How much does where you're from play a role in recruiting?

[Wall2Boogie]

just curious, as to how much of a factor this plays in recruiting? I know Matthews was ranked higher than Darius miller, yet most compare him to as the same type of player even though Matthews was a top 20 player. IIRC, at one time killer made 5 star status. This is just part of it. Had mayo stayed in Kentucky rather than head off to west virgina would he been ranked as high? Looking at 2 other guys who are similar are Jon hood and Luke kennard. One comes from madisonville ky while the other Franklin ohio. I know kennard is the better shooter, but hood was more athletic and not a terrible shooter. At one time both were 5 stars but kennard obviously never got hurt plus duke guys never drop in rankings. Those are just a couple I can think of in a minutes time, as I'm sure there are better examples. So I ask, does what state you come from more important or the level of competion mean more? Or obviously both. Would you rather have a 6'6 white guy from Chicago whos ranked 1-10 or a 6'6 black kid from Montana in the 25-35 range?

 

[mj2k10]

Where you're from has almost 0 to do with player ratings now. There's a system in place to identify the best players, and those players compete at a national level from the moment they hit HS, sometimes even before they hit HS. And they're rated based on competition against each other. There's a whole industry devoted to scouting these kids, and no one wants to be wrong, so while you may think that ratings are biased based on location, there's actually a lot of motivation for that to NOT happen. Every scout wants to be the one who gets it right, every scout wants to be the one who "finds" (or at least first recognizes the potential of) a player who's underrated by everyone else.

There are still cracks that a guy can fall through, but those are a lot smaller than they used to be. You aren't going to get a whole lot unknowns who show up at major colleges wildly underrated- like Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, and many others 30-40 years ago. You will get guys who develop later, because that's just how it works, but you can't know who those guys are until they actually develop. It's easy to say "wow, they completely missed Damian Lillard", but the odds are that he was seen, and was lacking when he was 18 years old. 3 years later, he wasn't lacking any more. There are many cases like that, and always will be.

 

[Smashcat]

just curious, as to how much of a factor this plays in recruiting? I know Matthews was ranked higher than Darius miller, yet most compare him to as the same type of player even though Matthews was a top 20 player. IIRC, at one time killer made 5 star status. This is just part of it. Had mayo stayed in Kentucky rather than head off to west virgina would he been ranked as high? Looking at 2 other guys who are similar are Jon hood and Luke kennard. One comes from madisonville ky while the other Franklin ohio. I know kennard is the better shooter, but hood was more athletic and not a terrible shooter. At one time both were 5 stars but kennard obviously never got hurt plus duke guys never drop in rankings. Those are just a couple I can think of in a minutes time, as I'm sure there are better examples. So I ask, does what state you come from more important or the level of competion mean more? Or obviously both. Would you rather have a 6'6 white guy from Chicago whos ranked 1-10 or a 6'6 black kid from Montana in the 25-35 range?

Hmmm.

 

[Wall2Boogie]

Would a guy like farried, or Payne both from Murray state qualify? And of course steph curry and Russell Westbrook how does all major programs miss on these guys except Westbrook of course?