At the End of the Day, Coaches Are the Bellweather...
In reply to: Yes, your implied point that there is scant agreement posted by BabaGhanouj
...to follow for successful programs.
We've been over this ad infinitum but for many of these rating services, the ratings and the camps/showcases they run and/or co-sponsor are the carrot/stick of their business model. Those of us who are stuck in offices/at work/one place tend to rely on the ratings to get an idea of how a player in Georgia, say, rates against one in Oregon, and to measure one's progress/regression. The services are generally on the same court for the top prospects, but tend to vary widely outside the top 12-15, as you pointed out.
That's it....as for next year, I just want to see what post/forward we get and what other player (probably a guard) we get to round out the 2018 class.
And then onto 2019!
But the coaches are more interested in the camps/showcases/leagues these organizations offer. As Dawn Staley said in the Inquirer article in the other thread, they're aware of kids from 7th grade on because they've seen them play at these events.
Geesh, our entire staff of coaches were here, there and everywhere at these showcases the last two weekends in April....Virginia, Midwest, Texas. Probably Ohio, too.
But getting back to the disparities:
- The staff of most of these rating services are pretty small. Can't see everyone all the time and/or hear about them, let alone write about them.
Some of the observations are interesting...more than 1/3 (nine) of the HG 2019 are guards/wings from the Midwest. How'd that happen? Is the talent that good? Or has Dan Olson of Hoopgurlz been hanging in the Midwest a lot?
- And since time is precious and money comes from other things, these lists are not updated that often. Hoopgurlz was just updated but Prospect Nations has not done so yet. They'll have to raise Mikayla's rating from 150 or risk looking like fools given her performance this winter at Paul VI.
(In the middle of road, Danielle P. did what she was supposed to do for Mary Louis Academy, while Danielle C.'s Sachem East team was not a strong supporting cast in a tough league.)
- Kids these services see are naturally going to get more attention; particularly if the kid's team comes to their event on a regular basis (hello Philly Belles);
- While these are "teams," they're attending showcases and showing "what you got" is never far from one's mind/actions. This benefits some players, but not others whose DNA is more team-focused.
My guess is that is one reason why Abby Prohaska is not highly rated or never makes the top Ohio end-of-year teams. But her "not in the stat book" game is why she's chosen to play on U.S. National Teams and why Muffet went over her. Someone's got to get floor burns.
So, I just take a composite of all of the services to get a sketch and then look for a bit more, when possible. For me, I like to see players.
But for putting together a team, the best indicator is whether a coach thinks the talent can fit into his/her style and program.