ADVERTISEMENT

Connor McCaffrey

May 29, 2001
6
11
3
Just saw his baseball stats for this season and they are VERY impressive (.410+ BA with 8 HR). doing this while still playing summer basketball is a tough thing to do. Any thoughts around IC that he may try to do baseball at UI too (or instead)? He may have a chance to be a pro in that sport.
 
Just saw his baseball stats for this season and they are VERY impressive (.410+ BA with 8 HR). doing this while still playing summer basketball is a tough thing to do. Any thoughts around IC that he may try to do baseball at UI too (or instead)? He may have a chance to be a pro in that sport.

Easy there. Look, I have never seen the kid play......he may be really, really good. But instead of roundball? Come on, you're bored go find something else to do. Or if you really don't want to go find Pokemon anymore, then look up how many kids have hit .410 or better in the history of class 4A in Iowa, and how many of those made it to the big leagues. 75%, 80%? Must be a pretty big guaranteed success rate to give up a full D-1 scholarship for a 30-40% ride to play baseball.

And no, nobody gets full rides to play baseball.
 
Considering he's 15th in the state, in Class 4A, in hitting and 2nd on his own team (behind Oliver Martin, who knew, another 2 sport kid)...

I haven't seen him play, and I'm sure he's an outstanding player, but his #s at this point aren't screaming B1G. Now, I don't know if he also plays travel team, Big League, American Legion or some other non-school ball. But there are kids playing just as good of competition putting up better numbers.
 
He's considered a DIV 1 baseball prospect, so yeah

There was article in newspaper or somewhere a few weeks ago. Said he would like to try both but basketball first
Heller may let him try but it's a tough transition to start in mid-March or later
 
Considering he's 15th in the state, in Class 4A, in hitting and 2nd on his own team (behind Oliver Martin, who knew, another 2 sport kid)...

I haven't seen him play, and I'm sure he's an outstanding player, but his #s at this point aren't screaming B1G. Now, I don't know if he also plays travel team, Big League, American Legion or some other non-school ball. But there are kids playing just as good of competition putting up better numbers.
His stats wouldn't raise many eyebrows if he had a different name or had a deep right field. His home field is around 260' which is great for a lefty.
 
His stats wouldn't raise many eyebrows if he had a different name or had a deep right field. His home field is around 260' which is great for a lefty.

Was not aware of the short right field. Just thought it was impressive to put up those kind of numbers in his second sport. Guessing many of the ones with better numbers train 8 -10 months a year for baseball. (Sorry to offend those that assume anything from a cy fan has to be negative, I did think that it was impressive and meant as a compliment to him.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: EZ2BJZ and NI hawk
Was not aware of the short right field. Just thought it was impressive to put up those kind of numbers in his second sport. Guessing many of the ones with better numbers train 8 -10 months a year for baseball. (Sorry to offend those that assume anything from a cy fan has to be negative, I did think that it was impressive and meant as a compliment to him.)

Not the way I took it. But I was aware he was a good baseball player, just never heard anyone say he would play baseball beyond high school.
 
Considering he's 15th in the state, in Class 4A, in hitting and 2nd on his own team (behind Oliver Martin, who knew, another 2 sport kid)...

I haven't seen him play, and I'm sure he's an outstanding player, but his #s at this point aren't screaming B1G. Now, I don't know if he also plays travel team, Big League, American Legion or some other non-school ball. But there are kids playing just as good of competition putting up better numbers.

Oliver Martin is a 3 sport kid. He is arguably the best male high school swimmer in Iowa that only swims 3-4 months a year.
 
I'd be surprised if CM ever plays baseball. D1 baseball has very limited rosters now with the title 9 BS in place. Those spots are gold and it would be tough to reserve one for a guy not able to be around until April and hardly any fall work.

He would have to be pretty special. He does have excellent size. But stats really aren't a great tool for measurements either, both good and bad. They are A tool, but so much more goes into it.

I just don't see it but knowing Rick, he is open minded when it comes to finding kids that can help him win
 
Talked to Fran a month or so ago and he thinks Conner may well play baseball at Iowa in addition to hoops. He also says that there have been quite a few pro baseball scouts looking at Conner and Martin. None in basketball.
 
Imo, Connor definitely needs to keep baseball in the picture as I don't see him having a long playing career in basketball after college.....coaching perhaps. Whereas in baseball, if he is good enough, he could have a long and lucrative career in baseball. I've always thought Jale Chistensen's dad did Jake no favor by strressing football for him over a possible career in baseball.....he had a major league arm and hit over .400 playing baseball in the Chicago area. Its good that Fran is open to Connor playing baseball at Iowa.
 
Was not aware of the short right field. Just thought it was impressive to put up those kind of numbers in his second sport. Guessing many of the ones with better numbers train 8 -10 months a year for baseball. (Sorry to offend those that assume anything from a cy fan has to be negative, I did think that it was impressive and meant as a compliment to him.)
In Iowa tons of studs play multiple sports. My amateur opinion is he doesn't currently have the speed or arm strength to be a starter at the next level. You can't teach his height and genetics so he may be improving at a quick rate. My selfish side wants him to focus on basketball of course. I am sure cyclone fans love him trying to play 2 sports.
 
Easy there. Look, I have never seen the kid play......he may be really, really good. But instead of roundball? Come on, you're bored go find something else to do. Or if you really don't want to go find Pokemon anymore, then look up how many kids have hit .410 or better in the history of class 4A in Iowa, and how many of those made it to the big leagues. 75%, 80%? Must be a pretty big guaranteed success rate to give up a full D-1 scholarship for a 30-40% ride to play baseball.

And no, nobody gets full rides to play baseball.[/QUO
Yeah but how many of those kids are 6" 5' left handed athletes, such a good athlete that is rated 4* in basketball....I kind of agree with the OP on this one. If he was able to focus more on baseball can you imagine what those already impressive #'s would be? He has + speed and it appears he can hit for average and power (8 HR's). That is already 3 tools. With his frame I can only imagine he has a + arm, there is 4 and i bet he is athletic enough to field a ball well enough to play OF well enough. So in my estimation we are looking at a possible 5 tool player, that is 6"5' and is left handed.....not something that is a dime a dozen
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tunadog
My son swims on his club team, so I see them practice on a regular basis. I fully understand that Oliver wasn't the fastest kid on the team last year (but not by much). But the 3 that were faster, swim year round, & have D1 scholarships. That was my point. If Oliver just swam, he would be getting the same attention from colleges that he is in Football.
 
My son swims on his club team, so I see them practice on a regular basis. I fully understand that Oliver wasn't the fastest kid on the team last year (but not by much). But the 3 that were faster, swim year round, & have D1 scholarships. That was my point. If Oliver just swam, he would be getting the same attention from colleges that he is in Football.
Aiden is a better swimmer. But Oliver is very talented.
 
I am sorry but if it doesn't have a ball it's not a sport, or at least not one worth talking about

100-year-poster.jpg
 
I recall reading that of all the professional team sports, a minor league baseball player has the least chance statistically of ever appearing in a single major league game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TopHawkeye
I recall reading that of all the professional team sports, a minor league baseball player has the least chance statistically of ever appearing in a single major league game.

That makes sense. Every small city, and some bigger ones, have minor league teams. Iowa has 7 teams alone.
 
In Iowa tons of studs play multiple sports. My amateur opinion is he doesn't currently have the speed or arm strength to be a starter at the next level. You can't teach his height and genetics so he may be improving at a quick rate. My selfish side wants him to focus on basketball of course. I am sure cyclone fans love him trying to play 2 sports.

I'm a Cyclone fan and I couldn't care less if he tried to play one or two sports in college.
 

a lot of imaging, betting, and estimating got you to the conclusion that this kid is a 5 toll player in the professional ranks? OK.

Look, I am not saying he couldn't make it......I really do not know. My point is just that I will be shocked if he was to choose baseball over basketball all together....as in not even play basketball.

I am not "offended" by the OP ( not sure why that impression was taken), just pointing out that it was a pretty bad reach.
 
I'd be surprised if CM ever plays baseball. D1 baseball has very limited rosters now with the title 9 BS in place. Those spots are gold and it would be tough to reserve one for a guy not able to be around until April and hardly any fall work.
You have no clue about what you are posting.. There was a time when wrestling coaches tried to claim that their sport suffered because of money going to women's programs under Title IX. The data on financial support for athletes has been published over & over again, and conclusively shown that neither wrestling or baseball OR ANY other men's programs ANYWHERE were adversely affected by Title IX.

In the decade following the adoption of Title IX there was not ONE Division 1 member where the spending on men's programs decreased while the budgeting for women's athletics increased.

When I was a graduate student tutoring in the Iowa Athletic Dept in the glory years 1955-57 the only baseball players who got any significant financial aid were guys who were on football or basketball schollies. The kind of financial assistance that baseball, wrestlers, swimmers, etc got was phoney "counselors" jobs in the dorms or other "employment" by the university. The AD & U officials looked the other way at Coach Evy's under-the-table money, though everyone around the Fieldhouse knew about it (along with other scandals involving AD Paul Brechler).

The facts: almost all Division 1 schools pass on large sums of student fees to athletics----and the majority of students paying the fees are women. and until only recently this included Iowa (which has consistently operated its athletic programs with a profit & hasn't needed the fees---or the revenue from charging students for game tickets---always free until Fry and winning came in 1980); a constantly increasing number of athletes at Iowa---now about half----get financial aid from endowed scholarships (endowed by the millions donated by wealthy COUPLES---you know, the pairs that Republicans insist must be half women---who keep U of Iowa athletics in the top 10% of revenue in the entire Division 1. You might want to reflect a moment on the fact that Lucille Carver (of Carver-Hawkeye Arena) alone has and continues through the Carver Foundation to provide enough funding to underwrite the Hawekeye baseball program every year.

Title IX is not the reason why "minor" sports (in the bizarre manner that the NCAA finds the world's most popular sports like soccer/real football, baseball, track & field, tennis, hockey to be "minor" ones) can only be partially supported by scholarships. That is the decision of the NCAA (based on subservience to the major TV networks, ESPN, Comcast, Fox)----and any school not named Notre Dame, UNC, Ohio State. Michigan. UConn, Syracuse, Southern Cal, or Kentucky will get penalized for millions of dollars lost in consequence of overspending the limits placed on minor sports by the NCAA before Title IX was even proposed in the US Congress.

The only impact of Title IX is that almost two decades ago the NCAA decreed a 15% reduction in the numbers of FULL schollies in all men's programs (this was necessary to make it possible for expenditures on women's sports to make progress toward parity: NCAA Division 1 member schools were unwilling to allow schools to give less than a FULL schollie to ALL 100 football or 15 basketball players, but agreed to a 15% reduction in scholarship money to all men's programs. So blame belongs on football & basketball (i.e., the source of the hundreds of millions of dollars the NCAA gets---and partially divides---among member schools).

And if Title X still bugs you, I've got news for you: Hillary is about to become your worst nightmare.
 
I recall reading that of all the professional team sports, a minor league baseball player has the least chance statistically of ever appearing in a single major league game.
That is a meaningless statistic. It hugely distorts the true ratios because colleges & universities, even jucos, provide the minor leagues for all other sports but baseball, and in a limited, different manner hockey.

Professional basketball & football conduct their drafts from college players, mostly graduating seniors, or in basketball, from the entire world. In MLB's annual draft less than 10% are college seniors, and of those draft picks, virtually all of them are "fillers" (fillers are long shots to make the majors, but are needed to fill the 25 to 35 roster spots for 6 farm clubs for each of 30 organizations---plus one or two teams in the Dominican Republic for Latin players signed at ages 16 to 18, only about 20% of whom will make it as far as Florida or Arizona. There is a second reason for drafting college players who are not really "prospects"; they are the primary source of future scouts, coaches, managers in the drafting club's system).

The NBA has 2 rounds in its draft; the NFL has 7; MLB has 40---and that is a second reduction from 50, earlier 60 selections. Obviously, those numbers alone show why it is statistically more difficult to make the majors, but in raw numbers the NBA is toughest: about 100 selections of a total 1200 in the MLB eventually play in the Show; in the NBA less than half as many---about 50 rookies each year from 60 picks in the draft.

The meaningful comparison is to contrast the number of high school baseball players in the United States with the equivalent numbers in basketball and football (and ignore the many HS athletes who are multi-sport participants). Again, the ratio will be highest for basketball.

---And the widespread self-defeating dream among urban African-American youngsters of eventually playing hoops at the highest level is just one more obstacle in getting to that much more important dream of Dr Martin Luther King: the dream of a time when African-American young men will have equal opportunity and full awareness of what is needed to succeed. IMO perhaps the great disservice that higher education in America does to its poor & minorities is to seduce them with the circus of professionalized athletics instead of generous provision of the financial aid and supporting academic assistance to get to that even playing field for careers in the sciences and cultures where America has such urgent need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vbeachawk
You have no clue about what you are posting.. There was a time when wrestling coaches tried to claim that their sport suffered because of money going to women's programs under Title IX. The data on financial support for athletes has been published over & over again, and conclusively shown that neither wrestling or baseball OR ANY other men's programs ANYWHERE were adversely affected by Title IX.

In the decade following the adoption of Title IX there was not ONE Division 1 member where the spending on men's programs decreased while the budgeting for women's athletics increased.

When I was a graduate student tutoring in the Iowa Athletic Dept in the glory years 1955-57 the only baseball players who got any significant financial aid were guys who were on football or basketball schollies. The kind of financial assistance that baseball, wrestlers, swimmers, etc got was phoney "counselors" jobs in the dorms or other "employment" by the university. The AD & U officials looked the other way at Coach Evy's under-the-table money, though everyone around the Fieldhouse knew about it (along with other scandals involving AD Paul Brechler).

The facts: almost all Division 1 schools pass on large sums of student fees to athletics----and the majority of students paying the fees are women. and until only recently this included Iowa (which has consistently operated its athletic programs with a profit & hasn't needed the fees---or the revenue from charging students for game tickets---always free until Fry and winning came in 1980); a constantly increasing number of athletes at Iowa---now about half----get financial aid from endowed scholarships (endowed by the millions donated by wealthy COUPLES---you know, the pairs that Republicans insist must be half women---who keep U of Iowa athletics in the top 10% of revenue in the entire Division 1. You might want to reflect a moment on the fact that Lucille Carver (of Carver-Hawkeye Arena) alone has and continues through the Carver Foundation to provide enough funding to underwrite the Hawekeye baseball program every year.

Title IX is not the reason why "minor" sports (in the bizarre manner that the NCAA finds the world's most popular sports like soccer/real football, baseball, track & field, tennis, hockey to be "minor" ones) can only be partially supported by scholarships. That is the decision of the NCAA (based on subservience to the major TV networks, ESPN, Comcast, Fox)----and any school not named Notre Dame, UNC, Ohio State. Michigan. UConn, Syracuse, Southern Cal, or Kentucky will get penalized for millions of dollars lost in consequence of overspending the limits placed on minor sports by the NCAA before Title IX was even proposed in the US Congress.

The only impact of Title IX is that almost two decades ago the NCAA decreed a 15% reduction in the numbers of FULL schollies in all men's programs (this was necessary to make it possible for expenditures on women's sports to make progress toward parity: NCAA Division 1 member schools were unwilling to allow schools to give less than a FULL schollie to ALL 100 football or 15 basketball players, but agreed to a 15% reduction in scholarship money to all men's programs. So blame belongs on football & basketball (i.e., the source of the hundreds of millions of dollars the NCAA gets---and partially divides---among member schools).

And if Title X still bugs you, I've got news for you: Hillary is about to become your worst nightmare.
I was a d1 baseball coach when I was younger. Screw your BS.

I saw first hand what happens to men's programs like baseball. I watched as we fund raised several hundred thousand dollars for a new lighting system and turf and watched participation and roster limitations (not even talkingtalking about scholarships ) cut.

I then watch as softball had more scholarships than baseball and still had to hold open tryouts to fill those spots. Whereas we had close to 100 boys try out just to get an Opportunity to practice through fall and winter hoping to make the practice roster for the season. Many tried out 4 straight years. All that went away. Boys paying their own way were denied opportunitiea because if title ix.

I watched as softball demanded to have (for no effort on their own) all of the things we had built on our own. Not just the basics, the luxury items. The things we worked for in addition to the budget.

Using football roster #s in the formula is a joke.

I have a daughter that played basketball in college. So I am certainly glad she had opportunities but she understands that we cannot legislate equality in all situations. It's ridiculous.

So don't try to lecture me on your agenda BS.
 
You have no clue about what you are posting.. There was a time when wrestling coaches tried to claim that their sport suffered because of money going to women's programs under Title IX. The data on financial support for athletes has been published over & over again, and conclusively shown that neither wrestling or baseball OR ANY other men's programs ANYWHERE were adversely affected by Title IX.

In the decade following the adoption of Title IX there was not ONE Division 1 member where the spending on men's programs decreased while the budgeting for women's athletics increased.

When I was a graduate student tutoring in the Iowa Athletic Dept in the glory years 1955-57 the only baseball players who got any significant financial aid were guys who were on football or basketball schollies. The kind of financial assistance that baseball, wrestlers, swimmers, etc got was phoney "counselors" jobs in the dorms or other "employment" by the university. The AD & U officials looked the other way at Coach Evy's under-the-table money, though everyone around the Fieldhouse knew about it (along with other scandals involving AD Paul Brechler).

The facts: almost all Division 1 schools pass on large sums of student fees to athletics----and the majority of students paying the fees are women. and until only recently this included Iowa (which has consistently operated its athletic programs with a profit & hasn't needed the fees---or the revenue from charging students for game tickets---always free until Fry and winning came in 1980); a constantly increasing number of athletes at Iowa---now about half----get financial aid from endowed scholarships (endowed by the millions donated by wealthy COUPLES---you know, the pairs that Republicans insist must be half women---who keep U of Iowa athletics in the top 10% of revenue in the entire Division 1. You might want to reflect a moment on the fact that Lucille Carver (of Carver-Hawkeye Arena) alone has and continues through the Carver Foundation to provide enough funding to underwrite the Hawekeye baseball program every year.

Title IX is not the reason why "minor" sports (in the bizarre manner that the NCAA finds the world's most popular sports like soccer/real football, baseball, track & field, tennis, hockey to be "minor" ones) can only be partially supported by scholarships. That is the decision of the NCAA (based on subservience to the major TV networks, ESPN, Comcast, Fox)----and any school not named Notre Dame, UNC, Ohio State. Michigan. UConn, Syracuse, Southern Cal, or Kentucky will get penalized for millions of dollars lost in consequence of overspending the limits placed on minor sports by the NCAA before Title IX was even proposed in the US Congress.

The only impact of Title IX is that almost two decades ago the NCAA decreed a 15% reduction in the numbers of FULL schollies in all men's programs (this was necessary to make it possible for expenditures on women's sports to make progress toward parity: NCAA Division 1 member schools were unwilling to allow schools to give less than a FULL schollie to ALL 100 football or 15 basketball players, but agreed to a 15% reduction in scholarship money to all men's programs. So blame belongs on football & basketball (i.e., the source of the hundreds of millions of dollars the NCAA gets---and partially divides---among member schools).

And if Title X still bugs you, I've got news for you: Hillary is about to become your worst nightmare.

Apparently you are overlooking the mens programs that were CUT because of Title IX... That did not affect them adversely at all right?
 
ADVERTISEMENT