Your Ivy point lends itself more to the drafted cold weather players are more likely to be pitchers conversation. Aside from that I've watched plenty of Ivy baseball over the past few years. It's very low level D1 one. Your comment lends itself to the Ivies being on the same level as other D1's. You know better than that even if you haven't seen an Ivy game. But you've strayed way off base from the origonal debate in an attempt to find an angle you can win. Have a nice day.quote:Originally posted by infielddad:quote:Originally posted by RJM:Thank you for making my point. I knew the overall numbers were about 50%. But D3 draftees are usually 65-70% pitchers. Going back to my original point it's because 90+ is 90+ no matter where it's measured. Whereas the position players don't consistly face top quality (D1 type) pitching the quality of competition they face is in question with the scouts.quote:Originally posted by Up in the Stands:quote:Originally posted by Tx-Husker:quote:it's far more likely a pitcher is drafted than a position player
Isn't that true at all levels? Just look at MLB rosters...around half the rosters are pitchers. They have to draft more pitchers than position players.
Both true statements. I ran a quick calculation of the 2011 draft results. There were a total of 1530 players drafted. The combined number RHP(573) and LHP(218) drafted was 791. That means 51% of ALL players drafted last year were pitchers.
No attempt was made to sort out the number between D1, D2, D3, and HS.
This is hysterical.
In 2011, there were 8 Ivy League players drafted.
6 were pitchers.
http://www.ivygateblog.com/201...ncerest-condolences/
So I guess this proves the Ivies are not DI quality, but more like DIII, huh???
quote:Your Ivy point lends itself more to the drafted cold weather players are more likely to be pitchers conversation.
Another its true because a scout told you?
Geez.
What it reflects is the draft results don't have reliable relevance to discuss who is and who is not a DI player.
In my view, it further reflects what bbscout posted many years ago. MLB scouts are paid to find the best players who project upside into the level of play they know exists in professional baseball. They should and usually will find most of them in DI baseball.
It's true because it's statistically true. The rational according to an article (in Baseball America, Collegiate Baseball or one of these last year) is cold weather position players don't get nearly the reps warm weather players get creating less position prospects. Therefore many more pitchers are drafted from cold weather than position players. The article was about the potential change in this philosophy with the number of indoor training facilities popping up in cold weather regions. But we're way off topic now.
quote:It's true because it's statistically true. A rational according to an article (in Baseball America, Collegiate Baseball or one of these last year) cold weather position players don't get nearly the reps warm weather players get creating less position prospects.
Is it true because one article had some stats?
If I remember the article and hypothesis, the focus was on players through HS.
The Ivy leagues recruit nationally. They have position players from CA. Tx, Fla, and many, many warm weather states.
I am unaware of any study/hypothesis which would support the idea you appear to advocate: take a position player from a warm weather state, put him in an Ivy for 3 winters and his ability to be drafted is impacted by cold weather, not his talent, skills and projecting those to Milb.
You're being an excellent lawyer today. You've completely twisted around what I said into absolutely something I didn't say. Well done! The comment was on the development leading up to college, as in where players grow up. NOw I'm shaking your teeth off my ankle as you move further and further from the original diuscussion. By the way I'll take articled in Baseball America, Collegiate Baseball and other like publications as legitimate. You obviously have some ax to grind with the realities of the process. It's surprising since your son grew up in a warm climate while mine is the one who has dealt with the prejudices regarding kids who grow up in cold weather.quote:Originally posted by infielddad:quote:It's true because it's statistically true. A rational according to an article (in Baseball America, Collegiate Baseball or one of these last year) cold weather position players don't get nearly the reps warm weather players get creating less position prospects.
Is it true because one article had some stats?
If I remember the article and hypothesis, the focus was on players through HS.
The Ivy leagues recruit nationally. They have position players from CA. Tx, Fla, and many, many warm weather states.
I am unaware of any study/hypothesis which would support the idea you appear to advocate: take a position player from a warm weather state, put him in an Ivy for 3 winters and his ability to be drafted is impacted by cold weather, not his talent, skills and projecting those to Milb.
quote:The comment was on the development leading up to college, as in where players grow up.
And you used that article to support why the Ivy has 6 pitchers and 2 position players selected in the draft, and that is somehow different than the draft differentiation at DIII. That is exactly how you used it and how I applied it in response.
As to my son, or your son, why not leave out aspersions of who had "advantages" or "prejudice?"
I think it is really too bad you went there. Yes, that is really too bad.
I'm tired of going in circles. Every time I defend a point you make up a new one. I quit. You win. Feel better?
On a thread which has been almost silent for 5 years, you make a post and get some push back.
Your view is you establish points. I "make up" new ones?
Interesting concept.
It isn't about "winning."
It is about others who read a thread on NCAA Division III, and visibility for the draft, to have an exchange which provides them accurate and good information.
In our experience with our son and other DIII's and with bbscout, I posted our information.
It isn't easy.
Good scouts get paid to find players who have the ability to be drafted.
Some scouts don't or see "ability" through different lenses.
While I don't know precisely, my overall impression is more DIII's from Northern States(cold weather) are drafted from DIII than warm weather or it is close. More pitchers get drafted from every level, including DIII
Finally, the draft is not the best measurement and reflection of DI talent and skills.
Too bad you felt it okay to cast aspersions and bring in the son's. Too bad indeed.
Your view is you establish points. I "make up" new ones?
Interesting concept.
It isn't about "winning."
It is about others who read a thread on NCAA Division III, and visibility for the draft, to have an exchange which provides them accurate and good information.
In our experience with our son and other DIII's and with bbscout, I posted our information.
It isn't easy.
Good scouts get paid to find players who have the ability to be drafted.
Some scouts don't or see "ability" through different lenses.
While I don't know precisely, my overall impression is more DIII's from Northern States(cold weather) are drafted from DIII than warm weather or it is close. More pitchers get drafted from every level, including DIII
Finally, the draft is not the best measurement and reflection of DI talent and skills.
Too bad you felt it okay to cast aspersions and bring in the son's. Too bad indeed.
quote:It's surprising since your son grew up in a warm climate while mine is the one who has dealt with the prejudices regarding kids who grow up in cold weather.
What prejudices did your son have to deal with?
What if Tebow was a DIII baseball player?
Sorry, as a former D3 player, I'll admit to having average ability to go along with my love for the game. I appreciate that top D3's have very talented student athletes. When a small school player is drafted, I'm happy that the player has earned an opportunity.
To hear the story on infieldad's son is pretty inspiring. I'm not saying that he wasn't a very nice talent to begin with, but when a kid is a student of the game and works at it.... awesome to see at any level.
My sarcasm is unbecoming. Acknowledged. Excellent posts. This site is outstanding, and though I post infrequently, I appreciate the content and those who share their knowledge of the game.
I apologize in advance for my attempt to lighten the mood a bit....I figure that it can't hurt to try.
Sorry, as a former D3 player, I'll admit to having average ability to go along with my love for the game. I appreciate that top D3's have very talented student athletes. When a small school player is drafted, I'm happy that the player has earned an opportunity.
To hear the story on infieldad's son is pretty inspiring. I'm not saying that he wasn't a very nice talent to begin with, but when a kid is a student of the game and works at it.... awesome to see at any level.
My sarcasm is unbecoming. Acknowledged. Excellent posts. This site is outstanding, and though I post infrequently, I appreciate the content and those who share their knowledge of the game.
I apologize in advance for my attempt to lighten the mood a bit....I figure that it can't hurt to try.
In specific my son didn't have to deal with any prejudices. But there are prejudices cold weather players have to deal with in scouting. Even on this board there have been many comments in the past on the superiority of the warm weather prospect over the cold weather prospect. It doesn't mean there aren't cold weather position playing prospects. But percentage wise there are far more warm weather position playing prospects than cold weather. The rap on cold weather position players is not getting the reps in the field and at the plate warm weather players get. A preceived benefit of cold weather pitching prospects is they don't have the mileage on their arms (going back to preteen travel) warm weather pitching prospects might have.quote:Originally posted by J H:quote:It's surprising since your son grew up in a warm climate while mine is the one who has dealt with the prejudices regarding kids who grow up in cold weather.
What prejudices did your son have to deal with?
In the past year I read an article on how the playing field for cold weather position prospects is starting to tilt towards the positive due to the number of indoor facilties going into business. The winter after my son's soph year (I'm not calling him a pro prospect) he played in an indoor winter league on an full size domed field.
scroll down one picture
I don’t know about others, but my son's coaching staff does not give a rats behind where you are from. They are looking for the best ball players they can find and even though they are in Texas they recruit nationally. I think there are 7-8 “cold weather climate” players on the squad.
And your son's team would be one of how many hundred college programs? You guys have gone waaaaaaaaaaaaaay off point. You're now spinning in circles getting further and further from the original discussion (D3 players and the draft). Of course a coach doesn't care where a player is from. But the statistics bear out (the draft - where this conversation started) a D3 player or a cold weather developed player who is drafted is far more likely to be a pitcher than a position player. The draft overall is about 50/50. From these groups of the discussion it's 65-70% pitchers. I responded to JH since he asked a logical question. The rest has gone in circles drifting away from the point for two pages. So unless someone can come up with a relevant point rather than going in circles there's nothing more to discuss.quote:Originally posted by BOF:
I don’t know about others, but my son's coaching staff does not give a rats behind where you are from. They are looking for the best ball players they can find and even though they are in Texas they recruit nationally. I think there are 7-8 “cold weather climate” players on the squad.
quote:Originally posted by RJM:And your son's team would be one of how many hundred college programs? You guys have gone waaaaaaaaaaaaaay off point. You're now spinning in circles getting further and further from the original discussion (D3 players and the draft). Of course a coach doesn't care where a player is from. But the statistics bear out (the draft - where this conversation started) a D3 player or a cold weather developed player who is drafted is far more likely to be a pitcher than a position player. The draft overall is about 50/50. From these groups of the discussion it's 65-70% pitchers. I responded to JH since he asked a logical question. The rest has gone in circles drifting away from the point for two pages. So unless someone can come up with a relevant point rather than going in circles there's nothing more to discuss.quote:Originally posted by BOF:
I don’t know about others, but my son's coaching staff does not give a rats behind where you are from. They are looking for the best ball players they can find and even though they are in Texas they recruit nationally. I think there are 7-8 “cold weather climate” players on the squad.
Or, perhaps, your "point" and the "support" for your "point" were/are illusory, just like the illusory "prejudice" you asserted affected your son, and then admitted to JH, didn't.
I think, a few pages back, toward the start of this thread, I noted in 2004 there were more pitchers than position players taken in DIII. I provided the breakdown, which are similar to 2011.
For 2011, the stats are comparable for JC(about 75 pitchers and 50 position players), for Naia(13 position and 33-34 pitchers. Scouts can't evaluate those players, either?
Now you expand a thread on DIII to DIII and cold weather for the draft...and everyone else is not staying on point?
Now, about that prejudice...???
Hopefully, those who have son's playing DIII or looking to play at that level will be able to use and sort through this thread and decide whether parents who have son's playing/played/coached at DIII might be providing information which is reliable.
Kids in our region are affected. The stats bear it out. My son has not been drafted nor is he interested in being drafted. Therefore he has not been affected. The only illusion here is a lawyer looking for an angle because he won't accept he's wrong and the other person is right even thought the stats bear out he's wrong. Now you've strayed off into JC and NAIA players. You're desperate for an angle. We're done.
quote:Do not underestimate the effort,dedication, and gratification that it takes to be considered as draftable from a DIII program. There were 12 draftees selected on June 7 and 8 from all of DIII baseball and I am pretty sure that each was a senior. Good scouts will find you but not all scouts will find you. Use the summer wood bat leagues to show both you can compete with wood and that you can compete with those playing DI. It does make a difference.
I posted this nearly 8 years ago. As I recall, the other position players that year were from Trinity College(cold weather), Ohio(cold weather) and either Wisconsin or Minnesota(the same.)
My view on this has not changed in 8 years.
The learning experience from the steps our son and his college coaching staff followed in working to get him to be a draftable player, getting him visibility with scouts, and getting drafted are what I have communicated. That college staff has had other position players and pitchers drafted.
I think a proven track record by a college staff is far more valuable to this discussion, and what I have shared.
bbscout was a pretty good and reliable scout/source along that pathway.
You come on this thread, spew "stuff," assert your son experienced "prejudice" and then admit he didn't, and profess some "stats" prove something, when you have never been there.
I wish the best for you son in creating an opportunity at his Big Ten program.
It is sad you felt a need to use him as a "crutch" and then reversed course.
Those who read this thread can decide if you have offered any useful, first hand and reliable information on the path to being drafted for DIII players.
One aspect can now be agreed upon: this thread can end.
yawn
This actually is a pretty interesting discussion, although I am not sure why there is so much conflict.
I have a nephew at Oberlin College in Ohio. They played for a week last spring in AZ and will do the same this year.
I doubt any of the players I saw that week would stand out in the PAC 12, but I am sure some of them could play. I know lots of guys from Lynchburg College (in the town where I grew up) who were very good. More than a few did pretty well in pro baseball, although none made it to the Big Leagues (at least as a players).
But, the bottom line is that every one of those guys was having a great time playing college baseball. I had a great time watching, as did my brother and his wife and the parents and friends of all the other players. I also got to meet a lot of terrific people at the Oberlin College Arizona Alumni Chapter cookout for the team.
I don't know if anything else much matters.
I must add that the coach at Virginia Tech, Pete Hughes, did a lot to build up the Trinity program when he was there before he moved to Boston College. He believes it is a great program with great players and is very proud of what the school has accomplished on the baseball field.
I have a nephew at Oberlin College in Ohio. They played for a week last spring in AZ and will do the same this year.
I doubt any of the players I saw that week would stand out in the PAC 12, but I am sure some of them could play. I know lots of guys from Lynchburg College (in the town where I grew up) who were very good. More than a few did pretty well in pro baseball, although none made it to the Big Leagues (at least as a players).
But, the bottom line is that every one of those guys was having a great time playing college baseball. I had a great time watching, as did my brother and his wife and the parents and friends of all the other players. I also got to meet a lot of terrific people at the Oberlin College Arizona Alumni Chapter cookout for the team.
I don't know if anything else much matters.
I must add that the coach at Virginia Tech, Pete Hughes, did a lot to build up the Trinity program when he was there before he moved to Boston College. He believes it is a great program with great players and is very proud of what the school has accomplished on the baseball field.
Jemaz,
The only reason there is conflict is that RJM is involved. Other than that there is some good information here.
Certanly more relevant than schools banning Ugs...
The only reason there is conflict is that RJM is involved. Other than that there is some good information here.
Certanly more relevant than schools banning Ugs...
I came across this and thought it is relevant to post here.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/co...I/About+Division+III
Division III Facts and Figures
MEMBERSHIP
Source: September 2011 Membership Report
•442 Total Members (436 Active and 6 Provisional/Reclassifying)
•Out of the 436 active members, 19 percent (84) of the institutions are public and 81 percent (352) of the institutions are private.
•42 Division III Conferences
COMPOSITION OF STUDENT BODY
On average, student-athletes represent 20 percent of the student body at Division III institutions. (This percentage is much higher, typically between 25 - 40 percent at many smaller institutions.)
INSTITUTIONAL ENROLLMENT
Source: 2010-11 EADA Data Submission
LOWEST AVERAGE HIGHEST
Overall 329 2,625 22,097
NCAA-SPONSORED CHAMPIONSHIPS
Source: 2011-12 Division III Manual
Men Championship Sports (14)
•Baseball, Basketball, Cross Country, Football, Golf, Ice Hockey, Lacrosse, S****r, Swimming and Diving, Tennis, Indoor Track and Field, Outdoor Track and Field, Volleyball*, Wrestling
Women Championship Sports (14)
•Basketball, Cross Country, Field Hockey, Golf, Ice Hockey, Lacrosse, Rowing, S****r, Softball, Swimming and Diving, Tennis, Indoor Track and Field, Outdoor Track and Field, Volleyball
National Collegiate Championships (10)
•Men - Gymnastics, Volleyball (Divisions I and II), Water Polo; Women - Bowling, Gymnastics, Ice Hockey (Divisions I and II), Water Polo; Men and Women - Fencing, Rifle, Skiing
*New NCAA Championship starting in 2011-12
ATHLETICS PARTICIPANTS (including Emerging Sports)
Source: 2009-10 Participation and Sponsorship Report
About 40 percent of NCAA student-athletes compete at Division III institutions.
DIVISION III OVERALL
Men
101,329 (59%)
249,307 (57%)
Women
70,984 (41%)
186,460 (43%)
Total
172,313 (40%)
435,767
AVERAGE NUMBER OF MEN’S AND WOMEN’S SPORTS SPONSORED PER INSTITUTION
Source: 2009-10 Participation and Sponsorship Report
Men – 8.2
Women – 8.9
AVERAGE NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS PER INSTITUTION
Source: 2009-10 Participation and Sponsorship Report
Men – 230
Women – 160
NCAA DIVISION III BUDGET ALLOCATIONS
Source: NCAA Financial Statements
•3.18 percent of NCAA operating budget
PRIORITY INITIATIVES
Source: NCAA Division III Strategic Plan
•Clarify the values of Division III athletics
•Establish a greater strategic role for presidents in the Division III governance structure
•Ensure the division is effectively managing diversity and gender equity issues
•Establish a drug education and testing program that best protects student-athlete well-being
•Assess adherence to the Division III philosophical principle that student-athletes should have academic performance consistent with the general student body.
DID YOU KNOW?
Source: 2009-10 CIRP College Senior Survey
•Division III student-athletes report participating in club sports and intramural sports at greater rates than non-athletes. Female student-athletes also report in greater numbers than female non-athletes that they have served as a leader in an organization.
•Division III student-athletes report active academic engagement and participation in academic “extras,” such as research with faculty, study abroad opportunities and capstone/senior thesis projects.
•Division III student-athletes report significantly greater gains in time management when compared with non-athletes. Male student-athletes also report significantly greater gains in leadership when compared with male non-athletes.
•Division III student-athletes report greater involvement in volunteering. They also are more likely to report “leadership potential” as an important consideration in choosing a career.
•Division III student-athletes are more likely to report that they see themselves as part of the campus community.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/co...I/About+Division+III
Division III Facts and Figures
MEMBERSHIP
Source: September 2011 Membership Report
•442 Total Members (436 Active and 6 Provisional/Reclassifying)
•Out of the 436 active members, 19 percent (84) of the institutions are public and 81 percent (352) of the institutions are private.
•42 Division III Conferences
COMPOSITION OF STUDENT BODY
On average, student-athletes represent 20 percent of the student body at Division III institutions. (This percentage is much higher, typically between 25 - 40 percent at many smaller institutions.)
INSTITUTIONAL ENROLLMENT
Source: 2010-11 EADA Data Submission
LOWEST AVERAGE HIGHEST
Overall 329 2,625 22,097
NCAA-SPONSORED CHAMPIONSHIPS
Source: 2011-12 Division III Manual
Men Championship Sports (14)
•Baseball, Basketball, Cross Country, Football, Golf, Ice Hockey, Lacrosse, S****r, Swimming and Diving, Tennis, Indoor Track and Field, Outdoor Track and Field, Volleyball*, Wrestling
Women Championship Sports (14)
•Basketball, Cross Country, Field Hockey, Golf, Ice Hockey, Lacrosse, Rowing, S****r, Softball, Swimming and Diving, Tennis, Indoor Track and Field, Outdoor Track and Field, Volleyball
National Collegiate Championships (10)
•Men - Gymnastics, Volleyball (Divisions I and II), Water Polo; Women - Bowling, Gymnastics, Ice Hockey (Divisions I and II), Water Polo; Men and Women - Fencing, Rifle, Skiing
*New NCAA Championship starting in 2011-12
ATHLETICS PARTICIPANTS (including Emerging Sports)
Source: 2009-10 Participation and Sponsorship Report
About 40 percent of NCAA student-athletes compete at Division III institutions.
DIVISION III OVERALL
Men
101,329 (59%)
249,307 (57%)
Women
70,984 (41%)
186,460 (43%)
Total
172,313 (40%)
435,767
AVERAGE NUMBER OF MEN’S AND WOMEN’S SPORTS SPONSORED PER INSTITUTION
Source: 2009-10 Participation and Sponsorship Report
Men – 8.2
Women – 8.9
AVERAGE NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS PER INSTITUTION
Source: 2009-10 Participation and Sponsorship Report
Men – 230
Women – 160
NCAA DIVISION III BUDGET ALLOCATIONS
Source: NCAA Financial Statements
•3.18 percent of NCAA operating budget
PRIORITY INITIATIVES
Source: NCAA Division III Strategic Plan
•Clarify the values of Division III athletics
•Establish a greater strategic role for presidents in the Division III governance structure
•Ensure the division is effectively managing diversity and gender equity issues
•Establish a drug education and testing program that best protects student-athlete well-being
•Assess adherence to the Division III philosophical principle that student-athletes should have academic performance consistent with the general student body.
DID YOU KNOW?
Source: 2009-10 CIRP College Senior Survey
•Division III student-athletes report participating in club sports and intramural sports at greater rates than non-athletes. Female student-athletes also report in greater numbers than female non-athletes that they have served as a leader in an organization.
•Division III student-athletes report active academic engagement and participation in academic “extras,” such as research with faculty, study abroad opportunities and capstone/senior thesis projects.
•Division III student-athletes report significantly greater gains in time management when compared with non-athletes. Male student-athletes also report significantly greater gains in leadership when compared with male non-athletes.
•Division III student-athletes report greater involvement in volunteering. They also are more likely to report “leadership potential” as an important consideration in choosing a career.
•Division III student-athletes are more likely to report that they see themselves as part of the campus community.
quote:Originally posted by BOF:
I have to agree with infielddad these discussions on whether a D3 could beat a D1, or an Ivy could beat a ranked D1, or fill in the blank, they are all pointless. My hat goes off to any kid playing baseball in college regardless of the level or the major they are under takeing. It is a huge accomplishment and they are all making a commitment above and beyond their peers. Until you see it up close you really can not understand how hard they are working. They are in a fraternity of a very small and special group of kids IMO.
Just my 2 cents.
AMEN! The best post on this thread.
quote:Originally posted by BOF:
Pre-season D3 poll out.
http://www.d3baseball.com/top25/2012/2012week-0
Preseason 2012 D3baseball.com/NCBWA Top 25
# School (1st votes) 2011
Record
Pts Prev.
1 Marietta (25) 47-4 625 1
2 Chapman 37-13 579 2
3 Kean 42-11 559 3
4 Linfield 33-11 496 9
5 Cortland State 36-10 481 13
6 UW-Whitewater 37-13 455 4
7 Christopher Newport 39-7 445 14
8 UW-Stevens Point 34-10 357 15
9 Salisbury 34-14 351 6
10 Heidelberg 36-13 348 11
11 Alvernia 38-9 321 16
12 Eastern Connecticut 34-13 304 20
13 Buena Vista 34-18 284 7
14 St. Scholastica 37-7 276 12
15 Western New England 42-11 274 10
16 Keystone 38-12 215 5
17 Carthage 32-12 207 17
18 Wheaton (Mass.) 32-12 196 22
19 Thomas More 29-9 185 -
20 Redlands 30-13 170 -
21 Shenandoah 37-7 152 8
22 Trinity (Texas) 34-13 106 19
23 Texas-Tyler 33-8 105 18
24 Tufts 27-9-1 72 21
25 Birmingham-Southern 30-9 56 -
And the May 7 results are:
Through games of Sunday, May 7
# School (1st votes) Rec Pts Prev.
1 Marietta (13) 34-6 604 1
2 St. Thomas (10) 30-5 598 2
3 Keystone (2) 35-5 573 3
4 Cortland State 35-7-1 543 5
5 Salisbury 31-7 523 4
6 Christopher Newport 30-7 499 6
7 Birmingham-Southern 35-7 467 7
8 Wheaton (Mass.) 34-8 417 9
9 Kean 31-10 403 11
10 Adrian 32-8 381 8
11 St. Joseph's (Maine) 36-5 364 12
12 Concordia (Texas) 36-9 338 16
13 Misericordia 35-8 306 10
14 Washington and Jefferson 33-6 300 18
15 Trinity (Texas) 34-10 282 13
16 UW-La Crosse 30-9 274 19
17 Rowan 30-13 161 17
18 Lynchburg 34-8 157 21
19 Aurora 32-8 145 24
20 Shenandoah 29-11 142 22
21 Eastern Connecticut 28-11 120 15
22 DePauw 33-12 69 23
23 Western New England 32-11 66 -
24 Texas-Tyler 33-12 60 20
25 UW-Stevens Point 27-13 56 14
quote:Originally posted by bf_arod3:
Who knows how much exposure someone can get from an NCAA Division III school.
Well, I'll tell you this. My son played baseball at Birmingham Southern College. He was a catcher going in then switched to pitcher. Neither decision made much difference in playing time although it was the the only decision he could make considering the following. Eventually an underclass catcher and an upper class pitcher were drafted in the last two major league drafts. The catcher was the 62nd pick overall in the latest draft..Bruce Maxwell in the plus $800,000 signing bonus slot!!! Birmingham Southern is a DIII school. Best coaching and facilities in probably all DIII baseball. So there is definitely exposure, but you have to have the goods. Currently, Maxwell is hitting +400 in the Arizona rookie league. BTW, you'd better have academic chops, too, to get in.
Great news for the University of Dubuque...Coach Wychowski (sp?),formerly of Texas-Tyler, is the new head coach.
Don't forget BSC's LF last year, Leachman is also playing in the minors.
Upper level D3 programs are competitive with mid-level d1 according to many players who made the jump and they should know.
Upper level D3 programs are competitive with mid-level d1 according to many players who made the jump and they should know.
quote:Originally posted by Jones fan:
Upper level D3 programs are competitive with mid-level d1 according to many players who made the jump and they should know.
This fable continues to be repeated with absolutely no evidence.
Let's look at some draft numbers that may shed some light on the subject of top D3's vs. "mid-major" D1.
There are 32 D1 conferences. According to Boyd's World's Conference RPI's, the 16th best conference by this measure was the Sun Belt Conference; the 17th was the Big South. Let's look at the lower of those 2.
All of D3 had 12 players drafted. The Big South had 11.
The first D3 player was drafted 62nd. The first Big South player was drafted 46th.
of the D3 players drafted the mean round number was 25. Of the Big South players drafted, the mean round number was 15.
There was one D3 player drafted in the top 10 rounds. There were 5 Big South players drafted in the top 10 rounds.
Only one D3 school in the country had two players drafted. Four Big South schools had multiple players drafted, and two of them had three players drafted.
At least in terms of pro potential, the most middling of the the mid-major D1 conferences had more talent than all of D3 across the whole country.
Think this through with me. If a single mid-major D1 conference can have such a better draft than all D3's in the whole country. The likelihood that individual D3 schools would be competitive in a mid-major D1 conference is nil.
quote:Think this through with me. If a single mid-major D1 conference can have such a better draft than all D3's in the whole country. The likelihood that individual D3 schools would be competitive in a mid-major D1 conference is nil.
Again, I just don't quite get the reasons people seem to get anxious about this and want to go to such extents to prove it wrong.
There is no proof because D1's don't want to play D3's for many reasons. The plain fact is the sample size is so small as to be incapable of analysis.
The other plain fact is a D1 program which is pretty close to fully scholarship funded better be superior to most any D3. If they are not, the staff will get fired or the staff will replace the players, or the AD will replace both.
Now, if we took Ben Klimesh throwing 96mph(15th round pick) or Brian Rauh(89-91/11th round pick) and threw them in a game against a mid level D1, there is every reason to think that can be a highly competitive game...for that game/those innings. In California, Chapman has shown they can compete against some higher level D2's including Sonoma State. If someone put Bruce Maxwell on any D1 field, he would stand out. That does not, however, translate that every player on the BSC team would.
For those at the D1 level, D3 issues, in my view, should be toward the last things of concern.
We are not a threat!
Infielddad,
Last I checked, this was a discussion board. That means when someone says something preposterous, I'm allowed to throw the B.S. flag.
Apparently, however, you have great anxiety when the B.S. flag is thrown toward the excrement from your favorite sacred cow.
Your comment that the sample size of actual competition is too small to draw meaningful conclusions betrays the willful epistemological blindness you must adopt in order to maintain your fantasy.
Do you really think we can't predict what might happen if D3's and D1's played each other on a regular basis? At various times on these boards I have addressed various aspects of the equality fantasy as they were offered up to a credulous public.
A while back, I analyzed the PG ranks and ratings of players on top D3 rosters (you'd have to pool the rosters of about three of the top D3's to assemble a 35-man roster with a pedigree comparable to that of a competitive mid-major). On another occasion, I broke down what actually happens when D1's, even low D1's, play D2 schools (they win 80% of the time). And tonight, I compared the draft results.
Here's what we know:
Mid-major D1's bring in better players.
They have better resources to allow players to focus on baseball.
They have more internal competition and therefore, more intense practices and scrimmages.
They play more games.
They play better competition.
They have more players drafted.
In the face of all this information, you could still insist we don't know what would happen in a statistically significant sample of games. But doing so would be an act of stubbornness, not an expression of rational uncertainty. You might as well take the next logical step and pretend we don't know what would happen if the top D3's played MLB teams.
The fact of the matter is we know, or can know, or should know many things we can't test empirically. One of those things you should know is that the rules governing the various NCAA divisions do produce distinct competitive levels with only minimal overlap, some at the individual level, much less at the team level.
Nobody doubts there are D3 players that could excel in D1 or the pros. That's obvious. We see examples of it every year in the draft and the summer leagues. But please try to refrain from using those statistical outliers as a springboard to unreasonable assertions.
Regards,
Swamp
Last I checked, this was a discussion board. That means when someone says something preposterous, I'm allowed to throw the B.S. flag.
Apparently, however, you have great anxiety when the B.S. flag is thrown toward the excrement from your favorite sacred cow.
Your comment that the sample size of actual competition is too small to draw meaningful conclusions betrays the willful epistemological blindness you must adopt in order to maintain your fantasy.
Do you really think we can't predict what might happen if D3's and D1's played each other on a regular basis? At various times on these boards I have addressed various aspects of the equality fantasy as they were offered up to a credulous public.
A while back, I analyzed the PG ranks and ratings of players on top D3 rosters (you'd have to pool the rosters of about three of the top D3's to assemble a 35-man roster with a pedigree comparable to that of a competitive mid-major). On another occasion, I broke down what actually happens when D1's, even low D1's, play D2 schools (they win 80% of the time). And tonight, I compared the draft results.
Here's what we know:
Mid-major D1's bring in better players.
They have better resources to allow players to focus on baseball.
They have more internal competition and therefore, more intense practices and scrimmages.
They play more games.
They play better competition.
They have more players drafted.
In the face of all this information, you could still insist we don't know what would happen in a statistically significant sample of games. But doing so would be an act of stubbornness, not an expression of rational uncertainty. You might as well take the next logical step and pretend we don't know what would happen if the top D3's played MLB teams.
The fact of the matter is we know, or can know, or should know many things we can't test empirically. One of those things you should know is that the rules governing the various NCAA divisions do produce distinct competitive levels with only minimal overlap, some at the individual level, much less at the team level.
Nobody doubts there are D3 players that could excel in D1 or the pros. That's obvious. We see examples of it every year in the draft and the summer leagues. But please try to refrain from using those statistical outliers as a springboard to unreasonable assertions.
Regards,
Swamp
Swamp,
What unreasonable assertion might I have made?
This is all much ado about nothing, in my view.
Personally, I celebrate D3's who succeed in Summer Wood bat leagues against the best.
I love it when the D3 players get drafted, get signed as a free agent, and especially when they succeed in Milb against all odds, including the fact they are usually senior signs for reasons, perhaps different than you describe.
To celebrate a D3 kid who succeeds isn't in any way done to discredit DI baseball. He l l, our son played D3, coached D3 and now coaches D1. We know the difference.
D3 baseball is not D1, okay?
I read all the trials and tribulations associated spending thousands of dollars to get exposure, all those $$$ toward a NLI with a 25% scholarship, being cut, walk on, playing time, and all that is involved in D1 and I fully realize it is different.
It is better baseball, or better be.
But...is is better? On the field, it is for overall talent and level of play, but not with every player on a DI field.
Off the field...for more than a few at the D1 level..is it really worth it? Do they really "love" the game and all it brings?
What unreasonable assertion might I have made?
This is all much ado about nothing, in my view.
Personally, I celebrate D3's who succeed in Summer Wood bat leagues against the best.
I love it when the D3 players get drafted, get signed as a free agent, and especially when they succeed in Milb against all odds, including the fact they are usually senior signs for reasons, perhaps different than you describe.
To celebrate a D3 kid who succeeds isn't in any way done to discredit DI baseball. He l l, our son played D3, coached D3 and now coaches D1. We know the difference.
D3 baseball is not D1, okay?
I read all the trials and tribulations associated spending thousands of dollars to get exposure, all those $$$ toward a NLI with a 25% scholarship, being cut, walk on, playing time, and all that is involved in D1 and I fully realize it is different.
It is better baseball, or better be.
But...is is better? On the field, it is for overall talent and level of play, but not with every player on a DI field.
Off the field...for more than a few at the D1 level..is it really worth it? Do they really "love" the game and all it brings?
quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
Personally, I celebrate D3's who succeed in Summer Wood bat leagues against the best.
So do I. Looking ahead to my son's start this week, the clean up hitter, a D3 player from a middling D3, is the guy I'm most concerned about.
quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
I love it when the D3 players get drafted, get signed as a free agent, and especially when they succeed in Milb against all odds, including the fact they are usually senior signs for reasons, perhaps different than you describe.
So do I. And for the same reason I rooted for Stony Brook and Kent State at Omaha this year.
quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
To celebrate a D3 kid who succeeds isn't in any way done to discredit DI baseball. He l l, our son played D3, coached D3 and now coaches D1. We know the difference.
D3 baseball is not D1, okay?
Ok. But there are those here who seem bent on bringing the D1 guys down a peg, sometimes by saying the baseball isn't better, sometimes by challenging their academic legitimacy, sometimes by questioning the purity of their motives.
quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
I read all the trials and tribulations associated spending thousands of dollars to get exposure, all those $$$ toward a NLI with a 25% scholarship, being cut, walk on, playing time, and all that is involved in D1 and I fully realize it is different.
It is better baseball, or better be.
But...is is better? On the field, it is for overall talent and level of play, but not with every player on a DI field.
Off the field...for more than a few at the D1 level..is it really worth it? Do they really "love" the game and all it brings?
There is no doubt that many prospective D1 players "know not what they ask for." There is also no doubt they walk a harder, more treacherous road. For many, it is worth it because they do love the game and their hearts burn with desire to find out how they stack up against the best.
Best wishes,
Swamp
Swamp,
I think your post and mine say the same thing.
To compete and succeed at the top levels of D1 is special. To compete and struggle and persevere at the DI level is also special. To compete and struggle and move to D2 and D3 to compete is also special, but in a different way.
College baseball can provide a special opportunity where D3 opens lots of doors, some to those who are late bloomers and some to those who don't make it at their D1.
I just don't understand the apparent anxiety. D3 does not present any "risk" which would warrant the effort to justify D1 is better, when baseball scholarships are involved....or that D3 is worse!
From my experience, this is similar to threads going back many years where some posters would argue top D1 was similar or better than High A or AA. One could point to a Trevor Bauer and say "it is."
But when one watched top DI and low A or short season A, 9 players on each team proved it was not. In reality, it is just message board fodder. They never play.
I think your post and mine say the same thing.
To compete and succeed at the top levels of D1 is special. To compete and struggle and persevere at the DI level is also special. To compete and struggle and move to D2 and D3 to compete is also special, but in a different way.
College baseball can provide a special opportunity where D3 opens lots of doors, some to those who are late bloomers and some to those who don't make it at their D1.
I just don't understand the apparent anxiety. D3 does not present any "risk" which would warrant the effort to justify D1 is better, when baseball scholarships are involved....or that D3 is worse!
From my experience, this is similar to threads going back many years where some posters would argue top D1 was similar or better than High A or AA. One could point to a Trevor Bauer and say "it is."
But when one watched top DI and low A or short season A, 9 players on each team proved it was not. In reality, it is just message board fodder. They never play.
I read 50% of D1 players transfer to play someplace other than their first college. With the new rules it means many transfer to D2. Regardless of the level of play what's important is finding a positive personal college baseball experience.quote:There is no doubt that many prospective D1 players "know not what they ask for."
RJM
I have been surprised by the number of players that are changing schools after their first year and some cases after two years. 50 % seems high but it the chsnge rate is higher than I would have guessed.
It reinforces the difficulty of the recruiting process and finding the right fit. Good Advice that was given to my son "pretend baseball no longer existed would you still like the school?"
I have been surprised by the number of players that are changing schools after their first year and some cases after two years. 50 % seems high but it the chsnge rate is higher than I would have guessed.
It reinforces the difficulty of the recruiting process and finding the right fit. Good Advice that was given to my son "pretend baseball no longer existed would you still like the school?"
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dad43:
RJM
I have been surprised by the number of players that are changing schools after their first year and some cases after two years. 50 % seems high but it the chsnge rate is higher than I would have guessed.
It reinforces the difficulty of the recruiting process and finding the right fit. Good Advice that was given to my son "pretend baseball no longer existed would you still like the school?"[/QUOTE
A 50% graduation rate is required to meet the "minimum" NCAA mandated APR/matriculation rates. Any school falling below that requirement is subject to penalties which increase each year. The NCAA results seem to convey the message the APR is improving every year and only a few DI schools are failing to graduate/matriculate at the 50% level.
If 50% matriculation to graduation is the minimum, it seems the transfer rate throughout DI would be quite a bit less.
It is still, probably, a surprising number, though, when we consider how much time is spent on this site and others, and the monetary resources and effort expended in pursuit of an NLI and 25%.
RJM
I have been surprised by the number of players that are changing schools after their first year and some cases after two years. 50 % seems high but it the chsnge rate is higher than I would have guessed.
It reinforces the difficulty of the recruiting process and finding the right fit. Good Advice that was given to my son "pretend baseball no longer existed would you still like the school?"[/QUOTE
A 50% graduation rate is required to meet the "minimum" NCAA mandated APR/matriculation rates. Any school falling below that requirement is subject to penalties which increase each year. The NCAA results seem to convey the message the APR is improving every year and only a few DI schools are failing to graduate/matriculate at the 50% level.
If 50% matriculation to graduation is the minimum, it seems the transfer rate throughout DI would be quite a bit less.
It is still, probably, a surprising number, though, when we consider how much time is spent on this site and others, and the monetary resources and effort expended in pursuit of an NLI and 25%.
quote:Dad43 said...It reinforces the difficulty of the recruiting process and finding the right fit. Good Advice that was given to my son "pretend baseball no longer existed would you still like the school?"
Agree 100% Dad43. In addition, I think it underscores the numerous goals that recruited athletes pursue initially or eventually. Everybody is different. Thankfully there are 300+ D1, and 365 (or so) D3 schools out there that can assist in meeting those goals (plus D2, JUCO, NAIA). I've had many face to face and PM conversations with lot of folks since coming to HSBBWeb. It amazes me how many different paths there are to get to many different goals. To me, that is what is exciting about HSBBWeb.
quote:Originally posted by RJM:
I read 50% of D1 players transfer to play someplace other than their first college. With the new rules it means many transfer to D2. Regardless of the level of play what's important is finding a positive personal college baseball experience.
The schools that bring in 20 or so recruits per year need a 50% attrition rate among freshmen to stay within the roster limit.
For these schools, high attrition isn't a problem; it's a crucial part of the team's strategy because it lets them "test drive" twice as many prospects as they would if they renewed more scholarships.
These schools tend to have big freshmen classes and big junior classes, and a decent chunk of the juniors are transfers. They often don't have as many sophomores and seniors.
Basically, everyone on the roster is either contributing now, expected to contribute significantly next year, or on their way out the door.
(Another way to spot these schools is to see who is still playing in June.)
As long as the players who leave are academically eligible to return and transfer to another 4-year school, the baseball program doesn't take a hit on its Academic Progress Rate. So there isn't any consequence to the school.
BTW, I'm okay with this as long as the players know the deal going in and make informed decisions. As Fenwaysouth said, there are many different paths, and there's nothing wrong with choosing one that is likely to have more twists and turns.
Read the APR rules. A player transferring in good academic standing does not count against the program.quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dad43:
RJM
I have been surprised by the number of players that are changing schools after their first year and some cases after two years. 50 % seems high but it the chsnge rate is higher than I would have guessed.
It reinforces the difficulty of the recruiting process and finding the right fit. Good Advice that was given to my son "pretend baseball no longer existed would you still like the school?"[/QUOTE
A 50% graduation rate is required to meet the "minimum" NCAA mandated APR/matriculation rates. Any school falling below that requirement is subject to penalties which increase each year. The NCAA results seem to convey the message the APR is improving every year and only a few DI schools are failing to graduate/matriculate at the 50% level.
If 50% matriculation to graduation is the minimum, it seems the transfer rate throughout DI would be quite a bit less.
It is still, probably, a surprising number, though, when we consider how much time is spent on this site and others, and the monetary resources and effort expended in pursuit of an NLI and 25%.
Perfect way to again end what started and continued for many years as a helpful discussion of DIII baseball. Hopefully those interested in DIII can weave their way through.
quote:Originally posted by infielddad:
Perfect way to again end what started and continued for many years as a helpful discussion of DIII baseball. Hopefully those interested in DIII can weave their way through.
"Helpful discussion"?
Now you really are hallucinating.
This thread started 8 years ago with a simple question about how much exposure you can get from a Division 3 school.
That simple question was answered the same day with the first response, which said if you have professional talent, D3 can provide adequate exposure.
The thread could have been closed right then and there because soon afterward, the D3 enthusiasts turned it into a soapbox for inane inductive arguments about the overall quality of D3 based on the accomplishments of the D3 players who are three standard deviations above the D3 mean. It hardly ever returned within a long fly ball of its original topic.
Occasionally, someone would chime in with either a gentle or blunt reminder of the objective reality that exists external to the minds of the hyperventilating exaggerations. Each time, you and your like-minded brethren would ignore, deflect, or personally attack so as to preserve your cherished article of faith.
Thankfully it lay dormant for 7 years before being resurrected last year for a few more pointless rounds.
Yeah, it's been a great thread. Probably would have made the Golden Thread list if only RJM and I hadn't ruined it.
What arrogance...baseball arrogance!!!
If you want to proudly climb in the sand box with RJM on the site, be my guest.
If you think I am going to apologize for any aspect of D3 baseball, think again.
Professional baseball and the draft is one, but not by any means the only measure of the quality of college life, college athletics and college baseball.
Why you and RJM are so worried and outraged about a thread like this one is beyond me.
Why you and RJM feel such a need to display your views on superiority, coupled with RJM's outrageous claims(later admitted to be erroneous) of discrimination against his son is beyond me.
RJM's comment, if true, that 50% of all DI players transfer is, in my opinion, a very sad commentary on DI baseball. For all of your argument using the draft to show the virtues of DI, the concept that 50% transfer is, in my view, a black mark which strongly balances any argument you can make about what the draft proves. College is about education first and baseball second in my opinion.
Finally, as an FYI, when I started on this site, a few years before this thread started, DIII baseball was largely unknown. One SEC parent like yourself posted in a thread where I mentioned schools like Rhodes, Millsaps, Trinity, and Emory with disdain..he had never heard of them and how good could the baseball be at schools like that.
When this thread started, what DIII offered and the exposure it provided was anything but well known.
But hey, your son plays in the SEC just like the poster who ridiculed DIII on this site in 2003, and who are we to suggest our son's can shine the shoes or hold the jock of such "superior" talent?
If you want to proudly climb in the sand box with RJM on the site, be my guest.
If you think I am going to apologize for any aspect of D3 baseball, think again.
Professional baseball and the draft is one, but not by any means the only measure of the quality of college life, college athletics and college baseball.
Why you and RJM are so worried and outraged about a thread like this one is beyond me.
Why you and RJM feel such a need to display your views on superiority, coupled with RJM's outrageous claims(later admitted to be erroneous) of discrimination against his son is beyond me.
RJM's comment, if true, that 50% of all DI players transfer is, in my opinion, a very sad commentary on DI baseball. For all of your argument using the draft to show the virtues of DI, the concept that 50% transfer is, in my view, a black mark which strongly balances any argument you can make about what the draft proves. College is about education first and baseball second in my opinion.
Finally, as an FYI, when I started on this site, a few years before this thread started, DIII baseball was largely unknown. One SEC parent like yourself posted in a thread where I mentioned schools like Rhodes, Millsaps, Trinity, and Emory with disdain..he had never heard of them and how good could the baseball be at schools like that.
When this thread started, what DIII offered and the exposure it provided was anything but well known.
But hey, your son plays in the SEC just like the poster who ridiculed DIII on this site in 2003, and who are we to suggest our son's can shine the shoes or hold the jock of such "superior" talent?
