Power or Average?

Each coach looks for something else.  Most of them do not care about BAs. They are looking at technique and your approach at the plate.  Though it doesn't hurt to hit a bomb while they are watching. 

I have been told college coaches are looking at tools, rather than in-game performance.  That being said, I assume they get excited when they see a kid that is hitting in the high .300's or better, with power, and with speed.  There are lots of singles hitters out there, and from what I have read, that does not interest them as much (unless there is killer speed and defense with it).  JMHO. 

In my experience and observations, College Recruiters drool over power because there are less players who possess it.  

When you say, "playing in front of coaching" there is a difference between playing:

1) during a skills set BP at a showcase  2) playing in a showcase game  3) playing in front of a coach(es) during one of your HS/Legion/AAU games. From our experience coaches will be enamored with the long ball in a BP and are able to overlook strikeouts in showcase games (though would probably be concerned if none were "quality AB's".)

A single hitter's tools (does he have plus speed, can he hit to right field, advance a runner, bunt for a hit, hit with 2-strikes) are not apparent in a skills set, and really need to be seen during a live game with live "situations." In recruiting coaches are more interested in player awards recognition (all state, all district, all region, first team, second team, categories player led team) too than batting average.

 

A player may make a college team for hitting HRs, but when players are on a college team, I would imagine that coaches then play those with highest BA's for them over a period of time IMO.

Depends!  I say that because most HC/RC are looking to fill a "need".  If the player is 6'3 210b, then they may want their power potential. If the player is smaller they may want the speed and average.  At my son's school, they expect their middle of the order guys for power and rbi and don't pay much attention to the BA.

 

It was my experience during recruiting that the BP and Skills competitions was where they did the evals and got the serious interest and the games just solidified what they thought of the skills to make the offer.,

What's power?  Is it the ability to hit a ball 450'?  Or the likelihood of hitting xx home runs per year (i.e., MLB scale)?  I've seen kids hit colossal home runs on a rare basis, and I've seen kids hit home runs on a consistent basis.  I'd take the latter any day.  I think the ability to consistently do something well above average on the ball field is the hallmark of a very good player.

Agree w JABMK– it depends…. and it may not be as obvious as you may think.   For example – kid hit a HR and a double in a Lakepoint game at PG WWBA (kid also ended up on all tourney team).  RC from kids dream school tells kid he was at the game and liked his swing.  Fast forward a couple weeks and kid attends same dream school prospect camp and drills another one over the fence – this time entire coaching staff there including same RC.  But still no offer.  In looking at stats from previous season it appears this school could use some power bats – but perhaps there are other priorities.  So while some schools may jump on either a power hitter or a contact hitter w higher BA – I don’t think you can put a premium on one over the other.  For each coach it is going to depend on multiple factors that may not be apparent in stats…  

I concur with what the other guys have said.  I have never had a college coach ask about batting average.  Power they may track, but, so much is dependent on the pitching they are facing.  

They are looking at the swing and approach.  If a kid has a good batting average vs bad pitching with a big hole in his swing he may not get much love at all.  

Hasn't batting average been shown to be one of the least reliable ways to measure a hitter's productivity anyway?  I would think that High School batting averages, in particular, must be highly non-projectable.  Not only are we talking relatively small sample sizes, but also we're talking about highly variable pitching, fielding, and, not least of all, score keeping --  to name just a few things. 

 

That said, you would can probably still expect the top D1 type recruits to stand out sort of like men among boys, when compared to your average HS player.  

In youth players power usually is accompanied with high averages so they question is a bit mute. In BP if a players is hitting bombs he will get coaches attention, if he is hitting line drives he may or may not get his attention depending on other factors. 

 

As others have stated coaches are looking for tools and technique, not necessarily in game results, but in BP you take a lot of those variables out so be hitting bombs, if you can consistently do this you will be noticed! (it's like velo for pitchers)

 

Does the discussion change if the player in question is playing in a JC game?

My guesstimate is power is the first priority.  The ability to hit the ball out of the ballpark on a semi-consistent basis, especially with BBCOR is pretty uncommon.  Power is also the least "teachable" so if you have a guy with pop that has a less the perfect swing, the sentiment among coaches is the mechanical side can be cleaned up. 

Nope. Same for HS, College, Pro's, and frankly LL. Power is a rare commodity. 

Is it really true that power cannot be "taught." 

 

biggest determinants of power = ?

 

I am guessing some combination of bat speed, swing path and "approach"  (how deep do you let the ball get, etc,) 

 

Surely swing path can be taught and tweaked. So too can "approach"

 

To some extent,  bat speed, if not exactly "teachable" can be increased -- just as foot speed can be increased to some degree

 

So is it really true that power cannot be if not "taught"  then at least "developed." .  

 

 

I like how you asked the first part of this question, 2014 ... because a college coach recruiting for his team will look at hitters' differently from, say, a pro scout. The second part of your question trips me up, because I don't whether you mean .200 and .300 batting averages that day, or all season ... but since it's a player "playing in front of a college coach" I'll assume you mean that day.

 

And I'd say the simple answer to your question is No: A college scout isn't likely, in a general sense, to be more interested in one or the other. 

 

What he will be interested in is both -- to varying degrees -- based on his roster needs. 

 

Example: A college recruiting coach whose team is loaded with power but lacks a lead off guy who can hit for high average and run would likely be more interested in seeing someone with those tools. A coach who needs power will look past a high-average slap hitter.

 

It all comes down to need ... in the scenario you set up.

 

 

Still need more info.  Still lots of variables.  "A player hitting .200 with a home run".  When? Against who?  What is sample size?  Do his mechanics and approach give the impression he can hit for a higher average and/or for consistent power?  "A singles hitter hitting .300"  When?  Against who?  What sample size?  Does he have ability to get on base a ton (lots of walks/HBP along with hits)?  Is he exceptional at executing situational ball?  Does he have exceptional speed?  What are defensive capabilities of each?  What is their position of strength and how does that match up with RC's needs?  Have either shown consistent ability to contribute at that level?  Usually a college will want a power hitter who can put up a little better than a .200 average and will want a singles hitter to have something a little better than a .300 average and bring a lot of other things to the table so if I were limited to a one word either/or answer, I'd say neither.  But in reality, it would never be that simple. 

Logical Guessing!!

 

By the College Coach, the Pro Scout and the hitter.

Bob

I believe the biggest determinate of power is power. Not to get too far off from the original questions but if power could be consistently taught, the proliferation of PED's wouldn't have been so widespread in the big leagues. The mechanics of juiced swings didn't change so much but the results did. The initial question was: Power or average?  I'll contend that if a scout or recruiter is comparing two players that grade out similarly and project the same level of defense, base running, leadership, IQ etc....and one has hit for a high average built on singles and the other consistently hits the ball out of the ballpark but has a lower average, the next level guy will take the thumper 9 times out of 10.  It is rarely that cut and dried but if a player has raw power, most coaches feel they can teach the mechanics that will lead to more consistent contact and a higher BA without sacrificing pop. 

Power is often developed as a player gets older.  Most recent example might be Mike Trout, or Josh Donaldson.  For the most part, with a couple exceptions steroids didn't take weak hItters and give them power, it took power hitters and made them even more powerful. 

 

Interesting enough both Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds actually refined their swing and approach over the years. Steroids or not both developed a close to perfect swing.

 

We see young guys with great raw power that can't hit that well.  We see young guys that can really hit but lack the strength to hit with a lot of power.  I would rather take my chances on the kid who can hit.  This thing called pitching gets in the way of those that can't hit.

Coaches like to see gap to gap power. If a prospect is driving the ball up the gap at sixteen and seventeen years old chances are the homers will come as the player gets bigger and stronger. If the homers don't come he's still gapping the ball. Good swing mechanics and hitting the ball hard will lead to positive results. Throw in some speed and quality base running. You have a ball player.

I feel that as you better understand baseball the less this question (Power vs. Average) is important, even for coaches.   I would say what coaches want to see is a player's ability to get on base consistently as well as being able to often get more than one base hits.  That can be seen as the OPS number, which is a factor of both power and average.  A good OPS can be achieved with an ability to hit for power and yet have a low average as well as one with a high average with little power.  Now if you have a player with really good power AND and a skill for average, then that OPS is really going to be high and something that will certainly get attention from coaches.  So, power alone or average alone isn't as important as how both produce in combination. 

I have to agree with JP24 on this one...college recruiting has more to do with a teams needs than necessarilly anything else.  You can show up and have an awesome camp as a position player only to hear nothing if they need pitchers...etc....

As far as average and power, i think any coach will see value in hitting for average if it is displayed consistently against high level pitching...look at most college rosters and very few guys (maybe 3-5) are over .300

On the power side i have talked to many many coaches at different levels, all of which would tell you a kid who can drive deep into both gaps, especially oppo for extra base hits is a huge asset even if he never hits a single homerun.

Just reach out to coaches and RCs and ask what thier needs are before investing too much time and money getting in front of them.  I think you will find they for the most part are pretty straight shooters.

Several schools solicited my son l, but needed MIF and he was a true CF, so we knew it wasnt the best idea to pursue these schools. ..as fate would have it, he arrived on campus this fall and got converted to MIF anyway, ha ha...

Anyway, accentuate the skills and natural abilities you player has and find a good fit...the rest will work itself out with hard work

As a former College Coach and "founder" of the Area Code games, there are NO answers.

Until the player actually arrives in the classroom on the 1st day, the Coach does not know who he has as a freshman or transfers. The signed LOI is only a document

of interest.

There is very little "power" in College. With former pitchers now as Head Coaches they have changed the game. Defense and pitching. "Hit and Run"; "run and hit", bunt,

situational hitting is the rule now.

 

The kid, Schwarber from Indiana U [not drafted from HS] now with the Cubs is a true power hitter.

 

Bob

 

 

I don't know about that.  It may be down some, but it is still there.  I agree that teams are looking more at the "small" game, but there is still power out there.  My son's D2 team hit 74 HRs last year.  That's not a small number...

 

I think, while a high average against good competition is something to be looked at, coaches will almost never turn down a true power guy.  He can always be the DH if there is no spot in the field for him.  Coaches are always looking for good athletic kids, but the power will draw attention for sure.

 

On my son's summer team before senior year, he had a catcher on the team that had some obvious swing flaws.  But he was a pretty big framed kid and had a really good arm.  He was not hitting well at all that summer, but a Power 5 conference school showed up to watch him in two games that summer.  Both games, he hit a HR.  I believe they were the only HRs he hit that summer.  Wound up with a great deal from that school.  Next 3 years in college, never really hit for a high average, but continued with decent HR numbers and was drafted after his Jr. year.  He had the ability to hit HRs.  My guess is they could fix his flaws that prevented him from achieving a high average, but the power was there, so they took the chance.  

 

Chicks dig the long ball - and I think a lot of coaches do as well.

Ask the simple question of how do you standout.

Go 1 for 4 with and bomb

or

4 for 4 all singles

IMO the guy with the bomb gets the attention.

 

I've seen my share of really nice singles.  Think about the line drive shot that one hops the OF.  I think if some kids hit four ropes into the outfield but was never able to stretch out a double (because he hit the ball too hard - just not in the gap), he'd get my vote.  For comparision, I would have to assume that the two kids are facing the same pitcher in similar situations, specifically they are not being asked to advance a runner.  

I wonder if there is one correct answer (although I would come down with PG and Consultant if there is.)

Looked at from a college coaches perspective, no matter how much power they might be seeing, that power probably does not translate well for night games in places like Sunken Diamond, Jackie Robinson Stadium, Fullerton, and many others. Absent the type of extraordinary ability and power (which probably gets kid a very high draft pick) a power guy of the type seemingly being discussed is likely hitting long outs in the parks I have mentioned. For anyone who has watched games at UC Davis, as an illustration, a power hitter is just hitting long, long, long outs unless he pulls directly down either line.

That power also may not translate the same for a George Horton or West Coast type of offense.

Personally, as a starting point, I tend to  think college coaches are looking for guys who consistently barrel up pitches, have strong forearms, hands and wrists, demonstrate good hand/eye coordination,  and are quick to and through the hitting zone...coupled with  how the coaches then  can project what they are seeing at  the next level in the type of college game they coach and the type of park where more than 50% of their games are played.

PG makes a great point that it is not just the hitter who develops. College pitching is far better (far better) than what is being seen before college.  Certainly there can be exceptions but against better pitching in college, I would like to have the better hitter who consistently barrels the ball and work with him to develop his power.  Tying to turn a power guy in HS into someone who barrels the ball more consistently and do it against better quality college pitching is far more of a challenge.

Hitting is the most important tool.  Power without a good hitting grade tends to end up playing slo-pitch softball.

 

The early draft picks nearly every year are far from the guys twitch the most raw power.  Of course when you see a kid that can hit (forget statistics) we are talking about someone that can hit... Has the ability to have good ABs against the best pitching.

 

A few years ago the first two players selected in the draft were a HS shortstop (Carlos Correa) and HS Outfielder (Byron Buxton).  Correa did show some power, but many were more powerful.  Buxton really didn't show much power at all. Both graded out high as hitters.

 

We often see good hitters develop power.  In fact the big Leagues are full of them.  Once in while we see power hitters who are also outstanding hitters (Prince Fielder).  But we seldom see the guys that hit the longest balls in BP or win HS home run contests become great hitters.

 

Part of that is because of size and strength.  The most physically developed young hitter is likely to show the most power In BP.  It is very impressive to watch these guys hot a baseball out of sight.  Some of them can hit, some of them have no chance.  The young hitter with present gap to gap power and a good approach, with a quick swing that creates bat speed.  The guy that can battle the top pitchers and the ball jumps off his bat.  To me those are the guys most likely to get to the Big Leagues and hit with power in the Big Leagues.  

 

You could hit a baseball farther than everyone, by itself it won't even get you drafted.  If you are the best hitter in the country, but lack average power, you will be a good draft pick. Many develop into power hitters in their late teens and twenties. BTW, those guys in MLB that hit .200 with a lot of home runs are actually good hitters.  

 

Excellent post PG.  The parts I've emphasized in red are the parts that I feel are huge in addressing the Power vs. Average question.  

 

Through my years of "Dad coaching" I've always emphasized average when they were younger and have felt that maybe I had over-emphasized as both my boys did very well for their averages (not slap hitting but with quick bats to the ball) but lacked the HR power one might like to see.  In retrospect, I would still emphasize average more but certainly put more effort in developing some of the aspects the produce power.

 

I am certain that my younger son achievements for getting into a high end collegiate baseball program and now Milb was done in large part through those things I've highlighted in red.

 

 

 

 

 

Awesome response PG Staff and Truman.  Quality at bats, gap to gap power (especially oppo), lasers into the gaps that kids just can't catch up to, and an occasional dinger.  That is what this dad likes to see.  Hit the ball hard every at bat.  Have good at bats.  Don't worry about average (per Mr. Springer).