Prospects Nation 2017 Player Ranking Update

[Sluconn Husky]

The list expands from twenty-five to sixty.

Jade Williams jumps t0 #6 after a strong showing at the U-19 trials.

Andra Espinosa-Hunter 47th.

http://prospectsnation.com/players/ranked/2017

 

[willtalk]

Wow! Nine players out of sixty from Georgia. Only four from California.

 

[Wbbfan1]

http://prospectsnation.com/players/ranked/2017

Espinoza-Hunter is ranked 47th.

 

[CocoHusky]

The list expands from twenty-five to sixty.

Jade Williams jumps t0 #6 after a strong showing at the U-19 trials.

Andra Espinosa-Hunter 47th.

http://prospectsnation.com/players/ranked/2017

I am surprised that another UCONN 2017 target Danielle Patterson is not on this list.

 

[HGN]

http://prospectsnation.com/players/ranked/2017

Espinoza-Hunter is ranked 47th.

Thanks for the link WbbFan...........My hope is that AEH will make steady progress up the Rankings over the next 2 years. With this summer of USA Basketball play and experience , and potentially next year as well, she will improve. Hopefully that #47 could become a 7 or 17 by 2017.

 

[Magy Cannon]

Wow! Nine players out of sixty from Georgia. Only four from California.

Three of the five five stars from TX.

 

[MilfordHusky]

http://prospectsnation.com/players/ranked/2017

Espinoza-Hunter is ranked 47th.

I believe that AEH played out of position to help her team. I'm fairly sure she'll move up. I'm not sure how high, but I expect top 20-30 or better.

 

[Alexmia]

What surprises me is how few bigs there are in this class. Two at 6'4" and a few 6'3"s.

 

[Huskies Rule]

I am surprised that another UCONN 2017 target Danielle Patterson is not on this list.

What the hell is going on? There are so damn many low-ranking and unranked recruits (Molly Bent, Kyla Irwin, Patterson, Espinoza-Hunter), and such a cacophany of skepticism, it's clear that coach Auriemma has lost his mind and must be replaced immediately, before he completely destroys the program.

 

[UConnCat]

It is surprising that Patterson is among PN's top 60 players given the number of elite programs that are reportedly showing interest in her. Then again, Patterson's stock reportedly soared at the Boo W tourney and PN sent only one of its scouts to Boo (briefly, I think) while PN hosted its own event that same weekend.

 

[Boreifs]

Blue Star has Espinoza-Hunter ranked third, right after Walker and Boothe. She also made the U16 team, so the evidence seems to be fairly strong that being ranked 47th is ridiculously low.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Blue Star has Espinoza-Hunter ranked third, right after Walker and Boothe. She also made the U16 team, so the evidence seems to be fairly strong that being ranked 47th is ridiculously low.

She plays for Mike Flynn's AAU team so it probably shouldn't be a surprise that she's ranked very high at Blue Star. McCormick ranked her 6th as of late last year. Hoopgurlz doesn't have her in their top-25 yet.

 

[CocoHusky]

It is surprising that Patterson is among PN's top 60 players given the number of elite programs that are reportedly showing interest in her. Then again, Patterson's stock reportedly soared at the Boo W tourney and PN sent only one of its scouts to Boo (briefly, I think) while PN hosted its own event that same weekend.

I think you may be missing a not in your first sentence- Patterson is not among PN's .... In addition to PN not seeing Patterson at Boo there is the damming (IMO) evaluation of Patterson from Olson of ESPN Dec 2014 " inconsistent production on both ends of the floor"
http://espn.go.com/high-school/girls-basketball/recruiting/player/_/id/189242/danielle-patterson
My concern is that sometimes the player never recovers from the bad evaluation, most recently Ashley Hearn UCLA 2015 was label with "inconsistent effort" and more recently Boothe 2017 from most recent USA basketball trials was labeled with being at times "best player & other times invisible".

 

[CocoHusky]

She plays for Mike Flynn's AAU team so it probably shouldn't be a surprise that she's ranked very high at Blue Star. McCormick ranked her 6th as of late last year. Hoopgurlz doesn't have her in their top-25 yet.

Good point Slu. Danielle Patterson by contrast not only changed high schools but also left the Philly Belles April 2015 for the NJ Sparks.

 

[Huskies Rule]

I think you may be missing a not in your first sentence- Patterson is not among PN's .... In addition to PN not seeing Patterson at Boo there is the damming (IMO) evaluation of Patterson from Olson of ESPN Dec 2014 " inconsistent production on both ends of the floor"
http://espn.go.com/high-school/girls-basketball/recruiting/player/_/id/189242/danielle-patterson
My concern is that sometimes the player never recovers from the bad evaluation, most recently Ashley Hearn UCLA 2015 was label with "inconsistent effort" and more recently Boothe 2017 from most recent USA basketball trials was labeled with being at times "best player & other times invisible".

Coco- Aside from the indisputable evaluations of the really elite players in every class, there is simply so darn much subjectivity and bias in these evaluations/rankings. I'm certain kids do read that stuff, and it can affect them in various ways -perhaps to motivate them to prove the ratings wrong, or maybe bum them out and make them question their own abilities. But a player who will get so "Bent" (sorry) out of shape as to "never recover from the bad evaluation" is definitely NOT the kind of tough, strong-willed, determined kid that Geno recruits or one who could ever succeed at the pressure-cooker that is UConn Women's Basketball [imo]

 

[CocoHusky]

Coco- Aside from the indisputable evaluations of the really elite players in every class, there is simply so darn much subjectivity and bias in these evaluations/rankings. I'm certain kids do read that stuff, and it can affect them in various ways -perhaps to motivate them to prove the ratings wrong, or maybe bum them out and make them question their own abilities. But a player who will get so "Bent" (sorry) out of shape as to "never recover from the bad evaluation" is definitely NOT the kind of tough, strong-willed, determined kid that Geno recruits or one who could ever succeed at the pressure-cooker that is UConn Women's Basketball [imo]

You have hit on many important points here and I considered responding to you privately so as not to bore everyone else. My perspective is that I have two daughters that have been through the rating system recently-ended in 2010. I agree that the rating system are highly subjective but more destructive that the subjectivity are the ratings services that have built in conflicts of interest-two of which have been eluded to by Slu and UCONN Cat. BlueStar & Philly Belles AAU are under the same organization run by Mike Flynn. PN advertises that they do not rate players unless they actually see them play–great policy -but a horrible implementation because PN’s solution is to host their own tournament so they can see more kids play. FullCourt does the same thing. Hopefully the conflicts of interest are evident; 1) A rating service should not be running AAU teams. 2) A rating service should not be hosting tournaments. Those two conflicts inevitably result in players that are in the same AAU organization or play in the rating service sponsored tournaments geting rated higher. Full disclosure: Just so you don’t think I am being a total hypocrite- Both my daughter played for the Philly Belles AAU-an overwhelmingly positive experience for an entire decade.
The recruit that never recovers from a bad rating is probably not UCONN worthy- I agree. But outside of UCONN is something called the real world which these “non-UCONN worthy” kids have to live in-and there tons of them. The poor evaluation presents an unnecessary stigma/ obstacle. So like the reverse of a moth to a flame when UCONN interest in a kids grows so do other schools interest, If UCONN back away so will other schools.
Overall though the fault is ours-yes yours and mine. We consume and over-analyze everything the recruiting services produce as the absolute gospel-both positive and negative. We should be using them for what they are- incomplete, relative, observations, perhaps then “we” would realize that there is no such thing as an “indisputable evaluations” no matter how highly or lowly ranked the player.

 

[TFintheMix]

The potential conflicts noted are worrying but in the end I've wondered how important are the ratings. There are far more than 100 girls joining top D1 programs every year. I think that college programs like say that they have a top # ranked recruit or a top # rated class but good players will get selected by good teams. UConn interest and offers to girls who are not on any of these lists are a good indications of that. Aliyyah Handford is a good example of someone who was under the radar and not on many lists most of her high school career but ended up a a good program for her at St. Johns.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I wonder how much stock is placed in the rating services anyway? I know they give us fans a glorious excuse to argue, but there are so many examples of ratings being unpredictable prognosticators of college success, I don't imagine many recruiting coaches meetings where the coaches decide between two candidates, having been seen by the staff in multiple games, being based on the average rating of the two.

 

[TFintheMix]

And smart coaches seem to have specific types of players in mind that complements their system. Rutgers likes athletic players who can play their defensive system. St. Johns loves slashing guards. Villanova likes long range/3pt shooters. UConn likes athletic, versatile shooters. Penn St. seems to like big post players.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Good point Slu. Danielle Patterson by contrast not only changed high schools but also left the Philly Belles April 2015 for the NJ Sparks.

He still has Patterson the 10th player on his board though. In fact, Blue Star is the only service that has her ranked at the moment.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

^^Amend that to the 11th listed player on Blue Star for Patterson.