Roch: Hitting Coach Terry Crowley is coming back

[olehippi]

I took a look at all the players who played under Terry Crowley from 2006 to 2009 who also played under another hitting coach during that same time frame. These are players ranging from Miguel Tejada, to Freddy Bynum to Ramon Hernandez to Gregg Zaun.

Some played with other teams before Crowley, some with teams after Crowley, some both.

Here are the stat lines:

Crowley as hitting coach: .265/.326/.414 in 14,817 PAs

Others as hitting coach: .254/.312/.385 in 15,074 PAs

Would be curious to see some of the individual player breakdowns on this?

[Stotle]

You dismiss any progress Oriole players have made offensively as being part of their natural growth as a player gaining experience, yet you automatically attribute Cano and Gardner's success to a hitting coach. Why does the same not apply for them?

Cano may have praised Long, but players on the Orioles have also praised Crowley. I don't see that as being a reason for Cano's success to be intimately connected to some special influence of Long's.

No, you are misrepresenting my position. My point is that the minimal growth (which I think is safe to describe as incremental at best for everyone I can think of) isn't impressive given that these are professional athletes who are going to learn a certain amount just through playing the game year after year.

Who has grown in an unexpected way? Which player has developed from a decent power guy to a legit big power threat? Who has developed from a solid .280-.295 hitter to a hitter that opposing pitchers would fear facing with a runner on? Who has shown steady increase in OBP to the point that he's grown .3 points or higher?

Cano's growth is better than anything BAL has produced in the past 10 years, no? And when his power specifically increases and he states that his power has increased because he and Long have specifically focused on his power for the past two years, that gets my attention. If Cano were speaking in generalities about the merits of Long, I wouldn't care. Which Oriole has shown huge growth and then pointed to Crowley as the reason, as opposed to just stating he's a good coach who has really "helped"?

[Sports Guy]

I think he did. Obviously the end results don't show that but he also didn't get going until the middle of the year. His growth in two years under Crowley over where he started from has been pretty substantial though.

Really? You feel Pie was better this season than he was after June last year?

[Stotle]

How about giving me some examples of specific hitting coaches who are available and are demonstrably better than Crowley. You can't, your arguments are purely thoeretical. So yes in theory, there could be a better hitting coach, and it would improve the offense. But by how much? Theoretically we could improve the team by replacing the ball boy or the team masseur. Is it something to be wringing your hands about?

I'm just responding to your dismissive attitude. I stated earlier in this thread what my thoughts were, and "hand wringing" could not be a genuine interpretation by anyone without an agenda.

I haven't called for anyone's head. But your attitude that no one has any right to question Crowley's performance because they can't list a bunch of available studs is not just disingenuous, it's insulting. I can look at a balance sheet and have an idea of how a company is running. If a department is underperforming it could be for a host of reasons. But I don't rule out replacing the manager of that department because I'm not immediately aware of better candidates in the marketplace.

Come on -- you are a smart guy and these posts of yours are mental jousts, not reasoned arguments. If you stance is simply you don't have enough info to take a stand, fine. But to act like there is no logical argument against keeping Crowley is the worst kind of ostrich head-burying there is. You can prove a point without being willfully ignorant.

[Frobby]

An example of a player who displayed poorer plate discipline after Crowley worked extensively with is Felix Pie this year.

Minor League Career Plate Appearances - 2855 BB - 212 7.4% walk rate

Major League

2007 Chi Cubs Plate Appearances - 177 BB - 14 7.2% walk rate

2008 Chi Cubs Plate Appearances - 83 BB - 7 7.5% walk rate

2009 Baltimore Plate Appearances - 281 BB - 24 8.5% walk rate

2010 Baltimore Plate Appearances - 308 BB - 13 4.2% walk rate

In 2010, a year Crowley really worked with Pie, his walk rate was cut almost in 1/2 from what it had been in his previous career, minors and majors.

And it was particularly poor while Buck was here -- 3.9%. From July 30 to August 24, Pie had a stretch of 93 PA without a walk. This was very troublesome to me.

[Ohfan67]

I don't like this decision. From an entertainment perspective, and that's the whole point of MLB, I would have enjoyed having a new person in the job, especially one of our former players.

There are some interesting arguments about Crow's performance imbedded in this long thread, but in the end there's probably very little real variation among most hitting coaches, including Crow. For example, I think they have far less effect than a player getting 20% stronger. But the one area where I do have a real problem with Crow is his aggressive approach. He has stated MANY times over the years that he prefers an aggressive approach at the plate. Crow has made that very clear for a long time and I think that's a terrible approach to preach to a group of hitters like Jones et al.

[CompuCoach]

Cano's growth is better than anything BAL has produced in the past 10 years, no? And when his power specifically increases and he states that his power has increased because he and Long have specifically focused on his power for the past two years, that gets my attention. If Cano were speaking in generalities about the merits of Long, I wouldn't care. Which Oriole has shown huge growth and then pointed to Crowley as the reason, as opposed to just stating he's a good coach who has really "helped"?

This is true, but can you say that the Orioles have had a developing young player with the same "true talent" of Cano? In order for you to say that Kevin Long is a better hitting coach than Terry Crowley, you have to demonstrate that players with comparable talent performed better under Long. On the whole, given what the Yankees are year in and year out (a 'have' to the Orioles' 'have not'), this is just about impossible to fairly assess, in my opinion.

And as far as what Cano cited about his work with his hitting coach - is that exercise something that you really see as being exclusive to Long? Is that not something that another hitting coach in the same situation would have had Cano doing? Who is to say that Cano does not show the same growth with a different coach? You attribute this to Long's ability to teach moreso than Cano's talent, yet in order for that to hold up you have to isolate this down to something that Long brings that another coach doesn't. Can you do that?

[Stotle]

This is true, but can you say that the Orioles have had a developing young player with the same "true talent" of Cano? In order for you to say that Kevin Long is a better hitting coach than Terry Crowley, you have to demonstrate that players with comparable talent performed better under Long. On the whole, given what the Yankees are year in and year out (a 'have' to the Orioles' 'have not'), this is just about impossible to fairly assess, in my opinion.

And as far as what Cano cited about his work with his hitting coach - is that exercise something that you really see as being exclusive to Long? Is that not something that another hitting coach in the same situation would have had Cano doing? Who is to say that Cano does not show the same growth with a different coach? You attribute this to Long's ability to teach moreso than Cano's talent, yet in order for that to hold up you have to isolate this down to something that Long brings that another coach doesn't. Can you do that?

You are asking for too much -- asking for irrefutable proof in order to question Crowley's results. That is a ridiculous burden of proof for something like this. No one is trying to provide a scientific study that proves that Crowley is a bad hitting coach. Had you read my first long post in this thread you would see my point is that there are valid arguments on both sides of the Crowley debate, even with the limited info we have. There are also valid concerns and risks associated with keeping/losing Crowley.

Any side that claims they are 100% sure of what to do is is either ignorant or stupid, and probably a little bit of both.

The bolded is never something I set out to prove. My point is that Cano has made huge progress and he points DIRECTLY at drills that Long has brought to him. Specifically, his power has spiked big time the past two seasons and Cano has said specifically that he and Long have been working on developing his power the past two seasons. How can that NOT impress you? Of course there is huge raw talent there, but you're being dishonest if you claim that this is not a pretty darn good example of a coach clearly pressing the right button. Would another coach have done the same? I don't know. But I know what Long did and that it at least in part resulted in the emergence of one of the best all around hitters in the game.

All I asked for is one example of a player that has done the same for Crowley. Pointed to something specific other than "he's great and has really helped me" generalities. It shouldn't be hard. He's been in BAL for, what, 13 years?

[CompuCoach]

My point is that Cano has made huge progress and he points DIRECTLY at drills that Long has brought to him. Specifically, his power has spiked big time the past two seasons and Cano has said specifically that he and Long have been working on developing his power the past two seasons. How can that NOT impress you? Of course there is huge raw talent there, but you're being dishonest if you claim that this is not a pretty darn good example of a coach clearly pressing the right button. Would another coach have done the same? I don't know. But I know what Long did and that it at least in part resulted in the emergence of one of the best all around hitters in the game.

I do agree that Cano's development has been astonishing, but I consider that more of an accomplishment of his than his hitting coach's. I'm just not convinced that Kevin Long brought something that another coach dealing with a similarly talented player wouldn't have at this point.

Leo Mazzone "produced" the likes of Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, etc. He was supposed to be the cream of the crop in the world of pitching coaches; the kind of guy who would fit most people's definition of a "game changer" in instructional circles. He didn't quite live up to that billing during his tenure with the Orioles. Ultimately, I think it's safe to conclude that the talent in Baltimore was just not on par with what was present in Atlanta, so of course there was not the same kind of success.

Thus, I think the issue is much more a matter of talent than it is of coaching, and to write off the retention of Crowley as being this big blunder is overestimating the effect of a hitting coach on a team (in this case, on the negative end of the spectrum). Crowley got here when the playoff team of '96-'97 was being blown up, and we haven't seen the same semblance of personnel since.

[Stotle]

I do agree that Cano's development has been astonishing, but I consider that more of an accomplishment of his than his hitting coach's. I'm just not convinced that Kevin Long brought something that another coach dealing with a similarly talented player wouldn't have at this point.

Leo Mazzone "produced" the likes of Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, etc. He was supposed to be the cream of the crop in the world of pitching coaches; the kind of guy who would fit most people's definition of a "game changer" in instructional circles. He didn't quite live up to that billing during his tenure with the Orioles. Ultimately, I think it's safe to conclude that the talent in Baltimore was just not on par with what was present in Atlanta, so of course there was not the same kind of success.

Thus, I think the issue is much more a matter of talent than it is of coaching, and to write off the retention of Crowley as being this big blunder is overestimating the effect of a hitting coach on a team (in this case, on the negative end of the spectrum). Crowley got here when the playoff team of '96-'97 was being blown up, and we haven't seen the same semblance of personnel since.

So, Cano credits Long's drills with helping him to develop his in-game power -- specific examples of things Long has told him and worked on with him that have helped him to turn into a 25+ HR bat in addition to being a plus hitter with on-base skills -- and you don't see how Long had anything to do with it?

It's possible to acknowledge a player's talent and still point out that a coach has helped him to make the most out of that talent...

I'll ask again for just one example where an Orioles player has shown improvement and pointed to something specific Crowley has worked on with them. I'll also state again that this isn't evidence that Crowley is incompetent or should not keep his job -- that isn't my point.

[Sports Guy]

I just wish someone would show a good reason why he should stay.

Basically, the only reason given(which is extremely flimsy) is because (maybe) several managers have decided to keep him around..Of course, not one of those people has provided any evidence that Crow was definitely their #1 available choice.

[SilentJames]

I just wish someone would show a good reason why he should stay.

Basically, the only reason given(which is extremely flimsy) is because (maybe) several managers have decided to keep him around..Of course, not one of those people has provided any evidence that Crow was definitely their #1 available choice.

Just to play "devil's advocate" - what evidence do you have that he wasn't their number one choice?

Honestly we can look at crappy numbers but also the players need to bear some responsibility there. He didn't have the guns.

Now we can lok at Jones, Markakis and Wieters as the first real evidence of highly regarded hitters regressing, or at least not progressing as we had hoped, under Crowley.

[El Gordo]

So, Cano credits Long's drills with helping him to develop his in-game power -- specific examples of things Long has told him and worked on with him that have helped him to turn into a 25+ HR bat in addition to being a plus hitter with on-base skills -- and you don't see how Long had anything to do with it?

It's possible to acknowledge a player's talent and still point out that a coach has helped him to make the most out of that talent...

I'll ask again for just one example where an Orioles player has shown improvement and pointed to something specific Crowley has worked on with them. I'll also state again that this isn't evidence that Crowley is incompetent or should not keep his job -- that isn't my point.

I recall that he worked with Nick extensively on turning on the inside pitch when it seemed he was having trouble catching up to it, in 2006. I think the result was 10 HR's in August. I'm sure Long had plenty to do with Cano's improvement, but not so much because of the drills, which probably aren't that unique, but because of his ability to develop a rapport with Cano, who had a rep of being a bit of a head case, and getting him to work on the drills.

Everything we hear about Crowley suggests this is a strong suit of his as well.

[Sports Guy]

Just to play "devil's advocate" - what evidence do you have that he wasn't their number one choice?

Honestly we can look at crappy numbers but also the players need to bear some responsibility there. He didn't have the guns.

Now we can lok at Jones, Markakis and Wieters as the first real evidence of highly regarded hitters regressing, or at least not progressing as we had hoped, under Crowley.

I don't...My evidence is poor results, either in terms of numbers, approach against lefties, approach against rookie pitchers, approach against soft tossers, etc....

Same thing year in and year out.

I have been told that that stuff doesn't matter yet those who say it doesn't matter, haven't said anything about Crow being here except managers have kept him.

[Sports Guy]

I recall that he worked with Nick extensively on turning on the inside pitch when it seemed he was having trouble catching up to it, in 2006. I think the result was 10 HR's in August. I'm sure Long had plenty to do with Cano's improvement, but not so much because of the drills, which probably aren't that unique, but because of his ability to develop a rapport with Cano, who had a rep of being a bit of a head case, and getting him to work on the drills.

Everything we hear about Crowley suggests this is a strong suit of his as well.

And yet, Nick is still fighting this.

So, if Crow gets credit for helping him, shouldn't he also get blame for Nick not sustaining this?