Final ESPN Grades of Siena's Freshman Recruits

[Sienafan]

M. White - 66
J. Ogunyemi - 62
L. Long - 60
M. Wright - 59
M. Wolfe - 58

Below is ESPN's latest grading scale:

90-100: High-major plus prospect (5 stars)
Player demonstrates rare abilities. He should have an immediate impact at a national program with the potential for early entry into the NBA.

85-89: High-major prospect (4 stars)
Player is the centerpiece to a high-major program who starts three to four years.

80-84: High-major minus prospect (4 stars)
Player has the potential to significantly contribute to a high-major program over four years.

70-79: Mid-major plus prospect (3 stars)
Player is a fringe high-major recruit who contributes or a standout mid-level recruit.

65-69: Mid-major prospect (2 stars)
Player is a multi-year starter at the mid-major level.

60-64: Mid-major minus prospect (2 stars)
Player is a role player at the mid-major level.

50-59: Low-major prospect (1 star)
Player is a low-major Division I prospect.

I think ESPN dropped the ball here. They've only got White as a decent mid-major player. They see JO and Long as mid-major career role players. Wright and Wolfe they see as low-major players. Now we know that outside the top 150 they see a player maybe once in his career and that's the grade they're stuck with. In many cases, that one time is early in the player's career. I believe PPC said ESPN's people saw Long play once as a sophomore and never since - that's what his grade is based on. So my question is: why does ESPN even bother? Just stick with grading the top 150 and stop the pretense you follow players outside that group through their senior year. We're better off looking at the more regional recruiting sites that see players in their area regularly. All of the MD recruits were very highly regarded in the DMV area - widely regarded to be the nation's best recruiting area. The early returns show this isn't a recruiting class of role players and low-majors, so ESPN's recruit coverage cleary sucks.  Discuss.

[Tony]

Take those ranking with a grain of salt- having said that I much prefer having the rankings than not


Hoopscoop rankings

338 Maurice White
426 Marquis Wright
461 Lavon Long

[th24]

I prefer Rivals. I feel like their info is more accurate.

But..since we are dumping on ESPN I figured I'd chime in. Their ranking system is idiotic,although I do appreciate their scouting reports. Their highest rated players for MAJOR programs ALWAYS get a 90+, Mid-Major teams get more or less the same grades 70-89 and unranked players get a 40- it just makes no sense. It appears they want to use a hundred point scale but then no one can get the top rating ..so why even have it? Why start someone unranked at 40? Why change a recruit rank when they sign with a mid-major ?

[playerparentcoach]

I have been frustrated with these ESPN folks for years....They really should just stick to the top 100 because they have no clue about the rest of the players in the country.....too many coaches and fans take these rankings as face value and players are placed in a box that they cant get out of....I have also noticed players rank go up after they select a school.

[Sienafan]

Sept 12, 2013 11:18:12 GMT -5 Tony said:

Take those ranking with a grain of salt- having said that I much prefer having the rankings than not


Hoopscoop rankings

338 Maurice White
426 Marquis Wright
461 Lavon Long

These are all about right nationally at least. But still Hoopscoop ranked White ahead of the Maryland Gatorade Player of the Year who was also Washington Post's first team all-met in their same DMV area (Long was 4th team and Wolfe honorable mention). White was on the Baltimore Sun's first team all-met though. This is what I'm talking about - seems the regional coverage has a better line on players in their area than the national ones. I don't think it likely Maryland's player of the year is a low-major player. Every other member of the WP all-met first team went high-major.

[MTS]

What were guys like Hasbrouck, Moore, Franklin and Rossiter ranked? I think only Ubiles (and maybe Clarance Jackson?) were rated very highly. These kids all can play in the MAAC... how good they ultimately turn out time will tell. But I think this will turn out to be a pretty solid freshman class.

[Deleted]

Sept 12, 2013 12:16:41 GMT -5 Sienafan said:

Sept 12, 2013 11:18:12 GMT -5 Tony said:

Take those ranking with a grain of salt- having said that I much prefer having the rankings than not


Hoopscoop rankings

338 Maurice White
426 Marquis Wright
461 Lavon Long

These are all about right nationally at least. But still Hoopscoop ranked White ahead of the Maryland Gatorade Player of the Year who was also Washington Post's first team all-met in their same DMV area (Long was 4th team and Wolfe honorable mention). White was on the Baltimore Sun's first team all-met though. This is what I'm talking about - seems the regional coverage has a better line on players in their area than the national ones. I don't think it likely Maryland's player of the year is a low-major player. Every other member of the WP all-met first team went high-major.

White and Wright play different positions. Maybe the papers there name actual teams, unlike the MAAC, lol. You could be on a lower TEAM and still be better than someone above you as a prospect.

[siena79]

Sept 12, 2013 10:59:32 GMT -5 Sienafan said:

M. White - 66
J. Ogunyemi - 62
L. Long - 60
M. Wright - 59
M. Wolfe - 58

Below is ESPN's latest grading scale:

90-100: High-major plus prospect (5 stars)
Player demonstrates rare abilities. He should have an immediate impact at a national program with the potential for early entry into the NBA.

85-89: High-major prospect (4 stars)
Player is the centerpiece to a high-major program who starts three to four years.

80-84: High-major minus prospect (4 stars)
Player has the potential to significantly contribute to a high-major program over four years.

70-79: Mid-major plus prospect (3 stars)
Player is a fringe high-major recruit who contributes or a standout mid-level recruit.

65-69: Mid-major prospect (2 stars)
Player is a multi-year starter at the mid-major level.

60-64: Mid-major minus prospect (2 stars)
Player is a role player at the mid-major level.

50-59: Low-major prospect (1 star)
Player is a low-major Division I prospect.

I think ESPN dropped the ball here. They've only got White as a decent mid-major player. They see JO and Long as mid-major career role players. Wright and Wolfe they see as low-major players. Now we know that outside the top 150 they see a player maybe once in his career and that's the grade they're stuck with. In many cases, that one time is early in the player's career. I believe PPC said ESPN's people saw Long play once as a sophomore and never since - that's what his grade is based on. So my question is: why does ESPN even bother? Just stick with grading the top 150 and stop the pretense you follow players outside that group through their senior year. We're better off looking at the more regional recruiting sites that see players in their area regularly. All of the MD recruits were very highly regarded in the DMV area - widely regarded to be the nation's best recruiting area. The early returns show this isn't a recruiting class of role players and low-majors, so ESPN's recruit coverage cleary sucks.  Discuss.

[siena79]

Okay, we certainly need to take these rankings with a grain of salt, but we also need to be realistic as to our expectations for the next two years. In comparison to the other MAAC schools and our own history (pre-Mitch), this is not a highly ranked recruiting class and Mitch left very little for the new coach, so let's not have unreal expectations or get down on Jimmy and the team while we rebuild, grow and learn. The program was at rock bottom and let's not expect miracles (but we can hope!).


M. White - 66
J. Ogunyemi - 62
L. Long - 60
M. Wright - 59
M. Wolfe - 58

Below is ESPN's latest grading scale:

90-100: High-major plus prospect (5 stars)
Player demonstrates rare abilities. He should have an immediate impact at a national program with the potential for early entry into the NBA.

85-89: High-major prospect (4 stars)
Player is the centerpiece to a high-major program who starts three to four years.

80-84: High-major minus prospect (4 stars)
Player has the potential to significantly contribute to a high-major program over four years.

70-79: Mid-major plus prospect (3 stars)
Player is a fringe high-major recruit who contributes or a standout mid-level recruit.

65-69: Mid-major prospect (2 stars)
Player is a multi-year starter at the mid-major level.

60-64: Mid-major minus prospect (2 stars)
Player is a role player at the mid-major level.

50-59: Low-major prospect (1 star)
Player is a low-major Division I prospect.

I think ESPN dropped the ball here. They've only got White as a decent mid-major player. They see JO and Long as mid-major career role players. Wright and Wolfe they see as low-major players. Now we know that outside the top 150 they see a player maybe once in his career and that's the grade they're stuck with. In many cases, that one time is early in the player's career. I believe PPC said ESPN's people saw Long play once as a sophomore and never since - that's what his grade is based on. So my question is: why does ESPN even bother? Just stick with grading the top 150 and stop the pretense you follow players outside that group through their senior year. We're better off looking at the more regional recruiting sites that see players in their area regularly. All of the MD recruits were very highly regarded in the DMV area - widely regarded to be the nation's best recruiting area. The early returns show this isn't a recruiting class of role players and low-majors, so ESPN's recruit coverage cleary sucks.  Discuss.[/quote]