average 40 yard and 60 yard dash times

[3and0]

for a div 1 ncaa athlete?

[cosmo34]

Don't see the 40 tested too much, maybe at some of those Sparq events.

Also position dependent for what is acceptable. I don't know the exact numbers, but if you aren't a slugging 1st Baseman or a defensive stopper behind the dish, you better be having a 6.8 (ML Average, or 50 rating) 60, or better.

[Brett]

May 19, 2009 23:19:17 GMT -8 cosmo34 said:

Don't see the 40 tested too much, maybe at some of those Sparq events.

Also position dependent for what is acceptable. I don't know the exact numbers, but if you aren't a slugging 1st Baseman or a defensive stopper behind the dish, you better be having a 6.8 (ML Average, or 50 rating) 60, or better.

IMO the 40 and/or the 60 really don't mean that much. There is never a time during a game where you will have to run that distance in a straight line, so it really isn't as telling as your time running the bases, or how you run a ball down in the outfield. If you run well home to first or first to third, or you can really cut off balls in the gaps, that will matter much more than a 60 time.

And 6.8 is far ahead of MLB average...

[cosmo34]

Agree Brett, but you hear alot of people harping on it, so it isn't a waste of time to focus on lowering it. Lateral quickness and agility is more important, but few showcases I've been to tested that. That's something you have to show off in games.

Funny you mentioned that "there is never a time in a game where you run that far in a straight line". That was the first thing out of my mouth when we did our mile runs.

As for the 6.8 being MLB Average, I'm just going off what a Padres scout told me when I ran that a few years back. He told me I was right at the average point, and I ran a 6.84.

[tds]

What is the MLB avg 60?

Do all scouts use this as a prereq?
IMO this is where some scouts are missing the boat. The assumption that the mlb swing will be taught in the minors.

[Brett]

Jun 16, 2009 6:50:41 GMT -8 tds said:

What is the MLB avg 60?

Do all scouts use this as a prereq?
IMO this is where some scouts are missing the boat. The assumption that the mlb swing will be taught in the minors.

Good point. Scouts that get caught up in radar gun readings and 60 times without taking a hard look at if a player can actually play or not will get burned more often than not.

If I were a scout I would never draft a guy purely on the fact that he could run or throw hard. These are things that you can't teach, sure, but if they can't hit or throw strikes, you are fighting a very uphill battle.

Out of the five tools for a position player, being able to hit, hit with power, and field are the 3 most important in my mind.

Dustin Pedroia is a below average runner with an adequate arm...but he can hit and pick it, so he's got a ROY, MVP, and World Series Trophy...go figure.

Speed and arm strength never hurt, but when decisions are made made solely on those tools with no other tools to augment them, player personnel mistakes are made IMO.

[cosmo34]

IMO, some believe that the skills of hitting, fielding, and mentality can be taught easier than the skills of running fast or throwing hard. Because when you get a player with Jose Reyes tools to figure out the swing, you get a star. They feel they can get those players to "figure it out" and when they do, they are really, really good. However, they usually don't.

I'd rather take the guys that can hit and field, and go from there.

[tds]

Dustin Pedroia is a below average runner with an adequate arm...but he can hit and pick it, so he's got a ROY, MVP, and World Series Trophy...go figure.


Exactly! This is why I would like to get the avg 60 at the show so I could share with our local scouts.

[kupuna]

A 2007 study by a professor at Texas A&M gave these times for the 60.

NCAA D1 All 7.25 pitchers 7.35 catchers 7.40 inf 7.29 outf 6.93
Pro 6.92 NA 7.19 6.97 6.89

The study presented all kinds of data-grip strength, vert jump, body fat comp, bat speed etc. I could not find the study online but have it saved as a pdf file.

[cosmo34]

Could you share the rest? Or email it to me?

[kupuna]

Remember that this was discussed on baseball fever and was able to find the link.

falcon.tamucc.edu/~fspaniol/NSCA/2007%20NSCA%20SSTC%2001052007%20Final%20-%20Spaniol.pdf

[cosmo34]

Thank you good sir.

I can't get it to save, but I'll bookmark the page and see if I can find a printer that has that many pages to spend.

Page 64 REALLY stood out to me. The Research Notes.

BBV (batted ball velocity) is more indicitive of batting performance in bat speed.

Very high positive correlation between (r=.83) between grip strength and BBV.

Lean body mass, leg strength, rotational power are most predictive of BBV.

I do know that some have claimed that the hands play no role in the swing, and that some "study" proved that grip strength won't make any difference in swing speed. I would love to hear their replies to this, but they aren't here. Too bad.

Once again, I'm never going to let someone tell me that grip strength doesn't matter when it comes to hitting.

And again, thanks Kapuna.

Also, I'm gonna take this study, show it to my girlfriend and say "See honey, I WAS as good as I acted like I was!!!" ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[scorekeeper]

May 20, 2009 9:25:15 GMT -8 cosmo34 said:

… As for the 6.8 being MLB Average, I'm just going off what a Padres scout told me when I ran that a few years back. He told me I was right at the average point, and I ran a 6.84.

I’m not saying the guy was a jerk, but I am saying a lot of people make similar statements without proof, and that’s how baseball dogma gets started. The guy was an authority figure in the sense that he is expected to speak authoritatively on baseball matters, but I’ll bet if you put a gun to his head and told him to come up with some kind of proof as to support his statement, he’d end up with a big hole in his head.

[cosmo34]

Ok?

What is it with you and coming up with random stuff about "baseball dogma"? When you aren't rambling about stats, you do nothing but ramble, ramble, ramble.

What gives?

BTW, I'll bet you are dead wrong about him. DEAD wrong.

[scorekeeper]

Jul 24, 2009 2:52:20 GMT -8 cosmo34 said:

Ok?

What is it with you and coming up with random stuff about "baseball dogma"? When you aren't rambling about stats, you do nothing but ramble, ramble, ramble.

What gives?

I already told you to report me to the board administrator and put me on your ignore list if I drive you so crazy. Or, you can simply not read what I write.

Baseball dogma is not 100% correct, any more than any other dogma.

BTW, I'll bet you are dead wrong about him. DEAD wrong.

Dead wrong about whom? This scout who said 6.8 was the MLB average? Well, at least Brett doesn’t seem to give the statement any more veracity than I do. Perhaps the scout meant to say the 6.8 was the average for some specific position, but didn’t do that, and thus gave you the idea that 6.8 was the average for all MLB players.

But none-the-less, I understand why you defend the guy. To you, he’s an authority figure in the game. But me, when I hear things like that without any substantiation, I choose to see if there’s any proof one way or the other. Even the NCAA study seems to say he’s nowhere close to being correct, but does give me the strong notion that he was indeed talking about some specific position.