Has anyone ever seen a PG grade of less than 7?

Yes, while at the showcase, a player and parent will see who he will most likely be competing against for a college roster spot.  

 

But he will not be graded in relation to those players only.  It wasn't specifically you I was talking about TPM.  There have been numerous comments on this thread that have alluded to the PG ratings being generated with a geographic tilt.

Scouting is projecting based on tools. At any age, in any location, vs. any competition.

 

caco: Are the words that define all PG grades definitive? No. But as PGStaff says -- the 9's and 10's are. I think what you'd like to see is the scale indicate that someone with a 6 or 6.5 has virtually no chance to play college ball. Maybe -- but as bballman says, there's lots of variability in college talent.

 

 

This series of articles on FanGraph goes deeper than anything I've found about professional baseball's 2-8 scale. Some cold hard truths ... and still there's subjectivity.

 

Here's the chart, for those who don't have time to read it:

 

 

So JP.....a sixteen year old that throws 87, but is kinda big, quick arm action and has room to fill out, a scout "projects him" to throw 93 in (blank) years would rate the FB a "plus" fastball at sixteen?  And following that logic, PG would rate him a "9" (or something) at a showcase when he is 16?

 

So the MLB pipeline tool scoring and the PG is what the player is projected to be based on eyes and some metrics (velocity, 60 time, bat speed etc.)

 

Just seeking understanding.  I understand that it is an art as much as a skill in projecting and scouting.

Seems like this thread was generated by a simple misunderstanding.  (though some decent conversation has ensued).

 

CaCo, for reasons based on who knows what,  somehow got it in her mind that only grades 9 and 10 from PG were intended to be indicative of "college level talent."

 

 Then when she read (old versions of) the accompanying descriptions of what the grades are intended to mean which suggested otherwise, she somehow had the feeling that maybe deluded people were letting themselves be sold a bill of goods by PG.  Not  that she necessarily thought that PG actively intended to be peddling false hope.  But you  know how people are.  It's so easy to take advantage of them. And there seemed to be an undercurrent that that was what PG was doing somehow.   I mean think of all those deluded people who were taken in by those descriptions and so had the misfortune of letting  themselves believe that guys who score  8 or 7 or heaven forbid 6 on this particular scale were maybe good enough to play in college at some level or other. Surely, she seems to have thought, PG need to change how it tells people to interpret the numbers to protect people from themselves. 

 

Where she got all that who knows, really?    There never seemed to be  any real  basis for her initial belief,  except her hunch as far as I could tell, that only a 9 or a 10 could possibly indicate college level talent on any reasonable rating scale.

 

She can stick to that hunch if that suits her for some reason.   Or she can adjust  her belief.  Seems pretty simple, though.  Plus I doubt the descriptions are going to change to match up with her prior beliefs.

You have to read it -- really. It's all about Present Grade and Future Grade.

 

In Part 5, you find this, on amateur hitters, for example:

 

"All but maybe one or two hitters in each draft class will have present 20 hit grades, but the context and amount of evidence will vary greatly.  The peer hitting grade helps tie this all together because, for a player with a short track record, scouts will find themselves projecting only on hitting tools when there isn’t much performance to grade. Using this system, it helps remind you to consider performance, but still weighing it appropriately given the sample size, competition level, etc."

Just for clarification,  there is no regional aspect to the grades.  Also no event basis for grades.  We do showcases that might not have a single 10 grade.  We do showcases that will have as many as 100 10 grades. i.e. National Showcase. A 10 is a 10 in Calfornia or Florida or Canada. Same goes for a 6.

 

Also the scouting scale displayed by JP I details the actual MLB averages.  So a high school kid throwing 90 mph or a 60 time of 6.9 is already a 5 or 50 on the MLB scale without any projection.  On our scale he would grade a 9 at those tools.  Then projection could easily give him a 10.  The grade associated with a scouts view of a players potential is called OFP.  So there is a current grade based on current level of that player, 4.2 HTF time = 5 or 50 current grade.  If the scout sees some potential that the player might get faster in the future, he could upgrade that grade.  In the end all the numbers are added up divided by the number of skills and the player ends up with an OFP score. Overall Future Potential. Once again, an OFP of 50 is MLB average (Future potential)

Thank you PGStaff.  I know you get a lot of crud thrown at you on this site but your insight is just plain invaluable to those of us just starting this journey with our kids.  I hope the pros outweigh the cons for you on here. From a 13 year olds mother, thank you.

You don't have to get a PG  grade to get recruited.  

 

Conversely, I know of players with grades of 9-9.5 that didn't play much their freshman or sophomore years.  

 

Getting a PG grade is just one tool in the recruiting process.

 

 

I know of player rated 9 by PG who played on the JV team of a D3 school his freshman year.   Didn't even get a cup of tea on the varsity that year. 

SluggerDad,

 

I believe you and would be very interested in who that player is and which college he went to. I could easily see where a 9 might not play right away at certain DI programs.  Especially those loaded with 9 and above type players.

 

But unless it is one of the nation's top DIII programs I would expect a 9 to play right away.  Then it could be a case where we graded that player too high. Or it could be a player that simply didn't work and improve.  Actually it could be any of a number of things.  In any case, It's always good to look back and see what happened.

sent you a PM

OK. I resurrected this because, while looking for someone else, I came across a PG profile that answers the question. I won't post a link, out of deference to the young man, but if you want a link, PM me. The kid earned a "4". Catcher with an 8.99 60 time and a 2.38 pop time.

Of course, most kids like this probably wouldn't bother to show up at a PG showcase, I would think.  

You would think. However, looking at the percentiles, bit of those stats weren't the absolute worst. Hey, everybody has a right to figure out where they stand. I couldn't possibly think of anything PG does that would have enticed him unreasonably. However, I always love the comments. Even after raking a kid, they like to soften the blow. His comment section had this:

 

"He has baseball skills he just needs to get in better shape."

I just found someone that was drafted with a 5.5  (many years ago).

I have to laugh..........while posting on another thread regarding the Cape League, I mentioned a young man I remember who was an LHP at a D-3 NESCAC school and managed to get himself a roster spot in the Cape Cod League in 2011.  Played for the Chatham Anglers. 

 

Summer before his senior year of high school his range was 74-76mph.  PG gave him a grade of 7.0. 

 

FOUR YEARS LATER HE WAS PITCHING IN THE CAPE LEAGUE.  One year after that, he signed as a free agent with the Arizona Diamondbacks, and later pitched in Orioles organization.  He retired in 2014 and is now putting his NESCAC degree to work.

 

As Bucsfan stated, a PG rating is "just a point in time."

And if you look at the PG definition of a "7" it reads "College prospect, possible future draft pick with development".

 

I think most people are putting way too much stock in a rating and assume that a 9-10 is a guaranteed draft pick or D1 freshman starter and anything 8 or below is lucky to play after high school.

 

Like you state, it's a snapshot in time and whether a player grows or shrinks from there is dependent on a lot of variables.

 

A PG rating is valid for only 24-hours as long as the player wakes up the next day and decides to improve on weaknesses by way of hard work. 

that's basically what got this thread started.  The OP decided for her self that anything below a 9 or 10 (on a 10 point rating scale no less)  must be a kiss of death for a kid' hopes of playing in college.   Then when she found out what the scores were said by PG to mean, she had the vague suspicion that deluded parents and players with unrealistic visions of grandeur were somehow being sold false hopes by PG.  Instead of readjusting her prior belief that only a 9 or 10 could possibly indicate college talent,  she stuck with her guns.   Basically she was engaging in good old fashioned confirmation bias.    

Sluggerdad,
+1

Hate to disagree, but since I am the OP in question I will.  I will agree that I thought anything below a 9 or a 10 was the kiss of death for playing after high school.  The meanings I had originally found which prompted the post stated that a rating of a 6 meant you were a college prospect. 

 

I have now been educated that only a 9 or 10 is likely to play D1, providing it was an evaluation done close to graduation. However, there are a thousand no name colleges with baseball programs and if you can pay to go that school almost anyone can be on a baseball team in college.  I have surmised that since a LOT of the PG grade is based on athletic ability an in shape soccer player who has only played the occasional sandlot baseball could likely score at least a 6 because as others have said it is the base the scouts are looking for, not the actual tools.  

 

 I did have the hope that PG was at least one place you could take your kid to get a real evaluation of his skill, and an idea of which level program to shoot for, if any. I am actually a bit sad that when it is time to have my son looked at to gauge his skill (because I don't know anything, and at least know enough to know that I don't know), I now have no idea where to take him to be evaluated.  I guess he could write letters to every single college in the state of Georgia, Tennessee, Florida and South Carolina with a baseball program but I was hoping a PG grade would narrow that down a bit, but as I've said, that delusion is now gone.

 

Thank you everyone for the education, I feel a bit like Santa has been taken away, but I will get over it.

 

I think you have seriously missed the point.  You are way off base -- way off -- with this comment. 

How so?  Which part? 

WAY off, especially with what is in bold above....OP, let me set you straight, and I mean this with all sincerity and compassion.  Other than having your son work out for some local scouts or in front of college coaches who will give honest and direct feedback, there is NOTHING better you can do than to take your son to a PG showcase to have him evaluated.  If you need to forget that you ever read anything on this thread in order to believe this, then IMO do so.  After you get the evaluation (rating and comments along with measurables), perhaps come back to this site and several of us can help you interpret what was provided.  We'd be happy to do so.

First of all, I don't know who ever said that "tools" don't matter to a scout, recruiter or evaluator, but that is not accurate to start with.  Of course tools matter.  Maybe someone said in-game performance may not matter, depending on what tools the player shows, but tools do matter.  And I'm not exactly sure what "base" you are talking about.  Do you mean velocity, 60 time, pop time, etc...?  An athletic soccer player will probably not be able to come in and score a 6.  There needs to be SOME baseball skills there to garner even that number.  

 

Of course the PG evaluation will give you an idea where your son stacks up.  If he gets a 10, he's a super talented player is is looking at a minimum of a D1 opportunity.  If he's a 6, he's probably an average prospect.  Some baseball tools, but he has a LOT to work on.  My son was an 8 his first showcase and an 8.5 his second showcase a little over a year later.  He wound up at a top D2 program.  That's probably where he belonged.  Just because he was not a 9 or 10 didn't mean he wasn't a college prospect.  

 

CaCO3Girl, this stuff is not set in stone.  I know you have a scientific background and like concrete information.  Evaluating baseball talent is not like that.  There is no if you are a 10, you'll go D1, if you are an 8, you'll go D2, etc...  Beauty is often in the eye of the beholder.  There may be a 10 that goes D3.  There may be a 7 who goes D1.  

 

Suffice it to say, the higher your number, the better your tools showed at that showcase.  The lower your number, the more your tools did not show.  And yes, a big part of the evaluation is based on things like speed and velocity.  However, there has to be some baseball acumen there as well.  

The whole thing.  Just so much confusion in what you wrote.  I don't know where to begin.

 

I'll give you some concrete examples to illustrate how far off base you are with that silly comment/   The starting shortstop on my son's HS team for the last 2 years -- a kid who has started at SS since he was a sophomore -- and is now a rising senior -- earned a 6 in his first perfect game showcase --as a rising junior. And we are talking the starting ss in at a very competitive school in a very competitive conference in one of the hotbeds of HS baseball in this country.  Was he an absolute stud?  No, but at a PG 6, he was a league  honorable mention at shortstop that year.  Cause he made all the routine plays game in and game out,  never had an error, and was a decent slap hitter. 

 

This summer, he raised his PG rating  to a 7.5 and is now on the PG "follow" list. He was 2nd team all league this past year.  he is bigger and stronger and somewhat faster.  

 PG in very complimentary  accompanying comments says he can definitely play in college, but probably projects more as a 2nd baseman, than as a ss at the college level.  I know lots of highly competitive D3 and probably a few D2's that would take a kid with his skills and polish. 

 

Now  If you had ever seen this kid play and calibrated just by reference to him --  that he was a 6 last year  and now --mainly with greater arm strength and in improved swing -- is a 7.5 --  it would be just plain laughable to say as you did  that a soccer player with no baseball experience could match this kid, even as he was as a rising junior.

 

Another for instance.   My son's college team -- which is an elite D3 team --that has had a good number of kids drafted over the year -- is actually filled with kids whose PG rankings were 7's and 8's. There is an occasional  9 or 10 among them, but not many.  And at the low end there is at least  one 6.5.    

 

So you need to do some serious recalibration -- which you haven't really done.  PG ratings are much more  nuanced and well thought out than you are giving the credit for.  And they don't suffer from grade inflation.  They are not meant to answer a simple yes-no question -- "Can my kid play somewhere in college."   They are intended to help not just college recruiters, but also major league scouts, and also, of course, parents and players figure out where they belong in the complicated baseball landscape after HS.

 

I think that what you don't seem to understand is the levels of talent that PG is trying to distinguish among.  a 10 is an early round draft pick, potentially right out of HS.    Many of the kids PG ranks 9 or 10 actually will be drafted out of HS.   Not all of them, and not necessarily in the top rounds.  I know some of those type guys. My son has even played with a few of them over the years.   Do you have any appreciation of what an extraordinary level of talent it takes to be rated a PG 10?    Even 9's are extraordinarily talented.  They stand out from any crowd of talented baseball players with highly developed baseball skills -- and not just from the crowd of athletic kids in general.  They are really, really special. 

 

Think about it this way. There are only 300 draft picks in the first 10 round every year  (ignoring compensation picks.)    If everybody who was able to play college baseball had to be as good as the best 300 players in any given year, it would be a lot smaller universe of players.  A lot smaller.  But there are like 55,000  kids playing college baseball.   Most of them aren't going to sniff the MLB draft, let alone the top 10 rounds of the draft.  There are 10,000 kids playing D1 baseball alone and most of them aren't ever going to sniff the draft either, again, let alone the top 10 rounds of the draft.  But I tell you what most of the 12,000 kids playing at D3 would run rings around your in shape soccer player who's never picked up a baseball.   

 

All I can say is I try to read this board to become knowledgeable, and I know that future generations will be reading this thread.  I am not actually trying to be argumentative, I am actually trying to learn.  There are some very knowledgeable people on here that I tend to believe when they say something, but I am also a scientist as Bballman said, and my world is typically in black and white because I do crave concrete data.  I'm not trying to call anyone out or throw them under the bus.  If I misunderstood I apologize, but here is how I drew my conclusions:

 

Soccer player comment (keep in mind I said he would get a 6), and the base (perhaps I should have used the words athletic ability?) being more important than the tools:

On 8/12/15 at 5:00PM BucsFan said “Just by showing up and not tripping over oneself, a player can probably get a 6. “ 

 

8/13/15 2:43PM PG Staff Said “The grade is always based on potential.”  He also said in the same post “So when you see a player you know and wonder why we graded him an 8 when you know he isn't that good... It's because he shows something (arm action, bat speed, athleticism, body type, instincts, body control, etc.) that gives him more potential than some of the present day more polished players. “

 

8/14/15 6:13PM PG Staff said “So a high school kid throwing 90 mph or a 60 time of 6.9 is already a 5 or 50 on the MLB scale without any projection.”

 

9’s and 10’s play D1 comment:

On 8/12/15 at 6:05PM Cabbagedad said “I think most 8's would be borderline or not quite major or mid-major D1 potentially.”  BBallman has also made a statement about his son being an 8.5 and landing D2.

 

8/14/15 at 2:43 AM PG Staff said “And most every college wants those 9 or 10 type players. Even if a 7 or 8 it could create interest, but 9s and 10s are legitimate no brainers regarding ability and potential.  But the Vanderbilt's, Virginia's, Florida's, UCLA, Texas's, LSU's, Stanford's, Arizona St's, etc., of the world don't have room for them all. However, everyone knows a 10 can possibly make a very big contribution at any program.”

 

My statement about many colleges and being able to play were based on the following:

8/13/15 10:16PM TPM said “Where in the rating system does it say a 6 or 7 2016 cant play college ball?  There are different levels for all different type of players. “

 

8/14/15 2:28 PM BBallman said “I don't want to ruffle any feathers here, but there are some college teams out there that are not very good.  Pretty much everyone who wants to play college ball can.  Whether their team will be any good is another story.”

 

I hope that clears up why I came to those conclusions.

P.S. Personally knowing two 2016 10's probably didn't help!

For those who crave concrete data, I would suggest joining PG, then plugging in the names of currently-rostered players on some schools your son is interested in. Sort it by the position your son plays or any other method you like.

 

Not all currently-rostered college players will be in the PG database, but I think you will be able to get enough data points to draw reasonable conclusions about how PG grades correlate (or not) to roster spots at your selected schools.

 

Then you could come back and educate us. I, for one,  would be very interested to see the results of your work

I don't disagree with any of those statements quoted, other than maybe this one -

 

"On 8/12/15 at 5:00PM BucsFan said “Just by showing up and not tripping over oneself, a player can probably get a 6. “ 

 

With that being said, I think you need to start with the premise that we are talking about baseball players here.  BucsFan's comment even falls into that category.  There needs to be some basis of baseball ability here, UNLESS there is a tool that stands out WAY above the norm.  In other words, if a kid shows up wanting to play baseball and runs a 6.2 60 yd dash, someone may give him a chance because he is so far ahead of the curve in this one area.  Same thing if a kid shows up throwing 98 mph and can't do anything else.  He's going to get a shot.

 

But, overall, the higher the number the more talent is presently shown.  The lower the number the less talent is presently shown.  Even then, it is up to the kid whether he progresses or digresses or has behavior problems or grade problems or something else.  And even then, there are extenuating circumstances that may put a kid in a different place.  There is NO way to put all of these different factors into a formula and come out with a "this player will definitely wind up at this level".  For instance, I know of a kid who was a 10.  Signed with a major D1.  Got in trouble and got kicked off the team.  Went to a JUCO and is now on a D2 team.  I think his grades would not let him get into a D1.  That is one example.  There may be some 10s out there that didn't have the grades in HS to get in a D1.  It happens.  There may be a kid who is an 8 at PG, but someone at a big D1 likes what he sees after seeing the kid multiple times over the summer.  They are looking for someone with his tool set and they sign him.  Maybe a kid doesn't want to go out of state to school.  And none of the in state schools have a need for him, even though he is a 9 or 10.  But they do have a need for an 8 that plays a different position.

 

Lots of different things can happen.  Nothing is as concrete as we would like it to be.  All that being said, I think the higher the grade a player earns, the more doors are potentially open to him.  Same with grades.  The higher the GPA and test scores, the more doors will be open.  I think by doing a PG showcase and getting a grade, it will give you a pretty good idea where your son stands and what he needs to do to improve.  It won't tell him where he WILL wind up going, but it will give him an idea about where he stands and what kind of potential he has.  What he does with that is up to him.

 

And by the way.  My son did have some interest from some mid level D1 schools as well.  His grades just weren't strong enough.  Lots of interest from a couple of them until he talked with them about his GPA and interest dropped off.  So, it was possible he could have wound up at a D1, but for some reasons (other than baseball related), he didn't wind up there.

 

All this is WAY too subjective to give definite concrete answers that fit into a neat formula.

Very well said, bballman and thanks for clarifying my comment.  If I knew the OP was a scientist and would take my comment literally, I would not have been so casual with that statement.  Maybe another way to put it...and maybe this is even misleading..is that if you took every single HS player (at every level, every roster slot) in the U.S., I bet the average player (if one could compile them and "create" one who represents the average) would even get a 6.  Does that make sense?

Yeah, I would say that the "average" BASEBALL player would probably wind up with around a 6.  And we are talking about baseball players, not just your average HS student.  However, even with that statement, it is really hard to say what "average" is.  PG would probably have a better idea than most of us what that is because they have seen players from all over the country.

 

In other words, what is average in Boise, Idaho is probably a LOT different than what is average in the Metro Atlanta, Georgia area.  

 

VERY logical response in your last post, Caco. Great job!

 

May I ask a question?

 

Do YOU believe, as a scientist, that there's a better way to project athletic talent in teenagers than the one PG has developed? 

 

I ask from two points of view:

 

1. They've been very accurate with my son.

2. They do miss quite a bit -- on both sides of the ledger. 

Adding to jp's comment, I think we need to recognize two categories of "athletic talent in teenagers"

 

First there are the sports that feature head-to-head competition (such as tennis and wrestling) and the "race" sports (such as track and swimming).

 

For these sports it is easier to compile specific and detailed rankings. Even so, using tennis as an example, some lower-ranked players get recruited over some higher ranked players, due to subjective intangibles that coaches may see, such as attitude and projectability.

 

For other sports such as baseball, football, basketball, volleyball...rankings or grades are less precise. We are all familiar with the "star" system used in lots of these sports. PG uses a 10-point scale. Same basic concept. At the same time none of us should be surprised to find lots of 3-star recruits (based on a 5-star system) playing on teams in the College Football Playoff.

 

In all these cases it is possible to "back-test" the accuracy of the ranking or grading system by comparing the rank or grade of players that [fill in the blank] school recruits, and the ultimate college/pro performance of the players.

 

I think this would be the most scientific way to approach the issue.

 

 

 

 

 

       
       


To be completely blunt I don't know anything, and therefor don't have a clue what would be better or worse than what PG does.

I can say that I can look at a formula in a beaker and know with 90% certainty if that formula will split.  This is a skill it has taken me many years to just know, I imagine judging baseball skill is much the same concept.  Some people can tell just by how a kid throws or catches a ball that he has "it", I have no concept of "it" so I was really hoping that a PG score would be my answer of if I was willing to invest heavily in getting my son seen/recruited, when the time came.

In my mind I can't judge his talent, I probably have the least colored glasses of any parent out there because I'm logical enough to see that Timmy can throw the ball harder, or Johnny hits the ball further than my son.  I started a topic awhile ago of did you over or under estimate your sons talent and that was the crux of why.  My son tells me he is going to play for a long time, but I see other kids doing things that to my eye seem better than him, then this past year I was inundated with compliments about him from the most random sources and frankly I didn't see half of what they complimented him on.

I know many people spend tens of thousands of dollars on getting their son to showcases, special teams, college circuit tours, camps....etc.  Some of those people never get a sniff from a college.  I was looking for a bar of sorts, well IF he gets X score at a PG showcase I'll spend all the money to help him achieve his dream, if he doesn't I'll have to sit him down for a reality check.  Now I hear that the average baseball player on an average high school team would get a 6 meaning college prospect and my bar so to speak kind of vanished.  Like I said earlier, I feel a bit like Santa got taken away.

My son is one of those "7s" that will get the opportunity to see if he can get it done at a very solid D1 program. You don't have to spend a fortune but if it is his dream let him work for it until he is aware it is time to be done.  You might be pleasantly surprised at the outcome. 

If you take a look at this article - http://www.hsbaseballweb.com/inside_the_numbers.htm - on this site, you will see that about one out of ten HS seniors will go on to play college baseball. That's all there can be due to the sheer number of HS seniors playing baseball and the number of college spots that are open. Therefore, you would think the top 10% would be the ones to fill those spots. That's not necessarily true. I have known quite a few kids that had the talent to play college ball, but wanted to go to a big school, and their talent was not enough to allow them to play there. So, they decided to stop playing. Or there are kids that are good, but don't want to make the commitment to play in college. Or there are kids that don't market themselves appropriately and don't find a match. There are many reasons for some of those good HS players to not go on to play college baseball. Because of this, more kids that are closer to average could have the opportunity to play in college if they are willing to play at an appropriate level baseball program.

As I said earlier, the higher a rating you may receive, the more doors are likely open to you. A 10 can probably go D1, but a D2, D3, JUCO or NAIA are probably not going to turn him down. Conversely, a 6 can probably play at some less competitive D3, JUCO or NAIA, but a D1 will probably not take him (unless he's improved on that 6 and is no longer a 6) and he probably won't wind up in a top program at any level. So, his options are more limited. And keep in mind, PG describes that 6 as a "potential college prospect". Not a definite college prospect or an excellent college prospect or any of the wording of the higher rankings.   That's saying something without it actually saying it, if you know what I mean. This player has some work to do.

Not sure if we'll ever convince you, but the ratings are valid if you read into them the right way. None are meant to discourage a kid, which is why they are a little "soft" on the description part. I don't think PG wants to discourage a player from continuing his dream. A 6 can improve. There may be some programs out there looking for 6s. But the options are more limited than those options available for a 9.5 or 10.

Hope that makes a little more sense.

You have been given advice about how to assess PG grades from a scientific standpoint.

 

Now here is some advice about the  "Santa got taken away" observation...which is probably on the opposite end of the spectrum from science.

 

First, there is no Santa in sports evaluation, so Santa couldn't have been taken away in the first place. No need to feel badly about that...you are just like the rest of us...yours is not a special case.

 

What do the rest of us do? We see if the kid starts on his Little League, Cal Ripken, or Babe Ruth teams and if he does well...based on where the coach plays him, or bats him in the order, or how he is used as a pitcher, or if he makes all-stars.

 

We see if he starts on his high school team, if he is successful, how the coach uses him, and whether he is in demand for travel teams. Making local all-star teams? If he passes these tests we make decisions based on our budgets and available time about whether to take him to camps and showcases.

 

If the kid makes it that far, PG is not the only one who provides evaluations. Stanford, Headfirst, DeMarini and practically every college camp provide evaluations. You can ask in advance about this before you plunk down your time and money.

 

There is no certainty about the result, just as there is no certainty about any aspect of a kid's future. If a kid expresses interest in science, do you send him to a science camp? If there is an aptitude for languages do you enroll in an intensive program? These are all personal family decisions lots of us make all the time, without benefit of a ranking that tells us how successful the kid will be in college or as a professional in science or languages.

 

In baseball, as in many walks of life, the cream tends to rise to the top. Our job as parents, I think--not preaching here-- is to provide the best opportunities we can, consistent with our financial means.

 

My advice would be to pursue baseball opportunities and challenges for your son as long as he is having success at his current level...if your family is able.

 

 

Just happened to find this player on PG recently:

 

http://www.perfectgame.org/Pla...ofile.aspx?ID=177947

 

Looks like PG gave him a 6 during his senior year of HS.  69mph IF throw.  7.9 60 yards. Not very impressive.

 

Played at a FL JC, then went to UCF, where he tore it up - won every award possible, played SS, stole bases, hit with power.

 

Drafted in the 7th round by the Rangers this year.  

 

There is  hope for the Sixers! (but not the ones in the NBA)

CaCo, I'll try one more time.  This is a common sense statement and not a scientific one - MOST who rate 6 or lower at PG will not go on to play at college - probably not a lot unlike your 90% certainty formula.  MOST who rate 8 or higher will likely AT LEAST have the opportunity to play at some level of college IF they continue on a typical growth path, IF they continue to have the passion and work ethic to do so and IF they put forth a reasonable effort to be recruited.  A rating somewhere in between means just that.  Those players are more likely to be reliant on the many other variables that will ultimately determine whether they will play after HS.  And, if a player rates a 7 as a rising sophomore in HS, he probably has a much better chance to improve than a player who rates a 7 as a rising senior.

 

Previously in this thread, I stated...

"CaCo, again, it won't be the grade, it will be seeing the other players around him and from that, getting a clearer picture of where he stands.  This PG showcase platform really does afford that opportunity...  maybe a couple hundred kids who are all viable candidates for college ball at various levels.  Where did son stack up against this group?  How do his measurables compare?  How does his grading COMPARE with the others and where are they heading?  Now, take a look at the other PG showcases scheduled around the country and do the math.  Understand, also, that there are regions as expressed here where many of the good players go to other branded showcases.  Then you start to get a much clearer vision of the big picture and where son may fit best.  So, again, I would suggest focusing less on the grade interpretation and more on discovering where son stacks up among the group of players that RC's are choosing from."     

Again, when the time comes, use the PG rating as a COMPARISON with the other good players at PG and you AND your son will learn a great deal about where he stands.  Don't get too hung up on the rating "definition".  What is it about this that does not make sense?

 

I'm really a bit confused.  I read through this thread and felt there was a great deal of guidance that would leave you feeling more educated about how best to utilize the PG events and ratings and how they fit in the big picture as one of many measuring sticks (a very good one at that).  But, reading your last few posts, I can't help but feel you are using selective listening based on your preconceived viewpoints regardless of how many who have previously traveled the path suggest something different. (That's not to say that, in some of these instances, your viewpoints don't have a great deal of merit.)

 

You are still a few years off (give or take) from son going to a PG event.  You both will certainly learn a lot more between now and then and if and when he goes, there is a good chance you won't have to sit him down for a reality check afterward.  He will have just gone through it.

 

  

CaCo, as I recall your kid is still young.  I would suggest that it is way too early to worry about.  Get him to his Jr. year and take him to a showcase.  If his "grade" warrants it, then focus on where he may be able to play at the next level.  Too much can happen between now and then.  If he hits 90 mph before then (or does some other amazing thing), they your timeline will speed up.