MLB 60 yard dash vs SPARQ

I think a lot has to do with the time factor at tryouts as the sixty can be done quickly depending how many guys run at a time. While I agree the SPARQ tests are a much greater measure of overall athleticism, perhaps it would be a waste of time for everyone except outfielders and middle infielders as often hitting is the chief determinant of who plays corner infield spots, as well as the fact that pitchers can come in all types, some of whom are not great athletic types.

I would also add that the 60 is easy to set up, but I've seen both a ML scout staff and a college staff measure the distance wrong so I guess some people have trouble even measuring that. I have told the story of how a ML team let the whole tryout run 60's until they got to the last few outfielders and then my son ran a 6.0 flat measured on multiple stop watches that told the scout something wasn't right!! He ran past two guys measured at 6.5 and 6.6 like they were standing still. the scouts double checked and found that for some reason, they had measured the course at 57 yards instead of 60. They thought they were seeing a lot of fast Texas boys at that one!

I agree that it's most likely too time consuming and most relevant to MIF & CF only. Still...kind of a lazy approach to evaluating. I believe I read that Stanford uses a SPARQ type eval?

Might be better that some scouts not give a SPARQ type eval. Imagine how screwed up your 57 yard Scout would be if he had to setup a SPARQ type test! Great story BTW. I can totally see it.

SPARQ is very open to technique effects. You can make significant differences in scoring by training on the techniques without any real increase in athletic ability. You aren't going to turn a non-athlete into a stud with technique but a stud with poor technique may score worse than a decent athlete with great technique on several of the drills.

Having seen firsthand sparq testing in baseball I can attest that the baseball sparq score really says nothing about a baseball players actual baseball ability for the most part. When you look at what is actually desirable in a baseball player, no part of the sparq testing will support the desired outcome except for the straight sprint part. Guys who can jump high usually says more about how much they weigh in respect to the size of their feet. The shuttle run comes down to basic ally who is lighter and has the best cleats on. The powerball does say something indeed about strength, but takes no account for how they can apply that power as it translates into the mechanics of hitting and throwing.

I have seen it all too well. You cannot begin to judge baseball skill and ability from sparq alone. I have seen kids with really high scores who are not that good at baseball itself. The ones who do the worst? Kids in that 6'-6'2" range with stockier builds yet still very athletic. Because of their broader frames, they cant shuffle back and forth as quick, cant jump as high, and are slightly slower in their sprints. However, they generally hit for more power, throw harder, less injury prone, etc.

I have been to showcases where they have sparq training along with the regular baseball drills. Guess what? Not one scout or recruiter watched or cared about the sparq training! But, everyone of them watched intently at how they hit a ball, how well they fielded a ball, how accurate their throw w a s, how fast they threw on the gun, etc. The sparq training for baseball may indeed help train you to do certain skills better but the score itself says nothing about what scouts and recruiters actually look for.

These guys nailed it. Being able to score high on this "test" means nothing on a baseball field.

In my opinion it is "product" that Nike is selling and subsequently trainers nationwide are selling.

Did you notice the words "Advertisement" on all the pages of the link you posted?

Is it a bad thing? No. Its cool to compete against other athletes and it could develop into its own special on ESPN, sort of like the Strong Man or Cross Fit comps, but to use it as scouting tool is naive.

The advertisement mentioned how good Michael Vick's score was. But can he hit a slider?

FWIW, I've done SPARQ testing with a group of teenage ball players. I out scored all of them. I'm not half the player they are.

Rich
www.PlayInSchool.com
www.twitter.com/PlayInSchool

the spaRQ TESTIING to me is o no true value in evaluating baseball prospects

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
the spaRQ TESTIING to me is of no true value in evaluating baseball prospects

My only point is that baseball's only measure of athletic ability is the 60 and it's probably not enough to get a true idea of a kid's overall athlticism.

The NFL Combine is a good example of a multi-measurement system that gives scouts an idea as to whether the player has the athletic ability (Not Skill) to play at the next level. Doesn't guarantee anything skills wise but does speak to the athletic tools required to move forward.

Or, are are we just saying baseball doesn't require enough athletic ability to even worry about these types of measurements? Again, I think these type of measurements MOST apply to MIF and CF. Not the end-all-be-all measurement but an additional measurement to standard baseball measurements.

I was recently at a coaches clinic that had a ton of great speakers. A pro scout spoke about "what scouts look for" and the point that he kept coming back to is that his most important tool is not his stopwatch or radar gun. His most important tool is his eyes. A radar gun doesn't tell you if he's locating his pitches. A stopwatch doesn't tell you if he squares balls up.

A lot of "showcases" are trying to provide data in the form of the "measurables" and moms and dads love that. And there may be some good info to be collected. But just because you can't sprint doesn't mean you can't rake. And just because you cant throw a medicine ball doesn't mean you can't get outs.

Look at the Detroit Tigers. The middle of their lineup looked more like competitive eating team then "professional athletes". Good thing Leyland doesn't fill out a lineup based on Sparq scores!

Rich
www.PlayInSchool.com
www.twitter.com/PlayInSchool

as mos of you know I am old school----my eyes tell me what I need to know

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
as mos of you know I am old school----my eyes tell me what I need to know

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
as mos of you know I am old school----my eyes tel me what I need to know

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
as most of you know I am old school----my eyes tell me what I need to know

I will lead off by saying i totally agree, that the sparq test and other variations are not very accurate in baseball skills and your eyes do tell you alot more.

But in saying that at my school we do a test like sparq. The one thing i have heard all scouts pro and college ask is "Is this kid an athlete", i hear it all the time "is the kid athletic", "We need more athletes in the game". In saying that since we started to do the test we call the "MAZE" we have had an increase in numbers in off season conditioning, as the players challenge each other, results are better. Also we have had increase in the most athletic people in the school come to tryouts, which pushes our traditional baseball player. So I see the results of just having some of the most athletic kids coming to tryouts and to off season conditioning, even some found out they could play baseball which they werent to sure about. Now that doesn't mean we always keep those kids or if they can even play baseball a lick. But they come out to try to reach the challenge, it is always fun to see athletes challenge athletes.

So although i say again test like sparq test don't show me if a kid can play baseball, but i can def. tell a scout if a kid is athletic or not. Plus not sure or not but i would assume that the more athletic a kid is the more his potential or his ceiling would be.

Our maze test includes: 60 yd dash, 30 yd dash, pro shuttle, bench press 135 max reps, squat 185 max reps, 10 yd ladder forward timed, medicine ball throws, sit ups max in a minute, vertical jump, broad jump. everything is timed or measured. I also give them what an average college athlete would be expected to do, to give them something to strive for.

I would argue SPARQ is a nice test of athleticism but it might be even better used as training tool to bring out and develop those skills. To me , this is the way to go in terms of off-season conditioning. As someone pointed out, the guys who train in advance are gonna be at an advantage. It's like prepping for the SAT or getting ready for the NFL Combine. These days, nobody goes to the Combine without first having spent 4-6 weeks at the IMG Academy in Bradenton or training at another of the high-end facilities. It's no longer good enough, say, for a linebacker to run a 4.75 40 when a sprint guru can turn him into a 4.6 guy for a day, shoot from the second round into the top half of the first and make millions more. But he may not be a better player than he was a few weeks previous and he'll probably never run another 4.6.

Jay, I agree. At Velocity they taught my son how to take a tenth of a second off his sixty time without changing his speed. They taught him how to lean into the start better. It was the sixty equivalent of a better jump.

Hey, is Velocity still around? Believe the speed and science guy who developed the concept now oversees the speed/motion training at IMG Academy with potential top draft picks in advance of the NFL Combine. Did an incredible job last year with the linebacker out of Boston College.

quote:

Originally posted by jayhook:
Hey, is Velocity still around? Believe the speed and science guy who developed the concept now oversees the speed/motion training at IMG Academy with potential top draft picks in advance of the NFL Combine. Did an incredible job last year with the linebacker out of Boston College.

This was almost four years ago. But they're still there.

Didn't know how many were still around or if the operation had closed up shop. The two that I knew of re-opened under new names.