Is it still fun at 15?

So 2020dad, what is your definition of "Dominant" then?  At what age can you say...wow, that kid is really dominant out there...and what are you gauging it by?  To me dominant at 12 would be that the kid knows where to throw the ball without being told, has excellent hand eye coordination (able to get those tricky bouncing in the dirt balls thrown at him), and is consistent with his contact at the plate.  With the possible exception of hitting I don't see any of that changing on the big field.

I've seen plenty of kids dominate at 12 and then fade as they get older.  Many of these kids were athletic kids who grew faster then the others at that age.  They were bigger and stronger.  Thing is many of them did not have a good aptitude for the game.  They relied upon their athletic skills.  As the kids matured and others caught up to them their lack of understanding of the game became their downfall.  Yes they still had athletic skills but if you are unable to anticipate what needs to get done you are going to have problems.

I have seen it many many times. The really good player at 12 is also one of the best at 16 17 18. The really good player at 12 is not good enough to be an impact player at the HS level. I have seen it go both ways many many times.

 

 

       
       
Caco that is probably the key to our conversation isn't it?  How do we define dominant.  I am beginning to believe I hava much higher standard for that than most.  And these kids I would call dominant DO NOT fade away unless there is injury or other extenuating circumstances.  So how do I define dominant?  First there is the eye test - the educated eye test.  The kid just pops out as being on a whole different level than the other kids.  I believe PG has addressed this before as he obviously sees it in his line of work.  And these kids have to pop out among other really good players as well.  Second comes the numbers.  I love the numbers.  For example the 13 year old throwing 80.  Or a 12 year old with an astonishing 80mph exit velocity.  A 13 yo catcher with a 2.1 pop time etc.  Solid numbers that would already allow the player to sycceed in high school.  Now he has 4 or 5 years to get those to college/pro standards.  I completely ignore the kid with that sweeping curveball at age 12 who strikes out 2 an inning and wins every game.  That is meaningless for the future.  Niw here is where I think the confusion comes in.  Clearly that kid would be a 'dominant' 12 yo pitcher.  But for the purposes of this conversation I woulsd not call him dominant.  The trained eye already knows that advantage will disappear over time.  Maybe a better way of having this debate would be to ask the question "how many of those 12's or 13's that you IDENTIFY as future hs stars/college players/pro prospects wind up fading?"  If you look at the question that way I think we would all be closer to agreement.  Looking at my son's team we have 12 players.  I would be comfortable saying at least 10 will play hs ball.  4 maybe 5 being very good to great in hs.  Comfortable saying those same 4 or 5 will be able to play somewhere in college and probably a few of the others if they want.  Contrary to popular belief just about anyone can play college ball if they are willing to pick a school strictly based on who will let them wear a uniform.  There are two or three at thus point that have D1 potential.  There are zero I would feel comfortable saying are D1 locks.  We are a pretty good team.  Probably 3rd best in the greater milwaukee area.  Wisconsin is not a powerhouse for baseball I get that but we are pretty good.  I am a hard grader.  I think what happens a lot is people want to believe in the rags to riches storries so much we are a little too liberal with our definitions.  So when one of our players 'fades' in high school some will say 'look he was on this travel team hitting 4th and everything and then he faded'.  And then i would be there to say "i could have told you that when he was 12".  True greatness seldom fades.

Wow, this topic has strayed off topic.  That being said, let's take a look at this dominance thing in the light of the eyes of the average parent.  When kids are this young, most parents are not "baseball people".  What most parents see are that kids in general or their kid in particular do very well as young kids.  What they see is a pitcher who gets a lot of kids out and wins a lot of games - regardless of whether they are using a pitch that won't work in HS or college.  They see a kid who gets lots of hits - regardless of his hitting mechanics or speed.  They see a catcher who blocks pretty good and has a strong arm - regardless of pop time or footwork.

 

Most parents of kids 7 to 12/13 don't know their pitching velocity.  They don't know a kids pop time or his bat exit velocity.  They know that kids get strikeouts, throw runners out, get lots of hits and generally perform above average compared to other kids on their team and the teams they play against.  Most people would consider these kids "dominant".

 

I understand what you are saying 2020dad.  These things don't necessarily mean a kid is going to be "dominant" his whole career.  There is an "eye test" that baseball people can see.  And those people can see that the tools some of these kids are using at a young age might not develop them into dominant players as they get older.  But, to these non-baseball people, these kids ARE dominant in their current situation.  Not only do these "non-baseball" people not have the ability to see whether or not the kids passes the eye test, they judge the players skills through a very small world.  They see the other kids in the league or local tournaments that they play in.  They have no idea what kind of talent are in other parts of the country or even their state.

 

So, to many, these kids are dominant in the environment they play in.  And yes they do fade away due to puberty, lack of "true" baseball skills, lack of velocity as they get older, etc...

 

If, however, you have someone who is a true judge of baseball skills and have the ability to accurately perform the eye test, you may know early that their skills won't translate.  Many people don't see that.  They just know their kid struck out a ton of kids and won a ton of games when they were young.  They hold onto the perception as they get older and become totally disillusioned.  They think their player is not playing or not making teams because of politics.  They just don't understand why their "dominant" player at 12 is just an average or below player at age 15.

Bballman this is one incredibly excellent post.  And I don't feel too bad straying off topic since I started the thread!  You are spot on with every word you said.  But in this day and age it is so easy for everyone to be educated about their kids numbers.  Maybe that would help.  Like you allude to maybe that big kid at 12u was in a lousy league and striking kids out left and right with his 55mph fastball.  Looks fast compared to the other kids in the league.  So when he fails in hs it becomes 'this kid matured sooner than others and was throwing probably 70 as a 12 yo then...'  having every 12 and up showcase would be interesting and may put an end to some of these debates.

I may be trying to figure out what is a dominant skill and what is not at age 12, but I am surely not drinking enough of the kool-aid to pay for a showcase at age 12!

Oh my goodness!  I almost choked on my coffee.  I know there would be a mutiny in our small town if parents were asked to pay for a showcase during the little league years...the majority of them already think we're a little bonkers with the amount of traveling we do.  I think most parents are perfectly content with the small world of rec ball.  They know everyone, the kids have fun, and the best players at 10-12 are mainly the ones that go on to play in high school.  There might be a surprise or two, but not many.

 

Baseball at 15 is still fun, just a different type of fun.  Going into junior year and starting to see kids verbalizing already.  Yikes!  There is the added pressure of thinking of the future...you start to see the mental game and how it can really mess with a player. 

Fair enough -- me neither! Nor at 13 or 14.

 

I will say, however, that it is pretty interesting going to events where objective measures are recorded. Last week at the 14U USA Baseball tournament in Arizona there were about 1000 kids. The tournament posted the top 40 60-yard dash times -- in other words, if your kid's not listed, he's not that fast!

You should come to Atlanta!  I'm waiting for the place to open up where people can have their 6u-10u kids evaluated for future MLB potential...I"m not kidding, that place would make money hand over fist here! 

Certainly don't want anyone to choke on their coffee!  Ii am in no way saying this SHOULD happen.  Just commenting on how people really have no clue where their kids or other kids stand at those ages and yet when they have less than spectacular high school careers these same people who would laugh at you if you knew your 12yo's numbers will have no problem guessing what said kid was when he was 12 and ripping on him for being a fallen star.  Wow that was a run on sentence!   Just saying it would be interesting.  And then it would be a matter of record.  No more BS.  I know it can't happen.

And 2019 I agree it is interesting and good to know where your kid stands.  I have not showcased mine either although they are now available for our ages.  However I will be open to doing it next year.  We may or we may not.  But it certainly is not anything to be ashamed of if you showcase at 14.  And caco although you have not showcased your sons numbers from his PG tournament are a matter of record now.  I just think that is great.  No more BS it is what it is.  Seems to me the ones we ought to scoff at are the ones who make boastful claims and they are NOT on the record.

hummmmm........ lets see

 

little league was fun and cheap...

middle school was a little better

high school fun

High travel ball was great
college ball the best by far

 

I have had a son in the 2013, 2014, 2015recruiting class will have two in the 2016 recruiting class, and one in the 2018 class.... its a part time job

PART TIME? . that sounds FULL TIME!

Players 41-50 not showing on the list are still in the top 5%. They could still be fast. They may just not be the top burners.

 

When my son was twelve he played on a dominant LL all star team. They thrashed the district by an average of about 11-2 per game. The team had a roster of players who could out muscle or out run the small fields (including 50/70). I told a parent I felt only four or five would play high school baseball. He was shocked. I explained many of them lacked baseball skills that would translate on the 60/90 field. That's the difference between a baseball person and a baseball parent. Every kid became a varsity starter in some sport. They were all very athletic. They just weren't all baseball players.

At my son's showcase yesterday, the outfielders got 2 throws to 3rd and 3 throws home. The infielders got a chance to field 5 ground balls. Every kid was tested in 30/60 yrd dash and a couple other skills tests. All got 10 cuts at batting practice. Pitchers either threw to a couple batters in a scrimmage or threw 8-10 pitches in a bullpen, if they had pitched recently. One parent was asking how they could evaluate based on seeing so little of each kid. My reply was that they were baseball guys. They can see things most people can't and it doesn't take them long.

 

My husband is a baseball guy. He's been coaching for 17 years, from t-ball to high school. It doesn't take him long to see who can play or who has potential. It has nothing to do with who was dominant on the small field or who was an All Star in LL or who played on what travel team. Sometimes, even the best athletes don't make great baseball players, as RJM said. 

Just curious but how much did this cost?

       
       
Lets be fair.  We all know at a showcase you are paying for the profile and exposure not reps.  Showcases have nothing to do with making you a better player or allowing you a weekend of fun or whatever.  Strictly business.  Even at the major D1 camp my son goes to in the winter the lesser kids bullpens are extremely short and the better kids still aren't real long.  Maybe 10 pitches for the first and 20 for the latter.