Cohen to host press conference tomorrow at noon

[godlluB]

As the British say, I wonder if one of our assistant coaches has suddenly developed an intense interest in gardening?

[Jack Lambert]

whoops

[CadaverDawg]

I think it's a pretty standard press conference. I doubt there will be coaching changes, unfortunately.

[I seen it dawg]

I can't even remotely think of something nice to say

[rcsteph1]

The wording of the announcement makes me wonder. It wasn't announced as just an end of the year press conference.

[Smitty]

I wonder if any writers will decide to stop being scared little stenographers of the great Coins and actually ask him some tough questions about the stuff bandied about by us average joes.

[CadaverDawg]

The wording of the announcement makes me wonder. It wasn't announced as just an end of the year press conference.

Just read the wording and you're right...something's up. May just be a way of Cohen trying to rally the troops and rah rah to show everyone he's going to turn it around...but then again, maybe we see some type of announcement. Id love to hear that Mingione has been replaced, but I doubt it. It was definitely worded oddly for a routine end of the year presser though.

[MsStateBaseball]

I have informed a few writers please ask some tough questions. We shall see. Uncle Dave will but Gene won't.

[War Machine Dawg]

Anyone want to link to the announcement or paste it here? Don't tease us by mentioning it then not letting us see it.

[CadaverDawg]

Anyone want to link to the announcement or paste it here? Don't tease us by mentioning it then not letting us see it.

From the @hailstatebb Instagram account....

"Tomorrow at 12 p.m. CT, John Cohen will host a press conference to address several items regarding the future of the program. Watch it live on Periscope by searching for HailStateBB."

[messageboardsuperhero]

There will probably be no major staff changes, but expect Cohen to give a rah-rah speech about how this type of season will never happen again, adjusting to the balls screwed us up, etc. Personally, I want some serious answers about how he plans on managing the game in the future.

Will we still bunt runners from 2nd to 3rd after leadoff doubles next year?
Will we continue to lead the league in sac bunting?
Will we continue to do dumb shit like negate the speed of our fastest player by batting our 280 pound first baseman right in front of him?
Will stop trotting Ming out to the 3rd base box and let someone competent coach 3rd base who doesn't run us out of an inning every damn game?

He at least seems to be attempting to address the obvious issues we have offensively by bringing in more physical players... But some of the in game stuff we do is flat out inexcusable and needs to be corrected.

[Jacksondevildog]

David Murray is a Gene sheep. His toughest question will be he asking himself about whether he should write a 3,000 or 4,000 word article on the press conference.


I have informed a few writers please ask some tough questions. We shall see. Uncle Dave will but Gene won't.

[rcsteph1]

There will probably be no major staff changes, but expect Cohen to give a rah-rah speech about how this type of season will never happen again, adjusting to the balls screwed us up, etc. Personally, I want some serious answers about how he plans on managing the game in the future.

Will we still bunt runners from 2nd to 3rd after leadoff doubles next year?
Will we continue to lead the league in sac bunting?
Will we continue to do dumb shit like negate the speed of our fastest player by batting our 280 pound first baseman right in front of him?
Will stop trotting Ming out to the 3rd base box and let someone competent coach 3rd base who doesn't run us out of an inning every damn game?

He at least seems to be attempting to address the obvious issues we have offensively by bringing in more physical players... But some of the in game stuff we do is flat out inexcusable and needs to be corrected.

So we will now have bench players coaching first and third????

[CadaverDawg]

So we will now have bench players coaching first and third????

Yea, it's scary just how many stupid things Cohen did/allowed last season. Hope it isn't too many issues to fix in one season, bc he won't survive 2015 version 2.0

[Really Clark?]

Superhero I understand where you are coming from and you have some good questions but we didn't lead the league in sac bunts and don't think we ever have under Cohen. We have been close, too close probably but we didn't lead the league. And look while I am not as big of a proponent of bunting I do see several 1 seeds that lead the nation in sacrifice bunts UCLA, Oklahoma State, Missouri State, Miami, Houston, and Cal St Fullerton. 37.5% of the 1 seeds all were Top 50 in sacrifice bunts and had more than we did. Now the when to bunt and several of those instances, I see where you are coming from. But let's be fair about how much we really bunted.

[Intramural All-American]

It's a standard end of the year press conference. Don't expect any big announcements.

[Todd4State]

There will probably be no major staff changes, but expect Cohen to give a rah-rah speech about how this type of season will never happen again, adjusting to the balls screwed us up, etc. Personally, I want some serious answers about how he plans on managing the game in the future.

Will we still bunt runners from 2nd to 3rd after leadoff doubles next year?
Will we continue to lead the league in sac bunting?
Will we continue to do dumb shit like negate the speed of our fastest player by batting our 280 pound first baseman right in front of him?
Will stop trotting Ming out to the 3rd base box and let someone competent coach 3rd base who doesn't run us out of an inning every damn game?

He at least seems to be attempting to address the obvious issues we have offensively by bringing in more physical players... But some of the in game stuff we do is flat out inexcusable and needs to be corrected.

This is what I am expecting too. If people are expecting him to throw Mingione under the bus and then burn him at the stake, people are going to be disappointed. He might throw the seniors under the bus as a group though- rightfully so.

Someone should ask him about the S&C program though. That was a far worse coaching job last year than anyone else on the staff if we're honest with ourselves.

Coaching offense in baseball is basically allowing your guys to use their strengths. We bunted a lot because that is what we did fairly well. I kept up with how many times we bunted for a hit and how many times it resulted in an out- intentional or not. Including sacrifices- the times we TRIED to make an out, we actually bunted well over .300 as a team.

When we have players that have more power, we will bunt less. Just like we didn't bunt Wes Rea and Reid Humphreys a whole lot last year. When you have a lineup full of singles hitters, you will see a lot more bunting.

You hear me talking about balance regarding a line-up from time to time- when you have seven singles hitters in your lineup, you're more likely to see something like your clean-up hitter being Jacob Robson. That's because our lineup was out of whack from the start.

Now as you said, we will have more power in the future, but we're still going to have the small ball aspect of our game as well. Jake Mangum was the best bunter in Mississippi, and Luke Alexander is really good at it too. Gridley is also good at it. The difference is we will have guys like Cole Gordon behind them to drive them in.

[Todd4State]

Superhero I understand where you are coming from and you have some good questions but we didn't lead the league in sac bunts and don't think we ever have under Cohen. We have been close, too close probably but we didn't lead the league. And look while I am not as big of a proponent of bunting I do see several 1 seeds that lead the nation in sacrifice bunts UCLA, Oklahoma State, Missouri State, Miami, Houston, and Cal St Fullerton. 37.5% of the 1 seeds all were Top 50 in sacrifice bunts and had more than we did. Now the when to bunt and several of those instances, I see where you are coming from. But let's be fair about how much we really bunted.

But....but....that can't be.... I was told that if you bunt your offense is horrible...

[Smitty]

But....but....that can't be.... I was told that if you bunt your offense is horrible...

No it's that they can get away with it because their talent means it doesn't hurt them as much. Like I've said for years the sac bunt hurts bad teams MORE because it's a bigger road block. See our 2012 year.

Bunting is not the reason they are good offenses. The correlation to them being a one seed and them bunting is nothing. You fail to understand statistics though because you think a statistical luck factor is an insult.

[Really Clark?]

No it's that they can get away with it because their talent means it doesn't hurt them as much. Like I've said for years the sac bunt hurts bad teams MORE because it's a bigger road block. See our 2012 year.

Bunting is not the reason they are good offenses. The correlation to them being a one seed and them bunting is nothing. You fail to understand statistics though because you think a statistical luck factor is an insult.

Btw, I wasn't really trying to make a correlation between bunting and #1 seeds. I was just pointing out that it is not necessarily a hinderance that many always think when it is brought up. Bunting could help make a team better. Some of these teams also have good offenses and, without studying each case, it could have helped or been a negative. It is more of a part of the philosphy relationship those teams probably have. I think several of those teams I listed also have very good pitching and defense. Bunting can be used to enhance the overall scheme for a team, especially with a pitching and defensive relationship that makes sense. But each case is different and the game time strategy of the bunt has a big part to play in whether it enhances an offense.

[Backspin]

Real simple...bullpen has to improve dramatically and there's gotta be a better mix of hitters in the lineup. You need a couple small ball/speed guys then 5 or so good-sized (6' 180 lbs +) gap to gap hitters with occasional power plus a couple power hitters in the lineup. Beyond that, accountability starts at the top. Just throwing players under the bus is a very slippery slope.....

[messageboardsuperhero]

Superhero I understand where you are coming from and you have some good questions but we didn't lead the league in sac bunts and don't think we ever have under Cohen. We have been close, too close probably but we didn't lead the league. And look while I am not as big of a proponent of bunting I do see several 1 seeds that lead the nation in sacrifice bunts UCLA, Oklahoma State, Missouri State, Miami, Houston, and Cal St Fullerton. 37.5% of the 1 seeds all were Top 50 in sacrifice bunts and had more than we did. Now the when to bunt and several of those instances, I see where you are coming from. But let's be fair about how much we really bunted.

Only two SEC teams bunted more than we did in 2015- Auburn and Tennessee. And Auburn actually played more games than we did, so we sac bunted more per game than they did... Essentially we were 2nd in the league in sac bunts. We're arguing over semantics.

I get what you're saying though. Sac bunts were not our biggest issue this past season.

[KB21]

Superhero I understand where you are coming from and you have some good questions but we didn't lead the league in sac bunts and don't think we ever have under Cohen. We have been close, too close probably but we didn't lead the league. And look while I am not as big of a proponent of bunting I do see several 1 seeds that lead the nation in sacrifice bunts UCLA, Oklahoma State, Missouri State, Miami, Houston, and Cal St Fullerton. 37.5% of the 1 seeds all were Top 50 in sacrifice bunts and had more than we did. Now the when to bunt and several of those instances, I see where you are coming from. But let's be fair about how much we really bunted.

Sacrifice bunting is a part of the game. I don't like doing it when you have a runner at 1st with no one out, because you do not increase your chances of scoring with a runner on 2nd with 1 out. The run expectancy of a runner on first with no one out is 0.86 runs per inning. The run expectancy of a runner on second with one out is 0.68. So, you actually decrease your run expectancy by bunting a runner over from first to second and giving up that out.

Here's the rub. There is a reason bunt heavy teams are called "small ball" teams, and their goal is to manufacture runs. While bunting a man over from first to second when no one is out, giving up that out in the process, decreases your run expectancy, it does improve your chances of scoring exactly one run by 5.69%. This is from 2013 data on bunting.

The numbers don't describe the situations though, so you have to evaluate bunting based on the situation and the structure of the line up. The fact of the matter is, MSU did not have very many sluggers in the line up. The guy with the best SLG% on the team was also the guy with the best OBP% on the team.

[Really Clark?]

H
Only two SEC teams bunted more than we did in 2015- Auburn and Tennessee. And Auburn actually played more games than we did, so we sac bunted more per game than they did... Essentially we were 2nd in the league in sac bunts. We're arguing over semantics.

I get what you're saying though. Sac bunts were not our biggest issue this past season.

I don't think it was either. And Cohen backed off the bunts toward the end of the season. Bullpen really hurt and we had offensive issues for sure. We are probably in the tourney with correcting either one of those.

[KB21]

H

I don't think it was either. And Cohen backed off the bunts toward the end of the season. Bullpen really hurt and we had offensive issues for sure. We are probably in the tourney with correcting either one of those.

Pitching as a whole is the key. I said last year. This team needs TWO starters that can give them 90+ innings on the year. Ideally, one starter will push 100 innings pitched. When you do not have starters that can consistently go deep in the game, you have to rely on your bullpen more. Unlike 2013, we did not have that long relief guy like Chad Girodo and an effective Ross Mitchell that could come out of the pen and give you 3-4 strong innings.

Austin Sexton had 76+ innings on the year, so I think he's ready to make that jump to be the main innings guy on the staff. There is no reason he should not push 100 innings pitched in 2016.

[Really Clark?]

Sacrifice bunting is a part of the game. I don't like doing it when you have a runner at 1st with no one out, because you do not increase your chances of scoring with a runner on 2nd with 1 out. The run expectancy of a runner on first with no one out is 0.86 runs per inning. The run expectancy of a runner on second with one out is 0.68. So, you actually decrease your run expectancy by bunting a runner over from first to second and giving up that out.

Here's the rub. There is a reason bunt heavy teams are called "small ball" teams, and their goal is to manufacture runs. While bunting a man over from first to second when no one is out, giving up that out in the process, decreases your run expectancy, it does improve your chances of scoring exactly one run by 5.69%. This is from 2013 data on bunting.

The numbers don't describe the situations though, so you have to evaluate bunting based on the situation and the structure of the line up. The fact of the matter is, MSU did not have very many sluggers in the line up. The guy with the best SLG% on the team was also the guy with the best OBP% on the team.

Don't disagree with any of that and we have discussed run expectancies before and the strategy of when to bunt and why and what that does to runs in a given inning. It is a philosophy that can be very successful. Now like I said, I'm not as big on bunting as some people. Depending of the level of ball.

Our slugging has been an issue for a while. Type of player we have is an issue but there are other problems at work.

[CadaverDawg]

H

I don't think it was either. And Cohen backed off the bunts toward the end of the season. Bullpen really hurt and we had offensive issues for sure. We are probably in the tourney with correcting either one of those.

Did Cohen back off bc he's changing philosophy, or bc it took him 3/4 of a year to finally realize our pen sucked and 4 runs would win us zero games? I'm not sure he won't go right back to it if our pitching improves.

I'm not anti-sac bunt, but I'm against doing it every time you get a guy on 1st to start an inning. Bc you only do that 4-5 times a game which means you're playing for 4-5 runs, which won't win many games nowadays.

And I'm 100% anti-sac bunting a leadoff double to third base. Talk about a wasted out. If we had a semi-competent 3rd base coach or base running coach, we would score damn near every single time on a single with a man on 2nd...so no need to move a guy to 3rd by wasting an out.

Bunting is part of the game, but we don't use it the way it's supposed to be used. Not the right personnel, situations, execution, etc. that's my issue with it. If you're going to be a sac bunt heavy team, by God be good at it. And be excellent at base running and situational hitting so you can best maximize your wasted outs. Your only other option is a lights out pitching staff.

In other words, too many things have to go right

[Really Clark?]

Pitching as a whole is the key. I said last year. This team needs TWO starters that can give them 90+ innings on the year. Ideally, one starter will push 100 innings pitched. When you do not have starters that can consistently go deep in the game, you have to rely on your bullpen more. Unlike 2013, we did not have that long relief guy like Chad Girodo and an effective Ross Mitchell that could come out of the pen and give you 3-4 strong innings.

Austin Sexton had 76+ innings on the year, so I think he's ready to make that jump to be the main innings guy on the staff. There is no reason he should not push 100 innings pitched in 2016.

And going back to the bunting we have discussed, stronger pitching leads to more wins and fewer complain about it in situations that it actually makes sense. Not saying there were not questionable times it was called, but everything becomes magnified when the team struggles. I agree with having 100 IP guy but kind of thought we might get there this year with our staff. The pen struggles amplified a lot of issues with the team that we could have worked around in a transition year.

[Smitty]

H

I don't think it was either. And Cohen backed off the bunts toward the end of the season. Bullpen really hurt and we had offensive issues for sure. We are probably in the tourney with correcting either one of those.

We "backed off" because of previously shown numbers identifying our leadoff OBP down the stretch was dreadful and we were often behind. Those two equal not gonna bunt.

[Smitty]

And going back to the bunting we have discussed, stronger pitching leads to more wins and fewer complain about it in situations that it actually makes sense. Not saying there were not questionable times it was called, but everything becomes magnified when the team struggles. I agree with having 100 IP guy but kind of thought we might get there this year with our staff. The pen struggles amplified a lot of issues with the team that we could have worked around in a transition year.

That could be a relevant question tomorrow.

"Coach, you knew your pitching staff was a dumpster fire yet you still played for 1 early in games... Why? Why not maximize your runs?"

[CadaverDawg]

And going back to the bunting we have discussed, stronger pitching leads to more wins and fewer complain about it in situations that it actually makes sense. Not saying there were not questionable times it was called, but everything becomes magnified when the team struggles. I agree with having 100 IP guy but kind of thought we might get there this year with our staff. The pen struggles amplified a lot of issues with the team that we could have worked around in a transition year.

I do agree that our pitching magnified the bunting issues....HOWEVER...how realistic is it that we will have Lindgrens, Holders, and 2013 version Mitchell's every year moving forward? Truth is, our pitching will likely fall somewhere between the 2013 staff and the 2015 staff, except we won't have the luxury of the high seams. So...that leads me to believe that even with a good staff we're going to have to get away from so much wasting outs and awful base running errors. Both of which have been staples of the Cohen era.

We can't rely on Butch to pull off a miracle staff each year, or else we might as well make him the coach and try to find an offensive assistant. I believe in Cohen, but if all we're asking him to do is give us a sub par offense and then rely on Butch's staff to make our good seasons, what are we doing?

Why not have both, by maximizing offense AND trying to have a good staff. That's what a lot of us are saying. That doesn't mean going full Smitty and never bunting...but it definitely means not bunting guys like Rea, Pirtle, Collins, etc for the sake of one run in the 3rd inning of a scoreless game.

You get what I'm saying I'm sure. As do I with your stance.

[Smitty]

Your goal should be to field a team that maximizes the run differential.

Hypothetically you'd rather win a bunch of 7-3 games than win a bunch of 2-1 games.

[Really Clark?]

Did Cohen back off bc he's changing philosophy, or bc it took him 3/4 of a year to finally realize our pen sucked and 4 runs would win us zero games? I'm not sure he won't go right back to it if our pitching improves.

I'm not anti-sac bunt, but I'm against doing it every time you get a guy on 1st to start an inning. Bc you only do that 4-5 times a game which means you're playing for 4-5 runs, which won't win many games nowadays.

And I'm 100% anti-sac bunting a leadoff double to third base. Talk about a wasted out. If we had a semi-competent 3rd base coach or base running coach, we would score damn near every single time on a single with a man on 2nd...so no need to move a guy to 3rd by wasting an out.

Bunting is part of the game, but we don't use it the way it's supposed to be used. Not the right personnel, situations, execution, etc. that's my issue with it. If you're going to be a sac bunt heavy team, by God be good at it. And be excellent at base running and situational hitting so you can best maximize your wasted outs. Your only other option is a lights out pitching staff.

In other words, too many things have to go right

Agree with a lot of that. We struggled doing a lot of the little things right. Of course I think overall, including MLB, base running among other aspects of the game has declined over the years. And it's a shame to an extent. To answer you first question though, did he change philosphy? Honestly I don't know. I think he is planning a philosphy shift offensively and this was just a get by year to get to the different style players we have added in recent years and this. But if you look at 2013 and even his Kentucky years, it's not like you can't be a leader in runs and slugging and sac bunts. So in that vain I still feel like he may be at least in the top half of the league in sac bunts every year. I may be wrong but I think he will still use the bunt more than most teams.

[CadaverDawg]

Your goal should be to field a team that maximizes the run differential.

Hypothetically you'd rather win a bunch of 7-3 games than win a bunch of 2-1 games.

Exactly. If all we're hoping for is an offense that pushes 4 runs across by sac bunting and then hoping Butch's staff shuts everyone down to win games, we might as well make Butch the coach because it doesn't take a "guru" to waste outs, score a few, and cross your fingers.

We should be trying to score max runs AND shut opponents down...not just one of the 2

[Really Clark?]

I do agree that our pitching magnified the bunting issues....HOWEVER...how realistic is it that we will have Lindgrens, Holders, and 2013 version Mitchell's every year moving forward? Truth is, our pitching will likely fall somewhere between the 2013 staff and the 2015 staff, except we won't have the luxury of the high seams. So...that leads me to believe that even with a good staff we're going to have to get away from so much wasting outs and awful base running errors. Both of which have been staples of the Cohen era.

We can't rely on Butch to pull off a miracle staff each year, or else we might as well make him the coach and try to find an offensive assistant. I believe in Cohen, but if all we're asking him to do is give us a sub par offense and then rely on Butch's staff to make our good seasons, what are we doing?

Why not have both, by maximizing offense AND trying to have a good staff. That's what a lot of us are saying. That doesn't mean going full Smitty and never bunting...but it definitely means not bunting guys like Rea, Pirtle, Collins, etc for the sake of one run in the 3rd inning of a scoreless game.

You get what I'm saying I'm sure. As do I with your stance.

I don't necessarily disagree and for me and my offensive philosphy, I wouldn't plan a game the way he does at times. Again depending of the level of ball and even your competition changes your game time calls from time to time. But for me I prefer to have my players hit there way out of problems. But I am not so hard headed to not understand the beauty of guys who do win games with small ball. When done right it is harder to defend and pitch to than some think. Especially in high school or showcase levels. I have seen teams really destroy a team with a hard throwing ace that they probably would have struggled getting runs on if they played it straight up. But they really rattled the pitcher and defense (who was not use to having to field many balls behind this pitcher) to the point that they won going away and only had 2 hits out of the infield and both of those were just singles. It not only can work at the college level but can be very succesful in conjunction with and overall philosphy and players that make it work.

[It_Could_Happen]

No it's that they can get away with it because their talent means it doesn't hurt them as much. Like I've said for years the sac bunt hurts bad teams MORE because it's a bigger road block. See our 2012 year.

Bunting is not the reason they are good offenses. The correlation to them being a one seed and them bunting is nothing. You fail to understand statistics though because you think a statistical luck factor is an insult.

You change your opinion on this issue every time and quite frankly I'm sick of it. You've gone from bunting is horrible you should never do it to it's ok sometimes to only good teams should do it. At least pick a side and stick with it because we all know you have no clue what you are talking about anyway.

[CadaverDawg]

I don't necessarily disagree and for me and my offensive philosphy, I wouldn't plan a game the way he does at times. Again depending of the level of ball and even your competition changes your game time calls from time to time. But for me I prefer to have my players hit there way out of problems. But I am not so hard headed to not understand the beauty of guys who do win games with small ball. When done right it is harder to defend and pitch to than some think. Especially in high school or showcase levels. I have seen teams really destroy a team with a hard throwing ace that they probably would have struggled getting runs on if they played it straight up. But they really rattled the pitcher and defense (who was not use to having to field many balls behind this pitcher) to the point that they won going away and only had 2 hits out of the infield and both of those were just singles. It not only can work at the college level but can be very succesful in conjunction with and overall philosphy and players that make it work.

I agree 100%. I just feel like we aren't utilizing it properly. Like there's a disconnect.

There's a time for small ball...there's a time to avoid it...for some reason our head coach is totally missing these times, among several other mistakes.

Let's just hope it's part of a transition year and a change in philosophy, and we will all be able to look back at this year and laugh one day as Cohen leads us to a Title. I'm not giving up on him, just really concerned bc I see multiple issues that aren't easy fixes. We'll see

[Really Clark?]

Your goal should be to field a team that maximizes the run differential.

Hypothetically you'd rather win a bunch of 7-3 games than win a bunch of 2-1 games.

I don't disagree with that but you can also do that from the defensive and pitching side as well. 4-0, 5-1 is the same is 7-3. And you also have to consider as a coach you have to be true to your self and your philosphy. I like to consider myself flexible in a lot of areas in the game and especially open minded in learning but I have already admitted that in certain levels in the game I don't like bunting as much as some do. Now you have to always be willing to change but it has to be inside the frame work of who you are as a coach and person and your philosphy. I know a team I coach would not be as effective if I tried to be a small ball guy offensively. I know coaches that can beat you to death that way. It works for them. It doesn't for me but it doesn't mean it doesn't work and a lot of championships have been won that way. Now all of this is relative to the level of ball you are playing. Even the type if you throw softball in to the mix.

[Smitty]

You change your opinion on this issue every time and quite frankly I'm sick of it. You've gone from bunting is horrible you should never do it to it's ok sometimes to only good teams should do it. At least pick a side and stick with it because we all know you have no clue what you are talking about anyway.

1. Your logic is flawed. Bunting limits run production but it limits it even MORE for bad teams that can't overcome it as well.

2. Find a quote where I say "never" bunt. You can't. We should be in the lower quarter of the league in sacs not nearly leading it.

3. Addressing my first point with an analogy. Croom coaching Oregon last year would have harmed them but since they are insanely talented he wouldn't have had as bad an effect as him coaching.... Kansas. Oregon could overcome Croom better than Kansas. Good offenses overcome bad sacs better than bad teams. See us scoring in just 6 of 32 innings in 2012 with a bunt one man over from 1st play. Bad offense. Hurt MORE by bunting.

[Really Clark?]

I agree 100%. I just feel like we aren't utilizing it properly. Like there's a disconnect.

There's a time for small ball...there's a time to avoid it...for some reason our head coach is totally missing these times, among several other mistakes.

Let's just hope it's part of a transition year and a change in philosophy, and we will all be able to look back at this year and laugh one day as Cohen leads us to a Title. I'm not giving up on him, just really concerned bc I see multiple issues that aren't easy fixes. We'll see


I think transition is part of it. And I have said before I hate stepping all over coaches and players, especially when you are not living the program with them day in a day out. But you mentioned a disconnect. I think we had more than one actually. This may sound strange but a lot of talk we have gotten into lately with his fundamental teachings on offense. The man knows what he is doing in the basic sense of things. I disagree with him on aspects but I think the bigger issue from the coaching aspect is maybe he tries too hard to get every detailed covered with the mechanics and just doesn't let it come in a more natural way. You can see this in how several guys take a bit longer for it to click than maybe it should. The other disconnect, and this is just subjection on my part, but I don't think we had strong club house leadership from the players. A lot of times what we see as poor coaching because of problems on the field is actually poor leadership and work ethic from the players.

[dawgoneyall]

We were either 1st or 2nd in sac bunting.

[Really Clark?]

We were either 1st or 2nd in sac bunting.

This year? No we were 3rd.

[It_Could_Happen]

1. Your logic is flawed. Bunting limits run production but it limits it even MORE for bad teams that can't overcome it as well.

2. Find a quote where I say "never" bunt. You can't. We should be in the lower quarter of the league in sacs not nearly leading it.

3. Addressing my first point with an analogy. Croom coaching Oregon last year would have harmed them but since they are insanely talented he wouldn't have had as bad an effect as him coaching.... Kansas. Oregon could overcome Croom better than Kansas. Good offenses overcome bad sacs better than bad teams. See us scoring in just 6 of 32 innings in 2012 with a bunt one man over from 1st play. Bad offense. Hurt MORE by bunting.

Baseball isn't a math formula. There's a reason the Oakland A's haven't won a World Series yet. There are situations to bunt and situations to swing away. 1st and 2nd and 0 outs: Bunt. Late in the game runner on first or 2nd and you need a run to tie or lead: Bunt. Those are just a few examples. Quit going by your damn formulas.

[TUSK]

Baseball isn't a math formula. There's a reason the Oakland A's haven't won a World Series yet. There are situations to bunt and situations to swing away. 1st and 2nd and 0 outs: Bunt. Late in the game runner on first or 2nd and you need a run to tie or lead: Bunt. Those are just a few examples. Quit going by your damn formulas.

http://content.sportslogos.net/logos/53/69/full/h9p6ap64ybkayh0bmodm06282.gif

[It_Could_Happen]

http://content.sportslogos.net/logos/53/69/full/h9p6ap64ybkayh0bmodm06282.gif

#Moneyball

[Todd4State]

No it's that they can get away with it because their talent means it doesn't hurt them as much. Like I've said for years the sac bunt hurts bad teams MORE because it's a bigger road block. See our 2012 year.

Bunting is not the reason they are good offenses. The correlation to them being a one seed and them bunting is nothing. You fail to understand statistics though because you think a statistical luck factor is an insult.

And you fail to understand baseball at any level because you think it's all about luck and that hard work, preparation, and execution don't matter.

[Todd4State]

Btw, I wasn't really trying to make a correlation between bunting and #1 seeds. I was just pointing out that it is not necessarily a hinderance that many always think when it is brought up. Bunting could help make a team better. Some of these teams also have good offenses and, without studying each case, it could have helped or been a negative. It is more of a part of the philosphy relationship those teams probably have. I think several of those teams I listed also have very good pitching and defense. Bunting can be used to enhance the overall scheme for a team, especially with a pitching and defensive relationship that makes sense. But each case is different and the game time strategy of the bunt has a big part to play in whether it enhances an offense.

This guy gets it.

And I want to point out that Cohen doesn't SAC bunt as much as he appears because we drag bunt even in sacrifice situations a lot. It can be hard to tell because sometimes for players they sacrifice bunt the same way that they drag bunt as evidenced by this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj0G6kpbrO8

[Todd4State]

Sacrifice bunting is a part of the game. I don't like doing it when you have a runner at 1st with no one out, because you do not increase your chances of scoring with a runner on 2nd with 1 out. The run expectancy of a runner on first with no one out is 0.86 runs per inning. The run expectancy of a runner on second with one out is 0.68. So, you actually decrease your run expectancy by bunting a runner over from first to second and giving up that out.

Here's the rub. There is a reason bunt heavy teams are called "small ball" teams, and their goal is to manufacture runs. While bunting a man over from first to second when no one is out, giving up that out in the process, decreases your run expectancy, it does improve your chances of scoring exactly one run by 5.69%. This is from 2013 data on bunting.

The numbers don't describe the situations though, so you have to evaluate bunting based on the situation and the structure of the line up. The fact of the matter is, MSU did not have very many sluggers in the line up. The guy with the best SLG% on the team was also the guy with the best OBP% on the team.

And another person that gets it.

[Todd4State]

I do agree that our pitching magnified the bunting issues....HOWEVER...how realistic is it that we will have Lindgrens, Holders, and 2013 version Mitchell's every year moving forward? Truth is, our pitching will likely fall somewhere between the 2013 staff and the 2015 staff, except we won't have the luxury of the high seams. So...that leads me to believe that even with a good staff we're going to have to get away from so much wasting outs and awful base running errors. Both of which have been staples of the Cohen era.

We can't rely on Butch to pull off a miracle staff each year, or else we might as well make him the coach and try to find an offensive assistant. I believe in Cohen, but if all we're asking him to do is give us a sub par offense and then rely on Butch's staff to make our good seasons, what are we doing?

Why not have both, by maximizing offense AND trying to have a good staff. That's what a lot of us are saying. That doesn't mean going full Smitty and never bunting...but it definitely means not bunting guys like Rea, Pirtle, Collins, etc for the sake of one run in the 3rd inning of a scoreless game.

You get what I'm saying I'm sure. As do I with your stance.

Holder and Lindgren were special players- but we don't have to have special players to have a good bullpen. It's actually a lot easier to find bullpen guys than it is starting pitchers. If we can find a guy like a Saunders Ramsey, a Brett Cleveland, etc. we would be more than fine.

It's very realistic to find guys that can get 3-6 outs a game- which is all you are really asking a relief pitcher to do in general in college.

I've seen a ton of guys that weren't all world prospects that could get the job done at the college level throughout the years.

[Todd4State]

http://content.sportslogos.net/logos/53/69/full/h9p6ap64ybkayh0bmodm06282.gif

Well played.

[Smitty]

1st and 2nd and 0 outs: Bunt.

This one always humors me.

[Smitty]

And you fail to understand baseball at any level because you think it's all about luck and that hard work, preparation, and execution don't matter.

Only Siths believe in absolutes.

Darth Todd.

[engie]

Only Siths believe in absolutes.

Darth Todd.

So how many usernames has it now taken you to decide your philosophy is not "absolute"?

[CadaverDawg]

Holder and Lindgren were special players- but we don't have to have special players to have a good bullpen. It's actually a lot easier to find bullpen guys than it is starting pitchers. If we can find a guy like a Saunders Ramsey, a Brett Cleveland, etc. we would be more than fine.

It's very realistic to find guys that can get 3-6 outs a game- which is all you are really asking a relief pitcher to do in general in college.

I've seen a ton of guys that weren't all world prospects that could get the job done at the college level throughout the years.

I agree.

However, the further you get from an elite pen, the more runs you need to score to win games. Which is where my point is....That there is a happy medium between the amount of sac bunting, when we do it, who we do it with, vs the Smitty approach of basically never sac bunting.

In other words, abandoning sac bunts is NOT the answer. Improving our pitching is #1, and utilizing the sac bunt and small ball properly us #2. If we clean up those 2 aspects, we will cut down opponents runs per game while increasing our own.

[KB21]

And another person that gets it.

You know what's funny? I've been on these message boards for quite a while. I can remember fans criticizing Ron Polk for "not bunting" and playing for the big inning too much. Now, John Cohen gets criticized for bunting too much and not playing for the big inning.

[Smitty]

You know what's funny? I've been on these message boards for quite a while. I can remember fans criticizing Ron Polk for "not bunting" and playing for the big inning too much.

If Polk coached and Cohen recruited we'd be lethal. Their faults are opposites. Except for crooting midgets, but Polk wouldn't have played them and he would have made Garner, Rea, Hump, Collins, and Rooker into monsters.

[engie]

Lol @ the implication of Polk "making guys into monsters"...

Polk did very, very little with hitters in his second stint at msu. I can't speak to his first because I wasn't coming thru then. Had you, you know, played the game -- you would have known State's hitting development was practical all Raffo.

[MadDawg]

I just wish we did the simple things right. Like scoring a run if we get a runner on 3rd with less than 2 outs. I don't know what our % for scoring that run this past year was, but I can remember so many damn times we ended up stranding the guy at 3rd while he watched one or two batters not even be able to hit a fly ball to the outfield.

[Smitty]

Lol @ the implication of Polk "making guys into monsters"...

Polk did very, very little with hitters in his second stint at msu. I can't speak to his first because I wasn't coming thru then. Had you, you know, played the game -- you would have known State's hitting development was practical all Raffo.

I didn't know this until researching it but it turns out one of the aspects of being a head coach is good assistants. Or have you forgotten this last season already.

[engie]

I didn't know this until researching it but it turns out one of the aspects of being a head coach is good assistants. Or have you forgotten this last season already.

Nice deflection. Yeah -- Polk was so good at hiring assistants that his last best guy is .500 at Arkansas St. But I forgot -- the reigning national assistant of the year is terrible**

[Really Clark?]

I just wish we did the simple things right. Like scoring a run if we get a runner on 3rd with less than 2 outs. I don't know what our % for scoring that run this past year was, but I can remember so many damn times we ended up stranding the guy at 3rd while he watched one or two batters not even be able to hit a fly ball to the outfield.

I know what you are saying. And for all the fundamental talk (which I love) and strategy thoughts, at some point the players need to do their job and nut up and hit the snot out of the ball. Even with sloppy fundamentals these guys have above avg hand to eye coordination and a leader will get the job done regardless.

[tcdog70]

the decision to bunt a runner to 2nd with no outs should hinge on how good the the next batter is. If it is a Frasier or Renfrow maybe I bunt. But if it is a Guy hitting close to the Medoza Line, hell no don't bunt.Why give up an out to put runners at second if all you have is weak ass ground ball hitters who strike out 50% of the time.

[Todd4State]

You know what's funny? I've been on these message boards for quite a while. I can remember fans criticizing Ron Polk for "not bunting" and playing for the big inning too much. Now, John Cohen gets criticized for bunting too much and not playing for the big inning.

I think about that sometimes. I think Polk underutilized guys like Jeffrey Rea and Joseph Hunter as far as their talents go- but it wasn't just bunting- Polk wouldn't steal bases, hit and run, etc.

Of course part of that could have been because he was asleep in the dugout.

The bottom line is if your players do something well, it should be utilized. That's how you maximize a lineup- and why you can't always rely on large broad blankets of data to determine what you do.

[Todd4State]

Lol @ the implication of Polk "making guys into monsters"...

Polk did very, very little with hitters in his second stint at msu. I can't speak to his first because I wasn't coming thru then. Had you, you know, played the game -- you would have known State's hitting development was practical all Raffo.

I was about to ask what he was basing that on. I believe it was Mutt the Hoople that described our hitting approach under Polk as the "Cold War approach to hitting."

Actually, after Clark and Palmeiro came through we didn't get very many hitters into MLB that played for Polk- Jon Shave, Adam Piatt, Mitch Moreland (who Polk tried to redshirt), Craig Tatum, and just now Ed Easley. Pete Young made it as a pitcher. Tatum and Easley are basically back-up catchers- which is more about handling a pitching staff than being a great hitter.

[Smitty]

Polk bashing lol.. Cohen's 2015 was worse than Polk ever was. Polk never had less than 9 wins in the league and that came in his last year.

[Todd4State]

Polk bashing lol.. Cohen's 2015 was worse than Polk ever was. Polk never had less than 9 wins in the league and that came in his last year.

Thanks to the players and recruiting class that Pat McMahon left him which he rode for about four years- and then proceed to run the program into the ground by not recruiting people like Stephen Head.

[engie]

Didn't win 50 in his last 14 seasons at MSU. Never in his career went as far as Cohen has. Polk allowed Ole Miss to be built into something we can never fully put away again. You can play make believe all you want -- but that never happens if we hire Cohen's equivalent in 2002. They never are able to recruit the players. We prevent that, the fan support never shows. And it is never built.

[Really Clark?]

Polk bashing lol.. Cohen's 2015 was worse than Polk ever was. Polk never had less than 9 wins in the league and that came in his last year.

Wait a minute, the debate for these last posts was about developing hitters. You are switching topics to wins. That's a different subject altogether. If I am not mistaken in Cohen's first two years he eclipsed the 60 hr mark or in 2 of his first 3 years. Something like that. Polk did not have guys slugging quite as good.

[Smitty]

Thanks to the players and recruiting class that Pat McMahon left him which he rode for about four years- and then proceed to run the program into the ground by not recruiting people like Stephen Head.

Something occurred in 2007 in Nebrasaka, can't quite put my finger on it.

[engie]

Something occurred in 2007 in Nebrasaka, can't quite put my finger on it.

38 wins. "Anybody can get hot in the postseason!1!11 It's all about regular seasons!!1!1". Talk about using lightning in a bottle at your own convenience.

Cohen has matched that trump card of yours in 4 of the last 5 years here. Try harder.

[Todd4State]

Something occurred in 2007 in Nebrasaka, can't quite put my finger on it.


When you have a program as good as ours was before Polk, it takes some time to completely destroy it. We had a very obvious gradual decline that eventually culminated with the 2008 season that pretty much everybody that knew anything about baseball could see coming.

Even that team in 2007 could have been built a lot better- we had a chance to get Zack Cozart but we had Bunky Kateon. The only reason we had Moreland and Easley on that team was because they promised Polk that they would withdraw from the MLB draft.

[BulldogBear]

Nebrasaka?

Was that going to be the target if we'd had to drop a 3rd bomb on Japan?