Kentucky Sports Radio
[Moderated by Matt Jones]
[Moderated by Matt Jones]
This post is for those that dont follow recruiting a great deal and wonder about things that many just take for granted. If you are a recruiting expert (or think you are), just skip it and go directly into an argument on a message board about Dakotah Euton’s grown pattern
The past few months have been quite interesting. We have seen our basketball coach embark on an almost unprecedented recruiting binge, that has seen him get commitments from players all over the basketball map, ranging from an in-state star to a JUCO guard to a 5 star cant miss to an 8th grader few people knew. And throughout that time, Gillispie has had those who have praised and those who have criticized….often the same individuals, no matter what the decision. In trying to evaluate the relative success of these operations, most people use whatever criteria best bolsters their argument. If the guy is ranked highly by the scouting services, then he is a great pickup. If he is not ranked highly, well then thats ok because we dont like those guys anyway. One TCP poster (whose name I wont mention for his protection), I once saw write the following two sentences, ON THE SAME DAY:
You got to have the top studs. If you dont have 5 star kids, you wont win.‘
These top ranked kids are all head cases. Gillispie doesnt need them to win.
Unless one wants to be as consistently inconsistent as our friend above, it becomes necessary to figure out a criteria on which to evaluate recruits, specifically those you havent seen. I have learned over the years that the most effective way to do it (in my view) is find the opinion of someone you trust, who has no interest in the player’s success (aka not a fan of the team) and listen to how they say the individual competes nationally. For me, Dave Telep of Scout.com has been that guy for some time and Evan Daniels is growing into that role as well. These guys see hundreds of players every week, and over time start to evaluate those players in comparison to each other. They see the good patterns and the bad patterns. Their rankings thus act as a good starting point for player evaluation.
However, if you are like I used to be, you might ask yourself, how does this whole scouting thing work? Specifically, what do these scouts base their decisions on? In a nutshell, it involves three things:
1. AAU
2. AAU
3. AAU
There, you now know the basics. In order to rank the players on a yearly basis, scouts focus heavily on AAU. The reason is simple. If every scout does not see every player, the rankings are meaningless. Thus if I see a guy and you see another, how do we compare them? It becomes important then for the scouts to get to see all the players….but great players are all over the country and travel takes to long. In comes AAU, bringing all the best talent into one place at one time. The guys from Scout.Com, Rivals.com, Bob Gibbons etc, descend on these tournaments and camps, see the players playing these glorified pickup games, and make their evaluations. From these evaluations, likely 80% of a guy’s rating is based. It can fluctuate a bit based on high school performance, especially if a player plays in a large market, but the AAU is the base and if you play well or poorly there, your stock is set.
There are pros and cons to this style of course. The obvious pros of course are that all the best players are evaluated at the same time. However some players do better in an AAU setting:
1. Athletic players: In glorified pickup games, the athletic guys usually win out.
2. Guards or DOMINANT big men: Guards have the ball in their hand and like to showcase….a dominant big man however cant be stopped in an AAU setting and thus becomes a star.
3. Deadeye shooters: Spot up, use the sagging man to man and hit three bombs.
4. Good players on great teams.: In the same way that Kurt Rambis is remembered because he played with great players, second tier guys on great AAU teams get hype that is more a function of who they are with than what they are.
Others dont do well in AAU:
1. Defense First guys: In AAU games and camps, defense is an afterthought….playing it well is like being a right guard on a 7 on 7 team….you wont get to use your skill.
2. Tweeners: aka “Chuck Hayes”. ON a college team with a good coach, this guy can be used for his strength, in AAU he looks out of place.
3. Good player on bad team: If your team stinks and you cant create your own shot, you have no shot.
Thus the very nature of the AAU system means that the rankings are going to be a bit flawed. But that doesnt mean you throw them out. You have to use them for what they are good for and ignore what they arent. Here are my 5 Rules for Using the Scout and Rivals Rankings:
1. If they are Top 15, they are a star.: With all the caveats above, the best players are the best players are the best players….period. When you see them you know. If a guy is in the Top 15, he is likely a great player. In every class, 10-12 of the top 15 make the NBA and all but one or two become really good college players. The rankings are good at picking the best of the best….you see them and you know it and the scouts do as well.
2. After the Top 15, Look at the Rankings as groups, not as a List: This is the most important rule in my view. The rankings after the top 10-15 arent a science….22 is not necessarily better than 40. Instead, the players should be seen as groups, with the differences in the eye of the beholder. As a general rule of thumb, I use a tier system:
Top 15
16-40
41-75
76-125
126-200
Generally speaking, guys in those groups have a similar talent range. This can be seen by the fact that if you compare various lists, most guys fluctuate within these ranges, but they are generally mostly in the same range. So when I see a fan arguing about a guy ranked 40 versus a guy ranked 70, I want to say, “hey, they are similarly talented….dont waste your breath arguing who is better….it will all be about their college system.”
3. Realize who has an AAU game and who doesnt: If the player you are evaluating has a strength that is also a strength of AAU (as seen above), then his ranking likely tells you where he should be….if he is too low, then he isnt a “diamond in the rough.” But if the player’s strength is not an AAU strength, then add some spots on the rankings for him….AAU just isnt his thing.
4. Stay away from AAU wonders: Anytime I see a guy who is great in AAU, but doesnt star in high school, I get nervous. Call it the “Scotty Hopson” syndrome. I would much rather have a good AAU or ranking player, who is a star on the high school level (a la Darius Miller). The latter usually end up being better college (as distinguished from pro) players.
5. Dont use the rankings on kids who dont fit into the system: The most important rule of the day. I often hear, “Player X isnt ranked so he cant be good.” The name may be Chris Lofton, Gerald Fitch, Hunter McClintock or Shelvin Mack. But that is an incorrect assumption….the kid may have never been IN A POSITION TO BE RANKED. He may have never played AAU nationally or been involved in top camps….for whatever reason….thus he was never seen. Chris Lofton wasnt on the national scene….he was thus missed. Shelvin Mack has never been on the national scene….he will do well at Butler. When these kids come around, you have to trust the judgment of the coach to see how the kid will fit into his system. The rankings simply dont apply to him because he didnt take part in the prerequisite camps to fit into the rankings mold.
I think the rankings are very helpful. But you have to know how to use them. They arent the end-all and be-all. Great coaches try to find players to fit a role in a system and thus will often go outside the beaten path to find their Anthony Epps or Lee Humphrey. When they do this, the rankings will be of little use. But they do provide a way (when you trust the scout as I do Telep and Daniels) of figuring out what general area to place some players’ talents. Use them for that purpose and you will have a bigger smile on your face than our man Jared Carter does above.
[powered by WordPress.]
Bill Keightley Report : Never to be forgotten.
30 queries. 1.197 seconds
June 16th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
woo!
June 17th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Just drank way to much! Sorry Jared.
June 17th, 2008 at 12:09 am
Throw that damn carp back in the pond JC. They have to many bones and all they eat is garbage and sh*t!!
June 17th, 2008 at 12:22 am
Maybe we need a ranking system for the Scouts. How do we know what a good judge of a player is? Is it just “I know a good player when I see him?” What is Bob Gibbons criteria, for example?
June 17th, 2008 at 12:28 am
The best post I’ve read on this site. I cannot stand those people who love/hate Gillispie regardless of what he does and doesn’t have an open mind. I praise him, and I’ll call him out for doing stupid shit like starting Mark Coury.
June 17th, 2008 at 12:31 am
i agree with the point that scotty hopson is a mystery. he got so many high marks from recruiting experts but he played mediocre in many high school games this year while he should’ve been very dominant against kentucky level competition. maybe he will turn out to be a star for tennessee but i’ve always felt a sense of underachievment from hopson
June 17th, 2008 at 12:33 am
I was going to post this in the Adidas team topic but it won’t let me post in that topic so I will post it here.
Other than the signing of John Hood I am really surprised that UK isn’t more involved with Noel Johnson. Johnson’s high school coach, Andre Flynn, played basketball at Transylvania in the 80’s and is a HUGE UK fan. I went to Fayette Co High, where Noel Johnson goes, and it was very rare to see Coach Flynn not wearing some sort of UK paraphernalia everyday. I know that coaches don’t make the decision’s for the kids but they often do have a large influence on them. Coach Flynn was a pretty big Tubby fan so his support may have dropped of after he left for Minn. but I don’t know because I haven’t seen him since I graduated from high school 5 years ago.
June 17th, 2008 at 12:44 am
Is he sporting Gopher gear? If not help the cause and help support BCG get him back in blue.
June 17th, 2008 at 12:46 am
Jared really needs to be careful lifting that fish. He could injure his shoulder.
June 17th, 2008 at 12:48 am
#5 he sent a message by starting Flurry. Those days have passed and future will be brighter.
June 17th, 2008 at 12:48 am
June 17th, 2008 at 12:49 am
those sunglasses are supposed to be #8
June 17th, 2008 at 12:49 am
DON”T EAT THE CARP JC!!
June 17th, 2008 at 12:54 am
Are those Bill Dance shades?
June 17th, 2008 at 12:56 am
in my opinion, Rivals’ player rankings are alot more acurate than Scout’s
June 17th, 2008 at 1:03 am
Good post! Many questions answered, many not like Liggins losing a star.
June 17th, 2008 at 1:10 am
16) I think Liggins losing a star falls under 2 of the criteria mentioned above:
first: good player on a bad team
second: defense first
Isn’t Liggins a good player on a bad team who thinks defense first?
June 17th, 2008 at 1:13 am
nevermind I got Liggins team confused with K.C. Ross-Miller’s team. Liggins had a good team.
June 17th, 2008 at 1:18 am
Does JC ever smile?
June 17th, 2008 at 1:42 am
The TCP poster has to be UKJim or C-A-T-S… UKJim is just an idiot, and C-A-T-S has to chime in on every single thing, so it wouldn’t surprise me to see him with multiple views on the same subject at different points in the day. That dude literally lives on the message boards… kinda sad.
June 17th, 2008 at 2:11 am
BILLY CLYDE KNOW WHAT’S BEST!!!!
GO CATS!! OHHHH C
A
T
June 17th, 2008 at 2:19 am
We have the best ranking system, it is called Gillispie and staff.
Rankings help but I don’t think people realize how close the top 10-50 players maybe to the 50-100 players. Just bc your ranked higher doesn’t mean there is a huge gap between them
June 17th, 2008 at 5:21 am
20. LMAO
June 17th, 2008 at 8:15 am
Great post, Matt, thanks for the insights!
June 17th, 2008 at 8:28 am
Great article. Made rankings extremely understandable for all.
June 17th, 2008 at 8:32 am
Somebody who can’t shoot doesn’t belong on a basketball court. Period. End of story.
June 17th, 2008 at 8:58 am
26 - Rajon Rondo says you are wrong! Great Article Matt. Recruiting to me is very mixed bag. Lots of players are overlooked, and many times McDonalds All Americans disappoint.
I am now changing the topic, I think that PRO ATHLETES in general are way overpaid! This may sound stupid, but I think Pro Athletes should not be paid over $1M dollars annually by the team. If they can drum up endorsement deals, then let them all day long, but to get paid $10M a year to play a sport 6 months out of the year is just wrong. We, the fans, end up paying their salaries, and that is why many of the teams are struggling. How many families do you know that can afford to pay $5K plus annually for season tickets. If it wasn’t for big corporate money, most of these teams would already be gone!
Many may argue that athletes only have a short amount of time to make their money, but I say, why can’t they just get a job??? $1M a year to play a sport plus endorsement money should be good enough for anyone. I just thought about taxes…. Ok, let them get paid $2M a year, so they can have a little money left after taxes…. How many of us could live ok on that even if it only lasted 5 years????
June 17th, 2008 at 9:20 am
27 They get paid that much because of market value. Think about a very successful CEO or a hedge fund manager with a great track record in the same light (either of whom often earns far more–in salary and stock options–than any athlete). These individuals have specialized skills that make them worth at least three–and probably more like five to ten–times as much as they are paid in profit. Money talks, right? It comes in ticket sales and parking revenue, but more and more from the licensing that arises with global jersey/t-shirt sales (which are rising more every day) and advertising dollars so someone can put their logo in front of us.
The bottom line is they couldn’t get paid that much if we, as consumers, didn’t show up. A salary cap on the players would just make that much more money for the owners.
June 17th, 2008 at 9:30 am
I hope he caught that with a net and not by casting a fishing rod.
June 17th, 2008 at 9:35 am
All 3 UNC guys pulled out from the draft and are coming back to school. Man, they are gonna be tough. Fortunately, Roy Williams is still there to sabotage the show :-p
June 17th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Is he really posing with a carp?
June 17th, 2008 at 10:05 am
by my estimates (considering J-Rod’s relative height) that carp must be 4′ long.
June 17th, 2008 at 10:13 am
that carp is probably about 65 pounds. just looks small next to the monster that is Jared Carter.
June 17th, 2008 at 10:22 am
#26- That is like saying someone who can’t play guitar doesn’t belong in a rock band. Period end of story. Kind of ignorant.
June 17th, 2008 at 10:25 am
great post, matt.
June 17th, 2008 at 10:38 am
One of “the best” post ever on this site Matt. You made some very good points, however
there will still be fans that will treat rankings religiously. They will never,ever
learn.
#5, starting Mary Coury was a great move last year. We had NO depth up front and it
kept Perry out of possible early foul trouble. I don’t know why that is so hard for
some people to comprehend.
June 17th, 2008 at 11:27 am
And starting Coury instead of Stevenson helped contribute to us always falling behind by 10 to 15 points to start every game. Which I guess is a really good thing.
June 17th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
36.) You can’t be serious?!?!?! If that was the case, why not start Carter, or the Member, or AJ Stewart???? Thats rediculous. I think the Flurry must have edited game film or did all the statistical percentages or something. Other than that I can’t think of a reason to spot a team 15 points.
June 17th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Excellent post Mr. Jones…One comment about Gillispe’s recruiting methods. Someone once said all publicity is good publicity. For the last several months much focus has been placed upon recruiting. Specifically, at what age is it appropriate to receive (and accept) a scholarship offer. At the center of most of this discussion has been Kentucky’s recruitment of an 8th grader. Consequently, the University of Kentucky has received more “recruiting” publicity than at any time in the last several years. I firmly believe this was calculated on the part of BCG. We badly needed a boost back to relevancy. While this may not be the preferred method of most…I’m pretty sure it has worked.
June 17th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Bottom line: If you want to reach the highest levels(Final Four and beyond)of D-I basketball, you recruit offensively skilled players and worry about their defense when they get on campus. Defense can be taught and learned in college, you aren’t going to teach anybody how to shoot/score once they get there. IMO.
June 18th, 2008 at 12:27 am
#40 I agree. #37 and #38 There were only a few games where we fell down fifteen points to begin with and out of those few games none were Coury’s fault. His man didn’t score 15 for us to fall behind fifteen in about 3 minutes which is all he played before Purry came in the ball game. I remember just as many games where we went up fifteen with Coury in the game then down 15 with Coury in the game. There was obviously a reason for starting the kid. Let BCG settle in before you start treating him like Tubby and question every move. I am sorry that was not meant for CAnTuckeeBoi, you have never criticized Tubby. SORRY DUDE. IMO there are plenty of reasons to start Coury if you’re BCG. I have posted them before and am to tired to do it again. GOOD NIGHT!!!