Recruiting Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
#6,602
#6,602
BigZiti09 said:
Cherry picking.

Why not just say Ramar Smith and Duke Crews vs Jujuan Smith and Grant Williams.

Again, nobody is saying the rankings are flawless.

Side note: Kwe Parker = unranked, Pons is just getting started and Mostella was available for a reason.
Click to expand...

Sure it's cherry picking same with all these rankings
Because they aren't consistent. Parker was top 100.



Now maybe the best most intelligent thing we can say is the lower ranked players have exceeded better under Barnes at Tennessee. That's a fact.
 
#6,604
#6,604
BruinVol said:
Sure it's cherry picking same with all these rankings
Because they aren't consistent. Parker was top 100.



Now maybe the best most intelligent thing we can say is the lower ranked players have exceeded better under Barnes at Tennessee. That's a fact.
Click to expand...

Do you have access to a computer or are you having to phone into someone to type your posts?

Unranked on Rivals...
Rivals.com

He was 110 on 247 2016 Top Basketball Recruits

Lost his ranking when he busted his legs up in high school. Stock plummeted.
 
#6,606
#6,606
BruinVol said:
So throw out the one service that was correct?

Lol makes sense.
That nerd got it right.
Click to expand...

You are drilling down to 1 person.

Never seen anyone refer to ESPN for recruiting rankings. They do hardly anything with recruiting. They cover it nationally and throw it all behind a paywall hoping people will sign up for their insider subscription.
 
#6,608
#6,608
BigZiti09 said:
You are drilling down to 1 person.

Never seen anyone refer to ESPN for recruiting rankings. They do hardly anything with recruiting. They cover it nationally and throw it all behind a paywall hoping people will sign up for their insider subscription.
Click to expand...

Like I said I can use any service to argue either side of the "ranking matter" discussion.


And as I have said before If the services aren't a consensus then the rankings are worthless. The 5 stars are where you find that


5 star top 50 type guys are the only thing that matters. The rest is a crap shoot where some services get it right at times and wrong at others times
 
#6,609
#6,609
BruinVol said:
Like I said I can use any service to argue either side of the "ranking matter" discussion.


And as I have said before If the services aren't a consensus then the rankings are worthless. The 5 stars are where you find that


5 star top 50 type guys are the only thing that matters. The rest is a crap shoot where some services get it right at times and wrong at others times
Click to expand...

The only thing you've done in this thread today is show how little you've followed basketball recruiting.
 
#6,610
#6,610
BigZiti09 said:
The only thing you've done in this thread today is show how little you've followed basketball recruiting.
Click to expand...

Lol.

I have followed it plenty enough to know that players between 100-150 are liked by some nerds and disliked by others behind their screens. That's easily proven
 
#6,611
#6,611
BruinVol said:
Like I said I can use any service to argue either side of the "ranking matter" discussion.
Click to expand...

No you can't. You're just looking for outliers and acting as if they are the norm and using the service regarded as the worst to do so.

BruinVol said:
And as I have said before If the services aren't a consensus then the rankings are worthless. The 5 stars are where you find that
Click to expand...

Plenty of guys rankings are similar across different services. You wouldn't know anything about that. Today you've quoted ESPN multiple times then said that scout was still viable.

BruinVol said:
5 star top 50 type guys are the only thing that matters. The rest is a crap shoot where some services get it right at times and wrong at others times
Click to expand...

And yet I linked a graph showing 21 of the 31 awards in the SEC player awards went to guys ranked 5*, 4* and top 150 ranked 3*. 15 of those 21 were not 5*.
 
#6,612
#6,612
BigZiti09 said:
And yet I linked a graph showing 21 of the 31 awards in the SEC player awards went to guys ranked 5*, 4* and top 150 ranked 3*. 15 of those 21 were not 5*.
Click to expand...

That's completely irrelevant to what I am saying.

Now if you show me guys that were more awards given to consensus ranked by the four services(yes there where 4 services for this data) players 75-100 than there were over 100 you make a point.

I think you are are going to strike out proving that and that's the entire point
 
#6,613
#6,613
bruinvol said:
that's completely irrelevant to what i am saying.

Now if you show me guys that were more awards given to consensus ranked by the four services(yes there where 4 services for this data) players 75-100 than there were over 100 you make a point.

I think you are are going to strike out proving that and that's the entire point
Click to expand...

wth
 
#6,614
#6,614
#6,616
#6,616
I'm not using ESPN for any of it. They suck and everyone knows it.

Scout does not exist.

I could use 247 but I'm not gonna redo the work. You could if you want. Given your posting today I'm sure you'd screw it up though.
 
#6,618
#6,618
BigZiti09 said:
I'm not using ESPN for any of it. They suck and everyone knows it.

Scout does not exist.

I could use 247 but I'm not gonna redo the work. You could if you want. Given your posting today I'm sure you'd screw it up though.
Click to expand...

That's ok. You just took an L with your own data


50-100 is no different from 100 and up and you proved it for me.
Lol
 
#6,619
#6,619
14 players outside the top 100 won SEC awards this year while only 2 did ranked 50-100

Them nerds behind the computer sure do suck after the top 50 players

In fact more players outside the top 100 won awards than the top 50
 
#6,620
#6,620
Now ziti if you will use more of the services you can make those numbers not look so bad for you. You can make the nerds look smarter
 
#6,621
#6,621
Villanova takes plenty of kids in that range.

I would almost bet you clicked the link then restructured your argument then acted like you finally got around to looking at the link.
 
#6,622
#6,622
BigZiti09 said:
Villanova takes plenty of kids in that range.

I would almost bet you clicked the link then restructured your argument then acted like you finally got around to looking at the link.
Click to expand...

Led by a 5 star guy but yea if we are to win a natty we have to recruit better
 
#6,623
#6,623
We get it. All 3 of you have made your points about recruiting. None of you are accomplishing anything. You can all move on.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top