Bulldog 19 posted:Why is it that we harp on "getting a well-rounded education" but we aren't concerned about "well-rounded athletes?"
I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps for some, especially these days it's more about raising athletes than raising children.
Sports are a great tool to teach life lessons.
While most won't go out and seek a foreign language or calculus tutor, they will however, go after private instruction coaches, drive or fly to a camp.
The coach is telling his contingency to keep a proper perspective as he's had one player that went to MLB in his many years.
I agree with playing as many sports as an athlete wants to play, but it has become problematic with overlaps. It begins with spring football, fall baseball, summer basketball, ect.
Now add in high school programs vs club sports. Example, Our high school baseball coach despises club ball and pushes Legion ball. While I understand the sense of community and playing with your buddy's, in our area, we have options as I choose to exercise.
The club my '18 is involved in encourages multiple sports . Had it not been for playing hockey, he wouldn't have developed the lower half drive strength or even perhaps the hand eye coordination. His background playing football, golf and basketball all lend to his overall athleticism.
There comes a time when balance comes in. When all of the sports activities collide and time, travel and commitment are called into check, forcing specialization. In his case he was 15.
I'm 100% in favor of young kids playing multiple sports. The reason should be because they want to and enjoy it, not because it might make them a more well rounded athlete or a better baseball player. Are there athletic benefits involved in playing other sports? Yes in some cases, both physical and mental.
Here is what bothers me... Are the leaders in other sports telling kids they should be playing baseball? And if it is so important to develop baseball ability by playing other sports, how do all these baseball players reach the top by only playing baseball? And yes, there are many of them! And why do so many football and basketball coaches want their players to concentrate on their sport?
One question... If nearly 25% of all MLB is made up of Dominicans, would that be a higher or lower number if they had played multiple sports and were more well rounded athletes?
Guess I don't understand why people tell young kids what sports they should enjoy. Why not just let them decide. Either way is perfectly fine IMO.
Bottom line... As far as playing organized sports... There are many great football players that only played football. There are many great basketball players that just played basketball. Swimmers that just swam. Gymnasts that just did gymnastics, Golfers that just golfed, wrestlers that just wrestled, Baseball players that just played baseball. There are millions of great people that never played any sport. And yes, there are many that played multiple sports. So what is the correct way? Is there a correct way?
PGStaff posted:I'm 100% in favor of young kids playing multiple sports. The reason should be because they want to and enjoy it, not because it might make them a more well rounded athlete or a better baseball player. Are there athletic benefits involved in playing other sports? Yes in some cases, both physical and mental.
Here is what bothers me... Are the leaders in other sports telling kids they should be playing baseball? And if it is so important to develop baseball ability by playing other sports, how do all these baseball players reach the top by only playing baseball? And yes, there are many of them! And why do so many football and basketball coaches want their players to concentrate on their sport?
One question... If nearly 25% of all MLB is made up of Dominicans, would that be a higher or lower number if they had played multiple sports and were more well rounded athletes?
Guess I don't understand why people tell young kids what sports they should enjoy. Why not just let them decide. Either way is perfectly fine IMO.
Bottom line... As far as playing organized sports... There are many great football players that only played football. There are many great basketball players that just played basketball. Swimmers that just swam. Gymnasts that just did gymnastics, Golfers that just golfed, wrestlers that just wrestled, Baseball players that just played baseball. There are millions of great people that never played any sport. And yes, there are many that played multiple sports. So what is the correct way? Is there a correct way?
I think there is. Let's face facts. The pct of kids who play past high school is extremely small. And even those that do play in college most "go pro" in something else. So to me it becomes about enjoying the high school experience. If you enjoy playing multiple sports than do it.
However, the problem I see is that the HS coaches are pushing for specialization. They figure the more sport specific they can be with the kids, the more wins they can get. Thus, the "offseason" programs become disjointed and duplicative. The expectation that you participate in coach x's program and if you don't there are "no guarantees." My preference would be unification and corordination of the off season programs mainly around strength and conditioning. Then they could have individual sport specific skill sessions.
I am assuming that this is a perocial school? If so, don't many coaches, coach multiple sports. Here where I live most students do not just play one sport in private schools.
Just another coaches opinion (IMO). Comes across as a little preachy to me. What does he recommend to the kid who's not interested in other sports?
There's this assumption Dominicans grow up only playing baseball. There's a lot of soccer played there.
The push for specialization in high school bothers me. Fortunately for my son his baseball coach was a multi sport athlete. He was the JV football coach before getting the baseball head coaching job. He told the kids show up prepared to go all out day one. How you do it is up to you. Ere was an off season baseball program.
The soccer coach was pissed my son stopped playing travel soccer. He was also the only starter not to go on to college soccer. Knowing how important is a top goalie my son teased him with, "Goal is easy. Outside the box is like playing short. Inside the box is like playing third."
In basketball my son was the starting point guard on the freshman team. There were parents of returning varsity players wondering if he would make varsity soph year. He was cut for not participating in off season activities and not playing in a summer league.
The basketball coach let JV, freshmen and varsity end of the bench players play in the rec league. My son spent three years embarrassing those players.
Other parents made comments about him being cut. My son and I never said more than "thanks." The only multi sport basketball player was 6'7", 230. He went on to play D1 college football. He made the spring workouts and played summer hoops.
I asked this question on this board in the fall. After I sat through watching a handful of our football players play in "optional" fall baseball leagues on the weekend. What would the baseball coach think if the football coach instituted "optional" football games on the weekend during baseball season? Somehow I don't see that flying! Now, basketball is just as bad. So is soccer. Volleyball. Softball. Football is the only one who doesn't require you to PLAY football year-round.
And don't give me this nonsense of "well it's not required" because that's a load of BS. College baseball coaches love to claim that they promote the multi-sport athlete, while sitting at a baseball game outside of baseball season! Again, every other coach is the same way!
I'm at a school who produces several D1 athletes. There's only one sport where I can recall seeing a college coach go watch one of our recruits play a different sport than their own. And that's been football coaches. I've seen it twice.
Bulldog 19 posted:I asked this question on this board in the fall. After I sat through watching a handful of our football players play in "optional" fall baseball leagues on the weekend. What would the baseball coach think if the football coach instituted "optional" football games on the weekend during baseball season? Somehow I don't see that flying! Now, basketball is just as bad. So is soccer. Volleyball. Softball. Football is the only one who doesn't require you to PLAY football year-round.
And don't give me this nonsense of "well it's not required" because that's a load of BS. College baseball coaches love to claim that they promote the multi-sport athlete, while sitting at a baseball game outside of baseball season! Again, every other coach is the same way!
I'm at a school who produces several D1 athletes. There's only one sport where I can recall seeing a college coach go watch one of our recruits play a different sport than their own. And that's been football coaches. I've seen it twice.
Well I am kinda with you on this. We have has several discussions how baseball coaches love multi-sport athletes. Truth is every coach loves an athlete and the truth is the exceptional ones play many sports.
Did those guys mentioned just play baseball?
Baseball coaches like players who excel at baseball. Anything else is just talk. Yes, other sports may help in athleticism. But all the coaches really care is if the kid is athletic enough to play his position. Ever hear a baseball coach say of one of his players, "He would be a hell of a decathlete?" Me neither.
Once again, please understand that there are many playing in the Major Leagues that played baseball only in HS. I can't speak for what they did before HS. Some of these are among the very best players in MLB. I'm not saying the reason they are so good is because they specialized, only saying that is what they did.
Though we don't keep track of it like we do in baseball, I feel pretty sure the same thing happens with many players in the NBA. They only played basketball in HS.
I do understand that a small percentage reach those levels. I realize sports can teach important lessons. At the same time telling someone they have to play a sport they don't enjoy, just doesn't make sense. Then again, if they want to play other sports, more power to them, because it doesn't make any sense to tell them to specialize either.
For us...it was important to make sure that my son's high school coaches were on board with him playing football and baseball...and fortunately they are fine with it. I think it helps that one is a fall sport and the other is a spring sport.
He enjoys both sports and I feel like he shouldn't have to choose right now. He may change his mind, or not, but it's his choice to make and not any coach's.
2019Dad posted:PGStaff posted:Who is the speaker? Seems to be the common theme these days that kids are playing too much. Some go overboard on it.
If this person had his way he would want kids to play 30 games a year. I wonder how many that end up playing at a high level after HS play more than 30 games a year? I would say nearly ALL of them.
Guess I don't understand why a baseball person would tell a serious baseball player he should be playing a lot less baseball. Based on my experience the very best players are the ones that are playing the most.
Other than the obvious arm care issues, the more you play the better you get. Odd how that works at everything, but for some reason people think baseball is the exception. Is baseball the only sport that openly promotes participation in all the other sports? What is so wrong with allowing kids to do what they enjoy the most and to develop their skills? After all, isn't that exactly what happens in Basketball. In the Dominican Republic the kids are not playing all the sports. They concentrate on baseball. Anyone paying attention to the results?
So other than the fact we should be concerned with arm care and abusive usage of pitchers, why does anyone need to play all the sports? The only reason I can think of is that they want to play another sport because they enjoy it. That is perfectly fine and the right reason. But playing another sport only because someone says you are playing too much baseball is not the right reason.
So let's just watch the arms and play it safe. And let's survey those that have become the best to see how many games they played while growing up. I mean why would a young kid with dreams want to do the same thing that Bryce Harper, Carlos Correa, Zack Greinke, Josh Donaldson, Andrew McCutchen, and others did? Did they play travel ball? 30 games a year?
It seems like those not involved in Travel Baseball have a desire to find fault with it. I wish all those naysayers would take the time to see what is really going on. That nearly all the top college and pro prospects are coming out of Travel Baseball. It's not ruining anything, it is developing talent and producing recognition. There will be bad apples involved in everything including Travel Baseball, and every other level of baseball. Why define something just based on the negatives?
Thats all I got for now.
Couldn't agree more. Perhaps this guy would have had more than one drafted player in 37 years if his players . . . um . . . played baseball more?? Posted this on another thread:
Just read the ESPN article. This paragraph caught my eye:
Harper played 120 to 140 games a year as a preteen and hit nearly every day with his dad, an upright, puglike man who spent decades swinging 300-pound bundles of rebar high above the Vegas Strip. "He'd get up at 2, at work by 4, work 'til 2 in the blazing heat and then walk in the door and say, 'OK, let's get the hittin' in,'" Bryce says. "He was never too tired."
And Lorenzo Cain started to Play Baseball in his freshman year in HS and finished third in the MVP voting last year. I realize he is a very rare exception and the reps do help but the biggest factor is probably still natural Talent. You Need to have the mechanics too but the main reason harper dominates is that his Body can generate huge power. some of it is mechanics and Training but a lot is natural Talent too.
the question is whether he got good by playing a lot or if he played a lot because he had great Talent. If you are extremely talented it is normal that you want to get even better and practice a lot. it makes sense because that is your unique Talent. Harper did everything right (albeit he might have gotten just as good with 50 games a year), the bad Thing is if parents of average athletic Kids try to push their kid into such a schedule and try to make them something which they aren't.
TB is here to stay and it is a good Thing for some Players but I think it Needs to be Age AND Talent appropriate.
Nice post Dominik. I agree with much of what you have said.
Nearly every time the topic comes up regarding multi-sport vs. baseball-only in high school, there is a group of posters who say "Who cares? Let the kids do what they want. If they want to play multiple sports, fine; and if they want to play only baseball, that's fine, too." When that happens, another group of posters will say things like "I heard from a college coach that they like multi-sport athletes" or touting some star who played multiple sports in high school; there tends to be a strong implication that the kids who want to play baseball only are doing something wrong. Then the folks in the former camp tend to say something like "Wait a minute -- lots of MLB players only played baseball in high school."
The coach in the video in the OP seems like he falls squarely in the latter camp. I'm in the former camp.
Dominik85 posted:2019Dad posted:PGStaff posted:Who is the speaker? Seems to be the common theme these days that kids are playing too much. Some go overboard on it.
If this person had his way he would want kids to play 30 games a year. I wonder how many that end up playing at a high level after HS play more than 30 games a year? I would say nearly ALL of them.
Guess I don't understand why a baseball person would tell a serious baseball player he should be playing a lot less baseball. Based on my experience the very best players are the ones that are playing the most.
Other than the obvious arm care issues, the more you play the better you get. Odd how that works at everything, but for some reason people think baseball is the exception. Is baseball the only sport that openly promotes participation in all the other sports? What is so wrong with allowing kids to do what they enjoy the most and to develop their skills? After all, isn't that exactly what happens in Basketball. In the Dominican Republic the kids are not playing all the sports. They concentrate on baseball. Anyone paying attention to the results?
So other than the fact we should be concerned with arm care and abusive usage of pitchers, why does anyone need to play all the sports? The only reason I can think of is that they want to play another sport because they enjoy it. That is perfectly fine and the right reason. But playing another sport only because someone says you are playing too much baseball is not the right reason.
So let's just watch the arms and play it safe. And let's survey those that have become the best to see how many games they played while growing up. I mean why would a young kid with dreams want to do the same thing that Bryce Harper, Carlos Correa, Zack Greinke, Josh Donaldson, Andrew McCutchen, and others did? Did they play travel ball? 30 games a year?
It seems like those not involved in Travel Baseball have a desire to find fault with it. I wish all those naysayers would take the time to see what is really going on. That nearly all the top college and pro prospects are coming out of Travel Baseball. It's not ruining anything, it is developing talent and producing recognition. There will be bad apples involved in everything including Travel Baseball, and every other level of baseball. Why define something just based on the negatives?
Thats all I got for now.
Couldn't agree more. Perhaps this guy would have had more than one drafted player in 37 years if his players . . . um . . . played baseball more?? Posted this on another thread:
Just read the ESPN article. This paragraph caught my eye:
Harper played 120 to 140 games a year as a preteen and hit nearly every day with his dad, an upright, puglike man who spent decades swinging 300-pound bundles of rebar high above the Vegas Strip. "He'd get up at 2, at work by 4, work 'til 2 in the blazing heat and then walk in the door and say, 'OK, let's get the hittin' in,'" Bryce says. "He was never too tired."
And Lorenzo Cain started to Play Baseball in his freshman year in HS and finished third in the MVP voting last year. I realize he is a very rare exception and the reps do help but the biggest factor is probably still natural Talent. You Need to have the mechanics too but the main reason harper dominates is that his Body can generate huge power. some of it is mechanics and Training but a lot is natural Talent too.
the question is whether he got good by playing a lot or if he played a lot because he had great Talent. If you are extremely talented it is normal that you want to get even better and practice a lot. it makes sense because that is your unique Talent. Harper did everything right (albeit he might have gotten just as good with 50 games a year), the bad Thing is if parents of average athletic Kids try to push their kid into such a schedule and try to make them something which they aren't.
TB is here to stay and it is a good Thing for some Players but I think it Needs to be Age AND Talent appropriate.
Yes, talent is extremely important. But talent among a large population like the U.S. should be fairly evenly distributed, right? I mean there is no reason to think that the kids in California or Texas or Florida have more natural talent for baseball than the kids in Michigan or Minnesota or Pennsylvania. So why is it that California or Florida produce so many MLB players, at a much higher rate than you would expect, given their population? Could it be because the kids in California and Florida play more baseball than the kids in Michigan and Minnesota?
And, yes, very few make it to MLB. But do the same analysis with college players and I think you'll find the same correlation.
I am of the camp, let the player do what they want, however, I do not believe and ever will that young players should specialize.
My sons decision was to play baseball only in HS, and that was fine for him.
The thing is that you cannot keep bringing up the phenoms and what they did, because reality is that most players do not have those "special" gifts.
As far as why certain states produce more ML players, I think it is because of exposure. I live in Florida and there are at any given time scouts everywhere. My son grew up playing tournaments at Roger Dean Stadium, so his drafting team knew of him in HS. But reality is that when you have sunshine 365 days a year and no snow on the ground, you are going to be outside more than inside.
As far as the Dominicans playing year round, with all due respect, our children have a lot more opportunities in their lives so I am not sure why that comes up often. We have had that discussion. I don't know about anyone else but we wanted my son to get a college education and so that was the goal, the rest was the icing on the cake.
FWIW, son never played year round baseball until HS. I still believe that parents should limit their young players playing time and be involved in other things as well.
As far as what the coach said, he has some good points, you do NOT have to buy into spending 2400+ at a facility to get better. He mentioned finding a qualified instructor. Most people cannot afford that, and I know some folks feel anxiety they are not doing enough to make their player better.
JMO
If you are meant to be there, you'll get there. Meaning there are a number of players that would have "made It" regardless of where they played, they just had to play, period. Those players possess special talents, just as most that make it do (ex Albert Pujols, Mike Trout, Bo Jackson, Bryce Harper and Alanzo Cane). All can do what is deemed the toughest thing in sports and that is HIT.
An overwhelming majority of MLB players have a special talent and todays baseball is more specialized than ever. Pitchers, throwing to one batter for a matchup. Jerrod Dyson the baserunner, and so on.
If a young player wants to play one sport, fine! If the player wants to play multiple sports, great! I believe it's largely in the gene's, but who's to say a special talent doesn't come screaming out nowhere.
For most, playing baseball is to play baseball, as it should be. For a very small minority that dream continues beyond HS, in which there are an abundant amount of opportunities to do so.
As for the amount of games........ I have first hand account of , back in the day, when a young pitcher only played 25 games a year. However, he would guest on other teams frequently and regularly toss double headers. I was told it only took him 25 games a year to "make it"(LOL) and of course when my F-I-L told me this story and tried to relate this to his grandson playing a scheduled 55 games at 15 yrs old, that happens to only throw in a closer role. I quickly done the math and concluded my son probably throws half the innings in comparison to the pitcher from the '70's. That pitcher? '84 NL CY winner, the "Red Baron". I only tell this because I believe "players" find a way to play the game, albeit in the backyard with a tennis ball or playing caps.
Players simply find a way in spite of anything you do for them.
" Yes, talent is extremely important. But talent among a large population like the U.S. should be fairly evenly distributed, right? I mean there is no reason to think that the kids in California or Texas or Florida have more natural talent for baseball than the kids in Michigan or Minnesota or Pennsylvania. So why is it that California or Florida produce so many MLB players, at a much higher rate than you would expect, given their population? Could it be because the kids in California and Florida play more baseball than the kids in Michigan and Minnesota?
And, yes, very few make it to MLB. But do the same analysis with college players and I think you'll find the same correlation. "
I thought this was interesting...you mention California and Florida but look at the baseball stud states per capita!!!! All fear the frozen north of South Dakota, Wyoming and Connecticut
I believe there's a conflict not being looked at when this debate comes up. There are two kinds of players; talented and not so talented. The talented are likely to go on to college ball. The untalented are not.
There are times parents push their untalented kids into specialization. The reason being they can't see the lack of future potential through their rose colored glasses. One would be the 5'4" dad in my area who named his 5'8" 12yo son The Meal Ticket. I wonder if he renamed him Food Stamp when his 5'9" son washed out of JV ball in high school.
