A player walks up and says....

[_MIA_]

Have also xperienced a player elavatimg a team.
And a new coach.

Glass half full or half empty?

Yup if players on the current team and new coach/players are not pains in the rear

 

[radness]

I’d throw a ball at her face as hard as I could, if she caught it barehanded, I’d welcome her aboard!

Hmmm skills test!
With an interesting twist,
...beware transition speed! !

 

[Schmick's Gloves]

Always looking to improve the team, try the player out, if she fits in she gets in

 

[CoreSoftball20]

"Chemistry" (whatever that means...) will only be negatively affected by the addition of a new player if a) the player is a pain in the rear or b) some of the current players are pains in the rear (in which case the chemistry will likely be bad to begin with)

I like this, a lot of people just assume the problem with Chemistry is the new person coming on. No, a lot
of times its a current person or group that just dont want to welcome another player which is just as big
of a problem.

 

[radness]

I like this, a lot of people just assume the problem with Chemistry is the new person coming on. No, a lot
of times its a current person or group that just dont want to welcome another player which is just as big
of a problem.

!!!
To this point recently posted in discussions
'when CAMARADERIE shines'
A positive short story of a player on a team welcoming a new player who plays the same two positions as she does.

 

[NBECoach]

I like this, a lot of people just assume the problem with Chemistry is the new person coming on. No, a lot
of times its a current person or group that just dont want to welcome another player which is just as big
of a problem.

The OP stated that the team is " well coached and good" which usually does not translate to team chemistry problems. Could they be like the '72 Oakland A's? I guess it is possible.

At what threshold do you no longer consider adding "good players" players to the roster?

 

[radness]

At what threshold do you no longer consider adding "good players" players to the roster?

Thats a good question for a post!
Would imagine there would be different answers for team goals.

College programs rosters can be pretty darn big.
Do they set an example of standard?
Especially for a competitive 18u team?!

 

[efastball]

Can you pick up a Volkswagen?

 

[Bullseye]

Let player tryout. If she is capable of beating out another player than its earned. Come game time will help the team. Only reason for another player to be disgruntled is they didnt work hard enough to keep their position.
dd's 18u team was entirely commited already. Drawing from that these players want to win. That includes the best interest of the team not individuals.

 

[CoreSoftball20]

The OP stated that the team is " well coached and good" which usually does not translate to team chemistry problems. Could they be like the '72 Oakland A's? I guess it is possible.

At what threshold do you no longer consider adding "good players" players to the roster?

My quote wasnt really about the original post...as Im not saying there is a chemistry issue
or will be. There was a post in this thread about not bringing her on if its going to cause chemistry
issues. Thats why I quoted a member who said, chemistry issues arent always about the incoming player. That a lot of times chemistry problems are caused by players who are on the team by bringing on a new player...that its not the new players fault. Sometimes everything is great until a players spot
is threatened or a friend who's spot if being threatened by the new player.
By the other post made by Rad, sounds like he has great attitudes and none of these situations
are going to happen.

I always take good players with good attitudes and would rarely turn one down...unless you have
absolutely no need for them. I mean, not going to bring a kid on if I know she has no shot
at playing much or any meaningful time without her knowing the situation.