2020 Recruiting Class Rankings

[EricLA]

No real excuse for any "guru" who follows WCBB to not know who she is, and just as egregious, to not know how good she is.

Youngest player on the team for Team Canada. In the FIBA Americup finals, she was the 2nd leading scorer on her team, rated with the highest efficiency (only player over 10 and she was at 13). Scored 9 points on 4-6 shooting, 1-1 from beyond the arc, 3 boards, 4 steals, and 1 assist all in under 19 minutes. She was up agaist players like Fowles, Charles, Liz Williams, Dolson, Collier and ONO. I doubt she played the 5 so maybe take out Dolson, Fowles and ONO.

Either way, really solid performance. IMHO, when you rank each recruiting class, she should be considered a legit top 5 player. It's really only bragging rights, but UCONN easily has the best class in the nation. Muhl IMHO is somewhere between 10 and 20 also. Maybe higher.

 

[JonathanXIV]

No real excuse for any "guru" who follows WCBB to not know who she is, and just as egregious, to not know how good she is.

Youngest player on the team for Team Canada. In the FIBA Americup finals, she was the 2nd leading scorer on her team, rated with the highest efficiency (only player over 10 and she was at 13). Scored 9 points on 4-6 shooting, 1-1 from beyond the arc, 3 boards, 4 steals, and 1 assist all in under 19 minutes. She was up agaist players like Fowles, Charles, Liz Williams, Dolson, Collier and ONO. I doubt she played the 5 so maybe take out Dolson, Fowles and ONO.

Either way, really solid performance. IMHO, when you rank each recruiting class, she should be considered a legit top 5 player. It's really only bragging rights, but UCONN easily has the best class in the nation. Muhl IMHO is somewhere between 10 and 20 also. Maybe higher.

Agree to all of the above. Another flaw in rating recruiting classes, in my opinion, is that they seem to weight "volume." When I'm looking at recruiting classes, I'm putting significant weight on the top recruits. Would rather have two top 10 recruits (see Katie Lou/Pheesa class) versus four recruits ranked between 20 and 40. Only five players can play at a time, and really exceptional players have a disproportionate influence on the outcome of a game. Like any bell curve, the distinctions between players gets pretty thin after you get past the top handful of players.

 

[Charliebball]

As I have mentioned in the recruit thread, they have nothing on Edwards in their entire database, and none of their writers mentioned her verbal on Twitter, something they almost always do.

It's as though they have no idea who she is.

no big deal......................they'll figure out who she is when they see her kicking butt on the court next year..........

 

[jonson]

Agree to all of the above. Another flaw in rating recruiting classes, in my opinion, is that they seem to weight "volume." When I'm looking at recruiting classes, I'm putting significant weight on the top recruits. Would rather have two top 10 recruits (see Katie Lou/Pheesa class) versus four recruits ranked between 20 and 40. Only five players can play at a time, and really exceptional players have a disproportionate influence on the outcome of a game. Like any bell curve, the distinctions between players gets pretty thin after you get past the top handful of players.

I agree, generally. However, with a relatively small number of exceptions, it's proved to be really difficult to predict how high school players will actually do in college. Here's the 2016 top 10 from Hoopgurlz (in order) for this year's seniors: L. Cox, Joiner Holmes, C. Dangerfield, S. Ionescu, E. Boley, S. Sutton, D. Slocum, N Chou, L. Odom, T. McCoy. Some have indeed been difference makers (Cox, Dangerfield, Ionescu); some have been good to very good but not, imo, truly exceptional (Sutton, Slocum, Odom), and some (4 out of 10) have not yet proved that their top 10 ranking was justified: Joiner Holmes, Boley, Chou, McCoy.

Then there are many players outside the top 10 in 2016 who have proved to be equal to, if not better than, all of the above, with the exception of the first category. Here are some from the Pac 12 only: M. Pivec (#26), D. Carrington (#34), R. Hebard (#40), A. McDonald (#55). Doubtless any coach (or fan) would rather have as many top 10 players as possible, but--if 2016 is typical--only a relatively small number of them will actually become the game changers their ranking promises.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Only 4 stars?

It's the Canadian exchange rate. That equals 5 stars in the U.S.

 

[JonathanXIV]

I agree, generally. However, with a relatively small number of exceptions, it's proved to be really difficult to predict how high school players will actually do in college. Here's the 2016 top 10 from Hoopgurlz (in order) for this year's seniors: L. Cox, Joiner Holmes, C. Dangerfield, S. Ionescu, E. Boley, S. Sutton, D. Slocum, N Chou, L. Odom, T. McCoy. Some have indeed been difference makers (Cox, Dangerfield, Ionescu); some have been good to very good but not, imo, truly exceptional (Sutton, Slocum, Odom), and some (4 out of 10) have not yet proved that their top 10 ranking was justified: Joiner Holmes, Boley, Chou, McCoy.

Then there are many players outside the top 10 in 2016 who have proved to be equal to, if not better than, all of the above, with the exception of the first category. Here are some from the Pac 12 only: M. Pivec (#26), D. Carrington (#34), R. Hebard (#40), A. McDonald (#55). Doubtless any coach (or fan) would rather have as many top 10 players as possible, but--if 2016 is typical--only a relatively small number of them will actually become the game changers their ranking promises.

Agree with all of that. But I suspect that there are more quality players in the higher groups of ten (1-10 vs 31-40). So on an aggregate basis, better fishing for the higher ranked players. But UConn knows as well as anyone that gems are not always found in spots 1 through 10.

 

[UConnCat]

Perhaps there will be a 2nd?

 

[CompSci87]

espnW ranks our class #2 (behind Oregon):
...

Your link went to 2014. This one should work:

http://www.espn.com/high-school/girls-basketball/recruiting/class-rankings?class=2020

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Prospects Nation has added Edwards and Muhl to UConn's class list.

They were absent at the time this thread began.

Class Rankings -- 2020 -- Fall 2019 | Prospects Nation

prospectsnation.com

 

[Zanzman]

Thank goodness

 

[DEpup]

Perhaps there will be a 2nd?

Let's hope Fudd becomes #2....

 

[HopJim]

Agree to all of the above. Another flaw in rating recruiting classes, in my opinion, is that they seem to weight "volume." When I'm looking at recruiting classes, I'm putting significant weight on the top recruits. Would rather have two top 10 recruits (see Katie Lou/Pheesa class) versus four recruits ranked between 20 and 40. Only five players can play at a time, and really exceptional players have a disproportionate influence on the outcome of a game. Like any bell curve, the distinctions between players gets pretty thin after you get past the top handful of players.

Agree with your comments on quality, versus quantity. If you apply this to two consecutive classes, you have a good predictor of Final 4/Championship potential. If there are 3 or more All American level recruits in two consecutive classes that fill main positions (i.e. Stewey-C/F, Tuck-F, Jefferson-PG), you have a winner.

 

[Alydar]

Agree with your comments on quality, versus quantity. If you apply this to two consecutive classes, you have a good predictor of Final 4/Championship potential. If there are 3 or more All American level recruits in two consecutive classes that fill main positions (i.e. Stewey-C/F, Tuck-F, Jefferson-PG), you have a winner.

True for maybe a dozen or so programs but these rankings are also for fans of teams that are dreaming of some day winning their conference title. For them signing four No. 40-100 recruits would be a dream come true.

 

[EricLA]

Agree to all of the above. Another flaw in rating recruiting classes, in my opinion, is that they seem to weight "volume." When I'm looking at recruiting classes, I'm putting significant weight on the top recruits. Would rather have two top 10 recruits (see Katie Lou/Pheesa class) versus four recruits ranked between 20 and 40. Only five players can play at a time, and really exceptional players have a disproportionate influence on the outcome of a game. Like any bell curve, the distinctions between players gets pretty thin after you get past the top handful of players.

Just look at the rankings of UCONN players coming in and who we have:

• Danger (3)
• Walker (1)
• Westbrook (2), Williams (1), ONO (5)
• Griffin and Makurat - not in the top 10 but lots of potential and a very good class
• Bueckers (1), Edwards (IMHO a top 5 player - hell, she outplayed several Team USA players when Canada faced off against them). Jury out on Muhl but some think she's a top 10 kid. McLean is top 20 and incredibly athletic with excellent upside. Gabriel - no one knows for sure. Athletic post player but very raw.
• DeBerry (5), Poffenbarger rising in the rankings, and fingers crossed for Fudd - #1 in the class.

Huge recipe for success. On our current team, 4 top 5 players. Next year, 6 top 5. Following year it could be 7. That's just insane.

 

[Alydar]

To UConn fans in the MD/DC area, Piath Gabriel's Bradford Christian Academy will be playing in the "She Got Game" tournament in DC on Dec 14-15th. They are playing Blair Academy of NJ and Carolina Prep out of Va.

(Wasted a lot of time trying to find "Branford Christian Academy, as listed by UConn in their release.)

I wish the UConn sports information office would seek perfection like the womens basketball team. When I got out of school I toyed with going into journalism but my spelling, grammer, etc just wasn't good enough. Today that doesn't seem to matter much.

 

[Alydar]

And for UConn fans in the north east part of CT Gabriel will play at Putnam Science Academy on Sat., Dec 7th at 2:00pm.

 

[BobbyJ]

To UConn fans in the MD/DC area, Piath Gabriel's Bradford Christian Academy will be playing in the "She Got Game" tournament in DC on Dec 14-15th. They are playing Blair Academy of NJ and Carolina Prep out of Va.

(Wasted a lot of time trying to find "Branford Christian Academy, as listed by UConn in their release.)

I wish the UConn sports information office would seek perfection like the womens basketball team. When I got out of school I toyed with going into journalism but my spelling, grammer, etc just wasn't good enough. Today that doesn't seem to matter much.

Did you say "grammer"? Or grammar?

 

[HuskylnSC]

Prospects Nation has added Edwards and Muhl to UConn's class list.

They were absent at the time this thread began.

Class Rankings -- 2020 -- Fall 2019 | Prospects Nation

prospectsnation.com

Have to admit the PN ranking comes more into line with my thinking. Hailey Van Lith gives L'ville a big post and I think the ESPNW rankings were published before she committed

 

[HuskylnSC]

Just look at the rankings of UCONN players coming in and who we have:

• Danger (3)
• Walker (1)
• Westbrook (2), Williams (1), ONO (5)
• Griffin and Makurat - not in the top 10 but lots of potential and a very good class
• Bueckers (1), Edwards (IMHO a top 5 player - hell, she outplayed several Team USA players when Canada faced off against them). Jury out on Muhl but some think she's a top 10 kid. McLean is top 20 and incredibly athletic with excellent upside. Gabriel - no one knows for sure. Athletic post player but very raw.
• DeBerry (5), Poffenbarger rising in the rankings, and fingers crossed for Fudd - #1 in the class.

Huge recipe for success. On our current team, 4 top 5 players. Next year, 6 top 5. Following year it could be 7. That's just insane.

Yeah, I just wish the staff could learn how to recruit

 

[BobbyJ]

Have to admit the PN ranking comes more into line with my thinking. Hailey Van Lith gives L'ville a big post and I think the ESPNW rankings were published before she committed

A big post?

 

[Alydar]

Did you say "grammer"? Or grammar?

My grammer always said my spelling would be my undoing.

 

[HuskylnSC]

A big post?

Thanks, i must have fat fingered my way into spell check on that one. It was supposed to be BOOST. I'll be I forgot an 'o' and spellcheck turned me into an idiot. Well maybe I will learn to proof read.