Over trhe years I've grown kind of ammune to complaints about the rankings. First of all, I've always hated ranking players. The truth is that this is one of those things where you know ahead of time that you will be wrong once in awhile.
I'm all for discussion, but don't always have the time to explain everything. I love hearing what other people think. Often, when we hear a players name, it causes us to dig deeper.
Swampboy,
I'll try to answer the questions you asked here.
quote:
Would it be fair to say that players who go to an early showcase and do well may get early rankings that are higher than what they end up with simply because they are the first players in the class you know about, but that as PG learns more about other players and it gets closer to graduation that everyone finds their level and the players who attend showcases late or not at all work their way into their proper slots?
I also notice that neither UVA's in-state 2011 commitments nor other players with elite D1 commitments (e.g., Evan Beal to South Carolina) are on the list and that no Northern Region first team all-district or all-region players are in this group. Do you look at these other indicators of possible merit at some point to decide who gets a closer look? How does that work?
I guess it would be fair to say, the earlier we see a player the more we know about that player. As we see new players, often the player we saw earlier moves down in the rankings. Not because we think less of the first player, but because the new player deserves to be ranked very high and everyone moves down a spot. So I think you've described it accurately. We will be seeing more new players right up until the draft and some always end up in the rankings.
Evan Beal is another player we have seen several times and he is just more proof that we are not perfect. I can't believe he is not ranked and that will change tomorrow, thanks for the reminder. These things happen sometimes when we are looking at thousands of players in our database. So often we get complaints that are rediculous, and sometimes we get complaints or suggestions that are justified. We actually do check each and every player that is brought up, be it a complaint or a suggestion. We know we are capable of making mistakes. These mistakes are almost always someone we have missed, more than someone we have ranked being undeserving. I wish everyone who thinks we have missed on a player would take the time to email us. It would not be ignored, but at the same time, we might not agree.
Things like all metro, all district, all conference, all region, etc, are not something we follow closely. That information just doesn't tell us enough. We've had players ranked in the top 10 in the country that weren't on any of those type lists as a junior (Gerrit Cole comes to mind). He pitched about 20 innings as a junior in high school and we ranked him #2 in the country.
So even though we make mistakes, people would be surprised if they knew how many people and how much work goes into the rankings. That's what bothers us the most when others who don't see these players make out lists and reports that are simply based on what we have seen and put out there.
I think everyone here is bringing up some good points and the players mentioned in this discussion are definitely legitimate. If they weren't I wouldn't bother to reply. I tell all our people... We can afford to be wrong at times, but we can never afford to be wrong on purpose!