Recruit Rankings - what do they mean?

[Xalias]

In reading this and other sites it seems that many people put lots and lots of stock into the player rankings and how they will serve as an indicator of the recruit's impact on a program.

When reading a thread on this site about the ranking of our 2008 class, A10fan noted the site www.rscihoops.com and I checked it out. Basically, they take an avg. of several others to derive their ranking of the Top 100 players. I looked back through 1998, the first year available, and was a bit startled when I realized that the highest ranked recruit (according to them) was Lloyd Price in 1998 at #28, with Kenny at #40 this year and a few in the 50's and two at #95 or higher. None in 1999, 2003, 2005, or 2007 and never more than one in a single year.

Many of our highest ranked recruits haven't ended up being our best players. It's something that I knew intuitively, but seeing it all at once was intetesting and, given the high level of success of our program, made me ask the questions - What do the rankings really mean? and, in particular, what do they mean to X?

When ranking a class, how can things like coaching and style of play at the school or impact of the player/class on the existing mix of players and their chemistry be incorporated into the ranking? This might end up with a dual ranking of the individual and class (capabilities, fit/impact at school). If there was a way to include these types of things, should they be?

The rankings are below:

Xavier’s Top 100 recruits since 1998 – per RSCIhoops.com
2008: 40 - Kenny Frease 6-11, C Massillon, OH
2007: n/a
2006: 100 - Adrion Graves 6-4, WG Cincinnati, OH
2005: n/a
2004: 56 - Churchill Odia 6-6, WF Rockville, MD
2003: n/a
2002: 95 - Dedrick Finn 6-0, PG Newburgh, IN
2001: 52 - Keith Jackson 6-5, WF Cincinnati, OH
2000: 53 - Romain Guessagba-Sato 6-4, 2G Dayton, OH
1999: n/a
1998: 28 - Lloyd Price 6-5, WF Newark, DE

[drudy23]

Recruiting rankings are like pre-season rankings. The top schools you can pretty much count on their top prospects being good, but once you get past that, it's pretty much a crap shoot.

[gladdenguy]

Looking at those Top 100 recruits for X, it does no justice at all.
Sato panned out. Graves, Jackson, Finn, Price, and Odia were all disappointments even though Graves has 2 more years and Frease has not played.
I pay no attention past 10 or 15. A 200 ranking player could be just as good as a 30.

[waggy]

I think recruiting services has become a bigger business over the years, and it leads to more and therefore better information, such that the rankings have a little more meaning possibly. That said, rankings are subjective, so no two are going to be alike.

What gives me a lot of confidence is seeing the players that Miller has not only recruited to X, but those he missed out on the last few years. Lots of these players were productive freshmen for their respective programs, moreso than maybe players that were ranked higher. To me it's clear he knows what he is doing when evaluating talent.

[muskiefan82]

I don't care about the number or the stars, it's the talent level and if Sean and Co. have evaluated a player and determined he meets their needs,then I believe.....I have since the day Sean wanted Kyle Lowry and Matta wanted Odia....I think we all know who the better player was....i trust Sean's evaluations more than Rivals or anyone else. If Sean says they fit, then that's enough for me.

[wkrq59]

Ratings are just somebody's opinion written to make money. The ones that count come early in the season and even they don't mean much until January or February.
Price was instrumental in winning a UC game for X. Sato obviously was under-rated. As has been pointed out, the only rating that really counts is Sean Miller's and the evaluations of his staff and Sister Rose Ann Fleming.
In the end, all these ratings in the pre-season are just an extension of "My daddy can beat up your daddy," a mouthing uttered by grade school kids.
And it's still the off-season.:D

[XU05and07]

I think recruiting services has become a bigger business over the years, and it leads to more and therefore better information, such that the rankings have a little more meaning possibly. That said, rankings are subjective, so no two are going to be alike.



The bolded statement might be true, but some of the stuff out there is just crap. More beneficial information may come of more information and opinions, but you have to weed through the dust and smokescreens to see what is factual, accurate, and important.

[MADXSTER]

The first thing that people do not take into consideration is that it really should be viewed as a guide or an approximation not "the rule" as to where a player stands. I use the give or take 20 spots.

The second thing is that rankings are really like a snap shot in time. If memory serves me correctly, when Brian Grant committed to Xavier he was only 6' 4" and by the time the season started his freshman year he was 6' 8". He went from SG to PF in less than 2 years. It would have been very difficult to rank him accurately in that time period.

Besides, we Americans rank everything from basketball players to swimsuit models. But for some reason we forget to debate the rankings of swimsuit models. We just enjoy.

[stophorseabuse]

Way off on B-Grant Xster. He is from my rival high school. He was about 6-7 and grew to 6-9. However, he was completely raw, playing only 1 year of varsity ball before arriving at X, and he certainly had zero guard skills. He was a man among boys at Georgetown. Georgetown has had some serious players for a little town, Grant, his brother Brandon, the Chadwell clan, Jarret Young, and now this group that won a state title last year. Quite a little basketball town.
________
hot box vaporizers (http://hotboxvaporizers.com)

[MADXSTER]

Thanks horse. I thought I read that about him but it must have been someone else.

Grant must be an unbelievable hometown hero. Does he ever get back?

[MADXSTER]

Way off on B-Grant Xster. He is from my rival high school. He was about 6-7 and grew to 6-9. However, he was completely raw, playing only 1 year of varsity ball before arriving at X, and he certainly had zero guard skills.

Horse, this also goes along with the topic. Brian Grant by no means should been in anyones rankings coming out of high school. Rankins are a snap shot. As Grant progressed and passed others during his college years(give credit to Xavier and Brian) others were moving down the list. By the end of his Xavier career he was ranked by the NBA accordingly but even then it was a snap shot and not a guarantee that he would succeed.