This is the second part of my series on the internet recruiting site player data bases. The first part dealt with how one gets in a recruiting data bases on the national sites. This second part will deal with the ratings the sites give the players in their data bases..
How often are rating updated?
If you are a top 100 prospect, quite often, as many be 6-8 times a year. If you are a 0-3 Star prospect not very often if at all. A couple examples.
Last September I got a friend of mine at Rivals to put Josh Huestis in their data base. Scout.com and ESPN put Josh in their data base when he was named Gatorade player of the year. Since that time Josh’s recruitment has blown up, he has been featured in at least 7-9 articles on Rivals and Scout raving about him as a high major prospect. Despite all of this none of the services have bother to update his 0-Star rating, and all of the rest of his info is based on what it was a year ago.
Another example is over on ESPN / Hoopgurlz they have listed 7 Montana girls in their 2010 data base. It just so happens, that one of the seven is actually from Missouri, but Montana, Missouri pretty close any way. All of the girls are listed with a 40 rating except Jordan Sullivan who is listed as with an 84 rating. This list appeared about 18 months ago and nothing in it has changed since then. The stock of some of these girls has risen, and some have dropped. This list clearly identifies one solid prospect that is the cream of the crop (Sullivan). It then identifies six (actually 5) Montana girls who could be D-1 prospects, but to find out who is and who is not you have to do a little research. This list though should not be treated as an end all list though you have accept the fact that there could be some other D-1 prospects who may be out there, who may end up on D-1 rosters. In this case one has to look no farther than Bozeman’s Kellie Cole who just committed to the Lady Griz and is not one of those seven.
This ESPN example is exactly how you should look at the different recruiting site data bases. They are not complete and sometimes woefully out of date. They should be viewed as a snap shot of the prospects out there. Figure that they are only about 80% complete of the possible D-1 prospects out their. They cover players in larger metropolitan areas pretty good, but the more you get out to rural or out of they way areas the less the odds are that the quality prospects from these areas are on the lists. The ratings for the larger prospects are also pretty good and up to date but the lower the level of the prospect, the less likely so.
What I try to do with prospects the Bobcat’s and Griz recruit, is to not totally believe any one
source but look at all of them and pull out commonalities. I also try to figure out when was the last time each source has seen the prospect, and then ask questions. These sites make the bulk of their money catering to the Pac-10, ACC etc. etc. fans/boos
ters, and it is reflected in the content they put out. If you are a fan of the Big Sky, WAC etc. you have to work a little harder.
On last thing, to remember these recruiting analysts see a most Big Sky players only 1-2 times and never exclusively. Granted, sometimes a pl
ayer like Will Cherry may be seen a lot more than that but, other times a player like Divaldo Mbunga not at all. When a coach signs a player I can guarantee you that the head coach and at least one assistant has seen that prospect play in person a minimum of 2-3 times. Additionally they have collected video on that prospect and have gone over that video with a fine tooth comb. When it comes to determining the rating of a player if you trust your head coach you have to trust their rating over that of the Rivals and Scouts
Mslacat's Blog 
0 Responses to “National player rating (Part 2)”