Hey guys this is fantastic, i look forward to more of this. Bookmarking for sure!!

Not bad considering that this would be based on what's available and known. There might be other kids with similar abilities/potential that have not been covered at all due to lack of exposure.

Also would be interesting to know how "leadership" is defined by the creator. Struck me that Will McDowell-White, whom I have been following for the past 2-3 years, got 4 for leadership and 6 for IQ. The kid is a natural leader on the court; of course he may have withdrawn from the program but I hope this was not a reason for such a low score. IQ of 6??? Is this also related to his decision to withdraw. He can read the defense, lead the offense and can support his teammates far better than some on the list.

"McDowell-White and his brother missed the 2014 U18 Australian Junior Championships after they were dismissed from the team, allegedly, for consistently showing up to practice late."

This statement is simply not true and should be removed from the summaries for both the brothers.
Using the word allegedly does not cover your lack of knowledge surrounding the circumstances.

You are casting some fairly big aspersions on their characters obviously without any basis in fact.

Very shoddy and lazy piece of work.

Hadley and Gak are younger

Interesting concept and a great idea.

Obviously there will always be debate on where players fall etc.

As there really is only the national tournaments to use as a source I'm sure there are many players missing off the list. Mainly from states that don't go well at championships but may have one or two strong players. ie WA and SA don't have anyone in top 27...

A couple of things that I noticed:
- Class of 2016 has both 1997 and 1998 players. Really should only have one or the other???
- Harry Froling at #8? He led the national tournament in both points and rebounds (by a considerable margin), is 6'9", has a great toolset for a player at that size. I would definitely have him in the top 2 or 3.

But a great initiative that can be refined as more info is sourced...

The guys @ ausahoops are gonna be getting some phone calls tomorrow. What research was undertaken here? Not talking about the rankings as such, couldn't give a toss. But if ya gonna publish stats ya better make sure their right! Not impressed whatsoever. Not even amateur. Just crap.

Positions played are incorrect for some, where they live, dates of birth and the rest. Some even have stats for 18 Nationals when they didn't even play!!! Clearly this is unacceptable and possibly dangerous for some.

They need to take it down.No real bball coaches take any notice of this crap.

prakash averaged 5 points and stafford 20 at 18s , what a joke.

I know one parent who will be picking up the phone in the morning.

This was posted from the same IP as the original post...

A useful compilation. A few of the players are class of 2015 but still a good indication of ability nonetheless.

Firstly good to see the compilations creating some interest and thank you to Ausahoops for doing them.

Good to see everyone has opinions. And that is all they are, even the people that put these compilations together.

I'm not so sure how well connected the team is at Ausahoops as I know for a fact that St Mary's and Clarke have a verbal commit for 2015.

Also, looks like others maybe doing a good Sales & Marketing campaign for their kid as I know for fact that some of these kids have been contacted by 4 or 5 Colleges yet none appear next to their name?

Firstly, I'd wish all and sundry would get the heights of these kids right. That is my pet peeve.

Some of their observations of the players may be reasonable.

However, if you know these kids and have followed them closely for a number of years, then some of their comments are quite off the mark.

ALL F.Y.I.

Class 2016 refers to the year they become eligible to go to College in the USA. Looking at who Ausahoops are and their background, you would think they would know that?

So Akintola, Clarke & possibly Pupavac should be Class of 2015 as they finish their final year of Australian High School this year (2014). So they would be going to College in August (Fall) 2015.

In general the Class of 2016, will be kids born in 97, but there will be the odd '98 born kid.

Having said that some States start Pre-school/Kindergarten, primary school earlier than others.

476011.

Great effort by Hadley against Albury Wodonga in SEABL, however, I think you may be a little premature in you judgement/support.

He's tracking OK and no doubt he can shoot the ball.

However, he didn't shoot anywhere near that well in his own age group (U16's 2013) or in this year's U18 Nationals.

No doubt, he'll keep improving, but is was a great effort nonetheless.

False data is NOT reasonable!!

Let's not get too excited here. I think College re-cruiters are well versed on the talent in Australia and have well established recruiting networks. I'm also reasonably certain they can navigate their way around the Sportingpulse website for Stats at Nationals.

Also, it would serve everyone well to read Andrew Bogut's story. As a Junior he got cut from Dandenong and cut from a state team.

Also, I know plenty of kids that never made State teams or only made it in their Final year of U20's that have gone to or are at Div 1 Colleges - to name a few Dexter Kernich-Drew (No State Team - Washington State), Jock Landale (Vic U20's - St Mary's), Declan Soukup (No State Team - Bryant, Bosco Kostur (No State Team - Bryant) and no doubt there are many more.

What this says is - EVERYONE HAS AN OPINION, doesn't mean a kid can play or not. What matters is the prospective College's opinion.

Re the Stats - I think Ausahoops prepared this list from the incomplete stats from the recent U18 Nationals.

For some reason the stats for all 9 games was delayed, so most of the stats shown only include 8 games.

For some kids that is better, but for other it is worse as some kids had good last games, others not so.

For me they should revise the stats to include all 9 games as the last game for all teams was an important game. For some it was a medal game and the rest a placing game. So a lot was riding on it.

So for those that did well in that final game, they are particularly hard done by, given the stakes were so high.

That response still does not address incorrect dates of birth, position played or stats for those who didn't compete? If sporting pulse stats are do easy to navigate then why are they so incorrect? Subjective opinions were actually written about players referring to Ghent as guards when they are actually a 3 or 4. Very damaging.

Apologies for typo 'them as guards' above

This whole ranking system is floored. The national championships seem to be where players are exposed and "ranked". The "National Championships" are laughable! I was at the U18 mens tournament 2014 in Canberra. I would strongly suggest that 8 of the 14 teams there would not be competitive in the Championship Division of the Victorian Junior Basketball League. In reality the competition doesn't really get serious until the semi finals. Forget about the Nationals stats except where players play those teams which finished top 4. That way you will see how these players perform against serious or equal opposition. Have a look at the stats yourself - look how some of these "ranked" players perform against the top teams and not NT or Country WA for example.
When you ignore the stats that these "ranked" players accumulated against the weak teams you will look at some in a different light.
Some of these "ranked" players would be just ordinary VJBL Championship players if they played U18's on Friday in the VJBL.
If you are going to rank players then get out and look beyond the generally rubbish competition that the Nationals provide.
Have a look at the McDonalds Junior Classic in Melbourne over the Queens Birthday Weekend (where the top 8 Vic club teams,top 4 from NSW and top 4 from SA play)for starters. Have a look at the BIG V statistics for Youth League and Open Mens. Look at the other State league equivalents.

Players can play many positions, depends on the makeup of the team.

Also, as these players move to the pointy end of the spectrum, the elite level, they might find themselves playing or being suitable for very different positions. Generally, on the international stage and US college, they'll be playing a smaller position than they are used to in the Nationals or Rep Level unless you are a Perry, Humphries, Molloy-Leigh, they'll only ever be 5 men, or Owies, Darryl McDowell-White who will only be PG's as they won't be big enough to be a SG.

Some players can play the 1, 2 or at a stretch the 3 or there's players that can play 3 - 4.

That's not bad, it's called versatility and that is good to have.

476084

Agree mostly with your post.

Some of the State teams are very poor, so Stats accumulated against them can be discounted.

And yes there were really only 4 or 5 serious teams at the Nationals. Based on results, Vic Metro were indisputedly the best team, NSW Country & Vic Country were evenly matched. After that I would've had NZ, but they didn't live up to expectations or their talent/ability.

Fortunately, the National selectors are able to see that and only NSW Country, Vic Metro, Vic Country plus a few sprinklings from QLD North & Tas are in the Aus U17 squad.

476071

So we agree. Everyone has opinions.

Showing the wrong DOB is not crucial is it? I agree it is not ideal, but what matters is when the kid will finish High School and be eligible for College.

And believe me, the College's know this. There are serious NCAA penalties if the Colleges contact kids who are too young.

They can't make contact until their Junior High School year (Year 11) and I think it is after the 1st or 2nd semester of that year.

The NCAA College coaching staff have to sit exams on all these rules.

So don't worry about it. If you kid is good enough he'll get an offer, despite what people say on Ausahoops or on this website.

As I said, what matters most is what the College Coach thinks of your kid.

Can we beat 240 posts?

Some of these ratings are a joke! How can somebody who shoots 28% (42 from 150) from three point land (from one u16 and two u18 campaigns) be scored 9 out 10 for three point ability?
Come on!!!

I would say the stats are not the only criteria used in the assessment. If I recall right the same kid got us out of trouble shooting over 50% 3s against NZ and it appears he bring his A game when it matters, which may in fact be his limitation at present - consistency.

I would say the assessments are mainly based on ability and potential, the stats are not the primary. Akintola who was unofficial MVP of the last nationals is ranked fairly low, mainly due to predicted limitations. Personally I would rank him higher than Pupavac. Based on the last nationals and SEABL performance K. Clark should be ranked before J. White, and so on...

Seems like a very subjective list, and as I said in my first response, probably based on currently available information. And yes, must agree with the majority, they should have gotten at least personal info right.

I agree. Some of the compilations don't make sense.

There would appear to be no consistency between players in the application of the 'rules' or definitions of the categories they've used.

Example: At the recent U18 Nationals (3 Point %):
Of some of the kids selected for the Aus U17 squad/Camps:
Sean Cranney 45.4%
Trent McMullin 41.6%
Jack White 40%
Kyle Clarke 38.6%
Tom Wilson 37.7%
Angus Glover 36.6%
Harry Froling 35.2%
Gabe Hadley 32.3%
Jayden Hodgson 31.25%
Dejan Vasiljevic 30.64%

All the above took a significant number of 3P shots.

I note Ausahoops rate Vasiljevic a 9 for 3P, while Cranney is rated a 6, McMullin 6, White 8, Clarke 8, Wilson 8, Glover 8, Froling 7????? How can this be when all have a significantly better 3P% than Vasiljevic? I'd like that explained by Ausahoops.

From what I hear Vasiljevic is 'the 3P' shooter in this generation. Clearly the Stats don't back up Ausahoops subjective opinion.

Looks to me like the coaches need to ENCOURAGE the other kids to put up more 3P shots?

Agree Vasiljevic has brought his A game to some important games, as others have as well.

However, it is up to the coaches to identify the strengths and weaknesses of all in the group to get the most out of them for the BENEFIT of the team.

Clearly there are kids in the Ausahoops list who like to shoot the ball (Vasiljevic, Hodgson, Owies, Darryl McDowell-White come to mind) and there are others who are less likely to shoot it. Problem is the kids who like to shoot it need to pull it back a bit and some of the others Cranney, White, Wilson, Clarke need to shoot it more when representing Australia. And the coaches need to make that happen. As Michael Jordan said "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take". Good on Vasiljevic, he is testament to this, he won't die wondering.

Last year against NZ, it appeared only Vasiljevic wanted to shoot the ball from the 3. I think the coaches need to ask themselves why and encourage all of the players to shoot when they are open.

Final observation: Canberra U18 Stats had Owies 3 from 21 from the 3 (14.28%), yet Ausahoops rate him a 7?????????? Come on guys, read the Stats, PLEASE.

Based on the Stats above they have a good 7 or 8 kids that can obviously knock down a 3, some better than others. So the coaches need to USE that knowledge to the TEAM'S benefit.

I think it is incumbent upon the coaches to get all the above kids shooting the ball from the 3 WHEN OPEN, not just Vasiljevic. That will be the key for this team at the World's. More scorer's, they've got the talent, it's up to the coaches to tease it out of them.

Froling could be one the players to shoot 3's and surprise everyone.

The Stats above show he can do it at a reasonable clip and with his size they won't be expecting him to shoot 3's.

If personal information is not even correct then how does anyone know whether some of these negative player comments are even attributed to the correct players?

#476127

"Yes, some of the statistics and measurements are out of scale"
"Having said that, most of the information is pretty mush on the mark and certainly the top two are standouts with bright futures!"

Are you serious?

Identical 2014 U18 AJC stats for about 6 to 8 kids and FIBA stats attributed to kids that didn't even take part. To mention some of the glaring mistakes. But hey as long as everything is spot on for #1 and #2 it's accepable? I think not.
Take it down, start over on research, get a buddy to proof read it and re-post.
If this is the professionalism these recruiters take with this undertaking I wouldn't be putting the future of my kid in their hands.

And why on earth did they jump from 2014 to 2016? Yeah they are a talented bunch but show the 2015 guys some respect.

@Anonymous

Thanks for the condescending reply. Changes nothing.

Class of 2016 can have 97 and 98 kids it's not when they were born it's when they finish high school that determines when they can start college. It's usually in the fall after they finish so for example those that finished high school last year in 2013 would start this coming fall, so would be joining the college in August this year. Some kids would have been born in 95 some in 96 . Hope that helps with the enquiry further up.

These rankings are a personal opinion NOT a factual list. Hence why there is no female players list as the person who runs the site isn't interested in women's basketball at all. Funny coincide ring how well the women's Australian basketball program has done compared to the men's !!!

Class of 2016 can have kids born 1997-8 however those 97 kids in year 12 now (only two or three I believe) may have an option to gapyear due to their age as they have gone into school a year earlier.

So, unless a kid in 98 also has gone in early they would all still be looking at 2016 if I read it right.

It is interesting to note the NBA is moving the age limit up to I think 20 and the AFL is also looking at 19 as the minimum draft age, so it is good to see that some organisations out there are recognising how year 12 can have an affect on these elite athletes.

Omg just checked this out. seriously. claiming kids to be starters and standouts in state teams- might want to clarify that with the coach. being "the" emergency in national squads pretty sure there were four emergencies all playing same position. massive stretching of reality and truth.what a joke. is their info based on what the mums tell them lol

Looks like the Class of 2015 kids have been removed.

when they enter college

2016 is when they start so finish in Australia in 2015, but they finish in USA 2016 and go straight to college.

"does Class of 2015 or Class of 2016 refer to the year that the boys (a) finish high school OR (b) the year that the boys enter college?"

The Class of 2015 will finish University next year and these players will be probably end being the Class of 2018 or 2019.