There have been a few recent threads in which someone brings up the "politics" of HS baseball, generally beginning with the suggestion that some player may not be getting a fair shake with respect to playing time from his HS coach. Many have weighed-in with their takes on the situation(s) and suggested that summer/travel teams can provide the opportunity to "showcase" the player who may not have had a comparable HS opportunity. Collectively, these threads touch on something I've wondered about.
Admittedly, my only experience has been following along on my oldest son's exodus, but this is what I feel I've observed ("What I learned on my summer vacation"):
Short of shopping for a private school with the baseball program that best suits the needs of your player, he's probably stuck with the philosophy of the local HS coach, fair or not. Thus, I agree that, aside from "individual" showcase events, the summer/travel team is often the ONLY opportunity a player gets to make a CHOICE impacting his playing time and/or "exposure."
So, what summer/travel team choice is it best to make?
My notion on that selection process boils down to two basic types of summer/travel team opportunities, both of which will always require the teams to play at premier events likely to be attended by the desired college recruiters...these are the "extreme" types and, obviously, there will be many teams falling somewhere in between:
1) The best team on which your son will be a regular starter at the position for which he wants to showcase himself; or,
2) A team of great players where the emphasis is not necessarily on winning, but on showcasing the talent of its individual players.
Generally, the former type of team would tend to put it's 9 best players on the field at their respective positions (and KEEP them there) to win games/tournaments. This may be great IF your son is among those 9 and playing his preferred position(s).
The second type would freely subtitute players, even at the expense of the game, to ensure the exposure of each. As always, the greater the quality of the players, the greater the attraction of recruiters to the team, BUT this could also make it difficult for even a good player to get playing time if it was the 1st team's "type."
An example: My oldest son's summer team went to a regional tournament known to be frequented by recruiters from many schools. He was slated to pitch the 1st game which, unfortunately, was played at a locale most of the recruiters couldn't initially find. Accordingly, his very strong, complete game effort was seen by exactly TWO recruiters (from schools in which he wasn't interested) and, as a pitcher at least, he was then "out" of the tournament. Conversely, the opposing team (which appeared to be the far stronger/deeper team) in losing the game, threw 4-5 pitchers, none going more than 2 innings, but all seen by the 2 recruiters AND still available to be seen in later games.
What are your thoughts on the relative approaches? Which would you recommend? Would your recommendation change based on the player's ability, or the playing time/exposure he received from his HS team? Are there any other thoughts/considerations that should go into making the choice?
Original Post
