 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|||||||
|
Life Lessons Life Lesson #40: Early Development How hard should we push our young athletes? There is a disturbing trend pushing athletes to develop earlier and earlier. The topic of Early Development for me straddles the fence between pushing our young athletes and allowing for natural progression. While we would never choose to hold an athlete back from getting better, we must be careful, at the same time, not to put too much pressure on a youngster to perform at a high level. Do the risks associated with pushing our young athletes outweigh the benefits/experiences of accelerated development? Follow up questions: How hard should we push our athletes? How early should we expect development? What are the tradeoffs to allowing a more natural, slower development? Or are those added successes of early development worth it? Would you choose to win at age nine at the potential risk of health and enjoyment problems at age 19? In reality, the first true test of development comes at age 14 ? when entering high school. This is the age when athletes must have a certain level of game understanding in order to make the cut. Until high school, an athlete can pay to play - write your check and your athlete gets to play. Only at age 14, when an athlete enters high school, is there a chance that someone of authority will decide that your athlete isn?t cut out to play anymore. With that being said, how hard should you push your athlete to have this ?development? at younger ages - 12, 10 or even 8 years of age? This ?knowledge? or ?development? I refer to are baseball intangibles, more than fundamental skills. The intangibles that come with playing tons and tons of baseball: A good discussion point involving early development is at what age to allow athletes to pitch? It seems as if we?ve moved younger and younger in the age that we allow athletes to pitch. Not long ago, the 7/8 year-old level was called ?coach pitch.? Now, kids pitch in the major division of this age group, while the minor division remains coach pitch. There is a real push to make the entire league kid pitch? how does this positively or negatively affect development? To answer this question, let?s first entertain the argument of allowing young kids to pitch. This argument must be centered around development: We want our kids to pitch so that they can develop control, comfort and experience on the mound. If we allow athletes to start pitching at 7 and 8 years old, then they will be better prepared to win championships at 9 and 10. Both of these are valid arguments for early pitching, as I agree there is no substitute for mound-experience to foster development. Conversely, a strong argument can be made that the game is not helped by early pitching. It can be said that the development of pitchers, hitters and the game in general is slowed by athlete pitching at a young age. From the standpoint of pitchers, most 7-year old pitchers can not throw consistent strikes. Place them on a mound, in a game, with a batter standing in the box? and they become even less consistent. And when they do throw strikes, the chance of having a solid team-defense behind them is very slim. This means that pitchers are going to be forced to throw a high number of pitches per game ? due to their own inaccuracy as well as the limitations of defense. From a hitter?s standpoint, opportunities to put the ball in play are limited. For a hitter to develop, he needs to experience success. Success in the batter?s box means hitting the ball with regularity? and this requires strikes. Since the majority of pitchers struggle to throw strikes, this means that the majority of hitters will not see strikes. Additionally, an inconsistent pitcher will undoubtedly hit batters with much greater regularity. A hit-batsman at the age of 7 can be a major obstacle in development confidence. These batters become scared of the ball, now looking ?not to get hit? versus trying to hit the ball. The game can very easily become a combination of walks and strikeouts, doing little to foster development for pitchers and hitters alike. It is a fact that the competitive landscape of today?s baseball scene is very intense. To coin an old accounting firm phrase, parents are driven by the ?opportunity cost? of not training. If they are not playing on a given weekend, then they are not developing. In order to compete in tournaments and all-star games at 10/11 years old, leagues must have athletes playing and pitching at much younger ages. This atmosphere creates the desire for our athletes to be all-knowing baseball robots by very early ages. Remembering that the first true test of baseball development comes at 14 years of age, there must be a balance be a balance between pushing development and allowing development to happen. I do not believe that we should stifle growth, or encourage athletes not to play the game. If a specific group of athletes is talented, and has lots of success at an early age? who are we to try and contain that development? And I do believe that a certain level of instruction and training is a healthy addition to a young athlete?s career. I believe it is our responsibility to allow athletes to develop naturally ? to put them in a position where they can develop. And if they exceed and excel, then it?s our job to assist and encourage such development. To conclude, I?d like to highlight a quote by Dr. James Andrews (the nation?s leader in elbow surgeries and director of the American Sports Medicine Institute - ASMI). Made in a recent article in the Birmingham News (al.com), it was shared by Coach Nick Dixon from Nedco Sports (Hit2win.com), and addresses this dilemma of developing our athletes at an early age: ?At some point you have to figure out whether you want to be a star in the Little League World Series or in the real World Series? they don?t necessarily match.? Keep your eye on the big picture and keep the game fun! |
|
||
|
||
