Baseball Official 2025 Nebraska Cardiac Beaver Slayers Baseball Thread - (33-29) - BACK TO BACK BIG TEN CHAMPIONS

[HuskerBaseball]

Max could have sat indian style anywhere on the field and I wouldn't have complained about him being in the lineup. Your point of Offense makes up for defense is valid

 

[Bulldog10]

Max could have sat indian style anywhere on the field and I wouldn't have complained about him being in the lineup. Your point of Offense makes up for defense is valid

They actually have to be good at offense though. Trotting Swanson out there the past 2 years and expecting him to be anything other than terrible was insane.

 

[PonyBoy]

You can’t be on here saying our defense is good while also agreeing 5/9 spots are below average, that’s not how it works.

I didn't say 5 of 9. FFS, there aren't even 9 defensive spots in the discussion. Defense isn't why Nebraska struggled during a stretch in 2025. My goodness.

 

[Bulldog10]

I didn't say 5 of 9. FFS, there aren't even 9 defensive spots in the discussion. Defense isn't why Nebraska struggled during a stretch in 2025. My goodness.

Not a reason we won games either (we didn’t win very many)

 

[...TrueColors...]

Nope, they're not but it's all we have. @...TrueColors... mentioned a year or so ago it'd be nice to have some data like MLB. But holy heck the investment would be off the charts. Advanced defensive analytics for college is somewhat ridiculous too. Judging amateurs (- NIL) to perform at the level of professionals isn't really fair to anyone and that's exactly what the highly advanced analytics will do.

Yep, Swanny wasn't a good OF'er. Value his offensive production vs defensive liability and purely a guess, his offense offset the defense? I'm aware of the next level, understand it and agree with you.

MLB has 30 teams. D1 has 300 teams. The standards have to be different. It's unrealistic to expect the same.

Analytics is really good for the game, up to a certain point. But honestly, in a 56-game schedule; FIP, xFIP, UZR, DRS, etc, etc would drive a lot of people in the game nuts. And I don't think it's needed, or warranted. AA works much better over a 162-game schedule with the best ball players in the world. Which college athletes aren't.

I can definitely see your point here.

Would I be able to sell you on the idea that advanced analytics would mean something in college. But only after about 4-5 years of data collection.

That make a difference?

The MLB data is worth a lot because we’ve got decades and in some cases centuries of it.

 

[PonyBoy]

no but your reliance on fielding percentage being top 50 etc cant hold water when the guy with the best fielding percentage is Swanny.
you disproved your own statement.

My point is a great fielding percentage doesn't automatically make a great defense and you know this.

Are you drunk!? Swanny wasn't even top 10 in fielding %. And I said he was bad.

I never said it did. It's the only available statistic in college.

 

[PonyBoy]

Not a reason we won games either (we didn’t win very many)

The 2025 Vandy game alone laughs at the above.

Swanny's offense benefited NU more than balls not caught in his career in Lincoln, including 2025.

 

[PonyBoy]

Yep, Swanny wasn't a good OF'er.

In English, right away.

 

[HuskerBaseball]

Not a reason we won games either (we didn’t win very many)

He won several games by himself

Vandy, PSU Big ten championship come to mind.

some guys are worth playing even though they suck at defense

I apologize to others on that team because it takes a whole team to win. But Swanny and Caron literally CARRIED us to that first B1G tourney win.
I will take three years of bad defense for that alone, no questions asked.

Gabe was also a really good leader along with Walsh and Christo

I can see Beek playing this year because he's a leader vs being the best option at third. He brings energy nobody can deny

 

[PonyBoy]

I can definitely see your point here.

Would I be able to sell you on the idea that advanced analytics would mean something in college. But only after about 4-5 years of data collection.

That make a difference?

The MLB data is worth a lot because we’ve got decades and in some cases centuries of it.

Absolutely it will, to an extent. I'm a big analytical guy, but not so much of the advanced stuff for college as I feel it can negatively impact the game with not just the 56-game schedule but also over-reliability and more importantly - the NCAA restrictions of coaches time allowed with the team per week.

Find an assistant like Marcuzzo and my opinion will slightly change.

I'd rather the money go in to as-is resources to benefit the players. We have a lab that can take our pitching up a level, hitting can get a bump too, but we rarely, if ever, use it. Part of that is NU Athletics related with limited access. Part of it is not having dedicated people to use it correctly, so on and so on. Pay a pair of guys $60,000 each per year to solely focus on this and you'll see improvements. But, that's too much to ask for.

We cant even get radar guns to match inside Hawks Field. Let's correct what is currently at our disposal before wanting more.

MLB/MiLB guys don't have school (required attendance + homework) to sweat, it's 110% baseball focused over a 7-8 month period including ST. And zero time restrictions. They also have "data coaches", which solely focus on that and a front office with nerds pumping the information to those dedicated coaches.

@HuskerBaseball can likely verify this. I was told by a former parent, we have a current pitcher (please keep his name out of this discussion) that went and visited with a specialist. In the very first or second visit, he diagnosed something that should be corrected. This specialist hasn't way less access to this player, no more access to analytical data than Rob Childress has and Rob never once mentioned this. I don't know if it's analytical or fundamentally related but the point is - our T5 pitching coach couldn't identify something that seemed minor but very beneficial.

 

[HuskerBaseball]

In English, right away.

Absolutely it will, to an extent. I'm a big analytical guy, but not so much of the advanced stuff for college as I feel it can negatively impact the game with not just the 56-game schedule but also over-reliability and more importantly - the NCAA restrictions of coaches time allowed with the team per week.

Find an assistant like Marcuzzo and my opinion will slightly change.

I'd rather the money go in to as-is resources to benefit the players. We have a lab that can take our pitching up a level, hitting can get a bump top, but we rarely, if ever, use it. Part of that is NU Athletics related with limited access. Part of it is not having dedicated people to use it correctly, so on and so on. Pay a pair of guys $60,000 each per year to solely focus on this and you'll see improvements. But, that's too much to ask for.

MLB/MiLB guys don't have school (required attendance + homework) to sweat, it's 110% baseball focused over a 7-8 month period including ST. And zero time restrictions. They also have "data coaches", which solely focus on that and a front office with nerds pumping the information to those dedicated coaches.

@HuskerBaseball can likely verify this. I was told by a former parent, we have a current pitcher (please keep his name out of this discussion) that went and visited with a specialist. In the very first or second visit, he diagnosed something that should be corrected. This specialist hasn't way less access to this player, no more access to analytical data than Rob Childress has and Rob never once mentioned this. I don't know if it's analytical or fundamentally related but the point is - our T5 pitching coach couldn't identify something that seemed minor but very beneficial.

I can verify this.

 

[...TrueColors...]

Absolutely it will, to an extent. I'm a big analytical guy, but not so much of the advanced stuff for college as I feel it can negatively impact the game with not just the 56-game schedule but also over-reliability and more importantly - the NCAA restrictions of coaches time allowed with the team per week.

Find an assistant like Marcuzzo and my opinion will slightly change.

I'd rather the money go in to as-is resources to benefit the players. We have a lab that can take our pitching up a level, hitting can get a bump top, but we rarely, if ever, use it. Part of that is NU Athletics related with limited access. Part of it is not having dedicated people to use it correctly, so on and so on. Pay a pair of guys $60,000 each per year to solely focus on this and you'll see improvements. But, that's too much to ask for.

MLB/MiLB guys don't have school (required attendance + homework) to sweat, it's 110% baseball focused over a 7-8 month period including ST. And zero time restrictions. They also have "data coaches", which solely focus on that and a front office with nerds pumping the information to those dedicated coaches.

@HuskerBaseball can likely verify this. I was told by a former parent, we have a current pitcher (please keep his name out of this discussion) that went and visited with a specialist. In the very first or second visit, he diagnosed something that should be corrected. This specialist hasn't way less access to this player, no more access to analytical data than Rob Childress has and Rob never once mentioned this. I don't know if it's analytical or fundamentally related but the point is - our T5 pitching coach couldn't identify something that seemed minor but very beneficial.

Couple things -

I agree with your entire post. I would also never suggest that we invest money into advanced analytics right now. Most certainly not as there are many other things we need before we can spend money on “nice to have” things.

A buddy of mine’s son runs the pitching lab at UNO. He’s getting his PHD in some type of movement science. Can’t remember whatever the hell it is. All this to say that Childress has forgotten more about baseball and pitching than any one of the guys working in those labs. But when they hook those kids up to the machines the numbers don’t lie and it becomes easy for anyone to analyze the data, help increase velo, and prevent injury.

 

[Bulldog10]

The 2025 Vandy game alone laughs at the above.

Swanny's offense benefited NU more than balls not caught in his career in Lincoln, including 2025.

Ah yes an early season game that didn’t matter. You could’ve atleast used the Big 10 tourney 2 years ago for your argument, even though he didn’t do anything in Stillwater once we got to regionals.

 

[PonyBoy]

Ah yes an early season game that didn’t matter. You could’ve atleast used the Big 10 tourney 2 years ago for your argument, even though he didn’t do anything in Stillwater once we got to regionals.

You said, "we didn't win many games" which is in reference to the 2025 season hence why Vandy - who we played in the 2025 season - was brought up. B1G tournament wasn't 2 years ago, it was a year ago in 2024 when he went ham.

Swanny was 6-13 in Stillwater with 2 2B's, 4 HR's, 6 RBI's and was named to the All Regional team. 😂 Fucking eh man, take your loss & log off.

Your hatred for Husker baseball needs checked at the door. Maybe it's ignorance, who knows.

 

[Bulldog10]

You said, "we didn't win many games" which is in reference to the 2025 season hence why Vandy - who we played in the 2025 season - was brought up. B1G tournament wasn't 2 years ago, it was a year ago in 2024 when he went ham.

Swanny was 6-13 in Stillwater with 2 2B's, 4 HR's, 6 RBI's and was named to the All Regional team. 😂 Fucking eh man, take your loss & log off.

Your hatred for Husker baseball needs checked at the door. Maybe it's ignorance, who knows.

We were a .500 team in the Big 10, we didn’t win many games. And yeah I got the years mixed up, it was this last year where he went 2-11 with 8 k’s in the regional.

 

[PonyBoy]

We were a .500 team in the Big 10, we didn’t win many games. And yeah I got the years mixed up, it was this last year where he went 2-11 with 8 k’s in the regional.

No shit, hence 2025 Vandy used as a single example and not any game in 2024.

The entire offense sucked ass in Chapel Hill; .215, 29 or 30 K's with a majority of them against Oklahoma x2. Brutal showing.

 

[2010sarenevercomingback]

@HuskerBaseball can likely verify this. I was told by a former parent, we have a current pitcher (please keep his name out of this discussion) that went and visited with a specialist. In the very first or second visit, he diagnosed something that should be corrected. This specialist hasn't way less access to this player, no more access to analytical data than Rob Childress has and Rob never once mentioned this. I don't know if it's analytical or fundamentally related but the point is - our T5 pitching coach couldn't identify something that seemed minor but very beneficial.

When you say "something that should be corrected," can you narrow down what type of issue? Like something mechanical with his delivery? Grip? A tendency? Workout method? Fielding his position?

 

[PonyBoy]

When you say "something that should be corrected," can you narrow down what type of issue? Like something mechanical with his delivery? Grip? A tendency? Workout method? Fielding his position?

From memory, mechanical.

@HuskerBaseball care to chime in?

 

[HuskerBaseball]

From memory, mechanical.

@HuskerBaseball care to chime in?

No sir.

 

[Kaladin]