Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just calm down and wait a few years.

Yes, I’m asking when it evens out and it’s not such a noticeable size gap .

Around 15/16

Anonymous wrote:My son played at a close in HS and played travel, rec, Legion, Babe Ruth etc. The best player I ever saw him play with was a 5 ft 7, 130lb kid he'd known since middle school.

That kid never made the HS team despite being the literally the best player I'd ever seen in the community.

99% of most coaches are morons.

I actually know several shorter boys (5’5”-5’7”) who play on large classification high school teams. One is even a freshman on varsity (the only freshman to make varsity in years)- and he is maybe 5’5”. All of them are strong, muscular, kind of stocky kids though (like 150lbs or more). We know a 14yo kid who is 5’7” and throwing mid 80s.

I think a lot of times with baseball it is strength/bulk (and speed) rather than height, TBH. With the exception of pitching.

OP, if your kid is in the 95% for height, they're certainly not short. They're statistically taller than 19 out of every 20 boys their age. But that doesn't put them in the "whoa, they're tall category. The CDC says between 5 and 95% is "normal stature". Which, as a 6'2" man, I agree with - I never feel short, but I rarely feel tall.

My son, however, is 11yo and 5'10". He's literally off the charts. We'll see where he ultimately lands, but for now he is a freaking giant among his peers.

That said, as others have indicated, that doesn't equate to value as a player. In basketball, he's mid-pack in the value he brings to the team, while some of the smaller kids are just tremendous players. That may change over time, too, but I wouldn't sweat it in the meantime. Everybody is right height.

The red shirting thing is annoying and should be banned. Especially when's the old fashioned held back, dumb players. Kids need to play in their own age groups.

That being said. I can see how it gets to be sort of an issue even amongst the same age groups. IMO if he can make the teams, it's a long-term advantage at least in basketball. Eventually 99.99% you will have to play against people taller much much taller. You'll also need to acquire the skills that shorter players typically need to acquire.

Though on that point. IMO I don't think people give taller players the credit they deserve for the skills they do acquire. Again in basketball, taller/bigger players can start younger learning to shoot and pass. Especially, amongst girls this is a huge advantage in acquiring skills. Smaller players literally can't hit the rim, so can't acquire the skills. I mean Basketballl is a skills sport. I think there is a rough patch when kids are growing alot, or if taller haven't finished developing where they have trouble with skills, but when they get the coordination and speed. It's all over. If you watch smaller players they bounce the ball way way too much and often times don't have the shooting passing skills.

My son played at a close in HS and played travel, rec, Legion, Babe Ruth etc. The best player I ever saw him play with was a 5 ft 7, 130lb kid he'd known since middle school.

That kid never made the HS team despite being the literally the best player I'd ever seen in the community.

99% of most coaches are morons.

Anonymous wrote:According to the CDC calculator, a 10 year old boy who weighs 85lbs is in the 82nd percentile for weight.

Not tiny at all.

That being said, larger kids, and kids who are expected to be big (large parents) tend to gravitate towards certain sports. Leading to a very skewed perspective of what is “average size” by many coaches or parents who are in those circles. Particularly on higher level teams.

Being young for grade or for sports cutoff obviously really does not help.

Yes and he’s actually 9. It’s in the 80 something percentile. Not small. The high weights seem to be celebrated in youth sports though so it may be small compared to 115-150 lbs but that is generally high for 9-11.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Size doesn’t “start to even out” (as much as it is ever going to) until boys are around 16. And still, there will be some who have a lot of growing to do, still.

Size at age 10 means very little. Size at age 13 means even less.

This will be going on for years and years, in other words- so get used to it. And for all of those years- yes, larger and stronger (and earlier to puberty) boys will have the upper hand in some sports.

Your son can only control what he can. He may not be able to do much to get bigger or stronger just yet, but he can work on things like speed, agility, attitude, skills. In a few years he can begin to work on things like diet, strength etc.

And don’t ever let him hear you talking about his size, making excuses (but those boys are older/bigger etc- no fair). It will be harmful to his attitude and work ethic.

And at age 10- the main purpose of sports should still be to have fun.

Signed, parent of late blooming sons who has dealt with this for years.

What crazy world do you live in where you think size in sports for boys doesn’t matter at 10 and even less at 13?

Op don’t listen to this poster. Size always matters in team sports for boys. Particularly at this age! My short boys were really good in sports up until around age 10/11. I was always realistic that once kids start going through puberty they would be sized out if most sports. They had fun and had a good run playing all star baseball, club soccer, point guard in basketball teams. They were old for their grades which helped as well.

I always had them in individual sports as well which has been helpful in high school.

OP no one cares that your kid is young for his grade. There is no young for the grade division. Your kid is still 9 and there are probably kids who just turned 11 entering 5th.

Go back. Read again. More slowly this time.

Anonymous wrote:Size doesn’t “start to even out” (as much as it is ever going to) until boys are around 16. And still, there will be some who have a lot of growing to do, still.

Size at age 10 means very little. Size at age 13 means even less.

This will be going on for years and years, in other words- so get used to it. And for all of those years- yes, larger and stronger (and earlier to puberty) boys will have the upper hand in some sports.

Your son can only control what he can. He may not be able to do much to get bigger or stronger just yet, but he can work on things like speed, agility, attitude, skills. In a few years he can begin to work on things like diet, strength etc.

And don’t ever let him hear you talking about his size, making excuses (but those boys are older/bigger etc- no fair). It will be harmful to his attitude and work ethic.

And at age 10- the main purpose of sports should still be to have fun.

Signed, parent of late blooming sons who has dealt with this for years.

What crazy world do you live in where you think size in sports for boys doesn’t matter at 10 and even less at 13?

Op don’t listen to this poster. Size always matters in team sports for boys. Particularly at this age! My short boys were really good in sports up until around age 10/11. I was always realistic that once kids start going through puberty they would be sized out if most sports. They had fun and had a good run playing all star baseball, club soccer, point guard in basketball teams. They were old for their grades which helped as well.

I always had them in individual sports as well which has been helpful in high school.

OP no one cares that your kid is young for his grade. There is no young for the grade division. Your kid is still 9 and there are probably kids who just turned 11 entering 5th.

Size doesn’t “start to even out” (as much as it is ever going to) until boys are around 16. And still, there will be some who have a lot of growing to do, still.

Size at age 10 means very little. Size at age 13 means even less.

This will be going on for years and years, in other words- so get used to it. And for all of those years- yes, larger and stronger (and earlier to puberty) boys will have the upper hand in some sports.

Your son can only control what he can. He may not be able to do much to get bigger or stronger just yet, but he can work on things like speed, agility, attitude, skills. In a few years he can begin to work on things like diet, strength etc.

And don’t ever let him hear you talking about his size, making excuses (but those boys are older/bigger etc- no fair). It will be harmful to his attitude and work ethic.

And at age 10- the main purpose of sports should still be to have fun.

Signed, parent of late blooming sons who has dealt with this for years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just calm down and wait a few years.

Yes, I’m asking when it evens out and it’s not such a noticeable size gap .

Except you picked one of the schools where all the boys redshirt so it may not even out until you reach the age when they stop growing.

Anonymous wrote:I would not be shy in the slightest to tell them all exactly what you said: “actually, he’s 95th percentile for height but unfortunately it looks like everyone here made their boys start school a year late.”

Im a previous poster with a boy finishing 4th grade, August birthday, about to turn 10 and he is 105 lbs. So if my son were on the same team, he would be both bigger and younger. I mention it because that statement of holding your kid back doesn't matter as much as I think OP wants it to matter. Kids of all ages are both bigger and smaller than her son, this is normal. Blaming parents for their school choice is not normal.

Anonymous wrote:Aren't sports teams usually organized by age? My kids never played on teams with kids who were 2 years older-- though my May baby was often 10 months younger than others. Redshirting can't be an issue unless the team is organized by grade level. Unless people are "redshirting" by lying about their kids' age lol.

Yes many sports are by grade. Especially basketball at private schools they have a 4th/5th grade boys team foe example. Lacrosse and flag football usually do bands of grades too.

Soccer and baseball tend to be birth year, so your team is typically mixed with early year of one grade and late year of another.

Aren't sports teams usually organized by age? My kids never played on teams with kids who were 2 years older-- though my May baby was often 10 months younger than others. Redshirting can't be an issue unless the team is organized by grade level. Unless people are "redshirting" by lying about their kids' age lol.

Anonymous wrote:We are in upper elementary and dealing with some size bias- have heard from multiple coaches, parents and even kids “he’s really good but tiny” He’s in the 95 percentile for height, but he goes to a private school most of the boys are redshirted and he’s turning 10 in July. He’s 85 lbs and incoming 5th grade so not small by any means but small in his peer group because many are 11 already. Has anyone dealt with this? I don’t want him to get passed up for these and it feels like he has to show up and have better skills because he’s small compared to most of the kids. When does this start to even out and not matter? These are in team sports that size matters later and there is a general preference for bigger kids now.

Not sure what the age cutoffs are, but with a July birthday your kid is always going to be one of the youngest kids even if everyone is on grade level with their age. For schools with a September 1 cutoff, kids in his class will be 10+ months older than him without redshirting. So in June to say that some of the kids are 11 when your July birthday boy is 10 is not indicative of redshirting.

According to the CDC calculator, a 10 year old boy who weighs 85lbs is in the 82nd percentile for weight.

Not tiny at all.

That being said, larger kids, and kids who are expected to be big (large parents) tend to gravitate towards certain sports. Leading to a very skewed perspective of what is “average size” by many coaches or parents who are in those circles. Particularly on higher level teams.

Being young for grade or for sports cutoff obviously really does not help.