New ESPN rankings

[nkymuskie]

Mitch McGary drops from #2 to #21. Ouch.

Torian Graham drops from #38 to #83.

Ouch.

[UCGRAD4X]

ESPN just reclassified again and X moves back up to #14.

ESPN TOP25

It says that none of the recruits are top 100. Is that correct and how can we have the 14th ranked class with nobody in the top 100?

[xu15]

It says that none of the recruits are top 100. Is that correct and how can we have the 14th ranked class with nobody in the top 100?

Three of them are post grads (don't get included in that 100), but are still two 4 stars and a 3 star. Davis is a 4 star and is just outside that top 100 (he is graded a 92, which is the same grade as the last 15 or so players in the top 100).

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Go to scout, they include everyone and from what I hear on other boards they are a lot more accurate.

[Masterofreality]

I really don't give a crap.

Rankings are made by guys who A) Either are failed coaches- for a reason. B) Guys who have somehow made themselves into "experts" by spending their entire lives in gyms watching undisciplined AAU basketball and writing about it. They never coached, probably never played, never go to watch a kid's practice with a real team and somehow, because they write a lot, got some gig with ESPN, Scout or Rivals. 90% of this stuff is BS and based upon a kid's raw physique and "athleticsm". Basketball IQ is way down the list.

I prefer, as winning coaches do, to watch kids play, not only in real HS games, but also in practice to see what the kid's practice habits are. You see a lot beyond the flash and statistics. How do they handle adversity? How do they react in crunch time? How do they interact with their coach? How do they react when the coach challenges them? Do they sell out on defense? Do they box out, share the ball, take charges, compete on the boards and read the defense?

Want an example? Aaric Murray is the poster boy. Top 10 recruit to LaSuck. Was a team wrecker and only wanted to shoot 3's. Left. LaSuck is way better without him.

Screw the rankings.

[UCGRAD4X]

Screw the rankings.

1. I try to take all of this with a huge block of salt...but I can't help myself.

2. True, it seems like there are as many unranked players who do well and highly rated busts.

3. In general, players are (pretty much) complete unknowns until they contribute in a regular season D1 game.

4. 'Fit' is as important, maybe more so at X, as talent...but talent sure helps.

5. ESPN is only reliable to report what is in their best interest to report. It is a business, after all.

That being said, what is a reasonably reliable source for this information about recruits?

[Juice]

I really don't give a crap.

Rankings are made by guys who A) Either are failed coaches- for a reason. B) Guys who have somehow made themselves into "experts" by spending their entire lives in gyms watching undisciplined AAU basketball and writing about it. They never coached, probably never played, never go to watch a kid's practice with a real team and somehow, because they write a lot, got some gig with ESPN, Scout or Rivals. 90% of this stuff is BS and based upon a kid's raw physique and "athleticsm". Basketball IQ is way down the list.

I prefer, as winning coaches do, to watch kids play, not only in real HS games, but also in practice to see what the kid's practice habits are. You see a lot beyond the flash and statistics. How do they handle adversity? How do they react in crunch time? How do they interact with their coach? How do they react when the coach challenges them? Do they sell out on defense? Do they box out, share the ball, take charges, compete on the boards and read the defense?

Want an example? Aaric Murray is the poster boy. Top 10 recruit to LaSuck. Was a team wrecker and only wanted to shoot 3's. Left. LaSuck is way better without him.

Screw the rankings.

I share some of your views but the guys from those sites do go to a ton of normal high school games, not simply the AAU games.

[Masterofreality]

I share some of your views but the guys from those sites do go to a ton of normal high school games, not simply the AAU games.

However, the primary time when these "rankings" are developed is at AAU tournaments in the spring and summer. That is where all the kids are at one time so the "experts" see a bunch of them at once- and most of the time they see them only 3 or 4 times.

When the high school season starts, all the players are spread out all over the country, so most of these guys only go to the games where their "Top Ranked" players are playing, so perpetuating their tunnell vision.

[MADXSTER]

Sometimes it's hard to judge kids when they play HS ball. A kid can be very dominating but playing inferior talent. That is why the AAU games are so important for judging purposes. It's not an exact science.

A lot of these kids fall under the radar because they don't play AAU like Anthony Davis. From obscurity to top 5 recruit.

[Masterofreality]

A lot of these kids fall under the radar because they don't play AAU like Anthony Davis. From obscurity to top 5 recruit.

Thus proving my point.