Rating Services Questions

[Ricker]

I've been following recruiting rankings since I was a subscriber to Hoop Scoop and Gibbons reports probably in the late 80's early 90's when everything was mailed. I just use the services to help me keep my eye on good players, but I'm embarrassed to say that after all these years I still don't know what any of these services are even trying to rank. I'm sure each ranking service is different, but I'd be interested if anybody on this board has seen an explanation for any of them.

Are they ranking who is the best high school player right now with dominate skills and physical attributes?
Are they ranking who they project will be the best college players based on current skills and physical attributes?
Are they ranking who will eventually be the best pro prospects?
Are they ranking who will be the best college players as finished products, (gaining strength, improving on something)?
Are they ranking every attribute individually and arriving at a score, (like a golf course rating)?
I assume they evaluate guards, wings, power forwards, and centers differently?
What makes a highly skilled point guard more highly ranked than a 6'10PF or visa versa?

I'm pretty sure most ranking services are a consensus of a small group at those rating services. Is each person at a 24/7 or ESPN, or Rivals, using the same metrics or might one analyst be valuing what a player is now, and another analyst valuing what they think a player can become?

At times I have seen a rating service tout that their ratings have correlated with high NBA draft picks which suggests that might be a focus. I have never seen a rating service correlate it's ratings with 'all conference' or 'ncaa all american' team selections which would be relevant if you were projecting college prospects.

Maybe somebody on the board has seen these questions addressed and can provide some insight.

(I admit that my curiosity is piqued by Filipowski and Karaban and Clingan, in comparison to players like Justice Williams. Players that are winners against top competition, statistically blow away other players, and are ranked lower. A player like Clingan who has great tools, but more to work on, versus a more finished product like Filipowski or Karaban).

Also, Evan Mobley got his ass kicked as a senior against Hunter Dickenson, and Ware that went to Kentucky kicked his ass the game before. He was number 1 but his teams lost and I never saw him dominate or even play even to another quality player. His ranking had to impute potential and strength gain rather than what he was as a senior.

Interested in what you might know

 

[HuskyHawk]

I think the answer to all of those questions is "yes".

 

[Lynyrd]

Great post. I too loved the old Bob Gibbons All Star Report, Van Coleman's Future Stars, HoopSeen, Husky Blue & White, to name but a few ...

In looking back at some of my old publications (yes, I still have them) ...

Eastern Basketball (July 1996) specifically notes their ranking is a result of the impact incoming freshmen will have in college.

While Basketball America (1994) refers to NBA projected talent for their rankings

Obviously the landscape has changed but initially scouting reports (which ultimately lead to ranking of prospects), like those produced by Tom Konchalski and Bob Gibbons, were meant to assist college coaches so I think that gives us a basis for what the sites were initially intended. Their purpose now is most likely akin to that of the national media ... obsession with click-bait.

 

[HooperScooper]

It's a good question. I've asked this question of different recruiting analysts a few times and the general answer is they are ranking the impact the recruit will have in college combined with their professional potential. So sometimes you may have someone who is tall and very athletic who is just starting to scratch the surface of their potential and they have to project where that player will end up. Other times you may have someone, like Karaban, who dominates at every level he's played but lacks that freak athleticism so he gets knocked down because they might not see NBA level potential.

Which is why the recruiting rankings are not an exact science and you can't take them literally. I do think they do a very good job of evaluating talent but as the NBA draft proves, nobody can get it right all the time.

 

[aburks41]

It's probably all subjective. Some might place more emphasis on just college level impact, NBA potential, or just pure potential in general like how college football recruits positionless players literally as "Athlete".

Look at a kid like Andre Jackson. Recruiting sites had him listed as a SG, but Hurley thinks when he goes to the NBA he'll be drafted as a PG. Does that factor in to his recruiting rating? If he was listed as a 6'6" PG could that have bumped him up a couple of spots? Maybe.

 

[Watchdog]

Inexact is the word. Flexibility on criteria also important.
JB was #66 according to 247 (number 10 at his position), and in two years projects to be a lottery pick.
Keeping it vague as to their methodology may be the key to the ratings' services maintaining any sense of credibility.

 

[UofCT]

One of my favorite things is to randomly look back at old rankings and see how wrong they were.

Class of 2015 Rivals Rankings

#1 - Skal Labissiere - WHOOOOF
#5 - Cheick Diallo -
#6 - Diamond Stone - Who?
#7 - Ivan Rabb
#8 - Malik Newman
#9 - Jamal Murray - NBA
#23 - Jalen Adams
#31 - Donovan Mitchell - Best player in Class
#58 - Steven Enoch
#60 - Aaron Holiday - NBA
#66 - Shake Milton - NBA
#88 - Landry Shamet - NBA
#98 - Terrance Mann - NBA
#120 - Divincenzio - Lottery Pick, NCAA Champ, MVP

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

One of my favorite things is to randomly look back at old rankings and see how wrong they were.

Class of 2015 Rivals Rankings

#1 - Skal Labissiere - WHOOOOF
#5 - Cheick Diallo -
#6 - Diamond Stone - Who?
#7 - Ivan Rabb
#8 - Malik Newman
#9 - Jamal Murray - NBA
#23 - Jalen Adams
#31 - Donovan Mitchell - Best player in Class
#58 - Steven Enoch
#60 - Aaron Holiday - NBA
#66 - Shake Milton - NBA
#88 - Landry Shamet - NBA
#98 - Terrance Mann - NBA
#120 - Divincenzio - Lottery Pick, NCAA Champ, MVP

I've done this too.

Really helps give perspective on how useless the whole ranking process is.

But, it gets clicks I guess.

 

[NJHusky]

I've done this too.

Really helps give perspective on how useless the whole ranking process is.

But, it gets clicks I guess.

You would think at least the top 10 would be somewhat predictive….

 

[husky429]

One of my favorite things is to randomly look back at old rankings and see how wrong they were.

Class of 2015 Rivals Rankings

#1 - Skal Labissiere - WHOOOOF
#5 - Cheick Diallo -
#6 - Diamond Stone - Who?
#7 - Ivan Rabb
#8 - Malik Newman
#9 - Jamal Murray - NBA
#23 - Jalen Adams
#31 - Donovan Mitchell - Best player in Class
#58 - Steven Enoch
#60 - Aaron Holiday - NBA
#66 - Shake Milton - NBA
#88 - Landry Shamet - NBA
#98 - Terrance Mann - NBA
#120 - Divincenzio - Lottery Pick, NCAA Champ, MVP

I'm confused... are we just ignoring

#2 Ben Simmons - All star
#3 Jaylen Brown - All star
#4 Brandon Ingram - All star
#11 Henry Ellenson - NBA
#20 Jalen Brunson - NBA
#22 Dwayne Bacon - NBA
#25 Luke Kennard - NBA
#27 Thomas Bryant - NBA
#37 PJ Dozier - NBA
#41 Chimezie Metu - NBA
#43 Malik Beasley - NBA (all star?)
#45 Justin Patton - NBA
#46 Dejounte Murray - NBA
#49 Derrick Jones - NBA

So, 4 out of the top 10 are career NBA guys.

8 out of the top 25 are in the league.

16 out of the top 50

Not sure about top 100.

I would guess in an average year that 50% of the top 10 become decent NBA players, 25-35% of the top 50, and less as you get farther from the top, with your outliers like Russ or Steph sprinkled in, of course.

To me, the rankings are more accurate than I would have expected, frankly. This year they obviously misjudged a few kids in the 50-150 range you referenced, but I wouldn't say 5 guys being in the league out of 100 in that range is a huge indictment on rankings pros.

Top 10 is usually pretty clear IMO. Then 20-50ish is kind of jumbled. and 50-150 is practically meaningless.

 

[MDHuskFan]

I like to look up where superstars ranked & who was ahead of them.

Embid 14- notable good Wiggins, Randle, Aaron Gordon; Bad- Chris Walker, Dakari Johnson

Steph 256- Good- Kd & many more, Bad- not enough space to list them.

KD-2, same class as Steph. Sandwiched between Oden & Bran

Leonard 57- good- Wall, Boogie, Avery Bradley; Bad- Reynaldo Sidney, Tyler Honeycutt & a bunch of dudes who never sniffed the league.

Harden 14, Good-Rose & love; bad- OJ Mayo & Eric Gordon (oddly enough every player ahead of harden played professionally but maybe one. Great class)

 

[UofCT]

I'm confused... are we just ignoring

#2 Ben Simmons - All star
#3 Jaylen Brown - All star
#4 Brandon Ingram - All star
#11 Henry Ellenson - NBA
#20 Jalen Brunson - NBA
#22 Dwayne Bacon - NBA
#25 Luke Kennard - NBA
#27 Thomas Bryant - NBA
#37 PJ Dozier - NBA
#41 Chimezie Metu - NBA
#43 Malik Beasley - NBA (all star?)
#45 Justin Patton - NBA
#46 Dejounte Murray - NBA
#49 Derrick Jones - NBA

So, 4 out of the top 10 are career NBA guys.

8 out of the top 25 are in the league.

16 out of the top 50

Not sure about top 100.

I would guess in an average year that 50% of the top 10 become decent NBA players, 25-35% of the top 50, and less as you get farther from the top, with your outliers like Russ or Steph sprinkled in, of course.

To me, the rankings are more accurate than I would have expected, frankly. This year they obviously misjudged a few kids in the 50-150 range you referenced, but I wouldn't say 5 guys being in the league out of 100 in that range is a huge indictment on rankings pros.

Top 10 is usually pretty clear IMO. Then 20-50ish is kind of jumbled. and 50-150 is practically meaningless.

Yeah I didn't want to type out every name since you could have just looked at the link.

 

[UofCT]

Yeah I didn't want to type out every name since you could have just looked at the link.

The rankings are not that bad but obviously there are misses at the top and bottom.

 

[UofCT]

Some good ones from 2010

Oladpio was #144
Joe Harris was #119
Shabazz was #98
Jeremy Lamb is #76 but only listed at 6'4 (He is closer to 6'7)

 

[rip7774]

I used to get Frank Burlison’s report and Big East Briefs via mail. I think i got HoopScoop online, Clark Francis was kinda a joke.

even Called into 1-800-numbers to get updates on Randell Jackson and Wayne Turner, what a joke it was Jackson was going to F$U! The late Tom Konchalski was the goat Of evaluators for Big East targets!

later, worked for Big East briefs briefly lol! i think we all valued their thoughts so much more back then when info wasn’t readily available.

I remember emailing Evan Daniels about shabazz Napier’s commitment and they had nothing on it but an Elon commitment on the front page. fun memories. That Daniels thing was the nail in the coffin at overvaluing what they said.