This is probably a question for PGStaff, but I was wondering if there is a percentage breakdown for rating given at the PG showcases. In other words, the percentage of players who receive a particular rating.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
At some point those numbers were posted here. I can have our tech people do it again. Last time we researched that, I think the largest percentage were 7s. The lowest were 10s followed by under 6.
Very roughly:
2009 stats -
5 thru 6.5 21%
7 thru 7.5 38%
8 thru 8.5 24%
9 thru 9.5 13%
10 4%
2009 stats -
5 thru 6.5 21%
7 thru 7.5 38%
8 thru 8.5 24%
9 thru 9.5 13%
10 4%
Interesting stats! Thanks for the information.
Here's another one based on the same stats and once again very rough. This only includes 80 and above. There are quite a few who are below 80.
Max pitching velocity:
80-82 30%
83-85 30%
86-89 20%
89-91 15%
92 and above 5%
Even without the sub 80 pitchers in there and using max velocities I'm surprised at how many have touched 90 and above. Roughly about 10 to 12% of those who touch 80 and above are able to touch 90 and above.
Max pitching velocity:
80-82 30%
83-85 30%
86-89 20%
89-91 15%
92 and above 5%
Even without the sub 80 pitchers in there and using max velocities I'm surprised at how many have touched 90 and above. Roughly about 10 to 12% of those who touch 80 and above are able to touch 90 and above.
quote:Originally posted by CADad:
Very roughly:
2009 stats -
5 thru 6.5 21%
7 thru 7.5 38%
8 thru 8.5 24%
9 thru 9.5 13%
10 4%
Our guys saw some 10s (literally) in Jupiter!
So, based on CADad's info:
2009 stats -
5 thru 6.5 21%
7 thru 7.5 38%
8 thru 8.5 24%
9 thru 9.5 13%
10 4%
Since every player receives a 5 or higher, it must be PG's position that every player they saw in the 2009 showcase referenced by CA Dad projects as at least a JUCO player.
I guess this leads to the question I saw on another thread why there is nothing below a 5? As someone stated, perhaps if you are below a 5, you and your parents know you are not good enough to play college ball anywhere.
2009 stats -
5 thru 6.5 21%
7 thru 7.5 38%
8 thru 8.5 24%
9 thru 9.5 13%
10 4%
Since every player receives a 5 or higher, it must be PG's position that every player they saw in the 2009 showcase referenced by CA Dad projects as at least a JUCO player.
I guess this leads to the question I saw on another thread why there is nothing below a 5? As someone stated, perhaps if you are below a 5, you and your parents know you are not good enough to play college ball anywhere.
curious.. how soon after the event are you made aware of your rankings?
No. That's all they had in the database. For example they only had 80 mph and above in the database but a lot of players top out at well less than 80 mph.
BTW, the ratings aren't a guarantee by any means. You've got to read between the lines "Possible" "Prospect"
"5 -- Possible DII prospect or mid range Juco prospect "
Possibly being a prospect means there's a chance but not a real good one without a lot of improvement.
A lot, but by no means all of the 8.5s and above get D1 "jobs". Some of the 8s do. A few of the 7s do. Very, very few of the 6s do. Not everyone lives up to their potential, has the grades and stays healthy.
BTW, the ratings aren't a guarantee by any means. You've got to read between the lines "Possible" "Prospect"
"5 -- Possible DII prospect or mid range Juco prospect "
Possibly being a prospect means there's a chance but not a real good one without a lot of improvement.
A lot, but by no means all of the 8.5s and above get D1 "jobs". Some of the 8s do. A few of the 7s do. Very, very few of the 6s do. Not everyone lives up to their potential, has the grades and stays healthy.
the ratings for the underclassmen are very subjective....its just too early to tell....the slower developers can get overlooked if they get rated as freshman...ratings should be done for upperclass athletes only
I prefer the term "evaluation" to "rating" ,because that is what it is at the time they see the player.
It is a means of tracking a players progress thru his HS career. For the underclassmen it is a starting point---collegh coaches go by that they see not what a rating number says---
It is a means of tracking a players progress thru his HS career. For the underclassmen it is a starting point---collegh coaches go by that they see not what a rating number says---
The best way to find out what college coaches think is to ask them.
Personally I like to call ratings, grades, reports, etc. a source of identification. We identify talented players, if no one used that service, we wouldn't and couldn't do it. It just so happens that the track record for identifying talent is impossible to ignore.
There's always the chance that a college recruiter or MLB scout would disagree with our assessment of a player (just as they might disagree with each other). But they can not afford to ignore a player identified as having talent by a reliable source.
Regarding the PG grades... Keep in mind that there are always more kids with DI potential than there are available DI roster spots. Also keep in mind that the results (draft and college recruits) are well documented. Even the below average player that attends these events has college potential. We simply don't have many NPs attend these events. If a kid can't play his parents should not waste their money on PG events.
FWIW, when it comes to baseball I never lie about anything. Some of the most well known and respected College Coaches in the nation contact us frequently wanting to know what our people think about players.
We also know that some colleges use the sort function to find players with a certain PG grade.
We could have ringing endorsements from hundreds of college coaches, but it is an NCAA violation for them to endorse any scouting or recruiting service. For some reason the NCAA groups scouting services and recruiting services together even though they are two completely different things.
eaters,
We think the early viewing can be very important, especially seeing projection is a vital ingredient.
Here is what David Rawnsley wrote about a pitcher who sttod out last week in Jupiter.
RHP Chris McCue (South Charlotte Panthers): This is fun stuff to follow. In 2007 McCue threw in the 14U WWBA National Championships and topped out at 74 mph. In 2008 it was the 15U’s and he topped at 81 mph. In 2009 it was the 16U’s and McCue was up to 89. Now he’s 91-94 mph, with plenty at the upper end of that margin. McCue definitely has the potential to get stronger, as he’s 6-0 and slender, but what an arm. And what a nice history and progression to track him by.
When comparing the pitcher above to someone the same size and all else being equal... let's say this other pitcher threw 90 at 15, 92 at 16, 94 at 17, and 94 at 18.
Had these two been seen only as a HS junior it's very likely scouts/recruiters might take the latter guy. (He's throwing up to 94)
Had both only been seen as HS seniors, it might appear to be a coin flip. (Both are throwing 94)
However if we know the history, who would we project to throw harder in the future. It's not an absolute, but it does tell us something. It even tells us some important things regarding the pitcher in Jupiter. It speaks of his work ethic, desire, etc. Some might say he is a late bloomer, but that history means a lot.
Also we have to be aware of the way colleges are recruiting these days and even the MLB scouting departments are getting into underclassmen more than ever before.
This in no way hurts late bloomers. Heck, they are late bloomers and need to be seen late (my own son was one). It doesn't mean what happened earlier is unimportant and for sure it can't harm anyone who has what it takes. It has been an eye opener for many when they see what they are dealing with and what they need to do.
Personally I like to call ratings, grades, reports, etc. a source of identification. We identify talented players, if no one used that service, we wouldn't and couldn't do it. It just so happens that the track record for identifying talent is impossible to ignore.
There's always the chance that a college recruiter or MLB scout would disagree with our assessment of a player (just as they might disagree with each other). But they can not afford to ignore a player identified as having talent by a reliable source.
Regarding the PG grades... Keep in mind that there are always more kids with DI potential than there are available DI roster spots. Also keep in mind that the results (draft and college recruits) are well documented. Even the below average player that attends these events has college potential. We simply don't have many NPs attend these events. If a kid can't play his parents should not waste their money on PG events.
FWIW, when it comes to baseball I never lie about anything. Some of the most well known and respected College Coaches in the nation contact us frequently wanting to know what our people think about players.
We also know that some colleges use the sort function to find players with a certain PG grade.
We could have ringing endorsements from hundreds of college coaches, but it is an NCAA violation for them to endorse any scouting or recruiting service. For some reason the NCAA groups scouting services and recruiting services together even though they are two completely different things.
eaters,
We think the early viewing can be very important, especially seeing projection is a vital ingredient.
Here is what David Rawnsley wrote about a pitcher who sttod out last week in Jupiter.
RHP Chris McCue (South Charlotte Panthers): This is fun stuff to follow. In 2007 McCue threw in the 14U WWBA National Championships and topped out at 74 mph. In 2008 it was the 15U’s and he topped at 81 mph. In 2009 it was the 16U’s and McCue was up to 89. Now he’s 91-94 mph, with plenty at the upper end of that margin. McCue definitely has the potential to get stronger, as he’s 6-0 and slender, but what an arm. And what a nice history and progression to track him by.
When comparing the pitcher above to someone the same size and all else being equal... let's say this other pitcher threw 90 at 15, 92 at 16, 94 at 17, and 94 at 18.
Had these two been seen only as a HS junior it's very likely scouts/recruiters might take the latter guy. (He's throwing up to 94)
Had both only been seen as HS seniors, it might appear to be a coin flip. (Both are throwing 94)
However if we know the history, who would we project to throw harder in the future. It's not an absolute, but it does tell us something. It even tells us some important things regarding the pitcher in Jupiter. It speaks of his work ethic, desire, etc. Some might say he is a late bloomer, but that history means a lot.
Also we have to be aware of the way colleges are recruiting these days and even the MLB scouting departments are getting into underclassmen more than ever before.
This in no way hurts late bloomers. Heck, they are late bloomers and need to be seen late (my own son was one). It doesn't mean what happened earlier is unimportant and for sure it can't harm anyone who has what it takes. It has been an eye opener for many when they see what they are dealing with and what they need to do.
PG Quote of David Rawnsley's Patience on a potential prospect, and most importantly, data collected over a period of several years. This is what scouting is all about. Collectively gathering information to be recorded in a data base. You never know when that player will "all of the sudden", pop up on everyone's radar screen.
Outstanding, reliable reporting on a pitcher who has progressed nicely!
Good stuff PG Jerry/David. Keep it coming! We are all watching very carefully what you guys have to say in the scouting world.
quote:Here is what David Rawnsley wrote about a pitcher who stood out last week in Jupiter.
RHP Chris McCue (South Charlotte Panthers): This is fun stuff to follow. In 2007 McCue threw in the 14U WWBA National Championships and topped out at 74 mph. In 2008 it was the 15U’s and he topped at 81 mph. In 2009 it was the 16U’s and McCue was up to 89. Now he’s 91-94 mph, with plenty at the upper end of that margin. McCue definitely has the potential to get stronger, as he’s 6-0 and slender, but what an arm. And what a nice history and progression to track him by.
Outstanding, reliable reporting on a pitcher who has progressed nicely!
Good stuff PG Jerry/David. Keep it coming! We are all watching very carefully what you guys have to say in the scouting world.
