Seattle Mariners manager Scott Servais' hiring continues a troubling trend of no experience necessary | FOX Sports

Ridiculous. We'll see how long it takes for the pendulum of the copy cats swings the other way. Anyone noticing that the trophies are going to teams led by some old-schoolers? Just a thought.

From fox sports.com

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/seattle-mariners-manager-scott-servais-no-experience-mike-matheny-walt-weiss-brad-ausmus-102515

Analytics are changing the game. The manager's role is changing along with it. Still, a manager's No. 1 task is not to crunch numbers, but to connect with 25 premium athletes, ages 20 to 40, who are full of ego and bluster.

The idea that a manager must slavishly adhere to his front office's philosophy is as narrow-minded as the old-school rigidity that gave rise to sabermetrics in the first place. The best managers adjust to what they see on the field, applying knowledge gained from years of watching games unfold in front of them.

Sent from my iPhone

2015 Draft Report Card: Cubs - BaseballAmerica.com

Bottom line, the Cubs should get over their recent playoff disappointment rather quickly. I like Ian Happ from the 2015 draft class and I believe that Billy McKinney will be the next bat to make an impact in the Cubbies young, but prodigious lineup. Cubs will just re-load and take another shot. If David Price reunited with Joe Maddon, that really solidifies the starting rotation with a Big Three in Lester, Arietta and Price.

Some day soon people are going to be openly questioning the genius who packaged both Addison Russell and Billy McKinney in a trade for a one-night stand with Jeff Samardjzia. Maybe some day:
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2015/6/24/8836273/russell-mckinney-keep-cubs-big-winners-one-year-later

Just saying. And it's not using the benefit of 20/20 hindsight either. When I heard the deal, the first thing I thought was Russell AND McKinney!! Oh my!! The spreadsheet must not have been working properly on that day.

from Baseball America:
http://www.baseballamerica.com/draft/2015-draft-report-card-cubs/

QUICK TAKE

Chicago's class could shine if prep millionaire Hudson and Wilson hit, and both sound exciting.

POSITION PLAYERS

BEST PURE HITTER: The Cubs believe in the hitting ability of both of their top picks, OF/2B Ian Happ (1) and OF Donnie Dewees(2), but Happ gets the edge because he makes more impact at the plate. Happ has a more polished approach and is adept switch-hitter. Dewees has more of a slashing, see-it and hit-it old-school approach with tremendous natural hand-eye coordination. » BEST POWER HITTER: 1B/3B Matt Rose (11) led the Sun Belt Conference with 16 homers this spring and has long levers and plate discipline, giving him plus righthanded power. Happ has a chance to develop 20-homer power at his peak, with present power to the gaps. » FASTEST RUNNER: OF D.J. Wilson (4) is an explosive athlete with plus speed that made him a Division I-caliber wide receiver in football. He's at top speed soon after his first step. Happ and Dewees are both plus runners as well. » BEST DEFENSIVE PLAYER: Wilson impressed with his reads, range and instincts in center field, and he has a plus arm as well. 2B/3B P.J. Higgins(12) is a steady, sure-handed infielder with body control.

Sent from my iPhone

2015 Minor League Player Of The Year: Blake Snell

If the Rays can add this guys to a rotation that should bring Matt Moore and/or Drew Smyly back, things will look a bit sunnier in 2016. They still need to score runs a bit better as well, but the Rays have led with pitching recently and it seems like the seemingly endless stream of young pitching prospects is poised to continue in Tampa Bay.

2015 Minor League Player Of The Year: Blake Snell - BaseballAmerica.com

				2015 Minor League Player Of The Year: Blake Snell - Base... Blake Snell is the fourth Rays farmhand to win BA's POY Award.
				View on www.baseballamerica...	Preview by Yahoo

Design a breakout season for a pitcher, and it would look like Blake Snell's 2015.

A supplemental first-round pick of the Rays out of a Washington high school in 2011, Snell still had not progressed past A-ball entering the year. Then he opened the year with 21 scoreless innings to show he was too good for high Class A, en route to a 46-inning scoreless streak. He finished the year in Triple-A, posting the best walk rate of his career.

Few pitchers have approached Snell's success over the past decade. He finished 15-4, 1.41 overall that included 163 strikeouts in 134 innings. His 1.41 ERA, which led all minor league qualifiers, is the lowest for a full-season pitcher since Justin Verlander's 1.29 in 2005, and he ranked among the leaders in wins (tied for fourth), strikeouts (also tied for fourth), WHIP (ninth, 1.02) and opponent average (first, .182).

The statistics tell the story of a pitcher who has fulfilled the promise that Rays area scout Paul Kirsch recorded in his amateur report on Snell, which summarized his looks at the Shoreline, Wash., lefthander from July 2010 through May 2011.

Kirsch recorded Snell as 6-foot-4, 180 pounds, after he had shot up 10 inches from his 5-foot-6 sophomore stature at Shorewood High. His radar gun registered the speed of Snell's three pitches: a fastball that peaked at 94 mph, dipped as low as 87 and averaged 91, a 72-76 mph curveball and an 80-83 mph changeup.

Kirsch graded all three pitches in their current states on the 20-80 scouting scale, marking Snell's fastball as a 55 (slightly above major league average) to go with a 50 change and 45 curve. Kirsch projected all three to get better, with Snell earning a future 65 fastball, 60 curve and 60 changeup with average life and average future command of all three.

Next, he graded his arm action and delivery as 60s as well, and he described Snell physically, with words that for the most part still hold true today: "Medium large, tall frame; elongated features . . . long levers; XL hands, should fill out well; physically immature; baby face." Under "Makeup," Kirsch added, "some pissant in him on field."

The summary also goes into more detail about each of Snell's pitches. Kirsch reports on Snell's loose, easy arm and notes there's "more (velocity) in the tank; feel he will throw very hard someday soon." He notes his loose wrist—crucial for improving his breaking ball—and quality changeup with "late tumble life when down." And calls him "extremely projectable" with "very high upside."

But the real fortune-telling comes at the end. "Consistency of stuff only thing that is keeping him from being on the top of my pref list . . . If it all comes together for this kid, I believe he could be a No. 2 type starter . . . I can't imagine how good he can be when he is about 21 years old or so."

We don't have to imagine anymore. The 22-year-old Snell—our 2015 Minor League Player of the Year—has closed the gap between his reality and his potential. His dominant season put him on the cusp of becoming the Rays' latest ace, following in the lineage of Scott Kazmir, James Shields, David Price and Chris Archer.

"I'm the same guy; I still just have fun playing baseball," Snell says, "because in my mind I'm just an average guy . . . I feel like it's still high school. How have I changed? I feel like I'm a lot better at pitching."

The change really started in 2013, in instructional league following Snell's first full season in the minors. As is their wont, the Rays took it slow with Snell, sending him to two Rookie-ball assignments—the Gulf Coast League in 2011 and the Appalachian League in 2012—before sending him to full-season ball with low Class A Bowling Green in 2013. The "long runway" approach, as Rays officials put it, gave Snell time to grow physically and mentally before the grind of a full minor league season.

Snell stumbled through his first full season, walking 73 in 99 innings for Bowling Green to rank second in the Midwest League and going 4-9, 4.27. The Rays figured he would have to tweak his delivery if he was going to execute the organization's plan to pitch inside with authority. With a fastball that was steadily increasing in velocity as he added strength, Snell tantalized the Rays with his ability to bust righthanded hitters inside with his fastball and put them away with an impressive changeup that faded away from them.

Then-Hot Rods pitching coach Kyle Snyder and longtime Rays roving pitching coordinator Dick Bosman had broached the subject with Snell, both before the season and in 2013.

"The battles we had with this guy on his mechanics, well, he was a stubborn kid," Bosman says. "We knew the better way to teach it was to see him pitch and fail and teach him from that . . . There was plenty of stuff Blake Snell didn't want to do early on, but let him get his ass handed to him a few times, pretty soon you've got a damn receptive audience.

"Kyle deserves all the credit for bringing this kid around tactfully, and it has been a wonderful progression . . . He now pitches inside well to righthanded hitters. It takes courage to pitch inside, and he's got plenty of that good courage."

Snell's breaking ball has evolved in the last two years as well, beginning in instructional league after the 2013 season. "I learned the curveball from Dick Bosman," he says, as he shifted the grip on the pitch, creating spin more with his middle finger rather than his index finger. "I should know my fingers. I'm a pitcher."

He said playing catch with teammate Austin Pruitt helped him hone the grip and release of the pitch, working on getting four-seam spin on the curve, similar to his fastball.

"The power finger is the middle finger," says Snyder, who has seen the change firsthand as Triple-A Durham's pitching coach working with Snell over his final eight starts of 2015. "The other thing we have stressed is the commitment, the conviction, and there's a lot to be said for that. With conviction comes an element of deception. If he's selling all four pitches, fastball/curveball/slider/changeup, from the same slot, it gives you some room for error."

Snell hasn't needed much room for error this season. His 46-inning scoreless streak finally ended in the first inning of a May 23 game against Kyle Schwarber and Double-A Tennessee. Snell says he didn't want to remember that game as the game that ended his scoreless streak, realizing he had to do something positive to make it stand out otherwise.

So he struck out 12—a career best—in just six innings. He got Schwarber three times.

Snell has mostly fulfilled the "future" aspect of Kirsch's amateur report. He has added an inch and 20 pounds, and added strength has translated to improved arm speed. Snyder categorized Snell's arm speed as elite now, and Kirsch now says he considered it average at the time.

The loose wrist and ability to spin a breaking ball from high school have translated into the swing-and-miss breaking balls that Snell throws now. Consistency with both remains a final piece for Snell to polish, as well as quickening his times to the plate and improving his command. He did that this year, improving his walk rate from 4.4 per nine innings in 2014 to 3.6, including just 2.6 in 44 Triple-A innings.

As Kirsh recorded, Snell had the body to pitch, and the "control tower works," as Bosman said, referencing Snell's aptitude and overall makeup.

Perhaps that comes from his baseball background. His father Dave pitched six minor league seasons, reaching Double-A, and schooled Snell and his three brothers (including twin Tyler, who played in junior college) in the game.

"He humbles me pretty quick," Snell says of Tyler. "So I could throw a no-hitter, and he would say, 'It's because you didn't face me—I'd take you deep.' "

Snell spends offseasons back home in Washington, collecting Jordan brand shoes—he's got around 200 pairs—and cheering for the Seahawks. He's passionate about his hometown Washington Huskies and his dog Junior, a chocolate lab.

"No tobacco, no booze, no girlfriend. His best friend is his dog," Bosman jokes. "He's just totally determined to get to the big leagues. He's just zeroed in on where he wants to go."

Kirsch saw the focus back in high school, saw Snell struggle with command in a big road game, where opposing fans were chirping at him. Snell said there were about 60 scouts on hand, and while he couldn't hear them dissecting his performance, "I could hear my heart beating."

Kirsch, who had his scouting director, R.J. Harrison at the game, saw something, though. "He upped his game," Kirsch recalls. "He punched out the next two guys, and he just looked over at their fans as they died down. When we got done, R.J. just said, 'He's got a little (jerk) in him,' and it was a compliment."

A first-round pick and significant prospect as a player, Snyder sees Snell reaching his lofty goals: "He operates in the present. He's very focused and strong-willed. Those are things you can't teach. He's very driven and he wants to be a No. 1 starter in the big leagues. There's no question that's his ceiling, and he's confident he'll reach it. Certain guys have confidence, but with certain guys, confidence can be a liability. That's not the case with Blake."

Minor League Player of the Year

1981: Mike Marshall, 1b, Albuquerque (Dodgers)

1982: Ron Kittle, of, Edmonton (White Sox)

1983: Dwight Gooden, rhp, Lynchburg (Mets)

1984: Mike Bielecki, rhp, Hawaii (Pirates)

1985: Jose Canseco, of, Huntsville/ Tacoma (Athletics)

1986: Gregg Jefferies, ss, Columbia/Lynchburg/Jackson (Mets)

1987: Gregg Jefferies, ss, Jackson/Tidewater (Mets)

1988: Tom Gordon, rhp, Appleton/Memphis/Omaha (Royals)

1989: Sandy Alomar, c, Las Vegas (Padres)

1990: Frank Thomas, 1b, Birmingham (White Sox)

1991: Derek Bell, of, Syracuse (Blue Jays)

1992: Tim Salmon, of, Edmonton (Angels)

1993: Manny Ramirez, of, Canton/Charlotte (Indians)

1994: Derek Jeter, ss, Tampa/Albany/Columbus (Yankees)

1995: Andruw Jones, of, Macon (Braves)

1996: Andruw Jones, of, Durham/Greenville/Richmond (Braves)

1997: Paul Konerko, 1b, Albuquerque (Dodgers)

1998: Eric Chavez, 3b, Huntsville/Edmonton (Athletics)

1999: Rick Ankiel, lhp, Arkansas/Memphis (Cardinals)

2000: Jon Rauch, rhp, Winston-Salem/Birmingham (White Sox)

2001: Josh Beckett, rhp, Brevard County/Portland (Marlins)

2002: Rocco Baldelli, of, Bakersfield/Orlando/Durham (Devil Rays)

2003: Joe Mauer, c, Fort Myers/New Britain (Twins)

2004: Jeff Francis, lhp, Tulsa/Colorado Springs (Rockies)

2005: Delmon Young, of, Montgomery/Durham (Devil Rays)

2006: Alex Gordon, 3b, Wichita (Royals)

2007: Jay Bruce, of, Sarasota/Chattanooga/Louisville (Reds)

2008: Matt Wieters, c, Frederick/Bowie (Orioles)

2009: Jason Heyward, of, Myrtle Beach/Miss. (Braves)

2010: Jeremy Hellickson, rhp, Montgomery/Durham (Rays)

2011: Mike Trout, of, Arkansas (Angels)

2012: Wil Myers, of, Northwest Arkansas/Omaha (Royals)

2013: Byron Buxton, of, Cedar Rapids/Fort Myers (Twins)

2014: Kris Bryant, 3b, Tennessee/Iowa (Cubs)

Tweet by Simon Nainby on Twitter

Ouch!! That hurts. So more doesn't always equal better? Like you can have plenty of knowledge, yet not enough wisdom, which is the application of knowledge?

Preaching to the choir. This exemplifies the problem of relying blindly/too much on a statistical model per se, without paying equal attention to how you are going to use those statistics, that knowledge.

	Simon Nainby (@SiNainby)
10/22/15, 5:11 AM "More data such as paying attention to eye colors of people when crossing a street can make you miss the big truck." pic.twitter.com/MtVSByxXUT

Download the Twitter app
Sent from my iPhone

The Dodgers may have lost a game, a series, a shot at a World Series berth and a manager all because a SS didn't know he had the cover of 3B when the 3B was shifted into RF. You can say that is not a failure of the statistical model all you want, but in a reach to maybe shave what .005 or .010 point off the opponents average, to say nothing of being slavish adherents to a "follow the cool trend or get left behind" the Dodgers came up big losers. And that is with having a big check book to back up the Moneyball approach which seems like an oxymoron. But that's modern day baseball.

Let;s see if the Mets and the Matt Harvey saga come up to bite them on the butt when they least expect it for similar underlying reasons.

Oh yeah, and the A's finished in last place.

Learning lessons from the military | Rugby Strength Coach

"There are many differences between science and real world coaching." You are preaching to the choir, sir. Preaching to the choir. I added italics where I identified confirmation bias (ditto!!, Atta Boy!!) but heck, if this doesn't hit it right on the head then I've been wasting a lot of time and effort over the years. But I do think Coach has the proper perspective and mind-set, from there good results are sure to follow.  

Great article. 

from rugbystrengthcoach.com

http://rugbystrengthcoach.com/learning-strength-and-conditioning-lessons-from-the-military/

Learning strength and conditioning lessons from the military

The longer I coach, the more I realise that though we are a science based discipline, there are limits to science in the strength and conditioning field. This is for several reasons:

• Research almost always lags behind best practice of coaches. Coaches find what works, then researchers tell us why it works. Until as late as the 1980s, science was convinced steroids didn't enhance athletic performance. Some people still think that about growth hormone use now. If you do everything according to the science, you risk being 10 years behind your competitors who aren't relying exclusively on the peer review process for their training.

• It is almost impossible to prove something works in the real world. Something may work well in the research, but there are a million other factors to consider in real life which may render a technique or method ineffective. Just because it works in the lab, it doesn't mean it's going to work with your athletes or your situation.

• Whilst scientific research about a particular idea may be extremely promising it is often unviable in the real world for a variety of reasons. It doesn't fit with your head coach's philosophy, there isn't the money, there aren't enough hours in the day, you don't have the staff or hours in the day to collect and process all the data it would entail.

• There are many differences between science and real world coaching. Where science is concerned with discrete time periods and individual attributes or similar groups of attributes, real world coaching is a continuous and evolving process concerned with only one thing- winning. Likewise when something bad happens in science, you just start the study again. In coaching, successful teams must have contingencies in place for when the shit hits the fan. The game does not stop.

I should preface this post by stating that this is in no way an attack on the value of science to strength and conditioning practice. I love science, I use it every day in my work and at times I have been accused of being an overly scientific coach. Nor am I apologising for coaches who- for the above reasons- completely abandon science, shrug their shoulders, and adopt a training process that is akin to a mixture of cheerleading and throwing shit at a wall to see what sticks.

However in light of the above, the longer I coach the more I look to other fields to advance my coaching practice and the performance of my athletes. A field in which I have taken particular recent interest is the military. Though the stakes of winning and losing are obviously far higher in the military than professional sport, I have identified an interesting number of parallels between the two fields:

• The perfect plan never exists. You go to war with the resources you have. If you don't have a cryo chamber, tendo units, or a GPS system, well, you need to learn how to create winning team with regular old ice, a cheap ipad app, and asking players how tired they feel after every session. Don't expend energy on worrying about what could be, deal with what is.

• Though resources matter, far more important is organisational culture, leadership of the group and the depth of thought that goes into planning and executing the strategy. I've seen some truly terrible strength and conditioning programmes produce great results on the field, because whatever the programme lacked physically was more than compensated for by the culture of the team, the leadership of the players and coaching group, and a near perfect game plan.

• Winning strategies put contingencies in place for all eventualities, because if something can go wrong, it will go wrong. What makes the difference is how you adapt to it. Do you have a plan B for when an athlete turns up exhausted, injured, can't do an exercise or has limited time to train?

• The list goes on. This is without getting into the great ideas we can steal from the business world, such as checklist and system development from the aviation, construction and medical industries.

For today's post I want to share with you a fantastic podcast that highlights all these lessons that we can learn as coaches from the military. This interview is between Tim Ferris and General Stanley McChrystal, who was responsible for leading the allied war effort in Afghanistan in the 2000s. Here are some of the key points I took away from General McChrystal (my notes in italics):

*Never take advantage of anything your troops don't get access to. If they sleep in shitty bunks, you sleep in shitty bunks (If your athletes can't party or drink in camp, or be fat fucks who never train, you should not be either). 

*It is rarely the brightest officers or those with the best disciplinary record who make the best soldiers. Consistently it is those who are rated highest by their peers who succeed (Train the person just as much as you train the athlete. Good teams are filled with good people). 

*If you are a commanding officer, you don't have to be able to physically dominate those under your command but you must be credible and demonstrate effort (Do not be the out of shape coach who is never seen training). 

*What would your biggest critic or worst enemy say about you as a person? If you cannot answer this question out loud perhaps you do not have the self awareness and/or courage to lead a group of people (This is getting used as an interview question for me!).

*The turning point in Gen. McChrystal's career was when his commanding officer told him he could be great- and 35+ years later he still remembers those words and feels their effect on his career. (What can we say to our athletes to have a similar positive effect on their lives?)

*"Success is purpose of organisation shared by members of a team" (Does your team have a purpose or big vision that everyone is working towards? Is it shared and lived by everyone on the team?)

*Red teaming is key to a successful plan. Red teaming is where you ask someone from outside the team with a fresh set of eyes and ideas to tear your plan to pieces. If your plan can stand up to red-teaming, it's a good plan. Never get married to your ideas. Always test the key assumptions of your plan.

*Learn to deal with incomplete information. The speed of warfare is such that commanding officers are forced to take decisions without always knowing the full picture. Learn how to react to new information, have contingencies in place for every eventuality, the plan should always be evolving.

*Leadership is about asking and convincing people to do things they do not necessarily want to do. Relationships are vital in this dynamic. (Great programmes often require athletes to dig deep and make tough commitments. The harder you ask them to go, the stronger your coach-athlete relationship needs to be.)

Once again, here is the link to General McChrystal's podcast with Tim Ferris. It's fascinating listen for coach and non-coach alike! Have your notebook at the ready.

Sent from my iPhone

Florida Gators scrimmage notes: 10/22 - Florida - Scout

That is a lot of guys throwing 90+.

There might be some MLB staffs that don't gave this many.
Looking at you Giants.

from scout.com
http://www.scout.com/college/florida/story/1602498-gators-scrimmage-notes-1022

Velocities: 

A.J. Puk: 93-95 mph

Logan Shore: 91-93 mph

Brady Singer: 92-94 mph

Alex Faedo: 91-95 mph

Jackson Kowar: 92-94 mph

Shaun Anderson: 90-92 mph

Dane Dunning: 91-95 mph

Sent from my iPhone

How to be an expert in 15 minutes a day according to a genius

I was talking with somebody about this quote and I couldn't cite the reference off the top of my head.

"Einstein said that if a person studies a subject for just 15 minutes a day in a year he will be an expert, and in five years he may be a national expert."

But it was Einstein....Albert Einstein!!! I wish I knew that, it would have given me more credibility. But there you go, the value of reading, writing and -- I would add -- arithmetic.

Some of the stats below really give you a good look at why we are where we are in this country, but there I go again complaining about stuff. FASCINATING!!

http://annkroeker.com/2008/11/22/just-fifteen-minutes-a-day-readysetread/

Jennifer at Scraps and Snippets posted about Lifelong Learning at her blog, citing a 2006 article by Harvey Mackay packed with statistics to make an autodidact sprint to her bookcase and grab anything within reach:

• Only 14 percent of adults with a grade-school education read literature in 2002.
• 51 percent of the American population never reads a book more than 400 pages after they complete their formal education.
• 73 percent of all books in libraries are never checked out.
• The average American watches 32 hours of TV every week.
• The average American reads only eight hours (books, newspapers, magazines, Yellow Pages, etc.) every week.
• The average American annually spends 10 times more on what he puts on his head than what he puts into his head.

Consider the following:

• If you read just one book per month for 12 straight months, you will be in the top 25 percentile of all intellectuals in the world!
• If you read five books on one subject, you are one of the world’s foremost leading authorities on that subject!
• If you read just 15 minutes a day — every day, for one year — you can complete 20 books!

The idea of becoming an expert by focusing one’s reading on a single subject reminds me of a post I wrote about lifelong learning and Five Fat Files. In it, I referenced an online article on brain research that included a statement attributed to Albert Einstein:

Einstein said that if a person studies a subject for just 15 minutes a day in a year he will be an expert, and in five years he may be a national expert.

Literary agent Terry Whalin used those same statistics from the Mackay article to encourage writers to read regularly.

With these statistics, it is little wonder that parts of the publishing business are struggling (and even predicting the struggle will continue for some.)If you want to be involved in some aspect of publishing (books or magazine writing where your work appears in print), then you need to be committed to reading on a regular basis. It’s important to take in great information through reading. The experience will fill your mind and heart with something important which will influence your writing. Create a habit of reading.

Strategies to develop skill among different ability levels

http://www.thetalentequation.co.uk/#!5-strategies-to-develop-skill-among-different-ability-levels/c137b/5575b54c0cf2e4994fb815ff

Another great source that a looked to for answers is Doug Lemov's latest book " Practice Perfect" which is a gold mine of highly practical suggestions to assist with all aspects of coaching and practice design. The book is split up into a series of 42 'rules' and right at the start in rule number 2 is an idea that makes total sense to me. The authors refer to 'Practice the 20' where they suggest that we should focus in on the "20% that is going to provide 80% of the value". 

So these are the conclusions I have come to...

1. Don't be in too much of a rush. The players are ready to move on when they are ready to move on. 
    
2. Work with each athlete individually and help them to identify their 20% development area. I do a lot on 1 to 1s with players during breaks or at the start and end of the session to get them to focus in on thier personal development area. I can then reference this throughout the session with a nod or quick 'hot review' during the session. 
     
3. Be relentless in reaffirming these focus areas even though we might feel like we need to add variety and move on. 
    
4. Create opportunities for repetition of these skills without it becoming repetitive. Vary the activity while still working on the same skill or development area. You can tweak the same activity just a bit to challenge ina  different way. 
    
5. Be clear on your own mind on what is the 'critical path' for the athlete or athletes and help them stay on that path. 

If you have any other thoughts I would love to here them. 

Happy Coaching 

P.S. My mission is to try and share my experiences with as many coaches and parents as I can so if you found this mail useful at all then please help me to reach some more people by sharing this. 

35 Secrets of Brilliant Coaches

				35 Secrets of Brilliant Coaches While superior knowledge of the sport is a cornerstone of a brilliant coach, it takes so much more than content and procedural knowledge to be a brilliant coach or ...
				View on www.huffingtonpost.com	Preview by Yahoo

Brilliant coaches...

1. Cherish the child over the athlete. Brilliant coaches know that being an athlete is just a small part of being a child. Brilliant coaches never do anything to advance the athlete at the risk of the child.

2. Treat their, and all other, athletes with respect. Brilliant coaches treat all of the kids in the gym, on the field, court etc. with total respect. No matter what.

3. Communicate with parents. Brilliant coaches understand that parents are not the enemy and, in fact, are an important ally in the development of the athlete.

4. Listen to their athletes concerns. Brilliant coaches don't tune out athletes worries, fears or mentions of injury.

5. Connect before they direct. Brilliant coaches understand the importance of emotional connection. You matter. You belong. You are important to me. Not you the athlete; rather, you the person. Our most fundamental need is safety. When we feel safe we can trust and when we trust we can learn. Brilliant coaches know that this foundation of trust is essential.

6. Begin with the end in mind. Brilliant coaches keep their focus on the big picture of the goal of the athlete. They have a plan, but are flexible as they are aware the road to success is filled with twists and turns.

7. Are obsessive about fundamentals. Brilliant coaches understand the value of fundamentals as the core of all skills. The stronger the core, the more successful the athlete. Legendary basketball coach John Wooden would spend his first practice with his players instructing them how to put on socks. Correct wearing of socks prevents blisters, and feet absent of blisters can attend basketball practice.

8. Break skills into chunks. Brilliant coaches don't simply teach a cartwheel. They break that cartwheel into several key sub-skills and instruct on those skills first before putting them together to perform the cartwheel. Brilliant coaches know that by isolating the individual elements that are woven together to achieve the skill athletes will succeed faster.

9. Embrace athletes' struggle. Brilliant coaches understand that learning is a curve. Like muscle needs to break down before building up, athletes need to struggle to push forward. A brilliant coach doesn't panic when this struggle happens.

10. Make the boring interesting. Brilliant coaches connect the tedious to the goal and make games out of those things that can be counted. They issue challenges and create missions. The goal is to make these dull, but necessary moments more engaging.

11. State corrections in the positive. Brilliant coaches say "do this" not "don't' do this." Don't bend your arms is less effective feedback than "push your arms straight."

12. Find the bright spots and build from there. Brilliant coaches are aware of weaknesses and try to improve them to meet minimal standard but spend much more focus on the areas that an athlete excels. Trying to turn a strong pitcher into a better batter is less effective than trying to make him better at his curve ball.

13. Don't try to break bad habits; rather, they build new habits. Brilliant coaches know that the most effective way to break a bad feedback loop is to replace one habit for another.

14. Give feedback in short, clear spurts that are precise and action oriented. No long speeches. John Wooden was once followed for a whole season so his motivational techniques could be studied. Wooden's average "speech" was four sentences. Furthermore, brilliant coaches do not engage in observational coaching. ("Get your arms up." Up where? "Your knees are bent." Tell me how to fix that.) Concrete feedback ("Your arms need to be right behind your ears." And "Squeeze this muscle and this muscle in your leg to make it straight.") is given instead.

15. Are careful about how they measure success. Brilliant coaches do not use scores or win-loss records as their sole measure of success. Brilliant coaches understand that doing so can erode the long term development of the athlete. Brilliant coaches instead develop competencies for the long run, even if that means sacrificing success at the beginning of journey. If you had to choose, would you rather have your child be the strongest student in the first grade or in the twelfth grade?

16. Use the right mixture of attainable and reach goals. Brilliant coaches have zoned in on the sweet spot of challenge.

17. Keep momentum moving forward. Brilliant coaches understand that objects in motion stay in motion, so there is not a lot of waiting around time in practice.

18. Constantly are seeking continuing education. Brilliant coaches never believe they know it all or that they cannot improve themselves. Quite the opposite. Brilliant coaches read journals, articles, books and scour the internet for training ideas. They attend professional workshops and seek mentorships from other coaches.

19. Create, instead of finding, talent. Brilliant coaches appreciate natural aptitude but know that it can only take an athlete so far. Furthermore, brilliant coaches are humble enough to admit that they are not perfect at predicting success, so they just get in there and work. Finally, brilliant coaches concede that extraordinary talent is not a fair assessment of their value as a coach; rather, they measure their coaching efficacy by taking an athlete who is less gifted and helping that athlete succeed.

20. Observe intently. Brilliant coaches are always trying to figure out what makes people tick so they can better reach them.

21. Understand interpersonal relationships of the team are important.Team building and bonding is not a waste of time but an essential element for success.

22. Use imagery in coaching. Brilliant coaches paint pictures in the athletes' minds. "Jump as high as you can," becomes "Push the floor away from you like a rocket blasting into space and reach that rocket to the stars."

23. Separate learning from practice. Brilliant coaches understand that practice begins after the athletes learn. As a result, they do not have athlete "practicing" something they have not yet learned so as to avoid creating bad habits. Learning takes place with close observation and direct instruction.

24. Focus the athlete on what to do, not what to avoid. Brilliant coaches tell their athletes things like "Shoulders squared and body tight" versus saying "Don't fall."

25. Focus on the multiple ways of learning. Brilliant coaches use auditory, visual and kinesthetic modes of teaching each skill, acknowledging that people learn differently.

26. Understand child development. Brilliant coaches have a working knowledge of the milestones of childhood and tailor their actions and expectations to meet the athletes where they are.

27. End practice before athlete is exhausted. Brilliant coaches know that bad habits and short cuts ensue when athletes are drained.

28. Give plenty of time for new skills to develop. Brilliant coaches allow at least eight weeks for athletes to learn a new skill. As the athlete progresses in the sport that time frame will actually get longer, not shorter, as the skills are increasingly complex.

29. Use positive coaching techniques. Brilliant coaches do not yell, belittle, threaten or intimidate. They do not need to bully to get results. While short term success my occur under such pressure filled environments, a brilliant coach knows that in the long run these techniques will backfire and are dangerous to the development of the child.

30. Have a growth mindset. Brilliant coaches believe that our basic skills can be developed through dedication and hard work. They reinforce this with their athletes over and over so their athletes feel motivated and are productive.

31. Know what they don't know. Brilliant coaches are not afraid to admit that they don't have all the answers. They do not allow their ego to prevent them from getting additional help, training or even suggesting to an athlete's family that the athlete needs to move to a more experienced coach.

32. Educate their athletes. Brilliant coaches go beyond instructing their athletes, instead educating them in a age-appropriate ways regarding the purpose of and objective of various drills, skill sequences and conditioning circuits.

33. Have clear rules and logical consequences. Brilliant coaches do not keep their athletes guessing with respect to the standards of conduct or the result that can be expected for breeches of those standards. Rules are applied justly without shame to all athletes, including the stars.

34. Understand that fun is an essential element in training, no matter how elite an athlete becomes. The number one reason that athletes quit sports, even sports that they love and in which they are succeeding, is because they are no longer having fun. Fun is not a frivilous sentiment but is the foundation of an athletes' healthy commitment to a sport.

35. End practice on a positive note. Brilliant coaches always find a way to seek the positive at the end of even the most awful workout. Even if it is as simple as "Tomorrow is a new day," brilliant coaches know that both success and failure are temporary states.

It is clear that content knowledge is just the beginning of what makes a brilliant coach (or teacher). Yet, absent these other qualities, all of the knowledge in the world does not make a smart or effective coach brilliant.

What do you think? What are other characteristics of brilliant coaching?

If you found this post to be helpful, please consider tweeting, emailing, sharing on other social media or forwarding it to the brilliant coaches and teachers in your children's lives. It will mean the world to them.