RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Recruiting, 2016
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
PRballer



Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 2535



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/30/15 10:58 pm    ::: Recruiting, 2016 Reply Reply with quote

Not sure where to post this (seems like verbals get one-off posts here?) but it looks like Hoopgurlz has updated their rankings for the 2016 class. Most noticeable are huge rises with Leaonna Odom (Duke), Natalie Chou and Sierra Campisano (Oregon). Big drop with Chassity Carter (Vanderbilt).

Not sure how much stock to take in these, but it is updated and there are new commitments for those who follow:

http://espn.go.com/high-school/girls-basketball/recruiting/rankings/_/class/2016


Oldfandepot2



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 996
Location: Northeast


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/01/15 8:02 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Does anyone know how to access the recruiting sites rankings from prior years. Hoopgurlz is easy to find but the other sites are difficult as googling them yields little. Some of the sites allow you to go back to 2013 with their drop down menu but that is it. A group of us amatuers are trying to do research on the various sites such as Prospectsnation, Blue Star, etc. and any help would be appreciated.



_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
#Occasionalwnbafan



Joined: 01 Mar 2012
Posts: 1380



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/01/15 10:23 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Calveion Landrum (Baylor) also had a free fall from top 10 to number 40.
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/01/15 2:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

#Occasionalwnbafan wrote:
Calveion Landrum (Baylor) also had a free fall from top 10 to number 40.


No idea about the reason for that drop, but I've always found it silly when a player drops 30 places simply because they chose not to do the whole summer circuit. Did that make them less of a player than they were last March? That seems to happen with some frequency.

I can understand players jumping up because of great summer league performances, or dropping because of bad performances.


Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 5221



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/03/15 4:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Oldfandepot2 wrote:
Does anyone know how to access the recruiting sites rankings from prior years. Hoopgurlz is easy to find but the other sites are difficult as googling them yields little. Some of the sites allow you to go back to 2013 with their drop down menu but that is it. A group of us amatuers are trying to do research on the various sites such as Prospectsnation, Blue Star, etc. and any help would be appreciated.


I think you would have to e-mail them and ask them to send it to you?

Hoopgurlz goes back to 2008, even though the drop down menu doesn't show it. You just have to change the year in the URL http://espn.go.com/high-school/girls-basketball/recruiting/rankings/_/class/2008

Prospects Nation only goes back until 2013 with their drop down menu. http://prospectsnation.com/players/ranked/all

I had a harder time finding the others but they do have websites with contact info. Will be interested to hear if you can get this data!


Oldfandepot2



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 996
Location: Northeast


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/03/15 7:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Durantula wrote:
Oldfandepot2 wrote:
Does anyone know how to access the recruiting sites rankings from prior years. Hoopgurlz is easy to find but the other sites are difficult as googling them yields little. Some of the sites allow you to go back to 2013 with their drop down menu but that is it. A group of us amatuers are trying to do research on the various sites such as Prospectsnation, Blue Star, etc. and any help would be appreciated.


I think you would have to e-mail them and ask them to send it to you?

Hoopgurlz goes back to 2008, even though the drop down menu doesn't show it. You just have to change the year in the URL http://espn.go.com/high-school/girls-basketball/recruiting/rankings/_/class/2008

Prospects Nation only goes back until 2013 with their drop down menu. http://prospectsnation.com/players/ranked/all

I had a harder time finding the others but they do have websites with contact info. Will be interested to hear if you can get this data!


Thank you for information. I shall contact them and let you know what they say.



_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
NoDakSt



Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 4929



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/15 11:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stanford just received a verbal from Nadia Fingall a Forward out of Florida. I think she was also looking at Oklahoma, FLorida, Florida State, and Penn State. Top 30 recruit according to Hoopgurlz


Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 5221



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/15 12:50 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NoDakSt wrote:
Stanford just received a verbal from Nadia Fingall a Forward out of Florida. I think she was also looking at Oklahoma, FLorida, Florida State, and Penn State. Top 30 recruit according to Hoopgurlz


Weird thing is Stanford does not seem to recruit the caliber of player that Duke or Notre Dame bring in the past few years. They definitely have a ton of things to sell, but I wonder if their staff could use a boost in recruiting.


Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/15 2:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Durantula wrote:
NoDakSt wrote:
Stanford just received a verbal from Nadia Fingall a Forward out of Florida. I think she was also looking at Oklahoma, FLorida, Florida State, and Penn State. Top 30 recruit according to Hoopgurlz


Weird thing is Stanford does not seem to recruit the caliber of player that Duke or Notre Dame bring in the past few years. They definitely have a ton of things to sell, but I wonder if their staff could use a boost in recruiting.

It is harder to get into Stanford, so they have a smaller pool of potential recruits than Notre Dame and Duke.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/15 3:30 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Fighting Artichoke wrote:
Durantula wrote:
NoDakSt wrote:
Stanford just received a verbal from Nadia Fingall a Forward out of Florida. I think she was also looking at Oklahoma, FLorida, Florida State, and Penn State. Top 30 recruit according to Hoopgurlz


Weird thing is Stanford does not seem to recruit the caliber of player that Duke or Notre Dame bring in the past few years. They definitely have a ton of things to sell, but I wonder if their staff could use a boost in recruiting.

It is harder to get into Stanford, so they have a smaller pool of potential recruits than Notre Dame and Duke.


Diggins for example was down on the last day to ND or Stanford.

I'd like to know who the elite recruits are who chose Duke or ND who could not have been accepted at Stanford. I'm not buying that excuse.


Hoops9092



Joined: 04 Nov 2008
Posts: 1631



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/15 3:43 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Fighting Artichoke wrote:
Durantula wrote:
NoDakSt wrote:
Stanford just received a verbal from Nadia Fingall a Forward out of Florida. I think she was also looking at Oklahoma, FLorida, Florida State, and Penn State. Top 30 recruit according to Hoopgurlz


Weird thing is Stanford does not seem to recruit the caliber of player that Duke or Notre Dame bring in the past few years. They definitely have a ton of things to sell, but I wonder if their staff could use a boost in recruiting.

It is harder to get into Stanford, so they have a smaller pool of potential recruits than Notre Dame and Duke.


Diggins for example was down on the last day to ND or Stanford.

I'd like to know who the elite recruits are who chose Duke or ND who could not have been accepted at Stanford. I'm not buying that excuse.


cough* cough* chelsea gray


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/15 3:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Hoops9092 wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
Fighting Artichoke wrote:
Durantula wrote:
NoDakSt wrote:
Stanford just received a verbal from Nadia Fingall a Forward out of Florida. I think she was also looking at Oklahoma, FLorida, Florida State, and Penn State. Top 30 recruit according to Hoopgurlz


Weird thing is Stanford does not seem to recruit the caliber of player that Duke or Notre Dame bring in the past few years. They definitely have a ton of things to sell, but I wonder if their staff could use a boost in recruiting.

It is harder to get into Stanford, so they have a smaller pool of potential recruits than Notre Dame and Duke.


Diggins for example was down on the last day to ND or Stanford.

I'd like to know who the elite recruits are who chose Duke or ND who could not have been accepted at Stanford. I'm not buying that excuse.


cough* cough* chelsea gray


Why do you say that? She was from a good HS, and according to ESPN was recruited by Stanford, Cal and Maryland.

One of the first things coaches at schools like Stanford, Duke, ND, Northwestern do is get transcripts and talk to the HSs. They don't waste their time if they're not pretty confident the player can be admitted. They're wrong sometimes after test scores come in and so forth, but not often. They have a pretty good idea. They've been through it enough times. They understand the limitations.


Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2539



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/15 5:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Gray did not get into Stanford but yes they need some new blood.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/15 7:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Nixtreefan wrote:
Gray did not get into Stanford but yes they need some new blood.


Just curious. You know that how?


goforit77



Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 123



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/15 8:10 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Nixtreefan wrote:
Gray did not get into Stanford but yes they need some new blood.


Just curious. You know that how?


Stanford eased up on recruiting Chelsea because they were concerned about her legs/knees(How her build would hold up)...Maybe they were right??

I dont doubt that Chelsea could have gotten into Stanford...


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11102



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/11/15 9:10 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It is very, very hard to get into Stanford, and if a potential player is not admitted, they can't play.

At Duke, for example, my understanding is there are two women's basketball slots for players who otherwise would not be admitted. Almost all schools have some exceptions to the admissions policy, and not just for sports, but my understanding is that Stanford does not.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2539



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/11/15 9:51 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

goforit77 wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
Nixtreefan wrote:
Gray did not get into Stanford but yes they need some new blood.


Just curious. You know that how?


Stanford eased up on recruiting Chelsea because they were concerned about her legs/knees(How her build would hold up)...Maybe they were right??

I dont doubt that Chelsea could have gotten into Stanford...


Nope, not qualified, I know as most were questioning and questioning as usually happens when a player is expected so as you can imagine the booties always find out many ways, from transcripts to tests scores Wink I think people forget that when someone is recruited, a lot of people get to know their ins and outs and the information is shared.

Knees had nothing to do with it look at Beebe and still recruiting Carrington on her second ACL.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/11/15 11:33 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
It is very, very hard to get into Stanford, and if a potential player is not admitted, they can't play.

At Duke, for example, my understanding is there are two women's basketball slots for players who otherwise would not be admitted. Almost all schools have some exceptions to the admissions policy, and not just for sports, but my understanding is that Stanford does not.


If they don't, then WBB is the only sport at Stanford that doesn't. And I doubt that's the case.

They certainly do in football and quite a few years ago they dropped the old policy that you couldn't get an offer until you filled out the entire application and were actually accepted. Since they offered Wilson two years ago, they obviously applied that to WBB too.

I have little doubt that Stanford has the toughest admission standards for athletes among major sports schools but the gap with several other elite schools is small enough that it does not remotely explain the gap in recruiting success.

As for Gray, "he/she couldn't get in to our school" is the oldest excuse in the book for bitter fans when a player goes elsewhere, and it's usually baloney. Especially in WBB where the number if players actually targeted by top teams for recruitment is so small, it's rare they would waste time on a player without being confident of their admittibility.


LegoMyEggo



Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Posts: 284



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/11/15 11:59 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Angel McCoughtry, Natasha Howard and a few others that I remember needed the "right" school.


Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2539



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/11/15 1:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
ClayK wrote:
It is very, very hard to get into Stanford, and if a potential player is not admitted, they can't play.

At Duke, for example, my understanding is there are two women's basketball slots for players who otherwise would not be admitted. Almost all schools have some exceptions to the admissions policy, and not just for sports, but my understanding is that Stanford does not.


If they don't, then WBB is the only sport at Stanford that doesn't. And I doubt that's the case.

They certainly do in football and quite a few years ago they dropped the old policy that you couldn't get an offer until you filled out the entire application and were actually accepted. Since they offered Wilson two years ago, they obviously applied that to WBB too.

I have little doubt that Stanford has the toughest admission standards for athletes among major sports schools but the gap with several other elite schools is small enough that it does not remotely explain the gap in recruiting success.

As for Gray, "he/she couldn't get in to our school" is the oldest excuse in the book for bitter fans when a player goes elsewhere, and it's usually baloney. Especially in WBB where the number if players actually targeted by top teams for recruitment is so small, it's rare they would waste time on a player without being confident of their admittibility.


They didn't waste time as noted above in another posters post. But it had nothing to do with her knees as for some reason Stanford still goes with players with multiple injuries like Beebe, which I disagree with but I am not giving the scholarship. Some players are clearly not close enough as with Gray, others borderline. Don't get me wrong, we have a couple of boneheads on the team right now. Just because they borderline get in, doesn't mean they are smart basketball players LOL.


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/11/15 10:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

LegoMyEggo wrote:
Angel McCoughtry, Natasha Howard and a few others that I remember needed the "right" school.


Those 2 being accepted into schools and then being able to maintain their eligibility are certainly a couple of the great mysteries.


Dennis1361



Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 248



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/15 9:19 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I have been closely associated with the Stanford Women's basketball program over the past 25 years and there are no exceptions in admissions standards. Many new coaches expect there to be "exceptions" but there are none. There are at other supposed "academic" schools such as Notre Dame and Duke. Teams such as UConn (not an academic school by any stretch of the imagination) will recruit down to a "partial qualifier" ( Remember Gillian Goring) And it does make a difference as one or two players can make a difference, a big difference. When all is done and said Stanford maintains a very high level program without compromising its academic rigor. As a side issue one thing has always mystified me and that is the seemingly endless carping about players performance in the sport and refusal to knock a players academic record, or lack thereof. And the fact that a 3.50 at good old state U is not the same as a 3.5 at Stanford or an Ivy


Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/15 9:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Dennis1361 wrote:
I have been closely associated with the Stanford Women's basketball program over the past 25 years and there are no exceptions in admissions standards. Many new coaches expect there to be "exceptions" but there are none. There are at other supposed "academic" schools such as Notre Dame and Duke. Teams such as UConn (not an academic school by any stretch of the imagination) will recruit down to a "partial qualifier" ( Remember Gillian Goring) And it does make a difference as one or two players can make a difference, a big difference. When all is done and said Stanford maintains a very high level program without compromising its academic rigor. As a side issue one thing has always mystified me and that is the seemingly endless carping about players performance in the sport and refusal to knock a players academic record, or lack thereof. And the fact that a 3.50 at good old state U is not the same as a 3.5 at Stanford or an Ivy

I thought the average grade 'awarded' at Harvard was over 90%. I know Princeton still grades on a curve but some top schools have ridiculous grade inflation, figuring that anyone that gets into their school (like Harvard) should get good grades. In summary, a 3.5 at Princeton is excellent and at Harvard, it's just average.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/15 10:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Dennis1361 wrote:
I have been closely associated with the Stanford Women's basketball program over the past 25 years and there are no exceptions in admissions standards.


That statement doesn't mean anything. What "standards"are you talking about? There is no floor. Not everyone is scoring 750 on all parts of their SATs. Not everyone has a 3.9 high school GPA. For example, Stanford's own published data states about 3% of freshmen scored in the 500s on their Math SAT. Some even scored in the 400s. We're not talking just 600s (20% score in the 600s) but 400s and 500s. The numbers in the 400s, 500s and 600s in the Writing and Critical Reading portions are even higher than for math. There were students admitted with GPAs between 2.5 and 3.0. Not a lot, but a few.

Obviously even those people who were admitted after scoring in the 400s and 500s were deemed to have satisfied Stanford admission standards, so there's plenty of room to accept just about anyone and still say there's "no exception" being made. In those numbers there's plenty of room for admission of a handful of athletes who without their athletic prowess would never have had a sniff of a chance of admission.

The point is that they are admitting students who are athletes who otherwise would never get admitted. I don't really care how you choose to describe that.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11102



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/14/15 10:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Dennis1361 wrote:
I have been closely associated with the Stanford Women's basketball program over the past 25 years and there are no exceptions in admissions standards.


That statement doesn't mean anything. What "standards"are you talking about? There is no floor. Not everyone is scoring 750 on all parts of their SATs. Not everyone has a 3.9 high school GPA. For example, Stanford's own published data states about 3% of freshmen scored in the 500s on their Math SAT. Some even scored in the 400s. We're not talking just 600s (20% score in the 600s) but 400s and 500s. The numbers in the 400s, 500s and 600s in the Writing and Critical Reading portions are even higher than for math. There were students admitted with GPAs between 2.5 and 3.0. Not a lot, but a few.

Obviously even those people who were admitted after scoring in the 400s and 500s were deemed to have satisfied Stanford admission standards, so there's plenty of room to accept just about anyone and still say there's "no exception" being made. In those numbers there's plenty of room for admission of a handful of athletes who without their athletic prowess would never have had a sniff of a chance of admission.

The point is that they are admitting students who are athletes who otherwise would never get admitted. I don't really care how you choose to describe that.


Just curious -- what's your evidence for this? The general understanding is what Dennis1361 said, and it's echoed in every Stanford sport. So all this time Stanford has been misleading, if not outright lying, about its athletic admissions?

You could well be right, but I think proof would be helpful given the long history of the Stanford assertions.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin