How short is too short?

Tribe - height does in fact compensate for a lack of tools!  How hard does you 6'5" son throw?  Whatever it is I bet it would be a lot less if he were 5'7".  Its simple physics.  The longer the distance from the middle of your body to the end of your fingers the easier it is to generate velocity.  So that smaller kid has to work much much harder to make his core move incredibly fast in order to generate the same velocity your son could with minimal effort.  Fact of life and physics folks.  And I bet your being modest.  I bet your son is at least in the 80's.  College coaches will believe they can get him to the 90 range and your son will land somewhere.

Jolietboy-

 

Not necessarily true.  Velocity is a combination of a bunch of things.  Most certainly a shorter pitcher can throw as hard or harder than a taller one (Billy Wagner at 5'9" threw as fast as Randy Johnson at 6'10").   It can be tougher for a taller pitcher to coordinate his movements as well as a smaller pitcher.  Smaller pitchers often have an advantage in terms of efficient movements, quick twitch muscles and coordination (it can be easier to synch things up and accelerate a smaller body than a bigger one), while taller pitchers have an advantage in leverage, some times strength, and plane.   That's why you see both tall pitchers and shorter pitchers being able to throw very hard (Kimbrel, Herrera, Holland, and Rodney all are 5'11" or under and can hit 100mph...and Collins who is 5'7" at best is in the upper 90s).  It does help if the shorter pitcher is solidly built (muscle/weight-wise), to help power creation.  See Collins' transformation: http://www.ericcressey.com/tim...n-at-least-for-a-day

 

As far as short D1 pitchers, I remember watching Nathan Kilcrease pitch in college for Alabama.  He was 5'6" at best and was hitting over 90 mph, and was the ace of their staff.  http://www.rolltide.com/sports...crease_nathan00.html

Yes it is possible but at some height as yet undetermined it does become impossible.  The shorter person as I said has to generate so much more explosiveness than the taller person it makes it ALMOST impossible.  Thats why the chances are ALMOST zero.  But I do have to say that citing incredible almost miraculous exceptions to the rule doesn't change the rule of physics.  There are not so many tall pitchers in mlb cause mlb is prejudice against short people!  They are there cause their size helps make them better.  A 6'5" male is something like 300 times more likely to be an mlb pitcher than a 5'11" male.   Look at the big picture not the tiny minority who are physical freaks of nature.

My 6'9" 230# RHP, freshman son, just completed week one of fall practice @ D1, a class of 26 freshman on the current listed 40 man roster, Head coach in his 2nd year, this is his first full recruited class. There are 18 pitchers listed, of that, 9 are over 6'4". He does like the more physical body type with a larger frame,  however,   The prize recruit is 5'10" as stated in one of his interviews.
In my sons case, size got him on the radar, but more importantly his academics sealed the deal, with a high GPA & he is in Engineering College. The coach is most proud of his first year team achieving highest GPA for University, & being so strong last spring they pulled the entire athletic dept GPA up a few notches~
Moral of story: Every coach has different priorities, position needs and personal goals. The only thing you can do is be the best you can with the gifts you have, Spiritually, (high moral character), Academically and Athletically. Strive to be the best version of yourself and grow in all 3 areas weekly.

Jolietboy, I'd be more than happy to take all of the pitchers currently in the MLB who are actually 5'11" or under (without cleats) and against a team of pitchers who are actually 6'5" or greater (without cleats). 

 

On this list of pitchers who threw 100mph in 2014, there is only one who appears to be 6'5" and over.  There are 3 that are 5'11" and under.

The other 4 in between those heights.

http://wallstcheatsheet.com/sp...2014.html/?a=viewall

 

And of the 4 pitchers in the MLB who currently have 42 saves or more, 3 of them are 5'11" or under (Kimbrel, Holland and Rodney).

 

Again, I'm not saying height is irrelevant.  But the physics of it is far from as simple as you make it out to be.  Coordination, fast twitch muscles, strength relative to body mass, leverage, are all factors.  At some point, you can probably be too short to be successful (due to lack of leverage), but at some point you can't move a tall frame fast enough to throw hard either (due to lack of strength and coordination).

 

I agree strongly with HS89...

I am not really sure what to say at this point...  the physics are NOT flawed and it is actually pretty simple.  Again you are citing an extremely small sample size not to mention they have all made it to the pinnacle of their profession.  Look at the bigger picture...  how many of each height in mlb.  Contrast that to percentage of males overall who are those various heights.  If height (and really wingspan is what matters.  I don2 know but I would guess some of these shorter pitchers have freakishly long wingspans) were really not a factor the MAJORITY of mlb pitchers would be under 6'0" tall just like the general population!   It is absurd to think that taller pitchers don't have a major advantage.  Hopefully I am misunderstanding your point.  Hopefully you are not trying to say that height is not a hugely important advantage for a pitcher.

I believe that part of the issue is that decision makers tend to think that bigger players are more durable.  Might not have anything to do with velocity or pitchability, they just think they will last longer and be more durable over a long MLB season.  It would be interesting to know the injury rates for the shorter vs. taller pitchers.

SABR discussion of the topic:

http://sabr.org/research/does-pitcher-s-height-matter

 

"The data speak for themselves. Baseball organizations have been scouting, signing, and developing players based on a fallacious assumption. Shorter pitchers are just as effective and durable as taller pitchers. If a player has the ability to get drafted, then he should be drafted in the round that fits his talent. 

 

The opportunity for major-league clubs is currently at its greatest potential. Clubs that value short pitchers with talent have an opportunity similar to those of clubs that, a decade or more ago, valued on-base percentage at a time when many of their competitors did not."

Another point to consider is the release point of a 6’4” vs that of a 5’10” guy. In most pitching corners, the correct % of stride length, compared to the height of the P, is 87% of the pitchers height. Using that %, a 6’4” P’s release point is approximately a foot closer, actually 9”, to the hitter when the ball is released than the 5’10” guys release point. 90mph traveling 59’6” will arrive sooner than a distance of 60’6”. Simple math. Visual Velocity. Now, add the “plane” advantage to the taller Pitcher….. combined with the possible durability point above, IMHO that’s why coaches prefer tall(er) pitchers.

Having said that, if you're putting up 0's, I don't think the coach will care if you're 5'nuthin'!

All this height issue really is not what is important.  The important thing is can the pitcher get outs, period.  I will agree that "eye candy" may open some doors along the way, but in the end, the ones that are successful are the ones that will continue to get opportunities.  I know I have read things very similar by PG and other posters.  The further my son gets along in the process, the more I tend to believe this.  Ultimately, at every level, the coach had better win as this is a results-oriented business.  I agree that the professional route can stand a little more development as opposed to the college route, but in the end you better produce.  Even that professional team has a clicking time clock on every player.  It may not be fair, but what in life is fair?  It is what it is.  Unless you are a college pitching coach or a MLB decision maker, our opinions are just that, our opinions.  And let's face it, nobody really cares about our opinions.

This is the reason I signed up here   I am so frustrated that baseball is lagging behind especially at high school and youth levels.  There is pure science, physics and data available for all to see.  Opinions are exactly what I want to get away from.  It is not my opinion that the average height for an mlb pitcher is just over 6'2".  That is a fact.  Not my opinion that the average male height is still about 5'10" (and you can even find some sources that say 5'9").  Now I am sure that if you pull out your probability and statistics text books this difference would be well over..  and I mean well over any standard deviation.  So you now are left only with the multibillion dollar industry known as mlb doesn't know what they are doing??  Is that really the ground you want to stand  on?  I challenge anyone on here to produce any reliable study showing that sub 6'0" pitchers at the amateur level throw just as hard as say 6'3" and above pitchers.  Remember there is a certain minimum velocity you need to achieve to even get to the major league level.  So naturally all major leaguers are fairly close in velocity or they wouldnt be there!!  But even then if you look at the whole league and not a sample size of five or six there is about a 1.5 mph difference COLLECTIVELY between the shortest group of pitchers and the tallest.  And 1.5 is still significant.  Bit again common sense tells you that if height didn't matter like society as a whole the vast majority of mlb pitchers would be under 6'2".  Does anyone here really want to step up and say mlb has a height bias?  Do you know how silly that would sound?

Speaking of PG...  does this guy work for perfect game?  If he can access data base it would be absolutely enthralling if he could break down average top speeds for pitchers that attend PG showcases based on age and height.  In other words maybe you take all 16yo or all 17yo.  Then break them down by height.  I am guessing you will find more than the 1.5 mph gap that exists in mlb.  And then if you could somehow do the same in regular high school baseball (high schoolers who know they are not college material don't go to PG events!) The gap would be huge.  Remember the kids who can't throw hard (many of them due to size limitations) don't get their velocities recorded at PG showcases or in college baseball and certainly not in mlb!

"This guy", PG is the founder and President of Perfect Game and does a fantastic job of donating his time and wisdom here.

Joliet - the point is that throwing 95 is what is required.  More guys throw 95 at 6'5" than at 5'6".  However, their height is still irrelevant.  Throwing 95 is relevant.  A little heart doesn't hurt.  Height still irrelevant.

Well I certainly wasn't trying to disrespect anyone by using that really awful slur 'this guy'...  and are you going to produce any evidence that height is irrelevant?  Like scientific?  Physics preferably.  Or how about relevant data?   Again I signed up to try and get people to present facts not opinions.  You know what they say about opinions right?

Ps.  The heart is irrelevant.  And I am sure from what I have read of his posts PG would tell you that!  Most dedicated ballplayers have 'heart'.  Higher level baseball is a cruel world.  You either have enough ability or you don't.   Maybe among a bunch of evenly matched recruits a coach may start considering 'heart' whatever that really means.

Joliet, I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but you keep asking for scientific facts. If it was simply physics and lever lengths, then why doesn't all 6'5" guys throw hard?  I just don't believe it is as simple as physics. Sure the laws of physics are what they are and I'm certainly not arguing against science. I am just not convinced it can be broken down into those simplistic terms. There are so many factors that produce velocity. Some can be improved (mechanics, strength, flexibility, etc) and some that can't be changed (genetics). I certainly don't have all the answers, but I don't subscribe to the fact that a pitcher can throw harder simply because he is taller and therefore has a mechanical advantage. Maybe I am misunderstanding your point.

Ok again lets talk big.picture.  you are correct in that if you take any miscellaneous 6'5" kid off the street he may or may not be able to throw a baseball hard.  If you take any 5'10" kid off the street he may or may not be able to throw hard.  But if you take ALL 6'5" kids who actually pitch and ALL 5'10" kids who actually pitch I would bet my life the 6'5" group would average out higher.  And by the way by high school or older age travel ball most 5'10" kids have already been eliminated from the mound so their group would even have the advantage of only the best of the best being left!  But still nobody has provided a shred of data or scientific evidence ti show height is irrelevant to pitching velocity! 


       

Did you miss the post by McLoven above?  Not sure what you want.

 

Someone close to him to not be considered short.

 

 

I have seen that study many times.  What is it supposed to prove?  That all people who can throw hard are people who can throw hard???  This study takes only those who have met the minimum velocity requirements to be in mlb.  Even in this study it shows taller pitchers in mlb t o throw a little harder than shorter ones.  But.this study misses the point.  I did this once for somebody else and cant believe I am about to do it again to prove something thatbis so self evident.  I will - from that study - take the number of pitchers at the various heights and compare it to the overall population...  stay tuned.


       

But what point are you trying to prove?   That people who are under 6' shouldn't pitch? 

 

Clearly there are very hard throwers under 6' and over 6'.   If a HS kid is throwing 90 and is 5'10", what's the issue?   Either they throw hard or they don't.   Either they can pitch or they can't.   I don't think anyone in baseball history would enjoy hitting against Billy Wagner or Craig Kimbrel or Randy Johnson.   So, you think physics supplies the answer, and they should have given up?   Physics tells me that a ball going 100 mph is going 100 mph whether it's thrown by Randy Johnson or Craig Kimbrel.  

Okay, since we are all stupid and just can't see the obvious, forget pitchers.  Are you saying that tall people throw harder than short people.  If so, I will certainly challenge that assumption.  I certainly don't have a study to prove my point, but look throughout the history of baseball.  Where would you say the best arms played?  Short and center.  I guarantee you that those positions were not occupied by the tallest players.  Why do you keep bringing in the general population to compare?  We are talking about baseball players, right?  Why do I care what the average height in the general population is?  Where is your scientific study that will prove that the tallest people throw the hardest?  You continue to ask for a study, where is yours?

Ok here it is...  went completely through 10 mlb rosters and to cut time just tripled numbers...  21 pitchers 5'10" or under.  249 5'11" to 6'2" and 327 6'3" and over.  So even though 5'10 and under represents 55.6 % of the male population it represents 3.5 % of mlb pitchers...  need more?  odds of being an mlb pitcher if you are 6'3" or more...  1 in 5024.  Not great but wait for this...  if you are 5'10" or under 1 in 2166788.  So not one in a mollion but more than one in two million!!  A person 6'3" or above is 431 times more likely to be an mlb pitcher than someone of average height.  Why is this not obvious?  We can all cite anecdotal information about the exceptions to the rule.  But how about the RULE!

I am giving you numbers odds and physics and you meet it with opinion.  Think of the circumference of a circle (yes I realize pitching is not a purely circular motion but near the release point it is close enough) the larger the radius the larger the circle.  A point on the outside of the circle travels faster than a point further inside the circle if the circle were rotating.  Same with longer arms.


       

Going to bed.  But would be more than happy to take this up again tomorrow!

Jolietboy, most pitchers (or heck baseball players) inflate their heights, I would imagine it is moreso for pitchers under 6'.   For roster purposes, most measure themselves in complete uniform, adding 1-2" to their height (with some rounding up).  So your 6' pitchers are almost definitely something below that, and more in the 5'10" range, your 5'11" pitchers are more likely in the 5'8"-5'9".  Obviously, if there is a perceived height bias, what do you think a pitcher is going to do when he's asked his height?   I personally know 3 professional pitchers who are each at or under 5'9" and the list themselves as either 5'11" or 6'.   There is no incentive or reason for MLB clubs to make them list their "real" height on a roster, and in fact, their height may be closer to those numbers in cleats with a hat on, so it's not necessarily misleading other than when you try to do calculations like you're doing  (5'9" can easily get to 5'10.5" with cleats, and then round up to the next whole number 5'11").

 

Same thing with NBA heights...the heights on rosters are almost all in shoes (look at the combine heights, and how much shorter many players are doing by "true measurements" or w/o shoes, versus with.) 

See: http://www.nbadraft.net/2014-n...combine-measurements

Generally, shoes add 1.25-2" to each player.  It's their choice what they list on the NBA roster (and I'd imagine most want to list the higher height, due to the height bias with fans....a 7' center sounds more impressive than 6'10.5", a 6'6" guard is more impressive than a 6'4" guard).

 

The general population stats that you are using are doctor's office measurements, and not self-reported, like roster heights. 

 

So, in essence, you're comparing apples to oranges (or apples to apples plus 2" ). 

 

Yes, baseball players are generally taller than the regular population, but, it's not nearly to the extent those stats would indicate, due to the roster height inflation factor.

 

And also, we're not talking lottery stats.   Yes, if you pulled a 5'9" person out of the general population, he or she might not throw hard.  But, if that 5'9" person throws 95mph, he throws 95mph.  That's why I'm asking: what are you even trying to prove with the stat?  Either the person throws hard or he doesn't.    

 

If a 5'8" pitcher is showing great mechanics and throws 88 mph in HS, do you tell him to give up on trying to throw 95mph (and D1/pros) because pitching is only for tall players?   What would have happened to Marcus Stroman, throwing 88 mph as a junior in HS if his coach or parent told him that?

http://www.perfectgame.org/pla...ofile.aspx?ID=106217

 

This is too fun.  I should have done this a long time ago.  So now afterni spend a half hour to go over ten rosters completely and look up us census info and make all the calculations your response is...  ITS ALL A LIE DARN IT!  Well I confess I can not specifically speak t o how these heights are derived but you can bet I will now look into it.  And return with something concrete.  There is nothing wrong with having a theory.  And thus one of yours may hold some water who knows.  But you have to PROVE it not just present it.  As for the major league pitchers I know personally I think all their heights were reported pretty accurately.  But no matter what we may find on 'misreported height' there is no way it will even come close to evening out those numbers.  That shorter group would only be bolstered by those listed at 5'11" and if your point is 100% correct 6'0"".  And there are not even enough of those to bring numbers any where close to proportionate.

In your circle analogy, you are forgetting one important fact.  Potential vs kinetic energy.  Just because the ball is on a bigger circle does not, in fact, mean if will travel faster.  No I am not a physicist, but I certainly took physics in college and have a pretty good grasp of science in general.  Like I said before and I will say again, there is a LOT more that goes into throwing hard no matter the position than simple height (levers or whatever you want to say).  Throwing is a very complicated action that is an unnatural motion.  I really wish Kyle or someone with his background would give their take on this topic.

Ok I have spent all the time I am willing to spend googling various things to find something reliable pertaining to accuracy of roster heights.  Can't find anything.  So I have given physics that make sense.  I have shown that tall people are by a landslide represented among mlb pitchers at a much higher rate than in our population as a whole.  Even within the ranks of mlb in a study designed to make the case for the short pitcher they are forced to admit there is a small mph advantage for taller pitchers. There has been absolutely no data or evidence given here to suggest shorter people have an equal chance to succeed as a pitcher as taller people.  None.  Presenting numbers from the very very few short pitchers in baseball is irrelevant.  Its like saying among the pitchers who can throw 95mph they can all throw 95mph.  You have to be great to get to the mlb level.  So yes they are all great short and tall alike.  Cause the bottom line is there isn't that much separating the greatest pitchers in the world.  But what about the path to greatness? That journey is finished by way more tall people.  Because when it comes to pitching size does matter!  From this point forward til I see some relevant data or evidence I am moving over to other topics.  Shall we agree on a few things?  The only thing that matters is performance.  Recognizing height aids level of performance but if a 5'5" person throws just as hard and accurate as a 6'6" pitcher they are indeed peers.  And please can we all agree that mlb has a performance bias not a height bias?  And I beg if you can we all admit that tall people have a better chance to be mlb pitchers than short people?

Jolietboy-

 

Again, what is the point of this? What value does it provide to a HS pitcher?  At that point it isn't some random drawing, it's already been selected that the player can pitch.

 

If a 5'8" pitcher who throws 88 mph is on your HS team, what are you going to tell him?  

 

And, importantly, your "physics" are not correct.  Two very prominent engineers/physicists involved in pitching (Trevor Bauer and Paul Nyman) have both said that tall and short pitchers have different advantages.  Taller pitchers generally have the advantage of leverage (longer levers/arms/legs), while shorter pitchers have an efficiency/movement pattern advantage (easier to move and accelerate more efficiently and coordinate actions).   Either can be successful.  Now it is "easier" perhaps to teach a tall person (with long levers) to throw harder, because they have greater margin of error, which is why most MLB folks for years thought "you can't teach velocity," however, as many have shown (Kyle Boddy, Wolforth, Wheeler, Nyman), you can teach throwing mechanics and efficient movements.  With the proper strength and conditioning, and instruction, there is no reason a smaller pitcher cannot throw hard. 

 

Go even further to extremes, would you expect a 7'1" person to throw hard?  Or would it be tougher for him to have the proper coordination, hip shoulder separation, and acceleration/movements to throw hard?   As you get larger levers, synching them up can be pretty tough.   If longer levers are of the utmost in importance, why wouldn't taller people make better sprinters?  [Throwing a baseball is more akin to a sprint, or a sport with a short burst.]

 

 

I think jolie's point is that if those advantages were any where CLOSE to being equal advantages, we'd see a lot more guys pitching in the big leagues in the 5' 8" to 5' 11" range. We don't. Which means that whatever advantage being 6' 5" has, significantly outweighs any advantage being 5' 8" may have. Significantly.

Thank you for that very intelligent and to the point response describing what should really be obvious to all!  It is sort of like selecting the best bat length and weight.  The advantage of a light bat is it can be swung faster.  A heavier bat delivers more mass at impact.  In the case of a bat speed is more important.  So if you could increase either length or mass you would choose length.   So long as that length does not slow the core speed significantly.  There are other considerations with a bat choice but this is just to equate it to pitching.  The end of a longer bat is going faster than the end of a MUCH shorter bat even if the core of the person swinging the shorter bat is going faster than the other.  So yes the length advantage out performs the core speed advantage.  Yes both short and tall have.their advantages.  The taller peoples advantages are simply' well...  more advantageous!

I'm not really sure height has an impact on velocity or durability for a pitcher. I've seen 5'10" guys that could throw really hard and that had muscular, athletic builds (good durability).  The advantage that I believe exists with the taller pitchers is the ability to create greater "pitch angle" towards the hitter.  If you compare a 5'10" pitcher with a 3/4 arm slot with a 6'5" pitcher with a 3/4 arm slot, the distance from the pitchers body in which the ball is released is significantly different assuming their arm lengths are in proportion to their height. So, if both pitchers were to throw an 11/5 curveball, the release point for the taller pitcher tends to be more difficult for the hitter to deal with assuming both pitchers have similar break and depth to their pitch. This goes for fastballs, change ups and other pitches as well.  In addition, taller pitchers in theory should have a greater stride to home plate which can make a hitter feel as if the pitcher is getting on them quicker (however, some tall pitches don't stride as far as they could/should).  Just my opinion for what it's worth. 

As to your other point what will I tell my shorter pitcher?  Well what I DO tell my 5'9" pitcher I sincerely hope gets to play D1 is that life isn't fair.  He needs to work that much harder.  Be that much better mechanically.  I put him to video and we.went over a couple things he can improve on.  I also tell him to keep up the great work in the classroom as getting an academic scholarship thus saving a program athletic dollars will open doors for him.  Don't know what he was at his last showcase but I had him at 84 during a game.  So he is not that far away.  If he can get a few mph by the time season rolls around given his grades there will be a taker.  Great kid.  Great student.  Student of the game.  Great teammate.  Will he ever pitch a game in the big leagues?  Probably not - like all the rest of us- but if his desire is strong enough he will pitch in a D1 game and hopefully lots of them.  And thats more than most of us can say.  And I will be very proud of him.  That's what I would tell him.

http://www.baseballamerica.com...00-with-commitments/

 

Interesting re top 100 2014 HS players/college commitments...Looking at all of the players who list themselves as a pitcher (either primary or secondary)...  12 of those pitchers are 6' tall or under, and 4 of them are 6'5" and over.   Though, no doubt, the ideal listed height is probably in the 6'2"-6'4" range.  In any event, the best objective determinant is the radar gun not the height of the pitcher.

 

 Jolietboy, that last response is probably your best--and I do agree with that re the 5'9" pitcher.

 

Just a couple of points.

 

Obviously, there are more tall pitchers in the MLB than shorter pitchers.  One question is, are there more because they are better or because MLB teams and scouts THINK they are better or will be better in the future, therefore, they are given more benefit of the doubt and more opportunities.  The numbers would then be skewed because the numbers you are using are not only based on talent, but on some pre-conceived belief.  I agree that MLB is about performance and that only the best get to the MLB.  But if you look at the draft, it is also skewed towards the taller pitcher.  So the pool of pitchers coming thru the MiLB starts off with a larger pool of taller pitchers.  I'm sure all of us have heard the stories of MLB teams telling their scouts don't bring me anyone under 6'.  I've heard it and I've heard others here mention it as well.

 

The more telling portion of the report above is the correlation of injuries to size.  This has nothing to do with velocity, but purely about injury rates.  I've heard it countless times that the bigger (taller) pitchers are more durable, therefore they are the guys teams want to pitch.  This reports shows that the shorter pitchers are no more likely to be injured than the taller guys.  So I think it debunks the myth that taller guys are more durable.

 

Whether there are more taller pitchers in the MLB because they are actually better or because they are perceived to be better or more durable, it doesn't change the fact there are more of them.  But as others have said, what does it really mean?  The chances of anyone making it to the MLB are miniscule.  But kids have dreams.  Kids want to pursue those dreams.  Tall or short.  The fact of the matter is, shorter pitchers with talent, determination and drive CAN make it there.  Height is one thing that they cannot change, but if they work hard, there is nothing saying that they can't have the opportunity if everything else falls into place.

 

My son is a short RHP.  I understand this reality and so does he.  What I tell him is that if he wants it, he is going to have to be that much better than the taller guys and he needs to work hard to get there.  I'm not going to tell him that he just needs to forget about it because he is too short.  That would be very counterproductive.  

So...  basically you tell your son the same thing I tell the 5'9" pitcher on my team...  work harder and you can do it!  One major difference is I am talking college not mlb.  Listen everybody hates the big guy and I just get sick of it.  Its not fair those little point guards are so darn quick!  But thats just the way it is.  I could point out famous exceptions by saying " well magic johnson played point and he was 6'9".  Or we can all accept the obvious and realize most point guards are smaller and quicker - quicker being the more important.  If they could find a lot of 6'9" guys with that quickness all point guards would be 6'9"!  My son is white.  Immediately that gives him very little chance to play in the nba.  Just a fact.  I don't think it has anything to do with the nba being bias against white kids.  My kid is also not quick.  Now his chances at.the nba are so miniscule as to not really even exist.  Should I encourage him to pursue a dream of playing in the nba?  I suppose that is an opinion.  Mine is NO.  I want to encourage my son in something he can succeed in.  If your son is 5'8" and he can throw 95mph then great.  If he is 16 and has not yet hit 75mph...  well that has to be your decision but I might start at least preparing him for another path.

Before I can slammed on this I want to quickly state that my son will play high school basketball because he ENJOYS it.  It is not always about do you have a chance to go pro.  But he will spend much more time - his choice not mine - on baseball because that represents a possible future for him.