The CardBoard
WBB: Recruiting classes 1999-2015 - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WBB: Recruiting classes 1999-2015 (/thread-7813.html)


WBB: Recruiting classes 1999-2015 - 81alum - 09-18-2014

Following are the lists of Stanford players recruited from 2006 to 2015 and their rankings on ESPN/Hoopgurlz over that time span.  Only recruits that were ranked in the top 100 appear.  I could have missed some--the records before 2008 are spotty.  Suggest corrections if you have data.  I would love to get rankings from before 2006--if anyone knows if they existed and are still accessible please point to them.

ESPN/Hoopgurlz rankings 2006-2015
2015 Sniezek (39)
2014 Rooks (18) McPhee (25) Johnson (30)
2013 McCall (11) Johnson (20) K Samuelson (78) Thompson (?)
2012 Beebe (13)
2011 Orrange (15) Greenfield (31) Green (49) B Samuelson (61) Payne (78) Camp (83)
2010 Chiney O. (1) James (18) Kokenis (60)
2009 Tinkle (10) Ruef (16)
2008 Nneka O (6) Boothe (39)
2007 Pederson (4) Pohlen (22) Donaghe (45) Cimino (74)
2006 Appel (3) Harrison (32) Murphy (49) Hones (?)
All-Star Girls Report 2005
2005 Clyburn (21 asgr) Gold-Onwude (53) Harmon (?)
2004 Wiggins (top ten press release) Pierce (?) Tichenal (?)
2003 Newlin (?)
2002 Bodensteiner (?) Nweke (?) Okafor (?) Rappahahn (?)
2001 Thiel (7 bkk) Kimyacioglu (?) Perryman (?) Suminski (?)
2000 Powell (1 USA Today) Trotter (?)  Bonner (?) Denny (?) King (?)
1999 Carey (top ten bkk)

One thing that you notice right away is that every single recruit who came to us ranked in the top 10 wound up having an extremely successful career with us--with the possible exception of Carey who was injured early.

From lower down the list, there were some very successful players too.  The greatest success stories from recruits outside the top ten were certainly Pohlen at the top, with Orrange, Ruef, James, Kokenis, and the Samuelsons figuring in, and never, ever forget Lili Thompson who came to us unranked and who may equal or surpass Pohlen before she is through.

In short, being ranked in the top 10 does seem to be a virtual guarantee of success, but being ranked lower seems to be a poor indicator of anything.  Some lower ranked players have sparkled, others never did break into a starting role.



Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 2006-2015 - TheFarm07 - 09-18-2014

Thanks for putting together the list.

As you pointed out, every top-10 recruit on the list has been integral to our success.  Particularly, Jayne Appel and the Ogwumike sisters were among the top 5-10 players in the country and players that each of our opponents had to game-plan around and a lot of times, they were just too good for any defense to adequately contain them.

That just underscores the importance of having at least one or two of them to make a championship run.  Great coaching can take you so far.

The last couple years with just the Ogwumike sisters and then just Chiney leading the way as an All-American player, we hoped that Baylor in 2012 or UConn this past year had a bad day when we played them so we would have a chance to win.

Back in 2010-2011 with the combination of Appel, Pedersen, Pohlen and the Ogwumike sisters in some fashion or another, we had enough talent that we didn't have to hope that UConn had a bad day for us to win.

Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 2006-2015 - CompSci87 - 09-18-2014

This goes back to why I said in the other thread that there's a much smaller pool to work with in WBB. In WBB there tends to be a big dropoff between the top 10 or so (maybe even less) and players beyond that. Rankings are far from an exact science, and injuries happen, so sometimes top 10 players don't pan out and sometimes lower ranked players end up being superstars. But regardless of the exactitude of rankings, you really do need some superstars to make a national championship run, and there are very few of them, even fewer who have the academic ability and willingness to do the hard work to get into Stanford.

It may be that things are actually somewhat the same in MBB, with a big dropoff after the top 10 or so. Maybe they only look different to me because Stanford doesn't aspire to national championships in MBB. We just expect to make the tourney and make a good showing. Still I do get the feeling that there's a faster dropoff in talent and skill as you move down the rankings in WBB than there is in MBB.

Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 2003-2015 - BobK - 09-18-2014

Random:
Yamasaki 1
Moos.  6
Thiel.  7
Carey top 10
Enghausen 10 or so. 

Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 2003-2015 - 81alum - 09-18-2014

Thanks Bob.  If you or anyone has access to rating services that go back before 2005, please help us to fill in the ?s.  It might be very interesting to do a statistical analysis of how closely the pre college rankings predict college success for Stanford players.

Since I have just finished reading 20 years of press releases to try to fill this in, I thought I would share a few interesting additional tidbits for WBB fans.

Candice Wiggins was ranked within the top 5 nationally.  In press releases, she says it came down to Stanford and Duke for her, and she picked Stanford.  Duke seems to have always been an important competitor for Stanford recruits.  Brooke Smith is the other obvious example. 

Kristin Newlin had a 4.0 GPA in high school and was the Wyoming Gatorade Player of the Year--both exactly like frosh Kaylee Johnson.  I did not remember that we had another highly successful player from Wyoming.

It is amazing to see all the signing-day quotes for twenty years of recruits.  It is as if they all read from exactly the same script.  "I chose Stanford because of its excellence in basketball and its excellence in academics."  "It was the best combination of both."  While this may seem obvious to us, it is very powerful to see the mantra repeated over and over and over with virtually every single high school kid who elects to come.  That is now, has always been, and always will be our competitive recruiting edge over other programs.  Stanford recruits have to have an appreciation for our academic excellence.

In reading through the press releases and news stories I was struck at how many of our players were 4.0 or better students.  It is not just a few,  but I get the impression that it may be the majority of them.  Then again, that should not particularly surprise us.  I had a 4.0 but became a lot more humble when I went to my 1977 orientation and discovered that 40% of the entering class also had 4.0 gpas in high school.  Why should the basketball teams be any different?

Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 1999-2015 - BobK - 09-19-2014

I don't recall where Harmon was ranked but very high. She was several times Oregon POY

Trotter was top 20 at one point but many knee operations before and during Stanford.  Now a lawyer in LA

Brooke Smith very highly ranked.

Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 1999-2015 - 81alum - 09-19-2014

(09-19-2014, 07:09 AM)garvin link Wrote:My recollection is that Nicole Powell was very highly ranked and getting her was regarded as a big coup.
Yup, while I have not been able to access rating services from that far back, I did see in a press release that USA Today had classed Nicole as the #1 recruit.  Bob says Yamasaki was a #1 and her wiki says "Lindsey was one of the most sought-after recruits for college basketball when she graduated in 1998 and was named the most highly recruited female athlete of 1998."  That does sound like a #1.

That makes three number 1 recruits in the last 16 years.  I wish it had been four.

Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 1999-2015 - 81alum - 09-19-2014

(09-19-2014, 08:39 AM)BobK link Wrote:I don't recall where Harmon was ranked but very high. She was several times Oregon POY

Trotter was top 20 at one point but many knee operations before and during Stanford.  Now a lawyer in LA

Brooke Smith very highly ranked.
Bob, do you see a resemblance between Brooke Smith and Kailee Johnson?  Kailee doesn't have the hook shot (that I know of), but they seem to have similar body types, the same height, and seem to move similarly.  Their stats for their frosh years are almost identical, though Brooke's were at Duke.  Makes me wonder if Kailee could spend a summer developing the hook--she might become unstoppable.

Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 1999-2015 - BobK - 09-19-2014

Well both very good looking.  :P

Kailee is much thinner than Brooke.  I don't see her as a 5.  Of course McCall is the 5 same class.  Johnson is very mobile can shot 3s.  I see Johnson as a quicker Kayla Pederson but Kayla a better rebounder and with an out of site basketball IQ. 

I'll have to look but did you list # 13 recruit Beebe?



Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 1999-2015 - standfan - 09-19-2014


2014 Rooks (18) McPhee (25) Johnson (30) Thompson (?)
2013 McCall (11) Johnson (20) K Samuelson (78)

Thompson certainly was the earliest contributor in the 2014 class.  :)


Re: WBB: Recruiting classes 1999-2015 - JasonJT - 09-25-2014

Powell was in the same class as Taurasi no?  I remember Taurasi and Ashley Robinson (Tennessee) were #1 on ASGR and/or Bluestar that year.

Other random tidbits the last few years that I can remember.  ESPN was the only service that had Nneka that low.  I believe both Bluestar, ASGR, and Olson had her #2 or 3.  Delle Donne was the consensus #1 that year.  ESPN/HoopGurlz at the time was the only rating service that rated Pohlen high.  Most rated her in the lower half 50-100.  She was certainly the biggest surprise, becoming first team AA.  Sara James never quite lived up to her ranking, but Kokenis and Thompson have certainly exceeded it.  Hopefully, that means a Romano/Sniezek/Kaylee Johnson will exceed our expectations.

Losing KLS hurts...and it seemed like all signs pointed to Lambert coming to Stanford too.  :(