PBR Rankings

They don't matter.

Coaches may glance at some posted video or at the data, but no coach is basing their recruiting decision on PG scores or PBR rankings. They're a tool, not an answer.

Coaches don't pay any attention to that stuff. As mentioned, they might check out the video but they are not relying on it for a decision. One showcase gave my son a 92 exit velo this summer.... he didn't even bring a bat or take a swing. PG bumped my son's summer teammate from 80 to 88mph on the mound during the WWBA in Atlanta. Weird since the kid missed his flight and was in Jupiter, FL during the game. I've watched a showcase worker tell a dad he missed the kid's time and asked him what his usual pop time was and entered that number. Coaches know this stuff goes on.

I don't think they base anything on them or PG.  They take notice of the top 100-250, but don't recruit them based on that.  I do think that for that group of players (top 250), they are probably more accurate than PG because they also watch them play in hs games and not just their own showcases or events.

Recruiting at a high level is not generally done because of ranking. PBR is much, much more in tune with my state's players than PG. I am guessing that PG is more in tune in other states/parts of the country. Lots of politics type stuff happening along with how many events you have attended has some impact as well on these rankings.

I would say hard no. PBR in our home region was incredibly political. Maybe it’s improved since then but I would say the interest of colleges drove PBRs ranking of our son more than the other way around.

I once did a comparison of 22s at a particular position in our state - PBR rankings vs PG rankings.

Some kids were on both lists whereas some kids were on one and totally left off another.

How? Simple...parents weren't willing to pay for showcases at both and they ain't going to list you if you never attended an event.

My kid was ranked (in his position for our state) #6 in one and #8 in another. Pretty much the same. IIRC the top 2 or 3 in both were same kids. But there was a lot of differences in the rankings too.

To the coaches question...I would have said that coaches don't care about the rankings. But, just recently I saw a tweet by a coach talking about how happy they were to have an incoming player and he specifically mentioned his ranking. So, maybe some do look at it?

Personally, I think the rankings are like spring training statistics. Great to have good ones. Not necessarily meaning anything if you have bad ones. And none of it means anything when the real stuff starts.

One thing I would stress is that it all varies from state to state. In some states the PBR and PG guys are great. In others, not so much. It's not consistently administered across the country.

Can he hit the curve?

Bob

@Francis7 posted:

I once did a comparison of 22s at a particular position in our state - PBR rankings vs PG rankings.

Some kids were on both lists whereas some kids were on one and totally left off another.

How? Simple...parents weren't willing to pay for showcases at both and they ain't going to list you if you never attended an event.

My kid was ranked (in his position for our state) #6 in one and #8 in another. Pretty much the same. IIRC the top 2 or 3 in both were same kids. But there was a lot of differences in the rankings too.

To the coaches question...I would have said that coaches don't care about the rankings. But, just recently I saw a tweet by a coach talking about how happy they were to have an incoming player and he specifically mentioned his ranking. So, maybe some do look at it?

Personally, I think the rankings are like spring training statistics. Great to have good ones. Not necessarily meaning anything if you have bad ones. And none of it means anything when the real stuff starts.

One thing I would stress is that it all varies from state to state. In some states the PBR and PG guys are great. In others, not so much. It's not consistently administered across the country.

One of the D3 schools recruiting my son market their PG recruiting ranking. I'm sure it is more of a recruit marketing tool than an evaluation tool.

@TerribleBPthrower posted:

One of the D3 schools recruiting my son market their PG recruiting ranking. I'm sure it is more of a recruit marketing tool than an evaluation tool.

I am always looking to leverage data to help shape my son's recruting process.

I think this PG Recruiting Ranking https://www.perfectgame.org/ra...uiting/Rankings.aspx can be another useful means to identify college programs that could be a good fit skill-level wise.  For a player that has his own PG ranking, it can be used by the player/parent to help check if your son is "over-reaching" with his dream school list/target school list.  This data can compliment the advice received from an advisor or coach.

If a school does not make the top 100 list in recruiting rankings, then you can hand calculate the schools "Avg Player Recruiting Rank (Pts) using this scale.

@mjd-dad posted:

I am always looking to leverage data to help shape my son's recruting process.

I think this PG Recruiting Ranking https://www.perfectgame.org/ra...uiting/Rankings.aspx can be another useful means to identify college programs that could be a good fit skill-level wise.  For a player that has his own PG ranking, it can be used by the player/parent to help check if your son is "over-reaching" with his dream school list/target school list.  This data can compliment the advice received from an advisor or coach.

If a school does not make the top 100 list in recruiting rankings, then you can hand calculate the schools "Avg Player Recruiting Rank (Pts) using this scale.

I agree 100%. I used this to show my son A) you need to get a lot bigger to think about these schools B) see what types of players schools have recruited at his position. It was an easy way for him to realize he should open things up a bit for his target list. That didn't mean give up on those schools, just start looking at others.

I think schools do look at rankings, but also don't rely on them exclusively. My son has never participated in any PBR or PG event, so I doubt he'll ever get ranked. I sort of have this deep desire for him to end up committing a collegiate program, just so he can promote that it's unnecessary. However, I have a feeling at some point his club team will end up playing in a PG or PBR tournament, so we shall see.

I don't think it is required but it makes the recruiting process easier.  The big PBR and PG events allow kids to be seen by a lot of coaches at  one time.  Without it, you have to do a lot of sending emails, videos, and promoting.  The true Big Dogs will get recruited no matter what they do or don't do but those are few and far between.  D1 schools want to know that you can compete with their level and for the average player that is only seen at PG and PBR events.  If you are not playing these, then you probably have not shown you can compete at the D1 level.

@TerribleBPthrower posted:

I agree 100%. I used this to show my son A) you need to get a lot bigger to think about these schools B) see what types of players schools have recruited at his position. It was an easy way for him to realize he should open things up a bit for his target list. That didn't mean give up on those schools, just start looking at others.

I would respectfully disagree with the use of the rankings for sharpening one's recruiting efforts.  I am not a great math guy, but I would suggest the "margin of error"  - as it relates to a single individual - is too significant to rely upon.  Error slips in on both ends, whether it is the PG grades assigned to the players (including subject recruit) as well as the points assigned.  It does help demonstrate that the top schools generally have recruits with very high rankings (this in itself is a chicken/egg scenario of who identified the skill to begin with), but is starts to lose value quickly.  For instance, a "Top 1000" is twice as valuable as a "High Follow".  Add in # of recruits (assuming they each contribute to the total points) and you can break the Top 100 with no players above the Top 500.

I am a big fan of rankings as I do think they get your name on scouting lists and give you an increased chance of being seen by coaches at some larger tournaments (coach pulls list of all kids "High Follow" and above from PG database - might filter for schools of interest and correlate with rosters/game schedules as one example).  On the down side, I do think showcase attendance is probably one of the best ways to improve your ranking (understanding that you can get ranked without attending).  It's one thing to get a "Follow" after a good tournament/game and a different thing altogether to jump into Top 1000 by having a great showcase.

My recruiting process boiled down is 1) claw your way onto the coaches radar, and 2) prove up yourself to that coach as often as feasible.  It seems like #1 is often the more difficult for the average recruit and the average school.

@PitchingFan posted:

I don't think it is required but it makes the recruiting process easier.  The big PBR and PG events allow kids to be seen by a lot of coaches at  one time.  Without it, you have to do a lot of sending emails, videos, and promoting.  The true Big Dogs will get recruited no matter what they do or don't do but those are few and far between.  D1 schools want to know that you can compete with their level and for the average player that is only seen at PG and PBR events.  If you are not playing these, then you probably have not shown you can compete at the D1 level.

My son did do PG events. But beforehand he did two regional showcase events requiring a pro scout recommendation. Of the six tournaments each summer only three were PG. All had were heavily represented by D1 coaches.

@2017 Lefty Dad posted:

I would respectfully disagree with the use of the rankings for sharpening one's recruiting efforts.  I am not a great math guy, but I would suggest the "margin of error"  - as it relates to a single individual - is too significant to rely upon.  Error slips in on both ends, whether it is the PG grades assigned to the players (including subject recruit) as well as the points assigned.  It does help demonstrate that the top schools generally have recruits with very high rankings (this in itself is a chicken/egg scenario of who identified the skill to begin with), but is starts to lose value quickly.  For instance, a "Top 1000" is twice as valuable as a "High Follow".  Add in # of recruits (assuming they each contribute to the total points) and you can break the Top 100 with no players above the Top 500.

I am a big fan of rankings as I do think they get your name on scouting lists and give you an increased chance of being seen by coaches at some larger tournaments (coach pulls list of all kids "High Follow" and above from PG database - might filter for schools of interest and correlate with rosters/game schedules as one example).  On the down side, I do think showcase attendance is probably one of the best ways to improve your ranking (understanding that you can get ranked without attending).  It's one thing to get a "Follow" after a good tournament/game and a different thing altogether to jump into Top 1000 by having a great showcase.

My recruiting process boiled down is 1) claw your way onto the coaches radar, and 2) prove up yourself to that coach as often as feasible.  It seems like #1 is often the more difficult for the average recruit and the average school.

I wasn't referring to rankings. I personally feel there is a lot of BS involved including how many showcases you attend. We've all seen kids that are not good players get a high ranking because they have high velo numbers. I was referring to looking at individual players at my son's positions at the specific schools he's looking at. When he started the process he was 5'11, 145 lbs. The kids committing to these schools were 6'+ and 190+. It motivated him to change things up and he gained 45 lbs (also grew 2 inches but that has nothing to do with motivation).

Another example, a good friend has a 2024 catcher that thinks he wants to go to Notre Dame to play baseball. He's 5'9", 160, and runs a 7.8. Pop time is about a 2.1 and throws it 70-72 to second. One look at the catcher recruits for Notre Dame over the past few years will tell you this kid's chances of getting recruited to Notre Dame are very slim. The kid is a gamer and was voted team MVP on a team loaded with talent. He's just very unlikely to catch the eye of those coaches.

Well, I think PG's school recruiting rankings could have some meaning for top D1 schools, but is fairly meaningless for D2 and D3 - funnily enough, none of them have any "Top 100" players committed.   At least for the D3s, all it really shows is how many players have recorded their commitment on PG, which, for some schools, is very few. 

@Francis7 posted:

To the coaches question...I would have said that coaches don't care about the rankings. But, just recently I saw a tweet by a coach talking about how happy they were to have an incoming player and he specifically mentioned his ranking. So, maybe some do look at it?

The rankings are for you (the fan). The school could not care less about his ranking. Posting their rank is a tool to get people excited about the incoming players.

@anotherparent posted:

Well, I think PG's school recruiting rankings could have some meaning for top D1 schools, but is fairly meaningless for D2 and D3 - funnily enough, none of them have any "Top 100" players committed.   At least for the D3s, all it really shows is how many players have recorded their commitment on PG, which, for some schools, is very few.

Still a lot of recruiting activity going on. Son has several "offers" and is doing his visits over the next month+. I imagine we'll see a huge increase in D3 commits over the next 6 weeks leading into EA/ED