I like the new profile pages.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Agreed, and just in time for the Summer events and Showcases! Much more appealing visually.
And I really like how PG includes the age of the player below the graduating class year. I am seeing huge disparities in age. My son will graduate next June as a 17-year old senior while there are sophomores now he is playing against who are already 17. It would seem player age might be a big indicator for coaches considering physical size and metrics that may have room for an increase for the younger kids versus the older ones. But I don't see any other sites that include age.
Backstop22 posted:Agreed, and just in time for the Summer events and Showcases! Much more appealing visually.
And I really like how PG includes the age of the player below the graduating class year. I am seeing huge disparities in age. My son will graduate next June as a 17-year old senior while there are sophomores now he is playing against who are already 17. It would seem player age might be a big indicator for coaches considering physical size and metrics that may have room for an increase for the younger kids versus the older ones. But I don't see any other sites that include age.
Age won't matter much to college coaches because they just want to win no matter how old you are. MLB scouts love the young-ens it gives them more to dream on 3-5 years down the road.
I think the biggest change is the graph that shows when they were scored, how they compared to their age group at that time, and how a class rates during a particular year. It looks like it will account for the problem where a player's early scores (i.e., 75mph as freshman) are included with his class's average later on (i.e., at graduation year).
Much nicer. It did revert to an older profile pic of my son vs. the one that was being used in the old format.
Definitely like the graphs. Gives context to the data.
Everyone will like it a lot more in the near future. We will b adding several cool features, including more graphics.
I like the new format as well. Fresher and easier to digest at a glance. Like Nuke, my son's photo reverted to one used previously rather than the one from his last PG showcase. I don't really care, just thought it was odd.
I like the format but some of the percentile rankings don't appear to be correct - Random 2016 RHP - FB 84, Avg 2016 84 Rank 37.6%; 60 - 7.29 Avg 2016 7.26 Rank 56.63%; Bat Speed 83.2 Avg 2016 79 Rank 64.38% The 60 time seems like it should be below 50% while the FB speed should be closer to 50% as it is the average correct? The Bat speed makes sense but on several players, especially pitching numbers, the percentile seems backwards. Am I missing something?
FriarFred,
We have noticed some issues with the percentiles and our IT staff is working on that. I noticed one player has a 6.9 60 listed at the 30 something percentile. I don't think 70% of the players we see run better than 6.9.
I would imagine we will find a few more glitches as everything is pulled from the datbase. It is very helpful when people bring these things to our attention.
The new format is great. Much improved. Kudos to the PG team.
Would it be possible to link the listing of a high school in a player's profile so that if one clicks on it, all of the other players from that high school appear in a list? Not sure how your database is set up, but that would be a nice feature if possible.
Really like:
-All PG showcase grades have been combined into a graph, that's just cool!
-The logo for the college they have committed to
-LOVE LOVE LOVE that it doesn't take 5 minutes to load a players 40 events, that usually crashed my system before.
one teeny tiny suggestion, I miss the All Tournament team banners being bright red. By keeping them the same color as much of the page it doesn't stand out as much, and that is an accomplishment that SHOULD stand out.
FriarFred posted:I like the format but some of the percentile rankings don't appear to be correct - Random 2016 RHP - FB 84, Avg 2016 84 Rank 37.6%; 60 - 7.29 Avg 2016 7.26 Rank 56.63%; Bat Speed 83.2 Avg 2016 79 Rank 64.38% The 60 time seems like it should be below 50% while the FB speed should be closer to 50% as it is the average correct? The Bat speed makes sense but on several players, especially pitching numbers, the percentile seems backwards. Am I missing something?
I think this is an issue of using both mean and median as a way of measuring players against their respective class.
On my son's profile pg there is no photo. Even though there is a photo on every event page. Any ideas how to add a photo top the profile page?
Not sure why the main picture in my son's profile disappeared. Must be that you have to have a PG Showcase pic? Overall, looks better though...
My son's picture disappeared as well. Like any new rollout, glitches to find and deal with. I know PG will get it right!
His profile pg refreshed and now there is a photo there
PG did a great job with the overall revamp. Really like the fact that ages are now listed. Seeing a 9th grader listed as turning 17 in a few months made me chuckle.
Wow! I like this. One thing that stood out to me was that PG shows a kid's age down to months.
roothog66 posted:Wow! I like this. One thing that stood out to me was that PG shows a kid's age down to months.
LOL, that was my kids least favorite part! "Now everyone knows I'm the youngest on the team "...you want some cheese with that whine son?!?!?!?!
Big improvement. Everything loads faster for me. Layout is much less cluttered. I think table sorting by column is new for most of the grids. Rankings are available for players who have graduated high school (without membership or even logging in).
Love the new look and I am a big fan of the age in years and month being shown. Looks like a whole lot of redshirting has gone on with a lot of the good players.
slider8 posted:On my son's profile pg there is no photo. Even though there is a photo on every event page. Any ideas how to add a photo top the profile page?
if you login you can add it, or just email them and they will do it.
d-mac posted:Love the new look and I am a big fan of the age in years and month being shown. Looks like a whole lot of redshirting has gone on with a lot of the good players.
Redshirting? Thats funny stuff.
Look at how many kids are 18 6 mos and older compared to 18 0 mos and younger. Maybe only 5-6% are below 18 especially in the top players.
I admit I like the years+months thing because my 2018 is young. Anyone could do the math, but it's an eye catcher to see him listed as 16 years and 0 months when comparing to other 2018s that are 16 years, 10 months.
The Doctor posted:d-mac posted:Love the new look and I am a big fan of the age in years and month being shown. Looks like a whole lot of redshirting has gone on with a lot of the good players.
Redshirting? Thats funny stuff.
Look at how many kids are 18 6 mos and older compared to 18 0 mos and younger. Maybe only 5-6% are below 18 especially in the top players.
Doc - After seeing that, would you recommend "redshirting?"
Who is for/against holding your kid back for athletic purposes? I am not talking about doing it in kindergarten. I am talking about the very popular having your repeat 8th grade because it takes him from a good player in one class to a great player in the one below.
HSHULER, Not for the soul purpose of sports. However boys do develop a little stagier than girls. Fine motor skills such as tying shoes, and holding a pencil or crayon, girls pick up sooner. Boys would prefer going barefoot and throwing rocks while girls can color inside the lines. Some studies suggest a boy should start school a year later when their fine motor skills start kicking in.
Back to your question, there has been much discussion about birth dates right after the cut off. These kids are bigger, they make the better teams, they get more playing time, they continue to advance because of this through the years. You can find some results online of what month has the most MLB birthdays. They changed the cutoff from Jan 1st to May 1st about 10-12 years ago to help the age and grade match up a little better, a whole year can make a big difference.
The Doctor posted:HSHULER, Not for the soul purpose of sports. However boys do develop a little stagier than girls. Fine motor skills such as tying shoes, and holding a pencil or crayon, girls pick up sooner. Boys would prefer going barefoot and throwing rocks while girls can color inside the lines. Some studies suggest a boy should start school a year later when their fine motor skills start kicking in.
Back to your question, there has been much discussion about birth dates right after the cut off. These kids are bigger, they make the better teams, they get more playing time, they continue to advance because of this through the years. You can find some results online of what month has the most MLB birthdays. They changed the cutoff from Jan 1st to May 1st about 10-12 years ago to help the age and grade match up a little better, a whole year can make a big difference.
I agree that a year can make a difference which is why I posed the question. I know several families who have done this but only two will openly admit it was foe athletics while the others spin it to sound good.
If the data shows that older players are more successful, why is it taboo to say the I held my kid back because I thought he'd have a better chance for an athletic scholarship?
hshuler posted:The Doctor posted:HSHULER, Not for the soul purpose of sports. However boys do develop a little stagier than girls. Fine motor skills such as tying shoes, and holding a pencil or crayon, girls pick up sooner. Boys would prefer going barefoot and throwing rocks while girls can color inside the lines. Some studies suggest a boy should start school a year later when their fine motor skills start kicking in.
Back to your question, there has been much discussion about birth dates right after the cut off. These kids are bigger, they make the better teams, they get more playing time, they continue to advance because of this through the years. You can find some results online of what month has the most MLB birthdays. They changed the cutoff from Jan 1st to May 1st about 10-12 years ago to help the age and grade match up a little better, a whole year can make a big difference.
I agree that a year can make a difference which is why I posed the question. I know several families who have done this but only two will openly admit it was foe athletics while the others spin it to sound good.
If the data shows that older players are more successful, why is it taboo to say the I held my kid back because I thought he'd have a better chance for an athletic scholarship?
What about his friends? What message are you sending if you can't keep up you just start over? or other missed opportunities what about fate and destiny? blah blah blah! ....you will hear plenty from some folks, but hey....are they chipping in on Jrs scholarship. I'm sure most schools wouldn't want a healthy kid with good grades to hold back. How did the others you know do it?
The Doctor posted:hshuler posted:The Doctor posted:HSHULER, Not for the soul purpose of sports. However boys do develop a little stagier than girls. Fine motor skills such as tying shoes, and holding a pencil or crayon, girls pick up sooner. Boys would prefer going barefoot and throwing rocks while girls can color inside the lines. Some studies suggest a boy should start school a year later when their fine motor skills start kicking in.
Back to your question, there has been much discussion about birth dates right after the cut off. These kids are bigger, they make the better teams, they get more playing time, they continue to advance because of this through the years. You can find some results online of what month has the most MLB birthdays. They changed the cutoff from Jan 1st to May 1st about 10-12 years ago to help the age and grade match up a little better, a whole year can make a big difference.
I agree that a year can make a difference which is why I posed the question. I know several families who have done this but only two will openly admit it was foe athletics while the others spin it to sound good.
If the data shows that older players are more successful, why is it taboo to say the I held my kid back because I thought he'd have a better chance for an athletic scholarship?
What about his friends? What message are you sending if you can't keep up you just start over? or other missed opportunities what about fate and destiny? blah blah blah! ....you will hear plenty from some folks, but hey....are they chipping in on Jrs scholarship. I'm sure most schools wouldn't want a healthy kid with good grades to hold back. How did the others you know do it?
Either homeschool or private school in eight grade...
Regarding friends, it was a pretty easy transition because they played baseball with mostly kids from the class that they reclassified to. The football parents/kids wear it as a badge of honor. The baseball community seems to be less receptive.
Here's my opinion, parents will do what they think is best for their kid. No matter how the decision turns out, they thought it was the best thing when the decision was made. If someone reclassifies strictly for a chance at a scholarship, I don't have an issue with it.
I am always for parents doing whats best for the kids. The best hitter in the 2016 class is 19 1mos on draft day. If he goes to school (doubtful) his Coach will not care one bit how old he is. Makes since!
One inadvertent thing -- everyone can see grades and standardized test scores now. Ok with me but might not be OK with others. I doubt most would want that so public.