The PG Top Prospect list and PG rankings are invaluable, I'm sure, to the recruiting public. For a variety of reasons, NTGson has never been able to attend a PG showcase: his time to shine or tarnish has been at various PG Tournaments as a contributing member of his team. Showcases have been pushed to the lower level of our family's priority list.
To us, earning a PG All-Tournament designation has to be considered a major accomplishment because it is representative of baseball skill and talent in a venue where that skill and talent contribute to a team's success, on the scoreboard, against top talent.
Showcases are wonderful opportunities for prospects to display quanitifiable skills: velo, exit speed, 60 times, etc. However, Showcase results and ratings, in my opinion, lack somewhat in the areas of game knowledge, tracking ability, throwing accuracy, timeliness of hitting, unflappability, the intangibles of the game and the playing of it.
PG staff is extremely qualified to assess the skills and capabilities of players and I well acknowledge the thoroughness of their work, especially in a controlled Showcase environment. The comments on players are incisive and encompassing.
My humble suggestion to you is to structure the WWBA All-Tournament designations to reflect a similar ranking of excellence in the areas of: batting - (average and extra base hits in a minimum number of at bats); pitching - (ERA and K's in a minimum number of innings pitched); and team impact - (RBI's, 2-out RBI's, batting average with RISP, plus scouts' choices based on each game's stellar plays or a player's overall contribution to a team's success: the kid who advances a runner from 2nd to 3rd with a placed ground ball out to the right side in a one-run game; a pitcher's ability to escape from trouble without giving up key runs, etc.).
There will be players who meet a fairly stringent level of performance in all three categories, in 2 out of three or in just one. To me, those players are your all-tournament designees. Honorable Mentions are earned by the players whose performance falls below one threshold and above another in each of the categories.
The algorithms necessary to pull statistics from tournament stats wouldn't be too difficult to write and inputs from the scouts at each game are easily quantifiable for these purposes.
I'm not trying to mount a soapbox. PG is an industry leader and its rankings and lists are most-respected for their accuracy and fairness. My suggestions are driven by what I perceive as a need to make a PG All-Tournament designation closer to being as meaningful and impactful as inclusion in PG's Top Prospect and other lists.