"If You Don't Run a 6.9 60 You Can't Play D1" & other Falsehoods

3and2Fastball posted:

2020DAD - well said... The thing is, we don't know the full genetic potential until they get older.  We've all seen the 16 year old who runs 7.5 and then who runs 6.9 at 18, or the line drive hitter as a Soph who starts hitting HR's as a Senior, and yes the Soph who throws 84 who is in the 90's by college.

It isn't "over" until the game of Baseball tells you it is over.  For some it might be a longer steeper road with twists and turns.

One thing I have seen is that for the early bloomers the game flips on them, too, expectations are high, wear and tear in meaningless teenage tournaments is high etc

The bottom line is that coaches want out getters and runs and wins.   Some might really need to prove themselves over & over again.  

One thing that Perfect Game is more advanced than PBR on is the 10 yard split.  There are kids who run 7.2 but have elite burst and quickness, can cover ground with proper angles and many times the 7.2 kid with the 1.59 ten yard is a better Baseball player than the 6.6 guy with the 1.81 ten yard.   PG with the ten yard split is coming up with the early rudimentary method of showing that.  More technology I'm sure is coming.  Same with spin rate as you mentioned.  The 84 mph kid who nobody can hit because he spins it and deceives the best hitters?  There is a place for him.

I am with you on deluding oneself.  At the same time don't get so caught up in numbers that you delude yourself into saying it is over before it even starts.

I won't dive into the numbers results since many more knowledgeable people here have brought up excellent points.  This may have been posted previously, so I apologize, but a player may have off the chart numbers, high rankings, on the radar for power-5 since a freshman, but there is another aspect which makes a player desirable.  How the person conducts themselves on and off the field.  I know of at least 2 situations where because of a player's prior actions, one left the team during a critical time, and the other lost millions $$ because he dropped in the recent MLB draft.  Social media is a great tool but also a great temptation.  I know coaches/teams who contact the opposing coaches not to find out about what kind of player he is, but what kind of person he is.

Agree that coaches are looking for measurables but also agree with the OP that there are plenty of exceptions to the rule as well. Here is some great info that was shared with me by my son's pitching coach:

"If you want to make "it", whatever "it" is, you need to stay true to yourself and have a development plan. 

The plan needs to include the following pieces:
Strength and Conditioning
Mindset / Mental Game
Nutrition / Hydration
Recovery
Mechanics (swing/pitching/fielding etc) 
Time Management 
Relationship Development (family/social)

When a player is in tune and has a growth plan for all those areas, only then does"Exposure" comes into effect.  If you want a coach or scout to like you...you need to work on YOU.  They don't care who you pay to send emails for you, or what team you are on.  Be the best YOU, you can be.  Coaches and scouts want a well rounded person over the showcase player that has a fat bank account, pays to go to everything, and only cares about their velocity reading and individual accolades.  They want someone to build their program around."

During my 17 years [1987-2004] with the Area Code games, I complied the players info for my roster. This included the player's shoe size, because Adidas was our sponsor. Each player received "free" shoes and paid only transportation and lodging. This was the pro scouts event and at the games we average over 300 scouts and 200 college coaches and agents. Our 900 team was players I personally selected based on observation at the 8 tryouts.

During the games I enjoyed discussion with the scouts and Scouting Directors. One year, I mentioned that I could determine future success based on shoe size.

Since I had 17 years of stats and many players in the MLB, I had a record of the player's shoe size and his ultimate success. For a few minutes the scouts believed me!!!

Hamilton [Rays 1st round] size 19 shoe.

Bob

As I have followed this thread, an article I saw awhile back came to mind (it's two years old).  There are so many factors that go into who is selected and why and it's not all baseball stats. There's a line in this article about coaches looking at three things: can the kid play (a lot of what has been discussed here), can he pass (is he academically able) and can he pay (given scholarship limitations)?   

Certainly if you have a kid who is at the very top tier, the other two dimensions aren't as significant.  But if you're not a Power 5 Powerhouse (school or student athlete), then it becomes more of a gray zone.

http://www.baseballamerica.com...#LRtl8VRpg70IvH5z.97 

2forU posted:

Quote from a VA tech coach (part of a conversation about being a catcher with my oldest):  "if you hit for average, they you better expect to play MI.  And if you want to play MI at VA Tech, you better run a sub 7 sixty"  Pretty clear and direct.  Right or wrong, he's the guy who signs the papers.

Of course. Coaches say stuff like that all the time. They also say stuff like "I love kids who play multiple sports." And then they recruit single-sport baseball players all the time. 

So I just went to the Virginia Tech roster, and literally the first middle infielder listed, a shortstop who just transferred in from a JC, ran a 7.19 in high school: www.perfectgame.org/Players/Pl...ofile.aspx?ID=274798

Then I checked the next one, a freshman who ran a 7.13:  www.perfectgame.org/Players/Pl...ofile.aspx?ID=274798

The third one ran a 6.86: www.perfectgame.org/Players/Pl...ofile.aspx?ID=474914

Do I think there is a cutoff? Yes. But I think 7.0 is a round number and easy shorthand, and isn't the real number.

coachld posted:

Agree that coaches are looking for measurables but also agree with the OP that there are plenty of exceptions to the rule as well. Here is some great info that was shared with me by my son's pitching coach:

"If you want to make "it", whatever "it" is, you need to stay true to yourself and have a development plan. 

The plan needs to include the following pieces:
Strength and Conditioning
Mindset / Mental Game
Nutrition / Hydration
Recovery
Mechanics (swing/pitching/fielding etc) 
Time Management 
Relationship Development (family/social)

When a player is in tune and has a growth plan for all those areas, only then does"Exposure" comes into effect.  If you want a coach or scout to like you...you need to work on YOU.  They don't care who you pay to send emails for you, or what team you are on.  Be the best YOU, you can be.  Coaches and scouts want a well rounded person over the showcase player that has a fat bank account, pays to go to everything, and only cares about their velocity reading and individual accolades.  They want someone to build their program around."

I had a thread on "the plan" recently and you have some great additions -- particularly mental game, time management and relationship development. 

This thread is really taking off and there is just a ton of insight that can be gleaned from it. 

3and2Fastball posted:

I think one has to determine:  where is the love?

If a Kid loves Football that is one thing.  If a kid is playing Football mainly to get a free education I don't know how they are going to be able to compete with the equally talented kid who loves it.

Same with Baseball.  Some Kids will be very happy being at Northwest Idaho Community College if it means they are playing Baseball.  They'd rather go there and be on the team than go to Vanderbilt and not be on the team.

Just like in "real life" when you want to find out the truth in how the world works you follow the money....if you want to carve out a path in life, if you follow what you love you can't go wrong (well unless what you love is sitting on the couch eating Doritos and playing video games!)

For your son 2020DAD:  if money wasn't an issue, which Sport does he love more?  Football or Baseball?  There's your answer

That's easy.  It's baseball.  But respectfully that's NOT the answer.  He has almost officially a zero percent chance at a scholarship.  And we can not afford to just let him play for fun at some expensive D3.  If you are from a poorer family and you have the ability to get a full ride do you not have an obligation to do so?  Welcome to the real world.  The real world comes at you a little quicker if you are not loaded.  You don't always get to do what you love.  Speaking of myths - in a way isn't that the greatest myth of all?   Do what you love?   That may work for the upper crust but where I can from brother you did what you had to to survive.  Hopefully the next generation will do it right and my grandkids will have the privilege and luxury to do what they love someday.  For now we gotta do what we gotta do.  

2020DAD -  not every D3 is super expensive.  And the JUCO route for the first two years is extremely inexpensive.  Throw in some academic effort and there is scholarship money there, too.  I understand, my family isn't wealthy either.  But to say "my Kid has to play football or go broke" is not looking at all the possibilities.

From a parent perspective my 2018 pitches, competes, gets outs over and over again and velo just isn't good enough to be noticed.  I watch the scouts put the gun down and leave the stands.  I watch high velo pitchers blow games, hit higher numbers and get write ups.  Just watched it at PG qualifier this weekend.  83 mph and success pitching is meaningless to a recruiter.  If it is something some a college coach wants then we are not in the right place.  Not sure where the exceptions are that people mention.

So measureables, especially pitching MPH, is the gold standard.

There are a lot of Junior Colleges where one can play two years of Baseball for next to zero money and get 2 years of transferable credits.  In state tuition at Wisconsin-Oshkosh (as just one example) is $6,422 per year.  I'm certain that with academic effort there can be scholarships available to reduce those costs even more.

edit to add:  I suppose we can file this under "other falsehoods".  The false notion that D3 Baseball isn't affordable for lower income families.

What's the best way to get in front of D3 coaches? 

A Daug posted:

What's the best way to get in front of D3 coaches?

What part of the country are you in?  With excellent grades if a kid profiles at getting into a high academic D3, Headfirst has a ton of D3 coaches scouting their events.  

Outside of high academic opportunities, if you have verifiable measurables from a Perfect Game or PBR Showcase, the athlete (not the parents, the athlete) can email D3 coaches and begin a dialogue, including the profile from a Showcase.  They might then go to the D3's camp to be seen in person.

a kid with a 83 mph fastball does not need to be done playing Baseball after high school, especially if there are other things they bring to the table such as grades, the ability to afford school, a projectable body/size etc.....

3and2Fastball posted:

There are a lot of Junior Colleges where one can play two years of Baseball for next to zero money and get 2 years of transferable credits.  In state tuition at Wisconsin-Oshkosh (as just one example) is $6,422 per year.  I'm certain that with academic effort there can be scholarships available to reduce those costs even more.

edit to add:  I suppose we can file this under "other falsehoods".  The false notion that D3 Baseball isn't affordable for lower income families.

I get what 2020Dad is saying:

Choice A: Play baseball, go two years Juco, mostly free, 2 years at a 4 year college on a 25% scholarship if that, graduate owing about 20-30K.

Choice B: Play football, free to almost free 4 year college, graduate with little to no debt.

If a kid is a B- baseball player and an A+ football player you just have to let the baseball dream die sometimes for the greater good of your life.

CACO -  sure I understand

In terms of what 2020DAD said, and I know this isn't the High School Football Web (!), but 275 pounds might not be projectable for Power Fives anyways.  A lot of bigtime OL's are 320 pounds plus.  There are measurables limits there, too!

There are plenty of athletes playing pro sports simply because they are good at the sport and can make money.  They don't really love the game.   I get it, no judgement there.

But if you have options in sports, you don't have to give up on the sport you love.  A college choice, to me, should mostly be about the development a player can receive towards their professional career.  If an athlete doesn't profile as a pro player, then it is all about academics and getting a degree that can lead to a post college career

The other side of that is that bigtime college football is a true meat grinder.  The punishment those kids take, the pain medications, surgeries, concussions, and yes in many cases the steroids will give one serious pause if they don't love it.

if you love Baseball, $20,000 in debt is well worth it vs the mental and physical toll that football costs and zero debt.  Especially if you don't love football as much as Baseball.  It is different if you love Football.  It is different if you profile as an NFL prospect.

3and2Fastball posted:

A Daug posted:

What's the best way to get in front of D3 coaches?

What part of the country are you in?  With excellent grades if a kid profiles at getting into a high academic D3, Headfirst has a ton of D3 coaches scouting their events.  

Outside of high academic opportunities, if you have verifiable measurables from a Perfect Game or PBR Showcase, the athlete (not the parents, the athlete) can email D3 coaches and begin a dialogue, including the profile from a Showcase.  They might then go to the D3's camp to be seen in person.

a kid with a 83 mph fastball does not need to be done playing Baseball after high school, especially if there are other things they bring to the table such as grades, the ability to afford school, a projectable body/size etc.....

We are in Texas.  Son hits higher number in lessons, but not translating to games.  Great grades, avg test scores, we can afford college, considered a projectable 3rd baseman, 6' 200 lbs, runs a 7.1, inconsistent bat with power, but really loves and wants to pitch.  Showcase coach would rather promote him as 3rd base bc of "measureables."  ERA is very secondary to MPH.  Exit velo greater than MPH so you are a third baseman?  Arm velo higher from 3rd to 1st than mound to home.

3and2Fastball posted:

There are a lot of Junior Colleges where one can play two years of Baseball for next to zero money and get 2 years of transferable credits.  In state tuition at Wisconsin-Oshkosh (as just one example) is $6,422 per year.  I'm certain that with academic effort there can be scholarships available to reduce those costs even more.

edit to add:  I suppose we can file this under "other falsehoods".  The false notion that D3 Baseball isn't affordable for lower income families.

For some $6000 might as well be six million.  Also when you do not come from a family rich with opportunities how many doors do you think Oshkosh opens up?  Compared to say playing football at UW or Notre Dame or Michigan.  Before I get assaulted here by anyone NO I AM NOT PREDICTING that level of play for my son.  But it's at least a possibility whereas major college baseball is not.  If you could be a golden domer it's like printing money.  Those guys stick together.  Chances of unemployment after graduation for a ND football player = zero. And it will be gainful employment.  Life is much bigger than baseball.  I would be very proud of my son playing baseball at Oshkosh.  They are actually really good.  He may not even be good enough.  But even if he were what doors would it open?   How would it significantly enhance his future?   Sorry at least for my kid after high school fun time is over.  Time to build a life.  Go to the biggest place you can go with the best contacts.  Then leverage it.  Then hopefully someday his kids will be able to go to Oshkosh and play baseball because they have more money than God and they can extend their childhood.  

3and2Fastball posted:

CACO -  sure I understand

In terms of what 2020DAD said, and I know this isn't the High School Football Web (!), but 275 pounds might not be projectable for Power Fives anyways.  A lot of bigtime OL's are 320 pounds plus.  There are measurables limits there, too!

There are plenty of athletes playing pro sports simply because they are good at the sport and can make money.  They don't really love the game.   I get it, no judgement there.

But if you have options in sports, you don't have to give up on the sport you love.  A college choice, to me, should mostly be about the development a player can receive towards their professional career.  If an athlete doesn't profile as a pro player, then it is all about academics and getting a degree that can lead to a post college career

 

Agree on measurables in football.  But important to note he is a sophomore at 255.  Want him to be a Junior at 275 then a senior 285-290.  They will normally redshirt lineman and by the time they actually suit in college they are a man and 300+

Just got ANOTHER camp invite from a mid level D1 expensive college so I just phantomed asked what is your minimum MPH for a RHP?  Getting aggressive with communication these days. He said our current lowest RHP is 83 to 85 and that they look at movement and location.  And the camp will be capped at 175 players!!  How can you see anything move with that many people moving around?  LOL

2020dad posted:

I would almost guarantee if you took all the parents of kids throwing mid 80's who say their kid has 'great command' only about 10% of those kids would get the same evaluation from a scout - maybe less.  

 

If you think that's bad, 2020, have parents evaluate their kid's hit tool -- there would be no accurate grades!

3and2Fastball posted:

2020DAD -  not every D3 is super expensive.  And the JUCO route for the first two years is extremely inexpensive.  Throw in some academic effort and there is scholarship money there, too.  I understand, my family isn't wealthy either.  But to say "my Kid has to play football or go broke" is not looking at all the possibilities.

+1

FYI most expensive schools no matter what the level, there is plenty of needs based money available.  You just have to be honest with the coaches about financials and you have to make sure academics are in order.

A Daug posted:

Just got ANOTHER camp invite from a mid level D1 expensive college so I just phantomed asked what is your minimum MPH for a RHP?  Getting aggressive with communication these days. He said our current lowest RHP is 83 to 85 and that they look at movement and location.  And the camp will be capped at 175 players!!  How can you see anything move with that many people moving around?  LOL

Um, it doesn't take long to have a group of kids warm up, then they get 10 pitches. Coach stands behind the catcher, behind a net, and watches the location and movement of the pitches.

It was nice of him to tell you what their low end is, that's not something I have heard much of.

Re: Vanderbilt having a MI running a 7+ sixty ...

Vanderbilt gets to recruit whomever they want. They have the depth of roster to take recruiting risks. If the 7+ MI doesn't work out they have three players behind him to take his place. Plus that MI can be moved to the corner of the field if he hits. 

I followed Vanderbilt closely when a couple of friends/former teammate's kids were playing. I watched a lot of webcasts. At one point they had four all world high school/top PG/pro prospect catchers on their roster. Then they moved an outfielder to catcher due to his arm (bet the other four didn't see that coming). But they all played somewhere because they could hit. One lineup had them at C, 1B, 3B, LF and DH. All five were drafted. One has spent four years bouncing between AAA and the majors.

2forU posted:

Quote from a VA tech coach (part of a conversation about being a catcher with my oldest):  "if you hit for average, they you better expect to play MI.  And if you want to play MI at VA Tech, you better run a sub 7 sixty"  Pretty clear and direct.  Right or wrong, he's the guy who signs the papers.

2forU,

I believe you.  What I witnessed for 4 years in lower to mid D1 college baseball is exactly as you describe it.  I saw CF and MIFs were are all sub 7.0 guys except for one (senior) and he was in there for his bat because they didn't have depth at that position.   Lesson learned...if you weren't under 7.0, you better be darn close to 7.0 and hit the snot out of the ball if you wanted your name on the line-up card.   It was not a falsehood, it was fact.   My son was a college freshmen when they introduced BBCOR into the college game.  Now, teams are more built for speed, and the successful teams in my son's old conference were exactly that.  It is one of those things you just can't help noticing.  The game has changed a little bit.

I saw a few VT games this past year (they weren't good) but they had some decent speed up the middle, and one guy in the corner OF was pretty fast.  More successful ACC teams had quicker guys up the middle.  

JMO

fenwaysouth posted:

Lesson learned...if you weren't under 7.0, you better be darn close to 7.0

Now that I can believe. The first two VT examples I gave were both sub-7.2. 

I know a coach who played MiLB up to AAA. He said "There are three kinds of runners. You have the burners, and for them speed is a huge tool and part of their game. On the opposite end you have the base-cloggers. They go station to station and they better be able to hit the crap out of the ball. And in the middle you have everyone else -- they move alright, they can go first to third, but they're not burners." There are an awful lot of 6.9 - 7.0 - 7.1 guys . . .

To me, it's like saying a RHP must be 90+ to go D1. Well, sure , it helps. And anyone can find plenty of examples of D1 pitchers who met the mark in HS. But the guys who were darn close -- like 88 or 89 -- in HS, well, it's not hard to find them on D1 rosters, either. 

Speed is an easy disqualifier

fenwaysouth posted:

Numbers are a huge part of recruiting, especially if a recruiter is not familiar with a recruit.   It seems to me that there are rules, guidelines, and exceptions and it just depends on the specific recruiter or program as to which they want to label a specific recruit's skill set.   It seems to me this thread has taken on the tone of let's discuss exceptions, and I don't think that is a good place to start. 

I think it is absolutely ridiculous to think that numbers don't come into play when a program is looking at a pool of recruits with metrics at a certain position.   Experienced coaches know what they are looking for.  Numbers become the way a pool of recruits and their skill sets are evaluated, separated, and selected whether we like the numbers or not.   This is not only true of baseball, but also college admissions,  and career advancement.   If anything, baseball skills measurables are going to mean even more going forward given the technology advancements and tools available.    

Nobody should be telling a recruit they can't do anything, but I think good advice comes in the form of explaining to a recruit what the measurable goal is and a plan for getting there.

As always, JMO.

Fenway pretty much nails it here. In my opinion .

This is quite the thread. The sort of back and forth on 60 times / Velocity . The 'Don't give up hope' thing. All entertaining stuff. 

I am just a bit concerned about some of the sourcing of the opinions and data. I mean, is your son playing D1 ball or Pro Ball?  Or are we High school parents of uncommitted players looking at PG profiles trying to find exceptions to the measurables? I don't mean that in a patronizing way. This site is about information. Parent to Parent. HS parents come here looking for info. I get it. That's what I did

But as the parent of a D1 player, A player MLB scouting bureau contacted and worked out before the '16 draft, I'll go ahead and my 2 cents in on this thread .

THE. NUMBERS. MATTER.

StrainedOblique posted:

This is quite the thread. The sort of back and forth on 60 times / Velocity . The 'Don't give up hope' thing. All entertaining stuff. 

I am just a bit concerned about some of the sourcing of the opinions and data. I mean, is your son playing D1 ball or Pro Ball?  Or are we High school parents of uncommitted players looking at PG profiles trying to find exceptions to the measurables? I don't mean that in a patronizing way. This site is about information. Parent to Parent. HS parents come here looking for info. I get it. That's what I did

But as the parent of a D1 player, A player MLB scouting bureau contacted and worked out before the '16 draft, I'll go ahead and chime in on this thread . Throw my hat in the ring based on my experience:

THE. NUMBERS. MATTER.

Wouldn't that depend on what the end goal is?

Are you going to live your MLB dream with a 87mph fastball as a RHP, NOPE! 

But if your dream is playing D1 at your dream college that you otherwise may not have made it into...um...yeah, maybe.

The title of the thread talks about falsehoods to playing D1 but I'll go further and say there are some VERY select colleges (not necessarily D1) that pretty much everyone who applies has a 3.5+ GPA and extra curricular activities...will baseball get you in there?  It's possible, and not giving up on a 87mph fastball could get you in.

SEC pitch coach "I like my pitchers to be sub 7.0 60. Currently 9 of 16 of my pitchers are sub 7.0. It's a goal. We measure it and work on it.  We want athletes."

CaCO3Girl posted:

StrainedOblique posted:

This is quite the thread. The sort of back and forth on 60 times / Velocity . The 'Don't give up hope' thing. All entertaining stuff. 

I am just a bit concerned about some of the sourcing of the opinions and data. I mean, is your son playing D1 ball or Pro Ball?  Or are we High school parents of uncommitted players looking at PG profiles trying to find exceptions to the measurables? I don't mean that in a patronizing way. This site is about information. Parent to Parent. HS parents come here looking for info. I get it. That's what I did

But as the parent of a D1 player, A player MLB scouting bureau contacted and worked out before the '16 draft, I'll go ahead and chime in on this thread . Throw my hat in the ring based on my experience:

THE. NUMBERS. MATTER.

Wouldn't that depend on what the end goal is?

Are you going to live your MLB dream with a 87mph fastball as a RHP, NOPE! 

But if your dream is playing D1 at your dream college that you otherwise may not have made it into...um...yeah, maybe.

The title of the thread talks about falsehoods to playing D1 but I'll go further and say there are some VERY select colleges (not necessarily D1) that pretty much everyone who applies has a 3.5+ GPA and extra curricular activities...will baseball get you in there?  It's possible, and not giving up on a 87mph fastball could get you in.

It absolutely depends on what your goal is. And yes, there are plenty of academic schools that use a sliding scale on player field evaluations against standardized test scores & GPA . My son was recruited and got close with an Ivy school in his recruitment . I've seen that sorta thing first hand. And yes , there are top academic D3 schools that have yet another way to Eval guys.

The point I was trying to make was that in D1ball recruiting , 60 times, Velo, it MATTERS . And with pro ball it REALLY Maters .

The first thing they do at a proper D1 camp or MLB scouting event is run the players . The 60 time is huge. As Fenway earlier pointed out. it's a sorting tool . A way to categorize guys. Same with Velocity for pitchers . It's a way to sort them out . And make no mistake the RHP's that are sitting mid-upper 80's vs guys sitting low 90's , They are recruited differently . Same with foot speed . Talent evaluators at all levels place an enormous amount of importance on foot speed. A kid that runs a 6.7 and maybe goes 2-6 at the plate that day is going to get way more attention than a guy that runs a 7.5 and  goes 3-4 with a double against the wall.  That guy is viewed as SLOW . Which is the kiss of death for position players . The thinking is that foot speed is an inherent skill set. It can't be taught .  But they can 'fix the swing'.

It's the same thinking with Velocity. It can't be taught. But you can teach breaking pitches and adjust mechanics to help control issues .

Body size matters to a lot of talent evaluators. It wasn't discussed as much in this thread as other things but it is a fact. RC's and Scouts like tall lean guys. A HS Jr RHP throwing 87 at 6'2-6'3 might get a little pass on the low Velo if the RC thinks he hasn't grown into his body or doesn't understand his stride yet. They see potential in Big RHPs and LHPs. Not always but I've seen it happen

You are always going to find exceptions to the rule like Jose Altuve or the infamous Albert Pujols story. Pitchers like Jordan Zimmermann who drafted out of D3 ball and has had a good  MLB career. But these guys are not even measurable as far as success rates go . 1 in 1,000 - 3,000 . Who knows?

Looking at PG profiles and looking for low Velo numbers or bad 60 times is a waste of time. It tells you nothing other than on the day PG graded him that is what he did. It tells you nothing about how the school that recruited him evaluated him. Or what his Velo or 60 time was on campus or at the event that inspired the school to offer him.

The bottom line is  that these standard measuring tools have been ingrained into baseball culture for quite sometime . They aren't going away any time soon. That being said that doesn't mean that a kid that can't break a 7.0 on the 60 or a RHP that can't break 90 on the gun can't play college ball. Not at all. It means that he has to find the program that values him with his existing skill set . Whatever it is.

Tracy Smith at ASU say's it best " This whole thing is  about finding the 'right fit' both for the player and the program"

Pitchers run a 7.0 60? I think my pitcher ran a 9.0 60 and still got a nice schollie.

But you are soooo right though, coaches want athletes!

StrainedOblique posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

StrainedOblique posted:

This is quite the thread. The sort of back and forth on 60 times / Velocity . The 'Don't give up hope' thing. All entertaining stuff. 

I am just a bit concerned about some of the sourcing of the opinions and data. I mean, is your son playing D1 ball or Pro Ball?  Or are we High school parents of uncommitted players looking at PG profiles trying to find exceptions to the measurables? I don't mean that in a patronizing way. This site is about information. Parent to Parent. HS parents come here looking for info. I get it. That's what I did

But as the parent of a D1 player, A player MLB scouting bureau contacted and worked out before the '16 draft, I'll go ahead and chime in on this thread . Throw my hat in the ring based on my experience:

THE. NUMBERS. MATTER.

Wouldn't that depend on what the end goal is?

Are you going to live your MLB dream with a 87mph fastball as a RHP, NOPE! 

But if your dream is playing D1 at your dream college that you otherwise may not have made it into...um...yeah, maybe.

The title of the thread talks about falsehoods to playing D1 but I'll go further and say there are some VERY select colleges (not necessarily D1) that pretty much everyone who applies has a 3.5+ GPA and extra curricular activities...will baseball get you in there?  It's possible, and not giving up on a 87mph fastball could get you in.

It absolutely depends on what your goal is. And yes, there are plenty of academic schools that use a sliding scale on player field evaluations against standardized test scores & GPA . My son was recruited and got close with an Ivy school in his recruitment . I've seen that sorta thing first hand. And yes , there are top academic D3 schools that have yet another way to Eval guys.

The point I was trying to make was that in D1ball recruiting , 60 times, Velo, it MATTERS . And with pro ball it REALLY Maters .

The first thing they do at a proper D1 camp or MLB scouting event is run the players . The 60 time is huge. As Fenway earlier pointed out. it's a sorting tool . A way to categorize guys. Same with Velocity for pitchers . It's a way to sort them out . And make no mistake the RHP's that are sitting mid-upper 80's vs guys sitting low 90's , They are recruited differently . Same with foot speed . Talent evaluators at all levels place an enormous amount of importance on foot speed. A kid that runs a 6.7 and maybe goes 2-6 at the plate that day is going to get way more attention than a guy that runs a 7.5 and  goes 3-4 with a double against the wall.  The thinking is that foot speed is an inherent skill set. It can't be taught .  But they can 'fix the swing'. It's the same thinking with Velocity. It can't be taught. But you can teach breaking pitches and adjust mechanics to help control issues .

Body size matters to a lot of talent evaluators. It wasn't discussed as much in this thread as other things but it is a fact. RC's and Scouts like tall lean guys.

You are always going to find exceptions to the rule like Jose Altuve or the infamous Albert Pujols story. Pitchers like Jordan Zimmermann who drafted out of D3 ball and has had a good  MLB career. But the fact remains that these measuring tools have been ingrained into baseball culture for quite sometime . They aren't going away any time soon.

 

Would the statement "The tall lean athletic guy checks half the boxes before he does anything on the field" be a fair statement? 

I mean obviously if you have a 6'4 180# guy cruising around 75mph that does nothing for him, but, will a 6'4 180# guy throwing 85mph get the nod over the 5'10, 230# guy throwing 85mph?

TPM posted:

Pitchers run a 7.0 60? I think my pitcher ran a 9.0 60 and still got a nice schollie.

But you are soooo right though, coaches want athletes!

Quit messing with me.....haha. you know I'm talking about position players only w/ 60 times . Also, why am I writing about the importance of velo and 60 times? Your boys are BEASTS. You know way more about the importance of that stuff than me!

By the way I still owe Coach Harbin a hello from you.

-R

CaCO3Girl posted:

StrainedOblique posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

StrainedOblique posted:

This is quite the thread. The sort of back and forth on 60 times / Velocity . The 'Don't give up hope' thing. All entertaining stuff. 

I am just a bit concerned about some of the sourcing of the opinions and data. I mean, is your son playing D1 ball or Pro Ball?  Or are we High school parents of uncommitted players looking at PG profiles trying to find exceptions to the measurables? I don't mean that in a patronizing way. This site is about information. Parent to Parent. HS parents come here looking for info. I get it. That's what I did

But as the parent of a D1 player, A player MLB scouting bureau contacted and worked out before the '16 draft, I'll go ahead and chime in on this thread . Throw my hat in the ring based on my experience:

THE. NUMBERS. MATTER.

Wouldn't that depend on what the end goal is?

Are you going to live your MLB dream with a 87mph fastball as a RHP, NOPE! 

But if your dream is playing D1 at your dream college that you otherwise may not have made it into...um...yeah, maybe.

The title of the thread talks about falsehoods to playing D1 but I'll go further and say there are some VERY select colleges (not necessarily D1) that pretty much everyone who applies has a 3.5+ GPA and extra curricular activities...will baseball get you in there?  It's possible, and not giving up on a 87mph fastball could get you in.

It absolutely depends on what your goal is. And yes, there are plenty of academic schools that use a sliding scale on player field evaluations against standardized test scores & GPA . My son was recruited and got close with an Ivy school in his recruitment . I've seen that sorta thing first hand. And yes , there are top academic D3 schools that have yet another way to Eval guys.

The point I was trying to make was that in D1ball recruiting , 60 times, Velo, it MATTERS . And with pro ball it REALLY Maters .

The first thing they do at a proper D1 camp or MLB scouting event is run the players . The 60 time is huge. As Fenway earlier pointed out. it's a sorting tool . A way to categorize guys. Same with Velocity for pitchers . It's a way to sort them out . And make no mistake the RHP's that are sitting mid-upper 80's vs guys sitting low 90's , They are recruited differently . Same with foot speed . Talent evaluators at all levels place an enormous amount of importance on foot speed. A kid that runs a 6.7 and maybe goes 2-6 at the plate that day is going to get way more attention than a guy that runs a 7.5 and  goes 3-4 with a double against the wall.  The thinking is that foot speed is an inherent skill set. It can't be taught .  But they can 'fix the swing'. It's the same thinking with Velocity. It can't be taught. But you can teach breaking pitches and adjust mechanics to help control issues .

Body size matters to a lot of talent evaluators. It wasn't discussed as much in this thread as other things but it is a fact. RC's and Scouts like tall lean guys.

You are always going to find exceptions to the rule like Jose Altuve or the infamous Albert Pujols story. Pitchers like Jordan Zimmermann who drafted out of D3 ball and has had a good  MLB career. But the fact remains that these measuring tools have been ingrained into baseball culture for quite sometime . They aren't going away any time soon.

 

Would the statement "The tall lean athletic guy checks half the boxes before he does anything on the field" be a fair statement? 

I mean obviously if you have a 6'4 180# guy cruising around 75mph that does nothing for him, but, will a 6'4 180# guy throwing 85mph get the nod over the 5'10, 230# guy throwing 85mph?

Probably, but I'm not a talent evaluator . A 6'4 guy looks like you can see the 85 reach 90 soon. The 5'10 guy not as much . But if the 5'10 guy is a lefty he has action.

I don't think anyone has argued that the numbers don't matter or that things like running speed and fastball velocity aren't use to sort players. And no one has argued that slower is better than -- or "just as good" as -- faster. 

I read this topic as pointing out that some of the shorthand used ("better be below 7.0") is just that -- shorthand. And a better read on the topic, IMO, was Fenway's when he said "you better be close." 

I'll go back to the data that an average (50 grade) 60 time for a MLB position player is 6.9 - 7.0. Saying "if you don't run a 6.9 you can't play D1" -- which would put the average for D1 closer to 6.7 -- would indicate that D1 recruits are significantly faster, on average, than MLB players. I, for one, find that hard to believe. 

Is anyone else disturbed that a 91mph fastball is considered average, ANYWHERE?

CaCO3Girl posted:

Is anyone else disturbed that a 91mph fastball is considered average, ANYWHERE?

Well, it's worse than that, CaCO -- that's not what they are "touching" -- that's the average fastball of the guy (where he "sits") so someone with a 50 grade fastball is probably touching 94.

Great thread. I feel this topic, heck we lived it with my son. When i look back at the path he took, it is full of twists and turns but he ended up where he should have. The numbers drove him, the projections or lack there of for him ..drove him.....seeing bigger guys throw like girls and get all the love/offers drove him. Numbers matter, hell once you get to college you better produce or they will replace you. 

At some point I will need to do some research as to the Top 75 Middle Infielders in MLB and what percentage of them never ran a 7.0 in high school.  I know off the top of my head Tulowitzki, Hardy, Drury, LeMahieu, Sogard, Zobrist, Pedroia, and Murphy never did... I'm certain the list will grow with more research

Now obviously you have the Robinson Cano types who ran 6.6 but when the list gets pretty long of MLB MI's who never ran below 7 I start to question the word "exception"