Review of the 2007 College World Series

PART FIRST

To me, college baseball is the best thing the sport of baseball has going right now. MLB has become a farce, and I have nothing against youth, high school, or international baseball (which I think has great promise). They're all great. I just think college baseball is the best game in town. And I'm sure many of you could make solid arguments against this premise of mine.

Yet on 6/25/07 at 6:30 PM CST, when I happened to visit ESPN.com's home page doing some research for this report, there was NOTHING to be found on the College World Series. Hardly 24 hours had passed since the Oregon State Beaver's completed their second straight conquest of the University of North Carolina.

As I scrolled down the page, carefully examining the various sports news offerings, I found links for college football and college basketball. One sport completed its season 3 months ago, with the other due to begin two months hence. But nothing about an event covered by ESPN TV itself, presumably a fairly prominent story, barely a day old.

I'm sure I don't know much about how the world really works. So forgive me for finding it hard to believe that the interest level in college basketball at this time of year is such that it requires several links on a major sports news venue, while college baseball doesn't rate even one, in the midst of baseball season. Go figure.

PART SECOND

So, in case you hadn't heard, Oregon State has just won their 2^nd consecutive College World Series. I have to admit that this is pretty impressive and amazing to me. Last year, I considered them an anomaly. Now they've accomplished something that has been done only 4 times previously in the 60 year history of the CWS: winning back-to-back titles.

In 2006, everything was in perfect alignment for them – the planets, the stars, the players and coaches, even their competition. This was OSU’s moment, and we would never hear much from that program again. I predicted to a few people that they would never again qualify for a college world series, let alone win another one. Certainly not in 2007, which appeared to be a re-building year for the Beavers. Order and tradition would once again prevail in college baseball.

I could not have been more wrong. Overcoming some serious mid-season adversity, OSU responded like warriors and champions, finishing off the formidable University of North Carolina – a basketball school, fer cryin’ out loud, in two straight games. What's next - the University of Indiana as the 2008 CWS champ? (No offense, IU fans!)

Here’s my quick take on the eight CWS teams:

· Arizona State – traditional baseball power, Pac 10 team

· CS Fullerton – traditional baseball power, California-based team

· UC Irvine – good baseball school, first CWS appearance, California based

· Mississippi State – traditional baseball power, from SEC, arguably the best baseball conference in the country

· U of Louisville – a football/basketball school, first CWS appearance. Not a baseball power; had a heck of season. After watching them destroy Oklahoma State in their Super-Regional, they were my “dark horse” team to win it all

· Rice University – traditional power, Texas based school

So the usual baseball power-house areas (AZ, CA and TX) and conferences (Pac 10 and SEC) were all represented. No big surprise.

But for the past two years now we've had two teams playing for the CWS title with the following line ups:

1) OSU had one starter from Northern CA. The rest were from the states of Oregon and Washington.

2) North Carolina, the basketball powerhouse, had a starting lineup composed of all North Carolina natives! No one from TX or Florida, states they are relatively close to.

I know nothing about the recruiting practices of either of these teams. I don’t know what priority they place on seeking players from the traditional power, warm-weather states. But two things are obvious – they place a great deal of emphasis on getting local players, and once they get them, they do an impressive job of developing their skills further. Pat Casey and Mike Fox can flat-out coach.

One (or both?) of them should be coach of the year. Last year it was Casey; maybe this will be Fox's year.

Note to players (and parents): regardless of where you live, if either of these two schools contacts you about playing for them, listen very carefully to what they have to say

The world, sports and baseball included, is changing, isn’t it? First, a minority rises to the top of professional golf. Now the seats of amateur baseball power appear to lie not in the deep south or on the west coast, but in both the Pacific Northwest and the state of North Carolina. What’s next – a white guy as the #1 selling rap musician?

---

(C) 2007 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Short quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Academy - www.BaseballFit.com

Has The Time Come For A MLB Combine?

Imagine you’re a baseball GM. Albert Pujols and Babe Ruth are available. Which of these two do you pick to build your team around?

It is interesting to me how the various professional leagues go about evaluating prospects for their draft days. Perhaps there is something for baseball, and MLB in particular, to learn from the NFL and their scouting combine approach.

Given the expense associated with the high “washout” rate for baseball draftees (above 50%) you’d think MLB would be interested in improving what is essentially a "crap shoot" of a system.

The NFL scouting combine has grown in scope and significance from its early days, allowing personnel directors to evaluate upcoming prospects in a standardized setting. Its origins have evolved from the National, Blesto and Quadra Scouting services in 1977, to the media frenzy it has become today.

In 1985 all 28 NFL teams decided they would participate in future National Invitational Camps with the goal of sharing costs for the medical examinations of draft eligible players. They also use this setting to evaluate prospects in a variety of tests, which include the following:

• 40 yard dash

• Bench press

• Vertical jump

• Broad jump (standing long jump)

• 20-yard shuttle

• three-cone drill

• 60-yard shuttle

• Position-specific drills

• Interviews

• Physical measurements

• Injury evaluation

• Drug screen

• The Cybex test

• The Wonderlic Test

Approximately 335 total athletes are selected to attend each year, by invitation only. Participants are determined annually by a Selection Committee. The directors of both National and BLESTO scouting services are joined by members of various NFL player personnel departments to form the committee.

The participating NFL executives can rotate on a yearly basis, and remain anonymous. ALL eligible players are reviewed and voted on by the committee members. Each athlete receiving the necessary number of votes, by position, is then extended an invitation.

The closest MLB has come to this "combine" concept occurred almost 100 years ago. In 1921, Popular Science Monthly published the results of a study they performed on Babe Ruth.

According to Marcus Elliot, MD of the Peak Performance Project in Santa Barbara, CA:

“… the Babe Ruth testing was more appropriate and more intensive than anything any professional team is doing now.”

As reported in the September 2006 issue of GQ, these experiments were replicated on the St. Louis Cardinals’ Albert Pujols. The results are very interesting.

These are the original tests the Babe went through, which Pujols performed at Washington University in St. Louis in the spring of 2006:

· Bat speed: Swinging a 54 oz bat, the Babe clocked in at 75 mph. Pujols, swinging a 31.5 oz bat, was at 86.99 mph.

· Letter cross-out: Pujols was given a sheet of jumbled text and told to cross out all the A’s as rapidly as possible. According to the author, the test was not “well normed” in Ruth’s day, making comparison’s with Pujols impossible. Pujols’ results indicated he possessed “extraordinary binocularity,” a key visual attribute for hitters.

· Pegboard: This test assesses fine motor control and speed. It involves inserting as quickly as possible 25 steel pegs into holes punched in a plain metal box. Ruth’s score was off the charts; Pujols’ was considered high average.

· Digit/symbol substitution: Involves converting weird symbols into numbers, as many as possible in one minute. Both Ruth & Pujols made average scores. On a separate part of the test, in which one simply copies the symbols, Pujols score was off the charts.

· Finger tapping: with your dominant index finger, you depress a tapper as many times as possible in 10 seconds. Both Ruth and Pujols scored in the 99th percentile.

There is a lot of valuable testing being done by various experts that is largely ignored by MLB. Still, might we someday see a MLB combine, similar to the NFL’s, which measures attributes such as the above? Surely it would benefit pro and college baseball to have a standardized setting in which medical and performance evaluations can be made.

Why might this not happen? Well, for one thing, it would take a good pile of $$. Yet to me, this concept appears to be a business waiting to happen. Top players could be invited, as with the NFL combine. They could choose to participate or not. When a particular player declines to participate, another can be selected. This would likely give players an opportunity to be "discovered" that they might not otherwise have.

Regardless, the structure would be fairly easy to develop. MLB and maybe the NCAA could assume the costs of the operation; participants could pay a modest fee. Or, the creators of the combine would collect their data and charge MLB and college teams for access to it.

Medical and relevant performance tests for ball players would be administered, just like the NFL combine. The baseball combine could continue to monitor the careers of participants, which would help determine the reliability and predictive value of the data collected.

Here’s my suggested list of what a MLB Combine might use in their player evaluations. I’m sure there are other useful tests that could be included:

• Most/all of the above Ruth/Pujols tests

• A test that measures emotional maturity

• Running speed, straight-line and on the base paths

• Throwing velocity, all positions

• Bat speed for all hitters

• Agility and quickness tests for IF and OF

• Visual acuity/depth perception

• Tests to measure body-core strength

• A drug screen

Can a greater number of prospects be identified this way, with more objective testing? Of course. This doesn’t mean that scouts are no longer needed. With the above information, scouts could have more objective tools at their disposal for player evaluation.

Developing a data base of norms for these tests could usher in Money Ball, Part 2. Each team would define the attributes most important to them, much as they do now, and select prospects accordingly

In any case, it would appear that you would do well in choosing either Pujols or Ruth!

________________________________________________________________________________________________

(C) 2007 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Conditioning - www.BaseballFit.com

The information contained herein is the opinion of the author based on his personal observations and years of experience. Neither Steve Zawrotny or Baseball Fit assume any liability whatsoever for the use of or inability to use any or all of the information presented on this website.

Why MLB Is Reluctant To Change

A question I occasionally hear is “If weighted baseball training is such a good idea, why aren’t more players and teams using this type of training? Why isn't professional baseball?” Well, I hear from pro ball players all the time that more players and teams ARE using weighted baseballs as part of their training. The process is slow, but progress is being made. At the NCAA D-1and other college divisions, they are more widely used.

Of the four major league sports, baseball is the slowest to adopt new methods in any aspect of the game. For evidence, read “Money Ball,” a book that has been largely ignored by MLB. This aversion to change is widely acknowledged. But why is this so? Here's my theory.

I’ll start by saying it has little to do with tradition. MLB will change its policies/procedures in a NY minute if it can make more money in the process.

It has everything to do with the people who run the system. MLB is the ultimate “good ol’ boys” club. While this may seem obvious, there are some deeper issues at work. To illustrate, let’s compare MLB with the NBA and the NFL.

Every player that enters the NBA and NFL has anywhere from 2-4 years of college education. In recent years, the NBA has been drafting more high school players, but these are a distinct minority. How diligent athletes are in becoming educated is perhaps debatable, but recent NCAA D-1 statistics indicate a graduation rate of 62% for all athletes vs. a 60% rate for non-athletes. The NFL, of course, does not draft high school players.

In the early years of the MLB draft, more high school than college players were selected. In recent decades, opportunities to attend college have greatly expanded, with more players going the college route. Therefore, more college players are being drafted (for several reasons). The number of high school players drafted now comprises about 30-35% of the total.

Question: Where do the coaches, managers, and executives who run professional sports come from? Overwhelmingly, from the ranks of former players. Money Ball notwithstanding, few decision makers in MLB are outsiders.

So what might we learn from all of this?

That the pool from which the future leaders and decision makers in MLB are coming from is not particularly well educated! These guys have not been much exposed to “higher order” thinking or the scientific process (as opposed to most every NBA and NFL player and coach).

If you want to be a head coach at most any level of college sports, a degree is required, often an advanced degree. It is not unusual for college head coaches to hold Master's and Doctoral degrees. You occasionally hear the TV talking heads discuss a college coach's educational background. When was the last time you heard a discussion on some MLB manager's academic achievements?

So, like all of us, baseball coaches and managers teach what they know. And, like most of us, they are slow to change their ways. Perhaps this will change as the trend of drafting more college baseball players continues.

Don’t misinterpret what I am saying. This is not about educational elitism. I’ve encountered enough “degreed” dimwits over the years to know that formal education has its limitations.

But you can’t teach what you don’t know. So, if

• Your educational background is limited, and

• You’re not really into SELF-education, and

• You don’t have the background to properly interpret scientific
  data,

and

• You have poor communication skills

Then you’re more likely to be suspicious of new ideas and techniques, and reluctant to adopt them, regardless of all the positive evidence that may exist for an idea. Such a person may also have limited teaching skills as well, further hampering the process of transferring new concepts.

So what we have with MLB is an entrenched, self-perpetuating mindset that is not particularly open to new ideas, unless there is obvious financial benefit.

Keep all of this in mind the next time you hear the question, “If (insert new idea here) is such a good idea, why isn’t professional baseball doing it?” Most certainly, DO NOT judge the value of an idea based on MLB’s view of it. Do your own independent research instead. You’ll be better served.

IMPORTANT DEFINITION:

Arm STRENGTH: A euphemism that denotes how hard a player throws, or how good his/her arm is. For baseball and softball skill evaluation purposes, it has nothing to do with muscle strength.

---

(C) 2006 Baseball Fit, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Steve Zawrotny's BASEBALL FIT Hitting & Pitching Conditioning - www.BaseballFit.com

The information contained herein is the opinion of the author based on his personal observations and years of experience. Neither Steve Zawrotny or Baseball Fit assume any liability whatsoever for the use of or inability to use any or all of the information presented on this website.