stats book. He'll be the kid in High School, then college. As his father, I'm completely objective when I say he'll be the handsomest and most charming young man the world has ever seen. I'll be the unremarkable small business owner who writes the checks.
I know that it is the dawning of an era where he is embarking on all the dreams in the universe. Everything is open to him. His possibilities are endless.
My life? It's an awesome life, but the dreams I haven't accomplished by now have a time-limit and many of the will expire unfulfilled.
So, as I give him my name, I pass the torch. The years of your youth are a marvelous time. I enjoyed them tremendously. I accomplished more and did more and experienced more than I ever thought was possible. I envy you that you have so much adventure ahead of you.
I have 9 more years to shape you into young manhood. At least so far, it's been nothing short of an absolute joy for me. Just as quickly as the past 9 years have passed, the next 9 will fly by as well. I'll do all I can to cherish every moment, just as I've cherished every moment so far.
Go get 'em, Streb.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)