Rankings

L

logen

Well-known member
2023 $upporter
I understand the lifeblood of a site like this is differing opinions, pretty boring if we all agreed. Anyway, high school player rankings are one where I find myself constantly disagreeing with other posters. IMO, it is about as inexact a "science" as there is. So anyway, under the umbrella of a slow business time (everything going smoothly which scares the heck out of me) I decided to look at the last SJU team I REALLY rooted for, invested emotionally in from an almost completely positive frame of mind, Lavin's first year, the "Dunlap" team.
So ratings (247, the only one I could find )for the top 7 players were as follows:
Justin Burrell 48
DJ Kennedy 134
Malik Boothe 205
Paris Horne 298
Sean Evans 397
Dwight Hardy and Justin Brownlee - could not find their high school rankings but both appear to have come out of JC with three star rankings. So at least three of our top seven players were outside the recruiting wheelhouse many have identified as vital 50-150, with two of them significantly out. Only one was top 50 and I think most would agree he did not live up to that rating, albeit a good player for us, no question. But the point is they were a cohesive, well coached team, committed to winning, with players not afraid of the moment to lead them.
That is what I hope Mike Anderson and co. bring to SJU. I never envision us as a major national player for top talent and I know that annoys some people but that is just as I see it, I will certainly be glad to be wrong on that one.So while it is nothing more than this mans opinion, I don't put much, if any, stock in player rankings once you get past, oh, 25 or so. Again, just my opinion.
To emphasize further, three rankings that jumped out at me as I wasted an hour of my life on this exercise:
Marshon Brooks, who did little his first couple of years and then became a very important player for Providence, was ranked 297. The kickers for me though were Jimmer Fredette at 229 and Stephen Curry at 256.The exceptions, maybe, but there were plenty of names I recognized way further down the lists than their college careers, in hindsight, warranted.
 
Last edited:
That's true in every sport
Some guys peak in high school and never become big time college players
Player development, S&C and nutrition programs all play a big part
The "star" system can't measure heart, desire and willingness to put in the hard work
Many players in past Super Bowls were 2 star recruits coming out of high school
They should never have been big time college players let alone pros in this grading system
Gotta have faith that CMA knows what he wants and will find players that suit his system
I, for one, will believe in him until proven otherwise
 
Last edited:
Loved watching that team, too. Would have been even better if Lavin has not pushed out Ron Roberts, a legit post player, in order to bring in Dwayne Polee, who wanted to play on the perimeter, and who transferred after one year.
 
[quote="Las Vegan" post=355179]Loved watching that team, too. Would have been even better if Lavin has not pushed out Ron Roberts, a legit post player, in order to bring in Dwayne Polee, who wanted to play on the perimeter, and who transferred after one year.[/quote] Agree. Furthermore Roberts would have provided exp and be better for scholy class balance. I also think you can find some sub 250 players that turned out well, but my complaint is you have to mix them in w higher ranked players. If you looked at the final 4 teams of the last decade they would have plenty of top 100 players. That said, I agree w Login that there are additional factors like he mentioned. IE work ethic, by players and staff, team play,depth, having all positions covered, attitude, etc.
 
Last edited:
The best quality of that team was that they were all seniors. Experience and maturity are important qualities when you are not a one and done factory. Beside Stith and Polee of course.
 
Last edited:
I have 2 big issues with this:

1. The perception that Mike Anderson didn't recruit 50-150 caliber players at Arkansas is completely wrong. Why do some keep implying this? Here is what his classes were ranked (as well as his top 3 high school recruits):
2018: #38 (players: 138/157/160)
2017: #36 (players: 39/169/296)
2016: #29 (players: 3 top 6 JUCOs)
2015: #101 (players: 68)
2014: #43 (players: 114/171)
2013: #19 (players: 17/49/136)
2012: #46 (players: 152/167/177)
2011: #8 (players: 21/43/68)

Compared to St. John's 2019 class (as well as the top 3 high school kids):
2019: #154 (424)

I didn't include JUCOs (besides 2016 when his class was entirely top JUCOs), but he recruited them very well. At Arkansas he finished with a top 50 class every single year but ONE (2015/#101, and that was because he had only a one man class... and that one man was still ranked #68). If he recruits this well at St. John's then we'll be good. That is still a question mark.

As I mentioned in the other thread, he gets a complete 100% pass for 2019 given that all recruits were already signed by the time CMA took over. Some of us were simply a bit concerned seeing Dunn pop up as a potential solution to 2020 (not just 2019). We absolutely need to have a big class for 2019 (similar to how he recruited at Arkansas). Let's not pretend he got by at Arkansas with players of Dunn's/McGriff's caliber. He didn't.

2. I agree that Lavin's first year was a great one. The massive, massive elephant in the room though is they were all seniors. Plus, their high school rankings weren't that bad. It makes logical sense to me that those rankings would result in that type of performance as seniors. Seniors in that talent range can absolutely beat top freshmen. Unfortunately you're talking about only 1/4 of their college careers, and we know how their first 3 years (really first 3.5) went.
 
Last edited:
Never once did I say Anderson doesn’t recruit 50-150. What I have said is that “expecting” he is going to get those kind of players out of the chute is not realistic. We have not only been bad for a long time, we have been dysfunctional for just about the same period. We are not in 1985 anymore and it has been about as long in terms of relevancy since Artest and co. were here. I already commented on your praise of Lavin and Mullin’s recruiting so let me address Hurley. Forget the resources available to him, Hurley inherited a program that has almost as many national championships in the last decade+ as we have NCAA appearances. Think that may help, maybe just a little? My other point is how ludicrous it is that all you guys KNOW how to do it so much better than a pros pro that you feel comfortable criticizing him about players you have never seen play. But you know, right? Why don’t you break down McGriff for me since you obviously already know before he has even played his first game what he is and is not. The fact is you can’t, period, end of story.
And bamafan, much to your delight, this really is my last back and forth on Anderson with any poster. I might as well be talking to my wife.................;) ;) ;)
 
Last edited:
[quote="Logen" post=355201]Never once did I say Anderson doesn’t recruit 50-150. What I have said is that “expecting” he is going to get those kind of players out of the chute is not realistic. We have not only been bad for a long time, we have been dysfunctional for just about the same period. We are not in 1985 anymore and it has been about as long in terms of relevancy since Artest and co. were here. I already commented on your praise of Lavin and Mullin’s recruiting so let me address Hurley. Forget the resources available to him, Hurley inherited a program that has almost as many national championships in the last decade+ as we have NCAA appearances. Think that may help, maybe just a little? My other point is how ludicrous it is that all you guys KNOW how to do it so much better than a pros pro that you feel comfortable criticizing him about players you have never seen play. But you know, right? Why don’t you break down McGriff for me since you obviously already know before he has even played his first game what he is and is not. The fact is you can’t, period, end of story.
And bamafan, much to your delight, this really is my last back and forth on Anderson with any poster. I might as well be talking to my wife.................;) ;) ;)[/quote]

So now expecting kids in the Top 150 for 2020 is unrealistic? Geez, will this staff be held to any sort of standard LOL?
 
[quote="Windy City Johnny Fan" post=355202][quote="Logen" post=355201]Never once did I say Anderson doesn’t recruit 50-150. What I have said is that “expecting” he is going to get those kind of players out of the chute is not realistic. We have not only been bad for a long time, we have been dysfunctional for just about the same period. We are not in 1985 anymore and it has been about as long in terms of relevancy since Artest and co. were here. I already commented on your praise of Lavin and Mullin’s recruiting so let me address Hurley. Forget the resources available to him, Hurley inherited a program that has almost as many national championships in the last decade+ as we have NCAA appearances. Think that may help, maybe just a little? My other point is how ludicrous it is that all you guys KNOW how to do it so much better than a pros pro that you feel comfortable criticizing him about players you have never seen play. But you know, right? Why don’t you break down McGriff for me since you obviously already know before he has even played his first game what he is and is not. The fact is you can’t, period, end of story.
And bamafan, much to your delight, this really is my last back and forth on Anderson with any poster. I might as well be talking to my wife.................;) ;) ;)[/quote]

So now expecting kids in the Top 150 for 2020 is unrealistic? Geez, will this staff be held to any sort of standard LOL?[/quote]

Yes they will be. And the most important standard is will they win. There are many different ways to get there in terms of recruiting as has been beaten to death on this site. Would I like a top 20 2020 class , you bet , but after following the program for 38 years and the crap that has taken place in the last 26, 6 coaches in 27 years I know that will be exceptionally difficult.
What I am looking for is a system, an identity, effort, cohesiveness, a commitment to défense and rebounding , sharing of the ball and a continuous 100% effort by the staff. If that happens winning will occur sooner than later and better recruits will come.
 
[quote="redmannorth" post=355203][quote="Windy City Johnny Fan" post=355202][quote="Logen" post=355201]Never once did I say Anderson doesn’t recruit 50-150. What I have said is that “expecting” he is going to get those kind of players out of the chute is not realistic. We have not only been bad for a long time, we have been dysfunctional for just about the same period. We are not in 1985 anymore and it has been about as long in terms of relevancy since Artest and co. were here. I already commented on your praise of Lavin and Mullin’s recruiting so let me address Hurley. Forget the resources available to him, Hurley inherited a program that has almost as many national championships in the last decade+ as we have NCAA appearances. Think that may help, maybe just a little? My other point is how ludicrous it is that all you guys KNOW how to do it so much better than a pros pro that you feel comfortable criticizing him about players you have never seen play. But you know, right? Why don’t you break down McGriff for me since you obviously already know before he has even played his first game what he is and is not. The fact is you can’t, period, end of story.
And bamafan, much to your delight, this really is my last back and forth on Anderson with any poster. I might as well be talking to my wife.................;) ;) ;)[/quote]

So now expecting kids in the Top 150 for 2020 is unrealistic? Geez, will this staff be held to any sort of standard LOL?[/quote]

Yes they will be. And the most important standard is will they win. There are many different ways to get there in terms of recruiting as has been beaten to death on this site. Would I like a top 20 2020 class , you bet , but after following the program for 38 years and the crap that has taken place in the last 26, 6 coaches in 27 years I know that will be exceptionally difficult.
What I am looking for is a system, an identity, effort, cohesiveness, a commitment to défense and rebounding , sharing of the ball and a continuous 100% effort by the staff. If that happens winning will occur sooner than later and better recruits will come.[/quote]

I agree with all of that - but to be fair, I did not say a top 20 class, I said kids in the Top 150
 
[quote="Logen" post=355201]Never once did I say Anderson doesn’t recruit 50-150. What I have said is that “expecting” he is going to get those kind of players out of the chute is not realistic. We have not only been bad for a long time, we have been dysfunctional for just about the same period. We are not in 1985 anymore and it has been about as long in terms of relevancy since Artest and co. were here. I already commented on your praise of Lavin and Mullin’s recruiting so let me address Hurley. Forget the resources available to him, Hurley inherited a program that has almost as many national championships in the last decade+ as we have NCAA appearances. Think that may help, maybe just a little? My other point is how ludicrous it is that all you guys KNOW how to do it so much better than a pros pro that you feel comfortable criticizing him about players you have never seen play. But you know, right? Why don’t you break down McGriff for me since you obviously already know before he has even played his first game what he is and is not. The fact is you can’t, period, end of story.
And bamafan, much to your delight, this really is my last back and forth on Anderson with any poster. I might as well be talking to my wife.................;) ;) ;)[/quote]

Wrong again. We should expect him to get some top 50-150 kids for 2020. Lavin did. Mullin did. Anderson did at Arkansas. Their first couple recruiting classes were excellent. CMA's first recruiting cycle (2019) wasn't good, which is completely understandable given the circumstances.

Class rankings for first 2 years (and top 3 high school players rankings):
Lavin 2011: #7 (34, 37, 46)
Lavin 2012: #33 (38, 66, 224)

Mullin 2015: #26 (97, 108, 115)
Mullin 2016: #24 (45, 109)

Anderson 2011: #8 (21, 43, 68)
Anderson 2012: #46 (152, 167, 177)

Anderson 2019: #154 (424)
Anderson 2020: ?

We need a big 2020 class, period. I'm not saying it needs to be top 25, but top 50 at least like 7/8 of Anderson's years at Arkansas.

The data is pretty clear.
 
Last edited:
The rankings aren't the end all/be all, but there is some form of method to the madness. Basically stating, more times than not the rankings does play a role.

Frankly, I think we need to have a top 35 (or better) recruiting class in 2020, even if it's from an aesthetic standpoint. Momentum of any kind can be good.
 
Totally agree MJ...of course there will be #102 ranked guys who outperform many top 50 guys...but I think the cut off is top 100 or 150 at worst. As long as we are routinely landing top 150 kids and the occasional stud top 60 or so, I think we will be ok. There is certainly a big dropoff between top 150 and after that. No power team is going to be loaded with 2 star kids. We have several 2 star level kids right now, but we all know it's by necessity not the plan for right now. We all obviously hope they will overperform, but outside of Heron, LJ, and Steere I'm not going to get my hopes up honestly. Williams could make a big jump but who knows? I think CMA is doing all the right things except the recruiting is a bit iffy still but yes it's very early. If he can prove he can recruit well I really think he will be a beloved figure here who can actually turn things around in time. If we don't have at worst a rock solid 2020 class though it may be a long rebuild.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top