Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Ward, post: 2226306, member: 1958"]
Agreed. I think the best way to view it is as tiers more or less with the "bands" growing as you get deeper into the top 100. The top say 5 or so more often than not are no brainer studs. The next say 10-12 guys are players who are great but not quite as good as that first group and so on. A program's playing style and fit, situation, coaching, kid's work ethic/attitude all are much better indicators of how a kid will be in college than where he ranks in his "grouping" or "tier" IMO.

I also think anything from ~50-100 is all a crapshoot contingent on those above factors more than anything. Much better litmus test is who is going after the kid, and usually that's all these scouting services do anyways. They trust that Bill Self, Calipari, Coach K, etc. know more than they do. Then when they see them starting to follow a kid around they start to hype him up and act like the coaches are interested because they think he's good not the other way around.

Those teams who win without the top players are because they have older guys who have used 3-4 years of being in a college program and experience to close the gaps on the younger but more talented guys. But then when you have programs like UNC who habitually get top tier kids to stay 3-4 years you're going to see a lot of success.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?