|
|
|
Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!
|
| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| highcheese99 |
Posted - 08/11/2010 : 10:42:45
For experienced coaches and parents.
Soon to be first year nine year old travel what is the best number of players for each age group in travel baseball.
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17- |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Alter-Ego |
Posted - 09/23/2010 : 11:41:41
People always talk about competing for playing time, but unlike competing on the field, a player does not have control of all the components when the decision is made who is to be in the lineup. Especially when you have 16 or more players.
I agree that players need to be in a situation where they can't just "phone it in" and still be on the field, but there is also the opposite end where there are too many players for the same positions and more playing time is just not in the players control.
If the focus is more on competing with the players in your own dugout, than the omes in the other dugout, team chemistry is hard to build.
I still believe that players need to be on the best team they can be on and still get the amount of playing time needed for them to develop.
I agree with RACGOFAR that the level does not matter. |
| RACGOFAR |
Posted - 09/22/2010 : 15:46:24
Ask the high school coaches and they will tell you that parents want them to play the best 9 players on the team . . . and their son!
11 players for 12u or lower seems to be the right number. 13+ you start to see players as pitchers only and then the rosters should expand. Elite teams usually have a larger roster so they can pull players in when theri are conflicts with player's local teams.
But players on any age travel team should be competing for playing time no matter how many players are on the roster. That is not to say that the 11th or 12th players should ride the bench all the time.
But if all your players ever do is what you tell them and teach them as a coach, then all they will ever be is an average player. The above average players on all our teams understand this and compete all the time, aginst their opponents, their temamates and against thmeselves and their most recent performance.
So for me the answer to the question is you need enough players to play the game (9) and enough extra players as the situation dictates to be able to 1) compete as a team; and2) make teammates compete against themselves and each other.
The overall level of the team doesn't really matter, Rec, AA, AA Major, Elite. This principle works for them all. |
| PASSBALL |
Posted - 09/21/2010 : 23:48:14
I'm a dad who's son is on the 14 EC ASTROS. And what I have learned is that parents really don't want their the kids to compete. We all think that our kids are one of the tops in their age group. At what age do we really want them to compete. Now I understand that there should be a limit. I have been on teams with 10,11,12 15,now 16. We all look at it from a money stand point, most figure if I'm paying little johnny needs to be playing. What if you paid and little johnny didn't earn anything on the field! More kids breeds more competition and drive to get more playing time! But the flip side to that is most of your 11,12yr olds are coached by 3 or 4 dads so 11 might be a good number or put a team together and just pay a coach who doesn't have a kid on the team. That has worked for me the last 3years. |
| Alter-Ego |
Posted - 09/21/2010 : 17:41:34
Jong,
Every kid could find a way to contribute. The question is whether the opportunities for their contribution is enough to give them the continued development they need.
I have always told people that there is a lifecycle in baseball.
Kids that are the top one or two on their team should not stay at that level for too many seasons. They need to move up (more competitive team or up an age group) to continue to be challenged.
Kids that are the bottom 20% of the team(not necessarily in talent, but in playing time.) should not stay at that level for too many seasons either. They need to move to a level (down a level or parallel to a team that has space availability for more play time) so they can get the reps and development they need. This can occur if a player gets stuck behind another player for the same position. This happens in HS too, but there are more options in travel ball to do something about it.
The ideal situation is to be in the top 25% of the team in playing time so there is enough development opportunities.
I am not saying to never be happy where you are, or that you should team hop every year. The important thing is to be in a place where you can develop. The hard thing is to truly assess where a kid is, not just in talent but also in the hierarchy of a team and that age group. As parents it is tough to see where they are, as opposed to where they could be if all way perfect. The key is to help them find the path that will help them get to where they want to be.
There is a lot of talent around here and very few weekends, during the season, can you not find good talent to play against. By the way teams around here compete nationally, not playing out of town every weekend does not hinder you from seeing national caliber talent. Traveling out of town to tournaments should be for diversity in competition, not believing there is better talent somewhere else. I argue that is not the case. |
| jongamefan |
Posted - 09/18/2010 : 20:22:16
i can agree with all that but in doing so I also can not imagine a player being on a true Elite team who did not contribute to its success otherwise why is - was he there ?? .
never have seen that happen .
sure contribute maybe less than other players but contributing is a team mentality you contribute when and where can.
that goes for life too 
quote:
Originally posted by Alter-Ego
Jong,
I have lived it so I feel i can speak to this subject. Kids have to play. Sitting on the bench does not teach kids how to win. They can learn how to keep competing by watching those do it but can get the same view from the stands. There is no such thing as osmosis in baseball. Being around it does not teach you how to be successful against it. Only being in there will do that.
Conversely, playing all the time, against weaker competition, never teaches you how to compete at a higher level. Being on a team which consistently gives up when they get down never teaches you how to work through things and come back and win.
Finding the right balance between playing time, development, and competition is the key.
Being on an Elite team, without contributing to make it Elite, is not beneficial for your development.
|
| Alter-Ego |
Posted - 09/18/2010 : 14:17:46
Jong,
I have lived it so I feel i can speak to this subject. Kids have to play. Sitting on the bench does not teach kids how to win. They can learn how to keep competing by watching those do it but can get the same view from the stands. There is no such thing as osmosis in baseball. Being around it does not teach you how to be successful against it. Only being in there will do that.
Conversely, playing all the time, against weaker competition, never teaches you how to compete at a higher level. Being on a team which consistently gives up when they get down never teaches you how to work through things and come back and win.
Finding the right balance between playing time, development, and competition is the key.
Being on an Elite team, without contributing to make it Elite, is not beneficial for your development.
|
| DoubleD |
Posted - 09/18/2010 : 10:16:54
I'm not sure if I have 'lived it' with my son if you're implying the teams he's been on were not of elite stature. They most certainly have been among the top 4-5 teams in the state within the majors division and could compete and beat any team on any given day, including the 'elite' team(s).
No, we have not yet experienced a large roster scenario in which many of the players receive only spot play at best. I'm very aware that at the older, high school age groups, large rosters include PO's and specialized role players. I'm just saying at 13U, 14U and probably 15U the kids are still growing and learning how to play on the bigger fields. How are the going to learn & progress just by practicing? I guess it could be argued they too have a role, to help fund the team, be available if needed, and support their teammates, etc...If parents want their kid to be on an 'elite' team just for the stature and are not bothered by the lack of playing time then that's certainly their choice. If the kid is ok with this type of situation then who am I to pass judgement? I have a hard time understanding it but I can respect the fact it's their kid and if he's ok with it, so be it.
As for my kid, he loves to compete and will work his tail off to stay
in the game. Practicing is not enough for him. If given the option of playing on an high stature, 'elite team' but receive less playing time or a slightly lesser stature, non-elite team and play every day he would opt for playing time over bench time every time as long as he has the chance to compete against the 'elite team(s)'. That's just him and I'm obviously of the same mindset.
As I stated before 'in my humble opinion'.
|
| jongamefan |
Posted - 09/17/2010 : 22:43:27
interesting thoughts DD but unless you have lived it with your own son you can not possibley have a accurate perspective on the situation or the 'investment . Have You ?
thats the competition level offered the winning baseball learned the pride in playing on a true elite team which thousands of kids per year would give their little fingers for and carry with them forever.
its not about 'scouts' that Ive heard of either so dont judge a book by its cover Sir .
quote:
Originally posted by DoubleD
12 at 12 years old, 13 at 13 years old, 14 at 14 years old, etc.
I hear stories of 16-20 kids being projected on some 14U teams. WHY?
What does a kid learn by sitting on the bench?
The team may be (on paper) one of the top teams in the country but only 9 are are in the field at the same time. Kids learn and get better at the game by practicing and then applying what they learned in practice with pressure added into the situation. Some kids practice great but can't make the plays in pressure situations.
Pitcher only at 14U is not a good idea if you want a kid to develop.
Who knows what he might end up being if only given the reps. Unless your kid is Jason Heyward, the scouts are not looking at 14 year old kids because are still growing and learning the game!
Parents pay alot of money to be on an 'elite' team and drive great distances as well. If a kids sits on the bench and never gets the needed reps in order to develop it's not much of a return on investment in my humble opinion.
|
| Hurricane |
Posted - 09/17/2010 : 14:49:57
If you have 13 I can almost guarantee atleast one will quit before the season is over. |
| Alter-Ego |
Posted - 09/16/2010 : 10:02:32
I firmly believe that having any players over 14 is just covering the "just in case" events. Even playing 85 games between May 1st and August 5th does not offer enough player wear and tear to require a coach to "have" to play other players. Many tournaments, during that time, play a game a day during the week and give players plenty of rest between to be ready the next day.
No matter what tournament or level you play, only 9 players can be on the field at the same time. What occurs is you have 2 or 3 players that get almost all the reps. Another 4-5 players that get "most" of the reps (2/3rd). A third set that rotate in and out and get about 1/3 of the reps, and a final group that gets very few reps. This last group are many times PO's and unless the team has a specific pitching rotation, where they are on a regular regiment, they don't get the reps they need to continue to develop. The teams that do manage it better will have very few position players pitching to ensure their PO's get the right work. |
| DoubleD |
Posted - 09/15/2010 : 19:05:26
12 at 12 years old, 13 at 13 years old, 14 at 14 years old, etc.
I hear stories of 16-20 kids being projected on some 14U teams. WHY?
What does a kid learn by sitting on the bench?
The team may be (on paper) one of the top teams in the country but only 9 are are in the field at the same time. Kids learn and get better at the game by practicing and then applying what they learned in practice with pressure added into the situation. Some kids practice great but can't make the plays in pressure situations.
Pitcher only at 14U is not a good idea if you want a kid to develop.
Who knows what he might end up being if only given the reps. Unless your kid is Jason Heyward, the scouts are not looking at 14 year old kids because are still growing and learning the game!
Parents pay alot of money to be on an 'elite' team and drive great distances as well. If a kids sits on the bench and never gets the needed reps in order to develop it's not much of a return on investment in my humble opinion.
|
| tajacket |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 11:31:25
I have found this to be a complex formula:
if n = the number of players I decide to carry, then n+1 is the correct number according to the parents of each player I cut, and n-1 is the correct number according the parents of each player who is not getting enough playing time due to my selection of some other player who is unfairly receiving that playing time.
such is life |
| zwndad |
Posted - 08/12/2010 : 12:35:09
Totally agree with tae281. Good point. |
| tae281 |
Posted - 08/12/2010 : 12:04:32
quote:
Originally posted by zwndad
At 12 or younger, it depends on what kind of team you are. If you play tournament-only, I think you will regret having less than 12 because of the number of games in a weekend, especially in June or July. Eventually, you will run into arm issues, even at the younger ages. If you play mostly in a league (GGBL, Lanier, NWGA), then I think that 11 is ideal for 12 or younger because the games are more spread out.
If your team has 8 kids that pitch then it doesn't matter, tournament teams might play 22-26 innings if they reach the championship so that's roughly 3 innings a weekend. It's been my experience that my 7-8 pitchers didn't get enough work in each weekend even if we reached the ship. |
| zwndad |
Posted - 08/12/2010 : 11:09:10
At 12 or younger, it depends on what kind of team you are. If you play tournament-only, I think you will regret having less than 12 because of the number of games in a weekend, especially in June or July. Eventually, you will run into arm issues, even at the younger ages. If you play mostly in a league (GGBL, Lanier, NWGA), then I think that 11 is ideal for 12 or younger because the games are more spread out. |
| homer |
Posted - 08/12/2010 : 09:27:39
This question requires an "it depends" kind of answer. In addition to the age of the team, what are your goals for the season? What kind of schedule will you keep? What skill level do you have amongst roster players? How good of a game day coach are you (are you capable of frequent substitutions during games)? So the answer really is, carry as many players as you can while developing all players. If all players have a role that they're happy with and are continuing to improve over the course of the season, then you've got the right number. In most cases that's 11 or 12 until 13U season then you add a player or two each year.
Beware of numbers significantly higher than the numbers posted in the comments in this forum for each age group. It seems every year there's a team or two around that try to load up a team with way too many players so they can fluff up their budget. This never ends well for a few players on these teams. They don't get attention from the coaches/instructors and don't get much playing time. They wore the uniform on game day but rarely got to show their stuff when it mattered. Last year I saw a 15U team in Atlanta with 20 on the roster! No doubt there were some very unhappy parents on that team.
I saw an earlier posting about POs at 13yo. Please don't tell me someone is doing that to kids! The youngest POs should be 15 and then only if they really can't hit or field and understand going into the season that PO is their role. Also, as a PO they must get separate pitching instruction regularly and be a part of the rotation no matter what. If a PO is getting hammered every time he steps on the mound then either cut him or keep working with him. Don't just sit him on the bench to ride out the season. |
| tae281 |
Posted - 08/12/2010 : 09:09:17
I prefer to carry 10 with a full time alternate, batting 11 on Sundays can be challenging especially if you have a few kids struggling at the plate. It seems like forever for you get through your batting order with 12 and the next thing you know it's the 5th inning and your at #9 in your order.
Problem with the full time alternate has been that player usually gets picked up by another travel team, happened to me twice last season. |
| LeftyBat |
Posted - 08/12/2010 : 01:10:03
quote:
Originally posted by Tball
If you are going to Cooperstown you better have at least 12 and they need to be able to pitch.
But quite a few teams carry 11-12 during the spring and add a player or two for cooperstown, which likely makes more sense as you don't want to have too many boys on the team all season sitting on the bench just so you can have enough for your end of season tourney... |
| Tball |
Posted - 08/11/2010 : 18:53:12
If you are going to Cooperstown you better have at least 12 and they need to be able to pitch. |
| highcheese |
Posted - 08/11/2010 : 17:33:38
The PO'd I was referring to above was pis... off, not pitcher only. Sorry for the confusion.If people really sit back and take a look at what it takes to be a competitive travel team they should end up taking more players. Tell me it is ok to take ten kids and play 5-7 games on a weekend. you can't. Sure it can be done and I have done it. Some worn out kids come monday. If you teach the game right as mentioned above, more team members are better than fewer. |
| oldschooldad |
Posted - 08/11/2010 : 16:51:39
Great question!
Too many = less playing time
too few = pitching shortage and hard to overcome injuries
at 12U I like to see no more than 11. Rest the next player to go in as a pitcher and limit the time on the bench. The more players also helps in team budget issues but most parents I know would rather write a big check if Jr. playing more. |
| bballman |
Posted - 08/11/2010 : 16:29:11
I don't think it has to do with PO to have extra kids. I think it has a lot to do with arm care for your pitchers. Some of the biggest overuse problems with youth baseball are taking a kid directly out of a position and putting him on the bump, taking a kid off the bump and putting him back in a position and - related to that - not having a kid warm up enough before he pitches. If you run your team right, you will have your starting pitcher and whoever you plan to use as the relief guy out of the game, getting warmed up. That means you have to have at least 10. Your starting pitcher should really rest up during the next game - as well as the relief guy depending on how many pitches he threw. Then you have your starter and reliever out for the following game in addition to at least the starter from the previous game. That is 2 guys out for the second game (reliever for that game & starter from last game). That means you have at least 11 needed at a minimum. You should really have a second catcher to give your catcher a rest every other game. That makes 12. What if someone gets injured? or someone misses a tournament? What about having a player on the bench to pinch run for the pitcher or catcher? It is not unreasonable to carry a roster of 13 or 14 and allow everyone to get play time - if you do things the right way.
I think most coaches do not follow the above plan. The problem is, your best pitcher is usually one of your best fielders - so you don't want to sit him out to get rest from pitching or sit him out to warm up to relieve. I know, it happened with my son. If you are running your team in a fashion that gives your pitchers proper rest - starting at 12 and and especially when they reach HS age - you will need the extra players that everyone says you don't need.
Every kid has a role. Every kid has a place on the team. You can't stop parents from complaining. If they are not complaining about play time, they will complain about what position their kid plays. Don't worry about that. There will always be unhappy people. Run your team the right way, which is development of the kids and taking care of their health. Not running the team to make everyone happy at the expense of the health of the kids arms.
|
| coach0512 |
Posted - 08/11/2010 : 15:06:18
11 until the age of 13.
Max you will sit, then, is 2 and you usually have a kid who can't play a tourney for one reason or another , so you end up with 10 at the game with 1 sitting. Works the best. Can't stand having 12 and sometimes sitting 3, usually sitting 2, and with 10 you usually end up playing every kid the whole game in 100 degree heat for 2 games. One injury and you're playing shorthanded.
At 13U you start adding POs so 13+ works best. |
| highcheese |
Posted - 08/11/2010 : 14:54:14
12 is a good number for 12 and under. We are talking about kids here who get sick, have to go out of town, get injured, and even get in a slump. If you care about your kids arms you will carry 12. Have the next pitcher who is coming in warming up on the sidelines instead of coming in from center or shortstop cold. Guaranteed you will have better success and fewer injuries. If you have a coach worth his salt and is worried about teaching the game you will have a margin of 10-15 at bats between the top and bottom guy come the end of the year. If that makes johnnies parents mad then they have bigger issues. Starting at 13 the field changes size, innings and time of game changes, and so do the physical properties of the kids. Guess what, the strategies of the game change from a coaching standpoint too. Situational base running, pinch hitting, defensive subs, you may even run 3 pitchers out there to close out an inning and keep the bleeding to a minimum. From puberty on these guys really learn how to compete and start to become team players. To do this you need more players, add a few more each year. Ridiculous to pigeon hole your kid as a pitcher only at 13 and 14u, doing him a disservice, keep him learning multiple positions. If that means playing at a different organization for more reps then do that. One of the biggest keys with a roster size is telling the players and parents how you are going to handle the roster. If coaches do not communicate this then johnny and parents get PO'd and create false expectations and the rants and raves start. There is enough baseball to be had for everyone. Keep it real. |
| highcheese99 |
Posted - 08/11/2010 : 13:54:30
quote:
Originally posted by bballman
I would say:
8-11, 12 players
12-14, 14 players
15-18, 17 to 18 players
Ages 15-18 could be more if you have the philosophy of carrying a certain number of pitchers only. However, it should be clearly communicated that the player will be a pitcher only.
Also, the reason I say 17-18 for the older group is that pitchers begin to throw harder and have more strain on the arm, requiring more rest before they get back on the field. Even if you are a two way player, if you are throwing 80mph plus and are throwing between 80 & 100 pitches in an outing, you will be out for that day and the next - at least. Not back on the mound without at least 4 days rest. You wind up with several guys unable to pitch or play in the field at any given time.
The younger kids don't tax their arms as much with the lower velocities and will usually not throw as many pitches (at least they shouldn't) and can come back to play the field quicker. Therefore you don't need as many players.
14 players at 12U, I bet at cooperstown you have kids that dont even get to play with 14 on a roster. |
|
|
| Georgia Travel Baseball - NWBA |
© 2000-22 NWBA |
 |
|
|
