Standardized Testing in Baseball

“…..that would include all data being sent to coaches from around the country.”

This is the limiting step for most players.  You can collect all of the data in the world and have the most perfect “test” conceivable but it doesn’t matter unless the right coach sees it, believes it and acts upon it.  

So before you ask for a page full of personal information from players and parents, perhaps you could share the following:

A.  How will you send the data to coaches around the country?

B.  How will you get them to look at the data you sent?

C.  Why will they value this specific data over the 3rd party data already available?

D.  Assuming you solve A-C, now what?  Aren’t coaches still going to want to see kids actually play the game?  

Thank you for the questions!

Data would be sent through a database that will be accessed by coaches from around the country. Once we have gained some traction and have enough players in the system, we would be able to give player suggestions to schools based on the batted ball metrics. A sort of "match-maker" if you will.  In my discussions with coaches, they have a hard time trusting the data being emailed to them. With our system, they will know that the data is credible and in a standardized environment. The database will also include video of each swing that coaches can view that as well. We are not replacing game action or other showcases, but offering an alternative that is objective. Player rankings would be strictly objective based on batted ball results.

Answer as many or as few of the questions as you'd like. I am just trying to get some input from parents on this topic.

During our 17 years of Area Code games and 24 years of International Goodwill Series which included evaluations of 40,000 players.

The selection of the competitive player was the judgement of a trusted Pro Scout and a player & parent interview.

Bob

I am absolutely not trying to eliminate the jobs of any scouts or anything. Traditional scouting helped me a lot as a player. I am just thinking about a standardized test because the data and technology is available. Scouts and coaches will always have final say, but using the technology available in a controlled environment to evaluate a player can do nothing but help the player promote himself and help coaches trust the data they receive.

What you plan is the "open the front door" &/or "get to first base". The player needs 4 of 6 tools to get to home plate.

Bob

My kids are done playing, graduated and are young adults in the real world now. I also played college ball. I did read the survey questions out of curiosity.

You could get very different responses based on how connected to reality is the respondent. How are you going to know who is grounded to reality in a survey? Some of the questions would become long discussion threads on this board.

From having coached softball from 7/8 rec through 18u Gold, baseball from 7/8 rec through 16u and played from LL through college I’ve seen parents grounded in reality and many grounded in delusion. The parents who see reality rarely think their kids got screwed. The delusional parents are more likely to think their kid was screwed somewhere along the line than recognize where the talent fits in the talent spectrum.

For example, I advised a 16u player and the parents the kid was a D3 prospect. I had coached the kid from LL through 16u. I watched his entire high school career (son’s hs teammate). They didn’t want to believe me. They hired a recruiting consultant for $1,500. This guy supposedly knew the ropes. He maneuvered his son being a first round pick and another son going ACC into a lucrative side gig. Without ever seeing the kid play he advised him to email the coaches at Vanderbilt and Stanford. At that point the parents sort of stuck their tongue out at me.

The kid got hooked up with an expensive travel team that went winless at PG events in GA and FL. They played on back fields. They never saw a college coach.

When it was all said and done the kid was a HA D3 bench player for four years. His recruiting experience was “if you get accepted on your own you’re on the team.” But in the recruiting process the parents chose to trust an alleged recruiting industry expert over a former coach and friend who had the player’s best interests at heart. They preferred to be told what they wanted to believe as opposed to reality.

Another kid I coached parents thought he was being recruited by UNC. The kid filled out the online recruiting questionnaire. He received an invitation to a camp. Hence, recruiting interest. When I couldn’t convince them this wasn’t interest I filled out the questionnaire with my dog’s name. I figured a (Coach) Fox might be interested in a dog. My dog received an invitation to a UNC camp.

I agree, there are many many steps to getting recruited. Video, watching live games, coach/scout recommendations, etc. are all very important to recruiting. I am just thinking a standardized test could be one more avenue that a player could take to get his name/data/video in front of coaches.

I absolutely agree with you RJM, many parents see their sons as much better players than they truly are. The way I see it, an objective standardized test can be very black and white with these parents. Rankings would be objective and they could easily see that their son did not hit the ball as well as the other 50+ kids ranked higher as an example. 

The purpose of the survey is just to collect data from parents. I just want to hear what parents have to say, no matter their perspective. I have my own ideas and experiences with the recruiting process but want to hear what others have to say. Once I have a good sample size, I am thinking about posting my key findings on here as well.

Sorry I'm confused......

Can you explain the process of standardizing a "hitting test"???  After all, I've seen a lot of cage warriors come and go.

LVeinbergs,

I think your heart is in the right place, and your idea of a standardized baseball skill test is great in theory.   College baseball recruiting is not a one-size fits all experience.  I don' think any college coach is going to believe a standardized test more than his own eyes or his recruiting coaches eyes.   Recruiting is their lifeblood, career and their paycheck.  That is not going to change overnight.    Do I see a standardized baseball skills test augmenting or possibly replacing what PG camps and tourneys do today?  Sure, anything is possible but it has to have tremendous buy-in from the travel & college coaches and add tremendous value for the recruits.   I guess it is just as possible as some future organization replacing the SAT or ACT testing that has been going on since I was in high school.  Anything can be measured, but whether or not it is meaningful is another matter.

Additionally, I think you are focused on the wrong audience.   The travel & college coaches have the decision making power and financial  resources.   The college coaches decide who gets a scholarship and who doesn't.   I'd focus there, not on the parents.  The parents will follow what the travel and college coaches say.   In general, most parents have no idea what is involved or what to expect with regards to college baseball recruiting.

JMO.

The standardized test would include a standard set of pitches (ex. 10 rounds of 5) with each round focusing on one thing (3 fastball rounds, 2 breaking ball rounds, etc.). Each pitch in each round would be identical (every FB @ 85mph 2200RPM for example). The batted balls would be recorded for exit velo, distance, etc. and those results would drive the rankings.

I am talking to coaches and travel coaches as well but wanted to specifically get parent insight because they would be the ones taking their sons to these testing days. It would definitely take some time to get established and get the requisite buy in from coaches, but it would greatly help small town kids that don't have the means to get to Florida for tournaments or who live in places where baseball is not big.

If you have had a son go through the recruiting process, please help me out and fill out the short survey and share your thoughts.

If you want more feedback you need to scale your survey down to the information that is relevant to your initial research. The survey as it sits feels like a data mining attempt.  Making my email address a required field is an immediate hard no.

As to the marketability of this “standardized test”, you don’t have a product. Your potential value propositions and target audiences are:

A: Parents- The value proposition here would be the ability to match their kid to a receptive and appropriate level college team while reducing cost.  You don’t currently have access to these coaches as you state you will “gain traction” once the product has enough data points to prove its value.

B:  Coaches-  The value proposition here is a proprietary data set that identifies recruits in a novel way. The problem here is that you don’t yet have the willing participants and there is nothing proprietary about your “test”.  The minute you gain any traction, PG and/or PBR will just apply your methodology to their current huge stream of willing (and paying) customers.  Anyone can set a pitching machine at 85 MPG for five fastballs and run Trackman to collect the data.  What you need is the massive number of willing participants that PG and PBR already have.

Aside from all of this, there is a saturated market of technology companies that are spending millions on R&D to do what you are proposing and they already have adoption.

I am not trying to be rude, and I have a great deal of respect for your passion and initiative, but I don’t think you have a viable product or model to build upon.

Thanks for the input, it really is valuable. I just like to have discussions about baseball and thought this sort of standardized test would spark some conversation. I recognize that PBR and Perfect Game run the show and dominate the market. With that said, they still run on the old model of overcrowded "pro style" showcases with a little new technology sprinkled in. I highly doubt any coaches look at the K-vest data from the PG tech cage. The market is saturated with baseball products, but most don't know what to do with that data. From my experience, the data most valuable to coaches when recruiting is the basics: EV, Distance, bat speed (maybe), some game stats, and video. Any of the extra stuff is just fluff.

I'm just thinking of a way to shake things up a bit. That Tech cage sounds interesting and somewhat similar to my idea but I don't know a single coach that truly values the result of a batted ball off of a tee.

The value of a single batted ball, or 5, off a tee is basically zero.   I would argue the same is true of a batted ball traveling at 85 mph with a known spin rate.  When you add thousands of batted balls by thousands of players it becomes a basis for comparisons, which is exactly what you proposed doing.

Coaches may not yet value the data from the tech cage but note that it’s in beta now.  The current perceived value by coaches may well be attributed to where any given coach sits on the adoption curve.  Pitching tech, biomechanics and pitching analytics have exploded in adoption in the past 5 years.  Bullpens are rapidly being replaced with “pitching labs”.  Hitting is headed that way quickly….

@LVeinbergs said "From my experience, the data most valuable to coaches when recruiting is the basics: EV, Distance, bat speed (maybe), some game stats, and video." 

I'd largely agree with all this.  Your problem is all this information is already available and through any number of organizations/avenues.  I am all for ideas and innovation (and dreaming big), but I don't like your chances in the slightest in getting anywhere with this.  Are PG, PBR, etc all perfectly standardized?  Nope.  But they're close enough to give coaches what they need initially in order to put most kids into their yes, no or maybe piles.  If a kid attended 3 PBR showcases and his exit velos were consistently above 97 mph (or whatever), then that's either enough for a particular coach or it isn't.  For some that 97 mph means a kid immediately gets into the yes pile, but for others, it's the maybe pile.  But once they feel a kid is a yes or a maybe, the coaches/scouts will take it from there.  I'd argue that once a player meets a certain threshold for a coach, PBR and the like are no longer part of the equation.  PBR/PG metrics are an easy to start whittling down the pool of candidates for a coach.  They're not super trustworthy/accurate 100% of the time, but close enough for many when they see a kid has an 81 mph exit velo or whatever.  It doesn't matter if that number has a plus or minus 5 mph margin of error due to a bat (wood, metal, illegal), a crappy radar gun, an incompetent administrator, whether it came off a tee or BP, etc.

For your product to beat out what is currently available it'll have to be significantly more accurate, more easily accessible to everyone, cheaper, and adopted coast to coast and everywhere in between.  Right now, even the long well-established big dogs aren't universally adopted/implemented/accessible coast to coast.  Yes, it's Nebraska, but I live in Omaha which is by far the largest city in the state.  PG has zero presence here.  You wanna do a PG showcase?  It involves a 3-hour drive to Kansas City.  We've got two D1 teams in the city and Nebraska is 45 minutes down the road.  Perennial Juco powerhouse IWCC is 10 minutes away.  We host the College World Series and the Royals' AAA-affiliate plays here.  The Omaha metro area is nearing a million people.  Yet it is not worth PG's time to do even one showcase a year here.  So you're looking at a monumentally huge task and it's one the vast majority aren't starving for a new solution to.

Is the target audience college coaches or parents/players?

Many PG tournaments now record every single pitch- speed, type or pitch and result.  Stat lines/box scores for both pitchers and hitters are already out there.  A hitters BA and to a degree power (via type of hit) are all recorded.  It wouldn’t take much for them to point another gun at the batter.  Heck, they can add a Rapsoda.  Currently, on a players profile, everyone can see their metrics rank compared to class.  I agree with 22and25 in that this is all in motion.   So, I am not too sure there are many recruits that, at a minimum aren’t aware of the public data and how to get some data recorded for themselves.  If a kid is not on a team that goes to PG or other similar events,  perhaps that could be a priority.  I am not saying this is important, but if you feel metrics should be standardized and are important, there are avenues now.

What I haven’t seen is someone presenting this data to players/parents in a comprehensive way to help them navigate their ‘fit’.  We all know about USNews College rankings but there is nothing out there using baseball data in a remotely similar fashion.

@LVeinbergs posted:

Hi Everyone,

From what I have seen on these message boards, there is a lot of concern regarding college recruiting. Whether it is how to get recruited, where to get recruited, etc. there is a lot of confusion and grey area. One thing that I believe could help high school athletes get recruited is a standardized test of sorts. What are your thoughts on this sort of thing? I would love to hear any input you all have and have created a google form to keep responses organized.

https://forms.gle/Kb7WJ55Y3o8qAE2w6

The survey asks questions about your/your sons' experiences in recruiting and how it could change for the better. I am in the process of creating a standardized hitting test that would include all data being sent to coaches from around the country. Would you be interested in taking your son to this sort of showcase rather than a PBR or Perfect game?

Any and all input is greatly appreciated!

Check out the vendors at the ABCA Convention 2022, this will provide help you gauge where the trends might be going.

https://www.abca.org/ABCA/Even...53-b9c3-8735f9e604e2

There is also a company called statstak https://www.statstak.io/  that I see Josh Rudd promoting.

Don't know if this is exactly what you are trying to accomplish, but you should confirm.

Good luck

LV

how do you measure the 6 tools for a player? Your questionnaire does not ask about two sport players.

Bob

The test as it sits is just for hitting. Measures power via hard hit %, contact via contact %.

One of the nice things about the SAT is that you don’t have to send it to a school unless you like the score. I would think that if this was a low cost way to get metrics that you could choose to make public or not…but that the player could use to get a rough idea where they stand…it could be very helpful. I agree with the rest that the actual true recruiting would still require in game observation, connections, etc. but one of the beauties about the college process for NARPs is that there are some general guidelines and metrics you can use to objectively and privately determine if a school is a reach school, a safety school or in your sweet spot.

PTWood, that is a great idea! Thank you! I hadn't thought about that. I took the ACT 5 times in high school and only sent my best score to the schools I was hoping to get into. That would be a great option for athletes to choose after their test. If they feel like they rocked it, then they can send the score. If they really sucked that day, they can keep the results private.

@BBSBfan posted:

What I haven’t seen is someone presenting this data to players/parents in a comprehensive way to help them navigate their ‘fit’.  We all know about USNews College rankings but there is nothing out there using baseball data in a remotely similar fashion.

I agree with this, but many on here would say it can't be done, because the numbers don't line up with levels, or because of the 6th tool.  Anyway, doing that would be more like individual consulting, than data on a large scale.  Or, if it's large scale, and you're just going to tell a player that 83 EV=D3, how would that be different from what you can find, for example, on NCSA's website?

The final "score" would be based on all metrics that are measured. It wouldn't be as linear as the 83-D3, 88=D2, 90+=D1, so on and so forth.

Contact %, hard hit %, etc. would help paint a better picture of a hitter's abilities. I just recently read about "Smash Factor" from Driveline. That number is supposedly the best way to measure quality of contact. These slightly more advanced and detailed numbers would create a better comprehensive score. No ranking system will ever be perfect because of the intangibles that make baseball the beautiful game it is, but we sure can try to be as objective as possible.

@anotherparent posted:

I agree with this, but many on here would say it can't be done, because the numbers don't line up with levels, or because of the 6th tool.  Anyway, doing that would be more like individual consulting, than data on a large scale.  Or, if it's large scale, and you're just going to tell a player that 83 EV=D3, how would that be different from what you can find, for example, on NCSA's website?

Yes, I was saying there isn’t a tool that attempts to use a lot of the same data (not just for coaches) to help parents narrow target schools.  There is a data tool called CollegeVine that attempts to give parents more info about target schools based on (academic) profile.  Not saying it is easy or even accurate to do, just saying that’s an area I don’t see much help and the available data is piling up.  For the vast majority of families with an excellent HS player who wishes to play college ball but is not a prized recruit, there is a lot to parse through.  This knowledge gap is illustrated at basically at any college camp and many showcases.

Ideally, we would be able to identify your best fit school with the comprehensive standardized score. This would be really helpful if we were able to get some example scores from current players at those schools.

Ex. Get all of Iowa's hitters through the test to get their scores. That would help the coaches find replacements for the guys they're losing and would help high school players compare themselves to D1, D2, D3 scores. These would be in no way completely limiting, players with lower scores can still end up at a D1, but it would give a good idea of where they stack up compared to peers and current college players.

Do you believe a D3 guy can have a D1 swing?

What is a D-1 swing?

@Consultant posted:

What is a D-1 swing?

Kind of my point ..... 

@ReluctantO'sFan posted:

Do you believe a D3 guy can have a D1 swing?

Yes, two kids my son played with and against had great swings but missed on all the other metrics including size. One was a D2 All American and went undrafted. One was a D3 All American and went undrafted.

Here is an example of what I am seeing more often along these lines.  Club teams partnering with PBR (in this case) to do a scout day with published Trackman data from the event.  For hitters they are publishing :

Avg exit velo

Peak exit velo

Average batted ball distance

https://www.prepbaseballreport...Man-Files-7394261085

I've been thinking about this.  Obviously an SAT/ACT score doesn't tell you what the best school for you is, although it can suggest a range.  And, the higher the level, the more selective the school can be.  So, e.g. if you have a 35 ACT you have an 87% chance of getting into UConn but a 6% chance of getting into Yale.  I assume it would work the same for baseball test scores.

But, much of this information is already out there, if players or coaches want it.  PG/PBR collect enough numbers to make some kind of prediction, to a certain extent.  PG even has (had?) a scale based on their showcase grades, which didn't correspond to much of anything, as was discussed endlessly on here, e.g. https://community.hsbaseballwe...rade-of-less-than-7?, which interestingly first lists one set of meanings for the grades, and then farther down lists another much more vague set of meanings.

My guess is that this would not succeed as a large-scale business venture.  If it was feasible, PG and PBR would have already done it.  They don't want to mess up their business by telling a lot of their customers that their sons are D3-bound.

There is no such thing as a D-1 swing or D-3 swing. The results are what matters. That is the beauty of this standardized test idea. IF you hit the ball 100mph, you are objectively rewarded for that. You can have a terrible swing but if you crush the ball, you are ranked higher. As we all know, typically a good swing produces good results, but players shouldn't be ranked based on appearances, just production. I'm not knocking traditional baseball and projectability or scouts' eyes and intuition, but in my view any swing that gets results is a good swing.

@fenwaysouth wrote “ anything can be measured. whether or not it’s meaningful is another matter.”                                              

This is the absolute truth. The metrics that so many are focused on achieving DO NOT necessarily translate to being a player that will be sought after. What makes a player recruitable is being a really productive player in game situations, which is something a coach has to see with his own eyes.

@LVeinbergs

There is a lot to this thread.

Simple question, is your product/service an aspirin or vitamin?

Here is my simple answer, if you have something that is unique, has future value,  has the proverbial high entry barrier and you can quickly prototype.

Then you will have the potential of selling the product as a feature that could  be used in a bigger platform.

You might have multiple decision points.

Understand it might be a 3 to 5 year journey.

Successful teams have 12-15 players who can compete at the level required by the Coaches. These players have the 6th Tool.

How does the Coach determine the 6th Tool?  Can it be measured?

Bob

I completely agree that the final piece to the puzzle is what is between the ears. In my opinion, that is what separates good from great but physical attributes open doors. A kid can be an absolute bulldog, but if he doesn't throw hard enough or produce results, he isn't even looked at by higher level schools. More or less there is a physical floor that must be met to open doors to college.

Like many, I just got this PG email.   To follow up on 22and25’s post,  the big wallets are well on their way here:

“ CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa – Perfect Game today announced that its innovative, data-capturing, PG Tech, aced its beta testing phase in 2021, and will now be rolled out and available for use by amateur baseball players participating in more than 140 of its showcase baseball events in 2022.

Developed and launched in partnership with leading sports technology company, K-Motion, PG Tech provides Perfect Game athletes with access to cutting-edge technology and data- capturing that to this point has been available mostly to professional players.

PG Tech’s first effort, a cutting-edge baseball batting cage, incorporates the use of industry-leading sport technology companies such as K-Motion (3D data), Edgertronics (high speed video), Pocket Radar (ball data), Diamond Kinetics (bat data) and TrackMan (launch monitor data.)

Using high speed video cameras, a launch monitor, a radar unit, a bat sensor, and a 3D motion capture system - all individually adjusted by PG Tech biomechanics specialists – player batted-ball information is gathered from the technologies listed above and combined to provide players with the “cause data” of their swings. Included in the data are exit velocity and ball flight as well as biomechanical data related to hip, torso, and pelvis movement. Combined, the data allows players, parents, coaches, and scouts the ability to evaluate a player’s swing in each of its many phases. This allows a player the ability to improve weaknesses and further develop strengths, to help them maximize their potential as a hitter.

During this past season, PG Tech was sampled by more than 4,000 players participating in Perfect Game events. The data captured by PG Tech is uploaded to the players’ profile pages on the Perfect Game website, allowing collegiate and professional scouts opportunities to compare their own “eye-test” notes with the data captured in the PG Tech batting cage.

“It’s no secret that baseball, and all sports for that matter, are increasingly turning to high-tech applications to enhance methods and practices,” said Perfect Game President, Jerry Ford. “In an effort to stay ahead of the curve, Perfect Game is committed to providing its athletes with best-in-class services that allow them to play the game for as long as they can and to their fullest potential. That’s why we’re working closely with K-Motion to develop PG Tech. So far, the reaction to and the results from PG Tech have been outstanding.”

“The beta testing of the PG Tech batting cage exceeded all of our expectations,” stated K-Motion Chairman and CEO, Steve Diamond. “For the first time ever, amateur baseball players had access to cutting-edge and innovative technology that was beyond the means and reach for most of them. The universe gives a player talent, and we’re here to help each one of them maximize their natural talent and fulfill their dreams by giving them access to meaningful data that will help them improve and reach their full potential, and the best is yet to come for PG Tech.”

“PG Tech will emerge as a trusted and welcome resource for amateur baseball players, their parents and their coaches. It will also be an important tool for college coaches and professional scouts,” stated Bill Bavasi, a former 40-year Major League Baseball player development and scouting executive, with 10 years as a general manager. “PG Tech sits at the intersection of old-school and new-school methods of coaching and scouting. What we see with our eyes is confirmed through PG Tech data analysis, which also picks up what our eyes do not see or are not capable of seeing. PG Tech data might pique a scout’s interest in a player and get a player a closer look. And isn’t that what we all want, thorough looks at players? Just as important, PG Tech provides players and coaches with the information that helps everybody – players, scouts and coaches – reach their potential.”

Tommy would suggest “robots “ to play the game with “robot” umpires!
any psychological testing?

Bob

As far as I know PG has never missed an opportunity to fleece the general public. No surprise that they are on the leading edge of gimmicky metrics that mean nothing to 80% of the players chasing them because those players aren’t high level prospects and they never will be.

Hi Everyone,

Thank you so much for all of your input and wanted to say I've really enjoyed this discussion. I would love for it to continue but would also like to take this time to revert everyone back to the initial survey. I have changed up the questions a bit and would love to hear what y'all have to say. Once again the link is:

https://forms.gle/bTNoxQYy65xduWyr7

Thanks in advance, all input is greatly appreciated!