BB: CCIW: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Gregory Sager]

Gregory, you are absolutely kidding yourself if you believe that there has only be one maybe two cheap home runs hit to right field this entire year.

I didn't say "this entire year." This is what I said, and I'll bold it this time for you:

And there hasn't been more than one or two cheap homers hit to right in CCIW games played at HAC this season.

Moving on ...

I can only speak for the two games I was at between North Central and North Park but Abrahams home run off Giovenco would not be a home run at most CCIW fields.  The ball was hit off the end of the bat and hit the press box 350 feet from home plate. 

In game two Romanello hit a ball to the right center gap that if the wind was blowing in would have landed in the infield however the wind blew it to the first row of the bleachers and was laughing rounding the bases because he knew that it was a gift handed to him.  So to say that there has only been one or two out to left is questionable at best.

OK, then, there's been three rather than one or two. Happy?

Do you know the dimensions of the field by chance ... Because left is still short but it looks farther than normal considering the extreme shortness of right field.  I am just wondering if you know because if not I am going to find out.

No, I don't know, but Mr. B might. Again, the scoring charts that Mr. B and I posted earlier today do not bear out the assertion some of you are making that Holmgren is some sort of run factory.

I too, droppinbombs47, remember a couple infield flies that turned into homeruns (from both teams).  This was because of the blustering winds blowing out, and the incredibly short fence in right.  Definitely seems like a good factor if you are a North Park hitter getting the luxury of hitting pop flies into the bleachers in right on daily basis for homeruns. Visiting hitters coming to the park must be ecstatic as well. 

Did you even read my post and Mr. B's? Did you even look at those charts?

Holmgren does have the highest home run total of any ballpark in CCIW play thus far, but not by much -- and this has to take into consideration the fact that North Park hosted that extraordinarily windy April 2 doubleheader that produced 11 of the 16 dingers hit in Holmgren to date in CCIW contests. A similar situation exists for Elmhurst, as 10 of the 15 homers hit during Elmhurst home games in CCIW play this year took place in that April 2 doubleheader against Carthage.

The idea that hitters get routine pop flies to drop into the seats in right at Holmgren with clockwork regularity, to the point where it completely distorts the game, simply isn't true. Remember, this is right field we're talking about. Most hitters are right-handed, which means that left field is their pull field. Ergo, most homers hit on every level of baseball are hit over the left-field fence.

[Gregory Sager]

If you haven't seen the new rankings yet here are the two links:

http://www.d3baseball.com/top25/2010/week-8

http://www.muhlenberg.edu/pdf/main/athletics/abcapoll42010.pdf

Augie is in sixth place in the CCIW, two games out of a possible playoff spot and four games out of the lead with only nine CCIW games left, and yet the Doggies are still getting votes in both polls? Augustana has gone 6-9 in its last fifteen games and is 5-7 in league play. That's a lot of forbearance on the part of the pollsters towards Augie.

[augie_superfan]

I remembered North Park's field being fairly short to right-center and center.  It's been about 4 years since I've been there but if you take a look at some satellite pictures, it gives a good estimate of the distances.  Here's what I got:

RF Line: 310
Right Center: 310
Straight-away Center: 360

You can't see the fence in left from the pictures but maybe someone more familiar can tell us where the fence is located with respect to the softball infield dirt.  Here are a few estimated distances to left field landmarks:

LF line to softball dirt: 295
Left-center to football goal post: 340

Wonder what anyone else thinks

And by the way, I have no clue how Augie is getting any votes in the polls but it all won't matter in the end as they won't even make the conference tournament unless they figure it out real quick.

[mr_b]

I don't know the distances to the various parts of the field, but I'd guess right-center is actually the shortest distance, then the right-field line, then the left-field line.  Because of the orientation of the bleachers, the distance gets pretty significant fairly quickly past right-center.  Straight-away center is a monster short, and it's rare to see anyone hit a ball over the center-field wall.  Perhaps the left-field gap is even further away from home plate.  There's a lot of ground to cover out there in left and left-center.

I remember with the old field, there used to be a high net -- maybe 30 feet above the bleacher railings -- that held a lot of balls in the yard.  It was our version of the Green Monster.

On Sunday a Millikin batter hit a clean single to right that right fielder Wade Yunker fielded on one hop.  He fired a strike to first baseman Mike Domenick and got the runner by a step. 

[Gregory Sager]

I remembered North Park's field being fairly short to right-center and center.  It's been about 4 years since I've been there but if you take a look at some satellite pictures, it gives a good estimate of the distances.  Here's what I got:

RF Line: 310
Right Center: 310
Straight-away Center: 360

You can't see the fence in left from the pictures but maybe someone more familiar can tell us where the fence is located with respect to the softball infield dirt.  Here are a few estimated distances to left field landmarks:

LF line to softball dirt: 295
Left-center to football goal post: 340

Wonder what anyone else thinks

The left-field fence is located well within the softball diamond's dirt infield, and runs beyond the football goal post of the north end zone. If you're looking at the satellite map, draw a straight line from the paved angle between the north end of the bleachers and the fieldhouse across to, and through, the right side of the softball infield over to N. Albany Avenue, and you'll see where the portable left-field fence is laid out for baseball.

I don't know the distances to the various parts of the field, but I'd guess right-center is actually the shortest distance, then the right-field line, then the left-field line.  Because of the orientation of the bleachers, the distance gets pretty significant fairly quickly past right-center.

This really becomes apparent when you look at the satellite picture on Google Maps, as augie_superfan suggested. Right-center is actually closer to home plate than the right-field foul pole is. Of course, Deutscher's home run on Sunday was a good forty to fifty feet up the air and only beginning its downward arc when it hit the fence atop the press box, so it was no right-center cheapie by any stretch of the imagination.

[DirtyJersey]

I think this is a huge week for CCIW matchups, so I dug up some stats that might be interesting.

               Avg.         ERA           Conf. Avg.  Conf. ERA         FLD %
   
Augustana      .332        4.36      .317             5.47                .938

Carthage        .359         5.63     .394             7.62               .950

Elmhurst          .327       9.30      .345             11.60             .943

Ill. Wesleyan   .263        6.10      .264            6.01                .952

Millikin            .286        7.14      .276           7.82                .940

North Central   .357        4.88      .369           7.13                .957

North Park       .336        4.32     .355             5.68              .962

Wheaton         .347        4.51      .338           5.67              .956


Anyone have any predictions for the games?  I personally cannot wait to watch Wheaton vs. NCC on live stats, and NPU vs. IWU, as well

           (Matchups)

*Wheaton vs North Central
*North Park vs. Ill. Wesleyan
*Augustana vs. Carthage
*Elmhurst vs. Millikin

What an exciting weekend of baseball upcoming!! Here is my source for the 95.5 MPH reference. http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/blog?name=olney_buster&id=5108902&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fmlb%2fblog%3fname%3dolney_buster%26id%3d5108902

Either way, throwing strikes, keeping hitters off-balance while locating the ball well leads to pitching success. I am going to take a crack at it predictions. Good point, Sager, Augie certainly seems out of the hunt without anything short of something Colorado Rockies-like  

Wheaton 2 out of 3 against NCC
IWU 2 out of 3 against NPU
Carthage sweeps Augustana
Elmhurst 2 out of 3 against Millikin

[HITandRUN463]

Just saw this on the main d3baseball page.  >>>

http://d3baseball.com/pressreleases/North+Central/2010/04/20/North-Central-Earns-First-National-Ranking-Since-99/5864

Congrats to North Central for making a statement in the polls and revisiting their roots of a strong baseball dynasty.  It looks like the Cardinals have made a progress in aspects of pitching, hitting, and defense.  Truly a big turn-around from last season's record (11-25-1).

Also, Wheaton had collected 14 votes in the recent poll, along with Augustana receiving 7 votes.  (still confused about Augustana's votes  )  But way to represent the CCIW! 

[BigPoppa]

If you haven't seen the new rankings yet here are the two links:

http://www.d3baseball.com/top25/2010/week-8

http://www.muhlenberg.edu/pdf/main/athletics/abcapoll42010.pdf

Augie is in sixth place in the CCIW, two games out of a possible playoff spot and four games out of the lead with only nine CCIW games left, and yet the Doggies are still getting votes in both polls? Augustana has gone 6-9 in its last fifteen games and is 5-7 in league play. That's a lot of forbearance on the part of the pollsters towards Augie.

Don't look at me. I avoided every Central region team with my vote.

[HITandRUN463]

I'm just curious to see what everyone has to think about the comparison of this year's stats versus last year's stats because of the recent ban of composite barrel bats?  Do you think it has made a difference or no 

[Gregory Sager]

Interesting question. What's readily apparent from a look at the stats is how much more the hitters have dominated the league than last year. In 2009 CCIW hitters had a collective .297 batting average in league play, and the pitchers had a collective ERA of 5.69. Thus far this year, CCIW hitters are up to a whopping .333 in league play, and the league's ERA is at 7.09, almost a run and a half more than last season.

[HITandRUN463]

I was scoping around the league and it looks like the Cardinals of North Central have gotten some revenge on the Maroons of University of Chicago.  The Maroons took 2 games out of 3 last year from the Cardinals, but today it seems like a different story because  the Cards pounded out 14 runs off of 17 hits.

http://northcentralcardinals.com/news/2010/4/21/MTEN_0421104228.aspx

I am starting to jump on the Cardinal bandwagon, but I am anxious to see how they fare against Wheaton this weekend 

[warrior35]

In my exposure to D2 baseball, I honestly don't think it's made much of a difference... The team that I follow in D2 this year has 7 of 9 returning starters from last year and last year they averaged roughly one home run per game and this year they are averaging nearly 1.5 home runs per game.  The new players have not significantly contributed to that total.  So I would argue that overall, it has not had any effect.  I'm interested to see the data on injury total at the end of the year... I'd be surprised if it had any true effect.  The non-composite technology is good enough, that while the exit speed may still be a few MPH slower than composite, it is not significant enough to reduce the chance of injury.  I remember back in the 90's when the Iowa Conference experimented with wood bats for a couple years.  They struggled to justify the increased expense of wood bats with the very minor improvement in injury and after only a couple years reverted back to using metal... although I'm sure metal bats are even better now.  I just don't know that any metal regulation is really going to significantly reduce injury.

[CrashDavisD3]

In my exposure to D2 baseball, I honestly don't think it's made much of a difference... The team that I follow in D2 this year has 7 of 9 returning starters from last year and last year they averaged roughly one home run per game and this year they are averaging nearly 1.5 home runs per game.  The new players have not significantly contributed to that total.  So I would argue that overall, it has not had any effect.  I'm interested to see the data on injury total at the end of the year... I'd be surprised if it had any true effect.  The non-composite technology is good enough, that while the exit speed may still be a few MPH slower than composite, it is not significant enough to reduce the chance of injury.  I remember back in the 90's when the Iowa Conference experimented with wood bats for a couple years.  They struggled to justify the increased expense of wood bats with the very minor improvement in injury and after only a couple years reverted back to using metal... although I'm sure metal bats are even better now.  I just don't know that any metal regulation is really going to significantly reduce injury.

[/b]

Solution is Wood Composite bats.  Peform like wood but last longer and would reduce the expense. Already approved for professional baseball.

http://www.justbats.com/product.view.aspx?p=9249

http://www.baumbat.com/

[warrior35]

I don't disagree that composites would save money, and might be the best solution to the injury issue... however, in terms of the game of baseball, my experience with composite bats is that they significantly lack pop from other wood, especially Maple.  But, if injury is solely what you're going for then perhaps that's the best option for college baseball.  Perhaps composites have improved, but the Baum bats I swang a couple years ago were not good baseball bats if you're looking for a bat that performs well.  I guess that's the ethical dilemma at the heart of the issue, and it's hard to know what blend of performance and safety should be assumed.  I don't think college baseball is going to resort to safety balls anytime soon ;-) haha.  Considering how baseball is becoming a revenue sport at the D1 level, I find it hard to believe that the NCAA would sacrifice revenue for a very small degree of safety.  I think college baseball would suffer revenue if it didn't possess some of the offensive prowess it does from metal bats.  The general public just doesn't enjoy/respect the defensive side of the game anymore.

[HITandRUN463]

I don't disagree that composites would save money, and might be the best solution to the injury issue... however, in terms of the game of baseball, my experience with composite bats is that they significantly lack pop from other wood, especially Maple.  But, if injury is solely what you're going for then perhaps that's the best option for college baseball.  Perhaps composites have improved, but the Baum bats I swang a couple years ago were not good baseball bats if you're looking for a bat that performs well.  I guess that's the ethical dilemma at the heart of the issue, and it's hard to know what blend of performance and safety should be assumed.  I don't think college baseball is going to resort to safety balls anytime soon ;-) haha.  Considering how baseball is becoming a revenue sport at the D1 level, I find it hard to believe that the NCAA would sacrifice revenue for a very small degree of safety.  I think college baseball would suffer revenue if it didn't possess some of the offensive prowess it does from metal bats.  The general public just doesn't enjoy/respect the defensive side of the game anymore.

I agree with you on the defensive comment, warrior35.

I think the "crack" of a wood bat would be an awesome thing to bring to the CCIW.  But I feel like it would give a major advantage to the pitchers.  It would keep most games under 10 runs (what normal games should be).  So it seems like there are two sides to this. 

I don't know how much it would cost for schools to buy wood bats in max quantities, but most likely it would be quite costly.  This is the main factor that would keep schools/conferences from changing from metal to wood bats (even if wood bats are safer for the kids).

One more thing...having wood bats would take away little "dinkers" or any other "cheap" hits from the hitters (unless it's a broken bat hit).  So I feel it would put hitters into different categories, metal from wood,  based on if they can really use the "sweet spot" of the bat to put on the ball.  So in other words, if the can really hit or not.