TPM...
Agree with most of this post. Particularly the middle part You have done a very nice job IMO and based upon whats out here in the trenches, of explaining where velocity and development fit into collegiate selection. And of the fact that some may never reach quaklifying velocities for the higher levels of play.
My concern was with the initial view that velocity was irrelevant. It is VERY relevant. As evidenced by the Radar guns.
And as evidenced by the The kids who throw 90+ in the NCAA and stuggle. This is a direct result of coaches lthinking like this..."if he can throw 90+ he qualifies! and I can teach him to pitch." I know of few coaches who think the other way..."well he can pitch but I'll teach him to throw 90"
The player who gets to the NCAA and cannot pitch, or gets hit is a perfect example of the thinking that exists out here. Velocity clouds thinking and is arguably the single most important qualifying factor for high DI.
Give me a kid who knows the craft of pithcing and has velocity and he gets a June/July offer or gets drafted early. Give me a kid over 90 and he is a July scholarship guy. Even if he struggles to throw a range of pitches. I can alwsy teach a kid who can throw 90.....Give me a kid who throws 85 and can get kids out and I'll give you smaller schools and smaller JC's.
Not so sure about trying to throw hard as being a major components of injury...Yes, it may be a factor, but I figured the major casues were likely overuse, lack of training, too much junk too early...