Movement with ESPN c/o 2021 Rankings?

[kat0189]

2021 HoopGurlz Recruiting Rankings - espnW 100 - ESPN

Get the inside scoop on the top ranked high school girls' basketball players. In-depth player briefings, film and more on ESPNHS.com.

www.espn.com

Mostly looks like the same names but some reordering here and there.

I think Rayah Marshall dropped down a few spots. Talia Von Oelhoffen might've dropped a couple spots as well. 6'5" Akunwafo from California up a few spots and actually technically the "top post" at #18. I also don't remember Kampschroeder being quite as high before?

Feagin might've rose a bit, too, at #6. I'd actually heard from a knowledgeable coach who watched the U16 Trials that they thought Feagin was the most impressive player he saw despite not making the final roster.

All U16 team members are ranked in the top 25, not sure if that was the case in the prior list.

1​	Azzi Fudd	98​	None	G	5-11		St. John's College H.S. (DC)
2​	Olivia Miles	98​	None	PG	5-10		Blair Academy (NJ)
3​	Saniya Rivers	98​	None	G	6-0		Emsley A. Laney H.S. (NC)
4​	Brooke Demetre	98​	None	W	6-2		Mater Dei H.S. (CA)
5​	Amari DeBerry	98​	None	F	6-5		Williamsville South H.S. (NY)
6​	Sania Feagin	98​	None	F	6-3		Forest Park H.S. (GA)
7​	Rayah Marshall	98​	None	G	6-3		Lynwood H.S. (CA)
8​	Aaliyah Moore	97​	None	F	6-1		Moore H.S. (OK)
9​	Payton Verhulst	97​	None	G	6-1		Bishop Miege H.S. (KS)
10​	Talia Von Oelhoffen	97​	None	W	5-11
11​	Latasha Lattimore	97​	None	F	6-4		Crestwood Secondary (CAN)
12​	Okikiola Iriafen	96​	None	F	6-2		Harvard Westlake H.S. (CA)
13​	O'Mariah Gordon	96​	None	PG	5-4		Braden River H.S. (FL)
14​	Greta Kampschroeder	96​	None	G	6-0		Naperville North H.S. (IL)
15​	Kayla McPherson	96​	None	PG	5-7		Madison County H.S. (GA)
16​	Raven Johnson	96​	None	PG	5-8		Westlake H.S. (GA)
17​	Sonia Citron	95​	None	G	6-1		Ursuline H.S. (NY)
18​	Clarice Akunwafo	95​	None	P	6-5		Rolling Hills Prepatory (CA)
19​	Jillian Hollingshead	95​	None	F	6-4		Holy Innocents' Episcopal School (GA)
20​	Aziaha James	95​	None	G	5-9		Princess Anne H.S. (VA)
21​	Saylor Poffenbarger	94​	None	G	6-2		Middletown H.S. (MD)
22​	Damiya Hagemann	94​	None	PG	5-7		Detroit Edison Public Academy (MI)
23​	Jersey Wolfenbarger	94​	None	PG	6-1		Northside H.S. (AR)
24​	Jada Malone	94​	None	P	6-3		The Village School (TX)
25​	Taylor Bigby	94​	None	G	5-11		Centennial H.S. (NV)

 

[Sluconn Husky]

UConn-wise:

Poffenbarger's first appearance on ESPN's list.

Demetre went up to #4.

DeBerry up one spot to #5.

Von Oelhoffen down a few spots.

Moore, Verhulst, Lattimore right about where they were give or take a spot.

Citron up a couple places.

They moved Bigby down from 18 to 25.

Hollingshead, who was on the first '21 ranking before being removed, is back on at #19.

Kampschroeder up a few spots to #14.

 

[DaBball]

Also movement within 2020, which saw Edwards fall and Cochran jump. Not sure why Edwards fell?

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Also movement within 2020, which saw Edwards fall and Cochran jump. Not sure why Edwards fell?

Some of the decisions make sense: players moving up after strong showings at trials or AAU tourneys, others do not. Edwards has done nothing but win five MVP awards since March and make the Canadian senior team as a 16-yo. The former would seem to have something to do with her initial appearance at ESPN at #14. Doubt those moving in front of her have been more impressive. And how does Kapinus never move from the top-10 after being out injured since November?

 

[WewatchBall]

Making USA basketball shouldn’t determine someone rank lol

 

[DaBball]

Making USA basketball shouldn’t determine someone rank lol

Why is that? To make the team, one has to llay well at the trials, and a lot of the scouting services are there evaluating.

 

[Lwrc]

Why is that? To make the team, one has to llay well at the trials, and a lot of the scouting services are there evaluating.

Scouts or no scouts, 160 players are whittled down to 18-20 within a two day period. There is NO WAY it’s a good way to assess who the best players are. By the USA coaches or by scouts. As clearly evidenced by MANY players over the years that were “cut” that have been asked to come back for the top 30 trials (when they’re older) or made the teams when older.

There is no simple solution unless they extend the tryouts or change the number of players allowed to come. Possibly not bring back the initial 12 that make the U16 team so they’re forced to look through the next wave of players?

It is a terrible way that scouting services give more credit to a player than they should have. Services like Olson’s ESPN lean into the results too much. Has ESPN ever dropped a girl below 25 in future years who made the initial 12 (or even the 18) as a 15 year old? The player gets the luxury of a top 20 ranking the rest of their grassroots time because they made shots that weekend when they were 15? In addition, except in rare cases, these young players that make it are all selfish players, or have to choose to play selfish at least that weekend. With 160 players in two days, if you pass the ball, don’t expect it back.

 

[DaBball]

Scouts or no scouts, 160 players are whittled down to 18-20 within a two day period. There is NO WAY it’s a good way to assess who the best players are. By the USA coaches or by scouts. As clearly evidenced by MANY players over the years that were “cut” that have been asked to come back for the top 30 trials (when they’re older) or made the teams when older.

There is no simple solution unless they extend the tryouts or change the number of players allowed to come. Possibly not bring back the initial 12 that make the U16 team so they’re forced to look through the next wave of players?

It is a terrible way that scouting services give more credit to a player than they should have. Services like Olson’s ESPN lean into the results too much. Has ESPN ever dropped a girl below 25 in future years who made the initial 12 (or even the 18) as a 15 year old? The player gets the luxury of a top 20 ranking the rest of their grassroots time because they made shots that weekend when they were 15? In addition, except in rare cases, these young players that make it are all selfish players, or have to choose to play selfish at least that weekend. With 160 players in two days, if you pass the ball, don’t expect it back.

Well, Sania Feagin didn’t make the team and she jumped a few players who did make the team. Amari DeBerry dropped spots despite making the team. Saylor and Sonia were still behind players who they made the team over (Hollingshead (only ahead of Saylor), Johnson, and McPherson).

 

[CocoHusky]

Scouts or no scouts, 160 players are whittled down to 18-20 within a two day period. There is NO WAY it’s a good way to assess who the best players are. By the USA coaches or by scouts. As clearly evidenced by MANY players over the years that were “cut” that have been asked to come back for the top 30 trials (when they’re older) or made the teams when older.

Couple errors here and a few bad assumptions. USA Basketball trials a longer than two days. It is not impossible to evaluate 160 within this time period because that is exactly what the selection committee MUST do to get down to 12 players. Very poor assumption that the rankings reflect the result of USA trials. The trials are a component of the rankings but some rating services like ProspectsNation skip the trials & host their own events. Also keep in mind that USA basketball is Nike affiliated and players like Talia Von Oelhoffen who was blowing up on the Adidas circuit this summer while USA U16 was at FIBA of Americas. Lastly players that get cut from USA basketball do get better. Moriah Jefferson did and Amari DeBerry also did. DeBerry's example is note worthy because she handled it like a pro. She wrote a letter to USA basketball thanking them for the invitation to tryout and for the feedback of what she needed to do to get better.

There is no simple solution unless they extend the tryouts or change the number of players allowed to come. Possibly not bring back the initial 12 that make the U16 team so they’re forced to look through the next wave of players?

There is a very simple solution because there is no problem. You ignore the work of USA basketball does in selecting the kids that are invited to tryout. There are thousands of kids playing HS ball and AAU the line has to be drawn somewhere. Will there be mistake (kids overlooked) made in the invitation process? Always.
Can't think of a single player that made a USA basketball team and was not invited to tryout the following session. Again the line (# of invitees) must be drawn somewhere.

It is a terrible way that scouting services give more credit to a player than they should have. Services like Olson’s ESPN lean into the results too much. Has ESPN ever dropped a girl below 25 in future years who made the initial 12 (or even the 18) as a 15 year old? The player gets the luxury of a top 20 ranking the rest of their grassroots time because they made shots that weekend when they were 15?

I'm not sure I'm following your logic here and hence I don't understand why a player who has made a USA basketball team should drop out of the top 25. Never the less is has happen multiple times. BTW USA basketball teams start with U16 team, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a player ranked below the top 25, and being ranked in the top 20 is not a luxury it is earned through hard work.
Player who made USA Basketball Age Group and was ranked Outside top 25 by ESPN:
2009 U16: Kiah Stokes #42: Alexia Standish #30
2011 U16: Sydney Umeri #29
2013 U16: Chassity Carter #45: Taylor Murray # 55: Chelsea Dungee #61
2015 U16: Bexley Wallace #100+: Valencia Myers#63 : Lauryn Miller #100+
2017 U16: Celeste Taylor #40

Conversely we have some very highly ranked ESPN players that did not make USA basketball tryout.
2019 :U19 Haley Jones # 1,
2018: U18 Brooke Demetre #3
This might be a Stanford bias though.

In addition, except in rare cases, these young players that make it are all selfish players, or have to choose to play selfish at least that weekend. With 160 players in two days, if you pass the ball, don’t expect it back.

That is very disrespectful of the players, the selection process, and and the volunteers at USA basketball. Selfish does not work very well at any level of USA basketball if you don't believe me ask Kelsey Mitchell.

 

[DaBball]

Couple errors here and a few bad assumptions. USA Basketball trials a longer than two days. It is not impossible to evaluate 160 within this time period because that is exactly what the selection committee MUST do to get down to 12 players. Very poor assumption that the rankings reflect the result of USA trials. The trials are a component of the rankings but some rating services like ProspectsNation skip the trials & host their own events. Also keep in mind that USA basketball is Nike affiliated and players like Talia Von Oelhoffen who was blowing up on the Adidas circuit this summer while USA U16 was at FIBA of Americas. Lastly players that get cut from USA basketball do get better. Moriah Jefferson did and Amari DeBerry also did. DeBerry's example is note worthy because she handled it like a pro. She wrote a letter to USA basketball thanking them for the invitation to tryout and for the feedback of what she needed to do to get better.

There is a very simple solution because there is no problem. You ignore the work of USA basketball does in selecting the kids that are invited to tryout. There are thousands of kids playing HS ball and AAU the line has to be drawn somewhere. Will there be mistake (kids overlooked) made in the invitation process? Always.
Can't think of a single player that made a USA basketball team and was not invited to tryout the following session. Again the line (# of invitees) must be drawn somewhere.


I'm not sure I'm following your logic here and hence I don't understand why a player who has made a USA basketball team should drop out of the top 25. Never the less is has happen multiple times. BTW USA basketball teams start with U16 team, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a player ranked below the top 25, and being ranked in the top 20 is not a luxury it is earned through hard work.
Player who made USA Basketball Age Group and was ranked Outside top 25 by ESPN:
2009 U16: Kiah Stokes #42: Alexia Standish #30
2011 U16: Sydney Umeri #29
2013 U16: Chassity Carter #45: Taylor Murray # 55: Chelsea Dungee #61
2015 U16: Bexley Wallace #100+: Valencia Myers#63 : Lauryn Miller #100+
2017 U16: Celeste Taylor #40

Conversely we have some very highly ranked ESPN players that did not make USA basketball tryout.
2019 :U19 Haley Jones # 1,
2018: U18 Brooke Demetre #3
This might be a Stanford bias though.


That is very disrespectful of the players, the selection process, and and the volunteers at USA basketball. Selfish does not work very well at any level of USA basketball if you don't believe me ask Kelsey Mitchell.

Thank you. I had the same opinions, but didn’t feel like formulating them in a post, so well done!

Also, see Rickea Jackson and I think Rellah Boothe(?), as examples of highly ranked players who got cut.

 

[Alydar]

Why is that? To make the team, one has to llay well at the trials, and a lot of the scouting services are there evaluating.

And the trials are a lot closer to showing how they play against other talented players and aren't these rankings meant to be predictive?

 

[Lwrc]

Couple errors here and a few bad assumptions. USA Basketball trials a longer than two days. It is not impossible to evaluate 160 within this time period because that is exactly what the selection committee MUST do to get down to 12 players. Very poor assumption that the rankings reflect the result of USA trials. The trials are a component of the rankings but some rating services like ProspectsNation skip the trials & host their own events. Also keep in mind that USA basketball is Nike affiliated and players like Talia Von Oelhoffen who was blowing up on the Adidas circuit this summer while USA U16 was at FIBA of Americas. Lastly players that get cut from USA basketball do get better. Moriah Jefferson did and Amari DeBerry also did. DeBerry's example is note worthy because she handled it like a pro. She wrote a letter to USA basketball thanking them for the invitation to tryout and for the feedback of what she needed to do to get better.

There is a very simple solution because there is no problem. You ignore the work of USA basketball does in selecting the kids that are invited to tryout. There are thousands of kids playing HS ball and AAU the line has to be drawn somewhere. Will there be mistake (kids overlooked) made in the invitation process? Always.
Can't think of a single player that made a USA basketball team and was not invited to tryout the following session. Again the line (# of invitees) must be drawn somewhere.


I'm not sure I'm following your logic here and hence I don't understand why a player who has made a USA basketball team should drop out of the top 25. Never the less is has happen multiple times. BTW USA basketball teams start with U16 team, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a player ranked below the top 25, and being ranked in the top 20 is not a luxury it is earned through hard work.
Player who made USA Basketball Age Group and was ranked Outside top 25 by ESPN:
2009 U16: Kiah Stokes #42: Alexia Standish #30
2011 U16: Sydney Umeri #29
2013 U16: Chassity Carter #45: Taylor Murray # 55: Chelsea Dungee #61
2015 U16: Bexley Wallace #100+: Valencia Myers#63 : Lauryn Miller #100+
2017 U16: Celeste Taylor #40

Conversely we have some very highly ranked ESPN players that did not make USA basketball tryout.
2019 :U19 Haley Jones # 1,
2018: U18 Brooke Demetre #3
This might be a Stanford bias though.


That is very disrespectful of the players, the selection process, and and the volunteers at USA basketball. Selfish does not work very well at any level of USA basketball if you don't believe me ask Kelsey Mitchell.

Some fair thoughts, some thoughts were misunderstood.

160 players are whittled down to 18/25 within two days. So that is correct. And although I am not criticizing the effort, I am making what seems to be a fair point. They are evaluating what is supposedly 160 of the best U16 players in the country that most USA evaluators there HAVE NEVER SEEN PLAY EVER. I am sure even the USA evaluators would say they don’t get enough time. That is that basic point. Which means it could be a process that’s improved. USA Gymnastics and other sports have different ways of establishing their teams than just a “one weekend trial”. Maybe USA basketball should consider sonething.

Over the last TEN years, an entire decade, you found 8 players that fell out of the top 30 ESPN rankings. 8. In ten years. I feel like that proves my point with ESPN being influenced by USA.

As far as players improving and such I completely agree. In fact it would make sense that many players would improve while many would digress even. So many that the number of players the USA, or ESPN have in the top 25, at age 15, should change a lot by the time they are in the final ranking as high school seniors. Non-USA making players being highly ranked certainly happens (I was never arguing it doesn’t).

Your quote here “ You ignore the work of USA basketball does in selecting the kids that are invited to tryout. There are thousands of kids playing HS ball and AAU the line has to be drawn somewhere. Will there be mistake (kids overlooked) made in the invitation process? Always.” Please understand my point, which you even make for me. There are mistakes and players missed. Your logic would be “oh well”. I disagree with that logic. Every system should evaluate effectiveness and ask “what can we do better?” Especially something as big as USA basketball.

By the way U16 trials and the U16 team consists most primarily of 15 year olds.

High ranked players not making USA team certainly happens as well, I wasn’t arguing that it doesn’t.

Lastly, you are very wrong about the selfish play. You clearly have not seen any USA trials. I have seen multiple trials. If you don’t take shots and score you won’t make it into the top 50. I don’t say the “selfish” thing to condemn. 160 girls are desperate to get noticed and they aren’t going to be noticed cause they passed the ball around or played hard defense. (Despite the fact that USA people say they will notice). When girls get the ball they try to make plays, it is the most NON TEAM environment I have ever seen. Even most scouting camps make more of the winning teams than USA does. So I respectfully disagree and stand by that statement. You have to play selfish to get noticed by evaluators who have no idea who you are going in with 160 girls and two days evaluation time.

 

[DaBball]

I mean also generally the players who make the USA teams are the best players in their respective classes. It shouldn’t be a surprise that there aren’t a ton of players inside the top 30 who made teams in the past.

 

[CocoHusky]

Some fair thoughts, some thoughts were misunderstood.

160 players are whittled down to 18/25 within two days. So that is correct. And although I am not criticizing the effort, I am making what seems to be a fair point. They are evaluating what is supposedly 160 of the best U16 players in the country that most USA evaluators there HAVE NEVER SEEN PLAY EVER. I am sure even the USA evaluators would say they don’t get enough time. That is that basic point. Which means it could be a process that’s improved. USA Gymnastics and other sports have different ways of establishing their teams than just a “one weekend trial”. Maybe USA basketball should consider sonething.

Over the last TEN years, an entire decade, you found 8 players that fell out of the top 30 ESPN rankings. 8. In ten years. I feel like that proves my point with ESPN being influenced by USA.

As far as players improving and such I completely agree. In fact it would make sense that many players would improve while many would digress even. So many that the number of players the USA, or ESPN have in the top 25, at age 15, should change a lot by the time they are in the final ranking as high school seniors. Non-USA making players being highly ranked certainly happens (I was never arguing it doesn’t).

Your quote here “ You ignore the work of USA basketball does in selecting the kids that are invited to tryout. There are thousands of kids playing HS ball and AAU the line has to be drawn somewhere. Will there be mistake (kids overlooked) made in the invitation process? Always.” Please understand my point, which you even make for me. There are mistakes and players missed. Your logic would be “oh well”. I disagree with that logic. Every system should evaluate effectiveness and ask “what can we do better?” Especially something as big as USA basketball.

By the way U16 trials and the U16 team consists most primarily of 15 year olds.

High ranked players not making USA team certainly happens as well, I wasn’t arguing that it doesn’t.

Lastly, you are very wrong about the selfish play. You clearly have not seen any USA trials. I have seen multiple trials. If you don’t take shots and score you won’t make it into the top 50. I don’t say the “selfish” thing to condemn. 160 girls are desperate to get noticed and they aren’t going to be noticed cause they passed the ball around or played hard defense. (Despite the fact that USA people say they will notice). When girls get the ball they try to make plays, it is the most NON TEAM environment I have ever seen. Even most scouting camps make more of the winning teams than USA does. So I respectfully disagree and stand by that statement. You have to play selfish to get noticed by evaluators who have no idea who you are going in with 160 girls and two days evaluation time.

I have been fortunate enough to attend two USA basketball trials. The selfish kids trying to get theirs are always the first to be sent packing. 10 players from 1 age group trails seems like a lot when you originally claim there were none. My attitude is not "oh well" to very good players being excluded. I'm all for constructive improvements. Longer evaluations would require more qualified volunteers. That would clearly disqualify you as long as you continue to believe "You have to play selfish to get noticed" . The volunteers responsible for doing the evaluations would universally disagree with you.

 

[CocoHusky]

I don't know enough about the USA tryouts to speak to that, but this statement accords with everything I've seen of McD's and Jordan Brand Classic games over the years - so much hero ball, much of it not all that heroic, mediocre efforts on defense (apart from the occasional swat block in the paint), and relatively little effort to attempt set plays. All of which makes sense when it's a ton of solo players smashed together and expected to stand out on a team of individuals with no pre-existing training or relationships. But the tryouts process is actually probably no more reflective of how good a player will be on a team than as an assessment of who'd be good at play one on one basketball. The best players (like Bueckers) will be both, but I think there are a fair amount of errors in both directions.

Completely different EVERYTHING between McD's and Jordan Brand Classic games and USA basketball evaluations. The key word here is "evaluations" as in a player at USA basketball is trying to make a team and that players skills & effort is constantly being evaluated. Mediocre effort on defense or hero ball or lack of skill will get you cut.

 

[Lwrc]

I have been fortunate enough to attend two USA basketball trials. The selfish kids trying to get theirs are always the first to be sent packing. 10 players from 1 age group trails seems like a lot when you originally claim there were none. My attitude is not "oh well" to very good players being excluded. I'm all for constructive improvements. Longer evaluations would require more qualified volunteers. That would clearly disqualify you as long as you continue to believe "You have to play selfish to get noticed" . The volunteers responsible for doing the evaluations would universally disagree with you.

Well maybe we’ve seen different trials then. Cause of the three I’ve seen no one, and I mean no one, took more shots than Azzi Fudd. No one was even close. Not a knock on her, great player. She should try to shoot to help her team win, she’s very good. But when she got the ball she wasn’t looking to pass. To say those “shoot first” players are “the first ones sent packing” is a joke. Totally not true. Or as I said, maybe we’ve seen different trials.

I wasn’t trying to disparage or come down on anyone so I’m unsure why your so mad at my comments. I have some experience as an evaluator but do not have any ambitions to work with USA. I’m sharing some observations your welcome to disagree with but calling me names and throwing stones only makes your arguments seem childish.

 

[CocoHusky]

Well maybe we’ve seen different trials then. Cause of the three I’ve seen no one, and I mean no one, took more shots than Azzi Fudd. No one was even close. Not a knock on her, great player. She should try to shoot to help her team win, she’s very good. But when she got the ball she wasn’t looking to pass. To say those “shoot first” players are “the first ones sent packing” is a joke. Totally not true. Or as I said, maybe we’ve seen different trials.

I wasn’t trying to disparage or come down on anyone so I’m unsure why your so mad at my comments. I have some experience as an evaluator but do not have any ambitions to work with USA. I’m sharing some observations your welcome to disagree with but calling me names and throwing stones only makes your arguments seem childish.

Imagine that. The most talented and youngest player in the gym (Azzi Fudd) was the one that took the most shots.
Not sure why you were expecting something else. You weren't trying to disparage anyone you successfully did. That would include the USA basketball coaches evaluators, rating services, the players, me and now Azzi Fudd. The real joke is that you attended three trials that were so unsatisfactory. Hoping you have a better experience next time.

 

[Dokey]

Call me perverse but I’d love to watch a game where the commentators have to deal with covering Greta Kampschroeder, Saylor Poffenbarger, and Jersey Wolfenbarger. It’s a great country.

 

[Fairfield Fan]

Is DeBerry a possibility for UConn? Lattimore? Akunwafo?

 

[meyers7]

Call me perverse but I’d love to watch a game where the commentators have to deal with covering Greta Kampschroeder, Saylor Poffenbarger, and Jersey Wolfenbarger. It’s a great country.

I would think they would quickly become "Greta", "Saylor" and "Jersey".

 

[kat0189]

Is DeBerry a possibility for UConn? Lattimore? Akunwafo?

Akunwafo was a new name for me when I first saw the list, and I keep tabs on California HS prospects fairly closely being a Cal fan. So I would guess she's earlier in the process than others who have had more exposure.

In the glimpses of video that I have since watched of her, I'd venture to say her skill level is about average for a young big at this stage, so not nearly as advanced as DeBerry, but appears coordinated. Furthermore, she does not appear nearly as athletic as Lattimore (who dunks), but definitely not slow either and has a bit more girth.

She might be more mobile and overall better prospect than the last high-major caliber 6'5" post out of California, Angel Jackson c/o 2019, whom folks here said was on Geno's radar for a bit (but ultimately did not seem to be offered).

 

[kat0189]

Akunwafo was a new name for me when I first saw the list, and I keep tabs on California HS prospects fairly closely being a Cal fan. So I would guess she's earlier in the process than others who have had more exposure.

In the glimpses of video that I have since watched of her, I'd venture to say her skill level is about average for a young big at this stage, so not nearly as advanced as DeBerry, but appears coordinated. Furthermore, she does not appear nearly as athletic as Lattimore (who dunks), but definitely not slow either and has a bit more girth.

She might be more mobile and overall better prospect than the last high-major caliber 6'5" post out of California, Angel Jackson c/o 2019, whom folks here said was on Geno's radar for a bit (but ultimately did not seem to be offered).

Better than my speculation...here's a little video of Clarice Akunwafo in action: Clarice Akunwafo

 

[Dokey]

I would think they would quickly become "Greta", "Saylor" and "Jersey".

You’re no fun. Poffenbarger dishes to Kampschroeder as Wolfenbarger sets screen...a guy can dream. If only my grandmother Dinkelacker could play...

 

[nwhoopfan]

Is it weird to anyone else that Von Oelfhoffen doesn't have a city or high school listed? She lives in Tri Cities (Pasco, Kennewick and Richland). There are a bunch of HS in the higher classifications there, 3A or 4A. I did a bit of internet sleuthing last night. Looks like she was at Chiawana (one of the big schools) her Fr. year, but was at Tri Cities Prep as a soph. That is a 2B school. That's an even lower classification than Van Lith is playing in at Cashmere. That can't be challenging for a player of that caliber even slightly. Probably AAU ball is more important than high school for many prospects, but that's a head scratcher for me when she has other options.

 

[WewatchBall]

Players like Raven Johnson, Taylor Bigby, Kayla McPherson, Jersey Wolfenbanger, Okikiola Iriafen could have very well made the USA team. Again making USA doesn’t require some 1 to jump in the rankings or drop. USA team is a matter of preference.