What good are HS stats?

No one ever said extreme stats won't draw a look. There's an assumption he may have the tools. But when a scout shows up he will leave quickly if the tools aren't there. I'll bet somewhere in the state there are several catchers with better mechanics and pop time. But their pitchers are terrible at holding runners.

RJM posted:

No one ever said extreme stats won't draw a look. There's an assumption he may have the tools. But when a scout shows up he will leave quickly if the tools aren't there. I'll bet somewhere in the state there are several catchers with better mechanics and pop time. But their pitchers are terrible at holding runners.

So after all the years of you ranting and raving about how worthless HS stats are, you’re admitting they can get a player on the radar. It doesn’t make any difference if he really has the tools or not or that there are other players who are better. My point is, he’s gonna get a look and those others may not.

Actually overheard from one of 2018's high school coaches to another - "sure, he hit .600 this summer & fall, but we both know the stats don't really matter."

I don't know who they were referring to, but assuming that this kid got the same 50 AB's our 2018 got this summer, there is no way to really "fluke" going 30 for 50. If the kid was 3 for 5 and "hit .600" that's one thing - thats just a good (or lucky) day. If they were talking about the kid I think it was (only so many kids hit .600 in the program!), it wasn't the least bit cheap - he flat out raked. But he has no pedigree - no one was talking about him before high school, and he looks awkward when he hits & runs. what he does do is go 2 for 3 most every game, with a double or two. 

We can make stats read whatever we want them to read, but a coach claiming "stats don't matter" in 2016 given the info readily available to them through GameChanger, etc. is just flat out ignorant. 

It doesn't seem so unusual to me that stats would be a starting point in the valuation process for recruiters and scouts . . . or anyone who understands athletics.

But you called the scout, right? He hadn't seen the statistic on Max Preps; in fact, he hadn't heard of the player until you brought him up.  So it's not really the stats that got the scout's attention, it's a guy called "Stats."  Your's is a prominent section with a lot of strong teams and pro prospects.  Seems like all this proves is that scouts looking for talent in that area are not doing so by checking statistics in Max Preps.

JCG posted:

But you called the scout, right? He hadn't seen the statistic on Max Preps; in fact, he hadn't heard of the player until you brought him up.  So it's not really the stats that got the scout's attention, it's a guy called "Stats."  Your's is a prominent section with a lot of strong teams and pro prospects.  Seems like all this proves is that scouts looking for talent in that area are not doing so by checking statistics in Max Preps.

Apparently true in this case.  But it doesn't mean it's not done in other cases, right?

No, stats didn't get him on the radar, you did. In fact, your post demonstrates that. All scouts have access to those same stats, yet it took you calling "a friend" who hadn't heard of the kid and who said it was worthy of a "little investigation." What that "little investigation" is is not described.

That having been said, certain pure result stats (HR, strikeouts) will raise a scouts interest so that a "little investigation" will follow. But, the traditional baseball stats of batting average, stolen bases, fielding percentage, ERA, wins/losses, are virtually meaningless to scouts - there are too many variables (e.g., scorekeeper quality, team quality, etc.) to be able to draw any conclusion that a kid should be seen.

All experienced scouts have a network encompassing every HS program/coach, JUCO program/coach, and college program/coach in his area. The scout taps into this network (and the scout will also ask every coach if the coach has seen any player from any team worthy of a look) to decide how his limited time is spent. There is nothing random about scouts scouring their area; they use every piece of information to find players who have skills.

JCG posted:

But you called the scout, right? He hadn't seen the statistic on Max Preps; in fact, he hadn't heard of the player until you brought him up.  So it's not really the stats that got the scout's attention, it's a guy called "Stats."  Your's is a prominent section with a lot of strong teams and pro prospects.  Seems like all this proves is that scouts looking for talent in that area are not doing so by checking statistics in Max Preps.

The reason he hadn’t seen the stat was he wasn’t aware MP was doing it. Now that he does he’ll be looking at it.

There are probably 100 local scouts and stringers around here if not more and each has his/her own way of finding talented players. So it seems like all it proves is, not all scouts refuse to look at stats.

Goosegg posted:

… There is nothing random about scouts scouring their area; they use every piece of information to find players who have skills.

Exactly! And in this particular case it was information from a friend.

It's a pretty far leap to make from a scout discounting traditional stats to "refusing" to look at stats.

Scouts use whatever tools which make their job easier. In the OP case, it clearly wasn't HS statistics; it was a voice from a trusted source - and that trusted voice relied totally on MaxPreps stats. Now, if it turns out that the kid has no talent, you have used up a chip.

(Interesting to have 14 stolen bases attempted in two games; that's a lot. It would make me wonder if a scorekeeper confused runners advancing on wild pitches/passed balls with true stolen bases.)

I can see how a statistic like that could create some interest. On the other hand 14 SBAs in two games also creates some doubt.  HS catchers who show a great arm don't have that many chances.  Teams don't run as much against them.  So it is possible that the best HS catcher would be 0-0 after two games.

Still, if they are running that much and he is throwing most of them out you might want to go see him.

BTW, there are several MLB clubs that actually pay us for all the stats from our tournaments. However, I think that is because they know there are many draft prospects, including early draft types.  They also know there is independent scoring.  I guess they want to see how well the guys they like are doing.  The unknown player that does well is no longer unknown because of the competition he is facing.  It means people will check him out and evaluate his ability.

If a scout cannot personally make it there they surely have someone they trust to give them some perspective prior to making the trip. What are the circumstances behind the results... If a scout does come they will be able to tell whether the player has the potential or not.  The other night at my sons game there were at least 20 scouts or more there to see him.  Prior to coming out they have seen him the past year and came to what was only our 2nd game of the year. Don't think the temps made it above 40.  The first game of the year no scouts but Hudson Belinsky from Baseball America and Nathan Rode of PBR were there to watch him. They took video and shared with the scouts their opinion of him as well. I know this because one of the scouts told me he personally spoke to Hudson. Remember the thing about stats is a guy could go 4-4 nearly every game and they be a variety of hits for example a bunt, and 3 flares or bloopers. To a scout that really does not translate to the next level.

Numbers are always an interesting discussion...I find it curious there are kids in our area and I'm sure in others who don't make their HS varsity teams, don't play in the "elite" travel orgs, etc. but still go on to play ball at the next level despite not having "stats".  Why?  It is generally in the eye of the evaluator...does he have tools that project.  "I always liked this quote, as I do work with a numbers guy on a daily basis -- "I can prove anything by statistics except the truth" -- George Canning.

Stats4Gnats posted:

RJM posted:

No one ever said extreme stats won't draw a look. There's an assumption he may have the tools. But when a scout shows up he will leave quickly if the tools aren't there. I'll bet somewhere in the state there are several catchers with better mechanics and pop time. But their pitchers are terrible at holding runners.

 

So after all the years of you ranting and raving about how worthless HS stats are, you’re admitting they can get a player on the radar. It doesn’t make any difference if he really has the tools or not or that there are other players who are better. My point is, he’s gonna get a look and those others may not.

In the past I've said high school coaches don't need stats to determine their starting lineup for two reasons. Stats in small numbers can be very misleading. Coaches can see who swing the bat properly and are making quality contact regardless of the result.

When comparing two players the one with higher stats may have them under different circumstances then the player with lesser stats.

When a player has exaggerated stats it will draw attention. There might be be something there. But there may not. There may be somebody better with lesser stats due to circumstances.

My daughter started one season of high school softball 0-12. My son started a season of baseball 14-16. My daughter was swinging the bat just as well as he was. The problem she had was hitting balls right at the 2b, 1b and RF. This stuff balances out over the season (larger numbers). She rose to about .480. He fell to about .525.

Theres another aspect to the legitimacy of high school stats. The quality time of high school stats may be as variable as kiddie ball stats. I've seen teams who give hits on every questionable ball that drops in. Others score everything objectively.

When my daughter was in high school the starting pitcher went 15-1 in conference play. A pitcher from another team went 15-1. A third coach tried to sell his pitcher as the first team all conference candidate because she went 12-0. He didn't use her the four games she would have lost against these two pitchers. Who do you think we're the better pitchers? Two went D1. One went D3.

I think there is an increased trend in using stats instead of raw tools ( see moneyball) but I'm not sure how that applies to HS ball. That is also a reason why he percentage of college players in the first two rounds is higher than 10-15 years ago, tools are important but they can fail ( like jeff francour) and now teams like to get players that have proven their tools against good opponents.

I think HS stats matter a lot -- to the team's success.

To scouts? No.

Except for W-L, I have no idea of my sons stats from last year or this year.  Based on subjective nature of score keeping I'm not sure how much I would trust the stats if I did know them.   And I'm sure most college coaches understand that too which is why they like to see a prospect in person. 

Jeff Francoeur has played in the Big Leagues for many years.  And he is still playing.  Defensively he has won a gold glove and has led the leagues a few times throwing out runners.  He had some nice years hitting and some bad years also.  There are some first rounders that have done better and there are some that have done much worse.  He has also made a pile of money and he is in his early 30s.

PGStaff posted:

I can see how a statistic like that could create some interest. On the other hand 14 SBAs in two games also creates some doubt.  HS catchers who show a great arm don't have that many chances.  Teams don't run as much against them.  So it is possible that the best HS catcher would be 0-0 after two games.

Still, if they are running that much and he is throwing most of them out you might want to go see him.

BTW, there are several MLB clubs that actually pay us for all the stats from our tournaments. However, I think that is because they know there are many draft prospects, including early draft types.  They also know there is independent scoring.  I guess they want to see how well the guys they like are doing.  The unknown player that does well is no longer unknown because of the competition he is facing.  It means people will check him out and evaluate his ability.

Sounds bogus to me.  14 SB in 2 games and 2 Coaches that manage to get their kids thrown out stealing 4 or 5 times in one game (assuming the 9 put outs were spread across 2 games).  I may test an arm once or twice, but my kids get hosed twice in 1 game, my running game is going to be cut down considerably.  But.... if someone believes a stat, hypes it up to right folks, I would agree that some interest may be sparked.  

In our case the young lady keeping stats doesn't know the difference between a RBI and a BLT, so nobody pays much attention.

Goosegg posted:

…Now, if it turns out that the kid has no talent, you have used up a chip….

I don’t have a clue as to why you characterize it as having used up a chip if the kid turns out to be a dud rather than a stud. I wasn’t asking my friend to drop everything and look at the kid, I only asked if he’d heard of him, and I told him why I was asking. He could have said “HS stats mean nothing”, but instead he said it was worth a little investigation. I assumed that would most likely be a phone call or two and maybe checking on that stat sometime in the future. To me that certainly doesn’t indicate having used up a chip.

I’ll guess that over the last 15 years I’ve been given cards or phone numbers of dozens of people who have told me to give them a call if I saw anyone I thought might be worth a look. Some have been scouts or college coaches, some have been stringers, some were coaches of “academies” or travel teams, and I’m sure some have just been trying to impress me or someone else. I’ve never made a call to do that, but I have made calls to get someone’s opinion and have certainly been contacted asking for mine. The only reason I even know most of them is because I scored for such a good team for so long and got to know many people who would look for talent.

PGStaff posted:

I can see how a statistic like that could create some interest. On the other hand 14 SBAs in two games also creates some doubt.  HS catchers who show a great arm don't have that many chances.  Teams don't run as much against them.  So it is possible that the best HS catcher would be 0-0 after two games.

Still, if they are running that much and he is throwing most of them out you might want to go see him. …

That pretty much sums up what I was saying. Thank you for saying it.

Stats4Gnats posted:

PGStaff posted:

I can see how a statistic like that could create some interest. On the other hand 14 SBAs in two games also creates some doubt.  HS catchers who show a great arm don't have that many chances.  Teams don't run as much against them.  So it is possible that the best HS catcher would be 0-0 after two games.

Still, if they are running that much and he is throwing most of them out you might want to go see him. …

 

That pretty much sums up what I was saying. Thank you for saying it.

Something else to consider is that in scrimmages and pre-district games coaches are more apt to take chances and see what kind of players they have.   In 7 games my son has thrown out 6 runners out of 6 attempts but in fairness half of those were in scrimmages.

After my son's Varsity HC was caught cooking the books in favor of his own son its hard for me to put a value on high school stats in general. 

Something else to consider is that in scrimmages and pre-district games coaches are more apt to take chances and see what kind of players they have.

Stats is here in CA.  The pre-season, non-league games he's referring to do not impact your league standings, but they do impact qualification for and seeding in section tournaments at the end of the season, and for most programs, winning your section is the ultimate goal.  So you play these games to win.

lionbaseball posted:

After my son's Varsity HC was caught cooking the books in favor of his own son its hard for me to put a value on high school stats in general. 

It’s a shame that happens, but it does. But it shouldn’t and doesn’t mean all HS stats in general are lousy. Over the years I’ve seen lousy scorers, biased scorers, and coaches who try to “cook the books”. But in my experience, cooking the books isn’t as widespread as many believe. The reason is, peer pressure keeps it pretty much under control. Coaches can fool a lot of people, but they can’t fool their peers who have played them.

Lousy scorers and biased scorers is something else again, but I always blame that on the coach who allows it, since he’s the one choosing the scorer. It’s a matter of priorities. If a coach likes to have good stats s/he isn’t gonna have a scorer who won’t give them to him.

Batting averages, SB's, fielding %'s and extra base hits are easily fabricated by many HS scorekeepers.  I'm sure there are a good percentage of people that score games straight up but with the advent of the digital scorebooks, people really don't know how to score a game properly any longer.  Strikeouts and home runs are pretty black and white, but I see a clean single with a runner in scoring position scored a double on the throw to home more times than not.  SB's get awarded on a passed ball or WP and hits are given away like candy when errors were clearly made.  Collegiate coaches might take notice of a pitcher averaging 2 plus K's per innings or high home runs totals, the extreme stuff someone else referenced but for the most part I don't think much attention is paid to general stats.    

The catching stats on Max Preps aren't new, at all. They've been there for a long time. However, a lot of teams simply don't report any.

We all know steals are on the pitcher.  Who's looking at who was pitching? 

roothog66 posted:

The catching stats on Max Preps aren't new, at all. They've been there for a long time. However, a lot of teams simply don't report any.

I know the stat has been there as part of fielding stats, but I’d never seen it as part of stat leaders.

Stats4Gnats posted:

roothog66 posted:

The catching stats on Max Preps aren't new, at all. They've been there for a long time. However, a lot of teams simply don't report any.

 

I know the stat has been there as part of fielding stats, but I’d never seen it as part of stat leaders.

Gotcha. However, useless to have a leader board for this. I see so many teams that simply don't bother to keep catching stats or, they are completely wrong. I see the same with stolen base percentage. I was looking at a team we will be playing early in the season. One kid was 17 for 17 in stolen bases last year. Then I noticed the team was 47 for 47 on the season. Looking at the individual box scores, I saw plenty of games where the opposing catcher was showing cs's. In plenty of others, I couldn't tell because the opposing team didn't enter catching stats at all.

2forU posted:

We all know steals are on the pitcher.  Who's looking at who was pitching? 

Yes, a great part of stolen bases are because of the pitcher and a great part is who is doing the stealing, and if one wanted to dig deep enough into ML stats who was pitching and who was stealing could easily be found out. But when one looks at catching stats, how many take the time to break down who was pitching and who was running? You see a percentage of runners caught stealing, the same as you see in the HS catching stats. And when you look at pitchers, you see the same thing, not who was catching or who was running.