2008 Pre-Season Rankings

Not bad, I would say that St. Charles North is way underrated, New Trier may not have the pitching early(but will be solid and the staff will mature as the season progresses, great staff, great system. I believe Schaumburg will be in the same situation as NT. Whitney and Minooka may be overrated, more in the 15-20 spots. Currently, there is no head coach at Prairie Ridge, tremendous talent though. Looks like a solid group of teams. Well done FVC

It looks like it's going to be another bad year for us in the South.

Good overall list.

In Central Illinois, I'd sub out Bloomington Central Catholic and put Olympia in there instead. The Spartans return two outstanding pitchers (LHP Jacob Hadsall and RHP Matt Frahm) and lost only two position players two graduation.

Also keep an eye out for Limestone. The Rockets return virtually everyone, save for two position players. Best of the bunch back are RHP Ryan Camp (86-87), C Mike Genovese, MIF Neil Yemm, OF Trevor Ault and OF Seth Schwindenhammer.

Don't worry about the South coach. The southern contingent will post its favorites shortly.

Playball.....

No Coach at Prairie Ridge? He is gone after one season?

What happened?

What about the West Suburban Silver Conference?

quote:

Originally posted by FastballDad:
Playball.....

No Coach at Prairie Ridge? He is gone after one season?

What happened?

I believe the coach there resigned so he could go back to school and finish his teaching degree.

Chatham Glenwood in Springfield is always a threat to go to State. This year they are on the bubble as far as class 3 or class 4. Oly and Bloomington CC are both 2 I believe.

Edwardsville, Belleville etc in the metro east are always good as well.

quote:

I believe the coach there resigned so he could go back to school and finish his teaching degree.

That is accurate

quote:

Originally posted by TNHN11:
Chatham Glenwood in Springfield is always a threat to go to State. This year they are on the bubble as far as class 3 or class 4. Oly and Bloomington CC are both 2 I believe.

Edwardsville, Belleville etc in the metro east are always good as well.

Good point on Chatham. They'll need to replace OF Kevin Hall (Wichita State), but P/OF Trevor McGrath is a pretty good start as far as replacing him.
Further south, Edwardsville lost a lot from last year's team, but still has a pair of up-and-coming juniors in RHP Greg Culp and OF Dane Opel.
Highland has to be considered a threat simply because of RHP/SS Jake Odorizzi.
O'Fallon is always a good bet to be solid and they've got a nice LHP to build around in Brandon Gass.
Columbia's still got a little left too if I'm not mistaken.

I'd go with:

1. Brother Rice
2. Sandburg
3. St. Charles North
4. St. Rita
5.Nequa Valley
6. Oak Park
7. Prairie Ridge
8. Mt. Carmel
9. Carmel
10. Edwardsville
11. Hinsdale South
12. New Trier
13. Highland
14. Schaumburg
15. Minooka

Plus I think the Highlanders might be pretty decent this year.

For the past 4 years I have watched Carmel get ranked, and ranked, and ranked,...and do nothing and be unimpressive not doing it. When do they quit getting the free ranking pass?

Probably when they stop averaging nearly 30 wins a year.

Here is their breakdown over the last few years. It's actually unbelievably impressive.


2004-05 - 30-8
2005-06 - 28 10
2006-07- 31-6

That may be a big number, but have you watched them play? Who were the wins against? Their play has not been indicitive of their ranking. The ranking is supposed to rank strongest teams, and Carmel has for the past few years, not been a strongest team, and that usually bears itself out when they get in the state tournament.

They play in the ESCC, which is a very good high school baseball conference.

I've seen them play a few times over the years. I think they have some great athletes. I also think they are very disciplined at the plate and are well coached.

I didn't realize the Highlanders were left off that list. Definitely need to be there

CPLZ, huh? 30 wins a year is not worthy of a top 20 ranking? Do you know how difficult it is to win a single elimination baseball tournament? The corsairs belong their, trust me.

All rankings sound solid so far... here's my .02

1)Nequa Valley
2)Brother Rice
3)Prairie Ridge
4)St. Charles North
5)New Trier
6)St. Rita
7)Oak Park River Forest
8)Sandburg
9)Mt. Carmel
10)Lake Zurich
11)Edwardsville
12)Olympia
13)Carmel
14)Bloomington Central
15)Hinsdale South

Close- Highland, Nazareth, Minooka, IVC

Pre-season rankings are tough to determine with a lot of switching around, especially around the 8-15 spots, but those are my rankings based on returning players and incoming talent, coaching, etc.

Nequa Valley keeps the number one spot in my mind with a great, young staff featuring some junior flame throwers and a good offense to back it up.

Brother Rice will remain good this year IMO and deserve the number 2 spot with a great overall team.

Prairie Ridge has a tremendous amount of senior talent with a couple good juniors which should keep at the top of all rankings.

St. Charles North will show many what they are made of this year with an amazing staff featuring Weinberg (08), Hirsh (09), Jimenez (08) and a couple others.

quote:

Originally posted by Playball2:
CPLZ, huh? 30 wins a year is not worthy of a top 20 ranking? Do you know how difficult it is to win a single elimination baseball tournament? The corsairs belong their, trust me.

Perhaps I should explain better...

The ranking has them in the top 10, not 20, and no, I don't think by vitue of a number of wins that should automatically qualify you as an elite team. Those wins should be contextual.

That being said, my contention is that excuses get made for them that aren't bestowed upon other programs. They are hyped to the extreme, program and individual players.

They are annually a good program that can be counted on to be very competitive. Not many schools can make that claim, so they have withstood the test of time. But being pretty good for a long time, does not make you an elite program each individual year.

They are a quality program, I just don't believe they are held to the same measuring standard that others are and the benefit of the doubt is a chasm rather than a gap.

I agree with Driscoll along with Montini, Walther Lutheran and Beardstown for the small schools. For the larger schools, Lyons Township always has a good team.

quote:

But being pretty good for a long time, does not make you an elite program each individual year.

CPLZ, again there is nothing pretty good about a 30 win season, that is a monster year, in fact an elite year, Carmel has done this over the last four consecutive years. Elite programs are defined based on the test of time not individual years. I am not sure what standard you hold other programs up to or against but I can't name many area programs that have put together over a 120 wins in the last four years, in fact yes I can, none. As a head coach I aspire to represent our school in the same manner as Carmel, the are more than just competitive they are a power and when scheduling them you know you must play up to their level to have a chance to be successful. But more than anything else I would consider an elite program much like the kids would. When your kids act like betting them is like betting the Boston Red Sox in game 7 of the World Series you know you have beat an elite program and over the years I have seen (but obviously not to often)teams act like what I described.

While I appreciate your opinion, I don;t believe you could be any more wrong.

I gotta go with CPLZ on this one... and it's not only Carmel. Doesn't it stick in anyone else's craw that the Catholic League schools even play in the same state tournament as the public schools? I take nothing away from the Catholic school system - I think it's great and I support every parent's right to choose any private school they wish for their kids... however, to me it's like when we used to take our in-house all-star team and go play in tournaments against travel or club teams. A public school has to play with whomever shows up - any private school has the huge advantage of being able to draw from wherever they want and they can take whoever they want. And the better they are, the better they are going to get because the reputation keeps attracting top level players.

I remember Carmel in the state finals one year (2004 maybe?) anyway, they had four players on that team who would under other circumstances have been playing for our high school. How can any public school compete with that? And why should they? Why not a public league championship and a private league championship? Look at these rankings - how many of those are private school programs? Look at the history of the state finals - how many times do private schools make it to the final four?

Can we please leave the public vs. private arguments/comments off this message board? It has infected so many other message boards that they are no longer fun to read.

An average of 30 wins per season is unbelievable and it goes back over ten years. I also think Palatine will be pretty good. I'm throwing that one out there for Playball2.

CoachIU26 is right on the money. There is no need for more seperation. In fact, there are already too many levels in the state playoffs as it exists today. No need to water it down anymore. I would like to see the playoffs go back to everyone in just one group to see just who is the best team.

M3S, so that's the reasoning with regard to their status as an elite program?

I wasn't questioning if they WERE an elite program because clearly they are. I was commenting on ranking teams who can pick from amongst many districts against those who have to pick from within the boundaries of their district. Can anyone really say there isn't a difference? A HUGE difference? Carmel has a great baseball program - consistently great. Their record shows that. Our high school plays them every year - they're a well coached, highly competitive group of athletes. However, they do start on a different level than public schools, that's all. One of the definitions of "elite", by the way, is "the select".

All you guys putting Bloomington Central Catholic out there. I saw them play in the Pontiac Tourney last year. Who did they lose to in the championship?

My3sons

The public schools seem to dominate according to the IHSA website:

Class AA

Most Appearances

STATE FINAL TOURNAMENT

CLASS AA: 11, Edwardsville (H.S.), 1980, 82, 88, 90, 91, 98, 99, 2000, 02, 04, 07
10, Oak Park (O.P.-River Forest), 1981, 84, 85, 86, 90, 91, 95, 98, 2001, 2005
8, Chicago (Clemente), 1979, 81, 82, 88, 89, 95, 97, 2002
8, Winnetka (New Trier), 1980, 83 (East), 1989 (New Trier), 1993, 97, 99, 2000, 2002
8, Joliet (Catholic), 1977, 1980, 81, 88, 90, 94, 2000, 2004
8, Barrington, 1980, 86, 87, 88, 95, 98, 2005, 07
7, Bartonville (Limestone), 1979, 80, 81, 2001, 02, 05, 06
6, Tinley Park (Andrew), 1989, 92, 97, 98, 99, 2002
6, Belleville (East), 1978, 85, 86, 87, 96, 2003
6, Lockport (Twp.), 1963, 1984, 92, 97, 98, 2005
5, Chicago (Simeon), 1983, 85, 90, 98, 99
5, Springfield (Griffin), 1982, 87, 88, 89, (Sacred Heart-Griffin), 2005
5, LaGrange (Lyons), 1987, 1996, 2001, 2003, 2006
4, Oak Forest, 1979, 80, 85, 86
4, Belleville (West), 1984, 92, 93, 97
4, Chicago (Lane), 1994, 96, 2000, 01
4, Mundelein (Carmel), 1990, 94, 99, 2004

Since 2000, catholic schools have won only one class AA title 2004 Notre Dame (Niles)

2000 New Treir
2001 Bradley
2002 Orland Park
2003 Lyons
2004 ND
2005 Lockport
2006 Illinois Valley Central
2007 Neuqua Valley

Apparently the public schools do very well. It is not right to diminish the hard work of public and private school athletes with this discussion. The facts dispute your claims.

The success of non-public schools in IHSA tournaments in recent years has led to considerable debate among the members, 83% of which are public schools. Although statistical studies[citation needed] seemed to indicate that, as a whole, non-public (and certain non-boundaried public schools) enjoyed a disproportionate amount of success, there was little agreement on the reason. In 2005, the Board of Directors implemented a multiplier for classification purposes that boosted the enrollments of non-boundaried schools by a factor of 1.65. A group of 37 private schools later sued the Association, and a settlement was reached that required the multiplier to go through the Association's annual legislative process. In December 2005, the member schools voted 450-143 to retain the 1.65 multiplier.

That's directly from the IHSA website. Non-public schools enjoy a "disproportionate" amount of success. Tell me how the discussion "diminishes" any individual athletes hard work? It's just a conversation for heaven's sake.

In Class A I believe Westminster Christian of Elgin is returning all of their players (starters) from an Elite 8 appearance last season

According to the roster on the IHSA website, Westminster didn't have any seniors on the team last year. They were in a conference (PSL) that used wood bats last year. Walther Lutheran is also in that conference and they both went to state for the first time. Olney East Richland was also in the final 8 from a wood bat conference last year.

NEVER leave OPRF out of any pre season ranking!

Coach Ledbetter will find a way.

So much for the HS summer results being a precursor for the spring ... 1/15 3/15 3/15 ...... Why?

Sandburg - 2
Fenwick - 0
Hinsdale South - 2
Lake Zurich - 2
Highland Park - 1
Oak Forest - 0
Jacobs - 0
Glenbard North - 0

The 1.65 multiplier was instituted primarily to
move Mt Carmel Joliet Catholic and Providence up classes in football. The IHSA was getting tired of JC and Providence destroying the 5a and 6a schools in the state football chamoinships.

It really doesn't matter in baseball because in the old 2 class system these private schools were already playing in the highest class. The mulitpier doesn't affect baseball the same way with fewer classes.

I really don't see how the private schools have any advantage in baseball - the results don't lie and as previously shown the public schools do very well in winning IHSA state baseball championships.

Maybe you should check your facts before you post mythreesons - looks like you got a personal vendetta for private schools.

quote:

Originally posted by bballfan5:
Maybe you should check your facts before you post mythreesons - looks like you got a personal vendetta for private schools.

Without entering the private/public debate, he was quoting the IHSA. I also don't see how a position or concern could be construed as a vendetta. Belief of unfairness doesn't equate to targeting for prosecution of an agenda.

"Doesn't it stick in anyone else's craw that the Catholic League schools even play in the same state tournament as the public schools?"

This quote makes it seem like mythreesons has a problem with private schools. Furthermore, answer my post with the reasons and proof that private schools are at an advantage when it comes to IHSA baseball.

The mutilpier was instituted to remedy the 8 class football perceived problem. Go look at ihsa.org and tell me where the IHSA perceived a private school advantage as it pertains to baseball. To use this quote from the IHSA as disproportionate success and relate it to baseball is inaccurate by mythreesons. I'm just calling out the error. When the multiplier was passed, most private schools were already playing in class AA for baseball - the highest class. Thus effecting a 1.65 times multiplier had no effect on these private schools.

Also, having seen Carmel play on many occasions, I would disagree with your overrated assessment. They have a very good program and are well coached. I don't know how good they will be this year but they have been very good recently.

Now it's a vendetta? Oooooooookay. Apparently it's a vendetta that I share with the ruling members of the IHSA, since they are the ones who instituted the multiplier rule in an attempt to level out the playing field - in every sport. If they were only concerned about football, they could have made the ruling only apply to football. You concede that there was a perceived advantage in football... how could you think the advantage didn't carry over to every other sport? I guess we can add Catholic schools to the list of things that cannot be discussed in this forum. Geesh.

I already said I don't have a problem with private schools, and I already said I believe Carmel is an elite baseball program - a well coached team with many, many fine players year after year after year. But their team(s) - because this applies to every sport - are made up of players who, if Carmel did not exist as an option - would be playing at local public high schools, making those programs stronger. And that's OK - choice is a great thing. I just don't think it makes sense for a public school program to play for a state championship against a private school program - like playing an in-house team against a travel team. That's my opinion. Our boys played Little League baseball - our All-star teams were pulled from within our league boundaries. We played many, many travel teams who could take players from any where they wanted - there's a definite advantage. Did we beat them? Sometimes. Just because you are ABLE to pick the best players doesn't mean you'll always be able to attract them to your team. But that's another story.

I don't believe that a private school will necessarily be better in every sport - Carmel has struggled in basketball in recent years, for example - but they definitely have an advantage that a public school does not have in that they can draw the best players - and I believe that the better they get, they will continue to draw the best players. That only makes sense. Success is the best recruiting tool they have... whether it's on the playing field or in the classroom.

The multiplier had no effect on private schools since they were already plaing in the highest class. Is that difficult to understand? Carmel, JCA, St Rita were already competing against New Trier Naperville Central Lockport etc. etc. How does the 1.65 multiplier have any effect on this?

The multiplier was created because JC and Providence were badly beating the Bloomingtons, Normals Riverside Brookfield and Metamoras in the IHSA footbal tournament. The IHSA never mentioned other sports when discussing creating the multiplier, in fact they originally planned to only apply it to football.

You can talk about Catholic schools all you want. I just have a problem when someone misuses the facts. The mutilpier was a "football" remedy. It had no effect on the baseball tournament.

The multiplier has affected small school baseball in the past. Four classes had made it a much easier transition of middle sized schools. Last year we were the smallest AA school in the state tournament after the multiplier was put in. We had under 400 kids in our school at the time. We were 24-7 and probably a favorite to get downstate in Class 'A' but instead we faced a school of 3200 kids in round 1 in the AA regional. Anyone think 390 kids vs 3200 is fair????? The school we faced had larger study halls than our entire school combined.

The point is both sides have opinions on this. By wanting this conversation ended I wanted to just talk baseball. Too many other sites have turned sour on this line of discussion. Can we once again please drop this discussion about public vs. private?????? I'd like to continue to post here because this is a great baseball site and I can't do so if this becomes a site negatively calling out private schools.