|
|
Post by Disc808 on Sept 7, 2016 15:50:01 GMT -5
Not to be bashful, but is Rettke quick enough to close the block if she were to be a MB? Or is she slated to play at the pins? Ive seen very little of her so I'm just curious
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2016 15:52:15 GMT -5
Not to be bashful, but is Rettke quick enough to close the block if she were to be a MB? Or is she slated to play at the pins? Ive seen very little of her so I'm just curious I think she would be better on the right side, I really don't see her being fast enough to close blocks at a collegiate level |
|
|
|
Post by bball on Sept 7, 2016 15:59:49 GMT -5
Not to be bashful, but is Rettke quick enough to close the block if she were to be a MB? Or is she slated to play at the pins? Ive seen very little of her so I'm just curious I think she would be better on the right side, I really don't see her being fast enough to close blocks at a collegiate level Rettke moves way to slow right now, but she has room for improvement. id rather like to see her on the RS, but anything can happen. |
|
|
|
Post by BadgerAce42 on Sept 7, 2016 16:01:42 GMT -5
It's a good thing that Whalen (#37) and both our two top 10s will be enrolling in January, then.
|
|
|
|
Post by northwoods on Sept 7, 2016 16:22:13 GMT -5
I think she would be better on the right side, I really don't see her being fast enough to close blocks at a collegiate level Rettke moves way to slow right now, but she has room for improvement. id rather like to see her on the RS, but anything can happen. Not sure when you saw her last, but she was plenty quick enough at nationals in Indy to close in the middle. |
|
|
|
Post by vollypopaz on Sept 7, 2016 16:30:20 GMT -5
i think a lot of these ratings of ACES are off, sorry... but i don't agree with lots of these this year. i also think it is interesting to note which kids out of these rankings make all-american honors during their 4 years. it's an interesting stat i've seen posted on this forum before.... they seldom "get it right" which is also impossible for pvb to do anywayz. it's all pure hype and opinion, most of these top 30 kids won't ever even see AA honors in college. somebody should repost the all-americans for the past few seasons and notice their senior aces ranking... kind of deems the whole thing useless. if you're a top 100 recruit, the sky is the limit for your potential..... who cares about someone 22 and 25 is better? if they're getting noticed, they are good. there is always a couple kids who are WOWzers and big time gets, but after that, anything is possible for these kids. (FOR EXAMPLE) LSU/Nebraska's Briana Holman was ranked 37 in 2013 for senior aces? uhm? now she's arguably one of the best players in the country.... 1st team all american her sophmore season? 1 example of many! It's Art not Science! But I agree with most of your post as this year's list seems to contain a lot more reaches and DOR's doing some serious CYA. Someone did a study of the 2014 Senior Aces and the transfer/retirement rate after only one season! The %'s were amazing...this year looks to be on the same track. I think the arguement could be made that the transfer/retirement rate has more to do with the increasingly early commitments but it does shadow the overall talent evaluation process as well. At the end of the day 95% of the DOR's and HC's look at the measurables. Height, reach, jump, quickness. They think they can coach the intangibles like volleyball IQ, competitiveness, strength, mental strength, work ethic, court awareness, etc. Sometimes they can and many times they can't. But I don't blame them to take the ones that meet the measurables (that you can't coach) first. It only makes sense when they have very limited time watching these kids. Who wouldn't want to start with the best clay. The problem is it leads to some epic fails as well because those intangibles inevitability can't be coached into most players. I agree with both of these. After visiting 10 different D1 schools with my daughter (she went on 12 visits) , I noticed a PVB top 100 ace on a top25 team roster. She is talked about on this forum (another thread) with some regularity, but she doesn't play. This player had good "measurables, and performed well in practice. However she had the worst attitude and work ethic of any player I saw in all my visits. It's very difficult to coach these things and I suspect that is a big reason this girl doesn't play much. Also these kind of mental characteristics are hard to measure or observe during a tournament. So the measurables may get you a place in the 100 but I think the mental aspects will dictate how you end up doing on your college team. |
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Sept 7, 2016 16:49:04 GMT -5
Not to be bashful, but is Rettke quick enough to close the block if she were to be a MB? Or is she slated to play at the pins? Ive seen very little of her so I'm just curious bashful? |
|
|
|
Post by BuckysHeat on Sept 7, 2016 16:53:24 GMT -5
Not to be bashful, but is Rettke quick enough to close the block if she were to be a MB? Or is she slated to play at the pins? Ive seen very little of her so I'm just curious When I saw her in Chicago in March, she was not nearly as effective as a middle as she was as an outside. Her blocks were too slow to be effective but put her on the outside and she killed everything. Right side would probably be the best for her given her height and what she could do to opponents outsides without having to swing over to meet them from the middle |
|
|
|
Post by BuckysHeat on Sept 7, 2016 16:55:33 GMT -5
why would class be based off of immediate need? that would be a pretty dumb measuring tool. Because that would never be a consideration at all right? Good luck on projecting high school players and recruiting classes solely on what they will do in 3-4 years while ignoring the present Now that would be dumb |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2016 16:58:35 GMT -5
Not to be bashful, but is Rettke quick enough to close the block if she were to be a MB? Or is she slated to play at the pins? Ive seen very little of her so I'm just curious bashful? Bashingness. |
|
|
|
Post by wishinwestcoastvb on Sept 7, 2016 16:59:20 GMT -5
So, my question hasn't been answered yet. What happened to Halle Johnston making the list? A previous user said that she was going to be rated at 22.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disc808 on Sept 7, 2016 18:21:16 GMT -5
Not to be bashful, but is Rettke quick enough to close the block if she were to be a MB? Or is she slated to play at the pins? Ive seen very little of her so I'm just curious bashful? Lol sorry I misused the word. I was thinking about the word bashing, and thought that was its adjective form, but I clearly made a mistake |
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 7, 2016 18:28:50 GMT -5
why would class be based off of immediate need? that would be a pretty dumb measuring tool. Because that would never be a consideration at all right? Good luck on projecting high school players and recruiting classes solely on what they will do in 3-4 years while ignoring the present Now that would be dumb eh, the only problem is that there is no way to quantify "immediate need" because of staggered classes. Stanford had the #1 recruiting class this past year but Stanford doesn't NEED any of those players to actually play because of attrition. |
|
|
|
Post by northwoods on Sept 7, 2016 19:11:49 GMT -5
Not to be bashful, but is Rettke quick enough to close the block if she were to be a MB? Or is she slated to play at the pins? Ive seen very little of her so I'm just curious bashful? If not Bashful, could you be Sleepy, Grumpy or Doc? |
|
|
|
Post by Sbilo on Sept 7, 2016 20:57:05 GMT -5
I'm guessing that top 10 will be: 10. Texas 9. Wisconsin 8. Minnesota 7. UCLA 6. Florida State 5. Kentucky 4. Florida 3. Wisconsin 2. Texas 1. Texas So Lexi Sun is the unanimous pick as the #1 recruit for 2017 unless everyone is talking about Butler. That would make the last 3 number 1 recruits as OHs (Hodson, Lanier). |
|
