Huge disconnect between ESPN's recruiting rankings and their Top 100 players

[SilentsAreGolden]

Looking at their list of the Top 100 players, one has to wonder what is going on. Duke has the #1 class, yet in ESPN's Top 100 players list, their highest ranked incoming player is Ingram at 41. UK has 2 incoming players in the Top 19, and we all know Murray at 19 is a joke. Here are the numbers

UK

Skal 11
Murray 19
Briscoe 62

Duke

Ingram 41
Thornton 78
Jeter 79

These are ESPN's rankings in both lists, so how exactly are they the #1 class? That's not the only thing that doesn't jibe. Jeter is 11th in their recruiting rankings and 79th in the Top 100 and Thornton is 17th and 78th. Seems like the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

 

[Shawn (uk7spd)]

Interesting post. I think some differences could be explained away by the approaches taken -- i.e., recruiting looks at best players period (perhaps even NBA upside) whereas college player rankings may look at the most impactful players this year. But even if this were true, the discrepancies in this case are pretty stark.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Very interesting. I thought it was interesting that Duke barely had a top50 player, but didn't think of how it compared to the rankings.

I also agree with Shawn, they make be looking at different criteria. But Ingram was being talked about so much, how can he only be a ~40? And that's with a freshman as the #1, so it's not like ESPN was holding back on putting unproven players high on the rankings.

Either way, we all know how Duke, Rankings, and MCDAA go. If any of the lists have some favoritism, it's the recruiting rankings. There's actual bragging rights with top incoming classes. With the top college players list, however, there's no need to fluff anyone or any school. Sounds to me like when it comes down to it, gun to their head, ESPN pundits just aren't as sold on Duke's class.

 

[kentucky_wildcat_#1]

Murray at 19 is crazy talk. If college basketball has 18 freshman players better than him in the country, this should be a great college basketball season. Murray is the best guard in the country from day 1. He will be the first guard off the nba draft boards when he declares. If someone said Murray would be the 19th best player in the entire country his freshman year, i might take that a lil more seriously. Even if that is also wrong. When Murray leads Kentucky to the national championship and wins it, these guys doing these rankings are going to look like a fool. Skal at 11 is pretty bad as well. That kid is projected to go #1 in a lot of NBA mock drafts. How can you be good enough to be the top pick of the NBA draft, yet, you're only ranked 11th best incoming player to college basketball? Briscoe at 62, i don't agree with that either. Briscoe is at least a top 25 player. I wonder if the people doing these ratings even watch basketball any?

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Just to clarify, it's ranking all college players. And also, just to be fair, while guys like Murray, Skal, and Simmons might be the best NBA prospects, it doesn't mean they will be the best COLLEGE players for their respective positions. Players like Trimble and Ulis are much more known commodities.

 

[DY9ASTY]

ESPN claiming Duke as the #1 class is a flat-out joke, they basically ignored the additions of Murray and Humphries. We were right behind Duke before them, and went a mile ahead when we added those two. Obviously someone at ESPN really really really wants Duke to be labeled as the #1 class.

 

[yoshukai]

Ingram at 41 is a total joke. He is top 15 easy .

 

[caneintally]

ESPN claiming Duke as the #1 class is a flat-out joke, they basically ignored the additions of Murray and Humphries. We were right behind Duke before them, and went a mile ahead when we added those two. Obviously someone at ESPN really really really wants Duke to be labeled as the #1 class.

Yep . we had the best class last year by a freaking mile . Briscoe , Matthews, Murray , Humphries , Skal all will be 1st round picks one day Duke has Ingram and maybe the pg who reclassified as 1st rounders in their class . Not even close.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

Pretty sure they base their team class rankings by number of ESPN Top 100 players, which didn't include Murray for some reason. They included Humphries, who was foreign and reclassified, just like Murray. But Humphries did play in the States this past season, and Murray didn't. Still, don't understand why they don't include Canadian players in their rankings, especially since so they are becoming such a big supplier of college talent.

 

[Untouchables22]

It's also highly likely that we are talking about two separate departments at ESPN.com. Paul Biancardi (poorly in my opinion) heads up the recruiting department. And the top 100 list was likely voted on by the regular college basketball writers like Dana O'neil Jay Bilas and Andy Katz.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

It's also highly likely that we are talking about two separate departments at ESPN.com. Paul Biancardi (poorly in my opinion) heads up the recruiting department. And the top 100 list was likely voted on by the regular college basketball writers like Dana O'neil Jay Bilas and Andy Katz.

Sounds plausible.

 

[Federal Cat]

I don't try to figure it out anymore, we usually know what kind of players and class were going to have way before the so called experts come out with any listing, they probably come on here for guidance anyway, as much as our fans study and scrutinize players every year we probably are better qualified than some of them

 

[OHIO COLONEL]

Why worry about class rankings? It's the W's and L's that are important....and hopefully a NC. Anybody remember the incoming class rankings of UCONN?

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

ESPN claiming Duke as the #1 class is a flat-out joke, they basically ignored the additions of Murray and Humphries. We were right behind Duke before them, and went a mile ahead when we added those two. Obviously someone at ESPN really really really wants Duke to be labeled as the #1 class.

ESPN's rationale for not including Murray and Humphries was based on the idea that they came in too late.

B.S.

That's like a middle school teacher refusing to acknowledge a transfer student and call them by their name because they started a week late.

The idiotic part of it is that ESPN will be reminding UK fans on a semi-regular basis that UK has the "number two recruiting class"- not just this season, but for many years to come as well when they look back on UK recruiting. So essentially, Cal's hard work falls victim to ESPN's laziness.

 

[Teachable Moe]

Just to clarify, it's ranking all college players. And also, just to be fair, while guys like Murray, Skal, and Simmons might be the best NBA prospects, it doesn't mean they will be the best COLLEGE players for their respective positions. Players like Trimble and Ulis are much more known commodities.

I don't know what that means -- college vs NBA in terms of skill. College coaches have to shuttle kids around to patch up holes in their team's play, but the kid is still the same athlete. They play with the same goal, ball, and floor. Sports writers (who vote for these teams) are just often crap at evaluating players. And they only see a fraction of the players available since there are only so many hours in the day. Log rolling and stat comparison do the work of experience and thinking.

 

[Clark_MSC_Kent]

Why worry about class rankings? It's the W's and L's that are important....and hopefully a NC. Anybody remember the incoming class rankings of UCONN?

This. Right here. Who gives a rat's you know what about where we rank with "recruiting". We don't hang banners and get rings for being ranked #1 with incoming recruits. If you don't trust Cal by now when it comes to getting players, I don't know what to tell you. Let Duke or LSU or Arizona get a little publicity for bringing in some nice players and let's keep going to Final Fours and winning chips.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

I don't know what that means -- college vs NBA in terms of skill. College coaches have to shuttle kids around to patch up holes in their team's play, but the kid is still the same athlete. They play with the same goal, ball, and floor. Sports writers (who vote for these teams) are just often crap at evaluating players. And they only see a fraction of the players available since there are only so many hours in the day. Log rolling and stat comparison do the work of experience and thinking.

Bigger and fatser in the NBA.. that lends itself to those college ball players who have that as part of their game. Hench why a school like Albany, with good players with sound fundamentals won't sniff the NBA. It's because they just don't have the speed or size to compete. But in the college game, you can somewhat get by without that.

My point is that ESPN's college rankings are a little different than ranking the top college players. STILL, however, I don't agree there should be that much of a disparity.

 

[*Bleedingblue*]

Can someone provide a countdown on the freshmen listed in their top 100 players?
Who is the 1st freshmen mentioned and 2nd etc.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

ESPN claiming Duke as the #1 class is a flat-out joke, they basically ignored the additions of Murray and Humphries. We were right behind Duke before them, and went a mile ahead when we added those two. Obviously someone at ESPN really really really wants Duke to be labeled as the #1 class.

Not basically. They DID ignore them. Their reason? Murray played in Canada. Which of course is a joke because 1) Its not like ESPN cant get a scout to Canada and 2) everyone saw him in the all star games.

 

[ukcatsfan2]

it's ESPN, what would you expect?

 

[*Bleedingblue*]

Not basically. They DID ignore them. Their reason? Murray played in Canada. Which of course is a joke because 1) Its not like ESPN cant get a scout to Canada and 2) everyone saw him in the all star games.

He played most all his games here in the States. How do I know this? Because I was their watching them and then coming back to the board here and proclaiming this Murray kid is really good a special player and we need to get involved.

I first went to watch Maker but after 2 min I was watching Murray instead. Do they have Maker ranked? I think they do so they could of easily ranked Murray as well. Even a yr ago I was on here sayin he was a top 7-8 player in the country.

 

[Mark Gastineau]

Why worry about class rankings? It's the W's and L's that are important....and hopefully a NC. Anybody remember the incoming class rankings of UCONN?

Agreed. Regardless, I thought both Rivals and ESPN ended up saying UK had the #1 class?

 

[bigblueinsanity]

He played most all his games here in the States. How do I know this? Because I was their watching them and then coming back to the board here and proclaiming this Murray kid is really good a special player and we need to get involved.

I first went to watch Maker but after 2 min I was watching Murray instead. Do they have Maker ranked? I think they do so they could of easily ranked Murray as well. Even a yr ago I was on here sayin he was a top 7-8 player in the country.

I totally agree. Its stupid. It looked pretty intentional as a way to ensure Duke had the top spot.