Rankings Primer
With updated 2018 rankings scheduled to begin rolling out tomorrow, we thought it would be approrpriate to remind our readers of some of our philosophies and standards with regards to player rankings.
First and foremost, rankings are subjective and ultimately only just an opinion. However, for any analysis or opinion piece to be at all credible, be it rankings or anything else, it has to be unbiased and from an informed and qualified source. Additionally, it should also clearly identify the criteria which it is assessing.
At NERR, we base our criteria off the same national standards which ESPN has publically stated. The first criteria is to identify any players which may have the potential to play at the highest levels beyond college or, in other words, have potential NBA upside. That may only apply to a select few each year, but when it does, it puts them at the top of the list. Second, is the prospect's projected level of play and subsequent impact at the college level. Finally, is the productivy of the prospect to date.
In there lies sometimes the biggest misconception. We are not ranking, nor have we ever, the best high school or grassroots players, we are ranking the best prospects, which can sometimes be very different. It requires an understanding of the next level, the ways in which the game is different, and what qualities and attributes most often translate. Even at that, it is an inexact science, one in which evaluators are not measured by whether or not they make mistakes, but by the amount of mistakes they make relative to others.
So when rankings begin to be published, please keep in mind that it is about a glimpse into the feature, not a measuring stick of the past.
Please also note that our post-summer rankings will not include incoming prep products if they have not yet played in New England prior to this season. Those players will be added following the fall when we'll again visit various prep schools and attend various events throughout the region.