Top prospects for 2021....ESPN | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Top prospects for 2021....ESPN

This set of rankings is totally amateurish. I don't think the rankings are very accurate, and the fact that the verbiage doesn't match the ranking list is ludicrously poor. ESPN should have waited until all the info was internally consistent before going public. This new group is off to a really, really, really bad start. :eek:
 
Just for comparison here are the Blue Star top 30 for 2021:

1 Azzi Fudd
2 Olivia Miles
3 Aaliyah Moore
4 Amari DeBerry
5 Payton Verhulst
6 Saniya Rivers
7 Caroline Ducharme
8 Greta Kampschroeder
9 Taylor Bigby
10 Saylor Poffenbarger
11 Brooke Demetre
12 Okikiola Iriafen
13 Sania Feagin
14 Sonia Citron
15 Rayah Marshall
16 Jillian Hollingshead
17 Raven Johnson
18 Damiya "DD" Hagemann
19 Kyndall Hunter
20 Jada Walker
21 Kayla McPherson
22 Brianna Turnage
23 Macie James
24 Jersey Wolfenbarger
25 Teonni Key
26 Reigan Richardson
27 Clarice Akunwafo
28 O'Mariah Gordon
29 Ava Learn
30 Rori Harmon Website Moved

Since UConn's 3 recruits are all top 10 we can just assume these are the most accurate rankings. :rolleyes: :)


And to add even more confusion here's a link to Prospect nation's top 75

2021 Ranked Players | Prospects Nation

prospectsnation.com prospectsnation.com
 
Alydar said:
Just for comparison here are the Blue Star top 30 for 2021:


6 Saniya Rivers

13 Sania Feagin

17 Raven Johnson


Since UConn's 3 recruits are all top 10 we can just assume these are the most accurate rankings. :rolleyes: :)
Expand ...

I'll still "settle" for what we got. But, just for argument's sake: Do your think Summer AAU performances can change rankings?
 
EricLA said:
So Ducharme is their #5 top prospect, but they have her rated as #37 on their list?

So in updating the espnW 100 for the Class of 2021, our staff pored through hours of film and talked with coaches to re-rank the top high school seniors in the country. Here are the top five seniors and five other prospects whose stocks rose over the past few months.

I get that with the pandemic, there is precious little to go off in comparing recruits, but that's an insane leap - am I reading it right? IF they were to update their rankings, Caroline would jump from #37 to #5??

Per ESPN their top 5:
  1. Azzi Fudd
  2. Raven Johnson
  3. Saniya Rivers
  4. Sania Feagan
  5. Caroline Ducharme
Not sure I'm reading the entire article right, but #37 to #5? WOW...
Expand ...
It seems the key to becoming a top high school senior you simply need to commit to Dawn Staley! I must say, I’m a little unsure what criteria were used, as it could not have been watching them play, results of games, or NCAA tournament results? Even if these changes can be attributed to some concrete data, it is difficult to believe that over the course of five to six months of enforced idleness ( games, season, tournaments) Ducharme jumped 30 places and Saylor dropped 20!
 
.-.
I've seen Saylor 3x. Here are her weaknesses: (1) She had hip surgery; (2) Middletown plays low-level competition.

I don't know if Saylor is the #5 player or the #18 player, but she's clearly top 20 and probably top 10.
 
It looks like the Hoopgurlz rankings reflect Premier rankings now.

2026 SportsCenter NEXT 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 www.espn.com
 
visitingcock said:
I'll still "settle" for what we got. But, just for argument's sake: Do your think Summer AAU performances can change rankings?
Expand ...

Sure. What makes you think these weren't post-summer AAU rankings?
 
sivad40 said:
It looks like the Hoopgurlz rankings reflect Premier rankings now.

2026 SportsCenter NEXT 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 www.espn.com
Expand ...

Back to the list from this morning which might mean that's the permanent one.

7 of their top 20 going to one of the Carolinas.
 
.-.
Saylor up to 30. It does indeed seem they are making their updates in real time. I know i said i wouldn't comment till they were done, but my comments are more related to "which ones are right"...

There are some recruits who are #1, or top 5, or even top 10 according to the services we look at most - ESPN, Blue Star and Prospects Nation. Those are pretty easy - as in Fudd is #1 per everyone. But other players are all over the map. Blue Star seems to be really high on all the UCONN recruits. PN not as much, and ESPN HG is i mixed bag.

Most of us, when we do a deep dive, will look at the composite rankings, meaning the average of the rankings by all the services. Sometimes we get reports of ASGR, another service who I don't think publicly publishes their rankings. At any rate, at least an average of 3-4 services gives us a good idea of how the kids are ranked coming in.

A few of the biggest discrepancies i ever saw involved Kiah Stokes, Stef Dolson and Kelly Faris.
  • Kiah - 42, 14, 6, 9
  • Stef - 39, 24, 25, 12
  • Kelly - 34, 26, 9, 7
Kiah averaged about 18. Stef about 25. Kelly about 19. I think in general, for what those kids meant to UCONN, Stef and Kelly definitely performed way above their rankings, and Kiah was definitely better, but not by as huge a margin as the other 2.

I guess my point is as much as we scratch our heads at some of the numbers we see, the flip side is in a lot of ways the folks ranking for the services have a thankless task as most people will find many nits to pick with their numbers. But bottom line, taking the average should give us a decent idea of how good these kids are currently combined with how the evaluators view their potential. A very subjective science to be sure...
 
Alydar said:
LOL And it's just a coincidence that ESPN has contracts with both the ACC and SEC and none with the PAC12.
Expand ...
Great point Alydar. ESPN has a history of glorifying favorites. It seems that they latch onto one player or one issue and milk it until the cow runs dry. Their ex-jocks and ex-coaches fawn over players who, if you had to work with some, would lead you request a new work station.
 
.-.
Steelerone said:
Great point Alydar. ESPN has a history of glorifying favorites. It seems that they latch onto one player or one issue and milk it until the cow runs dry. Their ex-jocks and ex-coaches fawn over players who, if you had to work with some, would lead you request a new work station.
Expand ...
 
I just think ESPN has become a corrupt, bloated bureaucracy that can no longer be trusted. They seem (imo) to be more interested in what benefits their brand than objectivity and truth. They are no longer willing to make the tough call but rather seem to take the least controversial path every time. When you start choosing your bottom line over truth and objectivity, you have lost your way.
 
Cuango said:
I just think ESPN has become a corrupt, bloated bureaucracy that can no longer be trusted. They seem (imo) to be more interested in what benefits their brand than objectivity and truth. They are no longer willing to make the tough call but rather seem to take the least controversial path every time. When you start choosing your bottom line over truth and objectivity, you have lost your way.
Expand ...


You sir/madam are talking about what makes US business the success it is. :)
 
visitingcock said:
Excellent post by CocoHuskey about evaluators in the September UConn recruiting thread.

Red flag about players paying $900 to be "evaluated." Also, the evaluators are tied in with a tournament that Raven and Caroline competed in last month. I'm pretty certain their performance in that tounament had something big to do with their big "jumps" in the rankings
Expand ...

The $900 evaluation fee is just the tip of the iceberg regarding red flags with all these evaluation services! Sneaker companies pay 10s of thousands of dollars for them to promote "Nike kids", "Adidas kids", etc. Coaches also pay 10s of thousands of dollars, especially if they are on the hot seat at their respected school. Spending $20k to raise your recruiting class ranking in order to save your $1+ million dollar/year job is just a sound financial decision for a lot of these coaches! These services also receive 10s of thousands of dollars from high school/AAU coaches who are looking to get their players in high level D1 schools. Just a really dishonest and shady business from top to bottom! I would take ALL rankings with a grain of salt, good and bad.
 
Cuango said:
I just think ESPN has become a corrupt, bloated bureaucracy that can no longer be trusted. They seem (imo) to be more interested in what benefits their brand than objectivity and truth. They are no longer willing to make the tough call but rather seem to take the least controversial path every time. When you start choosing your bottom line over truth and objectivity, you have lost your way.
Expand ...

Agreed, but according to their ratings and massive layoffs it has absolutely backfired! The saying "get woke, go broke" exists for a reason.
 
.-.
When you start choosing your bottom line over truth and objectivity, you have lost your way.
Expand ...

The truth unfortunately ends up being what is written in the headlines and ESPN writes the headlines.

While I curse ESPN often and loudly they are really the main source for wcbb streaming. I think that Fox will stream all of the UConn games (and put a few in FS1/2 . If Bueckers draws viewers like I think she will it will be interesting to see who gets non-conference game rights unless Fox gets BE conference and non-conference rights under the one package.
 
Last edited:
soxfan23 said:
The $900 evaluation fee is just the tip of the iceberg regarding red flags with all these evaluation services! Sneaker companies pay 10s of thousands of dollars for them to promote "Nike kids", "Adidas kids", etc. Coaches also pay 10s of thousands of dollars, especially if they are on the hot seat at their respected school. Spending $20k to raise your recruiting class ranking in order to save your $1+ million dollar/year job is just a sound financial decision for a lot of these coaches! These services also receive 10s of thousands of dollars from high school/AAU coaches who are looking to get their players in high level D1 schools. Just a really dishonest and shady business from top to bottom! I would take ALL rankings with a grain of salt, good and bad.
Expand ...
I agree with your premise that all of these rankings are subjective and overrated. But two questions. How does a high level coach save their job by having a high recruiting class ranking from these gurus if it turns out that those kids aren't actually very good and don't win a lot of games? And do you really believe that high level D1 coaches are risking their jobs and signing players based on what these amateur gurus and pushy AAU coaches tell them?
 
I think they earn their money with detailed individual scouting reports paid for by either the parents or the colleges. Coaches that don't have 6 figure recruiting budgets probably have to rely on these reports and their own networks to find players. So a rater shouldn't last long giving out BS advise.

But the shoe connection gave me a thought that maybe in the recruit's bio they should list the shoe of her HS/AAU teams and the shoe company of the schools recruiting her. It might help in predicting choices. :rolleyes:
 
I enjoy the rankings because they are debatable and an indication of who is doing well in recruiting. If DeBarry drops in the one of the

As far as the Uconn kids, if a certain, unnamed, number one ranked recruit chooses the Huskies, Geno and his staff will be ecstatic with all four, no matter where the other three will be ranked.
 
BobbyJ said:
I agree with your premise that all of these rankings are subjective and overrated. But two questions. How does a high level coach save their job by having a high recruiting class ranking from these gurus if it turns out that those kids aren't actually very good and don't win a lot of games? And do you really believe that high level D1 coaches are risking their jobs and signing players based on what these amateur gurus and pushy AAU coaches tell them?
Expand ...

Coach X is on the hot seat and about to get fired, he/she tells the AD just wait until next year, I have this amazing recruiting class coming in, he/she gets an additional couple of years at $1+mil/yr. When the kids show up and don't produce he/she will eventually be fired but they just made an additional couple million dollars. When I say "high level D1", I am not referring to perennial Top 10 teams, I am referring to the top 25% of schools. There are 331 D1 women's teams, those teams in the 40-80 range don't have the recruiting budgets of Top 10 schools, the coaches of those schools ABSOLUTELY pay close attention to recruiting rankings!
 
Last edited:
Alydar said:
I think they earn their money with detailed individual scouting reports paid for by either the parents or the colleges. Coaches that don't have 6 figure recruiting budgets probably have to rely on these reports and their own networks to find players. So a rater shouldn't last long giving out BS advise.

But the shoe connection gave me a thought that maybe in the recruit's bio they should list the shoe of her HS/AAU teams and the shoe company of the schools recruiting her. It might help in predicting choices. :rolleyes:
Expand ...

One of the main reasons why I think Fudd is going to Maryland, far too many connections to Under Armor and Maryland.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,964
Messages
4,547,003
Members
10,428
Latest member
CarloPFF


Top Bottom