Pitching in a controlled environment and tracking your data is valuable—it helps you compete against yourself. However, it doesn’t give any insight into how a player will perform against live hitters. External variables can greatly affect results. The game is about competition, and when you get a chance to simulate live reps, take that opportunity. Players who go 4–5 months without simulating real-game situations often discover they had a false sense of readiness. That doesn’t mean you need to overdo it—again, it’s all about using common sense.
The OGX hot take missed the mark. Criticizing college coaches for wanting to see a player perform in front of them doesn’t make sense. Saying, “We send them the data,” only shows performance in a controlled environment, which tells nothing about how a player handles live competition. You see players posting their max velocities online, but those numbers often don’t translate to real-game performance. They’re not pitching a whole game—at best, they might get one inning. What’s wrong with that?
Some programs don’t have the resources to travel across the country in the summer or a players team might not be at a tournament. When they have a chance to evaluate a player in person, and they’re interested, the player should seize that opportunity. How is that a bad thing?
If my job depended on evaluating a player in a cage with no batter and minimal noise versus a simulated game with other players, more noise, and live competition, I’d choose the simulated game every time. It provides a much clearer picture of how to allocate recruiting time for that player moving forward.
Go out, compete, and use a little common sense.
Message Thread
« Back to index | View thread »