Scouting Rant

Here's what I see with player A

Control - teachable

Off Speed - teachable

Mechanics - teachable

98 MPH - cannot teach this

This kind of guy will always get attention and chances because he has the one thing nobody can teach but they can teach the rest.

 

Here's what I see with Player B

.............absolutely no clue why nobody would be interested in him.  I would take him in a heartbeat and build around him.

 

Possibilities - bad attitude, bad work ethic, history of injuries, not getting exposure

 

Really have no clue to be honest.

Player B's Dad is a PIA. 

First, I may be the village idiot, but if the numbers are true regarding Player B, he will probably get drafted.  6'4" and throws 95??  I think a lot of teams would want a guy like that.

Player B is adamant about going to college and/or his signability is more than MLB wishes to spend at where they rate him. There could be other reasons as mentioned above.

if player B has a good D1 ride he's not unnoticed. Sometimes high school kids drop in draft status based based on other information. Some insist they are going to college. Others put out a number where they won't sign for less. Sometimes teams will take a shot with a late draft choice. But they don't want to waste higher choices. As someone else mentioned their could be other variables viewed as negatives.

Both sound like early round candidates based on the info given.

comments in bold above. I do get the projectable and understand why it is important but some kids are not going to learn. if the kid really throws 98 and can't get innings on HS roster i have my doubts.

Whether a kid is good enough to play regularly on his HS roster is irrelevant to a scout. If it was, HS coaches would be determining who is a pro prospect.

 

Whether a kid is good enough to play regularly may be relevant to a college coach.

 

Pro scouts are projecting out five or even six years, assuming great development coaching, great conditioning coaching, etc., to a finished product. The pro scout has decades of corporate memory upon which to compare the kids probable developmental path (e.g., the developmental paths of Randy Johnson, Sandy Koufax, etc). The college coach has his memory of his players with similar profiles and is projecting out maybe two years to a finished product; with knowledge of his ability to develop (or not develop) similar pitching talent. (I'm assuming all the other potential variables (sign ability, college desires, etc.) are equal.)

 

In the OPs scenario, as a college coach, I would think long and hard before commiting my limited money to a kid who will not contribute at all the first year, then deal with the situations which may arise if the kid doesn't develop - or get playing time - by the second year. Proball is totally different; for a kid who throws 98 there is plenty of patience available. There are a handful of players on the planet who can reach 98; there are more then that handful who can reach 95. The rarer the skill, the more in demand the player.

 

In many cases, kids who throw that hard don't yet have the mechanics or the body coordination needed to command the ball. That typically comes later; indeed, the taller the player then the truer that statement. Proball for a HS draftee = more patience to develop.

 

Now, we all know that the second player appears pedestrian in velo when compared to the first player. However, the second player is far from pedestrian when compared to all dradt eligible players.

 

i saw both Max Freid and Lucas Giolito throw on the same day when they were in HS. Freid was a rail thin guy who touched 95 that day; Giolito was man size touching 99. Worked out well for both - both got TJ; both have high chances of being impact MLB players. Tomato Tomahto.

 

 

These are facts. They are not made up. I got these numbers from several area scouts that are responsible for grading this young men. I really ask these questions because I do not understand the logic. I am not making these velo numbers up, they are simple facts about two local kids and I am confused.

 

Player A- I counted 4 performances this year with 6+ walks. Primarily used as high school closer. Do not see logic in clubs drafting a high school closer. This player has great 2014 summer.

 

Player B- has sat 91-94 multiple games, touched 95 several times. This player had bad 2014 summer.

Did you ask the scout that gave you the numbers?

ECTIGERS93,

 

What makes you sure that player B will not be drafted?

 

I am trying to think of a past HS pitcher, that was 6'4", signable and throwing 95, that went undrafted.  I really can't think of one.

 

BTW, there was a HS pitcher drafted in the first round last year that was very wild.  He topped out at around 97 and had a great curveball.  He just had trouble throwing strikes.

Simple, A throws 98

B will get drafted, unless there are other factors as previously mentioned.

 

Happened to  a very high ranked teammate of my son (T.T.).  PG would know better, but this kid was absolutely adamant he would not sign because he was going to Vandy......but he ended up signing and I think he went later than originally projected and lost out on some money because of that.

Reading between the lines here Goosegg's comments make sense. 

 

Player B is more likely to contribute in college immediately, likely making his scholarship opportunities very appealing.  

 

Player A is more draftable because while the college coaches would love to say they have a 98+ pitcher it doesn't do much good if he can't put him in a game, so that just wastes the resources of their 11.7 scholarships.  MLB is better suited to provide the control training Player A obviously needs.

I don't understand the OP's question.  I mean I understand the question I guess I just don't understand why anyone would ask it.  As always I will just take OP for his word on numbers.  KID A THROWS THE BASEBALL 98 MPH.  Were you looking for a better explanation?  And I seriously doubt he has a hard time pitching for his high school.  Let's be real here.  If his coach doesn't pitxh him much then the coach is an idiot.  And you say he walks about one an inning or slightly more.  But you also say he has more walks than strikeouts.  Again I find this very hard to believe.  A kid throwing 98 in high school will strikeout at least 2 per inning I don't care how good of a baseball area you live in.  And the other kid will also get drafted so what's the big deal?  Could you in fact be dad of B?  Something is brewing here.

Ok looking back I see you didn't mention how many walks per inning.  So do you have that information.  Also it is worth noting.that the sweet spot for mlb hitters is right in that 91-93 range pitcher B cruises at.  Those guys are toast if they don't have exceptional stuff.  MLB offensive numbers drop precipitously at 95mph and up.  And at 98 offensive numbers are really bad.  It is a myth that 'it doesn't matter how hard you throw in the big leagues'.  People like to say that but the hard data completely disproves that.

Keep in mind these are HS pitchers. A HS pitcher that sits 91-93 could be projectable and maybe get a few more ticks. I ask these questions because they are the only 2 pitchers in my area that are supposed to be drafted. Just curious about how they are evaluated as a prospect. As I watch these two young men I clearly see Player B being a better HS pitcher and Player A having hard stuff. I guess the stuff trumps command etc.

This post made me think of Jason Neighborgall.  6'5" 205 lbs and threw 100 mph at Georgia Tech.  Got drafted in the 3rd round and there was some question about his control.  Never rose above the low minors with a career 17.22 era.  Maybe there were injury problems but I believe the problems were control.   

Some time back there was a HS kid from Alvin Texas that threw really hard but didn't know where it was going.  I think the Mets had him and gave him up for a washed up infielder.  All of a sudden he found the plate and turned out to be pretty good.

 

You might have heard of him....his name was Nolan Ryan.  He was one of a kind and that is what 98MPH is.  Imagine if he picks up another tick or two like your 91-93 guy. 

 

They also picked Steven Chilcott #1 overall in 1966 and left the Athletics with their sorry #2 pick.  Maybe you've heard of him?  Reggie Jackson.

 

They've done a few stupid things over the years, but I'm still a fan.

 

Look at the pitcher with the eyes of a scout. Is he throwing MAX effort?

Is the arm loose or tight. Do you see "movement" on the ball.

 

Have you played catch with either pitcher?

Take a bat and stand next to the catcher when pitcher 'A' and 'B' are warming up.

 

Do you remember Bob Gibson, Jack Stanford?

 

Bob

 

 

 

Consulrant - needing some definitional help.  Still trying to sort out arm slot and front side, but wanted to get a real life explanation of loose/tight and MAX effort.  On the max effort, what are the key takeaways?  I've seen pictures where the pitcher looks like he is holding his breath for a long time (viens popping, eyes bulging) and assumed that meant max effort.  On the loose/tight, can you replace "fluid" with "loose"?  This past year I think the pitchers I've been watching have skills that have surpassed my basic skills evaluation and am trying to work myself up the curve to better understand what seperates the "good" from the "better".

After reading this thread, I am hoping velo is just one factor. My son is a HS senior and signed a NLI to play JUCO ball in Dallas. He is only 6'0 200lbs and throws 83-85 with movement. He has very little quick twitch movement so we are hoping with proper training he can reach 88-90. When I catch his pitches it feels like a bowling ball but others who throw 90 feel lighter in the mitt. Praying for 5mph🔥🔥🔥⚾️!!!

Forgot to add he is a LHP.

If you're catching guys throwing 90+ on a regular basis, you're my hero. I gave up at about 85mph.

If a person can throw 98, his name could be Charles Manson and an ML team would draft him. The guy that touches 95 and sits at 91-93 will get drafted too.

2017 and Ken Rod;

LHP have advantages. their fast ball moves away from RH hitters.

 

The key word in hitting or pitching is "effortlessly" "if you feel at ease, you are relaxed" - be ready.

The secret is the feeling of "controlled violence".

Each day work on improvement your skills.

 

Bob

 

 

Thx Bob. Since he signed he hasn't stopped working hard everyday especially on his lower half. I catch my son on a regular basis and after a 40-50 pitch bullpen my hand hurts. I do not catch 90 plus guys on a regular basis but have caught a few and noticed the heavier ball my lefty throws. I can't wait to see him develop and gain quick twitch. It's like he throws hard with zero violence and I believe that gives him projectability.

I truly appreciate the fforts around pitch counts but asked the question about MAX effort in part to see if anyone feels that the "more effort" (especially upper body) or the "tight" delievery places more stress on the arm.  To bring this back into the "Ask the Scout" forum, what are the opinions as to longevity/durability as it relates to tight/loose and violent/non-violent to use Consultant's words?  I think my 2017 is relatively effortless but not 100% sure what to look at.  Have asked him at what effort level he throws the majority of his fastballs and he says 85-90%, saving a little for when needed.  Is this a common statement from pitchers?

Based on your comments above, if you see that scout again, I think you should ask him to help you in understanding just exactly how the draft works.  

JMO

I agree. I sent my son to a pitching coach the winter before junior year. His velocity improved. I discovered so when my son asked me to catch him in a facility after several raimy days. I couldn't pick up the ball well off the back wall. I dove out of the way. I pointed to the square on the net. I told my son there's his new catcher. I never caught him again.

Me too...among the best moves they ever made was winning the lottery and getting Seaver out of the hat.  A ray of hope this year ...finally...Let's Go Mets!

Regarding the question about max effort.  For the most part it is a scouting term that describes a pitchers delivery.

 

There is no universal description, it is more a visual thing.  Perhaps the easiest way to explain it would be a pitcher that appears he is straining to throw the ball.  Where as low effort looks like the pitcher could have more in his arm.  Usually associated with the words fluid, smooth, effortless, loose, easy, etc.

 

What everyone loves to see is that pitcher that looks like he is throwing BP while throwing fastballs in the 90s.

 

Truth is, there are max effort guys in the Big Leagues.  Quite often they are relief pitchers because of several reasons including stamina and endurance.  The lower efforts guys simply tend to last longer before tiring.

 

That said, I'm not certain there has been any real evidence that the max effort guys are more likely to be injured.  I suppose it is because the low effort guys tend to throw longer before tiring.  Fatigue being one of the major enemies It can get to any pitcher it just happens at different times.  Therefore, we see many TJ cases with both types.

 

One last thing, it is the baseball after it is released that is most vital.  However, in scouting the low effort pitcher is more attractive and appears to have the highest ceiling. He also is more likely to have, or develop, better command of his pitches. None of this means there will be no interest in the max effort type.  Some of them are so good you just can't ignore them.  Plus stuff is never ignored, it is just more appealing on a lower effort pitcher.  BTW, there is no such thing as an "effortless" pitcher no matter what he might look like.

Thanks for the insight - guess it is one of those "you know it when you see it".  I guess we should teach our young kids not to grimace too much when they throw.

Some of this is just deceptive physical appearances. It often just looks like the 5' 9" kid throwing 90mph is putting more into it than the 6' 5" kid throwing the same speed. I believe a lot of it is just that a big long body and long arms give the appearance of less effort than short limbs moving fast.

I guess I go back to pictures of the guys throwing - taken from behind the plate.  Some guys look like they are throwing BP while others look like they are about to explode - literally with their neck/face veins popping, mouth clenched, neck muscles/tendons taught.  I've seen some pictures where I almost felt sorry for the guy.  Again, I do not have an advanced ability at grading all the various moves of a pitcher but I can certainly see some differences in "effort" in these still pictures.  May no be any difference in true physical effort and maybe simply differences in approach/intensity.

You ever see a race horse gritting his teeth while running?  Most have their mouth flopping around loosely.

 

I actually believe that gritting your teeth tightens muscles used for any type of speed.  That includes running, throwing and hitting.  It also has a negative effect on eye sight.

 

Back in my previous life I used to take binoculars to games so I could get a good look at the pitchers face when delivering the baseball.  It's not so much the grimace as it is the tightness.   Believe it or not, it is possible and even common to make some very strange faces, even grimace, when throwing a baseball while still staying loose mouthed.

Many pitchers use mouth guards to ease any discomfort later on from clenching teeth while on the mound.

 

The answer is very simple,the only other profession that fails as much as a weather man is a scout.Less than 10,percent of players drafted make it to the big leagues.This means that scouts fail miserably and organization waste millions.Scouts do not draft the most impotant skill of all,consistency.