No. He has 5 days to put up big numbers or he will not be drafted high this year. Draft starts this Sunday.
What about the player that wasn't recruited heavily coming out of HS, yet has straight worked their tail off and deserves to be on the bigger stage to meet their personal goals and their potential. Does that kid not deserve that chance without sitting out?
And that’s what’s great about our country. You can find it offensive, I generally don’t and it’s perfectly ok for us to disagree. I personally did stop using the word because I don’t want to offend someone who does find it offensive. There are other ways to get the same point across.
that's what I think about Amick
I believe Holman will be several more days.
I think Amick could go lots of places and be successful.
I honestly think Holman's best choice would be Knoxville
One angle that hasn’t been discussed is turf. I think turf is absolutely the best place to develop as an infielder and that’s huge for Amick. Put that as a check mark in the big orange column
However, the turf fields in the MLB are pretty close to artificial turf anyway, with very few bad hops. Now, college fields are once too however, not as nice as the ones in MLB. I do agree with Bruin on this one.........Interesting take given that he's always played on dirt/grass infields and the pros, at all levels, play on dirt/grass.
Remember he just needs to trick the scouts into thinking he can play the left side of the infield.
Turf helps that
Why do you say it like that? Why does he need to “trick the scouts”? I don’t think the book is written on a 20 year old kid. You’ve been weirdly negative and unfair to him just because he is a transfer. It’s possible that he can work hard and make big defensive improvements with a full year in the field. You’re just assuming he can’t ever be a good fielder.
It’s no secret scouts don’t like evaluating infielders on turf. They admit to getting “tricked” into thinking guys can really flash the leather.
The post wasn’t meant to be a negative one about Amick. Just one of the issues scouts are having
You are speaking from a fan standpoint rather than inserting yourself in the shoes of the recruit/player.no he doesn’t. He “deserves” to be loyal to the school that did recruit him. If he wants to jump ship on them he should sit out
You are speaking from a fan standpoint rather than inserting yourself in the shoes of the recruit/player.
There are multiple reasons why a player would transfer, some kids need a bigger stage, playing time, etc. There is obviously a pretty small time window from an eligibility/career standpoint. You've obviously not gone through this process before as a player or parent.
Have you ever changed jobs to advance your career?
I’m totally confused by your posts regarding turf. If you develop better on it, why do scouts not like it? If scouts don’t think it gives a true indication of your skill set then how does one develop better on it? I’d say it’s easier to field on and hence why it likely “tricks” scouts because everything is smooth. If everything is smooth and consistently repeatable then you’re not completely developed; you’ve proven you can field a rolling ball and little more.Also I’ll add I think playing and developing on turf makes a player better at a higher rate than natural
Ridiculous take imo. You are limiting a major step in that professional career, or just that "amateurs" life in general. As a fan, I understand where you are coming from. From the other side of the coin, not so much. Sometimes you have to walk in their shoes before you understand.all this has been covered too much here so read back thru the answers but the main thing is imo amateur sports should be different than professional sports or an adults professional life