Good player but high school politics means no playing time

I think some folks misunderstood my meaning in regards to "athleticism, mechanics, translating to game play", etc.  It occurs to me that I should have worded it differently.

My primary point is that college coaches can see a kids size, athleticism, mechanics, hands, etc, and project how that may translate to the college level.  A spreadsheet with numbers on will not.

There are thousands of non-athletic kids who hit .450 in high school against poor pitching, squirrely bookkeeping, with horrible mechanics.  There are also kids who face D1 pitching regularly, have fantastic measureables, along with great hands and mechanics who hit in the low .300s over a short 20-25 game season with only 60 ABs.  Maybe they hit 8 missiles right at someone which prevented their batting average to be lower than the next guy.

Point is...the college coach can see the difference, and the latter player is getting their attention. 

SanDiegoRealist posted:

I would agree that stats are not the end all be all, however they do have some merit. HS stats show a pretty large body of work. Starters at the top of the order will see 100-125 plate appearances. College coaches are not dumb, they can discern that a team who plays in a metro area will typically play against stronger competition that rural area teams based on the larger pool of more skilled players to select from. Not that there aren't great teams in rural areas (Buchanan HS in Clovis, CA for instance), so I guess my point is yes, the college coaches of course take the HS stats with a grain of salt, but when you look at really how little time a coach spends actually seeing a prospect play before offering them a scholarship the stats have to play something of a factor in his decision process, whether it is in the player's favor or not. But my opinion is that favorable stats never look bad...never.

Maybe it's a regional thing, but I can't think of one local kid who's HS stats helped or hurt him with college recruiting. The guys who are getting looks from top schools are being seen in summer and fall games. The top position player from around here in the past 5 years hit in the .200s his senior high school season; he was a top 100 draft pick three years later. I guarantee you his SEC coach never looked at his HS stats. I also remember a kid who was really productive and had off the charts hitting stats, but the kid just looked a little awkward and uncoordinated. That poor kid ended up on a 60 man roster (D3), and never got an opportunity to play.

In my experience, college coaches mostly trust their eyes. They would trust their own assessment from a single game over four years of high school stats. Maybe I'm generalizing too much. Maybe a smart RC from a small juco could find a diamond in the rough by looking at HS stats, but I just haven't seen any evidence of that.

MidAtlanticDad posted:

SanDiegoRealist posted:

I would agree that stats are not the end all be all, however they do have some merit. HS stats show a pretty large body of work. Starters at the top of the order will see 100-125 plate appearances. College coaches are not dumb, they can discern that a team who plays in a metro area will typically play against stronger competition that rural area teams based on the larger pool of more skilled players to select from. Not that there aren't great teams in rural areas (Buchanan HS in Clovis, CA for instance), so I guess my point is yes, the college coaches of course take the HS stats with a grain of salt, but when you look at really how little time a coach spends actually seeing a prospect play before offering them a scholarship the stats have to play something of a factor in his decision process, whether it is in the player's favor or not. But my opinion is that favorable stats never look bad...never.

Maybe it's a regional thing, but I can't think of one local kid who's HS stats helped or hurt him with college recruiting. The guys who are getting looks from top schools are being seen in summer and fall games. The top position player from around here in the past 5 years hit in the .200s his senior high school season; he was a top 100 draft pick three years later. I guarantee you his SEC coach never looked at his HS stats. I also remember a kid who was really productive and had off the charts hitting stats, but the kid just looked a little awkward and uncoordinated. That poor kid ended up on a 60 man roster (D3), and never got an opportunity to play.

In my experience, college coaches mostly trust their eyes. They would trust their own assessment from a single game over four years of high school stats. Maybe I'm generalizing too much. Maybe a smart RC from a small juco could find a diamond in the rough by looking at HS stats, but I just haven't seen any evidence of that.

I am in agreement with you, a player must pass the eye test.

Very few things that come to mind have not already been said, but here are those few:

1.  Anyone who wants to get an evaluation with an eye towards joining our program should fill out the form on our web site, send me a private message, or otherwise contact us.  We have no reason to get involved in your school's "politics," nor any other bias against any player that we come into this with.  But to be clear, that is not a promise of a roster spot. You have to demonstrate a high level of talent and drive, and we also verify academics before a player gets to suit up for us.

2.  The first thing you won't want to hear is, for every 100 parents who complain of "politics," maybe 1 has any genuine beef.  The other 99 fall on the spectrum somewhere between someone having so much pride in their son that they are blinded to the reality of where he truly stacks up, or there is something else going on that perhaps the parent is not aware of.  Hint:  If you ask your son what's going on and he says "I dunno," in all likelihood he does know, he just doesn't want to tell you.  Sometimes our sons' behavior in the locker room and the dugout is (a) not what we imagine and (b) not made known to us.  As for you/your son, maybe you're that 1 in 100, but you should realize that when you talk of "politics," eyes start to roll.  The best thing any parent can do in this situation is, not get involved and remain silent.  Accept that the greater likelihood is that you are in the wrong in your evaluation.

And while I'm glad that your son got his chance to shine before last spring's season ended, one AB tells us all very little.  For starters, if he's not a total stud hitter, he's not going to be the DH.  So most of us have to play defense as well.  We all have a tendency to focus on hitting and overlook or excuse defensive lapses ("bad hop" etc.), but if you have two guys who are comparable offensively and one of them is a liability on defense, the lineup card is not hard to fill out.  Giving opposing teams a 4th or 5th out causes losses and drives coaches crazy.

3.  There have been many players with talent in the King George program.  FoxDad's son was one of them, I'm sure, and I also know that they had a kid get drafted out of high school there not so long ago.  But the second thing you don't want to hear is that, in all candor, KG is not known as a program that puts 9 strong guys in the lineup day after day.  If your # 8 and # 9 hitters are batting around .200, and you have to believe that the guys on the bench are not able to beat them out, then any kid who's not making the roster at all ... Well, let's just say that while injustices are sometimes done, that kid is probably not a collegiate prospect at any level. 

On the Cardinals, we have definitely had strong players whose HS teams did not play them as much as their performances for us suggested was appropriate.  Maybe they just fell into a spring slump?  But all of them moved on to college ball at some level or another.  To be honest, though, we've never had a kid who got totally cut from his HS team, or who didn't play at all, to make our roster.  If there's a HS coach out there who's that clueless -- that he would have a collegiate-caliber player not even make the team -- I haven't run across him yet.

Regarding 2. Thanks for the candor. As for "politics" let me me be specific. When you are new to the area and the coach singles you out by making you and only you, not play but drag the metal chain thing around after the game, retrieve balls hit in the bushes, what else do you call it? Extremely piss poor coaching/hazing?

Regarding 3; we are certainly aware of it. That's why willing to pay for travel team. So he can learn and play and enjoy the sport he loves.

quizzkid57 posted:

Regarding 2. Thanks for the candor. As for "politics" let me me be specific. When you are new to the area and the coach singles you out by making you and only you, not play but drag the metal chain thing around after the game, retrieve balls hit in the bushes, what else do you call it? Extremely piss poor coaching/hazing?

Hate to say it, but I think this answers a lot of questions.  I'm sensing an attitude issue. 

Midlo Dad posted:

Very few things that come to mind have not already been said, but here are those few:

1.  Anyone who wants to get an evaluation with an eye towards joining our program should fill out the form on our web site, send me a private message, or otherwise contact us.  We have no reason to get involved in your school's "politics," nor any other bias against any player that we come into this with.  But to be clear, that is not a promise of a roster spot. You have to demonstrate a high level of talent and drive, and we also verify academics before a player gets to suit up for us.

2.  The first thing you won't want to hear is, for every 100 parents who complain of "politics," maybe 1 has any genuine beef.  The other 99 fall on the spectrum somewhere between someone having so much pride in their son that they are blinded to the reality of where he truly stacks up, or there is something else going on that perhaps the parent is not aware of.  Hint:  If you ask your son what's going on and he says "I dunno," in all likelihood he does know, he just doesn't want to tell you.  Sometimes our sons' behavior in the locker room and the dugout is (a) not what we imagine and (b) not made known to us.  As for you/your son, maybe you're that 1 in 100, but you should realize that when you talk of "politics," eyes start to roll.  The best thing any parent can do in this situation is, not get involved and remain silent.  Accept that the greater likelihood is that you are in the wrong in your evaluation.

And while I'm glad that your son got his chance to shine before last spring's season ended, one AB tells us all very little.  For starters, if he's not a total stud hitter, he's not going to be the DH.  So most of us have to play defense as well.  We all have a tendency to focus on hitting and overlook or excuse defensive lapses ("bad hop" etc.), but if you have two guys who are comparable offensively and one of them is a liability on defense, the lineup card is not hard to fill out.  Giving opposing teams a 4th or 5th out causes losses and drives coaches crazy.

3.  There have been many players with talent in the King George program.  FoxDad's son was one of them, I'm sure, and I also know that they had a kid get drafted out of high school there not so long ago.  But the second thing you don't want to hear is that, in all candor, KG is not known as a program that puts 9 strong guys in the lineup day after day.  If your # 8 and # 9 hitters are batting around .200, and you have to believe that the guys on the bench are not able to beat them out, then any kid who's not making the roster at all ... Well, let's just say that while injustices are sometimes done, that kid is probably not a collegiate prospect at any level. 

On the Cardinals, we have definitely had strong players whose HS teams did not play them as much as their performances for us suggested was appropriate.  Maybe they just fell into a spring slump?  But all of them moved on to college ball at some level or another.  To be honest, though, we've never had a kid who got totally cut from his HS team, or who didn't play at all, to make our roster.  If there's a HS coach out there who's that clueless -- that he would have a collegiate-caliber player not even make the team -- I haven't run across him yet.

The truth. Ouch!

My personal experience from having moved after soph year of high school (many years ago) and everything I've witnessed since coaches are damn pleased to have talent move into the high school. I never saw one talented player overlooked and hazed instead. In fact, hazing is now illegal and grounds for removal in most school districts.

Just a couple of points about paying for travel teams. You can't purchase talent. You can't purchase a roster spot on a quality team.

I've seen this thread on the board several times over the past ten years. I usually yawn and pass by. But it was hard to ignore Midlo's direct hit on reality.

politics might affect either travel or high school...it happens and is ALL over the place, but if it happens in both travel AND high school baseball then well...it might not be politics after all. 

BTW, if you help your son to get noticed through camps / showcases and he IS in fact a college prospect, then the recruiters will take notice.

Golfman25,

I would call that an indication that my son was being punished for some form of misconduct.

I would also conclude that the misconduct was not terribly serious, as otherwise, the coach would have contacted the parents.

I would therefore conclude that the coach is handling things between himself, as the authority figure, and the player, who apparently has not being doing as he shoulda oughta, as the coach sees fit. 

And I would finally conclude that the player also has no desire to reveal the truth of the situation to his parents.

Midlo Dad posted:

Golfman25,

I would call that an indication that my son was being punished for some form of misconduct.

I would also conclude that the misconduct was not terribly serious, as otherwise, the coach would have contacted the parents.

I would therefore conclude that the coach is handling things between himself, as the authority figure, and the player, who apparently has not being doing as he shoulda oughta, as the coach sees fit. 

And I would finally conclude that the player also has no desire to reveal the truth of the situation to his parents.

Agreed.  Perhaps the first time the player was asked to shag balls he mocked the system.  Perhaps he has vocalized loudly that "this isn't how we did it at my last school"....etc.  The fact that he's the only kid doing these things sounds very much like a punishment to knock a chip off their shoulder and not indicative of politics.

Guiding your son to have a frank conversation off the field with the coach would be best to understand what's going on, and how to move forward in a way that will benefit all.  

Good luck.

phillyinNJ posted:

politics might affect either travel or high school...it happens and is ALL over the place, but if it happens in both travel AND high school baseball then well...it might not be politics after all. 

BTW, if you help your son to get noticed through camps / showcases and he IS in fact a college prospect, then the recruiters will take notice.

As an example of this, my son's school team has four kids who are part time players behind other kids who have all committed to to D1-3 schools.  I'm sure their parents think they should be playing more.  The subs found starting spots on travel teams and did the showcase circuit.  All four have secured D3 commitments.

smokeminside posted:

As an example of this, my son's school team has four kids who are part time players behind other kids who have all committed to to D1-3 schools.  I'm sure their parents think they should be playing more.  The subs found starting spots on travel teams and did the showcase circuit.  All four have secured D3 commitments.

Sometimes it's just the luck of the draw.

The possible pitching rotation for this year at my son's school would have included 2 D1 commits, a D2 commit that had D1 offers, and another D2 commit.

As fate has it, all of those players transferred out.  So now the top two pitchers on the team would have been just fighting for innings if those players had stayed.

Same two pitchers didn't get any better or worse, but their playing time will change greatly.  

I get it, but....

What I've always said to my son and easy to understand at any age.

"If you produce you play if you don't  you sit"

Rob T posted:

smokeminside posted:

As an example of this, my son's school team has four kids who are part time players behind other kids who have all committed to to D1-3 schools.  I'm sure their parents think they should be playing more.  The subs found starting spots on travel teams and did the showcase circuit.  All four have secured D3 commitments.

Sometimes it's just the luck of the draw.

The possible pitching rotation for this year at my son's school would have included 2 D1 commits, a D2 commit that had D1 offers, and another D2 commit.

As fate has it, all of those players transferred out.  So now the top two pitchers on the team would have been just fighting for innings if those players had stayed.

Same two pitchers didn't get any better or worse, but their playing time will change greatly.  

Agreed.  At my sons school this year, our pitching rotation is

-D1/MLB

-Juco (could play D1, D1 velo, but recently moved here from Europe and needs a little work),

-Uncommitted D1/D3, has offers

-Uncommitted D3 recruit, has offers  

-The 5th pitcher (will get non-conf games and lots of relief time) on the bench is also uncommitted but will end up playing somewhere.

Same thing in the field.  

1B (my son) not playing college ball, but was being actively recruited at the D1level, had D3 offers.

2B could probably play college, has the skill set, not sure about the desire.

SS D1/MLB

3B D3, but has yet to commit.  

C - Not yet committed, but D3 for sure, possibly D1.

RF - Depending on line up, either a D1 player or a D3 player.

CF - Not sure on status, but could play at D3

LF - Younger player, Im sure he can play in college, just not sure what level at this point.

It would be tough for anyone to crack this line up.  Yet next year the talent really drops off, they have maybe 2 kids, 3 at the most that can play in college.  Only 1 at the D1 level.  

 

 

 

Florida State Fan posted:

I get it, but....

What I've always said to my son and easy to understand at any age.

"If you produce you play if you don't  you sit"

I'd take that with a grain of salt, especially in a short high school season.  We had a situation last year where our best 1st baseman from a productivity standpoint didn't get a lot of playing time.  He tried handling it himself, but very little changed.  By the end of the year, the parents where involved and it got ugly. 

Coaches have their guys who they will give opportunity after opportunity.  With a short HS season, by the time it's obvious who should play the season may be over.  Thus, if your fighting for a spot, your production needs to be off the charts. 

Heard something this week that may apply here: "parents before you get onto coach about playing time you may want to come watch a practice."

I remember the look on a few parent's faces when I said, "It doesn't matter how good a player is next year unless they're good enough to win the one available lineup opening or they can beat out a returning starter." A couple thought I was being arrogant. It was just the reality of the situation.

JCG posted:

Just for my own curiosity, what size school is this and where do they play?  That team is the best hitting team I've seen if those stats are legitimate (not questioning it...just saying).  My son's team was a District finalist his junior and senior years.  We had 2 or 3 guys at .375+ but then it dropped off dramatically....8 guys over .325 is ridiculously good.

Buckeye 2015 posted:

JCG posted:

Just for my own curiosity, what size school is this and where do they play?  That team is the best hitting team I've seen if those stats are legitimate (not questioning it...just saying).  My son's team was a District finalist his junior and senior years.  We had 2 or 3 guys at .375+ but then it dropped off dramatically....8 guys over .325 is ridiculously good.

Buckeye, these are actually from two different teams (three if you include the last line) ID'd by different colors in the "athlete name" field.  JCG states that they were the two best in their league last year.

Oh, didn't pay enough attention I guess.  That makes more sense.....I did read 1-2 in their league, and thought that was the team's record.  Maybe I should read slower lol, but watching bowl games and reading here is confusing for an old man