Velocity vs accuracy

[CoachJD]

Skewed toward lower end #'s.

Um... I don't think you know what "average" means.

 

[LEsoftballdad]

* and there are pitchers known to throw faster than the high-end averages on this chart even at young ages like previously discussed at 13 years old throwing 61 mph
And @uncdrew dd throwing 56 at 12yrs.

View attachment 26471

View attachment 26473

That's why they're called averages. You'll have some on the high side, and some on the low side.

 

[DonnyS]

The velocity will drop 2-4 mph on the way to the plate.

This is not consistent with what I've seen while using both the Rapsodo and the Pocket Radar set up behind the catcher. Small sample size, of course, but we were seeing the same #s or 1 (and sometimes 2) MPH differences. I am aware that others have said the same as you. Just reporting my experience.

 

[Bullseye]

Um... I don't think you know what "average" means.

I know what lower end numbers look like. Those numbers might be average in your neck of the woods.

 

[_MIA_]

I know what lower end numbers look like. Those numbers might be average in your neck of the woods.

Those are presumably the averages over all “neck of the woods”.. hence the word average without any other qualifiers eg Average for CA pitchers or Average for IL pitchers…

If you are saying those numbers are not representative of National averages as the sampling was skewed towards lower end pitchers than you have zero way of knowing that unless you have viewed every level of pitcher for all age levels across the country.

If you had said those are low for CA then you would have (maybe) had a point.

 

[radness]

Those are presumably the averages over all “neck of the woods”.. hence the word average without any other qualifiers eg Average for CA pitchers or Average for IL pitchers…

If you had said those are low for CA then you would have (maybe) had a point.

Are you saying that only California has better developed pitchers?
That may have been true years and years ago.

Those low numbers may be only taken from rec ball, middle school and high school but do not think they are reflective of average for at least half of travel ball. (Maybe more)
And even with that there are much higher numbers that are documented that those low numbers seem to be tanked.

That is why posted the numbers I did because think they are truly more accurate of lower-end average and higher-end average.
Think it is a false representation of softball to show only the lowest numbers and call it average.
Also to say those super low numbers are considered rare comes from some person that is not actually watching all of travel ball because they would not have considered it rare when it is very common to throw 65 mph.

 

[_MIA_]

Are you saying that only California has better developed pitchers?
That may have been true years and years ago.

Those low numbers may be only taken from rec ball, middle school and high school but do not think they are reflective of average for at least half of travel ball. (Maybe more)
And even with that there are much higher numbers that are documented that those low numbers seem to be tanked.

That is why posted the numbers I did because think they are truly more accurate of lower-end average and higher-end average.
Think it is a false representation of softball to show only the lowest numbers and call it average.
Also to say those super low numbers are considered rare comes from some person that is not actually watching all of travel ball because they would not have considered it rare when it is very common to throw 65 mph.

You can have your opinion of course but unless you have watched all levels of TB over the entire country it is a bit presumptive of you (or anybody else) to assume your opinion trumps the data unless we are told the population that data came from. How many TB teams from MA are you watching play? How about teams from NH? ME? ND? NM? etc,etc Your opinion is biased by what players and games you choose to watch (probably the same choices I would make btw..)

Humans (including me..I just assume that my judgement is wrong apriori) are horrible at judging, and acting on, statistics. It is why many people are still afraid to fly..

With regards to the outlier events, depends on your definition of rare. Typically in statistics if something occurs with less than a 5 percent probability it is considered rare. If you took ALL (not P5,D1,etc) college pitchers do you think more than 5 in 100 would be able to cruise at 65?

 

[Cougars]

This is example 1,000 of how far the typical poster here skews towards the upper end of TB.

Our 16u "B" team played 36 games last June/July. A mix of tournaments, but played in IL, WI, MI, and MD. In those games, pretty sure we never saw 60MPH. Don't have the radar out all the time, but I would guess the fastest pitchers we saw were upper 50's. The typical starter we faced was probably 49-53 (My daughter throws low 50's, and for speed, she is my baseline for deciding if the pitcher we are facing is "fast" or not.)

 

[radness]

This is example 1,000 of how far the typical poster here skews towards the upper end of TB.

Our 16u "B" team played 36 games last June/July. A mix of tournaments, but played in IL, WI, MI, and MD. In those games, pretty sure we never saw 60MPH. Don't have the radar out all the time, but I would guess the fastest pitchers we saw were upper 50's. The typical starter we faced was probably 49-53 (My daughter throws low 50's, and for speed, she is my baseline for deciding if the pitcher we are facing is "fast" or not.)

Good feedback added!
So you did see upper 50's in 'B' level
That low-end chart said 55 to 57 mph at 16 is rare.

The word 'rare' is inaccurate. (imo)

There is an entire 16u talent division above that.
'A' ball + top tier.

imo this is where it does make a difference what people are familiar with watching that influences perspective. But it's also important to have this discussion because if people think that their daughter 16 throwing 55 to 57 mph and they see a chart that says that is 'rare' then people get an over inflated idea of their own kids talent/ Level.

 

[Chilixa]

Good feedback added!
So you did see upper 50's in 'B' level
That low-end chart said 55 to 57 mph at 16 is rare.

The word 'rare' is inaccurate. (imo)

There is an entire 16u talent division above that.
'A' ball + top tier.

imo this is where it does make a difference what people are familiar with watching that influences perspective. But it's also important to have this discussion because if people think that their daughter 16 throwing 55 to 57 mph and they see a chart that says that is 'rare' then people get an over inflated idea of their own kids talent/ Level.

I think you may be getting stuck on what you see all the time. If you are always at A level tourneys you are going to have a false perception that everyone throws really really hard. Even in the B level tourney he described above he wasn’t seeing really fast pitching all the time. Now if you add rec and high school ball into the equation you probably get even more slower pitchers into the averages.

If you took averages of just A level pitchers than what you consider rare would be different than most. A level teams probably only represent 5-10% of all softball players. So to most, pitchers that throw hard like many of them would be considered rare.

The first time I attended a showcase tournament as a spectator for an 18u tourney I was actually surprised to find many were pitching under 60 mph. This tourney has teams from all over the country. I had the false impression that everyone at that level threw 65 mph plus. It just isn’t the case. Those girls are out there but it is why we call them rare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk