Great line from article on youth sports

2017LHPscrewball posted:

Can anyone tell me exactly what one's batting order really means?  When my kid was younger, he didn't bat until the 12 hole (oh yea - that's when they batted the entire team in t-ball).

On my son's team:

1. Out of the fastest kids on the team, he is the most consistent hitter.

2. Fastest kid on the team, or second fastest considering spot#1.

3. Most consistent hitter that moves the base runners

4. Best shot of clearing the bases.

5-7. Interchangeable with hitting consistency

8-9. The names behind the 8th and 9th slots seem to change a lot based on who is on the field.  i.e. the interchangeable fielders are in these slots.

Means nothing at this age. 

2017LHPScrewball: As a math teacher's angle, you want your #1,#2, #3 hitters to be your best hitters because they get up the most. There is something to be said about "moving someone down: who is slumping for that reason. 

#3 is usually the best hitter who will see the most from the pitcher's arsenal. Typically 3,4, and (5) have some extra base capability. Batters lower in the order (especially HS) will typically see more heat. #1 and #2 should be high OB% people who usually have some speed. "National league style" would have #2 and P as people called to bunt, though son has been on teams where 1-9 need to lay down a bunt. #3 hitter (or 4) may see more fastballs if basestealing threat is on base.

2020dad posted:

I think this is a chicken or the egg thing.  Not at all saying that a kid can't'come from behind' and be great - heck that's what I am hoping for from my kid!  I am on here cause I love talking baseball not because I am the dad of one of these elite player like some on here.  But what I am saying is though some may improve the true greats when they are young are still great later on.  In a.few years I will know if I called things correctly.  And if we are all still on here I promise you I will be honest about my success rate.

I you're talking about recognizing, say...Bryce Harper at 10 or 12?...sure.  But I think a lot of people did that.  Is that what you mean by "true great?"  Because I can easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids that were 'elite' in EVERYONE's eyes at 10 or 12 and are nowhere to be found now and I can even more easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids who at 10 or 12 were thought to be 'pretty good but not elite' that later became 1st round draft picks out of HS, now playing in the big leagues.

I am not saying you can't tell much of anything at 10 or 12.  I'm just saying for a parent, first time through...even second time through...I just don't think they/we get it right nearly as much as they think they can.

2020dad posted:

Still can't figure out how to respond directly to a post...  frustrating.  But LH, completely agree about not wasting youth looking for scholarship.  But I think you can do both.  Its ok for a kid to dream and work toward that end.  But I tell my kid all the time to enjoy this time.  I know I was never 'that guy' when I was his age that everyone knows.  Has high school coaches making a point to come over and say hello anytime they see him.  I tell him this could come to screeching halt at any time.  So enjoy.  When I came on here after my sons 12u season I called him  tweener.  One who may have that chance but certainly may not.  And nothing has changed my mind since.  He is just a tick or two behind schedule in my opinion for a D1 pace.  Will he.make up that gap?  Who knows.  I am on record many times though and remain convinced that with the no doubters you can tell even at 10 or 12.  I wish my son was one of those but he is not. 

Press "take action" at the bottom right of the post. Then you will see the option to reply with quote.

justbaseball posted:

2020dad posted:

  I am on record many times though and remain convinced that with the no doubters you can tell even at 10 or 12. 

Based on my own remembrance and observations, I would not agree with this.  Neither of our baseball sons would have passed that test, yet in the end both were the only 'no doubters' in their 10 or 12 year old age group for D1.

I saw a lot of no doubters at 10-12yo fail when they hit the 60/90 or failed to grow. Even is a kid is a physical no doubter there is a lot more involved in terms of motivation, commitment and obstacles that can get in the way.

justbaseball posted:

2020dad posted:

I think this is a chicken or the egg thing.  Not at all saying that a kid can't'come from behind' and be great - heck that's what I am hoping for from my kid!  I am on here cause I love talking baseball not because I am the dad of one of these elite player like some on here.  But what I am saying is though some may improve the true greats when they are young are still great later on.  In a.few years I will know if I called things correctly.  And if we are all still on here I promise you I will be honest about my success rate.

I you're talking about recognizing, say...Bryce Harper at 10 or 12?...sure.  But I think a lot of people did that.  Is that what you mean by "true great?"  Because I can easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids that were 'elite' in EVERYONE's eyes at 10 or 12 and are nowhere to be found now and I can even more easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids who at 10 or 12 were thought to be 'pretty good but not elite' that later became 1st round draft picks out of HS, now playing in the big leagues.

I am not saying you can't tell much of anything at 10 or 12.  I'm just saying for a parent, first time through...even second time through...I just don't think they/we get it right nearly as much as they think they can.

+1

justbaseball posted:

2020dad posted:

I think this is a chicken or the egg thing.  Not at all saying that a kid can't'come from behind' and be great - heck that's what I am hoping for from my kid!  I am on here cause I love talking baseball not because I am the dad of one of these elite player like some on here.  But what I am saying is though some may improve the true greats when they are young are still great later on.  In a.few years I will know if I called things correctly.  And if we are all still on here I promise you I will be honest about my success rate.

I you're talking about recognizing, say...Bryce Harper at 10 or 12?...sure.  But I think a lot of people did that.  Is that what you mean by "true great?"  Because I can easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids that were 'elite' in EVERYONE's eyes at 10 or 12 and are nowhere to be found now and I can even more easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids who at 10 or 12 were thought to be 'pretty good but not elite' that later became 1st round draft picks out of HS, now playing in the big leagues.

I am not saying you can't tell much of anything at 10 or 12.  I'm just saying for a parent, first time through...even second time through...I just don't think they/we get it right nearly as much as they think they can.

 Robert Stock .... Threw 90 at fourteen. Made every Team USA team through high school. Was determined to be a catcher despite everyone telling him he's a pitcher. Headed for USC to catch. At age 26 he's now in his fourth year as an A level pitcher. How can't miss is a fourteen year old throwing 90? Can't miss? Ask Billy Beane.

RJM posted:

justbaseball posted:

2020dad posted:

I think this is a chicken or the egg thing.  Not at all saying that a kid can't'come from behind' and be great - heck that's what I am hoping for from my kid!  I am on here cause I love talking baseball not because I am the dad of one of these elite player like some on here.  But what I am saying is though some may improve the true greats when they are young are still great later on.  In a.few years I will know if I called things correctly.  And if we are all still on here I promise you I will be honest about my success rate.

I you're talking about recognizing, say...Bryce Harper at 10 or 12?...sure.  But I think a lot of people did that.  Is that what you mean by "true great?"  Because I can easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids that were 'elite' in EVERYONE's eyes at 10 or 12 and are nowhere to be found now and I can even more easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids who at 10 or 12 were thought to be 'pretty good but not elite' that later became 1st round draft picks out of HS, now playing in the big leagues.

I am not saying you can't tell much of anything at 10 or 12.  I'm just saying for a parent, first time through...even second time through...I just don't think they/we get it right nearly as much as they think they can.

 Robert Stock .... Threw 90 at fourteen. Made every Team USA team through high school. Was determined to be a catcher despite everyone telling him he's a pitcher. Headed for USC to catch. At age 26 he's now in his fourth year as an A level pitcher. How can't miss is a fourteen year old throwing 90? Can't miss? Ask Billy Beane.

Sometimes a players tries to follow their heart and it works out and sometimes it doesn't.  My son following a similar decision.

FYI:  Actually, Stock played Hi-A and AA this last season, and he is currently a Free Agent. Apparently, the Pirates agreed to let him go free agency last month.  We'll see if he continues and finds a place to move forward this spring. (he's one of several players I've taken an interest in to see how they progress)

I think if anyone saw Robert Stock as a young boy and thought he was going to be very good when he was 18 or older...  They were absolutely correct!

There is a gigantic difference in predicting someone will be very good and predicting exactly how good.

There's also a big difference in who is doing the predicting.  Most people are guided by current results.   That can be very misleading in some cases.

PGStaff posted:

I think if anyone saw Robert Stock as a young boy and thought he was going to be very good when he was 18 or older...  They were absolutely correct!

There is a gigantic difference in predicting someone will be very good and predicting exactly how good.

There's also a big difference in who is doing the predicting.  Most people are guided by current results.   That can be very misleading in some cases.

Robert Stock is the perfect example of a young phenom who never really made it to his potential, not due to injury as far as I know.   To me he was the perfect example of everyone catching up.

Its doesnt matter where you start out, it matters where you finish, and how much love you still have for the game when you reach the finish line...

i will say this tough...i am 100% convinced certain organizations have a very heavy influence on commitments for certain colleges for kids high school age.  Ive seen some marginally talented players commit to big programs based on thier relationship with a travel program and the connections and exposure that program provided...

5tools22 posted:

Its doesnt matter where you start out, it matters where you finish, and how much love you still have for the game when you reach the finish line...

i will say this tough...i am 100% convinced certain organizations have a very heavy influence on commitments for certain colleges for kids high school age.  Ive seen some marginally talented players commit to big programs based on thier relationship with a travel program and the connections and exposure that program provided...

These players are the most fun to follow!  A coach at a top program is taking a chance and using up a roster spot on a kid.  They will make it, or they won't.  But, they were given an awesome opportunity.

Other players go to lesser programs with a lot less hype and do very well,  sometimes doing better than the players that go to the top programs.   "Where you finish" to some players is just getting in a top program (shoot, any program) and not necessarily playing time.

5tools22 posted:

Its doesnt matter where you start out, it matters where you finish, and how much love you still have for the game when you reach the finish line...

i will say this tough...i am 100% convinced certain organizations have a very heavy influence on commitments for certain colleges for kids high school age.  Ive seen some marginally talented players commit to big programs based on thier relationship with a travel program and the connections and exposure that program provided...

I agree. The reason being that these programs know their kids well and are good kids. Not every big program has players ranked 10.  

As far as the committment, you really have no idea what the commitment is. A parent here continually complained others were getting offers and his player, who he felt was much better were committing. He later found out, it was not for much, exactly what I had told him.

These players talent may not fit what you feel they should at big programs, but more than likely some of these players will contribute to the success of that team.

Well.  When I was twelve, most people thought I was a below average player at that time.  But, they couldn't have been more wrong...

I truly sucked.

Guess I can understand why some might consider Robert Stock an early bloomer.  However, he was playing at Southern Cal as a very young freshman.  He was drafted in the 2nd round.

I have a hard time saying that everyone passed him.  If someone thought he would be a first round pick when he was 13 years old, they missed by one round.

What happens in professional baseball is altogether different.  So many things go into success or failure.   Robert's biggest issue to this point has been lack of command.  I don't think his career is over, but even if that happens, he still will have done more in baseball than most everyone that he played with along the way.

Truman posted:

RJM posted:

justbaseball posted:

2020dad posted:

I think this is a chicken or the egg thing.  Not at all saying that a kid can't'come from behind' and be great - heck that's what I am hoping for from my kid!  I am on here cause I love talking baseball not because I am the dad of one of these elite player like some on here.  But what I am saying is though some may improve the true greats when they are young are still great later on.  In a.few years I will know if I called things correctly.  And if we are all still on here I promise you I will be honest about my success rate.

I you're talking about recognizing, say...Bryce Harper at 10 or 12?...sure.  But I think a lot of people did that.  Is that what you mean by "true great?"  Because I can easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids that were 'elite' in EVERYONE's eyes at 10 or 12 and are nowhere to be found now and I can even more easily list 2 or 3 (or more) kids who at 10 or 12 were thought to be 'pretty good but not elite' that later became 1st round draft picks out of HS, now playing in the big leagues.

I am not saying you can't tell much of anything at 10 or 12.  I'm just saying for a parent, first time through...even second time through...I just don't think they/we get it right nearly as much as they think they can.

 Robert Stock .... Threw 90 at fourteen. Made every Team USA team through high school. Was determined to be a catcher despite everyone telling him he's a pitcher. Headed for USC to catch. At age 26 he's now in his fourth year as an A level pitcher. How can't miss is a fourteen year old throwing 90? Can't miss? Ask Billy Beane.

Sometimes a players tries to follow their heart and it works out and sometimes it doesn't.  My son following a similar decision.

FYI:  Actually, Stock played Hi-A and AA this last season, and he is currently a Free Agent. Apparently, the Pirates agreed to let him go free agency last month.  We'll see if he continues and finds a place to move forward this spring. (he's one of several players I've taken an interest in to see how they progress)

Stock pitched four unsuccessful innings in AA. If you were going to define him he's an A ball pitcher.

PGStaff posted:

Guess I can understand why some might consider Robert Stock an early bloomer.  However, he was playing at Southern Cal as a very young freshman.  He was drafted in the 2nd round.

I have a hard time saying that everyone passed him.  If someone thought he would be a first round pick when he was 13 years old, they missed by one round.

What happens in professional baseball is altogether different.  So many things go into success or failure.   Robert's biggest issue to this point has been lack of command.  I don't think his career is over, but even if that happens, he still will have done more in baseball than most everyone that he played with along the way.

 

You're closer to the situation than I. Here's my take ...

Stock made a mistake graduating early from high school (after junior year and 16yo) and heading for USC. Had he stayed for his senior year of high school he would have been extremely dominant, all world and a very high pick as a pitcher.

i realize he put three years of college behind him and was eligible for the draft by nineteen. But his obsession with catching was his downfall. Almost everyone who mattered was telling him his future was as a pitcher. I saw an article he wasn't one of the top five high school catchers in CA his junior year.

TPM posted:

2020dad,

Do you actually know who the Websters are here who have elite players and what do you consider elite?  

No  don't necessarily know who everyone is.  But I certainly see a lot of kids getting big scholarships, getting drafted and having monster numbers.  What is an elite player?  Those guys I just mentioned!   I have a pretty high bar.  I don't think being part of an 'elite' program makes you elite.  Probably makes you better than most but elite is a very different definition.  To me an elite player is for sure D1 or draft.  

RJM posted:

PGStaff posted:

Guess I can understand why some might consider Robert Stock an early bloomer.  However, he was playing at Southern Cal as a very young freshman.  He was drafted in the 2nd round.

I have a hard time saying that everyone passed him.  If someone thought he would be a first round pick when he was 13 years old, they missed by one round.

What happens in professional baseball is altogether different.  So many things go into success or failure.   Robert's biggest issue to this point has been lack of command.  I don't think his career is over, but even if that happens, he still will have done more in baseball than most everyone that he played with along the way.

 

You're closer to the situation than I. Here's my take ...

Stock made a mistake graduating early from high school (after junior year and 16yo) and heading for USC. Had he stayed for his senior year of high school he would have been extremely dominant, all world and a very high pick as a pitcher.

i realize he put three years of college behind him and was eligible for the draft by nineteen. But his obsession with catching was his downfall. Almost everyone who mattered was telling him his future was as a pitcher. I saw an article he wasn't one of the top five high school catchers in CA his junior year.

I deleted my post. In correction, Stocks mistake was becoming a catcher. Drafted by the Cardinals his catching skills were not his issue, he couldn't hit, so they converted him back to a pitcher. I understand he was not really happy with that decision. Released by the Cardinals, I am not sure the Pirates offered him a contract.  Unless sometjoing phenomenal happens he is pretty old as even a high A pitcher.

One add here is sometimes i think we confuse more successful with better.  Some kids have success early on but you can see it will be fleeting.  Others you can see are smooth athletes but just not strong enough yet.  Who is more successful and who is better?

2020dad posted:

One add here is sometimes i think we confuse more successful with better.  Some kids have success early on but you can see it will be fleeting.  Others you can see are smooth athletes but just not strong enough yet.  Who is more successful and who is better?

I think its just very hard to tell a lot about a preteen boy.   SOoooo much changes, including their likes and dislikes.

TPM posted:

RJM posted:

PGStaff posted:

Guess I can understand why some might consider Robert Stock an early bloomer.  However, he was playing at Southern Cal as a very young freshman.  He was drafted in the 2nd round.

I have a hard time saying that everyone passed him.  If someone thought he would be a first round pick when he was 13 years old, they missed by one round.

What happens in professional baseball is altogether different.  So many things go into success or failure.   Robert's biggest issue to this point has been lack of command.  I don't think his career is over, but even if that happens, he still will have done more in baseball than most everyone that he played with along the way.

 

You're closer to the situation than I. Here's my take ...

Stock made a mistake graduating early from high school (after junior year and 16yo) and heading for USC. Had he stayed for his senior year of high school he would have been extremely dominant, all world and a very high pick as a pitcher.

i realize he put three years of college behind him and was eligible for the draft by nineteen. But his obsession with catching was his downfall. Almost everyone who mattered was telling him his future was as a pitcher. I saw an article he wasn't one of the top five high school catchers in CA his junior year.

I deleted my post. In correction, Stocks mistake was becoming a catcher. Drafted by the Cardinals his catching skills were not his issue, he couldn't hit, so they converted him back to a pitcher. I understand he was not really happy with that decision. Released by the Cardinals, I am not sure the Pirates offered him a contract.  Unless sometjoing phenomenal happens he is pretty old as even a high A pitcher.

I could just as easily stated position player instead of catcher. My point is his obsession with a position other than pitcher. He hit some balls a long way on the 16u Team USA. But I believe there was a question of hitting consistency.

Here's an example of a kid I knew had peaked early. It was a LL districts. We show up at the host park. I was told of a kid from the host park who was hitting balls to the rooftops across the street. The street ran behind right field. My response, "A lefty!"

When I was told he was a righty my first thought was, "a big, strong early bloomer who swings like a rusty gate." I was right. At age twelve his father was referring to him as "The ticket to Williamsport." The team didn't get out of pool play.

The kid did manage to win both his games pitching. But he was a non performer at the plate. The first opponents threw him nothing but changes and curves. The next three teams did the same. If the kid had a tutu he could have joined the circus as a dancing bear.

The kid hit nothing but high flies in middle school. Mid way through 7th grade he wasn't a position player anymore. He never made high school varsity as a pitcher. He was 5'8" throwing 75 in LL. He was 5'9" throwing 78 soph year of high school. 

The dad was 5'4". The mother probably wasn't five feet. When the kid was in LL his dad thought he had a future MLBer on his hands. I thought the kid would be a serviceable pitcher in 13u. I backed off when the dad asked me if pro scouts would be at the games. I was also told the dad knows nothing about baseball yet called pitches from the stands.

A kid I knew (played for an opponent) was a man child in 13u. He owned the game. He was still a stud in 14u. But you could see other kids were catching up. The kid didn't make his high school team. He would have been a serviceable high school player. Grades and pot held him back. He was another case of a big 13u player with small parents who was about done growing.

When my son was in LL the 12yo team went a long way. Only four kids played high school ball. It was a team full of very athletic kids who could out muscle and/or out run the small field. They all became high school athletes. They just weren't baseball players. The team that beat them in states was led by a stud who didn't play high school ball. He was a big kid who peaked early. I think every other kid on his team play(ed) college baseball except for the 4'11" kid who became a 6'4" college shooting guard.

And I know a kid we used to go see pitch when he was 12.  No radar guns except in big leagues then but I would guess pushing 75 and who knows maybe a tad more.  Everyone thought he was a future big leaguer.  Yes I have mentioned this before...  he was #2 overall pick and pitched about 15 years in the bigs.  We all have stories both ways.  But again having success at 12 is not the only thing you look at when determining potential.

2020dad posted:

One add here is sometimes i think we confuse more successful with better.  Some kids have success early on but you can see it will be fleeting.  Others you can see are smooth athletes but just not strong enough yet.  Who is more successful and who is better?

Couldn't agree more.  Youth baseball is littered with kids who are simply bigger and stronger, and therefore hit balls farther, run a little faster, throw a little harder.  In my observation, a number of those kids end up playing second fiddle to the little guy who does everything right.  Eventually, that little guy grows up, gets bigger and stronger, having had to do everything right just to compete, and it all comes together.  The big kid, as success came easy, has practiced flawed mechanics for several years, sometimes got overused, stopped growing earlier, and hit his ceiling when he was 14.  Obviously, this is not always the case, but it happens all the time.

In some ways it is similar to figuring out who the best 16 year old will be when he is 24 years old.  Some 16 year olds are physically mature, and it is difficult to add as much projection.  Others might not throw as hard or hit the ball as far, but they have room to grow so they are easier to project.

I think the very best NOW 12-13 year olds would include many of the most physical or mature 12-13 year olds.  Much more revealing would be to look for natural ability.  Take power last rather than first.  Natural athletic ability is very obvious at a young age.  Even in a scrawney young boy that lacks strength.

Obviously there is no certainty in predicting the future of a 12 year old.  Too many things can happen.   My only argument would be if you see a kid that shows natural ability and his actions are athletic, he should have those same traits when he gets older.  It doesn't mean the non athletic 12 year old that lacks coordination won't be the best of all of them.

Every year we see 16 year old players that are extremely powerful for their age.  Every year we see less powerful 16 year olds that we rank higher because we think they will end up being a much better prospect.  Not to brag, but these things almost always prove to be right.

I'm thinking a few pointers on "natural athletic ability" as it pertains to baseball might be very beneficial to some parents of younger kids - and perhaps to me.  At very early ages, I would suggest that those kids who perform with "ease" are the most naturally gifted.  When 2017 was young (here comes the bragging), he had a certain way of catching the ball, for instance, when warming up.  It was almost like he wasn't trying hard enough compared to the other kids.  Other kids would move about herky jerky and thrust their gloves toward the ball, whereas 2017 would somehow catch with a very light touch - often looked like he was taking his eye off the ball at the last minute and sort of had a feel for where the ball and glove were in space.  At 1st base, had an uncanny knack for picking the ball off the dirt - no huge sweeping motion but rather a smooth fielding action - with his head moving towards the ball (if your young son ever has his head and glove going in different directions, please get him some instruction).  Also showed the ability to track bloopers over his head at first - catching a few over his head with his back to the plate (10 yo ESPN moments).  In the outfield, he seemed to have an early feel for fly balls - knew how to track the ones he could get to and soon realized those he had no chance on - also able to employ the underhand catch and shortly after that the sliding catch (still hasn't mastered the diving catch but he's tried a couple of times - fortunately hasn't dislocated his shoulder yet).  At the plate with an inside pitch, was not one to flop but was comfortably turning away with the ball a few inches away.  Again, this was when he was young.  Did not have the strongest arm or the strongest bat, but as one dad commented - "he makes it look easy".  

I'm sure it gets a whole lot more complicated as age goes up, but wanted to see what others thought were the early signs of natural ability.

2017LHPscrewball posted:

 

I'm sure it gets a whole lot more complicated as age goes up, but wanted to see what others thought were the early signs of natural ability.

How about having an understanding of how everything is likely to move on the field and anticipate it? 

For example 2B fields the ball and instead of standing up and throwing the ball to second he tags the runner?  Most 10u kids have it in their head field the ball throw the ball....only a few seem to reach beyond that box to see if the end result can be achieved in a different way. 

Another great example is the 1B who fields the ball and instead of tagging first, which is 5 feet away, he shoots the ball home to get the runner that took off from third.  Now you just have to hope the 10u catcher understood the ball was coming to him!

I have seen on more than one occasion where the position player had NO idea the ball was about to come to him and the thing just sailed by at 10u.

The "feel" for the game!!!

Sure you can teach kids the game.  But I am convinced that the "feel" for the game is in fact a natural ability.

If you took two kids age 11 and neither of them had ever seen or played baseball.  One of them will instinctively catch on and utilize his instincts much better than the other one. One will also have better natural mechanics and actions than the other.  And still that kid with the natural ability might not be able to throw as hard or hit the ball as hard if the other boy is bigger and stronger.

Natural ability often goes to waste.  But I'm not sure if it isn't the single most important thing if it isn't wasted.

PGStaff posted:

The "feel" for the game!!!

Sure you can teach kids the game.  But I am convinced that the "feel" for the game is in fact a natural ability.

If you took two kids age 11 and neither of them had ever seen or played baseball.  One of them will instinctively catch on and utilize his instincts much better than the other one. One will also have better natural mechanics and actions than the other.  And still that kid with the natural ability might not be able to throw as hard or hit the ball as hard if the other boy is bigger and stronger.

Natural ability often goes to waste.  But I'm not sure if it isn't the single most important thing if it isn't wasted.

Well said, it applies to most sports and most occupations. It sounds simple but it isn't, it is the same as some kids can just feel how to throw, or hit, or read a ball inflight...or how a cop gets a gut instinct and just knows, or some business men have the ability to see a product others are looking right at but don't see. hard to define sometimes but very very real.

old_school posted:

PGStaff posted:

The "feel" for the game!!!

Sure you can teach kids the game.  But I am convinced that the "feel" for the game is in fact a natural ability.

If you took two kids age 11 and neither of them had ever seen or played baseball.  One of them will instinctively catch on and utilize his instincts much better than the other one. One will also have better natural mechanics and actions than the other.  And still that kid with the natural ability might not be able to throw as hard or hit the ball as hard if the other boy is bigger and stronger.

Natural ability often goes to waste.  But I'm not sure if it isn't the single most important thing if it isn't wasted.

Well said, it applies to most sports and most occupations. It sounds simple but it isn't, it is the same as some kids can just feel how to throw, or hit, or read a ball inflight...or how a cop gets a gut instinct and just knows, or some business men have the ability to see a product others are looking right at but don't see. hard to define sometimes but very very real.

Guess that's why such intuitive instincts and/or abilities are referred to as "Talent."  

It's certainly not unusual that some level of talent can be recognized at a very early ages or that some talent may simply be latent and not come out until adulthood.

The great thing about baseball is nearly every 10 year old might end up being a great player.  Not sure if that is true in every sport, like gymnastics for example.  

Still even after considering the many exceptions, it amazes me how many of the best 12 year olds end up being among the best 18 year olds.  I mean the real best 12 year olds, not necessarily the biggest and strongest or most mature that have the best results at 12.

PGStaff posted:

The great thing about baseball is nearly every 10 year old might end up being a great player.  Not sure if that is true in every sport, like gymnastics for example.  

I'm sure it depends on the particular group of 10 yr olds.   Not a lot of the 10 year olds my son played with got into any kind of baseball as they moved on to HS.  Even a few of the 10 year olds that were not bad at the game didn't move on with baseball as they discovered other activities that they found of more interest.

 

Still even after considering the many exceptions, it amazes me how many of the best 12 year olds end up being among the best 18 year olds.  I mean the real best 12 year olds, not necessarily the biggest and strongest or most mature that have the best results at 12.

Yup, I agree.  I'm sure you've seen a lot of it.

But I might add that not even all these will succeed by age 18 for various reasons and often things pop up and get in the way (e.g. injuries; a girlfriend had his baby; personality flaws; etc.) 

I'll add an anecdote -- thanks to PGStaff for making the rankings available this week! -- one of the kids ranked in the top 20 in California, I actually coached in Little League when he was about 10. You would not have predicted that 5 years later he would be one of the top 20 ranked players in our state -- not by a long shot. Obviously my coaching didn't do any long term damage!  As TPM noted, a lot changes as they grow up . . .

Some will roll their eyes at this, but...folks, how about just enjoy your 10 and 12 year old sons and try not to worry about what they'll or their peers will be at 18 or 21 or as a future MLB star.

Time goes too fast.  Your sons will grow up too fast.  Take pictures.  Don't get caught up in a whirlwind and forget to smell the roses.  If your son is one of the "16 year old players that are extremely powerful for their age" but isn't gonna mature beyond that, just enjoy it.  Not many kids or parents get to experience even that.  Just enjoy it.

And if your son is one of the "less powerful 16 year olds" but truly athletic, enjoy that too.  Maybe (or maybe not) he will be special in baseball, but its no failure of you if he isn't.

The only things that are important in the end are that your son is a good person, is happy with life beyond where you control it, that he respects his wife and raises his own kids as he was raised because he respects it and that he has a good and trusting relationship with you.  The rest as far as baseball is concerned...is just gravy.

Amen!!!

 I guess I missed the part about parents not enjoying their sons.  I thought everyone was just talking baseball and kids developing into young men.

 I have heard people say to just enjoy their son"s Senior season because it will be over soon.......but I don"t really think I have heard posters saying that they are not enjoying their kids baseball.

 I enjoyed every year with these kids.

justbaseball posted:

Some will roll their eyes at this, but...folks, how about just enjoy your 10 and 12 year old sons and try not to worry about what they'll or their peers will be at 18 or 21 or as a future MLB star.

Time goes too fast.  Your sons will grow up too fast.  Take pictures.  Don't get caught up in a whirlwind and forget to smell the roses.  If your son is one of the "16 year old players that are extremely powerful for their age" but isn't gonna mature beyond that, just enjoy it.  Not many kids or parents get to experience even that.  Just enjoy it.

And if your son is one of the "less powerful 16 year olds" but truly athletic, enjoy that too.  Maybe (or maybe not) he will be special in baseball, but its no failure of you if he isn't.

The only things that are important in the end are that your son is a good person, is happy with life beyond where you control it, that he respects his wife and raises his own kids as he was raised because he respects it and that he has a good and trusting relationship with you.  The rest as far as baseball is concerned...is just gravy.

+1

justbaseball posted:

Some will roll their eyes at this, but...folks, how about just enjoy your 10 and 12 year old sons and try not to worry about what they'll or their peers will be at 18 or 21 or as a future MLB star.

Time goes too fast.  Your sons will grow up too fast.  Take pictures.  Don't get caught up in a whirlwind and forget to smell the roses.  If your son is one of the "16 year old players that are extremely powerful for their age" but isn't gonna mature beyond that, just enjoy it.  Not many kids or parents get to experience even that.  Just enjoy it.

And if your son is one of the "less powerful 16 year olds" but truly athletic, enjoy that too.  Maybe (or maybe not) he will be special in baseball, but its no failure of you if he isn't.

The only things that are important in the end are that your son is a good person, is happy with life beyond where you control it, that he respects his wife and raises his own kids as he was raised because he respects it and that he has a good and trusting relationship with you.  The rest as far as baseball is concerned...is just gravy.

A good friend of mine was drafted out of high school. He also had a sizable offer to a powerhouse Big Eight. He injured his arm the summer before college. He PGed, then pitched for a D3 for a year and dominated. The Big Eight school made another offer. He injured his arm that summer. It was the end.

Then he had two boys. Dammit, they were going to make it. The older kid was a quality high school player who went to a top academic D3. He quit baseball after soph year. Quitting baseball ruined the father-son relationship for several years. 

The younger son was a PG Top 50. He attended a ranked program. He was drafted. When I asked how the boys were doing he only talked about the baseball player. The other kid was a fast riser in the financial world. But, no mention.

As my son was heading off to college my friend didn't want to talk about baseball. His son had shoulder surgery and was released. Everything dad had lived for was gone. It was a miserable experience to talk with him.

Fortunately with the youngest out if baseball the relationship with the oldest improved. As adults the older son is more successful.

As justbaseball said, enjoy the ride at every age. And accept your kids for what they are as long as they're putting in the effort.