|
Post by gogophers on Jun 6, 2013 13:24:20 GMT -5
Volley, I share your interest and took a look, last November, at the correlation between HS rankings and All American awards. I believe, based on that, that 2012 had an unusually high number of relatively low ranked players garnering awards. Here are some excerpts from a November 2012 post of mine examining the the overlap between top 10 recruit rankings and first team All American awards:"I looked at the AA first team lists from 2006-2011, 6 years in all. Each year’s team has had 14 members since 2008; 12 before that. So we’re talking about 80 spots for those six years. Three of those spots went to Europeans who never got a prep volleyball ranking, leaving 77 to go to those who did. Of those 77, few went to lower classmen. Two freshmen won spots. (Hodge and Faucette, for the curious). For sophomores, the number of winners by year, from 2011 to 2006, working from 2011 backwards, is 3, 0, 1, 1, 1, and 5. Yes, the class of 2005 was something else. So that means 64 spots for upper classmen. For any given year, the top 10 from the senior and junior classes total, of course, just 20. So how often did the first team spot go to members of this select group of 20?
The short answer is: very often. Here are some summary figures. I’ll mention a few names and their respective rankings, but only a few. I don’t want to just list player names and rankings, lest I give away information for which interested fans should be paying RichKern the modest fee he charges to stay in business.
In 2011, 8 of the 14 first teamers were top 10 recruits – though to be strictly accurate, the three sophomore first teamers that year are among the 8, meaning the 20 upperclassmen accounted for 5. Another first teamer was the 11th ranked senior, making it 9 out of 14 in the top 11 of their respective classes. None of the 14 was lower than 31.
In 2010, it was again 8 of 14 in the top 10, and indeed 5 of 14 in the top 5, with a ninth member of the team ranked 11th in her class. None of the 14 was ranked lower than 27, with one glaring exception: #72 from her class.
In 2009, 8 of the 13 (the 14th spot went to a European) were in the top 8. Two others were top 20. One was ranked 30. Another was ranked 62, another outlier. I couldn’t find any ranking for the other player, not even in the 100-250 grouping listed only alphabetically by prep volleyball, which stops assigning numerical rankings after 100; but maybe I overlooked it. That player was Ashley Mass. But she was a libero, and liberos for some reason often get little notice, much less love, in the prep volleyball rankings. It wouldn’t be too surprising if a great libero was wholly overlooked in the rankings.
In 2008, 11 of the 13 (another European accounts for the 14th spot) were ranked in the top 9—indeed, 7 were in just the top 4—and no one was lower than 25.
In 2007, 7 of the 11 (a European accounting for the 12th spot) were from the top 4; 9 from the top 10. Another was 14, and the last spot went to an outlier: the 51st ranked senior.
The 2006 team had three seniors (class of 2003) whose prep rankings, if any, I don’t know, because RichKern lists the rankings starting only with the entering class of 2004. Of the other 9, which again included 5 sophomores, making the pool of eligible candidates effectively the 30 top-10ers from three classes—every one was ranked no worse than 5th in her class.
So, we have a 51, a 62, and a 72 in the group, along with Mass, who may have been excluded wholly from the top 250 of her class. Every one of the 77 slots not given to Europeans went to a player ranked no lower than 31, and a solid majority were top 10ers. Therefore, Bergsma’s first team designation, which seems assured at this point, will be a rarity, and if she is NPOY, she’ll be far and away the lowest ranked hs player to garner that honor, at least in the six years I looked at.
If you accept the premise that the first teamers were the best of the best, and if past is prologue, you’re most likely to find them in the top 10 prep rankings. It would be fairly unusual if that pretty good prospect, the one ranked 35, ever reaches this particular pantheon.
Here are some other tidbits about the top 10ers. For the class of 2006, by my quick perusal, 8 out of the top 10 became a first, second, or third team AA in at least one year. For the class of 2007, the figure is 6; for 2008, 6; for 2009, the number is only 3, though that class has had only three years of voting eligibility so far. Harms is a virtual lock to increase the number to at least 4, come December.
One last tidbit. Including the class of 2012, there have been 70 top-10 recruits since 2006. By my quick count, 33 of those 70 went to just three schools. I won’t identify them but will just say that some schools make it a cardinal principle to hook the lion’s share of the pool of top 10 recruits, and leave it at that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2013 15:14:26 GMT -5
Alright, fine. Inky. She's very athletic too. And look how good she was as a freshman. Penn State is getting 4-5 kids with that kind of athleticism. Sorry. Both are very good classes, but I'm sorry, Penn State's has more potential in my opinion. The only 2 that might be as athletic as Inky are Washington and Reed. But Frantti and Lee are nowhere near as good or athletic as Burgess when she was their age. And on a similar note, everyone in the Midwest keeps talking about Frantti, Lee, and Haggerty as the top 2014 outsides but if I were a college coach, I'd take Annika Albrecht before all 3 of them. Just throwing that out there. Burgess might have been better as a junior, but again, and this is my only point, I think that the potential that Frantti, Lee, Reed, Washington, and Thelen have is so much higher than Burgess, Howard, McGeehee, or Bugg because of how athletic Penn State's class is. Stanford's kids are athletic, but I think Penn State's is much, much, more. Burgess may have been a better player in high school, but I don't think she will end up being better. You clearly disagree. I'm not sure why we keep restating our opinions without adding any further insight. And, concerning Albrecht, it's going to be interesting to watch the SPVB juniors who are on the 18-1 team this year play next year without Carlini. Her supporting cast isn't exceptional, but she makes everyone around her look like some of the best kids in the country. She literally takes thinking out of the equation for Haggerty and Albrecht because she is putting the ball exactly where they need it in every situation and gets them so many one-on-ones. It's insane. I wanna see how they do next season with Minarick, who, while very good, is not Lauren Carlini in terms of location. Then we can see where they fall in the discussion of the top 2014 outsides. I think Haggerty is a beast. Albrecht has some work to do with her decision-making, but she's very good too. And like another poster said, don't forget about the junior from Michigan, Snyder, who was the NORCECA MVP last summer on the YNT. She's my favorite kid in the class. I think she's better than any of the kids in Penn State's class.
|
|
|
Post by paloalto on Jun 6, 2013 15:45:27 GMT -5
The word athletic keeps getting thrown around. What does that mean for volleyball players. How high they jump? How quick they move? Their reflexes? Eye/hand coordination? Their physical strength? Does it have to do with fast twitch and slow twitch muscles and how these muscles respond to training? The ability to dig a ball? The ability to consistently pass a ball? How hard they hit a ball? Can a libero be as athletic as an MB?
You have to have a consensus definition of athletic or the debate goes in circles without a target.
|
|
|
Post by jasonr on Jun 6, 2013 18:22:05 GMT -5
The word athletic keeps getting thrown around. What does that mean for volleyball players. How high they jump? How quick they move? Their reflexes? Eye/hand coordination? Their physical strength? Does it have to do with fast twitch and slow twitch muscles and how these muscles respond to training? The ability to dig a ball? The ability to consistently pass a ball? How hard they hit a ball? Can a libero be as athletic as an MB? You have to have a consensus definition of athletic or the debate goes in circles without a target. All those factors matter, and the definition is relative to both position and cohort.
|
|
|
Post by vbgirls2 on Jun 6, 2013 18:44:32 GMT -5
All of the above and yes a libero can definitely be as "athletic" as a MB. I guess when I think of athletic, I think of .....quick learner. Quickness in relation to movement for sure. Fast twitch probably more important in VB. Overall coordination, hand/eye coordination. I think that the ability to dig or pass a ball is more about acquiring the skill. You may have to be quick and athletic to get to the ball, but the dig itself and pass itself is a learned skill. How hard you hit a ball is a function of timing, strength and quickness of arm swing. So maybe athletic and skill. Those that master the skills quickly are seen as being more athletic I guess. Tough concept to define, although when I watch an athlete regardless of sport, I feel like I can pick out the "athletic ones".
|
|
|
Post by NebraskaVBfan93 on Jun 6, 2013 19:03:39 GMT -5
Speaking of liberos and their "athleticism", I would venture a guess that as a group, they are probably the most athletic in as much as it translates into competing in other sports in addition to volleyball.
|
|
|
Post by Not Me on Jun 6, 2013 23:28:57 GMT -5
The word athletic keeps getting thrown around. What does that mean for volleyball players. How high they jump? How quick they move? Their reflexes? Eye/hand coordination? Their physical strength? Does it have to do with fast twitch and slow twitch muscles and how these muscles respond to training? The ability to dig a ball? The ability to consistently pass a ball? How hard they hit a ball? Can a libero be as athletic as an MB? You have to have a consensus definition of athletic or the debate goes in circles without a target. "Athletic" is a vague,meaningless term that is thrown around indiscriminately thrown around. If you are playing D1 volleyball at any position, aren't you "athletic"?
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Jun 6, 2013 23:52:00 GMT -5
Athletic is, in large part, to me, related to reflex. In volleyball it's keeping the ball alive on defense, reacting quickly and doing something with your reflex.
Just to change the subject, something I athletically specialize at, is Cal's class at 21 perhaps rated a little low? The frosh MB will probably start unless there is a position shift, after last year the setter, who got decent ratings, has an excellent chance to start, and Kerr is getting buzz around the program as being much better than her 60+ rating on prepvolleyball, and if Rostratter can't return because of injury Kerr will also get an excellent chance to start at libero. That's 3 potentialstarters from one class on a team close to top 6 of Pac 12. Better than 21st best?
|
|
|
Post by vbobserver on Jun 7, 2013 10:16:52 GMT -5
In reference to the 2012 All American list Vs Prep Rank, I'm pretty sure Brenner was ranked 21 by PrepVolleyball.
|
|
|
Post by roarlionsroar on Jun 8, 2013 4:30:29 GMT -5
I make a concerted effort to not hang around volleytalk during the off season that often, and the Penn State faithful have gone even further off the deep end.... And Stanford's class? No one even comes close to the potential that Lee, Frantti, or Weiskircher have. Oh please....And what, exactly, is your basis for saying such an outlandish comment? Stanford brought in, by far the consensus #1 recruiting class this year and WON the Pac-12 title largely starting 4 of those freshmen! Regardless of the post season failure, winning THAT many matches against quality opponents is a marvel achievement. There is NOTHING and I mean NOTHING other than your stupid Russ Rose colored PSU glasses to suggest that none of the Stanford recruits "even come close to the potential" of X,Y,Z future PSU recruits. Perhaps if these PSU players were, right now, challenging for spots on the national traveling team then I'd say you have a point, but, as we all know, they aren't, and you don't have a point. I think you underestimate how good this class is. Coaches around the country say it is the best class ever assembled: Frantti, Lee, Weiskircher, Washington, Thelen, Reed, Pierce. Which coaches are saying it's the best class ever? sources please..... Chis...I sure hope youre rite. Nothin like quality depth, competition & RS opportunities! RR & staff will get the cream to rise to the top..as it should! Courtney & Prietos talent & leadership upside go through the Rec Hall rafters! So, 2014 should be PERFECT! GO LIONS! !!!! Firstly, welcome to volleytalk....secondly, who is this clown? "Courtney and Prietos talent and leadership upside go through the Rec Hall rafters!"...really? what leadership has Courtney displayed on the court to lead you to say such a statement? Prieto hasn't even touched a ball against a D-1 team, so again, what has she shown that leads you to say that her leadership and talent upside are "through the Rec Hall rafters!"? I will be the first to say that PSU is continuing to recruit well, but some of these comments by the PSU faithful are just plain stupid. The fact is that volleyball has more and more parity in large part because the difference in talent level of recruits is minimizing. It used to be that landing a some top 10 recruits put a team in firm position to take home hardware. Not anymore...nowadays a random top 10 player is not excessively superior to a player in the 20's or 30's, and this increase in talent level will only expand. A variety of factors plays into why teams win, it's not always about percieved potential. It's finding the right players to execute at the right time. Having top players doesn't always mean they are the RIGHT players. It's all about finding the right players for the right systems to have true success, not about the "potential".
|
|
|
Post by roarlionsroar on Jun 8, 2013 5:01:08 GMT -5
Wow..what an honor to be attacked..I must be on to something! Guess what? I COULDNT CARE LESS ABOUT RANKINGS! I care about smart athletes, chemistry, & commitment that leads to Ws that lead to championships! When I hear about top recruits I google then understand why they are prized. Only time will shake things out. Ill say again, " I love Courtney & Prietos upsides". Megan played with & against the best..32 solo blocks & B1G FOY (a LION tradition). Paulina didnt play but her commitment to her team & her university showed me everything I need to see! When shes healthy watchout!
I think this thread spun PSUs way when someone questioned why the LIONS werent ranked this year. PSU is focused on '13..but its fun to discuss the future..good luck to all..GO LIONS! !!!!
|
|