Gotta wonder what I am missing

PG scouts saw him play.  They ranked him where they did based on his play.  College coaches looked at him play, liked it, and made a verbal offer.  It's as simple as that.

(unless he is really not committed, and it's listed in commitments as an error)

Go44dad posted:

PG scouts saw him play.  They ranked him where they did based on his play.  College coaches looked at him play, liked it, and made a verbal offer.  It's as simple as that.

(unless he is really not committed, and it's listed in commitments as an error)

So, based on what I posted as his stats, is the ranking and commitment commensurate with his performance in your opinion?

SanDiegoRealist posted:

Ok, I am scratching my head. I see on PG recent college commitments a kid who I have seen play, recently committed to a pretty big program. He's small in stature, plays for a very large travel ball organization. His PG national ranking is pretty high, as in there is a number associated with it, not words. He has never showcased. His PG event performance has never garnered him an "All Tournament Team". His career numbers over 5 PG tournaments are .235 BA, total of 2 extra base hits (doubles), an .887 fielding percentage with. Kid is a MIF'r. Kid did play Varsity as a frosh, but not on a powerhouse HS team. High school numbers as a frosh were comparable hitting, fielding were significantly better (.965 on significant full-season total chances).

What am I missing? Can the PG rankings and college commitments be so tied to "projections" that actual current performance doesn't factor into the equation, or is weighted disproportionately to projection? The events this kid has played in at PG have all been at age-appropriate level, so it's not like he's a 15 year old playing 18U, I could understand the stats if that were the case? Is the commitment based on a coaching relationship (remember he is an underclassman, so that club coach was definitely in the loop somehow).

I just don't get it. Help me rationalize this before I begin to think it's not about what you do or how you perform, but more about who you know and who you play for.

To a certain extent it can be about who you know and who you play for, as are most things in life!  Have the president of Home depot call the President...I bet eventually his call gets through, have the owner of a mom and pop hardware store call....they MIGHT get to the switch board at the White House, maybe.

-He could have committed to a walk on spot

-He could be attending where both his parents went and they are huge donors.

-Maybe he looks and plays just like an older brother who plays MLB now and they are projecting

-Well respected Travel Coach might have great connection with school

-His best friend may be a D1 superstar football player and he wanted his friend with him at college, so he made it part of his commitment deal.

Or maybe just maybe he had the flu when you saw him and he's actually an amazing player?:

There are a million things it could have been, and you will likely never know.

SanDiegoRealist posted:

Go44dad posted:

PG scouts saw him play.  They ranked him where they did based on his play.  College coaches looked at him play, liked it, and made a verbal offer.  It's as simple as that.

(unless he is really not committed, and it's listed in commitments as an error)

So, based on what I posted as his stats, is the ranking and commitment commensurate with his performance in your opinion?

Some kid I don't know committed to a school I don't know.  It wasn't my kid.  My only opinion is good for him.

CaCO3Girl posted:

SanDiegoRealist posted:

Ok, I am scratching my head. I see on PG recent college commitments a kid who I have seen play, recently committed to a pretty big program. He's small in stature, plays for a very large travel ball organization. His PG national ranking is pretty high, as in there is a number associated with it, not words. He has never showcased. His PG event performance has never garnered him an "All Tournament Team". His career numbers over 5 PG tournaments are .235 BA, total of 2 extra base hits (doubles), an .887 fielding percentage with. Kid is a MIF'r. Kid did play Varsity as a frosh, but not on a powerhouse HS team. High school numbers as a frosh were comparable hitting, fielding were significantly better (.965 on significant full-season total chances).

What am I missing? Can the PG rankings and college commitments be so tied to "projections" that actual current performance doesn't factor into the equation, or is weighted disproportionately to projection? The events this kid has played in at PG have all been at age-appropriate level, so it's not like he's a 15 year old playing 18U, I could understand the stats if that were the case? Is the commitment based on a coaching relationship (remember he is an underclassman, so that club coach was definitely in the loop somehow).

I just don't get it. Help me rationalize this before I begin to think it's not about what you do or how you perform, but more about who you know and who you play for.

To a certain extent it can be about who you know and who you play for, as are most things in life!  Have the president of Home depot call the President...I bet eventually his call gets through, have the owner of a mom and pop hardware store call....they MIGHT get to the switch board at the White House, maybe.

-He could have committed to a walk on spot

-He could be attending where both his parents went and they are huge donors.

-Maybe he looks and plays just like an older brother who plays MLB now and they are projecting

-Well respected Travel Coach might have great connection with school

-His best friend may be a D1 superstar football player and he wanted his friend with him at college, so he made it part of his commitment deal.

Or maybe just maybe he had the flu when you saw him and he's actually an amazing player?:

There are a million things it could have been, and you will likely never know.

Yeah, it's frustrating trying to explain that to my 2019 who is working his tail off...maybe it's "alternative facts" ;-)

How about you are not missing anything and just be happy for that kid?  Who cares what his opportunities are and/or how he came about them?  The ONLY thing that matters is what is your son doing and what are his opportunities.  That other kid (and others like him) are not depriving anyone of anything.  Focus on those things your son can control - his attitude and effort.  What some other kid is doing is out of his/your control and therefore is irrelevant.

Best advice I was ever given before starting the recruiting process.  You will drive yourself crazy if you start worrying about other kids committing and how they compare to your kid.   Forget about that stuff and focus your son on what he can control. 

There are a number of things that could be in the other kids favor.  None of them you can control.  It could be political (ie coach or parents have a connection).  It could be something that is seen but doesn't  show up in stats (stats by the way are meaningless).  It could be the way he is being played by his travel team.  It could be pure luck.  

Yes, its tough to explain to your son, but it is what it is and you can't control it.

ClevelandDad posted:

How about you are not missing anything and just be happy for that kid?  Who cares what his opportunities are and/or how he came about them?  The ONLY thing that matters is what is your son doing and what are his opportunities.  That other kid (and others like him) are not depriving anyone of anything.  Focus on those things your son can control - his attitude and effort.  What some other kid is doing is out of his/your control and therefore is irrelevant.

Gee, thanks for the beat down, Cleveland? Did I say I wasn't happy for him or anything to that effect? I was asking for people's opinions/comments on whether they felt rankings/commitments were based more on projection versus measured performance. Gee....upset that the Cavs aren't killing it this year?

So many intangibles that you the parent do not see,  or have the  awareness to identify vs the Scout or Coach who sees 1,500 -2,000 players each class year. The breadth of what the scout/coach  sees  combined with years of wisdom of the recruiting process vs 2-3 years of a parent going thru the process is another experience gap. Here is another perspective;  your son comes through the door with his friend and friends' girlfriend in tow. Would you ever ask that girl why she selected the friend as her boyfriend and not your son? You will never know the answer ! So I would suggest to live in the moment, focus on your son only,  to encourage him to be the best he can be, both academically & athleticly. Your distractions with these comparisons takes away from the positive energy you could be infusing into your entire family. Get Better, not Bitter, control what you can & let the rest go. Remember this, the Recruit is Coaches new girlfriend, till the next one comes along or the current one gives him a reason to breakup !

Focus on the Family & Your Son. I think the people posting are those who have been thru this process & it is very frustrating & maddening @ times. We are trying to protect you from this , and want nothing less than for your son to succeed & look back on the experience with positive vibes.

joes87 posted:

Best advice I was ever given before starting the recruiting process.  You will drive yourself crazy if you start worrying about other kids committing and how they compare to your kid.   Forget about that stuff and focus your son on what he can control. 

There are a number of things that could be in the other kids favor.  None of them you can control.  It could be political (ie coach or parents have a connection).  It could be something that is seen but doesn't  show up in stats (stats by the way are meaningless).  It could be the way he is being played by his travel team.  It could be pure luck.  

Yes, its tough to explain to your son, but it is what it is and you can't control it.

totally agree (in part) with what you are saying, and of course that is the best approach - ball out and see what comes of it.

I completely, 100% disagree with you that stats are meaningless. Stats are a reasonably objective measure of actual performance in actual games. They indicate what a player has actually done and usually are a good predictor of future performance. Obviously players (and stats) can improve or not.

SanDiegoRealist posted:

ClevelandDad posted:

How about you are not missing anything and just be happy for that kid?  Who cares what his opportunities are and/or how he came about them?  The ONLY thing that matters is what is your son doing and what are his opportunities.  That other kid (and others like him) are not depriving anyone of anything.  Focus on those things your son can control - his attitude and effort.  What some other kid is doing is out of his/your control and therefore is irrelevant.

Gee, thanks for the beat down, Cleveland? Did I say I wasn't happy for him or anything to that effect? I was asking for people's opinions/comments on whether they felt rankings/commitments were based more on projection versus measured performance. Gee....upset that the Cavs aren't killing it this year?

Sick Cavs burn.  Love that.    

CDad has a point, but I see yours too.  And as long as nobody is naming names I don't see anything wrong with airing your question.  I've seen the same thing happen.  Know of a kid who couldn't crack the starting lineup of his HS team as  a Jr last season, and yet committed to a very prominent school. It's puzzling but in the end, so what? Another thing that I've learned from this site is that except for a few can't-miss studs, any college commitment is a transitory thing.  If the kid you mention is not all that,  and the school is, things may not turn out that  well for him.

HS stats don't matter too much, not really even travel stats.  A player is ranked and offered by college coaches on the raw talent they see and how it projects forward.

PG, college coaches and pro scouts jobs depend on them making a good judgement.  Perfect?  Certainly not, but pretty darn good overall or they wouldn't stay employed.

Our older son was 7-5 in a crappy HS league as a junior, but was offered by nearly every school the West Coast which drove some of the other parents crazy.  He chose Stanford and we had to endure snide remarks behind us at HS games. 'He's not Stanford material' was not uncommon.  Funny thing is, when he got to Stanford most of the other players there were subjected to the same stuff at their HS games all across America.

I guess Stanford and the others don't know how to judge talent - is that the lesson?  I admit I didn't and I probably still don't.  Maybe you're in the same boat as me and the others?

Journey On posted:

... Get Better, not Bitter, control what you can & let the rest go. Remember this, the Recruit is Coaches new girlfriend, till the next one comes along or the current one gives him a reason to breakup !

Focus on the Family & Your Son. I think the people posting are those who have been thru this process & it is very frustrating & maddening @ times. We are trying to protect you from this , and want nothing less than for your son to succeed & look back on the experience with positive vibes.

I am not bitter, but as you also noted "it is very frustrating and maddening at times." I re-read my post and can't really see bitterness in it, just confusion on what is more important in the recruiting/offer formula. I'm actually not even that worried about my own kid, he'll end up at the right level whatever it is.

justbaseball posted:

HS stats don't matter too much, not really even travel stats.  A player is ranked and offered by college coaches on the raw talent they see and how it projects forward.

PG, college coaches and pro scouts jobs depend on them making a good judgement.  Perfect?  Certainly not, but pretty darn good overall or they wouldn't stay employed.

Our older son was 7-5 in a crappy HS league as a junior, but was offered by nearly every school the West Coast which drove some of the other parents crazy.  He chose Stanford and we had to endure snide remarks behind us at HS games. 'He's not Stanford material' was not uncommon.  Funny thing is, when he got to Stanford most of the other players there were subjected to the same stuff at their HS games all across America.

I guess Stanford and the others don't know how to judge talent - is that the lesson?  I admit I didn't and I probably still don't.  Maybe you're in the same boat as me and the others?

Probably (me...not Stanford) :-)

I don't see any problem asking the question. I'm happy for any kid that gets an offer and/or commits but once in awhile I'll scratch my head for a second wondering what exactly a college coach saw. And I think that's the key - you'll probably never know why a coach likes or does not like the talent level of a player.

My 2019 son has been contacted by 5 different D1 schools (and when I say contacted all where per NCAA rules). Several of the aforementioned school's coaches have seen him play while one in particular saw video and received feedback from travel coach before asking my son to call him. Son plays on a very high level travel ball team, sub-7 60 time, great hitter, yada yada yada. Means nothing right now and that was made very clear in High School. The high school coach placed him on JV. Decent program but the "pedigree" of PG ranking, his travel ball team, etc. meant nothing. What does varsity coach see or does not see? Neither I nor my son will ever know and we definitely won't ask. Same goes for college coaches....you never know what they see.

WestCoastPapa posted:

I don't see any problem asking the question. I'm happy for any kid that gets an offer and/or commits but once in awhile I'll scratch my head for a second wondering what exactly a college coach saw. And I think that's the key - you'll probably never know why a coach likes or does not like the talent level of a player.

My 2019 son has been contacted by 5 different D1 schools (and when I say contacted all where per NCAA rules). Several of the aforementioned school's coaches have seen him play while one in particular saw video and received feedback from travel coach before asking my son to call him. Son plays on a very high level travel ball team, sub-7 60 time, great hitter, yada yada yada. Means nothing right now and that was made very clear in High School. The high school coach placed him on JV. Decent program but the "pedigree" of PG ranking, his travel ball team, etc. meant nothing. What does varsity coach see or does not see? Neither I nor my son will ever know and we definitely won't ask. Same goes for college coaches....you never know what they see.

 

 

Thinking that sub 7 60 may be a big part of what they see

Maybe i was too strong & assuming, but i do know bitterness can creep into the mind when comparisons begin. Glad that is not the chosen path. As for precollege baseball game stats, most coaches really not interested.  However, they really did care about ACT/SAT scores & personal measureables ~ pitching velocity/ catcher poptime etc. And from my limited knowledge @ tournaments/ showcases, coaches/scouts make projection decisions on raw talent, physique, mechanics, repeatable mechanics, fluidity and mental tenacity/attitude ~ regardless of the outcome of the event (AB/Pitch/ Fielding )  having a postive or negative outcome. So statistics not too involved. I would suggest to read the scouting reports on players @ showcase events like PG to see what adjectives are used to describe these projectable players. Once again,  only wishing for great success for you and  your son navigating this process. 

I think I know who you're talking about. Consider this:

• He got over 100 PAs as a freshman at his HS. Looks like he started every game and batted near the top of the lineup (he was within 4 PAs of the team leader)
• His HS team may not be a powerhouse in the context of SoCal, but Maxpreps had it in the top 800 in the country last year, out of the ~14,000 high schools with baseball teams
• With the new playoff rankings put out by the CIF Southern Section, the high school is ranked solidly in Division 2 (out of 7) --- it is in the top ~12% of programs in the Southern Section, which has quite a concentration of high school baseball talent
• His HS played some good teams last year, including a league opponent they played three times who had a 1st round draft pick pitcher. Don't know what he did against that pitcher, but undoubtedly there were lots of scouts at that game or games.
• As a freshman, he struck out only 7 times in over 100 PAs and had an OBP over .370

Perhaps he is good.

Damn! You work the CIA or something? Probably same kid, and no doubt he may be good. The case in point wasn't so much he wasn't skilled, it was just that the objective numbers available didn't (in my mind) match that ranking or commitment...again, I will fall on my sword and say I am sure there are intangibles he must have displayed. 

I find nothing wrong with the question.  I am no expert on anything baseball and MIF evaluations are far down on  my list.  However, I would think he must has very good, natural smooth mechanics and a good, soft glove and gets the ball out of his glove quickly.  Seems some really young MIF's get offered early on based on those type of attributes.  I would assume his hitting is secondary.  

What does his mom look like. 

SanDiegoRealist posted:

Damn! You work the CIA or something? Probably same kid, and no doubt he may be good. The case in point wasn't so much he wasn't skilled, it was just that the objective numbers available didn't (in my mind) match that ranking or commitment...again, I will fall on my sword and say I am sure there are intangibles he must have displayed. 

Well, there aren't that many 2019 commits yet!

The point I was making, though, is that those weren't intangibles -- those are good numbers for a freshman at that level high school. 

SanDiegoRealist posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

SanDiegoRealist posted:

Ok, I am scratching my head. I see on PG recent college commitments a kid who I have seen play, recently committed to a pretty big program. He's small in stature, plays for a very large travel ball organization. His PG national ranking is pretty high, as in there is a number associated with it, not words. He has never showcased. His PG event performance has never garnered him an "All Tournament Team". His career numbers over 5 PG tournaments are .235 BA, total of 2 extra base hits (doubles), an .887 fielding percentage with. Kid is a MIF'r. Kid did play Varsity as a frosh, but not on a powerhouse HS team. High school numbers as a frosh were comparable hitting, fielding were significantly better (.965 on significant full-season total chances).

What am I missing? Can the PG rankings and college commitments be so tied to "projections" that actual current performance doesn't factor into the equation, or is weighted disproportionately to projection? The events this kid has played in at PG have all been at age-appropriate level, so it's not like he's a 15 year old playing 18U, I could understand the stats if that were the case? Is the commitment based on a coaching relationship (remember he is an underclassman, so that club coach was definitely in the loop somehow).

I just don't get it. Help me rationalize this before I begin to think it's not about what you do or how you perform, but more about who you know and who you play for.

To a certain extent it can be about who you know and who you play for, as are most things in life!  Have the president of Home depot call the President...I bet eventually his call gets through, have the owner of a mom and pop hardware store call....they MIGHT get to the switch board at the White House, maybe.

-He could have committed to a walk on spot

-He could be attending where both his parents went and they are huge donors.

-Maybe he looks and plays just like an older brother who plays MLB now and they are projecting

-Well respected Travel Coach might have great connection with school

-His best friend may be a D1 superstar football player and he wanted his friend with him at college, so he made it part of his commitment deal.

Or maybe just maybe he had the flu when you saw him and he's actually an amazing player?:

There are a million things it could have been, and you will likely never know.

Yeah, it's frustrating trying to explain that to my 2019 who is working his tail off...maybe it's "alternative facts" ;-)

 

Life is full of "how the hell did that happen" scenarios. The best thing to do is control your personal experiences and not worry about someone else's.

My son grew up playing with and against (with me coaching or watching) a kid who received a mind boggling (to me) offer and compliments of grandiose to go along with it. Quietly I told I friend the kid would never start for the program. But I didn't go public with my feelings or concern myself with how it affected my son. Why? It had zero effect on my son. 

It may not be fair. But I can guarantee right now your son will never be Chairman if the Board for the Ford Motor Company. It doesn't matter if your son is the most brilliant businessman in the world. His last name isn't Ford. He isn't high up in the Ford family tree. On the other hand the same thing was once said about IBM and the Watson name.

The lesson goes far beyond baseball. It's been stated many times on this board. You control what you can and figure out how to best deal with what you can't control. I suggest passing on giving your questionable prospect another thought. If your son wants college baseball to work out for him it will because he's focused, tunes out distractions, wants it to and puts in the required effort.

SanDiegoRealist posted:

Damn! You work the CIA or something? Probably same kid, and no doubt he may be good. The case in point wasn't so much he wasn't skilled, it was just that the objective numbers available didn't (in my mind) match that ranking or commitment...again, I will fall on my sword and say I am sure there are intangibles he must have displayed. 

Here's where you likely hit the nail on the head.  If you're simply looking at All Tourney Team listing and numbers, in those PG events, you're not seeing what actually happened.

First, the All-Tourney teams are 99% based on the pure stats.  Notice how many simply stop at .300 batting average.  If a kid had high RBI's or extra base hits, those can supersede the average, but by and large, they add everyone above some line of pitching and hitting stats and call it a day.

Likewise, with those stats.  A kid who was 2 for 11 in a PG tourney may have been robbed on 5 of those by high light plays or hit piss rods right at someone.  So the result wasn't indicative of the performance.  As we all know, over a season, those become hits.  In a 4-7 game week with 15 PA's and 11 AB's . . . . 

So observers see what they see and know, "the kid can play", without any concern of what the stat line was or who made all-tourney team or not.

Additionally, PG is in constant communication with RC's and Pro Scouts. The communication is two way, which is to say if enough trusted and known sources have eyes on a kid and are telling PG what the kid is, they listen.  His ranking may seem high based on what you can view publicly on PG's site, but they have the entire backend database of info that the industry can see.

SanDiegoRealist posted:

ClevelandDad posted:

How about you are not missing anything and just be happy for that kid?  Who cares what his opportunities are and/or how he came about them?  The ONLY thing that matters is what is your son doing and what are his opportunities.  That other kid (and others like him) are not depriving anyone of anything.  Focus on those things your son can control - his attitude and effort.  What some other kid is doing is out of his/your control and therefore is irrelevant.

Gee, thanks for the beat down, Cleveland? Did I say I wasn't happy for him or anything to that effect? I was asking for people's opinions/comments on whether they felt rankings/commitments were based more on projection versus measured performance. Gee....upset that the Cavs aren't killing it this year?

Not a good response to someone capable of providing expert advice on a kid overcoming perceptions.

SanDiegoRealist posted:

Damn! You work the CIA or something? Probably same kid, and no doubt he may be good. The case in point wasn't so much he wasn't skilled, it was just that the objective numbers available didn't (in my mind) match that ranking or commitment...again, I will fall on my sword and say I am sure there are intangibles he must have displayed. 

I will agree with others.  The "numbers" you mention mean absolutely ZERO to a college coach.   Most coaches can see a kid one time and tell if he's got the stuff to play for them.  Batting average is the worst number to consider at a PG event or otherwise...especially by itself.   A kid could be hitting .250 but smoked every ball all over the field only to have 4 great plays made by an all american SS or had an all state CF run down fly balls that most guys wouldn't get to......where another kid could have hit ground balls past a slow 1B and dropped bloopers in front of a fat RF and be hitting.600....trust me, I've seen it ALOT!!!   PG numbers and rankings (or any organization's for that matter) will help get a kid on the radar....but I'm fairly certain no kid has ever gotten an offer without someone seeing him in person....either a HC coach, RC or someone REALLY well connected to those two guys. 

The "numbers" you mention mean absolutely ZERO to a college coach.   Most coaches can see a kid one time and tell if he's got the stuff to play for them....A kid could be hitting .250 but smoked every ball all over the field only to have 4 great plays made by an all american SS or had an all state CF run down fly balls that most guys wouldn't get to......where another kid could have hit ground balls past a slow 1B and dropped bloopers in front of a fat RF and be hitting.600....trust me, I've seen it ALOT!!!   

Thanks, Buckeye, that is more of the kind of response that I was looking to receive. I actually hadn't looked at it from that perspective.

SanDiegoRealist posted:

 

I am not bitter, but as you also noted "it is very frustrating and maddening at times."

No offense intended, but it's very counter-productive for baseball players and parents to get frustrated and mad about the performances/accomplishments of other players.

freddy77 posted:

SanDiegoRealist posted:

 

I am not bitter, but as you also noted "it is very frustrating and maddening at times."

No offense intended, but it's very counter-productive for baseball players and parents to get frustrated and mad about the performances/accomplishments of other players.

Freddy, I think everyone is kind of piling on here, and in no way did I communicate I was mad, upset...anything like that. I am just trying to reconcile the numbers to the offer. So, while I am not offended, I really don't think I portrayed anything in my post as being negative. Buckeye put a good spin on it a few posts ago, and that is what I will take away from this thread.

I like to think of it this way, my kid never showcased and was never graded. We didnt pay for that. Hardly ever written about with any real detail and when described was either a "hard thrower" or something along those lines. Mute the noise or you will drive yourself bananas trying to justify things. 

Thanks, Shove....great advice.

SanDiegoRealist - I don't think we know each other well enough for you to be calling me by my first name alone - Cleveland without including my last name Dad  

Seriously, I didn't mean what I posted as a beat-down, so I apologize since it came across that way to you.  Looking at what you posted, it appeared you were beating-down that kid so I guess maybe I reacted to that.  Maybe nobody is beating down anybody?

Now the CAVS reference, there is no doubt in my mind that was intended as a beat down

Veering a bit off course here but Nuke said scouts are in constant contact with PG and vice versa.  I believe that to be true but....this is one thing I don't understand.  If a scout uncovers a kid a draft prospect, one that hasn't attended a showcase and is off the grid, what motivation would this scout have to disclose any information to anyone but his employing club?   Seems best case scenario would be to keep a lid on the find and not create competition with other clubs? 

Maybe in today's world, the diamond in the rough doesn't exist like it used to, I don't know.  Welcome to PM reply so this thread isn't hijacked.

PG is quite good at assessing.  If he played in 5 PG events with a large program, their guys got a good look at his skill set and gave him a high mark.  Being a MIF, the small stature thing is much less an issue.  Over the course of those events, they look at skill set far more than numbers, as others have touched on.  Arm action/strength, swing mechanics/approach, competitive nature, fluidity, athleticism, demeanor, head for the game, etc.  They are far more adept at determining what skill sets are likely to translate well at the next level.  They can speak in a language with RC's and HC's that allows them to communicate likely fits.  All of this goes for most RC's of big programs as well.  They can better project what the kid's physical maturity is and how much further it is likely to develop.  They are likely to dig deep into other aspects (genes, academic fit, background) that will allow them to make smart decisions based on levels of information we don't have.  

Our HS #1 P last year had a won loss record of something like 5-4 last year in a division that is lower than the one you are talking about here in Calif.  He was rightfully recruited as a D1 P at a good program.  He may be competing for a rotation spot as a freshman.  The W-L numbers were not at all indicative of his skill set.  He was a clear high D1 recruit for so many other reasons.

In my very limited experience recruiting often does not make sense....a 2017 player from our area is going to a Pac 12 team having only pitched one varsity game last year and never having attended a PG event. 

SanDiegoRealist posted:

freddy77 posted:

SanDiegoRealist posted:

 

I am not bitter, but as you also noted "it is very frustrating and maddening at times."

No offense intended, but it's very counter-productive for baseball players and parents to get frustrated and mad about the performances/accomplishments of other players.

Freddy, I think everyone is kind of piling on here, and in no way did I communicate I was mad, upset...anything like that. I am just trying to reconcile the numbers to the offer. So, while I am not offended, I really don't think I portrayed anything in my post as being negative. Buckeye put a good spin on it a few posts ago, and that is what I will take away from this thread.

SandiegoRealist, I am a chemist and can tell you that numbers out of context are worse than meaningless, they can lead you to false conclusions.

ClevelandDad posted:

SanDiegoRealist - I don't think we know each other well enough for you to be calling me by my first name alone - Cleveland without including my last name Dad  

Seriously, I didn't mean what I posted as a beat-down, so I apologize since it came across that way to you.  Looking at what you posted, it appeared you were beating-down that kid so I guess maybe I reacted to that.  Maybe nobody is beating down anybody?

Now the CAVS reference, there is no doubt in my mind that was intended as a beat down

At least you have an NBA team (and a championship) to your credit, a current NFL franchise, and I hear you have a decent MLB franchise there too. No worries, a lot is left up to the reader for intent...guess I shouldn't have asked the question like I did...

Hey SDRealist-

The college baseball recruiting process is maddening enough by itself. Please don't add another layer to that by including PG rankings into the mix.....That will make you flat-out climb walls or go postal!

LOL

SanDiegoRealist posted:

ClevelandDad posted:

SanDiegoRealist - I don't think we know each other well enough for you to be calling me by my first name alone - Cleveland without including my last name Dad  

Seriously, I didn't mean what I posted as a beat-down, so I apologize since it came across that way to you.  Looking at what you posted, it appeared you were beating-down that kid so I guess maybe I reacted to that.  Maybe nobody is beating down anybody?

Now the CAVS reference, there is no doubt in my mind that was intended as a beat down

At least you have an NBA team (and a championship) to your credit, a current NFL franchise, and I hear you have a decent MLB franchise there too. No worries, a lot is left up to the reader for intent...guess I shouldn't have asked the question like I did...

Is that what they call the 'Browns'? 

lol