Skip to main content

Reply to "Travel Ball - Good and Bad......."

quote:
A couple posters have PM'd me and are wondering why Daque had pushed his view about pre 16 travel ball vs rec ball not being necessary for youth development.What is he trying to achieve?
I think you've skewed the statement. I've always known Dacque's argument to be the preteen smaller fields versus the full size fields. That would be 12U and under versus 13U and older.

Personally, I don't believe where a kid plays prior to playing on the 60/90 field has any bearing at all on his future (high school or beyond). What matters is learning the basics of the game properly. But until the kid can walk on the 60/90 field and prove he belongs, anything he did previous to 13U (smaller fields) and where he did it (rec or travel) is meaningless.

My son played both rec and travel from 9-12. Most of those 9-12 travel players are no longer playing in high school. At 13U we started getting selective about who was on the travel team. It wasn't about developing successful LL all-star programs anymore. All those kids are playing high school ball. But we carefully selected players from a wide area we believed had the potential for success on the 60/90 field.

Note: One of the stud 9U/10U pitchers, the son of a former AAA pitcher didn't make the high school team. So much for genes and projection being 100% accurate. It wasn't lack of passion. It was lack of ability.
Last edited by RJM
×
×
×
×