http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/recruiting/tracker/espnu100
Final ESPN poll out and we don't crack the top 75. Maymon with a big drop to the mid-70s. ESPN seems to be the least kind to our recruits this year out of all of the services.
One other thing to point out though is that Indiana only has 2 recruits in the top 100, even though Tom Crean went there so he could recruit better players. 2 top 100 recruits with 5 starting jobs available does not seem too good to me. I'd say Buzz did better with having 4 starting spots open and getting 3 top 100 recruits.
You mean ESPN did not rank any MU recruit on their Top 75, not that MU's overall total class ranking is in Top 75.
Do not fret, ESPN's recruit ranking service is for the dogs. Rely on Scouts, Rivals,etc.
what did espn say about the three amigos class four years ago versus the other services?
good thing we've got the Juco's coming in.
but, seriously, with 3 top 100 players and some highly rated transfers coming in I really like our incoming group.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on April 14, 2009, 09:22:34 AM
what did espn say about the three amigos class four years ago versus the other services?
They weren't doing rankings 4 years ago. Their first class was 2007.
Quote from: HoopsMalone on April 14, 2009, 09:15:18 AM
http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/recruiting/tracker/espnu100
Final ESPN poll out and we don't crack the top 75. Maymon with a big drop to the mid-70s. ESPN seems to be the least kind to our recruits this year out of all of the services.
Not really a big drop for Maymon in this one, the big drop occurred a few months ago and it had nothing to do with his or anyone elses play on the court.
He and the other MU recruits were ranked highly when ESPN's ranking was done by the well respected Bob Gibbons who has been doing this for 20+ years. Gibbons left ESPN in the late summer and was replaced by a couple of guys that have not done rankings before, and a former NBA scout. Suffice to say they are looking at different things.
If you take a look at Gibbons new rankings separate from ESPN, you'll see how highly he thinks of this group.
#42 Junior Cadougan
#44 Jerrone Maymon
#83 Erik Williams
http://www.bobgibbons.net/index.php?/weblog/article/class_of_2009_top_150_introduction/
Quote from: bma725 on April 14, 2009, 09:47:07 AM
Gibbons left ESPN in the late summer and was replaced by a couple of guys that have not done rankings before, and a former NBA scout. Suffice to say they are looking at different things.
I was driving home from work the other afternoon and the sports talk dj was talking about the recruiting services. He mentioned Rivals, Scouts.com and he mentioned ESPN now had Scouts, Inc (I think) as the recruiting service they use. He said not to confuse the two "Scouts" because they were two different companies. Is this correct? Thanks!
is there any site/group that does the rankings for recruits and includes JUCO transfers?
QuoteThey weren't doing rankings 4 years ago. Their first class was 2007.
Sounds reliable....
Quote from: mu77vegas on April 14, 2009, 11:40:07 AM
I was driving home from work the other afternoon and the sports talk dj was talking about the recruiting services. He mentioned Rivals, Scouts.com and he mentioned ESPN now had Scouts, Inc (I think) as the recruiting service they use. He said not to confuse the two "Scouts" because they were two different companies. Is this correct? Thanks!
Yep. Scout.com is a part of the FoxSports network and was originally known as The Insiders. Their rankings for basketball are done by Dave Telep and Evan Daniels with minor input from Greg Hicks(for west coast kids) and Eric Bossi(for god knows what).
Scouts Inc started as a football scouting service that ESPN began using to break down college and NFL games. In 2005 they expanded that to include college football recruiting and in 2007 they expanded it to basketball recruiting. Originally the rankings were done by Bob Gibbons(of the All Star Report and HoopMasters) and Joel Fransisco(HoopScoop).
But Gibbons has left Scouts Inc, and they've got sort of a weird combination of former college coaches(Paul Biancardi, Reggie Rankin) former NBA Scouts(Antonio Williams), and the left overs from the recruiting service that was run by SchoolSports/Rise Magazine which ESPN purchased in 2008.
Quote from: socrplar125 on April 14, 2009, 11:55:51 AM
is there any site/group that does the rankings for recruits and includes JUCO transfers?
Not really.
Rivals has JUCO Junction which does rankings solely for JUCO players but does not group them with high school players. You can find the rankings here. http://jucojunction.rivals.com/viewrank.asp?ra_key=2309
HoopScoop doesn't publish it, but when they do their rankings of the best recruiting classes, they lump all players in the incoming group together regardless of whether they are high school, prep school, 1 year JUCO, 1 year JUCO or foreign players. They then break down the players into levels, like 1-5, 6-10, 11-40, 41-70, 71-100, 101-300, and 300+. Unfortunately they only tell you what level a player is on, not their specific rank.
HoopScoop has Marquette's 2009 class (including JUCOs) ranked 2nd behind North Carolina. Indiana is fifth.
JucoJunction doesn't list Johnson-Odom in their list. That seems kind of strange given that he was a 1st team all american. Is this list only for guys they thought were leaving JC after the normal 2 years?
By the way how many first team JC all americans are there? Is it just 5?
Quote from: RaleighWarrior on April 14, 2009, 12:23:44 PM
HoopScoop has Marquette's 2009 class (including JUCOs) ranked 2nd behind North Carolina. Indiana is fifth.
I know that they are different services, but how do you have no recruits over 75 but have a number two ranked class? I'm truly ignorant of how that can happen, I'm just asking.
Wouldn't we need 3-4-5 top 15, 20 recruits to be ranked second??
Quote from: NotAnAlum on April 14, 2009, 12:46:24 PM
JucoJunction doesn't list Johnson-Odom in their list. That seems kind of strange given that he was a 1st team all american. Is this list only for guys they thought were leaving JC after the normal 2 years?
By the way how many first team JC all americans are there? Is it just 5?
Take a look at the date on the JUCO Junction link. That list was update in the fall of 2008. At that time Johnson Odom had yet to play a JUCO game and was thought of as a class of 2010 product when this list is for 2009.
Quote from: warrior07 on April 14, 2009, 12:54:50 PM
I know that they are different services, but how do you have no recruits over 75 but have a number two ranked class? I'm truly ignorant of how that can happen, I'm just asking.
Wouldn't we need 3-4-5 top 15, 20 recruits to be ranked second??
well that's the thing, while espn has them ranked 75+, hoopscoop has cadougan, buycks, Williams AND Maymon all ranked in the 11-40 range. Roseboro is ranked in teh 101-300 range, and they haven't updated since we added DJO.
Quote from: warrior07 on April 14, 2009, 12:54:50 PM
I know that they are different services, but how do you have no recruits over 75 but have a number two ranked class? I'm truly ignorant of how that can happen, I'm just asking.
Wouldn't we need 3-4-5 top 15, 20 recruits to be ranked second??
Think about what you are saying for a second. You're asking how we can have the #2 class on HoopScoop, when the ESPN rankings don't have anyone inside the top 75. Wouldn't you think that since HoopScoop is ranking classes they would have their own individual ranks as well that just might be different than what ESPN has?
The fact that ESPN's ranking has all of them outside of the top 75 is irrelevant to the HoopScoop ranking because they do their own and they think these recruits are much better than ESPN does.
According to HoopScoop, Junior Cadougan is the #12 HS player in the country, Erik Williams is the #14 HS player in the country, and Jerrone Maymon is the #23 HS player. When you look at their combined ranking, Williams, Cadougan, Buycks and Maymon are all among the top 40 players in the class and DJO is among the top 100.
Quote from: dwaderoy2004 on April 14, 2009, 01:00:39 PM
well that's the thing, while espn has them ranked 75+, hoopscoop has cadougan, buycks, Williams AND Maymon all ranked in the 11-40 range. Roseboro is ranked in teh 101-300 range, and they haven't updated since we added DJO.
They have updated it. DJO is ranked in the 71-100 range. That gives MU enough points to tie UNC for the #1 overall class but UNC wins the tie breaker of points per player.
http://www.hoopscooponline.com/members/toprecruitingclasses-classof2009.asp
Quote from: bma725 on April 14, 2009, 01:05:58 PM
Think about what you are saying for a second. You're asking how we can have the #2 class on HoopScoop, when the ESPN rankings don't have anyone inside the top 75. Wouldn't you think that since HoopScoop is ranking classes they would have their own individual ranks as well that just might be different than what ESPN has?
Uhhhhh ... that was my point of stating that they are two different rankings ...
Quote
According to HoopScoop, Junior Cadougan is the #12 HS player in the country, Erik Williams is the #14 HS player in the country, and Jerrone Maymon is the #23 HS player. When you look at their combined ranking, Williams, Cadougan, Buycks and Maymon are all among the top 40 players in the class and DJO is among the top 100.
Even with those numbers, it's surprising that they average out to the second ranked group of incoming recruits in the country.
Quote from: warrior07 on April 14, 2009, 01:08:55 PM
Uhhhhh ... that was my point of stating that they are two different rankings ...
Even with those numbers, it's surprising that they average out to the second ranked group of incoming recruits in the country.
Take a look at the link I posted before. HoopScoop doesn't do averages, they do totals. They are more interested in the cumulative amount of talent coming into a program in a given year than the individual talents of the players.
MU has 39 total points for it's incoming recruits which ties it with UNC. But MU has an average talent rating of 6.5 per player which is behind UNC, Villanova, Illinois, Texas, Florida, Duke, and Florida State.
Quote from: bma725 on April 14, 2009, 12:17:32 PM
Not really.
They then break down the players into levels, like 1-5, 6-10, 11-40, 41-70, 71-100, 101-300, and 300+. Unfortunately they only tell you what level a player is on, not their specific rank.
I've never really followed the numbers in recruiting, but this seems like a pretty good way to evaluate classes. I mean, is there really a noticeable difference between the #20 player and the #40? There probably are some slight differences, but it's hard to see the small stuff when these kids play in all different leagues and tournaments.
Sounds like Buzz has brought in a nice class. I'm optimistic.
Now, what will really impress me is if Buzz can follow this class up with some more talented kids and still keep all of the players happy with their roles/playing time. I hate to bring in a bunch of talented guys who ultimately end up unhappy with the role play. I'm not saying that's going to happen, or that I doubt the head coach. I'm just thinking that it
could happen.
Quote from: 2002mualum on April 14, 2009, 01:31:34 PM
Now, what will really impress me is if Buzz can follow this class up with some more talented kids and still keep all of the players happy with their roles/playing time. I hate to bring in a bunch of talented guys who ultimately end up unhappy with the role play. I'm not saying that's going to happen, or that I doubt the head coach. I'm just thinking that it could happen.
FWIW, HoopScoop currently has MU's 2010 class at #14. Clark is listed in the 11-40 range which is not surprising at all considering that they had him at #43 when he was coming out of high school. Bowen is in the 101-300 range.
These rankings should be discredited by the fact that Jamil Wilson magically jumped Maymon by a mile. Please refer to the 2009 Wisconsin State Championship a more accurate comparison of skill.
Over the years hoops scoop has taken a ton of heat by people saying they dont like there scoring system, that is of the way they 'score" individual recruits. They give a 10 to like the top 10 recruits and then a 9 I beleive to like 10-20 and then a 8 to 21-40. And a 6 to a 41-100. i may be off on that but i think i am pretty close as I followed clark francis for along time partly becuase I actually wholheartedly agree with his system.
Alot of people complain that the 58th rated players gets a 6 while the 8th rated player gets a 10 and the affect that has on the rankings. i actually disagree, I think there should be a alarge disparity dont you think that over the years a greg oden, or a kevin Durant, or a Blake griffin, or a Carmelo anthony are way way way beter players and amke a much more signifcant impactthat a guy like a Steve Novak, travis diener or a Wes MAtthews. some system call one a 5 and the other a 4 a 20% difference hoopscoop would call one a 6 and the other a 10 a 40% difference. I agree and believe those top players make a big time difference. along those same lines I would take a top 20-30 player over a top 100 player any day and think there should be some disparity while on other services there is no difference 25-30 thru 100 or 125 is a 4 star period. i think that is off there is a differnce in most cases a big difference between a top 30 type player ala aDominic James, johnny Flynn, Scotty reynolds, Evan turner, etc over a kid how is rated in the 100 range.
just my take i know hoopscoop takes a bunch of heat for giving so mant points to the elite players but I think it is warranted, and more accurate.
also i like the averge class score, but I dont like his cumulative #. some years schools sign crappy classes but need 8 new kids and have a big cumulative score but no quality. I actaully like to rank the classes by the average score. would you rather have a class of 4 kids that receive an 8 score for a 32 or 8 kids that are rated a 4. In Mu's case we have abig class but a big time avergae to boot. Hence the 31 ranking with UNC. i sure hope Clark is right on his rnaking of Mu players, i will say this he had them extremely highly rated before they ever signed with Mu and that is different than many services where a guy will leap 50-100 spots if the sign with a Duke or Ucla, etc.
Quote from: bma725 on April 14, 2009, 01:37:38 PM
FWIW, HoopScoop currently has MU's 2010 class at #14. Clark is listed in the 11-40 range which is not surprising at all considering that they had him at #43 when he was coming out of high school. Bowen is in the 101-300 range.
I like the sounds of that.
I love the volume of talent coming in. The next hurdle is developing the talent and getting guys to buy into their roles.
Hopefully Buzz can create enough basketballs and minutes to keep everybody happy. I'm not trying to be a Debbie Downer, it's just something I've been thinking about every time I see Buzz add another talented guy.
I'm very hopeful.
I take it back, there is one more service that lumps JUCO players in with HS and Prep players...ESPN. They don't do a ranking, but you can sort all players based on grade, and that will put everyone together. When done that way, Buycks is #45 in the class, Cadougan is #91, Maymon is #96, and Williams is #113.
The problem comes in how they differentiate between players with the same grade. For example, Buycks is given a grade of 94. That means he could be anywhere from #39 to #51. Cadougan has a grade of 92. That means he could be anywhere from #69 to #93. Maymon and Williams both have grades of 91. That means either one of them could be anywhere from #94 to #121. No explanation is given on how they break ties between players with the same grade, so it's a little tough to buy into the notion that one guy is 20+ spots better than another with the exact same grade.
http://tinyurl.com/dlmab8
One more interesting note, just to show you how inexact these rankings can be. Take a look at Latavious Williams. Rivals has him as the #13 player in the country. HoopMasters has him at #39. USA Today has him at #79. PrepStars has him at #90. Scout and HoopScoop leave post grads out of their ranking, but would definitely have him in the top 100 if not the top half of the top 100.
ESPN on the other hand rates him as the 141st best player in the class of 2009.
Quote from: bma725 on April 14, 2009, 04:57:04 PM
One more interesting note, just to show you how inexact these rankings can be.
This discussion reminded me of an article written by Las Vegas R-J columnist Ed Graney on 12-03-08. I think it correctly addresses two things: 1) the fact that recruiting is not an exact science; and 2) recruiting big men is even more of a crapshoot. When UNLV signed seven footer Beas Hamga one headline proclaimed the Rebels had "Hit the Recruiting Jackpot". Hamga never developed his skills at UNLV and ended up transferring to Valparaiso during this past season. For some perspective: In the 2007 class he was rated by Rivals as #26 overall (3 spots behind Blake Griffin of Oklahoma!) and was ranked the #5 center (ahead of Cole Aldrich of Kansas!).
http://www.lvrj.com/sports/36099664.html
ED GRANEY: Hamga proves star rankings guarantee nothingLon Kruger was a no-star. All he turned out to be was one of the finest basketball players in Kansas State history. Lew Hill was a no-star. All he did was win a national junior college championship and become an All-Missouri Valley Conference player at Wichita State. Rene Rougeau was a no-star. All he can boast about is being the best all-around player on UNLV's roster today.
"They didn't have stars when I was playing," Kruger said.
Back then, stars were left to those who have use for them: Astronomers.
Things have changed for the worse.
Beas Hamga today is a confused 20-year-old searching for a new home. He's also a flawless example of how suspect rankings and overzealous expectations can lead to hasty decisions.
He is the poster boy for hype gone unrealized. He is one of many before and to come in college basketball.
Hamga was granted his release from the Rebels on Friday and now will look for playing time elsewhere, although what he assumes will be greener pastures has every chance of offering the same level of disenchantment he felt here.
He hasn't come close to proving he's near the player prep rankings advertised him to be, which speaks to a much larger problem than his frustration sitting the bench.
Simply, such rankings are more often than not absurd.
Internet sites and others who rank high school players serve a purpose, just not a legitimate one. They are an enjoyable hobby for fans, but anyone who accepts such evaluations as a definite gauge of long-term potential either works for those offering the ranking or is in desperate need of a life.
So few prospects are such obvious can't-miss greats, my 7-year-old daughter could rank them. Even she would have been OK with LeBron James getting five stars.
It's just the hundreds of others people guess at.
By one service Hamga was ranked as the nation's fifth-best center and its 26th-best player overall when arriving at UNLV. We now know how preposterous those claims were. It's not the first or even the 1,000th time.
The lunacy begins with a subjective number of stars being assigned to a player by someone who might watch the kid just a few times (if that) and often has questionable relationships with AAU coaches pushing players for their own benefit.
It continues with college coaches hyping the player once signed, with media relations officials writing releases and media guide bios highlighting such rankings, and with the media falling in line by repeating the same glowing information. We're part of the problem. We are guilty of feeding the beast like everyone else.
"You have to accept that's part of it and move on," said Hill, a fifth-year assistant under Kruger. "All of that stuff is part of the business now. ... But nobody seems to have patience -- (not) the kid's people (or) the kid himself. Look at the background of our program. Rene. Joel (Anthony). Gaston (Essengue). Joe (Darger). The only really good one right off the bat was Wink (Adams).
"Those other guys stayed and worked and developed and had patience. I think (Hamga) was going to be a good player for us, just not this year."
Did UNLV coaches miss on him as a recruit? We won't know until Hamga's career plays out, whenever and wherever that is. But this is certain: If you're near 7 feet on a team with little inside game -- or at least none that would worry good opponents -- and you can't get off the bench, you're at least a year or two from being able to contribute much at this level.
There's nothing wrong with that. Hamga is a redshirt freshman. He had time to grow and mature and add weight and eventually see more time.
But that's not the instant-gratification world we live in, and whether it was Hamga or those who advise him or both, the burden of living up to impractical expectations or believing ones that they wrongly bought into, the choice was made to leave.
I'm sure UNLV wanted him to stay, that Kruger wasn't at all forthcoming on a local radio show Thursday when asked about Hamga because he perhaps thought there was a way to salvage the situation. At least I'd like to believe it. You never really know. Coaches want more than anything to win. It's contained in their DNA.
I'm sure of this: The beast yet again proves itself as reliable as bald tires.
"Not being part of any of those (prep rankings) or having any stars by my name helped me a lot," Rougeau said. "There weren't any expectations of me out of high school, which allowed me to come in and work hard and get better. I'm still trying to prove myself each day.
"But you can either make it at this level or you can't. You have to understand not everyone is going to come in and play right away. I'm sorry Beas had to leave. He's a friend. I wish him the best. I hope it's the right move. But you have to either learn patience or move on.
"Five stars are nice for the fans to talk about, but you still have to prove you can play."
Maybe we should leave all the rankings to Rougeau. Let's hear it for a return to the time when reality trumped propaganda.
Leave the stars to the guys with telescopes.
Quote from: packermania on April 14, 2009, 02:00:37 PM
These rankings should be discredited by the fact that Jamil Wilson magically jumped Maymon by a mile. Please refer to the 2009 Wisconsin State Championship a more accurate comparison of skill.
Right because one game means everything.
Lets also take into account that that Memorial had probably 3 NCAA level players on their team (Maymon, Blue, and Lomomba... start recruiting him NOW Buzz), while Wilson was alone... And then take into account that Wilson had 4 fouls most of the second half and couldn't really play defense.
Maybe watch the game before spouting off rather ignorant comments.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on April 15, 2009, 09:38:15 AM
Right because one game means everything.
Lets also take into account that that Memorial had probably 3 NCAA level players on their team (Maymon, Blue, and Lomomba... start recruiting him NOW Buzz), while Wilson was alone... And then take into account that Wilson had 4 fouls most of the second half and couldn't really play defense.
Maybe watch the game before spouting off rather ignorant comments.
4 NCAA players. Tre Creamer had D1 offers and as of a month ago was planning on committing to Baylor.
http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/sports/443757