Late Bloomers

Not only is it realistic, it happens all the time.  You can't watch thousands of baseball players without developing a sense for projection.  This projection means different things to Colleges than MLB scouts. MLB clubs have 5 years to develop p[layers, colleges must see more immediate development.

 

However, there are many outstanding players/pitchers that blossom in college.  Let's face it, if you see a mature strong kid throwing upper 80s with lots of effort and another tall skinny immature kid throwing upper 80s easily, which one is the better recruit?

This is a great question...thanks for putting it out there.  I feel like my son (2016) is a late bloomer as well.  The amount he has improved in the past 4 months in both strength and speed amazes me. I don't think he is finished growing and if he has, there is still plenty of room to add strength to his frame.  

 

I think a lot of the advice we will be given is JUCO, but for my high academic son, that is not an option.

 

Maybe I am biased because I have a late bloomer and I've seen how hard he has worked to be competitive while being less physically mature, but I feel like his work ethic will give him a leg up when he does finish maturing.  A lot of (not all) the boys who were shaving every day in middle school never really had to train or work very hard to be the best players on their teams.  JMO

I'm with PG on this one there are all kinds of late bloomers playing college baseball.

 

There are also many different types of players and the best option for one will not apply to another. A high academic kid can go to JC, however if he is looking to play at an elite (baseball) program and take a difficult academic track, most of these programs are "baseball first" so it might not be the right fit longer term. (some are so this is not 100% true) A player can "grey shirt" in a JC also, which allows for an earlier move to a 4 year program. Redshirting is also an option. 

 

D3's are a perfect place for some high academic kids and the top D3 programs (baseball) are loaded with D1 players that fit this profile. So yes there are plenty of options, you just have to figure out the players profile and priority and work toward those opportunities. I watched a D3 pitcher this weekend who was 91-93 topped at 94/95 that will likely be drafted this year, that fits this profile. 

In my admittedly limited experience, late bloomers probably don't have much shot at D1's right out of the gate.  My guy is still pretty small  (5' 9" 150) as a senior and was even smaller when we started this hunt.  Just before his  first camp (less than 2 years ago) he weighed all of 120, I think. Even then he was and still is an  extreme fast twitch type guy, very athletic, very quick. (People tell me that his bat speed is top 5% but who knows really)

 

Despite his lack of bulk, his extreme athleticism did  get him a few sideways glances along the way from a  few D1 and DII programs -- but  maybe they were  checking out whether he disappeared from view when you looked at him sideways    Mostly, though, he got the  message that he needed to get physically stronger.

 

HIs own view, from many camps and showcases he has attended, is that the bigger guys tend to draw the attention, even if they don't have quite the best swing mechanics or throwing mechanics. He thinks D1 coaches tend to believe they can refine the mechanics of a bigger guy, as long as he as certain level of talent, more reliably or at least more quickly  than they can build a little fast twitch  guy into  specimen.   Not sure he's right about that.  But that's his own takeaway for what its worth. 

 

By contrast some very competitive D3 programs, have taken him seriously from the beginning. It does seem  like they are  more willing to take a bet on being able to help a kid  develop  "man strength" as one coach put it to him,  than the D1's. ("All we need to do for you," he said to the kid, "is to help you add some 'man strength.")  D1's seem to want you to come with a good bit of man strength already.  

 

His goal before showing up on campus next fall is to weigh in at 165-170.  One top D3 college coach  told him that  if he could add that amount of muscle,  he believes  the kid would be a "beast" -- with his bat speed and swing mechanics.    (Easier said than done, since the kid still seems to have the metabolism of a hamster.)

 

Don't know if the point really generalizes, but from our limited experience I would suspect that it does. 

While a kid may not have the size yet he may have other tools that allow projection. Blazing speed is an eye catcher. Some kids show great hands and first step quickness. 

 

My son was 5'11", 135 as a high school freshman. He was 6'1", 170 as a senior. By soph year of college he was 6'2", 195. He's still growing at a rate of a 1/4 inch per year. When he came home for Christmas break I asked him if he fell face first into some dust. "Very funny dad." He had been too busy with finals to shave that week. He said he only needs to shave every three days as a twenty-one year old.

A couple years ago Florida State successfully recruited a kid that was about 5'10, 150 lbs.  He listed himself as 5'11, 175 lbs but that was an exaggeration.  

He ended up getting drafted in the 1st round and is now one of the very top prospects in professional baseball.  He now is listed as 5'11, 175 and he is a wealthy young man.

Was he projectable?  Yes, very much so! More importantly he was extremely talented.  He sure wasn't over looked in favor of those much bigger and more mature.

It is all about talent and projection.

http://www.perfectgame.org/Pla...ofile.aspx?ID=210870

Not sure what will happen with my 2017 catcher. He's 5'10" on the dot and 160 lbs and ripped but has huge shoulders, long arms (his shirt size is 16/37), and huge hands. He grew 6" 2 years ago but only an inch since then. When I was his age I was maybe 5'7" but grew 2.5" from 18-19 yo (I ended up 5'10.5" but apparently have shrunk 1/4"). Apparently, the "late growth sport" is dominant on my Mom's side of the family with males. Both her brothers grew 3-4" from 18-21 or so. However, my brothers ar 6'3" and 6'2" (and left handed) and stopped growing by age 15. Who knows? Can't control height...

Every player should shoot for the top level they can play at. Every player should shoot for the best program and the best fit. Quite frankly the name of the jersey doesn't mean squat if your not at the right fit for you. There are things that are very important to people today that are not important at all a year down the road. Getting the opportunity to play college baseball at a place that is the right fit for who you are is what is going to be what matters. Be a late bloomer who got opportunities to bloom. Not a late bloomer that ended up on the bench and never got the opportunity to bloom.

 

Getting drafted because you show signs of being a late bloomer and getting signed by a college program because you show signs of being a late bloomer are totally different scenarios. A major college program signs you because they "think" you might be a player down the road. Another program signs you because they think you are a player now and see even better things down the road.

 

They need to tell you that you can play for them. Not he's a late bloomer and If he blooms he might play for us. The most important thing is, IS can he play the game at the level they require? There are ton's of stories of kids that were not highly recruited who blossomed in college. But very few of kids that were not highly recruited who sat the bench waiting to blossom who actually blossomed in college.

 

Go where they love you for who you are right now. And then let them be pleasantly surprised at how much better you were than they thought you were. Vs - Go where they think you might develop - and then never get the chance to actually develop. The name on the jersey means a lot when a kid signs. It means nothing after he has worn a hole in the pine.

 

Don't worry about what you can not control. Take care of what you can. Find the fit for you. Don't try and pound a round peg into a square hole.

 

I'm bumping this thread because I think it's a good read (and all contributors are still active).  I think having a late bloomer makes the plan a bit tougher, regarding recruiting.  I know 2017 gets frustrated at times, but reality is that no big program wants a 5'9" 142 lb catcher that knocks down the peach fuzz once a month.  It doesn't matter if they can flat out play, consistently hit for power, hit all the "measurables", etc.  I'm often reminding him "Control what you can control; you can't control genetics but you will grow eventually.  You can't control which schools reach out to you but you can control what schools you reach out to and you can focus on getting better every day."  

 

I catch myself thinking "if he can do this now, what is he going to do when he grows another three inches and adds 30 lbs?"  Then I give myself a good mental smack and remind myself that I need to enjoy where he is now and not try to predict the future.

 

So, the plan is in place.  I'm just wondering how often the plan changes for some of these late bloomers as they get bigger and stronger?...I guess the game will let us know!

It definitely will...2018 has a PG write-up that mentioned "Medium-large frame with long, lean present build and high levels of physical projection remaining on frame"...it is exciting to see what our boys will be able to do once nature brings it to them...btw, 2018 wipes the peachfuzz off once a month as well.

My roommate in college is the perfect example. He was around 6'2 155 as a senior in hs (Texas 5A) and was only getting looked at by two D3 schools. By his senior year in college he was like 6'3 210 and running a sub 6.7 60, benching 300+, and tearing it up on the field. He got drafted by the Cardinals after his senior year and is doing really well in the minors so far. 

 

Perfect example of a guy who bloomed a little late and absolutely worked his tail off. To make it to the next level it takes an extraordinary work ethic and this guy has it.

 

So yeah, work as hard as you possibly can because you never know where it might take you.

My S is a RHP but small, 145 lb, maybe 5 9 or 5 10.
Throwing high 70s topping at least 80.
Looking at academics first, baseball 2nd.

Thought maybe baseball could influence one academic
choice over another, if the coach showed enough interest.
So far, at multiple D3 programs, all he got was an invite
to tryouts "if he attends".  Not a supported recruit.
One coach even said "we could not teach you more
as far as mechanics".   Just want to see growth which leads
to 4-5 mph more speed.

Wondering how walk on at D3 actually works out,
if he does grow in the next year (2016 HS senior now).

There is a huge difference between a kid who is physically immature but shows outstanding skills and a kid who is the same physically but lacks outstanding skills (but having above average skills) and who attributes the lack of outstanding skills to physical immaturity. In the former, the program KNOWS the kid will get stronger and (hopefully add height); in the latter the program KNOWS the kid will get stronger and (hopefully add height) but doesn't know whether the skills will develop. As Gump said, "good, one less thing to worry about."

 

Garrett Stubbs comes to mind as an example. Stubbs was a small skinny catcher in HS with outstanding skills (baseball IQ, hitting mechanics, catching mechanics, etc). He was a small skinny college freshman and got strong, while maintaining a lean frame. Achieved big collegiate recognition at USC and finished his first season in proball in full season A. Also, Joey Denato, Bradley Zimmer.

 

Closer to to my heart, S graduated HS at 5" 11" and 145. Arrived at college same height and 160. He began getting offers as a Junior when he weighed 130 (parents were average height and build). Didn't impede his ability to find a place to play.

 

As as another poster noted, control what you can control: skill building and strength. 

 

On another note, do not take what scouts and coaches tell you about your kid as gospel. Look at the context of the conversation. If the scout has come to your home and tells you the kid is good, that is close to the truth. If the scout tells you the kid is good after seeing him at an event and you have been sitting with the scout during the event, that was just polite chatter. Scouts and coaches are not out to destroy your dreams, but most of the time being polite to a parent is part of the job; the scouts and coaches need only to be truthful to their employers and polite to everyone else.

 

Signs of the truth your kid is good (possibly recruitable) include (but are not limited to): home visits, questionnaires (from the pro side only), scholarship offers, personal phone calls, OV invites, a coach driving 200 miles to watch ONLY your kid play that day.

 

Signs that are ambiguous include (but are not limited to): camp invites, UV invites, requests for transcripts, mass mailings, polite talk outside of your home, invites to be a walk-on, a coach watching your kid and 150 others at a show case.

 

If you read anything more then ambiguity into an ambigious situation, you are setting the parents and the kid up for a huge disappointment. And, the process is stressful enough without adding self-imposed stress caused by misreading tea leaves.

 

Goosegg,

 

Garrett Stubbs - what a great example you gave.

 

Getting stronger can do wonders for a good player.

 

http://www.perfectgame.org/Pla...ofile.aspx?ID=220664

It sure does feel like reading tea leaves, haha.  Especially for us parents that are somewhat clueless.  That's why I look at rosters, independent evaluations, this website and any other info I can find.  I realize there is nothing I can control regarding my son's future in this game that he loves.   I can only offer support, make sure he eats well and drive him places.  However, he does ask me "what do your baseball people say?"....then I hop on HSBBW and do some more digging.  

 

Thank you for the link on Garrett!  It gives late bloomers hope!