2012-13 Preseason Top 20

[CamrnCrz1974]

I agree, Cam. I wonder why that is? Now enough staff to fully analyize the players?

Everyone missed on Beard. Do you know if the story out of Knuttsville is true that they lost a tape that Beard sent them and didn't recruit her?

ESPN also had Stokes at 41. Missed on that one too.

ASGR had Banks at #13, which seems high.

As far as misses go, we all need to remember that the rankings reflect where players are with some allowance for potential. No one can predict how a player will respond to a particular coach. Also, we are using analysis at the end of a freshman season to question a ranking from early in the player's senior year, maybe even the summer before the senior year depending on the service.

As for Beard, I have never heard anything other than the Tennessee staff lost the tape. And while Beard did not play a ton of AAU events, she was at the Deep South Classic. I cannot imagine that Tennessee did not have a coach in attendance who would have seen her. Chris Dailey is on the record as having seen Beard but that "the rumor in the recruiting world" was that Beard wanted to stay close to home, so Dailey did not pursue her.

As for discrepancies in rankings, I think it is a combination of staff/resources (e.g., having enough personnel to evaluate a player several times), shoe contracts (ASGR is affiliated with Adidas, Blue Star is affiliated with Nike), different sets of evaluation criteria, and different opinions. I also think the people who evaluate men's players generally have more experience.

 

[doggydaddy]

ASGR had Banks at #13, which seems high.

As far as misses go, we all need to remember that the rankings reflect where players are with some allowance for potential. No one can predict how a player will respond to a particular coach. Also, we are using analysis at the end of a freshman season to question a ranking from early in the player's senior year, maybe even the summer before the senior year depending on the service.

As for Beard, I have never heard anything other than the Tennessee staff lost the tape. And while Beard did not play a ton of AAU events, she was at the Deep South Classic. I cannot imagine that Tennessee did not have a coach in attendance who would have seen her. Chris Dailey is on the record as having seen Beard but that "the rumor in the recruiting world" was that Beard wanted to stay close to home, so Dailey did not pursue her.

As for discrepancies in rankings, I think it is a combination of staff/resources (e.g., having enough personnel to evaluate a player several times), shoe contracts (ASGR is affiliated with Adidas, Blue Star is affiliated with Nike), different sets of evaluation criteria, and different opinions. I also think the people who evaluate men's players generally have more experience.

THanks Cam. Great response.

 

[jsloanjr]

Lets see what happens this summer with injuries........I hope not, but something always comes up playing too many games year around...Most players need to take the summer off from games and work on their skills......#1 Court and game management, 2, shooting with either hand, 3, get much stronger and improve your speed with and W/O the ball, 4, Get needed rest and have fun!!

 

[Scotter]

I also think the ranking methodology is a lot more clearer on the men's side because on the men's side you are clearly ranking players at the top based on the assumption they have the potential to go pro after their freshman season. The emphasis on star potential is quite clear. Because the women stay four years I think there is more disagreement among the ranking services on how you rank players with a higher ceiling versus players with a higher floor that may not have star potential, but have a higher floor and are very likely to be high level supporting players for four years. In my opinion that is where many of the discrepancies are rooted.

Hoopgurlz, especially since they reorganized their staff about a couple of years ago, has a heavy emphasis on star potential and the player's ceiling. Bluestar and ASGR have less influence on that with ASGR having the most emphasis on a player's floor from what I have seen. Kelly Faris is somewhat of a lightening rod example of that. Chris Hansen came right out and said at one point that Kelly was ranked #34 because she didn't have enough scoring potential. She was never going to carry a team with scoring. ASGR and Blue Star still both had her on the top ten. ASGR also seems to give more weight to post players given the scarcity. ASGR had Buck really high, but they also had Stefanie Dolson and Kiah Stokes rated higher than anyone else. Heather Buck's ASGR ranking may seem silly now, but I don't think anything she has done at UConn has disproved that she could walk into just about any program, and play defense and rebound better than their current center. Geno demands that all five player play offense with confidence and be able to score, there are top 25 programs that don't ask that of their center that would probably be happy to have Heather start for them.

 

[EricLA]

Which kids were ranked in the top 10 in HS? I know Massingagle and Burdick were 3 and 4 in 2011.

Spani was 13. Simmons was 24.

I'd love to talk about the optomism on The Summitt, but I don't want to get Nan upset. I'll just say they are just a little bit delusional.

you are totally correct on your last point. we are going to have some fun watching that next year...

i think i counted Massengale, Burdick, Graves, and Simmons was top 10 per Blue Star (i think). and Tennessee fans keep talking about how Carter was a top 10 kid before her ACL. i counter by saying i think Michala Johnson was top 10 before her ACL's too. and Avant was #1 before it became clear she was not. and...

anyhoo i was trying to be generous. i'm already lobbying the NCAA to put Tennessee as the 4 seed in our bracket lol. would LOVE to play them any time in the next 4 years...

 

[Vowelguy]

. and just because they still have 4 kids on the team ranked in the top 10 in HS

HS rankings are irrelevant after your frosh year. It mystifies me when folks (including UConn ones) still bring them up.

 

[UConnCat]

anyhoo i was trying to be generous. i'm already lobbying the NCAA to put Tennessee as the 4 seed in our bracket lol. would LOVE to play them any time in the next 4 years...

When Summitt is no longer coaching Tenn, the NCAA will not hesitate putting Tenn and UConn in the same bracket.

 

[EricLA]

HS rankings are irrelevant after your frosh year. It mystifies me when folks (including UConn ones) still bring them up.

well let me see if i can help clear up the mystery.

as Scotter pointed out (great post btw scotter), ESPN, especially, ranks the players based on potential in college. Potential means just that. some highly rated freshmen stumble a bit out the gate only to really come on strong their last 2-3 years. now i have no idea how much Massengale will improve. i'd say she played (performed) better for Team USA last summer than she did for Tennessee this past year. is it coaching? was she struggling with new offense/defense? it's not like she played poorly, but she wasn't anywhere near one of the top 5 freshmen in the country, and everyone had her ranked in the top 5.

so without going into a lengthy diatribe, most of the kids in the top 10 in HS, at some point in college, play like their rankings. some get it early (KML and Williams), and some get it later (Tina Charles became a defensive AND offensive monster midway thru her junior year). still it's no guarantee that a top 10 HS kid will be a top 10 kid in her class when she's a senior in college. but the reason (can't speak for everyone) I bring it up is based on potential and expectations. and after all, ranking the teams 1-25 preseason is all about potential and expectations, right?

 

[ochoopsfan]

I think UCLA will be back on the list. I would say they finish 17-25, assuming all people out for injuries and transfers are back at 100%.

 

[Vowelguy]

well let me see if i can help clear up the mystery.

as Scotter pointed out (great post btw scotter), ESPN, especially, ranks the players based on potential in college. Potential means just that. some highly rated freshmen stumble a bit out the gate only to really come on strong their last 2-3 years. now i have no idea how much Massengale will improve. i'd say she played (performed) better for Team USA last summer than she did for Tennessee this past year. is it coaching? was she struggling with new offense/defense? it's not like she played poorly, but she wasn't anywhere near one of the top 5 freshmen in the country, and everyone had her ranked in the top 5.

so without going into a lengthy diatribe, most of the kids in the top 10 in HS, at some point in college, play like their rankings. some get it early (KML and Williams), and some get it later (Tina Charles became a defensive AND offensive monster midway thru her junior year). still it's no guarantee that a top 10 HS kid will be a top 10 kid in her class when she's a senior in college. but the reason (can't speak for everyone) I bring it up is based on potential and expectations. and after all, ranking the teams 1-25 preseason is all about potential and expectations, right?

But you could see potential in Tina her frosh year.

The question is whether a HS rating is a better or worse indicator than actual Frosh year performance. There are so many variables involved in the former, I'm inclined to believe it is the more likely source of error. Consider TN's Burdick. Evaluators said she was the 4th best player in her class - which typically means a major impact player from the start. Her frosh year showed nothing remotely close to that. Going into next year do we view her as a star performer (based on #4 HS) or just an average player on a tier-1 team (frosh performance)? I'm wholeheartedly in the latter camp.

 

[doggydaddy]

well let me see if i can help clear up the mystery.

as Scotter pointed out (great post btw scotter), ESPN, especially, ranks the players based on potential in college. Potential means just that. some highly rated freshmen stumble a bit out the gate only to really come on strong their last 2-3 years. now i have no idea how much Massengale will improve. i'd say she played (performed) better for Team USA last summer than she did for Tennessee this past year. is it coaching? was she struggling with new offense/defense? it's not like she played poorly, but she wasn't anywhere near one of the top 5 freshmen in the country, and everyone had her ranked in the top 5.

so without going into a lengthy diatribe, most of the kids in the top 10 in HS, at some point in college, play like their rankings. some get it early (KML and Williams), and some get it later (Tina Charles became a defensive AND offensive monster midway thru her junior year). still it's no guarantee that a top 10 HS kid will be a top 10 kid in her class when she's a senior in college. but the reason (can't speak for everyone) I bring it up is based on potential and expectations. and after all, ranking the teams 1-25 preseason is all about potential and expectations, right?

I thought I saw an all-freshman team that included Massingale. Burdick really underperformed for her ranking and what was expected.

 

[speedoo]

I also think the ranking methodology is a lot more clearer on the men's side because on the men's side you are clearly ranking players at the top based on the assumption they have the potential to go pro after their freshman season. The emphasis on star potential is quite clear. Because the women stay four years I think there is more disagreement among the ranking services on how you rank players with a higher ceiling versus players with a higher floor that may not have star potential, but have a higher floor and are very likely to be high level supporting players for four years. In my opinion that is where many of the discrepancies are rooted.

Hoopgurlz, especially since they reorganized their staff about a couple of years ago, has a heavy emphasis on star potential and the player's ceiling. Bluestar and ASGR have less influence on that with ASGR having the most emphasis on a player's floor from what I have seen. Kelly Faris is somewhat of a lightening rod example of that. Chris Hansen came right out and said at one point that Kelly was ranked #34 because she didn't have enough scoring potential. She was never going to carry a team with scoring. ASGR and Blue Star still both had her on the top ten. ASGR also seems to give more weight to post players given the scarcity. ASGR had Buck really high, but they also had Stefanie Dolson and Kiah Stokes rated higher than anyone else. Heather Buck's ASGR ranking may seem silly now, but I don't think anything she has done at UConn has disproved that she could walk into just about any program, and play defense and rebound better than their current center. Geno demands that all five player play offense with confidence and be able to score, there are top 25 programs that don't ask that of their center that would probably be happy to have Heather start for them.

Thanks, very informative post. Personally I think HG is wrong to emphasize scoring so much, since doing so clearly undervalues everything else players like Kelly and Kiah do. Not a fan of Blue Star either, but I wish their info was as freely available as HG's is.

 

[easttexastrash]

I'm telling you, watch our for Mariah Chandler next year. She has been in the Baylor system for a while now and her rehab looks 100% complete based on what I have seen. She looks strong and fast and can leap and is going to get a lot of playing time. Add her to Prince and Baylor is going to have two impact players stepping on the court, and both with size at 6-2. Prince looked bigger than 6-2 to me.

 

[MilfordHusky]

I'm telling you, watch our for Mariah Chandler next year. She has been in the Baylor system for a while now and her rehab looks 100% complete based on what I have seen. She looks strong and fast and can leap and is going to get a lot of playing time. Add her to Prince and Baylor is going to have two impact players stepping on the court, and both with size at 6-2. Prince looked bigger than 6-2 to me.

I barely recognize you with the new avatar. What does it say?

So tell us--did you treat CardFan to dinner?

 

[Coler]

I think Rutgers will take some time to adjust next year, but we will grow & get better as the season progresses. I could see us finishing 2nd-3rd in the BE.

 

[msf22b]

It really depends how they are coached up (A&M frosh) and if they can be successfully integrated into the team.
I have some feelings that that will happen

 

[Scotter]

Sydney Carter and Tyra White were good players that obviously played important roles in a national championship, but they both could be erratic. White shot 41% from the field and only 59% from the FT line this season. Carter shot only 31% on 400 FGA this season. Elonu might actually be the biggest loss, while being the least recognized. She developed into a fairly steady player as senior. Still Texas A&M is losing 3 of their top 4 scorers, leaving behind Kelsey Bone as the only player

I know I like really their point guard coming in, Jordan Jones, in terms of being smart and steady. I think she could form a pretty good backcourt with Standish who showed some flashes of being a perimeter scorer with the ability to play point as well at the end of the season. Given how inconsistent Carter was the backcourt could actually be better this season. Texas A&M is probably still a year away from having an Elite 8 team that could turn into a Final Four team, but I agree they could surprise because I think the backcourt will be strong enough if Kelsey Bone decides to get her act together and play like the All-American her talent allows her to be. I haven't seen any encouraging signs from her yet, but maybe losing Carter, White, and Elonu will make her step up since she needs to be the central piece to the puzzle.

It really depends how they are coached up (A&M frosh) and if they can be successfully integrated into the team.
I have some feelings that that will happen

 

[speedoo]

Sydney Carter and Tyra White were good players that obviously played important roles in a national championship, but they both could be erratic. White shot 41% from the field and only 59% from the FT line this season. Carter shot only 31% on 400 FGA this season. Elonu might actually be the biggest loss, while being the least recognized. She developed into a fairly steady player as senior. Still Texas A&M is losing 3 of their top 4 scorers, leaving behind Kelsey Bone as the only player

I know I like really their point guard coming in, Jordan Jones, in terms of being smart and steady. I think she could form a pretty good backcourt with Standish who showed some flashes of being a perimeter scorer with the ability to play point as well at the end of the season. Given how inconsistent Carter was the backcourt could actually be better this season. Texas A&M is probably still a year away from having an Elite 8 team that could turn into a Final Four team, but I agree they could surprise because I think the backcourt will be strong enough if Kelsey Bone decides to get her act together and play like the All-American her talent allows her to be. I haven't seen any encouraging signs from her yet, but maybe losing Carter, White, and Elonu will make her step up since she needs to be the central piece to the puzzle.

The other big loss for aTm is their defense coach.... He will be missed.

 

[ladybears4eva]

Baylor has 5 recruits and only 3 seniors? are Pope and Williams coming back? Does Baylor go 80-0? The only teams I see in the country with enough size and skill on paper to play Griner are Uconn, Stanford and Duke.
Baylor has 5 recruits, but only 1 ranked above #43. They will need to cash in on their championship the same way A&M did with a great class to replace Griner & co.
Does Uconn full court press they whole game like in 2000? like back then their second 5 would be a top 20 team. If KLM replaces Hayes as a starter, you could have the 3 freshman, Stokes, and Banks as a second unit, and I believe Buck and Johnson could start at some Div 1 schools. Press, press press!
Notre Dame has 3, 5'9" guards coming in and only have 2 players over 6'1". They will be very small with no post depth next year.
Stanford has the opposite problem. They get 6'3" and 6'5" recruits but no guards. They will have 8 players 6'3" or taller. Whatever happened to balanced recruiting. I forget which team I saw has 5 recruits that cover all positions 1-5. You need depth everywhere to win.

we recruited a complete team, we still had open spots on our team this year.

A Prince 3 Mcdonalds MVP
N Johnson 1 Mcdonalds
Fuqua PF
Brown SG
Higgins C

all top 100

looks like we all have some good people in training for our starters... and Pope, Chandler, Washington (maybe)

 

[cardfan]

Baylor has 5 recruits and only 3 seniors? are Pope and Williams coming back? Does Baylor go 80-0? The only teams I see in the country with enough size and skill on paper to play Griner are Uconn, Stanford and Duke.
Baylor has 5 recruits, but only 1 ranked above #43. They will need to cash in on their championship the same way A&M did with a great class to replace Griner & co.
Does Uconn full court press they whole game like in 2000? like back then their second 5 would be a top 20 team. If KLM replaces Hayes as a starter, you could have the 3 freshman, Stokes, and Banks as a second unit, and I believe Buck and Johnson could start at some Div 1 schools. Press, press press!
Notre Dame has 3, 5'9" guards coming in and only have 2 players over 6'1". They will be very small with no post depth next year.
Stanford has the opposite problem. They get 6'3" and 6'5" recruits but no guards. They will have 8 players 6'3" or taller. Whatever happened to balanced recruiting. I forget which team I saw has 5 recruits that cover all positions 1-5. You need depth everywhere to win.

Stanford recruited 6 players last year, including 3 guards, which 2 were out all year due to injuries. We get them (Camp and Green) back and Ruef, who was also out. We'll be very guard and wing orientated team with Chiney in the paint. 6'5" Bebe will probably see a lot of playing time as a a frosh and not sure if Boothe is returning for her 5th yr.

 

[easttexastrash]

we recruited a complete team, we still had open spots on our team this year.

A Prince 3 Mcdonalds MVP
N Johnson 1 Mcdonalds
Fuqua PF
Brown SG
Higgins C

all top 100

looks like we all have some good people in training for our starters... and Pope, Chandler, Washington (maybe)

I watched Johnson in the McDonalds game and she is a very good passer. When she is in the game look for her to pass very well to the post. She also seems to have good three point range. I don't see her as a slasher to the basket due to foot speed, at least from what I saw.

 

[Vowelguy]

1. Baylor
2. UConn
3. Duke
4. Kentucky - Mathies/Goss/Walker + transfer Stallworth
5. Maryland - return 4/5 starters + Malina Howard
6. Stanford - Nneka loss is huge, but return the rest
7. Notre Dame - Diggins/McBride/Achonwa + Loyd
8. Louisville - return 4/5 + 2 injured stars
9. Penn St - return 4/5
10. Vanderbilt - everyone back
11. Cal - everyone back
12. Kansas - all key players from S16 run back + injured Davis
13. Georgia - return 4/5; finally live up to expectations?
14. Nebraska - return 4/5
15. Oklahoma - all starters back
16. Delaware
17. West Virginia - all starters back
18. Tennessee
19. St Johns - Lose Stevens, but rest are back
20. Rutgers - Lose 3, but some good frosh coming

Also: LSU, Texas A&M, Oklahoma St, Ohio St

But I did better than Lindys.
I got 15 of the sweet 16. And I didn't miss on the other team -- it was #18 Tenn, replacing Vandy.

 

[doggydaddy]

But I did better than Lindys.
I got 15 of the sweet 16. And I didn't miss on the other team -- it was #18 Tenn, replacing Vandy.

You missed with Penn State. LSU is in.

 

[UcMiami]

Fun to look back. Thanks for reviving the thread! And a surprisingly accurate preseason. I think the biggest surprises for me during the year were TN - Holly did an excellent job and ND who kept it together with a lot of losses to graduation.