Can anyone give me an idea of what an excellent time would be for a 2017 kid?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
A 7.0 for a 13 year old kid is very very good IMHO.
Depends on what position the kid is playing. A 7.0 for an older kid could be considered good if he was behind the plate but would be a terrible time if he was a center fielder.
My point here is simply that the time is really relative to the position on the field that he occupies...
My point here is simply that the time is really relative to the position on the field that he occupies...
quote:I have seen players run 6.8 to 7.0 in the 60 then the same player run 3.9 – 4.1 home to 1B.
What that says is you've seen guys who need 3.9-4.1 to get out of the box and then run 30 yards; those same guys then need an additional 2.9-3.1 seconds to go the additional 30 yards.
Both times are important. In the example you give, it shows consistency and therefore, reliability of the information.
Whether you like 60 times or not, it's the standard in use for evaluations. Ignore the importance at your peril.
I'm not knowledgeable of how 13's and 14's measure up, so I can't answer the original post question specifically.
I can say that many, many players can and do improve their times tremendously from ages 13-14 to ages 16-17. For one thing, there's a whole lot of physical development going on in those years. For those who grow a lot, sometimes it takes time to get over the awkward stage and "grow into your shoe size" so to speak. And even then, those who dedicate themselves to it and work with a top-notch speed coach can knock off another 3-5 tenths just by conditioning and honing their technique.
Which leads me to say, I think 13-14 is too soon to be worrying too much about it. Results at that age are not necessarily accurate predictors of future performance.
I can say that many, many players can and do improve their times tremendously from ages 13-14 to ages 16-17. For one thing, there's a whole lot of physical development going on in those years. For those who grow a lot, sometimes it takes time to get over the awkward stage and "grow into your shoe size" so to speak. And even then, those who dedicate themselves to it and work with a top-notch speed coach can knock off another 3-5 tenths just by conditioning and honing their technique.
Which leads me to say, I think 13-14 is too soon to be worrying too much about it. Results at that age are not necessarily accurate predictors of future performance.
quote:Originally posted by Midlo Dad:
I'm not knowledgeable of how 13's and 14's measure up, so I can't answer the original post question specifically.
I can say that many, many players can and do improve their times tremendously from ages 13-14 to ages 16-17. For one thing, there's a whole lot of physical development going on in those years. For those who grow a lot, sometimes it takes time to get over the awkward stage and "grow into your shoe size" so to speak. And even then, those who dedicate themselves to it and work with a top-notch speed coach can knock off another 3-5 tenths just by conditioning and honing their technique.
Which leads me to say, I think 13-14 is too soon to be worrying too much about it. Results at that age are not necessarily accurate predictors of future performance.
Midlo beat me to it (he must run a faster 60 than I do). I couldnt agree more.
Another thing to consider when discussing OF and speed is his ability to run routes and track balls. May seem relatively basic, but it's a crucial attribute for an OF, IMO.
And this is how it ties into the speed discussion. You may have an OF that runs a "slow" 7.0-7.1 60 time, but that OF can be excellent at tracking balls and run routes on both fly & ground balls.
Whereas in that same scenario, the "fast" 6.6-6.7 OF might not be as good in those attributes and must hope that his speed can compensate for those shortcomings. Sometimes it does, but other times it doesn't.
And this is how it ties into the speed discussion. You may have an OF that runs a "slow" 7.0-7.1 60 time, but that OF can be excellent at tracking balls and run routes on both fly & ground balls.
Whereas in that same scenario, the "fast" 6.6-6.7 OF might not be as good in those attributes and must hope that his speed can compensate for those shortcomings. Sometimes it does, but other times it doesn't.
Seems like everyone is looking for a good catcher or two. Jus' saying....
At son's high school this past year, the starting catcher was injured during a game and the senior CF came in and caught for him the rest of the season. This player was a catcher for his travel team, but was behind a very good catcher and D1 commit in HS. He had a big bat in several key games, noticed by coaches attending, and will be playing at the next level this coming spring.
It's nice to be able to play more than one position.
At son's high school this past year, the starting catcher was injured during a game and the senior CF came in and caught for him the rest of the season. This player was a catcher for his travel team, but was behind a very good catcher and D1 commit in HS. He had a big bat in several key games, noticed by coaches attending, and will be playing at the next level this coming spring.
It's nice to be able to play more than one position.
If you need a speed guy, Reed Kagan is the best around. Search on this board and/or google for his website. Works out of the "23113" area. He may not make your guy a 6.5 runner, but he will be able to show him how to shave his time.
But, as others have said on this board, it is what the player does between sessions that will get him faster. Just going to a speed coach won't make it happen.
But, as others have said on this board, it is what the player does between sessions that will get him faster. Just going to a speed coach won't make it happen.
As a 2017, the most important numbers you should be looking at are 4.0 ! As in GPA... There are more dollars available to the guys that get it done in the classroom first !!!
I agree with Driller 100%!! Another number to focus on a bit later is SAT.
I agree 100%.
Yesterday, we had to cut some kids with talent, just because their academics were at a point where there was really very little anyone could do for them. They weren't going to be eligible for D1 or D2, and probably cannot gain admission to any D3's, so that limited them to JuCo's. Which is fine, but when you're starting the process with your options already sorely limited, it's more than just a challenge.
You can do some things to improve your test scores. Usually schools only look at your highest scores, and that's all the NCAA looks at, too, so if you mess up the test you can retake it and wash away the old scores. But once you get your semester grades, a couple of years of bad grades are like an anchor and then by the time these kids get to their junior years they are trying to catch up for 4 bad semesters all of a sudden. There's only so much you can do there at that point.
As best I can tell, a lot of people are oblivious to the NCAA's D1 and D2 eligibility requirements, and they think if their dream school wants them wearing cleats that all will be forgiven and forgotten. The reality, of course, is that most schools require far more than the NCAA minimums. And if you fall before the minimums, they couldn't do anything for you even if they wanted to.
The moral of the story is that college baseball players have to be college students. And you'd better wake up and smell the coffee in that department before you start the 9th grade or you're already closing doors on yourself.
Yesterday, we had to cut some kids with talent, just because their academics were at a point where there was really very little anyone could do for them. They weren't going to be eligible for D1 or D2, and probably cannot gain admission to any D3's, so that limited them to JuCo's. Which is fine, but when you're starting the process with your options already sorely limited, it's more than just a challenge.
You can do some things to improve your test scores. Usually schools only look at your highest scores, and that's all the NCAA looks at, too, so if you mess up the test you can retake it and wash away the old scores. But once you get your semester grades, a couple of years of bad grades are like an anchor and then by the time these kids get to their junior years they are trying to catch up for 4 bad semesters all of a sudden. There's only so much you can do there at that point.
As best I can tell, a lot of people are oblivious to the NCAA's D1 and D2 eligibility requirements, and they think if their dream school wants them wearing cleats that all will be forgiven and forgotten. The reality, of course, is that most schools require far more than the NCAA minimums. And if you fall before the minimums, they couldn't do anything for you even if they wanted to.
The moral of the story is that college baseball players have to be college students. And you'd better wake up and smell the coffee in that department before you start the 9th grade or you're already closing doors on yourself.
quote:Originally posted by Midlo Dad:
... And you'd better wake up and smell the coffee in that department before you start the 9th grade or you're already closing doors on yourself.
The way class schedules are plotted out in our neck of the woods, middle schoolers are taking high school level math and foreign languages as early as 6th grade. I am not an advocate for 11-12 year olds taking high school level classes but both my boys had 2 and 4 high school credits going INTO 9th grade year of high school. They may think they are doing well with a B, but starting your high school years with a 3.0 can be tough.
I've always thought it was wrong to count middle school grades towards your high school GPA, even if they were supposedly high school level classes.
But even if Chesterfield does that and uses the resulting numbers for ranking, I'm not sure the NCAA does, or the college admissions departments either.
But even if Chesterfield does that and uses the resulting numbers for ranking, I'm not sure the NCAA does, or the college admissions departments either.
On a more positive note, kids should be encouraged that if they have just solid (not necessarily outstanding) grades, their baseball skills can take them places that non-athletes in their situation could not hope for.
If you're a non-minority male from the middle class suburbs, and you post a 3.5 GPA with maybe 1000 on your 2-part SAT's, you aren't likely to gain admission to UVA or William & Mary. But if the baseball coach likes you, it can happen.
So you don't have to be the valedictorian. But don't come in with a 2.5 and an 850 and expect all the doors to open.
If you're a non-minority male from the middle class suburbs, and you post a 3.5 GPA with maybe 1000 on your 2-part SAT's, you aren't likely to gain admission to UVA or William & Mary. But if the baseball coach likes you, it can happen.
So you don't have to be the valedictorian. But don't come in with a 2.5 and an 850 and expect all the doors to open.
quote:Originally posted by Midlo Dad:
I've always thought it was wrong to count middle school grades towards your high school GPA, even if they were supposedly high school level classes.
But even if Chesterfield does that and uses the resulting numbers for ranking, I'm not sure the NCAA does, or the college admissions departments either.
NCAA does count all classes that are high school classes towards your final GPA. Virginia Beach District really screwed their students for years by not having anything other than A,B,C grades and having the A set at 94. Two of my son's grades from Middle School were 93's but count as a 3.0 towards his High School final GPA because the beach didn't do A-, B+. They have since changed their grading scheme to be in line with what most other schools in the country have been doing but they aren't changing existing scores.
It was my experience with one son who is now a college freshman that the way universities evaluate grades may vary. For example, some use the GPA as stated on the student's transcripts. Others use the GPA of core classes only (so the A in P/E does not pull up the C in English). Some did not recognize the additional point for classes considered as advanced or honors. If your son's GPA is in the low to mid 3's, my suggestion is to inquire with the recruiting coach about the exact method the admission's office uses to calculate GPA.
My experience is that teachers finagle the numeric scores to make the letter grades end up where they think justice is served. So I think arguing over what number translates to what letter misses the mark. You see the same percentage of A's from one school or system to the next no matter what numeric scale is used.
quote:Originally posted by Midlo Dad:
If you're a non-minority male from the middle class suburbs, and you post a 3.5 GPA with maybe 1000 on your 2-part SAT's, you aren't likely to gain admission to UVA or William & Mary. But if the baseball coach likes you, it can happen.
Right on with that one. With the "academic referrals" that many schools such as that have some kids on the borderline can still get in. Tough to come by them but they do at least offer a chance...
regarding positioning...Bryce Harper was a catcher with speed...he easily converted to OF. I wouldnt pull the plug on catching..easier to move fro there to another spot than the other way around.