CL Hawk Baseball & What Could Have Been with Season Stats
Caleb Williams and Hawks finished season with a .962 Fielding Percentage.
rr[Photo Credit: Mark Robinson / MJR Photography / www.mjrphotog.com]
First off The ReSporter will start off with the team stats to help put in perspective how this Hawk team compared to past Canyon Lake teams. With a caveat for the future as The ReSporter has both Varsity and Junior Varsity season stats.
Signature Homes says, Go Hawks!
Both clubs were at the top of their game this year and looking at the Varsity below will show just how lethal this team might have been in those district battles that were left out on the China Wuhan Wall.
This officially finished 2020 season had this group of young men holding the best in several categories when compared to previous Hawk teams.
These stats are not based on the most times a team had a *hit (*substitute: Runs, Strikeouts (SO), Base on Balls (BB), etc.) during a season but what those numbers averaged for a game which would be a better indicator. Especially after a shortened campaign.
Also notice the number of games shown for this season is 19 and not 14 as The ReSporter has already implemented this year’s exhibition numbers to help the team and Seniors. Many of those players, would have had a chance of reaching past players final stats, if the season would not have been halted by what China did to the world by spreading this Wuhan Virus around the world.
Here are the Top 3 Years in each standard. Batting Average On Base Percentage Slugging Percentage 1) 2020 .286 2020 .427 2009 .397 2) 2009 .283 2009 .394 2020 .365 3) 2019 .269 2019 .386 2019 .350 @ Bats # Ga Ave Runs # Ga Ave Hits # Ga Ave 1) 2020 496 19 26.1 2020 125 19 6.6 2020 142 19 7.5 2) 2009 534 22 24.3 2009 122 22 5.6 2009 151 22 6.9 3) 2010 680 29 23.4 2019 114 26 4.9 2019 163 26 6.3 RBI’s # Ga Ave BB # Ga Ave SO # Ga Ave 1) 2020 65 19 4.6 2020 94 19 4.9 2010 145 29 5.0 2) 2009 92 22 4.2 2011 93 24 3.9 2020 106 19 5.6 3) 2019 92 26 3.5 2009 85 22 3.8 2011 141 24 5.9 Defense categories are the number of runs/hits, etc allowed for a season. Runs # Ga Ave Hits # Games Ave SO # Ga Ave 1) 2020 44 19 2.3 2020 70 19 3.7 2020 146 19 7.7 2) 2010 123 29 4.2 2010 130 29 4.5 2009 133 22 6.0 3) 2019 133 26 5.1 2011 176 24 7.3 2018 123 28 4.4 Earned Run Average Fielding 1) 2020 0.94 2020 .964 2) 2019 3.75 2019 .928 3) 2010 4.37 2018 .904
You can see how this team dominated those previous CL Team starting with that 2009 season to present. The Hawk, Pitching, Fielding and Hitting was on top in almost every item this season.
Let’s Go Hawks!!
In fact, in many cases, so far ahead that you can imagine how far this team might have reached, when the post-season came calling.
As an example, look at this season’s final era number (0.94) and even if CL had played a pansy schedule, which they didn’t, would be hard to have for one pitcher much less a whole staff.
The ReSporter looked at one of the Top 25 Polls that was published before this Wuhan Virus stopped action in March. What was found, out of those 25 teams was striking, Canyon Lake topped all but one team in playing a tougher schedule based on win/loss records.
The Lake was not part of that poll, telling you just how tough it would be to know every team in this Great State of Texas, and being able to craft a poll without leaving schools out of that fray. Which was the case for your Home Town Boys.
Those teams were ranked based on how well they finished last year’s games and if a Pollster made a different, then it would only be based on their proximity to their geographical area.
Go Hawks!!
Another avenue The ReSporter took in comparing District 28-4A teams was by using a metric that would compare each team’s pitching staff. This would help in finding out which school had the best pitching staff.
Baseball can be won with good hitting or fielding but if a team has a consistent pitching staff, then those first two (hitting & fielding) do not have to be perfect for a team to finish a game with a win. Another tidbit is knowing that when it is time for district play to begin, a team can assess how well they might finish based on having two quality pitchers.
So, The ReSporter, went through each teams games and found that all the schools had played in 3 tournaments and going on an assumption that the first game a school will use their Ace Pitcher and that would be the case on down the road as the tournament would continue.
So the first game had the No. 1 pitcher, game two would have No.2 player, then a third game would pit each schools No. 3 pitcher.
Another variable was used where The ReSporter gave a ranking to each team being played and divided those schools with a (1) meaning a top notch school, (2) an average school, and (3) being a team that would be losing by a bunch and the game is usually stopped by the, ‘run rule’.
On that first game, CL finished with a 3-0 record for those first games of each tournament. Llano had the same record. The Hawks 1-2-3 opponent strength was a 6 while Llano added up to an 8, giving you an idea that CL played a tougher group of teams to start each tournament. A number that showed 9 would be an all patsy schedule and a 3 would tell a you that team played good teams and/or larger schools.
Here are the Teams based on that 1st Game of each Tourney:
FIRST GAME of Tournament Best Pitchers (an assumption)
Record Strength of Opp Runs Scored and Runs Allowed
Canyon Lake 3-0-0 6 12 3
Boerne 2-0-1 6 17 6
Llano 3-0-0 8 27 7
Wimberley 1-1-1 7 14 15
Fredericksburg 0-2-1 4 8 16
Bandera 1-2-0 7 11 8
SECOND GAME 2nd Best Pitcher Runs Runs Allowed
Canyon Lake 3-0-0 6 13 5
Llano 2-1-0 7 30 11
Boerne 1-1-1 6 9 11
Bandera 2-1-0 7 13 18
Wimberley 1-1-1 7 15 17
Fredericksburg 1-2-0 7 11 29
THIRD GAME 3rd Best Pitcher Runs Runs Allowed
Canyon Lake 3-0-0 7 33 3
Llano 1-0-1 4 13 10
Wimberley 2-1-0 8 23 18
Bandera 2-0-1 7 20 7
Fredericksburg 1-2-0 8 15 20
Boerne 0-2-0 4 8 21
That speaks volumes on how lock-down CL’s pitching staff performed as those numbers were more impressive when they played a 4th-5th game. In those 3rd game scenarios, The Lake was at their best in scoring 33 runs while allowing only 3 tallies total.
Canyon City Grill says Go Hawks!
Simply put, Canyon Lake’s pitching staff did not have a weak link and those players were consistent which allowed the Hawks to finish their regular season with just two losses and both games by one run with each loss coming in the last inning when their opponent rallied and took a lead.
One loss was to a decent Medina Valley 5A school that Canyon Lake was allowed to play again that next week and had a, 7-1 victory. That other contest was against San Antonio Christian and this team was blessed with a lot of arms and finished their season with a, 15-0 record. The Hawks lost 3-2 with a chance for a win before running out of outs with players in scoring position when that game ended.
Yes, a lot of numbers but seeing how well your Hawks performed needs to be emphasized as this year would have been an excellent chance of making the finals in Region IV. This Region had 4 teams that were ranked in that Poll mentioned earlier.
Liberty Hill, Lampasas, Llano, and Sinton are those teams listed that would be good battles during the rounds of playoff battles, but all that can be done now is quit buying anything that is made in China and take what The ReSporter deduces, that the Hawks would have won District 28-4A without question.
Below is this season’s 2020 Season Stats and now we can only wait for next season for another chance of making noise. This season, Canyon Lake’s Junior Varsity finished their season, 12–3-1 and this team had some impressive outings.
Go Hawks and Get a Hit Next Year
CLJV had 4 district contests before the Wuhan break and those two schools were stalwarts, Fredericksburg and Boerne.
Your Hawks swept both teams and finished with a 4-0 district record. The Junior Varsity did not have a chance to match-up against Wimberley so this is incomplete, but this group of players are biting at the bit for get a chance to play Varsity next season.
Yes, more pitching and a ton of hitting and they have their final Season Stats below Varsity.
Canyon Lake has never had this many players in the pipeline inching up for a chance to show the Hawk Coaches what they can do….there were over 30 JV players that suited up and CL could have easily had two teams much like this past football season, when Canyon Lake had a Junior Varsity, Freshman, and Gold Team that all finished with winning records with the JV finishing 2nd while the Freshman and Gold team winning their District 28-4A Crown.
Good times are coming and The ReSporter will be ready when February comes calling again next season with a baseball team that will be ready to finish what was started.
Way to Go Hawks and Thanks Seniors.
VARSITY 2020 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 R H E Opponent 6 8 0 3 4 7 10 2 4 0 46 70 45 CL Hawks (16-3) 20 18 20 16 26 5 10 1 0 1 125 142 38 ab r h bi 2b 3b hr bb so sb ave obp slg misc Brandon Robinson 55 14 23 16 2 0 2 7 7 3 .418 .536 .564 hbp 7 sf roe 3 fc Jeremy Greene 5 7 2 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 .400 .500 .400 James LaLonde 45 13 16 14 0 1 0 7 5 2 .356 .453 .400 hbp roe sac 3 fc 2 Kolton Ramey 16 4 5 3 1 0 0 0 3 0 .313 .476 .353 hbp 5 fc Ty Sellers 45 14 14 10 2 0 0 4 6 6 .311 .367 .356 sf roe 4 fc 2 Tyler Pauly 42 9 13 10 2 0 0 18 5 2 .310 .525 .357 hbp fc 3 roe Caleb Williams 61 15 18 16 2 2 2 6 15 1 .295 .377 .492 hbp 2 roe Hayden Baker 17 5 5 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 .294 .400 .294 Ethan Slater 18 13 5 3 1 0 0 7 8 6 .278 .480 .333 sac Mason Lee 40 8 10 6 2 0 0 6 9 2 .250 .388 .300 hbp 3 sf 2 roe Tanner Schultz 54 8 13 8 4 0 1 4 5 0 .241 .317 .370 hbp 2 sac fc 2 roe 5 sf Cale Claycomb 25 2 6 1 0 0 0 5 11 1 .240 .406 .240 hbp 2 sac 3 roe 3 fc 2 Hunter Anderson 19 5 4 2 0 0 0 3 8 1 .222 .318 .222 fc Chase Anderson 21 2 4 4 1 0 0 5 5 1 .190 .346 .238 sac roe 3 fc Matt Anderson 25 5 4 5 1 0 0 16 9 0 .160 .543 .200 hbp 5 sac 2 roe 2 Dalton Stanley 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 4 0 .000 .200 .000 sf Peyton McMullen 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 Totals 496 125 142 99 18 3 5 94 106 26 .286 .427 .365 hbp 28 Fielding: .964 Pitching ip h r er bb so era W L S Tyler Pauly 35.0 13 3 1 8 42 0.20 5 0 0 Tanner Schultz 38.0 20 5 2 7 39 0.36 7 0 0 Cale Claycomb 15.2 9 10 3 17 28 1.38 2 0 0 Hunter Anderson 5.2 4 3 1 3 4 1.35 1 0 2 Matt Anderson 26.1 20 12 6 13 21 1.61 1 1 0 Peyton McMullen 6.2 2 8 4 10 11 4.52 0 1 0 Hayden Baker 2.0 2 3 2 6 1 7.00 0 0 0 Totals 127.1 70 44 17 64 146 0.94 16 3 2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ JUNIOR VARSITY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R H E Opposition 9 7 14 11 7 1 2 51 40 42 CL Hawks JV 33 43 14 34 15 2 1 142 107 31 ab r h bi 2b 3b hr bb so ave obp slg misc Dalton Stanley 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 1.000 1.000 1.000 Marshall McConnell 5 4 4 3 0 1 0 1 0 .800 .833 1.200 fc Truitt Cutre 6 9 4 3 1 0 0 4 1 .667 .818 .833 hbp sb Jeremy Greene 6 2 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 .667 .667 .833 fc 2 sb 3 Gunnar Walker 34 12 18 15 4 1 0 8 4 .529 .619 .706 fc 2 sb 3 Frazier McNew 6 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 2 .500 .500 .500 Jordan Bryan 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 .500 .667 1.000 Travis Parma 13 12 5 1 0 0 0 4 3 .385 .556 .385 hbp sb fc roe sb 4 Brayden Welch 37 16 14 11 1 1 0 5 6 .378 .477 .459 hbp 2 sb roe 6 fc sb 10 Andrew Miller 27 4 9 10 1 2 0 5 7 .333 .514 .519 hbp 5 roe 3 sb 2 Brett Harwell 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 .333 .500 .333 Austin Bowers 19 8 6 9 1 2 0 7 5 .316 .483 .579 hbp sb 2 Bade Holland 19 11 6 9 0 1 0 11 3 .316 .563 .421 hbp sf fc 2 roe 2 sb 3 Zach Elson 23 10 7 7 1 1 0 9 3 .304 .515 .435 hbp fc 3 roe 4 sb Reagan Ackerman 10 4 3 4 1 0 0 1 1 .300 .364 .400 roe 3 fc Quinton Pearn 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 3 .250 .500 .250 Thomas Dorman 17 6 4 1 1 0 0 1 2 .235 .316 .294 hbp roe 4 sb 3 Hunter Anderson 11 2 2 5 0 0 0 4 4 .182 .400 .182 roe 2 sb 2 Cody Jones 29 1 5 4 0 0 0 4 9 .172 .265 .172 roe fc Gibby Martinez 6 3 1 1 0 0 0 3 1 .167 .400 .167 roe sb Brandon Monk 12 6 2 5 0 0 0 11 6 .167 .565 .167 fc sb Chase Anderson 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 .167 .286 .167 roe fc sb Hayden Baker 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 .100 .182 .100 roe 3 Adrian Duque 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 AJ Acosta 3 7 0 1 0 0 0 3 2 .000 .500 .000 sb Baylor Vickers 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 Blayne Carnes 5 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 4 .000 .286 .000 Dane Sweet 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 .000 .667 .000 roe Kolton Ramey 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 .000 .667 .000 hbp Kyle Herber 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 Lucas LeMore 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 .000 .667 .000 Reid Simpson 5 5 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 .000 .286 .000 Totals 324 138 103 96 13 9 0 100 73 .316 .495 .414 hbp 14 Pitching ip h r er bb so W L S era Hunter Anderson 9.2 4 1 0 6 21 2 0 0 0.00 hb 2 Baylor Vickers 2.0 0 0 0 2 4 1 0 0 0.00 hb 0 Brayden Welch 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0.00 hb 0 Hayden Baker 14.0 7 5 2 9 29 2 0 0 1.00 hb 0 Bade Holland 17.0 4 10 6 19 25 3 1 1 2.47 hb 7 Cody Jones 17.1 14 15 7 6 20 2 2 0 2.83 hb 9 Austin Bowers 18.0 12 21 11 26 20 1 0 1 4.28 hb 6 Totals 78.1 41 52 26 69 109 12 3 2 2.33 hb 24
