New Bluestar rankings

[Charliebball]

Respectfully, I disagree. The summer has several AAU tournaments, plus USA Basketball trials. And there are greater opportunities to see the players go against one another.

Also, if you see players five times over the summer, but wait until the end to change or update rankings, the last performance could have a greater influence. Updated rankings after seeing players play provides more of a present sense impressive (to borrow from the Rules of Evidence).

my experience tells me that if the evaluator has to change a judgement five times during the course of three months then somebody is being inconsistent................a fundamentally sound player may not shine quite as brightly against better competition but their skills should still be evident otherwise they simply fooled the evaluator into thinking they were better then they really were........

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

my experience tells me that if the evaluator has to change a judgement five times during the course of three months then somebody is being inconsistent......a fundamentally sound player may not shine quite as brightly against better competition but their skills should still be evident otherwise they simply fooled the evaluator into thinking they were better then they really were...

Skills are one thing. How they rank compare to their peers is completely different.

Updating rankings based on number of times seen, performances against elite competition, etc. is sound strategy. Would you characterize a player based on one good game, or do you evaluate the player based on multiple games and different opponents? The answer, to me, is obvious.

 

[Charliebball]

Skills are one thing. How they rank compare to their peers is completely different.

Updating rankings based on number of times seen, performances against elite competition, etc. is sound strategy. Would you characterize a player based on one good game, or do you evaluate the player based on multiple games and different opponents? The answer, to me, is obvious.

perhaps the answer is to wait on passing judgement all together until the evaluator is confident of their findings................

 

[willtalk]

perhaps the answer is to wait on passing judgement all together until the evaluator is confident of their findings......

If they did that they would be out of business. Basically, everyone is just evaluating players based on what they see. Many undermanned rating services go entirely by what other rating services rate the players as. ESPN's Hoopgils which used to have a big staff now only has one person on WCBB. Everyone that knows basketball recognizes that players performances are expressed on a sliding scale somewhere between their best and their worst. Even normally poor shooters can have lights out shooting games and even great shooters can have off games.

It is really up to everyone to recognize the circumstances of player evaluations. Olson of ESPN usually in his evaluations will document when he viewed the players. Because of limited resources, his evaluations are based on specific major AAU events where multiple teams are present at the same time.

There is nothing wrong about giving some credence to rating services as long as we also recognize that they are limited and should not be taken at face value. Nothing wrong with using all available resources in making evaluations as long as we recognize their potential fallibilities

 

[CocoHusky]

perhaps the answer is to wait on passing judgement all together until the evaluator is confident of their findings......

So the evaluators would have to wait to rank players until after they have graduated college?
The evaluation is a continuous process. The reality is some of the ranking will always vary among the recruiting services and some players will always out perform their rankings. That is the definition of uncertainty=ranking business.

 

[Charliebball]

So the evaluators would have to wait to rank players until after they have graduated college?
The evaluation is a continuous process. The reality is some of the ranking will always vary among the recruiting services and some players will always out perform their rankings. That is the definition of uncertainty=ranking business.

I was commenting on the idea that players rankings could be changed five times in a three month window....................how about once at the beginning of the AAU season and once at the end instead of five times...................it appears to me that this may be as much about justifying the price/necessity of their services as it is about the changes in a player's abilities over such a short span.............we all know that most players have good days and average days but that doesn't diminish their overall skills which should be a constant at this level of play........

 

[CocoHusky]

I was commenting on the idea that players rankings could be changed five times in a three month window.....how about once at the beginning of the AAU season and once at the end instead of five times?

Take it from someone who became obsessed with his daughters ranking, acquired a PHD in the ranking processes & ulcers as a result. A player being written about or changing of rankings 5 times in three months is an absolutely fabulous thing. It means someone was not only watching her but also paying attention and cared enough to write about it. Think of how relatively few players get ranked in the first place.

 

[Charliebball]

Take it from someone who became obsessed with his daughters ranking, acquired a PHD in the ranking processes & ulcers as a result. A player being written about or changing of rankings 5 times in three months is an absolutely fabulous thing. It means someone was not only watching her but also paying attention and cared enough to write about it. Think of how relatively few players get ranked in the first place.

yes seen and written about five times great, reranked five times questionable........