Are showcases worth it at 14u/16u?

[thebambino]

Wondering if showcases are worth the time and $$$ at this age. I've seen the younger age teams get the worst fields, no scouts, etc etc. When is it time?

[anonlooker]

Wondering if showcases are worth the time and $$$ at this age. I've seen the younger age teams get the worst fields, no scouts, etc etc. When is it time?

They are worth it if you go to the right ones.

In SoCal there are some good showcases and some glorified (and costly) friendlies.

Colorado in July is pretty much a must for 16u if you're serious about recruiting.

There's a thread somewhere around here about which are the top showcases.

Good luck.

[DDG]

Nothing beats winning to get noticed. Qualify for Premier or ASA Nationals and do well.

If you are talking about a newer team without the reputation or backing of a larger organization, and performing well on a national level has eluded you, consider starting the showcases earlier to get known by those running them. Otherwise, when they are 16 or 18u and it is really getting important to be seen, you may find yourself playing on a field far far away.

[watchtonsofsoftball]

14U IMO is to early and MOST coaches are really only "looking" at this age. 16U is easily one of the most important divisions. Obviously if you have a young kid playing up to 18G they would get more looks than either division as it does look good on your profile. I dont think 16 division draws AS many scouts as 18G but at the big time tourneys (ASA or Premier Nationals, Colorado, Surf City in June) they are looking at the top 16 teams very closely.

[bracketologist]

I dont think 16 division draws AS many scouts as 18G but at the big time tourneys (ASA or Premier Nationals, Colorado, Surf City in June) they are looking at the top 16 teams very closely.

18G may draw more total scouts but there are a lot of coaches at 18G that are there to "show face" and maintain relationships only. I believe the mid-major Division 1 teams still recruit at 18G, but overall 18G is not as important as it once was.

I bet if someone took the 2013, 2014, 2015, commits for the schools that played in last years College World Series that 60% of each class would have committed or already had an offer before playing on an 18G team.

At the current rate, at least in So Cal – I believe that 70-80% of the class of 2016 that will attend a top 20 program will have committed before playing on an 18G team.

[Battle]

16u has become huge for recruiting. Good teams will get the good fields and the coaches are out in force.

With all the early commits, why do people feel that it is so important for them to move their kids up to 18u so early if coaches are looking at 16s and 14s? I don't understand that.

[ontheblack]

16u has become huge for recruiting. Good teams will get the good fields and the coaches are out in force.

With all the early commits, why do people feel that it is so important for them to move their kids up to 18u so early if coaches are looking at 16s and 14s? I don't understand that.

Ego.

[watchtonsofsoftball]

I have to agree with Spaz here. Followed the recruiting scene for past 8 years or so (less closely this past year but still pay attention) and most of the kids are getting SOME looks at 16u but once the kids make the jump to 18G they seemed to quickly get picked up (the kids with some talent obviously or huge upside). At 16U my dd played on a very good team, well known ORG and we got scouts to the games and a lot of looks, but nobody on that team so much as sniffed an actual offer. My dd moved to 18G her sophomore year with a different team (less known might I add) and she was picked up within a month or two and had probably 7 or 8 schools looking at her. I have seen this ALOT. I also agree that kids arent getting picked up that young as much as people think. When we were going through it, we got "im just looking" or "I'm not sure what we need in this class yet" or "I will follow her in the upcoming season". All of these things we heard at 16U quite a bit. At 18G, we routinely heard from schools that they were interested in a particular girl and a lot of time wanted to them to call/write/ and/or come to a camp coming up. It was always our 3 or 4 young girls as I think a lot of schools knew if they were playing up and doing well, they were only going to get better. I think it also helps younger kids mature faster playing on an older team, if you find the right fit. And lets face it, 16U pitching isnt the BEST save for a handful of very good teams. Otherwise the rest of the year your playing just so-so pitching and recruiters know this. At 18G chances are these kids are facing much better pitching on a fairly regular basis. The really good 14U pitchers move up to 18G and most bypass the 16U division.

[Hinky]

I think the overall numbers nationwide for early recruits, while growing, is still a smaller percentage than people believe. The stud Freshmen and Sophomores that verbal early make the headlines but the numbers are still not overhwelming.
Also, the question was asking about CA. There again the colleges come out to see the younger teams

Spaz, so you agree early recruiting only happened in small percentages!


IMO
even with the NCAA changing their recruitment age rule AKA no early commits. the coaches will still be out there in the same numbers watching players at younger age levels including 14U. While 16u had already grown to possibly equal to or more showcasing importance than 18u,
16u will grow bigger as an important showcase bracket. because the smaller percentage of stud athletes that had previously early recruited in freshman or sophomore year will now be in the front of the recruitment line in 16u.

While there are players who jump to 18u early,.. those opportunities to play on older age bracket teams are fewer than playing on a more competitive 16u
team. Age + playing time/experience = talent...

since there won't be Ego & Prestige tacked on with players who did early commits to D1, the players will have to prove their skill sets by standing out on the field. presenting this question-
will a stud player stand out better on a high-performing 16u team or on an average 18u team?

[Hollow Grind]

16u has become huge for recruiting. Good teams will get the good fields and the coaches are out in force.

With all the early commits, why do people feel that it is so important for them to move their kids up to 18u so early if coaches are looking at 16s and 14s? I don't understand that.

Eighteen and more player rosters at 16U rarely benefits all players on said roster.

Some prefer to go with the brand name team; others prefer to move up to 18U and get more PT and recruiting support from smaller orgs.

There's too many variables on a player-by-player basis to definitively state there's a right approach vs. a wrong approach.