I know I'm splitting hairs but my hopes are that this might stir some thoughts and opinions. I couldn't help but notice the wording in what PG says about their National Showcase. I know they are literally up to their necks with the disaster in Iowa but while this is fresh on my mind I wanted to bring it up. They claim that they "produced" early draft picks. I disagree with the following statement:

"Perfect Game National Showcase has a long history of producing many early picks in the draft"
------------------------------------------

I think PGStaff is much more accurate on his comments when he says:

"PG National Showcase which will be held in the Metrodome this coming weekend is one of the events in the country that has the very most talent."

"We scour the country trying to find the very best prospects"

I agree that PG Nationals Has, Finds, and Attracts talented players. But to say they "produce" in my opinion is sending the wrong message. Your thoughts.
Fungo

Fungo,
Semantics. Here's one definition of the word produce:

"4. To bring forth; exhibit:"

That is pretty much what they are doing at the PG National.

We should all realize that they are a business and are trying to promote their business. At times there may be a bit of hyperbole, but in general I think they do a far better job than most of being ethical about what they present.

I've seen a lot that you've posted on the subject of showcases in general. You've made a good point that most of the time talent will show itself and showcases while helpful are not absolutely necessary. I've seen that in person when one of the young players from our area attended a showcase, didn't perform up to his usual standards and receieved a so-so rating by his standards then a few months later committed to a major D1 as a sophmore. But I've also seen where a player who got only 11 innings of pitching time for his HS was drafted in the 23rd or 24th round. He was highly rated by PG and it is very possible that the scouts wouldn't have made the effort to see him pitch without that rating.

The important thing is for people to understand what they are and aren't getting when they pay for a showcase and to do the cost benefit analysis to some level before paying out large sums of money for a showcase.

Fungo - perhaps this topic could have been raised in private as well.

Since it has been raised, I'll give you my take based on my understanding of the English Language and how people liberally use it here in the US. Dictionary definitions are often unhelpful imho when words can often have several meanings and nuances and connotations depending on context and thus I'll provide my own interpretation.

Barry Gordy is a famous Motown Producer. He hires the best musicians to make his records and he is always listed as the producer on his records. I am sure many of these musicians have been instructed by nationally-known vocal coaches. Should these coaches (or others) in fact be the one's credited with producing the talent? Of course, I am playing on words here a bit. Barry Gordy hires the sound Engineers, owns the studio in which to record, hires the DVD manufacturer after the recordings have been completed, and pays for the marketing of the product.

It seems to me a similar thing is happening in baseball. Fields are being leased (the studio), ball players who have had previous coaching use those fields (the musicians), scouts are brought in to evaluate the talent (the Engineers who record the records - interesting that in this case the scouts in fact record things albeit a different type of recording - numbers/evaluations versus sound), and then evaluations are made, lists generated, and players are "marketed" from those lists.

Often times in Hollywood movies, a person is listed in the credits as a producer who had hardly any role in the actual production of the movie. For instance, perhaps the only role that person may have had was getting a top star to sign a contract or arranged a single meeting between two powerful entitities. Were they an actual producer? In my mind, yes - no matter how small the contribution. The word produce means to facilitate some outcome (my definition). Facilitate means to help get something done.

The product we are all talking about here is major league baseball players. Does PG facilitate that process? Yes. Are those who facilitate a product often given credit as a producer? Yes. Thus, PG is a producer. Arguments can also be made the other way on this concept as well so perhaps this will turn out to be an interesting debate.

This is mt first opportunity to get logged on for awhile. I'm sitting in a domed stadium "watching" a lot of outstanding talent along with nearly every DI college and MLB Scouting department in baseball. Nobody here cares who produced what. They're just here "watching". So I could care less about what someone might think or why they might think it is important. What is going on here in Minneapolis is more important than a single word.

Nearly always the phrase used by us regarding draft picks or college signings is "Attended Perfect Game Events". I guess we could just keep those things quiet so that no on knows about it.

While at it... Why not mention this, which is repeated over and over on the PG site.

We do not make players better. That credit goes to the many people who are much closer to the individual player… The coaches, instructors, and most importantly the parents. Parents being the most important people of all. Then in the end the most important people become the college recruiters and professional scouts who take the identified player and determine his value to their organization or program.

All PG does is watch them play and let everyone know about them.

Fungo only asked for our thoughts after posting his opinion. I think that it was a good topic for consideration and could see how confusing it all can be for many.

Good answers.

I agree that semantics is involved. As a verb, the word produce also means "to bring before the public".

In our case, some may say that they did help produce my player. At a PG tourney is where his college coach first saw him. Some may say that is not producing a player, just giving them an opportunity to show off his skills.

In Kevin O'Sullivan's bio it says he "produced" my son as a 2nd round pick.

My son's HS coach claims he "produced" a pro ball player.

However,my husband and I take most of the credit for "producing" the ball player.

In reality many people helped to "produce", it takes a whole village to raise a child, IMO.

A few weeks ago I received a pm from a new parent asking where I thought their son should go to "show Off" his skills. My answer was to PG showcase of course! That parent, new to the process, was under the assumption that PG was more interested in players who wanted to turn pro. I described my experiences and that they provided the place for him to be seen by many college coaches (as well as scouts).

While PG strongly focuses on being the viewing catalyst in the process of getting players to the highest level (pro ball), I feel sometimes more emphasis could be placed on where most likely more players will fall, going to college. In 2004, very little mention that some of the top players in the country at the time WERE NOT drafted or some drafted went on to college. The hype was all about those that turned pro. Recently he asked for our opinions here regarding an article and I liked how they typed in BOLD many players in the 2004 draft class who never got drafted or signed and did well in the 2007 draft. That article was most likely one of the best follow ups on players that I have read. Letting people know and be aware how important, for some, the college experience can be.

JMO.

PG,
I see you responded and basically said what I was trying to say.

I was at the PG National Showcase today and I'll admit this wasn't the discussion I was expecting when I saw a thread by this name.

But anyway, what an event! This was actually the first showcase I've been to (my son and hubby attended in HS, but I never had). But even I can tell that these players are among the "best of the best" HS players across the country. I realize that they didn't get so good BECAUSE they attended a PG event. But because they were at this one, a whole lot of scouts and college coaches will know how good they are, and if they were not on the radar screen before, now they will be.

It was pretty amazing to me to watch the games and see HS pitchers who were throwing 91-92-93-94, and throwing strikes, with good off-speed pitches. And impressive to see the batters who could hit that stuff, although pitching dominated most of the innings we saw.

But actually the part of the event where my husband and I were saying "wow" was watching the 60 being timed. I started saying "wow" when we saw several pairs in a row running 6.5-something. Back to reality with some players running 6.8's and 6.9's which I USED to think was impressive and some 7+ players of course. Then we saw a handful of 6.3-something runs. I saw one 6.22, and I heard from a scout that there was a 6.21. So toward the end we saw quite a few more 6.5-something runs, and by then we are saying, "hmmm, pretty good". Amazing.

The first annual home run derby was fun, too. Pretty cool to see some of those long balls landing in the upper deck of an MLB stadium! And I think my hubby should be a scout. He picked the winner the first time he saw him swing the bat.

Lots of talent, lots of scouts. A pretty good day at the ball field!


Julie

Fun, ain't it?

And, for those expecting PG production miracles, sobering................


Nice post, MN-Mom.

The PG National Showcase produces All-Americans. Many of the players that will be at this summer's Aflac All-American Game will earn the honor this weekend in Minneapolis.

My player attended the PG Naional many years ago, in Omaha,the same year of the first Aflac All American Games.

On the roster was a player from California who was not well known at the time, he wowed them and it put him on the map.

Yesterday many of us watched that same player pitch in relief for Standford.

quote:

I know I'm splitting hairs but ....

FUNGO,....although, probably not very thought provoking,..... you could always try this next time!

quote:

But even I can tell that these players are among the "best of the best" HS players across the country

MN-Mom,....I'm pea green.
I love watching talent like that! Gives one goosebumps ( the good kind ) don't it?
Amazing stuff!! I wanna hear more!