Best at 12 and at 17?

Thanks for the plug lol.  Mine is 14u now...  so far the same kids who were best at 9 and 10 still are.  Soon will be high school years.  Time will tell.  

Anecdote is definitely the right word.  When son was 12 there were three "stud" pitchers in our county that were throwing 70 mph.   One threw 90 as a senior and played college ball.  One threw 75 as a senior.  The third played HS ball, but never pitched because he ruined his arm through overuse as a kid.    

Does any of this mean anything.  Absolutely not.   

MTH posted:

Anecdote is definitely the right word.  When son was 12 there were three "stud" pitchers in our county that were throwing 70 mph.   One threw 90 as a senior and played college ball.  One threw 75 as a senior.  The third played HS ball, but never pitched because he ruined his arm through overuse as a kid.    

Does any of this mean anything.  Absolutely not.   

Life is like a box of chocolates and you never know what your gonna get?

I believe that most kids that are the best players in an area at age 12 will also be one of the best players at 17 in that area.  Not all, but more than half IMO.  The only thing to consider is physical maturity and size.  Often the most productive players at age 12 are the biggest strongest players, not necessarily the best players.

Kids change a lot over several years.  Some that you would never guess become the best.  But if you see an average or below average sized 12 year old that really stands out, the chances are good that he will also stand out at 17. If he wants to!

I still want to know where all these 12yo's throwing 70 come from?  I am going to have to get my pocket radar recalibrated!

Tell your wife everyone says it's time to upgrade.  Keep your eyes on ebay and you can find a used Stalker Sport 2 for $300 or less.   

One year of LL all stars the team went to states. Five went on to D1 ball. Nine of twelve played college ball at some level. The next year, also going to states only four of twelve played high school ball. Two were the same players from the previous year.

The second team was loaded with big strong athletic kids who could out muscle and/or out run a small field. Overall the team was huge. Every kid on the team went on to play a high school sport. Everyone made all conference in their sport at some level. They just weren't baseball players. Back during all stars I quietly told a friend only four of them would survive the 60/90 field. I was right.

i remember one kid hit a ball so hard off a metal sign in the outfield it rang like a bell. It made a crease in the sign 

The best player (performance wise) in our district was named The Meal Ticket by his 5'4" father. The kid was 5'8" and threw mid 70s. He never lost a game in league or all star play. He hit balls to the rooftops across the street. I was proud of our kids they wanted to face him in all stars. His team got eliminated first.

He was done with baseball after JV his soph year. He swung like a rusty gate. He was done as a hitter on the 60/90. As a soph he was a sore armed 5'9" pitcher with a 78mph fastball.

i believe it's possible to cherry pick a travel team at 12 where players are likely to go one as baseball players. I created a 13u team of some of the best all stars from the district. Almost all went on in the game. Another dad did the same thing and his players went on. You can look at athleticism, coachability, the size of the parents and do a fairly good job of cherry picking a team. 

Even back when I coached Babe Ruth ball (13-15 rec ball/no travel then) after college and LL for my son when we got to the lower rounds in the draft I chose players the same way.

Since you correctly predicted who would and who would not make it at the next level this is just another testament that you can in fact tell at 12 who will be good at 17!

There are kids at twelve you most likely can predict if they are willing to make the commitment. There are preteen stars you can tell it's unlikely due to their mechanics or athleticism.

There will also be kids who will grow and change. One of my LL friends didn't make all stars. He was a chubby kid with coordination issues. He became a 6'4" all state player in GA, played in the SEC and pitched in the majors for six years. He threw 90+ back when it was considered major heat.

The only indication there might be something there is his older brother  was drafted and his father played major college football. But you wouldn't know watching him play as a preteen. 

Almost all good players at 17 were very good at 12 not not nearly all good 12 year olds are good at 17.

Dominik85 posted:

Almost all good players at 17 were very good at 12 not not nearly all good 12 year olds are good at 17.

+1

I saw plenty of quality players on the small field who were well instructed preteens. But I could tell they probably didn't have it for the big field.

I believe that genetics is the biggest (not the only) factor. When a 12 year-old is as tall or taller than his dad, he may not grow any more. The mom's height is also important. Now, it doesn't mean he won't be a stud if he's fundamentally sound but many get by just being bigger stronger faster at 12 and it just won't happen as much at 17. 

There is also a top 1% athlete who may be labeled 'Can't-Miss' but baseball is a skill and all that athleticism won't help you hit a baseball at the higher levels w/o good instruction. 

I think by 12 y.o. if a kid a phenom, not just good, you can tell.  In our small town I've only seen maybe 4 over the last 12 years. 

2020dad posted:

I still want to know where all these 12yo's throwing 70 come from?  I am going to have to get my pocket radar recalibrated!

Same place where all these Varsity high school pitchers are throwing 85+.   I haven't found them either. 

I was just cleaning out my son's bedroom (out of the house and living on his own near his work). There was a team picture of his travel 13U team of 12 players. (7) D1 players (1) SEC, (2) ACC, (1) Atlantic 10, (1) MAAC, (1) Ivy. (4) D2 players, all in the Northeast-10 and one D3 player in the Empire-8. Only one player did not play beyond HS. Additional one player is playing Milb and should be playing at the high A level this year.

These are all players that graduated HS in 2010 and are either 23 or 24 years old now. Not to bad for a team in Northern NJ from a very small area. 

birdman14 posted:

I was just cleaning out my son's bedroom (out of the house and living on his own near his work). There was a team picture of his travel 13U team of 12 players. (7) D1 players (1) SEC, (2) ACC, (1) Atlantic 10, (1) MAAC, (1) Ivy. (4) D2 players, all in the Northeast-10 and one D3 player in the Empire-8. Only one player did not play beyond HS. Additional one player is playing Milb and should be playing at the high A level this year.

These are all players that graduated HS in 2010 and are either 23 or 24 years old now. Not to bad for a team in Northern NJ from a very small area. 

Impressive!

Reminds me of my son's 14U team who also graduated HS in 2010, only. . . 3 played some other sport in HS and others were top players on their HS teams and all went on to play college ball at some level.  3 are currently playing pro ball.  That team was not in such a small area though (SF Bay Area). 

2020dad posted:

I still want to know where all these 12yo's throwing 70 come from?  I am going to have to get my pocket radar recalibrated!

I've still yet to see one except for the man children at LLWS. Kid goes to Cooperstown this summer maybe we can see one there, I want an autograph.

Size can play to the equivalent of talent or better at 12.  By 17, size alone will not trump talent.

So at 12, you have the kids who are larger than the other kids and can outperform all based on size alone.  Those kids will likely not be the best at 17 unless they also possess tools and work ethic.  Tools at 12 will be tools at 17, and so long as the kid is close to above average size, will likely be one of the better players as he progresses.

Using that same 2011 LLWS as an example, the then 5'11", 165# leader of his Warner Robins team will be going to Alabama as a QB.

My son a 2017 ballplayer.  When my son was coming through the youth ranks in his 11U, maybe 12U season, a former MLB player that lives in our area pulled me aside one day at the ballpark and made some nice remarks about my son.  Like most Dads, I was pretty puffed up that a big leaguer noticed my son at that age.  This gentlemen also offered me the best advice I have ever heard after I asked him if he thought my son had a chance to play beyond HS?  He smiled and said, "I have no idea but if he continues to play at a level that challenges him, continues to work hard and has fun playing the game, we'll both get to find out". 

I have always enjoyed watching my kid play but after that day, I fully understood the old cliché about the marathon and the sprint.  For all the pre-hs parents that have found this site, the above advice is relevant, irrespective of your son's talent level.  If he throws hard at 12, well....he throws hard at 12 but how hard will he throw at 17?  I don't know but I hope we all get to find out!

I read all this about the 'big 12yo'.  Full disclosure my son was the big 12yo...  and the big 9yo...  and the big 14yo.  And given he is 6'3" he will be the big 17yo.  I am 6'4" so yes we are the bigs.  But when we are at AAU events we are pretty normal.  And I am dwarfed when I am chatting with the dad on our team who played in the nba.  So I suppose its all relative.   But I just can't say I agree with the stereotype.  Yes of course we all know of that kid who hit some home runs at 12 because a lot of the fields are just too small and later he did not succeed.  But we must have a different definition of dominate.  Cause to dominate you need a lot more than a few home runs.  And again I just haven't seen all these 12yo's throwing 70.  By the way most of these folks who say they have seen the 70mph 12u's are the same people who say they don't gun or pay attention to velocity???  The ones who do generally are still good later.  Those that threw say 63mph...  well thats good at 12 but certainly not dominant.  So if a kid throwing 63 and playing rec ball 'dominates' isn't it just because of the level he is playing at?  You take a 12yo throwing 72 and hitting shots all over the field with some 275 to 300 ft home runs thrown in there...  real good chance - real good - that kid will be good at 17.  

I have tried to talk 6'3" plus kids who play other sports into trying to pitch.  I hear the same thing over and over.  'I wasn't very good when I was little - too wild - barely played etc'.  I actually think there is a bias AGAINST the big kid.  They are gangly and awkward in many cases and the 9yo coach just has to win that tournament so they get pushed aside.  Have a hard time throwing strikes so let's use the little 'athletic' kid after all at 9 if you throw strikes you will win.  These kids get shut down before they start.  By the time they are a 6'5" junior they have no interest.  How many could have been great pitchers if some patience and effort was put into them?  We will never know because at 9 and 10 etc. We need complete ballplayers.   Heaven forbid we have that big kid who can't hit or play the field very well costing us a big win.  Then you become a high school pitching coach (right root!) And you look around and realize you got  bunch of kids throwing high 70's and low 80's (if you're lucky) and wonder if that big kid in the hallway could have been a pitcher!!!

As a 6-7 2018, my son is still pitching.  Largely due to his 11u-12u travel coach barking in his ear during a bullpen workout some six years ago, "You're gonna be a pitcher son.........you're gonna be a pitcher!" 

Ironically, that coach NEVER used him to pitch.  He just wouldn't and probably felt he couldn't trust son with a game ball.  Just too many moving parts in the 6-foot 11-12yo.  To the coach's credit though, he still was able to inspire my son.  Son understood that the coach had confidence in son's future, just not his present.  At age 11, son understood.  Coach somehow was still able to inspire son.  I will never forget how he was able to pull that off?  Great coach who kept a "big" in baseball at the age when most bigs go "all in" for basketball or become soccer goalies.

Son wasn't best at 12, not best now at 17. 

Hoping for best at 19.

#1 Assistant Coach posted:

As a 6-7 2018, my son is still pitching.  Largely due to his 11u-12u travel coach barking in his ear during a bullpen workout some six years ago, "You're gonna be a pitcher son.........you're gonna be a pitcher!" 

Ironically, that coach NEVER used him to pitch.  He just wouldn't and probably felt he couldn't trust son with a game ball.  Just too many moving parts in the 6-foot 11-12yo.  To the coach's credit though, he still was able to inspire my son.  Son understood that the coach had confidence in son's future, just not his present.  At age 11, son understood.  Coach somehow was still able to inspire son.  I will never forget how he was able to pull that off?  Great coach who kept a "big" in baseball at the age when most bigs go "all in" for basketball or become soccer goalies.

Son wasn't best at 12, not best now at 17. 

Hoping for best at 19.

Good for that coach - seems to be the exception.

I don't think there is a bias against bigger kids.  In fact they often perform better at a younger age because they are bigger and stronger.  Some of them will show a lot of athletic ability and feel for baseball, some won't just like the smaller kids.

Maybe the best 12 year old I ever saw was 5'7 and around 150 lbs.  He threw harder and better than everyone else.  He hit better and had much more power than everyone else.  He also ran much faster than everyone else.  He is what some might call a super star at 12 years old.

Wasn't long before he was shaving and he continued to be a top player.  Each year the others would catch up a little and eventually pass him in size.  As a senior in high school he was still a good player, but nowhere near the best.  Also as a senior he was still 5'7 weighed probably 160 lbs.  He didn't go backwards, but others just kept gaining and then passed him.  He still went on to play small college baseball.  What helped him become so very good at 12, became the same thing that kept him from being the best at 17.

Point is, I think it is reasonable to think one can pick the 12 year olds that will become among the best 17 year olds.  You know that you will be wrong about a few of them.  You know it is possible that the very best 17 year old might be someone you would not have picked at 12.  But you can pick your 10 top 17 year olds and 5 years later find out you were wrong about a few of them.  There is more to it than what you can see.

Anyway some big kids keep getting bigger and have good skills.  You just have to pay more attention to the at the athletism and other baseball skills and disregard their size/strength advantage.  You can guess their eventual size based on parents, but that can really fool you at times.  Size and physical maturity tends to change a lot between 12 and 17.  However quite often if the skills are there at 12 there is a very good chance they will be there at 17.  The neat thing is that it is possible the 12 year old that shows no skills at all at 12 can still become the best player of the group at 17 or older.

I have to disagree with 2020dad.  I don't feel there is a biased against the big kids, some of the big kids may be clumsy because their athletic ability hasn't caught up with their size yet, but as seen through the eyes of a dad of a small kid, the bias is clearly leaning toward the big kids.  The 6 ft >  continue to get every opportunity no matter how they act or perform while at 5'7, 140lbs,  2018_son has to fight for everything he can get.

2018 and 2020, I agree with both of you.  How's that for diplomatic?  I think it all comes down to the coach.  In youth ball, I have seen the big awkward kids get short shrift because they couldn't help the team and the coach didn't have the time or desire to coach them up.  But, I have seen the same thing happen with the undersized kid with good skills but not a lot of strength.  

When son was in HS his coach liked the little, scrappy kids with the big heart.  I think they reminded him of himself.  He would keep the big goofie kids in hopes that he would turn into something, but never really did anything to try to help them develop.  

Again, just depends on the coach.  But, it sucks for the kids.  

2018_Dad posted:

I have to disagree with 2020dad.  I don't feel there is a biased against the big kids, some of the big kids may be clumsy because their athletic ability hasn't caught up with their size yet, but as seen through the eyes of a dad of a small kid, the bias is clearly leaning toward the big kids.  The 6 ft >  continue to get every opportunity no matter how they act or perform while at 5'7, 140lbs,  2018_son has to fight for everything he can get.

We may be talking about different age levels.  Certainly when you are 16 or 17 size can be an advantage.  But when 9 thru say 11 it is a disadvantage.  Only a small percentage of people are 6'2" and above.  And with every additional inch it really narrows fast.  The coach (many of them) who was that little scrappy guy tends to gravitate to the little scrappy guys.  Just opinions.  I guess neither one of us can prove anything and we will probably never agree.  So we can kindly agree to disagree.

When son was in HS his coach liked the little, scrappy kids with the big heart. I think they reminded him of himself. 

I know of a college coach like this. He's in a major conference. He's 5'10". One day I noticed the visiting team was large. I looked at the rosters. Then I realized the home team was small. A majority of the roster was 5'11" or shorter.

This team has not competed well since this coach came on board. There's a lot of criticism in the stands on his recruiting strategy. Not that I count, but I figure he has one more year unless the AD doesn't care about baseball.

MTH posted:

2018 and 2020, I agree with both of you.  How's that for diplomatic?  I think it all comes down to the coach.  In youth ball, I have seen the big awkward kids get short shrift because they couldn't help the team and the coach didn't have the time or desire to coach them up.  But, I have seen the same thing happen with the undersized kid with good skills but not a lot of strength.  

When son was in HS his coach liked the little, scrappy kids with the big heart.  I think they reminded him of himself.  He would keep the big goofie kids in hopes that he would turn into something, but never really did anything to try to help them develop.  

Again, just depends on the coach.  But, it sucks for the kids.  

I swear I did not see your post befIre typing mine!  The little scrappy coach thing was eerie! 

2020, I can agree with your response and I'm sure there are plenty of other variables that have influenced our opinions..

Like 2020DAD, I also have a 2020 that is 6'3" and although he is a good ball player, I think the road has actually been tougher on him then it has some of his smaller teammates. Now at 14U, I think he does get slighted a little because Coach refuses to play him at 3B, even though we have had a glaring weakness there, because he says he will be 1B/P when he gets older. Son tries out for 3B in MS and makes the team and starts there in 7th Grade.

HayBull posted:

Like 2020DAD, I also have a 2020 that is 6'3" and although he is a good ball player, I think the road has actually been tougher on him then it has some of his smaller teammates. Now at 14U, I think he does get slighted a little because Coach refuses to play him at 3B, even though we have had a glaring weakness there, because he says he will be 1B/P when he gets older. Son tries out for 3B in MS and makes the team and starts there in 7th Grade.

That's typical. My 2018 son (6' 3" his freshman year) showed up for the first practice last year and the coach asked him what position he played. "Third." "Nope. You're a pitcher and a first baseman." In fact, he ended up in left and center when he did play in the field. This year, we lost eight starters and there's no telling where he'll play.

I think when most people say that the bigger stronger 12yo players have an advantage they are referring to physical maturity. Does the kid look 12 or does he look 15?Puberty is a crazy thing. Kids that go through it early have an obvious advantage in size, strength and speed. But everyone usually catches up and the blue collar players often rise to the top. Not always but often. 

I see quite a few good players at 12 who are playing down a school year, then they get to Freshman ball or 15u and moved to grade level. Many of them get average or worse quickly.

A stud is a stud but keep an eye on the grade before you make to much of a judgment.

I had a son that was a total stud at 11 - one of the best players in the state and I told parents of the team I coached I did not think he would make the HS team.  They couldn't believe what I was telling them.  I had come to the realization by then he was going to be 5'6" and 130lbs.  Kid could play and was nails but he was going to one of the biggest and best baseball schools in the state. 

Turns out he made the JV as an 8th grader - older brother 3 year starter and the coach was the short scrappy guy helped.  He was a benchwarmer.  In one game he came out to warm up the leftfielder between innings and a nice little blue haired grandma said --  "Oh my!  Aren't they worried that little boy might get hurt."  He turned and looked with a face of pain that was the most awful thing I saw happen to my kids on an athletic field. 

I am convinced had he been 6'1" and 195lbs he would have been a DI prospect assuming he worked at it right.  Not to be though.

So he quit baseball after losing a position battle in Fall ball freshman year and played 4 years of lacrosse and dominated.  His hand eye coordination, endurance, athleticism and feistiness made him a natural. 

luv baseball posted:

I had a son that was a total stud at 11 - one of the best players in the state and I told parents of the team I coached I did not think he would make the HS team.  They couldn't believe what I was telling them.  I had come to the realization by then he was going to be 5'6" and 130lbs.  Kid could play and was nails but he was going to one of the biggest and best baseball schools in the state. 

Turns out he made the JV as an 8th grader - older brother 3 year starter and the coach was the short scrappy guy helped.  He was a benchwarmer.  In one game he came out to warm up the leftfielder between innings and a nice little blue haired grandma said --  "Oh my!  Aren't they worried that little boy might get hurt."  He turned and looked with a face of pain that was the most awful thing I saw happen to my kids on an athletic field. 

I am convinced had he been 6'1" and 195lbs he would have been a DI prospect assuming he worked at it right.  Not to be though.

So he quit baseball after losing a position battle in Fall ball freshman year and played 4 years of lacrosse and dominated.  His hand eye coordination, endurance, athleticism and feistiness made him a natural. 

Can't control your height but you can control your strength.   Know a guy who is 5'8" on a good day.  Had the second highest single season ncaa D1 BA ever I believe.  Played some milb.  Strong.  Very strong.  Coached a kid who was about the same size maybe even shorter.  Strong, very strong.  Got drafted.  Size may stop you as a pitcher at some point but not as a positional player. 

Interesting thread and an issue I have commented on before.  The question comes down to WHY are they the best player at 11-12...That Huntington Beach team from the OP had technically sound players all across that squad.  In addition they were competing in a very large pond.  The LLWS is not the be all and end all in baseball but the teams that make it to Williamsport they are playing top competition from multiple states.  Most 11-12 players in LL will play locally, make an all-star team and then get knocked out along the way to winning the state tournament.

For these players being the "BEST" may mean being the biggest or strongest or fastest in their area versus truly one of the best 11-12 baseball players.  Trying to project these boys to 17 is much more challenging

If an 11-12 player is technically and fundamentally solid, loves the game and sticks with it while challenging themselves that will likely (no there is no always in baseball) still be in that top group at 17. 

When I hear about the great player who led the league in home runs at 12 and then became a bust or was the star pitcher for the little league that lost in the district playoffs and never pitched in HS it just tells be the reason for their success was not sustainable.  When you hear about the boys in Huntington Beach that played in the LLWS  the odds are a little better that their success was based on talent, fundamentals and hard work...that gets you a long way in the world of baseball.

LUV BASEBALL,

While things probably worked out well, I hate hearing stories like that.  There are much more important things than size, especially in baseball.

I remember a player that was named the MVP at one of our big tournaments a few years back.  He was the smallest player, by far, in the entire tournament.  He was "listed" at 5'3!   He also went on to be a star player at a power DI program and even played some pro ball. To this day he is still 5'3 and actually works for us at times.

Sometimes I wish baseball was the same now as it was when I was a young kid.  Of course, in other ways it is actually better now.  But any adult that says or does anything to cause a young kid to quit the game before they get out of high school, is not good for the game.  Why take some thing that is supposed to be fun and turn it into something that is no fun?

BTW, I know it is off the topic, but I have never "cut" a player.  Even when they talked me into coaching a Legion team we were told we had to have tryouts and cut it down to the roster.  We picked our top team and formed two other teams out of the other kids.  The other two teams were not recognized by the Post, but we raised the money for them to play a summer schedule.  One player that was on the 2nd team ended up playing DI baseball.

Wait a minute, I did cut one player once.  It was my own son, but I wasn't really worried about him giving up.  He ended up playing in the Big Leagues.

This might interest some.  At the risk of sounding like a fool... One of the players on that Legion team was fairly talented.  He was a three sport star in HS.  QB in football, leading scorer in basketball and RHP/OF in baseball. He wanted to play either football or basketball in college, but he wasn't getting a lot of interest.  I strongly recommended that he try to play baseball at the next level.  I thought he had a chance to develop into a very good player.  Not sure if he thought about it or not, but he finally got a football offer at northern Iowa.  He sat on the bench for three years and when I saw his dad I told him that I wish his son had played baseball.  

Well... After a few Super Bowl championships that same guy will end up in the NFL Hall of Fame... Kurt Warner

So, does anyone need some advice? Am I ever glad that Kurt didn't follow it.

PGStaff posted:

LUV BASEBALL,

While things probably worked out well, I hate hearing stories like that.  There are much more important things than size, especially in baseball.

I remember a player that was named the MVP at one of our big tournaments a few years back.  He was the smallest player, by far, in the entire tournament.  He was "listed" at 5'3!   He also went on to be a star player at a power DI program and even played some pro ball. To this day he is still 5'3 and actually works for us at times.

Sometimes I wish baseball was the same now as it was when I was a young kid.  Of course, in other ways it is actually better now.  But any adult that says or does anything to cause a young kid to quit the game before they get out of high school, is not good for the game.  Why take some thing that is supposed to be fun and turn it into something that is no fun?

BTW, I know it is off the topic, but I have never "cut" a player.  Even when they talked me into coaching a Legion team we were told we had to have tryouts and cut it down to the roster.  We picked our top team and formed two other teams out of the other kids.  The other two teams were not recognized by the Post, but we raised the money for them to play a summer schedule.  One player that was on the 2nd team ended up playing DI baseball.

Wait a minute, I did cut one player once.  It was my own son, but I wasn't really worried about him giving up.  He ended up playing in the Big Leagues.

This might interest some.  At the risk of sounding like a fool... One of the players on that Legion team was fairly talented.  He was a three sport star in HS.  QB in football, leading scorer in basketball and RHP/OF in baseball. He wanted to play either football or basketball in college, but he wasn't getting a lot of interest.  I strongly recommended that he try to play baseball at the next level.  I thought he had a chance to develop into a very good player.  Not sure if he thought about it or not, but he finally got a football offer at northern Iowa.  He sat on the bench for three years and when I saw his dad I told him that I wish his son had played baseball.  

Well... After a few Super Bowl championships that same guy will end up in the NFL Hall of Fame... Kurt Warner

So, does anyone need some advice? Am I ever glad that Kurt didn't follow it.

Funny.  This would make an interesting thread!  Excellent advice given by coaches...  a sophomore decided to not play varsity baseball in order to focus on football.  I told him he was making a  mistake in my opinion.  That he could play college baseball at some level.  He politely declined my advice.  Mike Alstott.