05-26-2025, 01:21 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-26-2025, 01:22 PM by Maple Leaf.)
Stanford Baseball 2025/26
(This post was last modified: 05-26-2025, 01:22 PM by Maple Leaf.)
(05-26-2025, 12:58 PM)TonyLima Wrote: Fun fact (but check my work). Stanford went 7-8 against teams in the post-season. I counted Duke (3-0), Ga Tech (0-3), Clemson (1-2), NC State (2-1), and Wake Forest (1-2).
Add in the series win at North Carolina at the start of conference play (2-1)
05-28-2025, 06:59 PM
(05-26-2025, 01:21 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote:(05-26-2025, 12:58 PM)TonyLima Wrote: Fun fact (but check my work). Stanford went 7-8 against teams in the post-season. I counted Duke (3-0), Ga Tech (0-3), Clemson (1-2), NC State (2-1), and Wake Forest (1-2).
Add in the series win at North Carolina at the start of conference play (2-1)
Many thanks for that. I leave it to readers to do the arithmetic.
(05-26-2025, 01:21 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote:(05-26-2025, 12:58 PM)TonyLima Wrote: Fun fact (but check my work). Stanford went 7-8 against teams in the post-season. I counted Duke (3-0), Ga Tech (0-3), Clemson (1-2), NC State (2-1), and Wake Forest (1-2).
Add in the series win at North Carolina at the start of conference play (2-1)
Many thanks for that. I leave it to readers to do the arithmetic.
05-30-2025, 05:39 PM
(05-26-2025, 01:21 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote:(05-26-2025, 12:58 PM)TonyLima Wrote: Fun fact (but check my work). Stanford went 7-8 against teams in the post-season. I counted Duke (3-0), Ga Tech (0-3), Clemson (1-2), NC State (2-1), and Wake Forest (1-2).
Add in the series win at North Carolina at the start of conference play (2-1)
This team was in the thick of it. Cal series was the downfall. Not sure why they would not practice at all during finals week. You can get creative with schedules and night small group workouts.
(05-26-2025, 01:21 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote:(05-26-2025, 12:58 PM)TonyLima Wrote: Fun fact (but check my work). Stanford went 7-8 against teams in the post-season. I counted Duke (3-0), Ga Tech (0-3), Clemson (1-2), NC State (2-1), and Wake Forest (1-2).
Add in the series win at North Carolina at the start of conference play (2-1)
This team was in the thick of it. Cal series was the downfall. Not sure why they would not practice at all during finals week. You can get creative with schedules and night small group workouts.
06-02-2025, 10:21 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2025, 10:28 PM by Sam Leopold.)
It gets better, as we are given a demonstration that national seeds do not promise anything. Vanderbilt got the #1 overall seed, barely rallied past Wright State in the opener, then lost to Louisville, then got gibbed by Wright State on the second try to send them packing. Louisville comes out of that regional, and will host Miami who came out of Southern Miss's. Louisville and Miami didn't meet during ACC play.
Arkansas and Tennessee -- perhaps the favorite to win the championship, versus the defending national champs.
LSU got all they could handle from Arkansas-Little Rock, but they move on, and will welcome West Virginia to Alex Box. On the other hand, Murray State, which galloped out to a 12-3 lead over Ole Miss, had to hang on for a 12-11 win, and will go to the super regionals for the first time ever, traveling to Duke.
The SEC put 13 teams into the field to the ACC's 9 but the SEC got cut down at scale as the ACC got more teams into the super regionals (5) than the SEC (4). Stanford actually went 5-1 against the ACC teams they met in conference play that are in the super regionals.
Arkansas and Tennessee -- perhaps the favorite to win the championship, versus the defending national champs.
LSU got all they could handle from Arkansas-Little Rock, but they move on, and will welcome West Virginia to Alex Box. On the other hand, Murray State, which galloped out to a 12-3 lead over Ole Miss, had to hang on for a 12-11 win, and will go to the super regionals for the first time ever, traveling to Duke.
The SEC put 13 teams into the field to the ACC's 9 but the SEC got cut down at scale as the ACC got more teams into the super regionals (5) than the SEC (4). Stanford actually went 5-1 against the ACC teams they met in conference play that are in the super regionals.
“You often hear in chess and other sports that ‘this player is more talented’ but ‘that player works harder.’ This is a fallacy. Hard work is a talent. The ability to keep trying when others quit is a talent.” --- Garry Kasparov
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2025, 10:28 PM by Sam Leopold.)
It gets better, as we are given a demonstration that national seeds do not promise anything. Vanderbilt got the #1 overall seed, barely rallied past Wright State in the opener, then lost to Louisville, then got gibbed by Wright State on the second try to send them packing. Louisville comes out of that regional, and will host Miami who came out of Southern Miss's. Louisville and Miami didn't meet during ACC play.
Arkansas and Tennessee -- perhaps the favorite to win the championship, versus the defending national champs.
LSU got all they could handle from Arkansas-Little Rock, but they move on, and will welcome West Virginia to Alex Box. On the other hand, Murray State, which galloped out to a 12-3 lead over Ole Miss, had to hang on for a 12-11 win, and will go to the super regionals for the first time ever, traveling to Duke.
The SEC put 13 teams into the field to the ACC's 9 but the SEC got cut down at scale as the ACC got more teams into the super regionals (5) than the SEC (4). Stanford actually went 5-1 against the ACC teams they met in conference play that are in the super regionals.
Arkansas and Tennessee -- perhaps the favorite to win the championship, versus the defending national champs.
LSU got all they could handle from Arkansas-Little Rock, but they move on, and will welcome West Virginia to Alex Box. On the other hand, Murray State, which galloped out to a 12-3 lead over Ole Miss, had to hang on for a 12-11 win, and will go to the super regionals for the first time ever, traveling to Duke.
The SEC put 13 teams into the field to the ACC's 9 but the SEC got cut down at scale as the ACC got more teams into the super regionals (5) than the SEC (4). Stanford actually went 5-1 against the ACC teams they met in conference play that are in the super regionals.
“You often hear in chess and other sports that ‘this player is more talented’ but ‘that player works harder.’ This is a fallacy. Hard work is a talent. The ability to keep trying when others quit is a talent.” --- Garry Kasparov
06-03-2025, 07:57 AM
(06-02-2025, 10:21 PM)Sam Leopold Wrote: It gets better, as we are given a demonstration that national seeds do not promise anything. Vanderbilt got the #1 overall seed, barely rallied past Wright State in the opener, then lost to Louisville, then got gibbed by Wright State on the second try to send them packing. Louisville comes out of that regional, and will host Miami who came out of Southern Miss's. Louisville and Miami didn't meet during ACC play.
Arkansas and Tennessee -- perhaps the favorite to win the championship, versus the defending national champs.
LSU got all they could handle from Arkansas-Little Rock, but they move on, and will welcome West Virginia to Alex Box. On the other hand, Murray State, which galloped out to a 12-3 lead over Ole Miss, had to hang on for a 12-11 win, and will go to the super regionals for the first time ever, traveling to Duke.
The SEC put 13 teams into the field to the ACC's 9 but the SEC got cut down at scale as the ACC got more teams into the super regionals (5) than the SEC (4). Stanford actually went 5-1 against the ACC teams they met in conference play that are in the super regionals.
Go Beavers, Oregon State shut out usc 9-0 to move on to the super's. Justice comes in different forms plus the ducks did not make it out of their own regional (lost two straight).
(06-02-2025, 10:21 PM)Sam Leopold Wrote: It gets better, as we are given a demonstration that national seeds do not promise anything. Vanderbilt got the #1 overall seed, barely rallied past Wright State in the opener, then lost to Louisville, then got gibbed by Wright State on the second try to send them packing. Louisville comes out of that regional, and will host Miami who came out of Southern Miss's. Louisville and Miami didn't meet during ACC play.
Arkansas and Tennessee -- perhaps the favorite to win the championship, versus the defending national champs.
LSU got all they could handle from Arkansas-Little Rock, but they move on, and will welcome West Virginia to Alex Box. On the other hand, Murray State, which galloped out to a 12-3 lead over Ole Miss, had to hang on for a 12-11 win, and will go to the super regionals for the first time ever, traveling to Duke.
The SEC put 13 teams into the field to the ACC's 9 but the SEC got cut down at scale as the ACC got more teams into the super regionals (5) than the SEC (4). Stanford actually went 5-1 against the ACC teams they met in conference play that are in the super regionals.
Go Beavers, Oregon State shut out usc 9-0 to move on to the super's. Justice comes in different forms plus the ducks did not make it out of their own regional (lost two straight).
First thoughts on recapping the season and next year.
The most disappointing season in a long time, certainly of Esquer's tenure.
It wasn't the worst team in that span - those would be the mercifully strike-shortened 2020 season and then last year. But those two teams were extremely young and it would have been very surprising if they hadn't struggled. This year's team wasn't weak, it was a good team that somehow fell apart.
Anyone following the team knows the basics. Started out 15-3, ranked #14 and seemed well on the way to at least host a regional. Then finals --> Cal collapse --> everything collapse. Starting with cal, they lost 16 of 18 conference games - 5 by run rule. A little recovery towards the end of the season going 4-2 in the final two series (but nothing in the ACC Tourney). A winning record barely but disastrous 11-19 in conference.
There were some injury problems - Scott, Lim, Bates, MacDonald were key players who missed time. Probably others.
But, that wasn't really the story. Timely hitting went away, power hitting went away, and pitching crumbled.
Pitching, pitching, pitching. Can't throw strikes, so then starting grooving it --> big hits.
It was also one of those seasons where all the little things that may not really matter, and may not be worse than others, drive me crazy while if the team were winning would just be chalked up to the vagaries of baseball or just something I notice as an obsessive fan.
So ...
- Pitching can't throw strikes.
- Esquer loves bunting but the team cannot bunt well. I generally am not thrilled with the strategy, but if bunt pop out or foul three times then it's definitely a bad strategy.
- Bad and conservative base running. Lots of holding guys from second at third on singles (or from first at third on doubles). Not only fifth fewest stolen bases in the country (299 teams) but just about the only team successful less than half the time.
- Weak defense. This despite being tied for third in ACC in fielding percentage. That's a terrible stat for defense. Not only are errors too rare an event to be meaningful but many mistakes aren't errors (like the strange unwritten rule that if the ball doesn't touch your glove while fielding it's not an error). It certainly doesn't cover things like missed double plays.
The trend in pitching under Esquer is now officially troubling, even if there have been some individual excellent players and development along the way.
2018 ERA = 2.83 (Esquer year 1)
2019 ERA = 3.62
2020 ERA = 3.50 (COVID shortened season)
2021 ERA = 4.63
2022 ERA = 4.23
2023 ERA = 5.72
2024 ERA = 6.53
2025 ERA = 6.42
While this year was an improvement over last year, I would say anemically so considering the relative situations. Last year, we had almost all new arms - Dugan was the only returnee with any significant previous innings. This year almost every inning pitched came back (Nathan Fleischli with 5.2 IP was the only loss).
Interesting conversation I had with a HS coach in the stands during the BC series. Even with Scott scratched due to injury, Stanford kept pulling out pitchers throwing 94+. The coach turns to me and says "where did Stanford get all these arms? ... but what's their ERA??" Sure enough, 3 HBP and 4 walks ensue and the game slips away.
The offense was so-so. Batting average just slipped under 0.300 at the end of the season but was still sixth in the ACC. But that helped us to second last in the ACC (15th) in runs/game; too little power, too few walks (last in ACC), too little timely hitting.
A few pretty good frosh seasons.
Marsh was our best frosh, out of the blue for me. Highest OPS on the team. Very impressive.
We would be saying Sasaki had a really promising first year if we hadn't known who he was coming in.
Bates was promising before being injured, while playing out of position.
None of the many frosh pitchers distinguished themselves or played a lot - as usual live arms but no control and none pitched more than 12.2 innings.
Normally in looking to next year I'd go through a run down of the returning players and notes on the signed frosh. That seems pointless right now. Firstly, if the team is going to go anywhere they need to get out of the funk they got in and play to their talent. Secondly, with transfers and all, it's hard to tell who will be on the team next year.
I have heard of four transfers out so far. That's not so devastating as I didn't expect any of those four back.
Scott to Georgia. Uber to Notre Dame. Saum to Hawaii. Becerra to somewhere.
Uber, Saum, and Becerra were all seniors who have another year of eligibility. Scott was a junior I had expected to be in the draft and go ... to the minors (going pro no longer being an accurate description).
Who knows who else departs.
Haskins has played four years but was injured his sophomore year and played few enough games he could possibly get a medical redshirt. Don't expect it - at least not with us.
In the past we expected any starting junior to go pro, but now with NIL and a somewhat abbreviated draft that is less certain - now they'll just transfer.
Our starting(ish) juniors include: Nati (probably best draft prospect in this group, but not that high), MacDonald (pretty good soph year, but injured most of this), Dugan (our best ERA but only became starter as injuries mounted), O'Haran (was supposed to be closer), Hott (played well as a spot starter but I don't think on any MLB radars).
So, we'll probably lose 3/4 of our infield, our catcher, and our #2 and #6 pitchers in innings pitched.
There will be plenty of talent left behind, but things have to develop better.
Our frosh class includes headliners Brock Sells (MLB.com #62 draft prospect, OF), Brock Ketelsen (#161 draft prospect, OF/P).
However, the players I noted in the class include Colt Peterson (related to Kyle?) and Quinten Marsh, younger bro of this year's frosh phenom.
At the moment, PG has Stanford class at #21 in average player rating but #3 for 2026.
(Stanford always has smaller classes than most, as in most sports.)
The most disappointing season in a long time, certainly of Esquer's tenure.
It wasn't the worst team in that span - those would be the mercifully strike-shortened 2020 season and then last year. But those two teams were extremely young and it would have been very surprising if they hadn't struggled. This year's team wasn't weak, it was a good team that somehow fell apart.
Anyone following the team knows the basics. Started out 15-3, ranked #14 and seemed well on the way to at least host a regional. Then finals --> Cal collapse --> everything collapse. Starting with cal, they lost 16 of 18 conference games - 5 by run rule. A little recovery towards the end of the season going 4-2 in the final two series (but nothing in the ACC Tourney). A winning record barely but disastrous 11-19 in conference.
There were some injury problems - Scott, Lim, Bates, MacDonald were key players who missed time. Probably others.
But, that wasn't really the story. Timely hitting went away, power hitting went away, and pitching crumbled.
Pitching, pitching, pitching. Can't throw strikes, so then starting grooving it --> big hits.
It was also one of those seasons where all the little things that may not really matter, and may not be worse than others, drive me crazy while if the team were winning would just be chalked up to the vagaries of baseball or just something I notice as an obsessive fan.
So ...
- Pitching can't throw strikes.
- Esquer loves bunting but the team cannot bunt well. I generally am not thrilled with the strategy, but if bunt pop out or foul three times then it's definitely a bad strategy.
- Bad and conservative base running. Lots of holding guys from second at third on singles (or from first at third on doubles). Not only fifth fewest stolen bases in the country (299 teams) but just about the only team successful less than half the time.
- Weak defense. This despite being tied for third in ACC in fielding percentage. That's a terrible stat for defense. Not only are errors too rare an event to be meaningful but many mistakes aren't errors (like the strange unwritten rule that if the ball doesn't touch your glove while fielding it's not an error). It certainly doesn't cover things like missed double plays.
The trend in pitching under Esquer is now officially troubling, even if there have been some individual excellent players and development along the way.
2018 ERA = 2.83 (Esquer year 1)
2019 ERA = 3.62
2020 ERA = 3.50 (COVID shortened season)
2021 ERA = 4.63
2022 ERA = 4.23
2023 ERA = 5.72
2024 ERA = 6.53
2025 ERA = 6.42
While this year was an improvement over last year, I would say anemically so considering the relative situations. Last year, we had almost all new arms - Dugan was the only returnee with any significant previous innings. This year almost every inning pitched came back (Nathan Fleischli with 5.2 IP was the only loss).
Interesting conversation I had with a HS coach in the stands during the BC series. Even with Scott scratched due to injury, Stanford kept pulling out pitchers throwing 94+. The coach turns to me and says "where did Stanford get all these arms? ... but what's their ERA??" Sure enough, 3 HBP and 4 walks ensue and the game slips away.
The offense was so-so. Batting average just slipped under 0.300 at the end of the season but was still sixth in the ACC. But that helped us to second last in the ACC (15th) in runs/game; too little power, too few walks (last in ACC), too little timely hitting.
A few pretty good frosh seasons.
Marsh was our best frosh, out of the blue for me. Highest OPS on the team. Very impressive.
We would be saying Sasaki had a really promising first year if we hadn't known who he was coming in.
Bates was promising before being injured, while playing out of position.
None of the many frosh pitchers distinguished themselves or played a lot - as usual live arms but no control and none pitched more than 12.2 innings.
Normally in looking to next year I'd go through a run down of the returning players and notes on the signed frosh. That seems pointless right now. Firstly, if the team is going to go anywhere they need to get out of the funk they got in and play to their talent. Secondly, with transfers and all, it's hard to tell who will be on the team next year.
I have heard of four transfers out so far. That's not so devastating as I didn't expect any of those four back.
Scott to Georgia. Uber to Notre Dame. Saum to Hawaii. Becerra to somewhere.
Uber, Saum, and Becerra were all seniors who have another year of eligibility. Scott was a junior I had expected to be in the draft and go ... to the minors (going pro no longer being an accurate description).
Who knows who else departs.
Haskins has played four years but was injured his sophomore year and played few enough games he could possibly get a medical redshirt. Don't expect it - at least not with us.
In the past we expected any starting junior to go pro, but now with NIL and a somewhat abbreviated draft that is less certain - now they'll just transfer.
Our starting(ish) juniors include: Nati (probably best draft prospect in this group, but not that high), MacDonald (pretty good soph year, but injured most of this), Dugan (our best ERA but only became starter as injuries mounted), O'Haran (was supposed to be closer), Hott (played well as a spot starter but I don't think on any MLB radars).
So, we'll probably lose 3/4 of our infield, our catcher, and our #2 and #6 pitchers in innings pitched.
There will be plenty of talent left behind, but things have to develop better.
Our frosh class includes headliners Brock Sells (MLB.com #62 draft prospect, OF), Brock Ketelsen (#161 draft prospect, OF/P).
However, the players I noted in the class include Colt Peterson (related to Kyle?) and Quinten Marsh, younger bro of this year's frosh phenom.
At the moment, PG has Stanford class at #21 in average player rating but #3 for 2026.
(Stanford always has smaller classes than most, as in most sports.)
First thoughts on recapping the season and next year.
The most disappointing season in a long time, certainly of Esquer's tenure.
It wasn't the worst team in that span - those would be the mercifully strike-shortened 2020 season and then last year. But those two teams were extremely young and it would have been very surprising if they hadn't struggled. This year's team wasn't weak, it was a good team that somehow fell apart.
Anyone following the team knows the basics. Started out 15-3, ranked #14 and seemed well on the way to at least host a regional. Then finals --> Cal collapse --> everything collapse. Starting with cal, they lost 16 of 18 conference games - 5 by run rule. A little recovery towards the end of the season going 4-2 in the final two series (but nothing in the ACC Tourney). A winning record barely but disastrous 11-19 in conference.
There were some injury problems - Scott, Lim, Bates, MacDonald were key players who missed time. Probably others.
But, that wasn't really the story. Timely hitting went away, power hitting went away, and pitching crumbled.
Pitching, pitching, pitching. Can't throw strikes, so then starting grooving it --> big hits.
It was also one of those seasons where all the little things that may not really matter, and may not be worse than others, drive me crazy while if the team were winning would just be chalked up to the vagaries of baseball or just something I notice as an obsessive fan.
So ...
- Pitching can't throw strikes.
- Esquer loves bunting but the team cannot bunt well. I generally am not thrilled with the strategy, but if bunt pop out or foul three times then it's definitely a bad strategy.
- Bad and conservative base running. Lots of holding guys from second at third on singles (or from first at third on doubles). Not only fifth fewest stolen bases in the country (299 teams) but just about the only team successful less than half the time.
- Weak defense. This despite being tied for third in ACC in fielding percentage. That's a terrible stat for defense. Not only are errors too rare an event to be meaningful but many mistakes aren't errors (like the strange unwritten rule that if the ball doesn't touch your glove while fielding it's not an error). It certainly doesn't cover things like missed double plays.
The trend in pitching under Esquer is now officially troubling, even if there have been some individual excellent players and development along the way.
2018 ERA = 2.83 (Esquer year 1)
2019 ERA = 3.62
2020 ERA = 3.50 (COVID shortened season)
2021 ERA = 4.63
2022 ERA = 4.23
2023 ERA = 5.72
2024 ERA = 6.53
2025 ERA = 6.42
While this year was an improvement over last year, I would say anemically so considering the relative situations. Last year, we had almost all new arms - Dugan was the only returnee with any significant previous innings. This year almost every inning pitched came back (Nathan Fleischli with 5.2 IP was the only loss).
Interesting conversation I had with a HS coach in the stands during the BC series. Even with Scott scratched due to injury, Stanford kept pulling out pitchers throwing 94+. The coach turns to me and says "where did Stanford get all these arms? ... but what's their ERA??" Sure enough, 3 HBP and 4 walks ensue and the game slips away.
The offense was so-so. Batting average just slipped under 0.300 at the end of the season but was still sixth in the ACC. But that helped us to second last in the ACC (15th) in runs/game; too little power, too few walks (last in ACC), too little timely hitting.
A few pretty good frosh seasons.
Marsh was our best frosh, out of the blue for me. Highest OPS on the team. Very impressive.
We would be saying Sasaki had a really promising first year if we hadn't known who he was coming in.
Bates was promising before being injured, while playing out of position.
None of the many frosh pitchers distinguished themselves or played a lot - as usual live arms but no control and none pitched more than 12.2 innings.
Normally in looking to next year I'd go through a run down of the returning players and notes on the signed frosh. That seems pointless right now. Firstly, if the team is going to go anywhere they need to get out of the funk they got in and play to their talent. Secondly, with transfers and all, it's hard to tell who will be on the team next year.
I have heard of four transfers out so far. That's not so devastating as I didn't expect any of those four back.
Scott to Georgia. Uber to Notre Dame. Saum to Hawaii. Becerra to somewhere.
Uber, Saum, and Becerra were all seniors who have another year of eligibility. Scott was a junior I had expected to be in the draft and go ... to the minors (going pro no longer being an accurate description).
Who knows who else departs.
Haskins has played four years but was injured his sophomore year and played few enough games he could possibly get a medical redshirt. Don't expect it - at least not with us.
In the past we expected any starting junior to go pro, but now with NIL and a somewhat abbreviated draft that is less certain - now they'll just transfer.
Our starting(ish) juniors include: Nati (probably best draft prospect in this group, but not that high), MacDonald (pretty good soph year, but injured most of this), Dugan (our best ERA but only became starter as injuries mounted), O'Haran (was supposed to be closer), Hott (played well as a spot starter but I don't think on any MLB radars).
So, we'll probably lose 3/4 of our infield, our catcher, and our #2 and #6 pitchers in innings pitched.
There will be plenty of talent left behind, but things have to develop better.
Our frosh class includes headliners Brock Sells (MLB.com #62 draft prospect, OF), Brock Ketelsen (#161 draft prospect, OF/P).
However, the players I noted in the class include Colt Peterson (related to Kyle?) and Quinten Marsh, younger bro of this year's frosh phenom.
At the moment, PG has Stanford class at #21 in average player rating but #3 for 2026.
(Stanford always has smaller classes than most, as in most sports.)
The most disappointing season in a long time, certainly of Esquer's tenure.
It wasn't the worst team in that span - those would be the mercifully strike-shortened 2020 season and then last year. But those two teams were extremely young and it would have been very surprising if they hadn't struggled. This year's team wasn't weak, it was a good team that somehow fell apart.
Anyone following the team knows the basics. Started out 15-3, ranked #14 and seemed well on the way to at least host a regional. Then finals --> Cal collapse --> everything collapse. Starting with cal, they lost 16 of 18 conference games - 5 by run rule. A little recovery towards the end of the season going 4-2 in the final two series (but nothing in the ACC Tourney). A winning record barely but disastrous 11-19 in conference.
There were some injury problems - Scott, Lim, Bates, MacDonald were key players who missed time. Probably others.
But, that wasn't really the story. Timely hitting went away, power hitting went away, and pitching crumbled.
Pitching, pitching, pitching. Can't throw strikes, so then starting grooving it --> big hits.
It was also one of those seasons where all the little things that may not really matter, and may not be worse than others, drive me crazy while if the team were winning would just be chalked up to the vagaries of baseball or just something I notice as an obsessive fan.
So ...
- Pitching can't throw strikes.
- Esquer loves bunting but the team cannot bunt well. I generally am not thrilled with the strategy, but if bunt pop out or foul three times then it's definitely a bad strategy.
- Bad and conservative base running. Lots of holding guys from second at third on singles (or from first at third on doubles). Not only fifth fewest stolen bases in the country (299 teams) but just about the only team successful less than half the time.
- Weak defense. This despite being tied for third in ACC in fielding percentage. That's a terrible stat for defense. Not only are errors too rare an event to be meaningful but many mistakes aren't errors (like the strange unwritten rule that if the ball doesn't touch your glove while fielding it's not an error). It certainly doesn't cover things like missed double plays.
The trend in pitching under Esquer is now officially troubling, even if there have been some individual excellent players and development along the way.
2018 ERA = 2.83 (Esquer year 1)
2019 ERA = 3.62
2020 ERA = 3.50 (COVID shortened season)
2021 ERA = 4.63
2022 ERA = 4.23
2023 ERA = 5.72
2024 ERA = 6.53
2025 ERA = 6.42
While this year was an improvement over last year, I would say anemically so considering the relative situations. Last year, we had almost all new arms - Dugan was the only returnee with any significant previous innings. This year almost every inning pitched came back (Nathan Fleischli with 5.2 IP was the only loss).
Interesting conversation I had with a HS coach in the stands during the BC series. Even with Scott scratched due to injury, Stanford kept pulling out pitchers throwing 94+. The coach turns to me and says "where did Stanford get all these arms? ... but what's their ERA??" Sure enough, 3 HBP and 4 walks ensue and the game slips away.
The offense was so-so. Batting average just slipped under 0.300 at the end of the season but was still sixth in the ACC. But that helped us to second last in the ACC (15th) in runs/game; too little power, too few walks (last in ACC), too little timely hitting.
A few pretty good frosh seasons.
Marsh was our best frosh, out of the blue for me. Highest OPS on the team. Very impressive.
We would be saying Sasaki had a really promising first year if we hadn't known who he was coming in.
Bates was promising before being injured, while playing out of position.
None of the many frosh pitchers distinguished themselves or played a lot - as usual live arms but no control and none pitched more than 12.2 innings.
Normally in looking to next year I'd go through a run down of the returning players and notes on the signed frosh. That seems pointless right now. Firstly, if the team is going to go anywhere they need to get out of the funk they got in and play to their talent. Secondly, with transfers and all, it's hard to tell who will be on the team next year.
I have heard of four transfers out so far. That's not so devastating as I didn't expect any of those four back.
Scott to Georgia. Uber to Notre Dame. Saum to Hawaii. Becerra to somewhere.
Uber, Saum, and Becerra were all seniors who have another year of eligibility. Scott was a junior I had expected to be in the draft and go ... to the minors (going pro no longer being an accurate description).
Who knows who else departs.
Haskins has played four years but was injured his sophomore year and played few enough games he could possibly get a medical redshirt. Don't expect it - at least not with us.
In the past we expected any starting junior to go pro, but now with NIL and a somewhat abbreviated draft that is less certain - now they'll just transfer.
Our starting(ish) juniors include: Nati (probably best draft prospect in this group, but not that high), MacDonald (pretty good soph year, but injured most of this), Dugan (our best ERA but only became starter as injuries mounted), O'Haran (was supposed to be closer), Hott (played well as a spot starter but I don't think on any MLB radars).
So, we'll probably lose 3/4 of our infield, our catcher, and our #2 and #6 pitchers in innings pitched.
There will be plenty of talent left behind, but things have to develop better.
Our frosh class includes headliners Brock Sells (MLB.com #62 draft prospect, OF), Brock Ketelsen (#161 draft prospect, OF/P).
However, the players I noted in the class include Colt Peterson (related to Kyle?) and Quinten Marsh, younger bro of this year's frosh phenom.
At the moment, PG has Stanford class at #21 in average player rating but #3 for 2026.
(Stanford always has smaller classes than most, as in most sports.)
06-09-2025, 06:31 AM
Excellent CT card. Beyond Excellent
Scott going from a first rounder to a transfer sums up the season and quite possibly the future without major coaching changes
We really need the new AD soon. Decisions must be made
Scott going from a first rounder to a transfer sums up the season and quite possibly the future without major coaching changes
We really need the new AD soon. Decisions must be made
06-09-2025, 06:20 PM
This was only 2 years ago - Stanford walking it off vs. Texas in the Super Regionals. It feels like it was from a different era.
https://youtu.be/4-80t2zh9KA?si=ZUo81YS52HQ7-SeQ
https://youtu.be/4-80t2zh9KA?si=ZUo81YS52HQ7-SeQ
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
This was only 2 years ago - Stanford walking it off vs. Texas in the Super Regionals. It feels like it was from a different era.
https://youtu.be/4-80t2zh9KA?si=ZUo81YS52HQ7-SeQ
https://youtu.be/4-80t2zh9KA?si=ZUo81YS52HQ7-SeQ
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
06-11-2025, 08:45 AM
Agreed with BobK and others - Thank you CT - great post.
With Reveno now the GM of Hoops, do we soon have a GM of Baseball? Not sure how Andrew will fit into the new AD structure as he is now reporting into Levin.
As for the new AD, I'm hearing we are close. I sure hope so as we need all the help we can get in this new era. Levin, per his comments at Open Minds, continues to say we will compete at the highest levels. I'm glad he's at the helm.
With Reveno now the GM of Hoops, do we soon have a GM of Baseball? Not sure how Andrew will fit into the new AD structure as he is now reporting into Levin.
As for the new AD, I'm hearing we are close. I sure hope so as we need all the help we can get in this new era. Levin, per his comments at Open Minds, continues to say we will compete at the highest levels. I'm glad he's at the helm.
Agreed with BobK and others - Thank you CT - great post.
With Reveno now the GM of Hoops, do we soon have a GM of Baseball? Not sure how Andrew will fit into the new AD structure as he is now reporting into Levin.
As for the new AD, I'm hearing we are close. I sure hope so as we need all the help we can get in this new era. Levin, per his comments at Open Minds, continues to say we will compete at the highest levels. I'm glad he's at the helm.
With Reveno now the GM of Hoops, do we soon have a GM of Baseball? Not sure how Andrew will fit into the new AD structure as he is now reporting into Levin.
As for the new AD, I'm hearing we are close. I sure hope so as we need all the help we can get in this new era. Levin, per his comments at Open Minds, continues to say we will compete at the highest levels. I'm glad he's at the helm.
(06-09-2025, 06:31 AM)BobK Wrote: Scott going from a first rounder to a transfer sums up the season and quite possibly the future without major coaching changes
We really need the new AD soon. Decisions must be made
Obviously with concerns about pitching you wonder about the pitching coach - especially as the arms appear quite live. I do acknowledge that one really needs to be inside the program to really understand the problem, but problem there is.
I am certainly not ready to give up on Esquer. The team performed excellently during his first six years and as far as I can tell the players like playing for him. And as I noted, last year was fully understandable.
So far, our transfers out have been well fewer than average (saying that with all possible fingers crossed as its a dangerous thing to say out loud this time of year). On the other hand, we've yet to have an impact transfer in. Still hoping for something from Larson and Garewal.
By the way, Tatum Marsh was named second team frosh All-American by both National Baseball Writers and Perfect Game. Heck of a surprising year.
(06-09-2025, 06:31 AM)BobK Wrote: Scott going from a first rounder to a transfer sums up the season and quite possibly the future without major coaching changes
We really need the new AD soon. Decisions must be made
Obviously with concerns about pitching you wonder about the pitching coach - especially as the arms appear quite live. I do acknowledge that one really needs to be inside the program to really understand the problem, but problem there is.
I am certainly not ready to give up on Esquer. The team performed excellently during his first six years and as far as I can tell the players like playing for him. And as I noted, last year was fully understandable.
So far, our transfers out have been well fewer than average (saying that with all possible fingers crossed as its a dangerous thing to say out loud this time of year). On the other hand, we've yet to have an impact transfer in. Still hoping for something from Larson and Garewal.
By the way, Tatum Marsh was named second team frosh All-American by both National Baseball Writers and Perfect Game. Heck of a surprising year.
(06-11-2025, 08:45 AM)Treebound Wrote: Agreed with BobK and others - Thank you CT - great post.
With Reveno now the GM of Hoops, do we soon have a GM of Baseball? Not sure how Andrew will fit into the new AD structure as he is now reporting into Levin.
As for the new AD, I'm hearing we are close. I sure hope so as we need all the help we can get in this new era. Levin, per his comments at Open Minds, continues to say we will compete at the highest levels. I'm glad he's at the helm.
Same here. My hopes were raised when Levin was picked because he’s 100% Stanford. So far, I’m happy with the results.
CTcard dateline=' Wrote: By the way, Tatum Marsh was named second team frosh All-American by both National Baseball Writers and Perfect Game. Heck of a surprising year.
IIRC Marsh was rated pretty high coming in.
(06-11-2025, 08:45 AM)Treebound Wrote: Agreed with BobK and others - Thank you CT - great post.
With Reveno now the GM of Hoops, do we soon have a GM of Baseball? Not sure how Andrew will fit into the new AD structure as he is now reporting into Levin.
As for the new AD, I'm hearing we are close. I sure hope so as we need all the help we can get in this new era. Levin, per his comments at Open Minds, continues to say we will compete at the highest levels. I'm glad he's at the helm.
Same here. My hopes were raised when Levin was picked because he’s 100% Stanford. So far, I’m happy with the results.
CTcard dateline=' Wrote: By the way, Tatum Marsh was named second team frosh All-American by both National Baseball Writers and Perfect Game. Heck of a surprising year.
IIRC Marsh was rated pretty high coming in.
Notes on the CWS and baseball tournament overall.
This year's field included, by conference:
SEC: 13 of 16 teams made the field - 8 regonal hosts - 6 top 8 seeds
results - 4 in Supers, 2 in CWS
ACC: 9 of 16 - 3 regional hosts - 1 top 8 seed
results - 5 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Big 12: 8 of 14 - no regional hosts
results - 2 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Big Ten: 4 of 17 - 2 regional hosts
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
AAC 2 of 10
results - 1 in Supers
Sun Belt: 2 of 14 - 2 regional hosts
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Old Pac 12: 6 of 11 - 2 regional hosts - 1 top 8 seed
results - 3 in Supers - 3 in CWS
This year's field included, by conference:
SEC: 13 of 16 teams made the field - 8 regonal hosts - 6 top 8 seeds
results - 4 in Supers, 2 in CWS
ACC: 9 of 16 - 3 regional hosts - 1 top 8 seed
results - 5 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Big 12: 8 of 14 - no regional hosts
results - 2 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Big Ten: 4 of 17 - 2 regional hosts
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
AAC 2 of 10
results - 1 in Supers
Sun Belt: 2 of 14 - 2 regional hosts
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Old Pac 12: 6 of 11 - 2 regional hosts - 1 top 8 seed
results - 3 in Supers - 3 in CWS
[Note - The old Pac schools were bunched in regionals. 3 was the maximum possible number that could have reached supers.]
Current Pac 12: 1 of 2 - 1 regional host - 1 top 8 seed
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Observations:
- So far no Old Pac 12 team has lost to any team from anywhere else. Rather ironic that the "Pac 12" has this particularly strong showing after it no longer exists.
- I rather like the fact that the CWS has teams representing 7 different conferences. (Though OSU played as an independent this year - do they still represent the rump Pac 12?)
- It's true that the SEC is the top conference in baseball and ACC #2. But, it's a lot closer than most pundits like to believe. That plus the fact that a double elimination tournament isn't a particularly strong way to determine a "best" team in baseball leads to this kind of result.
- The SEC got 13 of its 16 teams into the tournament, fully half of the regional hosts, and 75% of the top 8 seeds. Rather poor performance versus that seeding. The SEC had the top 5 in the RPI, 9 of the top 13 - which is a comment on the utility of RPI. Still the 13 teams and the dominance of the RPI formula go a long way to explain how much the SEC has dominated recent champions (but not necessarily that they have the most recent champions).
- The pre-2025 Big Ten is not very good at baseball. Which is either surprising (given their resources and media attention) or not surprising (given the difficulties of fielding a good team when you basically cannot play at home for the first month or two of the season). The former Pac 12 teams were 4 of the top 5 in the conference standings. The only legacy Big Ten team in that group, Iowa, got there by having a soft schedule that only included two of the former Pac 12 teams (against which they went 1-5).
- Former Pac 12 teams in the Big 12 ended up tied for 4th/5th, and 14th (last), but Arizona is the only one still playing.
- While not the iffiest of those making it in, I am still not quite certain that either Miami or Louisville really deserved to make the tournament. But they both won their regionals and Louisville is now the only ACC team in the CWS.
- I'm cheering for OSU. They were never offensive as a Pac 12 rival and certainly not among those responsible for the death of the Pac 12.
Current Pac 12: 1 of 2 - 1 regional host - 1 top 8 seed
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Observations:
- So far no Old Pac 12 team has lost to any team from anywhere else. Rather ironic that the "Pac 12" has this particularly strong showing after it no longer exists.
- I rather like the fact that the CWS has teams representing 7 different conferences. (Though OSU played as an independent this year - do they still represent the rump Pac 12?)
- It's true that the SEC is the top conference in baseball and ACC #2. But, it's a lot closer than most pundits like to believe. That plus the fact that a double elimination tournament isn't a particularly strong way to determine a "best" team in baseball leads to this kind of result.
- The SEC got 13 of its 16 teams into the tournament, fully half of the regional hosts, and 75% of the top 8 seeds. Rather poor performance versus that seeding. The SEC had the top 5 in the RPI, 9 of the top 13 - which is a comment on the utility of RPI. Still the 13 teams and the dominance of the RPI formula go a long way to explain how much the SEC has dominated recent champions (but not necessarily that they have the most recent champions).
- The pre-2025 Big Ten is not very good at baseball. Which is either surprising (given their resources and media attention) or not surprising (given the difficulties of fielding a good team when you basically cannot play at home for the first month or two of the season). The former Pac 12 teams were 4 of the top 5 in the conference standings. The only legacy Big Ten team in that group, Iowa, got there by having a soft schedule that only included two of the former Pac 12 teams (against which they went 1-5).
- Former Pac 12 teams in the Big 12 ended up tied for 4th/5th, and 14th (last), but Arizona is the only one still playing.
- While not the iffiest of those making it in, I am still not quite certain that either Miami or Louisville really deserved to make the tournament. But they both won their regionals and Louisville is now the only ACC team in the CWS.
- I'm cheering for OSU. They were never offensive as a Pac 12 rival and certainly not among those responsible for the death of the Pac 12.
Notes on the CWS and baseball tournament overall.
This year's field included, by conference:
SEC: 13 of 16 teams made the field - 8 regonal hosts - 6 top 8 seeds
results - 4 in Supers, 2 in CWS
ACC: 9 of 16 - 3 regional hosts - 1 top 8 seed
results - 5 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Big 12: 8 of 14 - no regional hosts
results - 2 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Big Ten: 4 of 17 - 2 regional hosts
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
AAC 2 of 10
results - 1 in Supers
Sun Belt: 2 of 14 - 2 regional hosts
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Old Pac 12: 6 of 11 - 2 regional hosts - 1 top 8 seed
results - 3 in Supers - 3 in CWS
This year's field included, by conference:
SEC: 13 of 16 teams made the field - 8 regonal hosts - 6 top 8 seeds
results - 4 in Supers, 2 in CWS
ACC: 9 of 16 - 3 regional hosts - 1 top 8 seed
results - 5 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Big 12: 8 of 14 - no regional hosts
results - 2 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Big Ten: 4 of 17 - 2 regional hosts
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
AAC 2 of 10
results - 1 in Supers
Sun Belt: 2 of 14 - 2 regional hosts
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Old Pac 12: 6 of 11 - 2 regional hosts - 1 top 8 seed
results - 3 in Supers - 3 in CWS
[Note - The old Pac schools were bunched in regionals. 3 was the maximum possible number that could have reached supers.]
Current Pac 12: 1 of 2 - 1 regional host - 1 top 8 seed
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Observations:
- So far no Old Pac 12 team has lost to any team from anywhere else. Rather ironic that the "Pac 12" has this particularly strong showing after it no longer exists.
- I rather like the fact that the CWS has teams representing 7 different conferences. (Though OSU played as an independent this year - do they still represent the rump Pac 12?)
- It's true that the SEC is the top conference in baseball and ACC #2. But, it's a lot closer than most pundits like to believe. That plus the fact that a double elimination tournament isn't a particularly strong way to determine a "best" team in baseball leads to this kind of result.
- The SEC got 13 of its 16 teams into the tournament, fully half of the regional hosts, and 75% of the top 8 seeds. Rather poor performance versus that seeding. The SEC had the top 5 in the RPI, 9 of the top 13 - which is a comment on the utility of RPI. Still the 13 teams and the dominance of the RPI formula go a long way to explain how much the SEC has dominated recent champions (but not necessarily that they have the most recent champions).
- The pre-2025 Big Ten is not very good at baseball. Which is either surprising (given their resources and media attention) or not surprising (given the difficulties of fielding a good team when you basically cannot play at home for the first month or two of the season). The former Pac 12 teams were 4 of the top 5 in the conference standings. The only legacy Big Ten team in that group, Iowa, got there by having a soft schedule that only included two of the former Pac 12 teams (against which they went 1-5).
- Former Pac 12 teams in the Big 12 ended up tied for 4th/5th, and 14th (last), but Arizona is the only one still playing.
- While not the iffiest of those making it in, I am still not quite certain that either Miami or Louisville really deserved to make the tournament. But they both won their regionals and Louisville is now the only ACC team in the CWS.
- I'm cheering for OSU. They were never offensive as a Pac 12 rival and certainly not among those responsible for the death of the Pac 12.
Current Pac 12: 1 of 2 - 1 regional host - 1 top 8 seed
results - 1 in Supers - 1 in CWS
Observations:
- So far no Old Pac 12 team has lost to any team from anywhere else. Rather ironic that the "Pac 12" has this particularly strong showing after it no longer exists.
- I rather like the fact that the CWS has teams representing 7 different conferences. (Though OSU played as an independent this year - do they still represent the rump Pac 12?)
- It's true that the SEC is the top conference in baseball and ACC #2. But, it's a lot closer than most pundits like to believe. That plus the fact that a double elimination tournament isn't a particularly strong way to determine a "best" team in baseball leads to this kind of result.
- The SEC got 13 of its 16 teams into the tournament, fully half of the regional hosts, and 75% of the top 8 seeds. Rather poor performance versus that seeding. The SEC had the top 5 in the RPI, 9 of the top 13 - which is a comment on the utility of RPI. Still the 13 teams and the dominance of the RPI formula go a long way to explain how much the SEC has dominated recent champions (but not necessarily that they have the most recent champions).
- The pre-2025 Big Ten is not very good at baseball. Which is either surprising (given their resources and media attention) or not surprising (given the difficulties of fielding a good team when you basically cannot play at home for the first month or two of the season). The former Pac 12 teams were 4 of the top 5 in the conference standings. The only legacy Big Ten team in that group, Iowa, got there by having a soft schedule that only included two of the former Pac 12 teams (against which they went 1-5).
- Former Pac 12 teams in the Big 12 ended up tied for 4th/5th, and 14th (last), but Arizona is the only one still playing.
- While not the iffiest of those making it in, I am still not quite certain that either Miami or Louisville really deserved to make the tournament. But they both won their regionals and Louisville is now the only ACC team in the CWS.
- I'm cheering for OSU. They were never offensive as a Pac 12 rival and certainly not among those responsible for the death of the Pac 12.
06-13-2025, 11:10 AM
Saum was a local boy
Didn’t know, but good for him getting his master’s where he grew up.
Didn’t know, but good for him getting his master’s where he grew up.
06-14-2025, 01:37 PM
Some tough decisions looming for baseball.
My understanding is that by December 1, Div 1 baseball rosters have to be cut to no more than 34. The current limit is 40.
Stanford currently has 38 on the roster.
They appear to have 10 players coming in.
There are 7 seniors and we have heard that Junior Matt Scott isn't coming back.
That would take the roster to 40.
Further attrition of about 6 players is necessary. [7 on the remote chance that senior Haskins returns via a medical redshirt]
I don't expect a lot via the draft. Among Juniors, there are a few who may get drafted; in order (my guess): Nati, Dugan, O'Harran.
I would expect to hear about some more transfer portal entries, spurred by coaches' suggestion about their future.
Hard to say who.
Right now we have 11 juniors, all of whom saw the field this year, two of whom appeared in 10 or fewer games.
We have 9 sophomores, two of whom appeared in 10 or fewer games.
My understanding is that by December 1, Div 1 baseball rosters have to be cut to no more than 34. The current limit is 40.
Stanford currently has 38 on the roster.
They appear to have 10 players coming in.
There are 7 seniors and we have heard that Junior Matt Scott isn't coming back.
That would take the roster to 40.
Further attrition of about 6 players is necessary. [7 on the remote chance that senior Haskins returns via a medical redshirt]
I don't expect a lot via the draft. Among Juniors, there are a few who may get drafted; in order (my guess): Nati, Dugan, O'Harran.
I would expect to hear about some more transfer portal entries, spurred by coaches' suggestion about their future.
Hard to say who.
Right now we have 11 juniors, all of whom saw the field this year, two of whom appeared in 10 or fewer games.
We have 9 sophomores, two of whom appeared in 10 or fewer games.
Some tough decisions looming for baseball.
My understanding is that by December 1, Div 1 baseball rosters have to be cut to no more than 34. The current limit is 40.
Stanford currently has 38 on the roster.
They appear to have 10 players coming in.
There are 7 seniors and we have heard that Junior Matt Scott isn't coming back.
That would take the roster to 40.
Further attrition of about 6 players is necessary. [7 on the remote chance that senior Haskins returns via a medical redshirt]
I don't expect a lot via the draft. Among Juniors, there are a few who may get drafted; in order (my guess): Nati, Dugan, O'Harran.
I would expect to hear about some more transfer portal entries, spurred by coaches' suggestion about their future.
Hard to say who.
Right now we have 11 juniors, all of whom saw the field this year, two of whom appeared in 10 or fewer games.
We have 9 sophomores, two of whom appeared in 10 or fewer games.
My understanding is that by December 1, Div 1 baseball rosters have to be cut to no more than 34. The current limit is 40.
Stanford currently has 38 on the roster.
They appear to have 10 players coming in.
There are 7 seniors and we have heard that Junior Matt Scott isn't coming back.
That would take the roster to 40.
Further attrition of about 6 players is necessary. [7 on the remote chance that senior Haskins returns via a medical redshirt]
I don't expect a lot via the draft. Among Juniors, there are a few who may get drafted; in order (my guess): Nati, Dugan, O'Harran.
I would expect to hear about some more transfer portal entries, spurred by coaches' suggestion about their future.
Hard to say who.
Right now we have 11 juniors, all of whom saw the field this year, two of whom appeared in 10 or fewer games.
We have 9 sophomores, two of whom appeared in 10 or fewer games.
06-14-2025, 02:45 PM
My understanding was that the final House settlement had a grandfather clause so that roster limits didn’t cause anyone to be dropped. Here’s an faq from swimswam:
https://swimswam.com/house-settlement-fa...-revealed/
BC
https://swimswam.com/house-settlement-fa...-revealed/
Quote:The document confirmed that the roster limits will become effective for the 2025-26 academic year, and also detailed how anyone identified as a “designated student-athlete” won’t count against roster limits:
A current or incoming student-athlete may be identified as a “Designated Student-Athlete”, if they were removed from the roster, or would’ve been removed, for the 2025-26 academic year, due to the implementation of roster limits.
BC
My understanding was that the final House settlement had a grandfather clause so that roster limits didn’t cause anyone to be dropped. Here’s an faq from swimswam:
https://swimswam.com/house-settlement-fa...-revealed/
BC
https://swimswam.com/house-settlement-fa...-revealed/
Quote:The document confirmed that the roster limits will become effective for the 2025-26 academic year, and also detailed how anyone identified as a “designated student-athlete” won’t count against roster limits:
A current or incoming student-athlete may be identified as a “Designated Student-Athlete”, if they were removed from the roster, or would’ve been removed, for the 2025-26 academic year, due to the implementation of roster limits.
BC
06-16-2025, 07:31 AM
(06-14-2025, 02:45 PM)BostonCard Wrote:Quote:The document confirmed that the roster limits will become effective for the 2025-26 academic year, and also detailed how anyone identified as a “designated student-athlete” won’t count against roster limits:
A current or incoming student-athlete may be identified as a “Designated Student-Athlete”, if they were removed from the roster, or would’ve been removed, for the 2025-26 academic year, due to the implementation of roster limits.
As far as I can tell that means there is no roster limit at all for 2025-26 since a "current or incoming student-athlete" would appear to anybody at all enrolled in the school.
So, next year the roster will be 34 plus any number of "designated student-athletes".
(06-14-2025, 02:45 PM)BostonCard Wrote:Quote:The document confirmed that the roster limits will become effective for the 2025-26 academic year, and also detailed how anyone identified as a “designated student-athlete” won’t count against roster limits:
A current or incoming student-athlete may be identified as a “Designated Student-Athlete”, if they were removed from the roster, or would’ve been removed, for the 2025-26 academic year, due to the implementation of roster limits.
As far as I can tell that means there is no roster limit at all for 2025-26 since a "current or incoming student-athlete" would appear to anybody at all enrolled in the school.
So, next year the roster will be 34 plus any number of "designated student-athletes".
06-16-2025, 09:37 AM
Just an add. Stanford has 6 in the portal. I believe 4 now committed elsewhere
06-16-2025, 10:40 AM
(06-16-2025, 07:31 AM)CTcard Wrote: As far as I can tell that means there is no roster limit at all for 2025-26 since a "current or incoming student-athlete" would appear to anybody at all enrolled in the school.
So, next year the roster will be 34 plus any number of "designated student-athletes".
That's my read as well; the question is what the implication of this is beyond the 2025/26 year. The wording is very confusing.
BC
(06-16-2025, 07:31 AM)CTcard Wrote: As far as I can tell that means there is no roster limit at all for 2025-26 since a "current or incoming student-athlete" would appear to anybody at all enrolled in the school.
So, next year the roster will be 34 plus any number of "designated student-athletes".
That's my read as well; the question is what the implication of this is beyond the 2025/26 year. The wording is very confusing.
BC
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »