Showing posts with label THE ODDS OF MAKING IT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label THE ODDS OF MAKING IT. Show all posts

Saturday, April 30, 2016

Your kid and my kid are not playing in the pros | Guest Voices | NUVO News | Indianapolis, IN

Your kid and my kid are not playing in the pros | Guest Voices | NUVO News | Indianapolis, INlouisprofeta.jpeg

Presented without editing, one of the all-time best articles I've ever read. This was presented to me one evening by Mrs. The Slav after she finished convulsing in laughter. If you see yourself in any of the following examples, check yourself before you wreck yourself.

http://m.nuvo.net/GuestVoices/archives/2014/03/18/your-kid-and-my-kid-are-not-playing-in-the-pros


Your kid and my kid are not playing in the pros


                                                                                                                              
I don't care if your eight year old can throw a baseball through six inches of plywood. He is not going to the pros. I don't care if your twelve-year-old scored seven touchdowns last week in Pop Warner. He is not going to the pros. I don't care if your sixteen-year-old made first team all-state in basketball. He is not playing in the pros. I don't care if your freshman in college is a varsity scratch golfer, averaging two under par. He isn't playing in the pros. Now tell me again how good he is. I'll lay you two to one odds right now — and I don't even know your kid, I have never even see them play — but I'll put up my pension that your kid is not playing in the pros. It is simply an odds thing. There are far too many variables working against your child. Injury, burnout, others who are better — these things are just a fraction of the barriers preventing your child from becoming "the one."

So how do we balance being the supportive parent who spends three hours a day driving all over hell's half acre to allow our child to pursue his or her dream without becoming the supportive parent that drives all over hell's half acre to allow our child to pursue OUR dream? When does this pursuit of athletic stardom become something just shy of a gambling habit? From my experience in the ER I've developed some insight in how to identify the latter.

1. When I inform you as a parent that your child has just ruptured their ACL ligament or Achilles tendon, if the next question out of your mouth is, "How long until he or she will be able to play?" you have a serious problem.

2. If you child is knocked unconscious during a football game and can't remember your name let alone my name but you feel it is a "vital" piece of medical information to let me know that he is the starting linebacker and that the team will probably lose now because he was taken out of the game, you need to see a counselor.

3. If I tell you that mononucleosis has caused the spleen to swell and that participation in a contact sport could cause a life threatening rupture and bleeding during the course of the illness and you then ask me, "If we just get some extra padding around the spleen, would it be OK to play?" someone needs to hit you upside the head with a two by four.

4. If your child comes in with a blood alcohol level of .250 after wrecking your Lexus and you ask if I can hurry up and get them out of the ER before the police arrive so as not to run the risk of her getting kicked off the swim team, YOU need to be put in jail.

I bet you think I'm kidding about the above patient and parent interactions. I wish I were, but I'm not. These are a fraction of the things I have heard when it comes to children and sports. Every ER doctor in America sees this. How did we get here? How did we go from spending our family times in parks and picnics, at movies and relatives houses to travel baseball and cheerleading competitions? When did we go from being supportive to being subtly abusive?

Why are we spending our entire weekends schlepping from county to county, town to town, state to state to play in some bullshit regional, junior, mid-west, southeast, invitational, elite, prep, all- state, conference, blah, blah, blah tourney? We decorate our cars with washable paint, streamers, numbers and names. We roll in little carpool caravans trekking down the interstate honking and waiving at each other like Rev. Jim Jones followers in a Kool-Aid line. Greyhounds, Hawks, Panthers, Eagles, Bobcats, Screaming Devils, Scorching Gonads or whatever other mascot adorns their jerseys.

Somewhere along the line we got distracted, and the practice field became the dinner table of the new millennium. Instead of huddling around a platter of baked chicken, mashed potatoes and fruit salad, we spend our evenings handing off our children like 4 x 200 batons. From baseball practice to cheerleading, from swimming lessons to personal training, we have become the "hour-long" generation of five to six, six to seven, and seven to eight, selling the souls of our family for lacrosse try-outs. But why do we do this?

It's because, just like everyone else, we're afraid. We are afraid that Emma will make the cheerleading squad instead of Suzy and that Mitch will start at first base instead of my Dillon. But it doesn't stop there. You see, if Mitch starts instead of Dillon then Dillon will feel like a failure, and if Dillon feels like a failure then he will sulk and cower in his room, and he will lose his friends because all his friends are on the baseball team, too, and if he loses his friends then he will start dressing in Goth duds, pierce his testicles, start using drugs and begin listening to headbanging music with his door locked. Then, of course, it's just a matter of time until he's surfing the net for neo-Nazi memorabilia, visiting gun shows and then opening fire in the school cafeteria. That is why so many fathers who bring their injured sons to the ER are so afraid that they won't be able to practice this week, or that he may miss the game this weekend. Miss a game, you become a mass murderer — it's that simple.

Suzy is a whole other story, though. You see, if she doesn't make the cheerleading squad she will lose a whole bunch of friends and not be as popular as she should (and she's REAL popular). If she loses some friends, she will be devastated — all the cool kids will talk about her behind her back, so then she'll sit in her room all day, eating Ding Dongs and cutting at her wrists. Then, of course, it is only a matter of time until she is chatting on the Internet with fifty-year-old men and meeting up with them at truck stops. And that is why every mother is so frightened when her daughters have mononucleosis or influenza. Miss cheerleading practice for a week, and your daughter is headed for a career in porn. It's that simple.

We have become a frightened society that can literally jump from point A to point Z and ignore everything in between. We spend so much time worrying about who might get ahead — and if we're falling behind — that we have simply lost our common sense. Myself included.

There was a time when sick or injured children were simply sick or injured children. They needed bed rest, fluid, antibiotics and a limitation on activity. They just needed to get better. They didn't NEED to get better.

I know, I know. Your family is different. You do all these things because your kid loves to compete, he loves the travel basketball, she loves the swim team, it's her life, it's what defines him. Part of that is certainly true but a big part of that isn't. Tens of thousands of families thrive in this setting, but I'm telling you, from what I've seen as a clinician, tens of thousands don't. It is a hidden scourge in society today, taxing and stressing husbands, wives, parents and children. We're denying children the opportunity to explore literally thousands of facets of interests because of the fear of the need to "specialize" in something early, and that by not doing this your child will somehow be just an average kid. How do we learn to rejoice in the average and celebrate as a whole society the exceptional? I'm not sure, but I know that this whole preoccupation is unhealthy, it is dysfunctional and is as bad as alcoholism, tobacco abuse, or any other types of dependency.

I would love to have a son that is a pro athlete. I'd get season tickets; all the other fathers would point at me and I might get a chance to meet Sandy Koufax. It isn't going to happen, though. But you know what I am certain will happen? I'll raise self-reliant kids, who will hang out with me when I'm older, remember my birthday, care for their mother, take me to lunch and the movies, buy me club level seats at Yankee Stadium on occasion, call me at least four times a week and let me in on all the good things in their life, and turn to me for some comfort and advice for all the bad things. I am convinced that those things just will not happen as much for parents of the "hour-long" generation. You can't create a sense of family only at spring and Christmas break. It just won't happen. Sure, the kids will probably grow up to be adequate adults. They'll reflect on how supportive you were by driving them to all their games and practices and workouts. They'll call the ER from a couple states away to see how mom's doing but in time you'll see that something will be missing, something that was sacrificed for a piano tutor, a pitching coach, a travel soccer tournament. It may take years, but in time, you'll see.

Dr.Louis M. Profeta is an Emergency Physician practicing in Indianapolis, Indiana. He is the author of the critically acclaimed book, The Patient in Room Nine Says He's God.
Feedback at louermd@att.net is welcomed.


Sent from my iPhone

Friday, January 08, 2016

Estimated probability of competing in professional athletics | NCAA.org - The Official Site of the NCAA

Estimated probability of competing in professional athletics | NCAA.org - The Official Site of the NCAA
Image result for NCAA

I wonder sometimes if all the sports parents who spend considerable sums on their prodigies in order to "get exposure" for a coveted college scholarship understand the risk/reward ratio.

"Professional opportunities are extremely limited and the likelihood of a high school or even college athlete becoming a professional athlete is very low."
This study just looks at the odds of a college athlete going pro. The odds of a HS athlete going to college and then the pros is exponentially greater, as is the odds of a youth player going from that level. Think about a pyramid shape, more competitors at the lower levels trying to claw up to the limited spaces at the higher levels.

So going from the youth level to college level would seem to be almost as difficult (two level jump) as from HS or college to pros, which is to say "very low".

I wonder sometimes why they don't take the now large sums of money invested in that dream of going to college via scholarship and take the virtually guaranteed route of saving that money and paying their kids own way through college.

They can still walk-on and compete in a chosen sport. In the current environment, especially in baseball with 13.1 scholarships that needs to accommodate 25 players, coaches would appreciate a "freebie" every now and then.

IDK, maybe the glory is worth rolling the dice, but it's not even a double or nothing wager in my opinion.

from NCAA.org
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/estimated-probability-competing-professional-athletics


Estimated probability of competing in professional athletics

More than 460,000 compete as NCAA athletes, and just a select few within each sport move on to compete at the professional or Olympic level.

The table presents of how many NCAA athletes move on to professional careers in sports like basketball, football, baseball and ice hockey.  Professional opportunities are extremely limited and the likelihood of a high school or even college athlete becoming a professional athlete is very low.
In contrast, the likelihood of an NCAA athlete earning a college degree is significantly greater; graduation success rates are 84% in Division I, 72% in Division II and 87% in Division III.


NCAA Participants Approximate # Draft Eligible # Draft Slots # NCAA Drafted % NCAA to Major Pro* % NCAA to Total Pro^
Football 71,291 15,842 256 255 1.6% 3.7%
M Basketball 18,320 4,071 60 47 1.2% 11.6%
W Basketball 16,319 3,626 36 32 0.9% 4.7%
Baseball 33,431 7,429 1,216 638 8.6% --
M Ice Hockey 3,976 884 211 60 6.8% --
M Soccer 23,602 5,245 76 72 1.4% --

Percent NCAA to Major Pro figures are based on the number of available draft slots in the NFL, NBA, WNBA, MLB, NHL and MLS drafts only.  See methods notes for important details on the definition of NHL draftee in men's ice hockey.  Column percentages were calculated as (#NCAA Drafted) / (Approximate # Draft Eligible).

Percent NCAA to Total Pro takes the number of pro opportunities from the "% NCAA to Major Pro" calculation and adds in some additional professional opportunities that we were able to quantify.  So, for football, this calculation includes NFL, Canadian Football League and Arena League slots available to first-year professionals.  For men's basketball we accounted for NBA, NBA D-League and international opportunities.  For women's basketball, we assessed WNBA and international roster slots.  See methods notes for details on these calculations.  Data on full-time international professional opportunities available in baseball, men's ice hockey and men's soccer were not analyzed here.

Methodology and Notes

General
  • College participation numbers are from the NCAA's 2013-14 Sports Sponsorship and Participation Rates Report.  These college numbers account for participation in college athletics at NCAA-member schools only.    
  • To estimate the number of NCAA student-athletes in a sport eligible for a particular year's professional draft, the total number of NCAA student-athlete participants in the sport was divided by 4.5.  This figure was used to provide a general estimate of the number of student-athletes in a draft cohort (single draft class) in a given year, accounting for redshirting, degree completion delays due to transfer, etc. that extend the average time to graduation to just beyond four year in all sports.  In other words, we observe a year-to-year departure rate (whether due to graduation, dropout or departure for a professional sports opportunity) of just below one-quarter of the total number of student-athletes in each sport.  Because the sports examined (M/W basketball, football, baseball, men's ice hockey and men's soccer) have dramatically different rules for draft eligibility, these calculations should be treated as estimates only.
  • ​Data on available professional opportunities are described below for each sport.
Baseball
  • MLB draft data from 2013.  There were 1,216 draft picks in that year; 638 of those picked were from NCAA schools (source: NCSA Athletic Recruiting website).  Of the 638, Division I student-athletes comprised 552 of those chosen, Division II provided 72 and Division III had 14.  382 high school athletes were chosen in 2013 (some of whom went on to play in college instead of turning pro) along with 154 from junior colleges, 38 from NAIA schools and 4 from other sources. 
  • Percent NCAA to Pro calculated as number of NCAA student-athletes taken in the draft (n=638) divided by approximate number draft eligible.  Not all of the student-athletes drafted go on to play professional baseball and many draftees fail to reach the Major League.
Men's ice hockey
  • NHL draft data from 2013.  There were 211 draft picks in that year.  Only 4 players from NCAA rosters were selected in that draft.  However, this is not indicative of the likelihood of going from a college team to a professional team due to the nature of the NHL draft, where players are typically selected prior to turning college-aged. 
  • In examining the subsequent hockey pathways of 2013 draftees, we determined that 60 of the 211 (source: hockeydb.com) had attended an NCAA college for any period of time through February 2015 (or in two cases had committed to a college for 2015-16). These numbers, although not fully comparable to those used in the other sports examined, were used to calculate an approximate NCAA to Major Pro percentage.  Note that only a small subset of the players drafted ever play in an NHL game.  Undrafted college players may go on to sign contracts with NHL teams after completing college (those numbers are not part of the current NCAA to Major Pro calculation). 
  • Currently, 31% of players on active NHL rosters played college hockey, up from about 20% in the year 2000 (source: collegehockeyinc.com).  Of the 1,437 hockey players under contract with any NHL team in 2014, 27% were former NCAA student-athletes (all but one from Division I ice hockey programs).  Thanks to Nate Ewell at College Hockey, Inc. for providing these data.
Men's soccer
  • MLS SuperDraft data from 2014.  There were 77 draft slots in that year, but only 76 picks made.  Of the 76 picks, 72 were NCAA student-athletes (68 from Division I programs, 3 from Division II and 1 from Division III).  Percentage NCAA to Major Pro calculated using the 72 NCAA selections. (Source: mlssoccer.com).
  • These calculations do not account for other domestic or international professional soccer opportunities.
Men's basketball
  • NBA draft data from 2013.  There were 60 draft slots in that year, but only 47 went to NCAA players (others chosen were international players not attending U.S. colleges).  Percentage NCAA to Major Pro calculated using the 47 NCAA selections. Since 2006, 12 international players have been drafted on average each year.
  • On 2014-15 opening day NBA rosters, former NCAA players filled 81% of roster spots (all but one player from Division I schools).  (Source: Jim Sukup, College Basketball News).
  • Data on other professional opportunities in men's basketball were collected by NCAA staff with the assistance of Marek Wojtera from eurobasket.com.  It was determined that an additional 424 former NCAA student-athletes from the 2013 draft cohort played internationally or in the NBA D-League in 2014 (307 from Division I, 90 from Division II and 27 from Division III).  These numbers were combined with the NBA draftees to calculate an NCAA to Total Professional opportunities proportion (calculated as [47 + 424] / 4,071).   
  • We estimate that 3.9% of draft-eligible Division I players were chosen in the 2013 NBA draft (47 / 1,210).  However, in total, 29% of draft-eligible Division I players competed professionally (NBA, D-League, or internationally) in their first year after leaving college (calculated as [47 + 307] / 1,210). Approximately 15% of draft-eligible players from the five Division I conferences with autonomous governance (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC) were drafted by the NBA in 2013 (33 / 222), while 52% played professionally somewhere in their first year post-college (calculated as [33 + 82] / 222).
Women's basketball
  • WNBA draft data from 2013.  There were 36 draft slots in that year's draft, 32 of which went to NCAA players (other 4 chosen were international players not attending U.S. colleges).  All 32 NCAA selections came from Division I colleges.  Percentage NCAA to Major Pro calculated using the 32 NCAA selections.
  • Data on international professional opportunities in women's basketball were collected by NCAA staff with the assistance of Marek Wojtera from eurobasket.com.  It was determined that an additional 139 former NCAA student-athletes from the 2013 draft cohort played internationally in 2014 (129 from Division I, 8 from Division II and 2 from Division III).  These numbers were combined with the WNBA draftees to calculate an NCAA to Total Professional opportunities proportion (calculated as [32 + 139] / 3,626).   
  • We estimate that 2.9% of draft-eligible Division I players were chosen in the 2013 WNBA draft (32 / 1,089).  However, in total, 15% of draft-eligible Division I players competed professionally (WNBA or internationally) in their first year after leaving college (calculated as [32 + 129] / 1,089). Approximately 12% of draft-eligible players from the five Division I conferences with autonomous governance (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC) were drafted by the WNBA in 2013 (26 / 222), while 31% played professionally somewhere in their first year post-college (calculated as [26 + 43] / 222).
Football
  • NFL draft data from 2014.  There were 256 draft slots in that year's draft, 255 of which went to former NCAA players (1 player drafted from a Canadian university).  NCAA to Major Pro figure calculated using these data.
  • NCAA divisional breakdown of the 255 NCAA players selected in the 2014 NFL draft: Division I FBS (230), Division I FCS (19), Division II (6), Division III (0).  The top 5 conferences accounted for 172 of the 255 draft picks (SEC=49, ACC=42, Pac-12=34, Big Ten=30, Big 12=17).
  • Data on Arena League and Canadian Football League opportunities were collected by NCAA staff via rosters on each organization's website (sources: cfl.ca and arenafootball.com) in February 2015.  It was determined that an additional 327 former NCAA student-athletes from the 2014 draft cohort were listed on a roster (190 in the CFL, 137 in the Arena League).  Across these two leagues, there were 203 former Division I FBS players, 74 from Division I FCS, 44 from Division II and 6 from Division III.  These numbers were combined with the NFL draftees to calculate an NCAA to Total Professional opportunities proportion (calculated as [255 + 327] / 15,842). 
  • We estimate that 4.0% of draft-eligible Division I players were chosen in the 2014 NFL draft (249 / 6,153).  Limiting this calculation to FBS players, 7.0% were estimated to be drafted (230 / 3,275).  Narrowing further to the five Division I conferences with autonomous governance (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC), we estimate that 10.1% were drafted (172 / 1,709).  Accounting for Arena League and CFL opportunities, the NCAA to Total Professional figures are estimated as 8.5% for Division I ([249 + 277] / 6,153), 13.2% for FBS ([230 + 203] / 3,275) and 16.4% for the five autonomous conferences ([172 + 108] / 1,709).
Last Updated: April 14, 2015

Sent from my iPhone

Tuesday, June 09, 2015

50 Years Ago Today: Draft Continues To Evolve - BaseballAmerica.com


Great analysis as always from Baseball America. You can argue that the odds show that scouts do their job well or at some level a self-fulfilling prophecy is at work. Obviously, those selected at the top are given every opportunity to either succeed or fail due to basic economics. Higher bonus, higher investment or sunk costs, the team is going to do everything they can to get some return on that investment. To whom much is given, much is expected....and all that.

from Baseball America:

YOUR CHANCES . . .
Thanks to exhaustive research over the 50-year life of the baseball draft by resident draft historian Allan Simpson, we now have a clear answer on the chances of a drafted player reaching the major leagues. Allan took into account 61,719 players drafted from 1965-2009 (ignoring 2010-14 because those players’ careers are still in development), and here’s what he came up with: If you are a drafted player of any kind,
 your chances of reaching the major leagues are 13.9%.Obviously, a player drafted in the first round has the greatest chance of reaching his goal, and here are the odds for the top 10 rounds (June, regular phase only). Predictably, a player’s chances decrease with every succeeding round:
First round69.40%
First round supplemental56.70%
Second round47.00%
Third round37.00%
Fourth round31.40%
Fifth round29.80%
Sixth round25.40%
Seventh round23.00%
Eighth round19.20%
Ninth round18.90%
10th round
18.40%


You can see that in Rounds 1 and 2, the odds are roughly 50%. So those picks that were just made yesterday in Rounds 1 and 2, one will make it, one will fail.

In Round 3-5, the odds drop to roughly 33%, so of those three guys selected, one guy will hit, the rest you'll never hear about again professionally unless you follow minor league baseball.

In Rounds 6-10, the odds drop to about 20%, so of those five guys selected, one will hit, the other four will miss.

After that, the odds drop precipitously, into true lung-shot territory, probably 3-5% at best. so if one guys hits after Round Ten each year, the organization either does a good job scouting or they rely on the draft more than free-agents.

Giants Top Minor League Prospects

  • 1. Joey Bart 6-2, 215 C Power arm and a power bat, playing a premium defensive position. Good catch and throw skills.
  • 2. Heliot Ramos 6-2, 185 OF Potential high-ceiling player the Giants have been looking for. Great bat speed, early returns were impressive.
  • 3. Chris Shaw 6-3. 230 1B Lefty power bat, limited defensively to 1B, Matt Adams comp?
  • 4. Tyler Beede 6-4, 215 RHP from Vanderbilt projects as top of the rotation starter when he works out his command/control issues. When he misses, he misses by a bunch.
  • 5. Stephen Duggar 6-1, 170 CF Another toolsy, under-achieving OF in the Gary Brown mold, hoping for better results.
  • 6. Sandro Fabian 6-0, 180 OF Dominican signee from 2014, shows some pop in his bat. Below average arm and lack of speed should push him towards LF.
  • 7. Aramis Garcia 6-2, 220 C from Florida INTL projects as a good bat behind the dish with enough defensive skill to play there long-term
  • 8. Heath Quinn 6-2, 190 OF Strong hitter, makes contact with improving approach at the plate. Returns from hamate bone injury.
  • 9. Garrett Williams 6-1, 205 LHP Former Oklahoma standout, Giants prototype, low-ceiling, high-floor prospect.
  • 10. Shaun Anderson 6-4, 225 RHP Large frame, 3.36 K/BB rate. Can start or relieve
  • 11. Jacob Gonzalez 6-3, 190 3B Good pedigree, impressive bat for HS prospect.
  • 12. Seth Corry 6-2 195 LHP Highly regard HS pick. Was mentioned as possible chip in high profile trades.
  • 13. C.J. Hinojosa 5-10, 175 SS Scrappy IF prospect in the mold of Kelby Tomlinson, just gets it done.
  • 14. Garett Cave 6-4, 200 RHP He misses a lot of bats and at times, the plate. 13 K/9 an 5 B/9. Wild thing.

2019 MLB Draft - Top HS Draft Prospects

  • 1. Bobby Witt, Jr. 6-1,185 SS Colleyville Heritage HS (TX) Oklahoma commit. Outstanding defensive SS who can hit. 6.4 speed in 60 yd. Touched 97 on mound. Son of former major leaguer. Five tool potential.
  • 2. Riley Greene 6-2, 190 OF Haggerty HS (FL) Florida commit.Best HS hitting prospect. LH bat with good eye, plate discipline and developing power.
  • 3. C.J. Abrams 6-2, 180 SS Blessed Trinity HS (GA) High-ceiling athlete. 70 speed with plus arm. Hitting needs to develop as he matures. Alabama commit.
  • 4. Reece Hinds 6-4, 210 SS Niceville HS (FL) Power bat, committed to LSU. Plus arm, solid enough bat to move to 3B down the road. 98MPH arm.
  • 5. Daniel Espino 6-3, 200 RHP Georgia Premier Academy (GA) LSU commit. Touches 98 on FB with wipe out SL.

2019 MLB Draft - Top College Draft Prospects

  • 1. Adley Rutschman C Oregon State Plus defender with great arm. Excellent receiver plus a switch hitter with some pop in the bat.
  • 2. Shea Langliers C Baylor Excelent throw and catch skills with good pop time. Quick bat, uses all fields approach with some pop.
  • 3. Zack Thompson 6-2 LHP Kentucky Missed time with an elbow issue. FB up to 95 with plenty of secondary stuff.
  • 4. Matt Wallner 6-5 OF Southern Miss Run producing bat plus mid to upper 90's FB closer. Power bat from the left side, athletic for size.
  • 5. Nick Lodolo LHP TCU Tall LHP, 95MPH FB and solid breaking stuff.