Wade Boggs Would Not Get Recruited Today

He was selected in the 7th round.  In spite of the Scouting Bureau's label of non-prospect, that clearly wasn't the opinion of all scouts.  There is no question the game, recruiting, and talent assessment techniques have changed, but you have to believe most colleges would have found value in many of the skills he did have.

I think the same could be said about many stars from the past.  However, these guys were exceptional athletes of their time, and they trained and practiced to the standards of their time (one image that comes to mind is that of Len Dawson smoking a cigarette during half-time).  I have to believe that if they were coming up today they would be doing the same thing we tell our own kids to do - hit the weight room, nutrition, etc, etc and they'd have the metrics they need to go along with their exceptional talent.

Interesting topic.  I'd agree that with today's training he would have probably been a better athlete.  Looked at some video and remembered what a flat, handsy swing he had.  I Wonder if that would get coached out of him these days.

How can you measure "inner arrogance"? * the mentality of a gambler? * the ability to observe?

With 2 strikes Wade Boggs made adjustments.

It only takes one scout to be positive.

Bob

Nick madrigal got drafted 4th overall. If you have an 80 Grade hit tool that still plays, but you have to prove at a high level that your hit tool is really that good because if you are a 5 Homer guy in mlb you basically need to hit over 300 to be productive.

But that applies to other one tool guys too, if you hit 230 you also better have elite power because 230 with 15 homers is not that good

It’s a different world.  If Wade Boggs, with his mental toughness and tenacity, was a 15-16 year old today, he would train much differently, learn to develop core strength and more speed, lift weights and if anything would be a bigger prospect than before…

nice attempt though…

I know that a lot of people don’t agree with me, but college recruiters are not as focused on measurables as most people on this board seem to believe - with the exception of FB velo for a pitcher. Position players are different. They are evaluated primarily on their hit tool and whether or not they project to be able to hit college pitching. How they load, balance, bat path, how quick their hands are, how well they know the strike zone, how often they make solid contact, how often they walk vs strike out, their approach at the plate, understanding of situational hitting, how well they run the bases, body language, and how well they play in the field are the things that determine if a position player is recruitable. None of those things can be measured at a showcase. Those things have to be observed (by someone) in live game action against good competition. Once that happens, and someone is suitably impressed, phone calls start getting made and word gets out about a player. After all of that a coach is gonna watch the player himself more than once. He might look at verified measurables - or he might not. Coaches look for qualities in recruits that remind them of other successful players. Again, something that can’t be measured. When scholarships are involved (in other words not D3) the ability to play the game productivity is the primary reason kids get recruited. Sometimes a school will take a flyer on a kid because of size, speed, or arm strength. Producing a big exit velo number is not an indication that a player can hit good pitching. A good 60 time doesn’t mean a player is a good baserunner. Showcases and camps have adopted the model of the pro style MLB tryout camps that used to take place. I attended a number of them as a player decades ago. But the difference is that in the MLB tryouts the players were evaluated by pro scouts and coaches that knew how to grade what they saw - and those camps were usually free to attend. PG, PBR, etc. are for profit and are all about the money. Many events are run by people with little baseball experience who have no ability to judge anything they see. What they know is that a 6.8 time in a 60 is better than a 7.0 time. And that’s about it, so they push the narrative that recruiting is all about numbers and the public buys it.

My 2021, a 3B/1B who doesn’t have the hit tool of Wade Boggs (duh!), and runs a 7.5 60 and throws 80 across the infield, had about a dozen different D3 options to choose from, including schools that are perennial National D3 Title contenders.

To say that Wade Boggs wouldn’t get recruited by D3’s today is pathologically inaccurate.

I think we've all helped perpetuate coaches get lazier when it comes to recruiting.  We spend money in droves for showcases, camps, velocity increase training, laser measurements, etc.  What's more, we package all that up for them and then ship our kids off to their doorsteps.  I think there are a lot of good coaches that still work hard to look at the finer points (outside of metrics), but the low hanging fruit is in massive supply these days for them.  Literally every coach can use more time.  Every coach wants to be as efficient as possible.  You might need one SS, but you've got 352 of them begging to come play for you.  So you can afford to take the 15 of those who all run 6.50s, have 100 mph exit velos, and 90 mph INF velos and then feel confident that one of those 15 will fill the hole for you.  Are you looking at the all finer (non-metric) points of those 15 guys?  Maybe. Probably.  But you did whittle that massive stack of resumes down to a more manageable size using their metrics to some degree.  And if you don't do that, you won't be coaching much longer.  Time is the most precious commodity any of us have.  Yes, you might miss out the next Boggs, but you only need a couple/few of each recruiting class to actually work out for you.

I have said on here for years that most good college recruiters are not as enamored with numbers as many on here make a priority but who can compete.  Numbers help you get seen but you can get there if you don’t have great numbers.  

@adbono posted:

Position players are different. They are evaluated primarily on their hit tool and whether or not they project to be able to hit college pitching. How they load, balance, bat path, how quick their hands are, how well they know the strike zone, how often they make solid contact, how often they walk vs strike out, their approach at the plate, understanding of situational hitting, how well they run the bases, body language, and how well they play in the field are the things that determine if a position player is recruitable. None of those things can be measured at a showcase.

Adbono's entire post is money, but this passage is one in particular that every HS kid and parent needs to understand.

"Adbono's entire post is money, but this passage is one in particular that every HS kid and parent needs to understand."

It surely does not top the Sherpa story??!!

@Good Knight posted:

"Adbono's entire post is money, but this passage is one in particular that every HS kid and parent needs to understand."

It surely does not top the Sherpa story??!!

Hard to top a story with a Sherpa in it!

I realize that you have to "see a player to know" but do those numbers attract interest.

In recruiting emails, the kids are taught to lead with their best stats.

How do you get that RC or Scout to take a minute to look at the email?  And then get them interested enough to come see.

Would a line like top national travel team, 100 mph exit velo, batting .478 with zero strikes outs and 1 out of 3 hits a double. 1.147 OPS in all PG Events grab their interest?

@JETSR71 posted:

I realize that you have to "see a player to know" but do those numbers attract interest.

In recruiting emails, the kids are taught to lead with their best stats.

How do you get that RC or Scout to take a minute to look at the email?  And then get them interested enough to come see.

Would a line like top national travel team, 100 mph exit velo, batting .478 with zero strikes outs and 1 out of 3 hits a double. 1.147 OPS in all PG Events grab their interest?

At competitive D1 & D2 programs RCs don’t often develop interest as a result of emails they receive from players. Lots of them don’t even read their email. When they become aware of a prospect (usually by word of mouth) they are going to seek out trusted sources for opinions and then react accordingly. When D1/D2 Coaches show up at big events they have a list in hand of the players they want to see.  Good luck being noticed if you aren’t already on somebody’s list.  In D3 maybe emails are more effective and a good showing at an event might turn into something.

I think DJ LeMahieu would be a more recent parallel.  His measureables weren’t exactly off the charts in high school or in Perfect Game showcases.  But every scout with even half a clue knew that he could hit. Played for LSU, then drafted in the 2nd Round

What about JuCo or NAIA?

Keaton Hiura is another even more recent one.  Ran something like a 7.3 60 at a Perfect Game showcase, threw maybe low 80’s across the infield.  Everyone knew he could hit.  Played D1.  Drafted in Round 1.  Has already played parts of 3 MLB Seasons with the Brewers.

@JETSR71 posted:

What about JuCo or NAIA?

Not sure what you are asking. I have found JuCo coaches to be the most approachable and the most responsive. Lots of them even answer their cell phones. On a number of occasions I have contacted JuCo coaches to arrange tryouts for players. The coaches always appreciated it and it almost always worked out for the players. Lots of JuCos have on campus prospect camps in the summer. Cisco had one today. It’s a great idea to go to some of those if you can find them. Sometimes they aren’t very well advertised outside of the school website. Don’t have much experience with NAIA schools tbh.

@3and2Fastball posted:

Keaton Hiura is another even more recent one.  Ran something like a 7.3 60 at a Perfect Game showcase, threw maybe low 80’s across the infield.  Everyone knew he could hit.  Played D1.  Drafted in Round 1.  Has already played parts of 3 MLB Seasons with the Brewers.

What happened with his hit tool though? His reports always were good hitter with some pop and in the low minors he had decent K rates in the high teens with a few Homers and then one year his power spiked but he also started striking out a ton.

I wonder if he started swinging for the fences too much or if it is just the higher level of pitching.

@Dominik85 posted:

What happened with his hit tool though? His reports always were good hitter with some pop and in the low minors he had decent K rates in the high teens with a few Homers and then one year his power spiked but he also started striking out a ton.

I wonder if he started swinging for the fences too much or if it is just the higher level of pitching.

He’s still young.  And I suspect like a lot of MLB hitters, pitchers with Spider Grip happened to his hit tool.  And relative to this thread topic, Hiura is an immense success:  how many players with supposedly “inferior” measureables that the OP postulates wouldn’t get recruited by a D3 would be thrilled with MLB Service time?

By the way:  Hiura is hitting .412 with a .750 SLG in AAA so far this year.  He is only 24 years old.  Plenty of time to still develop

Wonder if those same guys would blow off Tony Gwynn when he waddled up to the plate?

If they do they will be NFL coaches....Not for long.

Check out what the man himself had to say on the subject.