bgtholt88 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 I have a question. Why is Keith Carter barely mentioned on ESPN's recruiting page? His grade is only a 40 and there is virtually no information on him. Also, the only player mentioned in SLU's commitment section is Jared Drew, an 85 (not bad), but only 2 stars. Is Keith Carter just underrated by ESPN or what's the deal here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Kind of interesting (and incriminating) that the second place finisher in the Illinois Mr. Basketball race, one of the hotbeds of college players being produced, isn't even listed on their top 100 nor on their "Tops in Illinois" list. Yet Jared Drew, a two-star recruit with an 85 rating, is 23rd best in the whole state of Indiana. Someone once told me that all recruits on here get a 40 if they've never been seen/rated by anyone at ESPN. How can one not see a kid in this lofty area code who's team is playing for a state title (or at least far up the list to win one)? I think it might be a fine question for an ESPN Insider to ask of ESPN. I'd sure be curious as to their response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billboy1 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 According to another thread the winner of Mr. IL BB got 400 votes, KC got like 72 and the third place guy got 66. Maybe that has something to do with it meaning KC was a very distant second and close to the pack of the rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 According to another thread the winner of Mr. IL BB got 400 votes, KC got like 72 and the third place guy got 66. Maybe that has something to do with it meaning KC was a very distant second and close to the pack of the rest. Nope. He was the best player on a top 25 team in the nation. Keith Carter isn't exactly a secret. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 ESPN is generally not considered a prime source for recruiting info. The 40 means they have not seen him play or at least not enough to grade him. I wouldn't worry about it at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicCityBilliken Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 ESPN is generally not considered a prime source for recruiting info. The 40 means they have not seen him play or at least not enough to grade him. I wouldn't worry about it at all. Does ESPN still employ Paulie B? Last year I seen him on NCAA championship discusion shows, not this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUDrew Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 The way I understand it if a recruit gets a "40" grade it means that ESPN does not have enough info to grade him accurately. Its like an incomplete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Does ESPN still employ Paulie B? Last year I seen him on NCAA championship discusion shows, not this year. I'm telling ya, Paulie, this kid is legit. He's from Upstate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 I have always thought "recruiting services" and "recruiting rankings" to be suspect ever since we found out that one "guru" was like a 13-year-old kid living in Indiana somewhere. What was his name? It wasn't Telep or Francis but the name escapes me. What I find to be incredibly suspect is that while ESAPN lists Mr. Illinois Basketball Jabari Parker in their top prospects list for 2013, and has third-place finisher Aaron Simpson in the 2012 list (by the way a two-star rating and a score of 83), there is no sign of Carter. The fact that the #3 finisher is listed and the #2 is not throws water on Billsboy1's thewory if you ask me. @kshoe --- who generally does not consider ESPN a prime source for recruiting info? Not arguing with you but why would you devote all that space and (some) research to the topic, including both football and basketball stuff, and not be a prime? They got McShay and Kiper out there. Paulie B. was their supposed Bb guru. Heck, even ESPNU is off the deep end on signing day (football anyway) for the most part. If I agree with the statement, who then do I get my prime stuff from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARon Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Yes Paul is still at ESPN. He's also on Twitter. @PaulBiancardi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 I have always thought "recruiting services" and "recruiting rankings" to be suspect ever since we found out that one "guru" was like a 13-year-old kid living in Indiana somewhere. What was his name? It wasn't Telep or Francis but the name escapes me. What I find to be incredibly suspect is that while ESAPN lists Mr. Illinois Basketball Jabari Parker in their top prospects list for 2013, and has third-place finisher Aaron Simpson in the 2012 list (by the way a two-star rating and a score of 83), there is no sign of Carter. The fact that the #3 finisher is listed and the #2 is not throws water on Billsboy1's thewory if you ask me. @kshoe --- who generally does not consider ESPN a prime source for recruiting info? Not arguing with you but why would you devote all that space and (some) research to the topic, including both football and basketball stuff, and not be a prime? They got McShay and Kiper out there. Paulie B. was their supposed Bb guru. Heck, even ESPNU is off the deep end on signing day (football anyway) for the most part. If I agree with the statement, who then do I get my prime stuff from? I think that kshoe is stating that 'insiders' don't really look at ESPN as a prime recruiting site. I think that Rivals and MaxPrep are considered more accurate and detailed when it comes to recruiting. Just my thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 I have always thought "recruiting services" and "recruiting rankings" to be suspect ever since we found out that one "guru" was like a 13-year-old kid living in Indiana somewhere. What was his name? It wasn't Telep or Francis but the name escapes me. What I find to be incredibly suspect is that while ESAPN lists Mr. Illinois Basketball Jabari Parker in their top prospects list for 2013, and has third-place finisher Aaron Simpson in the 2012 list (by the way a two-star rating and a score of 83), there is no sign of Carter. The fact that the #3 finisher is listed and the #2 is not throws water on Billsboy1's thewory if you ask me. @kshoe --- who generally does not consider ESPN a prime source for recruiting info? Not arguing with you but why would you devote all that space and (some) research to the topic, including both football and basketball stuff, and not be a prime? They got McShay and Kiper out there. Paulie B. was their supposed Bb guru. Heck, even ESPNU is off the deep end on signing day (football anyway) for the most part. If I agree with the statement, who then do I get my prime stuff from? Basically everyone. Its one thing to have a couple t.v. faces that know who is a prospect for the NFL or NBA; its quite another to have gone to a bunch of events and evaluated players such that a comprehensive list of players rate 0 - 500 can be determined. The mere fact that the best senior in Illinois has not been evaluated by ESPN probably says enough, doesn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 @jbizz -- thanks. Forgoet about those two. I guess you are likely right and I am in the dark as I don't subscribe to either ESPN Insider, Rivals or any others. Makes sense. Just seems an inappropriate wast eof ESPN time -- if you're going to do it, do it right. I was not arguing kshoe's point. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 @kshoe --- apparently, I'm not everybody (but you knew that already). Thanks for the info. Frankly, I would likely be lazy and confine my look-see to ESPN and be shortchanged there, eh? I am willing to bet a lot of folks lik eme exist out there. I remeber Rivals from the old days but have never heard of MaxPrep. I suspect that is just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgstl Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 its not like mr carter had no legit competition for number 1, he had to go up against this guy http://espn.go.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/player/_/id/100708/jabari-parker ranked #1 in the nation, offers from KU UNC duke michigan state and UK.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 10-15 years ago, I was a religious follower of the rankings. I thought the key to success was signing as many top 100 or top 150 kids as possible. (Apparently Quinn Snyder shared my former philosophy.) Since then, I have realized that the rankings are effectively meaningless once you get past the McDonald's All-American kids who are sure-fire prospects. Even the best recruiting writers can't possibly watch and observe a meaningful amount of games or skills among the 1,000's of potential recruits. The task of seeing them all in an objective setting that would enable true comparison ranking becomes an even further impossibility. As a result, what you end up with a list of "big time recruits" who merely had a single flashy game in front of an influential writer. God help you if the same kid happens to have a big-time coach or assistant observing him at the time; then he truly blows up. Of course, none of this even accounts for how a given kid fits a system, works on his game and fitness, plays as a teammate, etc. Since Majerus came on board, I hardly even pay attention to the recruiting and rankings. I trust that Majerus and his staff have the requisite knowledge and experience to identify the type of kid and skills they need for their system to succeed. If that kid is a top-ranked player like Rob Loe, great. If the kid is a largely unknown talent who the staff falls in love with like Dwayne Evans, even better. Majerus certainly understands talent and his needs better than anyone writing for Rivals.com, Scouts.com, or any other recruiting site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 With the exception of Loe and Ellis, most of our recruits have gotten very little respect from these rankings, so who cares. One of our signings who was very highly regarded on some lists was Brett Thompson, so take these with a grain of salt. I don't think KM was rated very high. I seem to recall Evans was nowhere to be found on some lists. RM knows what he's doing and the fact that the top senior in Illinois is not ranked by ESPN, says more about ESPN than it does about Carter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 10-15 years ago, I was a religious follower of the rankings. I thought the key to success was signing as many top 100 or top 150 kids as possible. (Apparently Quinn Snyder shared my former philosophy.) Since then, I have realized that the rankings are effectively meaningless once you get past the McDonald's All-American kids who are sure-fire prospects. Even the best recruiting writers can't possibly watch and observe a meaningful amount of games or skills among the 1,000's of potential recruits. The task of seeing them all in an objective setting that would enable true comparison ranking becomes an even further impossibility. As a result, what you end up with a list of "big time recruits" who merely had a single flashy game in front of an influential writer. God help you if the same kid happens to have a big-time coach or assistant observing him at the time; then he truly blows up. Of course, none of this even accounts for how a given kid fits a system, works on his game and fitness, plays as a teammate, etc. Since Majerus came on board, I hardly even pay attention to the recruiting and rankings. I trust that Majerus and his staff have the requisite knowledge and experience to identify the type of kid and skills they need for their system to succeed. If that kid is a top-ranked player like Rob Loe, great. If the kid is a largely unknown talent who the staff falls in love with like Dwayne Evans, even better. Majerus certainly understands talent and his needs better than anyone writing for Rivals.com, Scouts.com, or any other recruiting site. Exactly. I remember when Anthony Booker went from an unknown to Top 40 on some lists after one big game or summer tournament. What a joke. The Methdale fans were so excited that they were getting an elite recruit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 10-15 years ago, I was a religious follower of the rankings. I thought the key to success was signing as many top 100 or top 150 kids as possible. (Apparently Quinn Snyder shared my former philosophy.) Since then, I have realized that the rankings are effectively meaningless once you get past the McDonald's All-American kids who are sure-fire prospects. Even the best recruiting writers can't possibly watch and observe a meaningful amount of games or skills among the 1,000's of potential recruits. The task of seeing them all in an objective setting that would enable true comparison ranking becomes an even further impossibility. As a result, what you end up with a list of "big time recruits" who merely had a single flashy game in front of an influential writer. God help you if the same kid happens to have a big-time coach or assistant observing him at the time; then he truly blows up. Of course, none of this even accounts for how a given kid fits a system, works on his game and fitness, plays as a teammate, etc. Since Majerus came on board, I hardly even pay attention to the recruiting and rankings. I trust that Majerus and his staff have the requisite knowledge and experience to identify the type of kid and skills they need for their system to succeed. If that kid is a top-ranked player like Rob Loe, great. If the kid is a largely unknown talent who the staff falls in love with like Dwayne Evans, even better. Majerus certainly understands talent and his needs better than anyone writing for Rivals.com, Scouts.com, or any other recruiting site. This is exactly right. We care what some evaluator who has maybe seen a kid once or twice or hell even 10 times over RM and or his staff who has probably seen him in person and on film many times, spoken with them and their parents probably dozens of times and have really gotten to know the kids. Even good staffs who have done all their homework on a kid still make mistakes and kids don't pan out. So to think that some recruiting guru who has seen a kid twice and talked to him for 10 minutes really have much of a clue beyond what would be obvious to all of us is silly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 ESPN needs to GOSEETHEKIDPLAY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 ESPN needs to GOSEETHEKIDPLAY Shocked it took until post 20 in this thread for this to come out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 10-15 years ago, I was a religious follower of the rankings. I thought the key to success was signing as many top 100 or top 150 kids as possible. (Apparently Quinn Snyder shared my former philosophy.) Since then, I have realized that the rankings are effectively meaningless once you get past the McDonald's All-American kids who are sure-fire prospects. Even the best recruiting writers can't possibly watch and observe a meaningful amount of games or skills among the 1,000's of potential recruits. The task of seeing them all in an objective setting that would enable true comparison ranking becomes an even further impossibility. As a result, what you end up with a list of "big time recruits" who merely had a single flashy game in front of an influential writer. God help you if the same kid happens to have a big-time coach or assistant observing him at the time; then he truly blows up. Of course, none of this even accounts for how a given kid fits a system, works on his game and fitness, plays as a teammate, etc. i agree completely with the above. even the most active recruiting guys cant possible see enough of the quality recruits to realistically have a clue. i quit caring about recruiting reports beyond, "so we have a commit to fill a spot" way back in the spoon days when the highly acclaimed greg hardin turned out to be a fat no talent kid that never saw the floor and ricky cranford the supposed best player in nyc checked into his first game and had absolutely no game. i now trust only my own lying eyes to any degree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 I only want to know if a kid can dunk. If so, he's an 85 or above in my rating system. If he can do some And 1 tour moves, then he's a 95-100. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 i now trust only my own lying eyes to any degree. Roy's formula: Start with ESPN rating. +25 points for every IL-based recruit. -25 points for recruits from anywhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgtholt88 Posted March 27, 2012 Author Share Posted March 27, 2012 With the exception of Loe and Ellis, most of our recruits have gotten very little respect from these rankings, so who cares. One of our signings who was very highly regarded on some lists was Brett Thompson, so take these with a grain of salt. I don't think KM was rated very high. I seem to recall Evans was nowhere to be found on some lists. RM knows what he's doing and the fact that the top senior in Illinois is not ranked by ESPN, says more about ESPN than it does about Carter. And this is all very true. I guess ratings on high school recruits should be left to the schools actually recruiting them, not ESPN. Obviously RM is going to know more about KC than anyone from ESPN. I just thought it was interesting that I read a lot about KC on this forum, yet he isn't even mentioned on many recruiting sites.. While on the other side of the coin, I don't here as much about JD on this forum, yet he does have some recognition from ESPN. This is one of the reasons I love this forum and why I joined it. I consider my input to this forum be very little considering I'm unable to watch or attend most games since I have left St. Louis, and Cape Girardeau has zero coverage of them. A lot of you guys seem to know your stuff and I use this forum as a source for information on guys like KC. Just thought I'd ask if anyone knew what the deal was with ESPN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.