ESPNW's class of 2024 recruiting rankings are out.

[Fairfield Fan]

USC is #1 because of quantity not quality. The Trojans have 6 top 100 recruits. UConn has 3. Now, you can’t play 6 freshmen at the same time. But you can play 3. So let’s see how many players out of USC’s #1 recruiting class are still around next year at this time.

The ranking criteria have always been badly flawed. There is no accounting for quality. There is no ranking of the very best players and what they can do for a team. Kateryna Koval, a 6'4" post player, likely the best post in her class, went to Notre Dame. Yet ND's recruiting class isn't ranked. Clearly, Koval has the potential to dramatically improve the prospects for Notre Dame for the next four years. Further, South Carolina gets the third-highest ranking player in the class, Joyce Edwards, a 6'3" power forward. Combined with the team returning for SC next year, she could be instrumental in bringing them a NC. South Carolina only got two players, but the one could be NC-making.

Further, there is no attempt to figure in transfers, and that is a glaring failure. In the transfer age, those players can dramatically transform a team. Look at LSU in 2023.

So there should be a system in which the #1 player in the class garners a score that is higher than that going to, say, four other players outside of the top 10. A team with, say, three players in the top 10 should be ranked far higher than one with six players ranked from 20 upwards. Connecticut should get a high ranking for Sarah Strong, as well as enhanced rank for the #7 player. And it's absurd that Notre Dame isn't ranked, though it takes the transformative Koval.

The rating metrics are so bad and so misleading that ESPN should scrap it, and start again. Or just scrap its ranking altogether.

 

[visitingcock]

The ranking criteria have always been badly flawed. There is no accounting for quality. There is no ranking of the very best players and what they can do for a team. Kateryna Koval, a 6'4" post player, likely the best post in her class, went to Notre Dame. Yet ND's recruiting class isn't ranked. Clearly, Koval has the potential to dramatically improve the prospects for Notre Dame for the next four years. Further, South Carolina gets the third-highest ranking player in the class, Joyce Edwards, a 6'3" power forward. Combined with the team returning for SC next year, she could be instrumental in bringing them a NC. South Carolina only got two players, but the one could be NC-making.

Further, there is no attempt to figure in transfers, and that is a glaring failure. In the transfer age, those players can dramatically transform a team. Look at LSU in 2023.

So there should be a system in which the #1 player in the class garners a score that is higher than that going to, say, four other players outside of the top 10. A team with, say, three players in the top 10 should be ranked far higher than one with six players ranked from 20 upwards. Connecticut should get a high ranking for Sarah Strong, as well as enhanced rank for the #7 player. And it's absurd that Notre Dame isn't ranked, though it takes the transformative Koval.

The rating metrics are so bad and so misleading that ESPN should scrap it, and start again. Or just scrap its ranking altogether.

The other ranking services are no better, But, in truth, I thinks ESPN is pretty solid for wbb. Let's look at the last couple of WNBA drafts then look back at the classes for 2019 and 2020 . Looks like they predict wbb players better than football anyways.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Maybe the individual rankings in 2020 were unusually easy, but this is spot on from HG:

1. Paige
2. Reese
3. Brink
4. Clark
5. Cardoso

That’s very close to the draft order.

 

[Geew1992]

Ya'll just like to complain, huh?

 

[ABCDFE]

They also have two incoming transfers, Assuming Juju's spot is safe, that means 8 newcomers fighting for 4 starting spots. Gonna be a lotta' competition in the preseason and a lot of pressure on the coach to build a winning attitude. Will anybody pass to anybody else?

Good point. But I do remember a dude named Kobe Bryant who wouldn't pass to his teammates and Shaq basically said just get the damn rebound, so in those rare instances, maybe it doesn't matter??

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Further, South Carolina gets the third-highest ranking player in the class, Joyce Edwards, a 6'3" power forward. Combined with the team returning for SC next year, she could be instrumental in bringing them a NC. South Carolina only got two players, but the one could be NC-making.

Connecticut should get a high ranking for Sarah Strong, as well as enhanced rank for the #7 player. And it's absurd that Notre Dame isn't ranked, though it takes the transformative Koval.

The rating metrics are so bad and so misleading that ESPN should scrap it, and start again. Or just scrap its ranking altogether.

I'm confused. Laflin ranks South Carolina third among all classes, and UConn did get a high ranking as he has them #2 and likely only a hair behind USC with just three players. I don't get the beef here.

If you don't take all players a team gets into consideration than you might as well just list the best classes based on the teams that got top 10-20 recruits. And even then you end up with basically the same top 5 Laflin has, maybe in slightly different order.

 

[hoophuskee]

I'm confused. Laflin ranks South Carolina third among all classes, and UConn did get a high ranking as he has them #2 and likely only a hair behind USC with just three players. I don't get the beef here.

If you don't take all players a team gets into consideration than you might as well just list the best classes based on the teams that got top 10-20 recruits. And even then you end up with basically the same top 5 Laflin has, maybe in slightly different order.

UCONN was clear #1. I can't speak for South Carolina. I can speak for what I know of UCONN vs USC but this might show that whoever ranked 1 vs 2 doesn't know what they are talking about. But it's not a big deal. And they do a fine job of individual rankings, and am appreciative of their hard work.

When I look at UCONN - Eight of the 12 #1 ranked recruits in their history have been 1st team A/A. I believe 5 of 7 that were 2/3 ranked were also 1st team a/a. That's 13 of 19. A 1st team a/a is being double teamed schemed against etc vs nearly every team including many other super elite teams. And most times a 1st team A/a is leading their team to titles vs teams that don't have a 1st team a/a. .

There are exceptions but when you land the #1 recruit and your next two players are also ranked ahead of the other team - it's a pretty ridiculous assertion to put SoCal ahead. But it doesn’t mean much - the recruiting team ranking if you are that high.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

UCONN was clear #1. I can't speak for South Carolina. I can speak for what I know of UCONN vs USC but this might show that whoever ranked 1 vs 2 doesn't know what they are talking about. But it's not a big deal.

You're free to disagree with the end result but Shane Laflin certainly knows his recruits and basketball. He's the lead writer at ESPN and Premiere Basketball Report.

I would've ranked UConn first but I get why he had USC ahead. My guess is it was a split decision.

 

[hoophuskee]

You're free to disagree with the end result but Shane Laflin certainly knows his recruits and basketball. He's the lead writer at ESPN and Premiere Basketball Report.

I would've ranked UConn first but I get why he had USC ahead. My guess is it was a split decision.

You and I can disagree with assessments that even Geno Auriemma believes, right? So, whether it be Shane or Geno or anyone else, we can believe that sometimes others can go a little haywire, right? After all, this is "projection," only.

 

[Geesworld]

Only #2, you guys are doooooomed

I'm bummed we dropped to #7. Trying to console myself tonight.

Not sure why they are so low. Top 3 class for sure.

 

[hoophuskee]

You're free to disagree with the end result but Shane Laflin certainly knows his recruits and basketball. He's the lead writer at ESPN and Premiere Basketball Report.

I would've ranked UConn first but I get why he had USC ahead. My guess is it was a split decision.

I made a mistake. I'll back off the harshness of my post but still believe UCONN is #1 but I thought it was incredibly stupid. I'm wrong about that as I relook at now. I didn't notice Kennedy Smith was there at the rating she had and what I saw is/was very good. Initially I couldn't believe the 3 UCONN players were all ahead of all the SoCal's players and yet they were ranked as a team ahead of UCONN. Kennedy Smith's potential - I get it now. I yield.

 

[Cuango]

You're free to disagree with the end result but Shane Laflin certainly knows his recruits and basketball. He's the lead writer at ESPN and Premiere Basketball Report.

I would've ranked UConn first but I get why he had USC ahead. My guess is it was a split decision.

I’m sure he knows that his superiors want it that way.

 

[Fanofball]

Not sure why they are so low. Top 3 class for sure.

Duke is fine at 7. Fournier and Roberson are good, but they’re not very strong. Fournier when up against a muscular post is easily pushed around. She may struggle with people like Koval. Not to mention they’re not great outside shooters so they don’t spread the floor. Hell, Fournier is one of the worst FT shooters in the class. And a #98 player in the country to add to the class doesn’t make you #3 caliber unfortunately.

 

[visitingcock]

Maybe the individual rankings in 2020 were unusually easy, but this is spot on from HG:

1. Paige
2. Reese
3. Brink
4. Clark
5. Cardoso

That’s very close to the draft order.

And the top 5 for 2019 were:
1. Hailey Jones (6)
2. Jordan Horston (9)
3. Aliya Boston (1)
4. Zia Cooke (10)
5. Rickea Jackson (4)*

 

[Mandoo]

The ranking criteria have always been badly flawed. There is no accounting for quality. There is no ranking of the very best players and what they can do for a team. Kateryna Koval, a 6'4" post player, likely the best post in her class, went to Notre Dame. Yet ND's recruiting class isn't ranked. Clearly, Koval has the potential to dramatically improve the prospects for Notre Dame for the next four years. Further, South Carolina gets the third-highest ranking player in the class, Joyce Edwards, a 6'3" power forward. Combined with the team returning for SC next year, she could be instrumental in bringing them a NC. South Carolina only got two players, but the one could be NC-making.

Further, there is no attempt to figure in transfers, and that is a glaring failure. In the transfer age, those players can dramatically transform a team. Look at LSU in 2023.

So there should be a system in which the #1 player in the class garners a score that is higher than that going to, say, four other players outside of the top 10. A team with, say, three players in the top 10 should be ranked far higher than one with six players ranked from 20 upwards. Connecticut should get a high ranking for Sarah Strong, as well as enhanced rank for the #7 player. And it's absurd that Notre Dame isn't ranked, though it takes the transformative Koval.

The rating metrics are so bad and so misleading that ESPN should scrap it, and start again. Or just scrap its ranking altogether.

Lots of unheralded players in HS become outstanding college players. Look at Steph Dolson. Her progress at UConn was amazing and she became 1st team All American! Ratings are often highly flawed, a general guide although flawed.

 

[Bone Dog]

Kateryna Koval, a 6'4" post player, likely the best post in her class, went to Notre Dame. Yet ND's recruiting class isn't ranked. Clearly, Koval has the potential to dramatically improve the prospects for Notre Dame for the next four years.

I think Koval will be great at ND...
... but a doubt could be raised based on the game against Mitty HS. Mitty beat them without having a big center. Woliczko at 6'2" was their big against Koval. This is only one game and the score was very close, and one could argue that Mitty's speed overwhelmed Haeckel at the pg, etc. So it doesn't prove anything long term other than Koval has room to develop at ND. And I'm sure she'll develop very nicely under Niele's coaching. And no one is going to overwhelm ND's front court if Olivia comes back strong next to Hannah and Soni.

 

[Fanofball]

I think Koval will be great at ND...
... but a doubt could be raised based on the game against Mitty HS. Mitty beat them without having a big center. Woliczko at 6'2" was their big against Koval. This is only one game and the score was very close, and one could argue that Mitty's speed overwhelmed Haeckel at the pg, etc. So it doesn't prove anything long term other than Koval has room to develop at ND. And I'm sure she'll develop very nicely under Niele's coaching. And no one is going to overwhelm ND's front court if Olivia comes back strong next to Hannah and Soni.

Woliczko has a good vertical though and she's much more agressive than Kate. Kate is more of a post player who gets the ball and uses agile footwork to get it in, not an aggressive post-up kind of player. When we face ND later this year, Strong could give her trouble despite being a lot shorter just because she's more aggressive.

 

[Fairfield Fan]

The other ranking services are no better, But, in truth, I thinks ESPN is pretty solid for wbb. Let's look at the last couple of WNBA drafts then look back at the classes for 2019 and 2020 . Looks like they predict wbb players better than football anyways.

Actually, I was referring to the "recruiting classes rankings," rather than the rankings of individual players. For individuals, I have to agree that they usually get the top players pretty close. I was referring to class rankings, which seem based on the number of ranked players a university gets commitments from, without reference to how good one or more players are, or how low-ranked in the Top 100 some of them may be.

 

[visitingcock]

And the top 5 for 2019 were:
1. Hailey Jones (6)
2. Jordan Horston (9)
3. Aliya Boston (1)
4. Zia Cooke (10)
5. Rickea Jackson (4)*

Actually, I was referring to the "recruiting classes rankings," rather than the rankings of individual players. For individuals, I have to agree that they usually get the top players pretty close. I was referring to class rankings, which seem based on the number of ranked players a university gets commitments from, without reference to how good one or more players are, or how low-ranked in the Top 100 some of them may be.

I pretty much agree with you about class rankings. I think classes should pretty much be limited to a comparison of the top 4 players . I say this because rosters are limited to 15. Hence four classes of 4 players is just barely over the cap,

I look at U$C’s mega class as presenting the possibility of creating disunity through over competition for the backup spots and fewer starting spots.

Still, I would rank classes as:
1. uConn
2. U$C
3. SCar

And, of course, you can’t quantify how a grip of freshmen will fit with and existing roster. I had no Clue that Fulwiley, Johnson and Kitts would fit our team as perfectly as Dawn did, I trust Fswn and Geno. Not so sure about Gottlieb,

 

[meyers7]

Lots of unheralded players in HS become outstanding college players. Look at Steph Dolson. Her progress at UConn was amazing and she became 1st team All American! Ratings are often highly flawed, a general guide although flawed.

Dolson wasn't completely unheralded. She was ranked #39 and was a McDonald AA.

 

[Fanofball]

I pretty much agree with you about class rankings. I think classes should pretty much be limited to a comparison of the top 4 players . I say this because rosters are limited to 15. Hence four classes of 4 players is just barely over the cap,

I look at U$C’s mega class as presenting the possibility of creating disunity through over competition for the backup spots and fewer starting spots.

Still, I would rank classes as:
1. uConn
2. U$C
3. SCar

And, of course, you can’t quantify how a grip of freshmen will fit with and existing roster. I had no Clue that Fulwiley, Johnson and Kitts would fit our team as perfectly as Dawn did, I trust Fswn and Geno. Not so sure about Gottlieb,

Yeah the backups is a good point. Heckel, Juju, or Talia at point? Smith, Vivian, Williams, or Iriafen at the post with Marshall? If Howell and Heckel are playing, where does Forrester fit in? With all the incoming freshmen and so many at the same position as veteran players, I find it hard to believe that all see a minute off the bench. Heckel and Howell will, but Williams and Forester? I dunno. There's a lot of chemistry to be made between the two remaining starters and the 6 incoming freshmen and 2 transfers.

 

[Steelerone]

For all of those who are wondering who really has the best class check with me on the last day of the season and I'll let you know.

 

[mhshuskies]

Lots of unheralded players in HS become outstanding college players. Look at Steph Dolson. Her progress at UConn was amazing and she became 1st team All American! Ratings are often highly flawed, a general guide although flawed.

Steph developed into a good player because she chose the best program there is.

 

[TN-Gamecock]

Anyone remember Rhyne Howard at UK...she was ranked I believe #32 in the Gurlz Hoops 100. Boston was ranked #3 (should've been #1) and guess what, Joyce is ranked #3, so that may be a sign that she may follow in Boston's footsteps and be a potential #1 pick.

 

[hoophuskee]

Anyone remember Rhyne Howard at UK...she was ranked I believe #32 in the Gurlz Hoops 100. Boston was ranked #3 (should've been #1) and guess what, Joyce is ranked #3, so that may be a sign that she may follow in Boston's footsteps and be a potential #1 pick.

Anyone remember Diana Taurasi, Maya Moore, and Breanna Stewart; and they were #1 on Hoppgulrz, and #1 picks, and they won championships at both the pro level and college level? And guess what- Sarah is ranked #1. So, that may be a sign that she may follow in in their footsteps and be a potential #1 pick? .