Improvement in PG Showcase ratings

Mine went to the 2005 underclass and was rated a 7. This year he attended the classic and was rated a 9. Hope that helps.

Grades can go up or down. It depends primarily on what you do at the showcase you are being rated at. Rusty Shellhorn went from a 6.5 to a 9.5. Don't forget that to some degree he's being rated against other 2009s and some of them will also have gotten bigger and stronger. Best of luck with the next showcase.

PCBallDad.. my kid is that Rusty Shellhorn character CADad talked about. I would like to mildly disagree with one aspect of what CADad said. I don't think the (new) score primarily depends upon what your kid does at the showcase. I think scouts and PG have a pretty good idea of not only present ability but projectibility and talent. They know all kids have off days.

Of course, if a kid only goes there once and stinks it up, it wouldn't be fair to fault PG who can only go by the information on hand.

One of the reasons why we decided to go to the World Showcase was to display demonstrable improvement over time. There seems to be no rhyme or reasons to player improvements. Another example? Take a look at the profile of Matthew Zoltak.

So at least do a followup showcase.

I have read all of the threads about PG and I have some questions:

How does this rating work and of what value is it? Do coaches at the next level actually use this? Do players send this to caoches as proof of a an "independant assessment of their ability at the next level.

I have seen several ratings of players on my sons team and opponent that he has played and these seem to be overinflated or the next level is not all that it made out to be.

Examples: A 2009 5'-8" 130lb SS w/a 59 mph throw w/a level swing is a 6.5 (D1 prospect and a definite DII player/JUCO player)?

A 2010 RHP w/71 mph FB is also a 6.5?

I am not looking to pick a fight with anyone. I just can not make sense of the numbers and the ratings or understand thier value. I do make any claims to be able to project a player to the next level. I just can not understand it in my own mind.

boyinr,

I would have to see who exactly you're talking about. Your first example doesn't make sense based on the information you gave. However, there could be a lot more to that player. 59 mph throw sounds very poor. Level swing is more a description than an evaluation.

Without knowing who you're talking about, I would have no idea how well he hits, how well he fields, how well he runs, if he has older brothers who are 6-3/180 playing in college or pro.

Usually if we know which player someone is referring to, we can accurately explain why we gave him a certain grade. But so often, people just write what they choose and say they don't understand. The truth usually is... there is an agenda.

The easiest way to find out if PG has any credibility is to ask a high level DI coach.

BTW, grades are always based on potential.

PGStaff,
Since you definitely have first hand knowledge in this area let me ask my earlier question a different way. Does a player's previous rating have any bearing on his "new" rating at a later showcase? Is there consideration given from prior "ratings" as to the new rating? Ex: A 9.5 goes out and can't catch a cold and hits poorly. Since he was a 9.5 previously, what is he rated for this showcase?

Bum,
Agreed, although potential doesn't always show through as you noted. I know of a kid, not my son, who is a very good player who got what was for him a so-so rating and based on what I saw at the showcase I believe PG took potential into account and gave him a very fair grade.

Based on what I've seen from the kid in the past against top competition I think the next time he showcases he's going to get a much better grade despite a weakness in one area, that probably contributed to the rating he got. That's why I said primarily. I think he was the seen once and didn't do as well as he might have case similar to the case you mentioned. He got much too high of a rating to say he stunk it up, but relative to his ability I wouldn't be surprised if he felt he had.

Keep in mind that some kids do not showcase well especially in the initial event.

See the same kid in a tournament in team play and you may see a different player, a much better player.

PG Do you agree ?

TR, Yes there are lots of players who play much better than they showcase. These are players who play much better than their tools would dictate. Best example of this at the top level would be David Eckstein. There are also those who showcase well, but don’t take it to the game. Those guys are interesting because of their high potential. Good example from a former top level player would be Shawan Dunston.

quote:

Does a player's previous rating have any bearing on his "new" rating at a later showcase? Is there consideration given from prior "ratings" as to the new rating? Ex: A 9.5 goes out and can't catch a cold and hits poorly. Since he was a 9.5 previously, what is he rated for this showcase?

To be honest we try hard not to drop a player's grade much whenever possible. However, it does happen some times.

The grade is always recorded and the last phase before filing it includes checking previous grades. If we see we have a player graded an 8 and we find out we earlier graded him a 9 it sets off a red flag. This doesn't necessarily mean we will raise the 8, but we will take a second look at everything. The truth is that if we once saw a 9, he's more than likely a 9 and he just had a bad day.

Some might think this is confusing, but look at it this way. If a hitter hits a bunch of long balls and looks great at the plate so you grade him a 9 for hitting and the next time he doesn't look as good at the plate without much good solid contact... Is he a 9 based on potential or is he the hitter you saw the second time? Once a player or pitcher shows you something, he has proven what he is capable of. Only thing left isn't potential or ability, but it's consistency.

Often we grade a player as a sophomore and despite running better times, throwing better ect. we grade him the same as a junior. That is because we are grading on potential and so if we were correct the first time that player should be better a year later.

Hope some of that makes sense.

PG,
Just curious, when you say you grade on potential, is that just another word for "projectibility"? How do you define that often used assessment which seems to the uninformed to boil down to tall thin kids are good, physically mature kids are maxed out? No agenda here (in fact I have a tall thin kid) just curious.

igball,

Obviously I don't know as much as I'd like to know, but I don't mind answering questions if possible. That said, I tend to be paranoid regarding people who might (for some reason) have an agenda and would enjoy seeing us bite the dust. I don't think you have any reason for asking questions other than being interested. Also, "boyinr" sent me a PM that both makes sense and assures there is no agenda. I plan to answer his PM as soon as possible.

Anyway, FWIW here is an attempt to reply to your post. These are my opinions, not the gospel, and others could probably add a lot more.

Projection/potential is the most difficult and inexact part of scouting.

It does have quite a bit to do with size, body type, strength or lack of present strength and projected size. However there are many other things that can cause scouts to think a player projects well. Probably too many things to list them all here, but here are a few things to consider.

1 – Athletic actions
2 - Bloodlines
3 – Effortless movements
4 – Quickness shown in any area
5 – Any type of natural ability
6 – Feel for the game
7 – Work ethic and desire
8 – Competitiveness
9 – Instincts
10 – Hand eye coordination
11 - Comparisons
12 - Anything unusual

Also knowing the growth history of a player can be revealing. Sometimes, a young player who has grown a lot in a short period of time will take awhile to adjust his coordination to his new body.

One more thing… Once in awhile a player physically projects the opposite way. For example, a pitcher with a nice fluid and quick arm is throwing mid 80s, but he is overweight and his body lacks conditioning (soft). Rather than getting bigger this pitcher could have lots of projection based on him actually losing weight and getting in better shape. We have seen this happen several times over the years. In fact, the lack of conditioning can cause any size player to have some projection. Of course, these things don’t project as well if the player is missing a lot of the things listed above.

Things like desire, heart, persistance, mental toughness, and courage are very difficult to evaluate. These are things that are hard to put a grade on by seeing a player for only a couple days or couple times. The one thing that always stands out is when we see a player making significant improvements over time. There is no reason to believe that player will stop improving anytime soon, so he becomes easier to project.

Projection is a guessing game where some people are much better at guessing than other people are. Mostly they are better due to experience!

Thanks PG. What's your projection for the weather in the midwest this spring?

Very wet... followed by periods of dry and wet weather.

I just wish it would warm up and stay warm. This has been a bad winter, as if I need to tell you or anyone else who lives up here. I hear rz (WI) got it even worse!

Thank you very much for your PM PGStaff. You answered my questions. Thanks again.

PGStaff I posted a reply to your PM.

"3/4 arm slot on mound, arm works, ASR FB, works quickly, compact delivery, gets extension"

What does the above mean from my sophomore son's Perfect Game evaluation? I am not sure what "arm works, ASR FB" means. Any help would be appreciated.....

I'm guessing ASR stands for arm side run on his fastball. Movement to the throwing arm side.

I think that his arm works is a good thing too.

32Fastball, all of the PG descriptions sound positive to me. "Arm Works" means his arm works well (efficiently) and he apparently has fluid mechanics. 3/4 arm slot to me is the optimum slot. Works quickly is good because it tires and dominates the hitters.. the hitters are getting attacked. And arm side run is great because a flat fastball can be launced a long way! Just make sure he can find the strike zone with that run. Is he throwing a 2-seam to get the run?

I asked my son James how he throws his fastball and got asked back more questions than I began with.

When?
Whats the count?
How early in the game, how early in the count?
What number hitter in the lineup? and so on......

James told me he mostly throws a 4 seam fastball unless he is way ahead in the count and wants to run one up or in on someone......

Dad thinks that James is a catcher who happens to pitch and thinks too much....

lol.

If he's a RHP the 2-seam (with your son's armside run) will run it in on a righty but as for "up" in the zone the 4-seam is better. It sounds like your son knows the game and situations.. I suspect he'll be just fine.

"How does this rating work and of what value is it? Do coaches at the next level actually use this? Do players send this to caoches as proof of a an "independant assessment of their ability at the next level."

If you look at the college websites it proves that coaches do follow the rankings. They are recruiting the players with the highest grades. I think coaches know it without players sending them any proof. If there is a player interested in their college the coaches can search and find his grade. I can do that and I'm not a college coach.

A couple questions from a baseball dad. My son attended a PG state showcase as a rising sophomore, age 14, as a pitcher and was rated a 6.5. He attended the 2007 Mid Atlantic Underclass showcase in Virginia late last August as a rising junior, just turned 16 and was rated a 6. Velocity around 77-79. Granted, his command was off and he was tired from spring/summer...lots of innings. But, I assume all the other pitchers were in the same boat there.

Given that we believe he can pitch better (from a velocity and command standpoint), is it worth attending another showcase to try and improve his socre? Or should we concentrate on college camps for those universities that have already shown some interest...requesting varsity/summer teams schedules, etc? All of these things add up, money wise.

With better results in velocity and command, how likely is his score to improve given that he's now a junior?

Thanks for any and all help!

quote:

I know of a kid, not my son, who is a very good player who got what was for him a so-so rating and based on what I saw at the showcase I believe PG took potential into account and gave him a very fair grade.

Based on what I've seen from the kid in the past against top competition I think the next time he showcases he's going to get a much better grade despite a weakness in one area, that probably contributed to the rating he got. That's why I said primarily. I think he was the seen once and didn't do as well as he might have case similar to the case you mentioned. He got much too high of a rating to say he stunk it up, but relative to his ability I wouldn't be surprised if he felt he had.

That's what I posted last month. This player, a 2010, just verballed with UCLA. It'll be interesting to see how he does if he showcases anymore.

Redeye,
How old is he (Oops didn't read closely enough, he's about 4 or 5 months away from 17 at this point.), how tall is he, how physically mature is he, what is his velocity now and on what gun (Remember, a Stalker, which they use at the PG events, will typically read 1 or 2 mph less than a JUGS.)?

You have to ask yourself what the chances are that he's going to do significantly better and if so, what that will mean for his chances of getting recruited and then weigh that against the cost of attending. If he's going to register 80-81 with average command then it isn't worth it if your goal is D1. If he's going to work in the low to mid 80s and max out at 85 or more on a Stalker then that would show a lot of improvement and would probably be worth it. If his goal is a DIII, depending on the schools, then perhaps showing improved velocity and command might be enough without having to hit mid or upper 80s.

A strong summer team is always a good option. College camps are also a very good option if they've shown genuine interest as opposed to simply trying to get him to pay for their camp.

CADad,

Appreciate the feedback. Interesting stuff...especially the difference in the various radar gun readings. This winter, he's thrown low-mid 80's at a couple different college winter camps. Not sure what guns...I'll have to be more careful in finding that out. He's worked with an ex-pro with weekly lessons, much improvement in command and movement. He'll never be the tall lanky type that PG seems to prefer. He's about 6 feet even, 165 lbs., strong legs and core. Don't know if he's done growing yet. He's had legitimate interest from a couple D1 schools and a couple D2 schools, after attending their camps, not before. What that will tranlsate into, I don't know.

I guess I'm really wondering how likely the PG score is to increase given that he's older.

Redeye,
Look at the event you would have him attend, then look at the player profiles for past years to see kids of a similar size who threw in the low 80s to see what ratings they got.

For example, 2008 kids who were slighty taller and hit 84 max at the 2007 Sunshine Northeast got ratings around 7.5 or 8. The ratings tend to follow velocity but they can vary considerably depending on projectability and other pitches.

My guess is that if he hit 82 or so he'd be at least a 7, and possibly higher but that's just a guess.

I tried looking him up based on your info so I could make a more educated guess, but I wasn't able to find an exact match for the stats you've related. Does his school have the initials BS?

quote:

He'll never be the tall lanky type that PG seems to prefer.

Redeye,

Just to make a correction in your above post. We “prefer” those pitchers that have the most ability, whatever size they might be. It is true that the scouting community likes size, but only if that pitcher has the necessary talent. We had Scott Kazmir ranked #1 in his high school class.

Here are some pitchers in the present draft class that we absolutely love. We actually prefer them over much taller lankier pitchers in many cases. It wasn’t just us who like these guys, so did college recruiters, see who they have signed with.

Sonny Gray RHP from Tennessee (6-0/180) signed with Vanderbilt
Robbie Ross LHP from Kentucky (5-11/180) signed with Kentucky
Anthony Gose LHP from California (6-0/170) signed with Arizona
Tyler Chatwood RHP/OF from California (6-0/180) signed with UCLA
Walker Kelly LHP from Texas (6-0/185) signed with TCU
Ryan Weber RHP from Florida (6-0/170) signed with Florida
Matt Ramsey RHP/C from Tennessee (5-11/180) signed with Tennessee
And for the HSBBW community... Rusty Shellhorn LHP from Washington (5-10/165) signed with Washington State
Could add many more!

Anyway, to answer the question, there is no way of knowing ahead of time what a player will be graded. Velocity does count, but it is not the only thing. I think CADad pretty much gave some good advice.

Here is something to keep in mind, probably not so good for business, but it’s true.

We grade very much on potential/projection in addition to the present skills. In other words we are trying to guess how good someone might end up being in the future. This means that if we see him a year later we would expect to see some improvement, because we are projecting him to improve.

If there were zero improvement the grade would stay the same or might even lower a bit. If a predicted amount of improvement took place he might stay the same or make a slightly higher grade. If it was significant improvement (above what we expected) his grade would go higher. If there were a great amount of improvement he could go from a 6 to a 9 or even 10. That has actually happened several times in the past. Also, there are some players who don’t necessarily improve their skills over a one year period, but do improve or lower their projection. These things can include better/worse mechanics, arm action, physical growth, etc.

Remember, in the case of pitchers, velocity is important, but there are many other things that are considered. Even “future” velocity is part of the projection.

PGStaff,

Thanks for the info. No offense intended in my statement...more my ignorance on the topic I'm sure. I appreciate the feedback. As with other posts on the topic, we dads can use as much insight into the process as we can get! It can seem very subjective at times.

Redeye,

I understand your concern and did not take offense at all. I really wish I could answer all questions about PG without it sounding like a sales pitch of some kind. That has never been my intent on this site. Much prefer talking about subjects other than us on this board. It's a release from the day to day grind. However, sometimes I feel it necessary to reply when PG is mentioned.

As far as PG events go... We are not the answer for every single player out there. Unfortunately, we never know how much we can help until after we see the player. It is all based on the player.

I understand your sentiments/perspective. But, do listen to what PG says; plus, you can also pull a lot from their events and evals. For example, son ('08, RHP) went to PG in '07 and received not so great a rating (I think he got a 7) despite topping out at 86 and granted there were others who rated higher with less velocity. Later spoke to PG personnel (who are wonderful & accessible), asked some question, got some answers and advice. Passed the advice along to son . . . fast forward to now, he's added about 3-4 mph, developed an off-speed pitch (which, in addition to a curve ball, he lacked as noted in PG eval), and got some private lessons to help with some mechanical issues (which is really where his increased mph comes from). While it wasn't in our interest to attend another event and get "re-rated", we did take what we learned and applied it. This is the best part of the PG event and most people get so consumed with the ratings (and with good reason as once it's out there, that's your rating and key people do review these ratings--found out this with direct experience with recruiter); you spent the money to get an evaluation, so use the remarks as building points and, based on my experience with my son, you can improve your game.

Best of luck with it.

Redeye, I believe I have some experience in this matter with my son, a smallish-LHP. I'd like to tell you his story. I'll admit a few years back I had rose-colored glasses as to my son's projectibility. While I wanted him to become a top-prospect, mother nature just didn't want to cooperate! We went to a PG showcase and he scored a 6.5.

As they say, ignorance is bliss. Bum, Jr. just kept working at his game and ignored comments he heard at various tournaments, often about his size. Once, while warming up in the bullpen, a boorish player from the opposing team laughed, and said "Hey! Look at the little Asian kid warming up." (He's half-Asian.) I took that not as a racial comment but rather to be dismissive of his size. He shut that team out, 2-0. And, he just kept winning.

Although it probably dissuaded some colleges in the recruiting process, not all, as he finally signed with a Pac-10 team last Fall. We went back to a PG event this January and he scored a 9.5. A dramatic improvement.

Looking back, I believe PG had it exactly right. He really was a 6.5 at that time. He was small, maybe didn't have the top-notch velocity expected, and he still needed to work on his off-speed stuff. But you know what? In Bum, Jr.'s heart he was a 10.0 and he wasn't going to let anything stand in the way of his dream. When he did go back this year, PG saw a different player. Improvement, regardless of size, happens.

Today Bum, Jr. did something that even amazed me. 21 k's in a 7-inning game. A league record. Just perhaps a state record. He just continues to get better. Because there is always that elusive 10.

God speed, and please keep working at the game.

Bum,

Wish I'd have been there for that game. Stats like that do mean something! Congratulations to Rusty.

Wow! Did he get the win? I guess it would be possible to get more K's in a 7 inning game but it would take a catcher dropping a lot of third strikes and not making the throw.

Thank you, PG, that means a lot to me. CA Dad, he got the shutout, 5-0. There were no passed balls, all 21 outs were k's. He had a pitcher-perfect game going in the 5th inning before he gave up his lone walk. He had a no-hitter going in the 7th before he gave up a double and an infield single with one out. Then he k'd the next two. Thanks, guys.

Congrats Bum on your son's pitching and recruitment. Your rose colored glasses obviously were right, it just took some people longer to see what you saw all along. In your mind he is a 10 and with his hard work now everyone knows that too.(and he also has a good catcher to catch all those strikes)

Thanks, CAbb. Bum, Jr. had 14 k's in 6 innings tonight with only 2 BB, but he lost 2-1. Gave up 3 singles (2 of them bunts). I actually think he pitched better tonight but the boxscore doesn't show that.. sometimes you have to pitch backwards!

Hey Bum congratulations on your Son's success. There had to be a ton of dedication and hard work in the transformation from 6.5 to 9.5! And 21K's! My kid is a hitter, so I don't normally take too kindly to pitchers such as your Son, lol, but acknowledgement of your Son's accomplishments is well deserved! Impressive.

Thanks Florida fan! What's really amazing is that he's pretty much k'ing everyone. In his 5 starts, 14-16-10-21-14. That's 75 in 31.33 inn. When I looked it up on Maxpreps.com, of the 500 pitches listed his ratio is #2 in the US at 2.39 k's per inning. There's a kid named Gualco who's #1 at 69/28= 2.46. Now, Bum, Jr. doesn't throw low-90's. But he's got a knack for making people swing and miss! lol.