ESPN's College Basketball Player Ranks

[kAzE]

So, I guess since the NBA version of this has been wildly popular in social media (no matter how inaccurate it is), they decided to somehow apply it to college hoops (I have no idea how they got these numbers), ranking what they believe to be the top 100 college players this year:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/11819884/2014-college-basketball-player-rankings-10-1 (That's just the top 10)

There were 3 Blue Devils listed (as far as I'm aware):

Jahlil Okafor (#3)
Tyus Jones (#45)
Rasheed Sulaimon (#65)

Other Observations:

How are Justise Winslow and Amile Jefferson not in the top 100 players? That's unbelievable.

Both Harrision twins in the top 20, with Aaron at #12 . . . wow. I guess if you have a hot shooting streak in the NCAA tournament, you just get mad credibility with ESPN.

Marcus Paige is #2 . . . he's so overrated this year, it's kind of ridiculous.

[CameronBornAndBred]

So, I guess since the NBA version of this has been wildly popular in social media (no matter how inaccurate it is), they decided to somehow apply it to college hoops (I have no idea how they got these numbers), ranking what they believe to be the top 100 college players this year:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/11819884/2014-college-basketball-player-rankings-10-1 (That's just the top 10)

There were 3 Blue Devils listed (as far as I'm aware):

Jahlil Okafor (#3)
Tyus Jones (#45)
Rasheed Sulaimon (#65)

Other Observations:

How are Justise Winslow and Amile Jefferson not in the top 100 players? That's unbelievable.

Both Harrision twins in the top 20, with Aaron at #12 . . . wow. I guess if you have a hot shooting streak in the NCAA tournament, you just get mad credibility with ESPN.

Marcus Paige is #2 . . . he's so overrated this year, it's kind of ridiculous.
I think it's funny that freshmen are listed, period. But...gotta fill space on slow days.
I WOULD like to see the rankings done mid-season, that would actually make for some interesting and reasonable comparisons.

[uh_no]

How are Justise Winslow and Amile Jefferson not in the top 100 players? That's unbelievable.

Both Harrision twins in the top 20, with Aaron at #12 . . . wow. I guess if you have a hot shooting streak in the NCAA tournament, you just get mad credibility with ESPN.

Marcus Paige is #2 . . . he's so overrated this year, it's kind of ridiculous.

100 is only 20 teams worth of players.

amile was only 25th in his recruiting class, justice 15th.

If we worked on the (terrible) assumption that there are 4 years worth of players, that puts amile at 100, and justice at 60....not exactly locks....combine with the fact that a year to year improvement might average 20-25 spots worth of improvement, that means there would be

15 freshmen in front of winslow
25 sophomores
45 juniors
65 seniors

which would put him at 150

now obviously that's absurd, since people don't all improve like that (though some do), and many top players stick around...but i also think it's absurd to imagine that there's NOT at least a few dozen upperclassmen who have improved over the years to be better than winslow, and an even greater number of sophomores.

Obviously ESPN thinks so....but ESPN is often terribly at this kind of thing....i'm just pointing out that simply based on numbers (and remember there are 351 D1 teams...and 1755 starters), it's not out of realm of possibility that justice and amile aren't in the top 5% of that. 100 players is only 20 teams worth....that's not a whole lot.

[MPandolfi]

So, I guess since the NBA version of this has been wildly popular in social media (no matter how inaccurate it is), they decided to somehow apply it to college hoops (I have no idea how they got these numbers), ranking what they believe to be the top 100 college players this year:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/11819884/2014-college-basketball-player-rankings-10-1 (That's just the top 10)

There were 3 Blue Devils listed (as far as I'm aware):

Jahlil Okafor (#3)
Tyus Jones (#45)
Rasheed Sulaimon (#65)

Other Observations:

How are Justise Winslow and Amile Jefferson not in the top 100 players? That's unbelievable.

Both Harrision twins in the top 20, with Aaron at #12 . . . wow. I guess if you have a hot shooting streak in the NCAA tournament, you just get mad credibility with ESPN.

Marcus Paige is #2 . . . he's so overrated this year, it's kind of ridiculous.

In a follow-up Insider article, both Goodman and Bilas have Justise listed as "undervalued."

[gurufrisbee]

While I agree that a good case could be made for Winslow and Amile as possibly being in the top 100, the one who got left out that I think is ridiculous is Cook. Tyus is #45 and there is a strong wonder if he'll even really pass Cook as the starter on the team. With all due respect to everyone else on this team, when Duke was an elite eight team two years ago with great seniors in Mason, Kelly, and Curry it was still Cook who often took over in crunch times and made big plays and looked terrific.

Gonzaga has FIVE players in this top 100. Duke got three. Let that sink it for a bit.

[subzero02]

Gonzaga is obviously a lock for the final four...

[uh_no]

While I agree that a good case could be made for Winslow and Amile as possibly being in the top 100, the one who got left out that I think is ridiculous is Cook. Tyus is #45 and there is a strong wonder if he'll even really pass Cook as the starter on the team. With all due respect to everyone else on this team, when Duke was an elite eight team two years ago with great seniors in Mason, Kelly, and Curry it was still Cook who often took over in crunch times and made big plays and looked terrific.

Gonzaga has FIVE players in this top 100. Duke got three. Let that sink it for a bit.

and last year, the offense folded in crunch time....was it all cook? certainly not. but lets not cherry pick career highlights.

we have played 2 exhibition games and cook has come off the bench. There is a possibility cook could end up starting, but all indicators lead to jones^2.

he's a good player, but probably not top 20 at his position, nor 100 in the country.

[Jim3k]

This kind of rating coming from ESPN and aimed at college players is really inappropriate. College players are not pros and should not generally be subjected to pro-like public scrutiny. Both fans and the NCAA should push back on the very concept. I see it as mainly mean-spirited. Anyone rated outside the top 10 or so is being demeaned, whether they deserve it or not. ESPN should cancel this nonsense now.

[gurufrisbee]

and last year, the offense folded in crunch time....was it all cook? certainly not. but lets not cherry pick career highlights.

we have played 2 exhibition games and cook has come off the bench. There is a possibility cook could end up starting, but all indicators lead to jones^2.

he's a good player, but probably not top 20 at his position, nor 100 in the country.

When the offense folded in crunch time last year it was more often Parker or Hood or the fact that Cook was not on the floor. It's not cherry picking, IMO. It happened enough when he was a sophomore to believe it was a trend with Cook - which made it all the more bizarre and confusing when as a junior his role was minimized so much.

I'm certainly sure I could be wrong, but I also think you probably cannot find ten players in college basketball this season who were better than Cook in college two years ago, so the potential that he could be top hundred is not far fetched.

[PSurprise]

Don't care. Just as long as we have the best team at the end of the year, I couldn't care less about ESPN's preseason drivel.

[slower]

When the offense folded in crunch time last year it was more often Parker or Hood or the fact that Cook was not on the floor. It's not cherry picking, IMO. It happened enough when he was a sophomore to believe it was a trend with Cook - which made it all the more bizarre and confusing when as a junior his role was minimized so much.

I'm certainly sure I could be wrong, but I also think you probably cannot find ten players in college basketball this season who were better than Cook in college two years ago, so the potential that he could be top hundred is not far fetched.

As a very general and non-scientific observation, Cook is very good when he's good and very bad when he's bad. His sulking and body language are/have been very obvious, and yet he HAS been dominant at times in his career. But if we're going to have (apparently) calm, steady freshman leaders (in addition to the calm and steady non-freshmen, of course), Cook and Sheed need to get their heads in order or they're gonna sit. It seems that we have enough talent this year to not have to tolerate that particular brand of drama.

[sagegrouse]

This kind of rating coming from ESPN and aimed at college players is really inappropriate. College players are not pros and should not generally be subjected to pro-like public scrutiny. Both fans and the NCAA should push back on the very concept. I see it as mainly mean-spirited. Anyone rated outside the top 10 or so is being demeaned, whether they deserve it or not. ESPN should cancel this nonsense now.

Test question: Does ranking the top 500 college players produce more clicks? Lessee... 500 players, their families, friends and supporters. Probably 200 schools and their supporters. Lots of other players and their buds who can't believe they were left out.

[uh_no]

This kind of rating coming from ESPN and aimed at college players is really inappropriate. College players are not pros and should not generally be subjected to pro-like public scrutiny. Both fans and the NCAA should push back on the very concept. I see it as mainly mean-spirited. Anyone rated outside the top 10 or so is being demeaned, whether they deserve it or not. ESPN should cancel this nonsense now.

that's quite a criticism on a board where unnecessary judgement is often thrown at opposing players, whether about their weight, comments about numbers of books they've read in college, etc. Personally I'd rather see discussion of their on floor play than any of the other stuff.

[Henderson]

that's quite a criticism on a board where unnecessary judgement is often thrown at opposing players, whether about their weight, comments about numbers of books they've read in college, etc. Personally I'd rather see discussion of their on floor play than any of the other stuff.

Mrs. Henderson read that post to me, and I could have sworn she said "foreplay." I'm glad you didn't go there, but I sure do love Mrs. H.

[kAzE]

All I know is . . . I'd take Justise Winslow 100 times out of 100 over Ron Baker, the #8 player on that list. Baker's fine, he's a smart guard who can shoot it, but get outta here with that #8 ranking.

[jimsumner]

These kids have been ranked by scout.com, rivals.com et. al. since they were 14. I suspect they're used to it.

And yes, they're college kids not pros. But they also are college kids performing in front of 10,000-20,000 fans and national TV audiences in the millions, subject to the scrutiny of hundreds of websites just like this.

So, perhaps, in a broad, philosophical sense they shouldn't be evaluated like this. But in a world in which big-time college basketball is both the primary feeder system for the pros and a part of a vast and lucrative entertainment system, this is par for the course.

[MCFinARL]

and last year, the offense folded in crunch time....was it all cook? certainly not. but lets not cherry pick career highlights.

we have played 2 exhibition games and cook has come off the bench. There is a possibility cook could end up starting, but all indicators lead to jones^2.

he's a good player, but probably not top 20 at his position, nor 100 in the country.

I don't necessarily disagree that it's not an outrage to leave Quinn Cook out of the ESPN Top 100. But I have some nits to pick with the rest of your critique.

Re the offense folding in crunch time last year, I think Cook's stat line from the Mercer game provides some rebuttal: 23 points on 8-11 shooting in 35 minutes, 4 rebounds, 4 assists, 2 steals, 2 turnovers. [Compare Jabari Parker with 14 points on 4-14 shooting, 7 rebounds, no assists, 1 steal, 4 turnovers.] Yes, you could say I am cherry picking a game here, but I am cherry picking from your data pool.

Re your other point, technically, we haven't played two exhibition games but one exhibition game and an intra-squad scrimmage (told you I was picking nits). Arguably, the size of Cook's role can't be clearly determined by the Blue-White scrimmage, since all players were on the court at once. In the Livingstone game Cook did come off the bench--but he also played 25 minutes, only 1 less than Tyus Jones.

Maybe I am overreacting here, since as I noted, I'm willing to accept your premise that it's no shock for Tyus Jones (who comes into school with a big, big reputation and hasn't needed to live up to it yet) to be in the top 100 and Cook not to be. I just thought your description of Cook might be undervaluing him a little bit.

[Edouble]

This kind of rating coming from ESPN and aimed at college players is really inappropriate. College players are not pros and should not generally be subjected to pro-like public scrutiny. Both fans and the NCAA should push back on the very concept. I see it as mainly mean-spirited. Anyone rated outside the top 10 or so is being demeaned, whether they deserve it or not. ESPN should cancel this nonsense now.

So, anyone who is not a first or second team All-American at the end of the year is being demeaned?

Is any team that does not make the Sweet 16 at the end of the year being collectively demeaned? Should we chuck the tournament so that no feelings get hurt?

[gurufrisbee]

I still think Cook is clearly better than half that list, but that those guys made it simply because ESPN is trying to spread the love to drum up interest around the entire nation and with many fan bases. Although the Gonzaga thing still does not make any sense then.

It's funny there was a comment about taking Winslow over Ron Baker. One of my biggest shocks was that Van Fleet was rated ahead of his teammate Baker. That, to me, is inexplicable.

It does not matter of course and none of it is nearly as important as having the best team during the season and especially at the end. I just hope whoever was responsible for this is publically apologizing to Cook, Winslow, Amile, and hopefully all the team for vastly underrating them

[Jim3k]

So, anyone who is not a first or second team All-American at the end of the year is being demeaned?

Is any team that does not make the Sweet 16 at the end of the year being collectively demeaned? Should we chuck the tournament so that no feelings get hurt?

End of the year is one thing. Before the season even starts is another. You wanna be ranked 46th when you might be 9th at the end of the season? You wanna fall from 9th to 74th? Or compare your 83rd with a 63rd you will never play against? Move 'em around week to week by some kind of arbitrary and meaningless vote?

Point is, this is high risk speculation targeting (errrm...OK...:confused:) student-athletes, not adults who are making their living as professionals. School is tough enough. Adding some unqualified outsiders' athletic incentive is not necessarily a good thing--might be for some, might be a burden for others. It's a distraction for the player, not to mention fodder for opposing crowds. ("Overrated!" becomes "77th and you're still overrated!" "Yer a bum and the rankings prove it!") Not a healthy thing for college sports where balance between academics and athletics is already plenty difficult to achieve.

IMO, a rating system like this is either to get clicks for a commercial purpose or to satisfy the personal needs of insecure wannabe athletes turned wannabe sports pundits. Neither of these purposes is worthy of support. They should be rejected as b.s.

[Scorp4me]

...His sulking and body language are/have been very obvious...

If he improves this, I'll be a bigger supporter no matter the rest.