View Full Version : New Top 75 includes Reynolds

09-13-2010, 01:04 PM
With the Reds backing into the playoffs and the Bengal's with no pass rush I have found myself looking elsewhere for a sports fix. Nothing drives me crazy than having zero pass rush. Geathers is a joke. Odom a little better.

Slam Online has re-evaluated 2011 prospects based on Summer play and such and has Jalen Reynold way up and in the top 75. Not much info but it certainly bodes well for X with Wells and the transfer from Monmouth that is suppose to have a very high ceiling.

Also of note, no future watermelons in the mix. I thought they had the second best big man in Michigan.

Here is the link.


09-13-2010, 01:14 PM
Dee Davis is also in that class, and I'm more excited about him than any of the others. He just didn't spend much time on the AAU scene this summer, so he's not highly ranked. But I expect he'll be ridiculously good once he makes it to campus.

The 2010 class should be very good. The 2011 class will be amazing.

09-13-2010, 01:27 PM
Dee Davis will fly under the rader since he gave up the AAU circuit. I have to think he'll also be missing out on playing against some top-flight competition, though. But maybe he knows what he wants to work on already, and doesn't need to be under a microscope constantly.

09-13-2010, 01:39 PM
It has also been reported that Dee Davis has been playing against college players all summer. I think he's one of the few kids that doesn't care about rankings-just improving his game. Kind of a nice change to see a kid that isn't on an ego trip.

09-13-2010, 01:55 PM
I agree on Davis. He is suppose to real fast and his shot has developed since he committed per an interview in Hoopscoop. This was all that was keeping him from being rated higher. He now has a good three point shot with an improved release.

I still am confused about the fact that Dayton's big man (Percy) is not mentioned in the top 75. His uncle in law, who helps the trainer at his high school, said he was a real find. How could the talent evaluators miss this?