2025 girls hoops ranking

[Mustange76]

I generally take NorCal Preps’ rankings with a grain of salt, but your staff does its credibility no favors when you omit a player like PG Aleyah Harmon (Christian Brothers), who averaged 10 ppg and was the assist leader on a league co-champion and D2 section finals team. She locked down two players who made your list in blowout victories. Y’all need to get out more.

 

[Streak One]

She certainly has a good case and you laid it out well. These lists are always evolving as more games are watched and more people are talked to. Does she run track too?

 

[TheHillZ]

The 2024 list was well done, especially the "under the radar" names towards the end. Rather remarkable that the next five girls in order after #1 Morgan Cheli (Cal Stars) all play AAU for Jason Kidd Select. That is a stacked squad.

 

[Mustange76]

She certainly has a good case and you laid it out well. These lists are always evolving as more games are watched and more people are talked to. Does she run track too?

Yes. She runs track, too. Thanks for replying.

 

[runwithm]

Blows me away each time I see the list. Defense, Defense, Defense is all I can say. Let me look at game footage again.

 

[bunnyhopninja]

Blows me away each time I see the list. Defense, Defense, Defense is all I can say. Let me look at game footage again.

Why does it blow you away?

 

[bunnyhopninja]

I just read the list and agree with OP that it should be taken with a grain of salt. But I appreciate what you all are trying to do. Here are some humble suggestions from the Peninsula. Vallory Kuelker from Pinewood should be on there. I assume it’s because she had to sit out all season, but Nohealani Stores didn’t play a minute of basketball either. Vienn Sheng from Palo Alto should be on as well. She was Palo Alto’s leading scorer and was first team all league. Katherine Garr from Palo Alto was second team all league and has a strong case to be on the list too. Finally, Ruiqi Liu from Menlo should be on the list. She was first team all league and was a dynamic duo with Karen Xin, who is on there. Maybe the list should be expanded to include more players (40?) or include a brief summary as to why that player was included (e.g., ppg, which game your staff members watched of that player, etc.).

 

[MC415]

I think some get confused between top prospects vs top players rankings

 

[Norcal_Fan]

I just read the list and agree with OP that it should be taken with a grain of salt. But I appreciate what you all are trying to do. Here are some humble suggestions from the Peninsula. Vallory Kuelker from Pinewood should be on there. I assume it’s because she had to sit out all season, but Nohealani Stores didn’t play a minute of basketball either. Vienn Sheng from Palo Alto should be on as well. She was Palo Alto’s leading scorer and was first team all league. Katherine Garr from Palo Alto was second team all league and has a strong case to be on the list too. But Natalie Neumann from Palo Alto, who was third team all league, made the list? Finally, Ruiqi Liu from Menlo should be on the list. She was first team all league and was a dynamic duo with Karen Xin, who is on there. Maybe the list should be expanded to include more players (40?) or include a brief summary as to why that player was included (e.g., ppg, which game your staff members watched of that player, etc.).

Its one person's (or conglomerate) opinion and not everyone gets a medal. I think that's okay to say, right?

 

[bunnyhopninja]

Its one person's (or conglomerate) opinion and not everyone gets a medal. I think that's okay to say, right?

It’s a little more than that I think. If NorCal Preps simply started a forum post listing players they think are in the top 30, then I’d agree with you. Instead, they issued a press release saying--here’s our list of the top 30 players in Northern California, assigning each one stars and what not. By doing that, I think forum members like OP and myself are free to share their opinions as to who missed out on getting a medal (and I was just making humble suggestions). Players and coaches see lists like these and for many players who are trying to get noticed by colleges it means something (I’m not suggesting coaches are looking at NorCal Preps rankings, I have no insight on that). I guess what I’m trying to say is that when organizations post “official lists” like these, they should be open to objective criticism and should not be given the “it’s just their opinion” pass.

 

[bunnyhopninja]

And I’ll add that Streak One responded to OP’s post exactly right. It’s good to see.

 

[ClayK]

All these lists are fun and have some value, but I think it's important to distinguish between two approaches: Potential and production.

Obviously, some girls are high producers and have high college potential. Other girls might be excellent high school players but have trouble excelling in college, and of course some girls are loaded with athletic potential but lack the skills, at this point presumably, to apply them during games.

It's like the difference in ranking teams for how good they are at this particular point in the season, as opposed to ranking them by their body of work.

 

[letsski]

All these lists are fun and have some value, but I think it's important to distinguish between two approaches: Potential and production.

Obviously, some girls are high producers and have high college potential. Other girls might be excellent high school players but have trouble excelling in college, and of course some girls are loaded with athletic potential but lack the skills, at this point presumably, to apply them during games.

It's like the difference in ranking teams for how good they are at this particular point in the season, as opposed to ranking them by their body of work.

It would be helpful if NCP identified what they are actually ranking with these lists - college potential or current/past high school performance. Huge difference in ratings. Obviously one is much more difficult to quantify than the other.

I'm guessing these lists are based on college potential, hence a player like Stores, who didn't play last season, still is ranked.

 

[Marcskit]

It would be helpful if NCP identified what they are actually ranking with these lists - college potential or current/past high school performance. Huge difference in ratings. Obviously one is much more difficult to quantify than the other.

I'm guessing these lists are based on college potential, hence a player like Stores, who didn't play last season, still is ranked.

I go back to the beginning of 2002
Things changed when Rivals came into the picture. It used to be that players were rated by how they did in school. The picture got somewhat muddied by college potential vs High School play. There really is not a Definable distinction between the two now.

Here's wishing you great hoops

 

[Streak One]

NCP Player Rankings have always been based on college potential. That said, there is a balance we try to hit between potential and production. For example, a 5-foot-10 post who puts up big numbers in HS is going to struggle to be ranked high, but just because you are 6-foot-5 doesn't mean you shoot up the lists on that alone.

 

[letsski]

NCP Player Rankings have always been based on college potential. That said, there is a balance we try to hit between potential and production. For example, a 5-foot-10 post who puts up big numbers in HS is going to struggle to be ranked high, but just because you are 6-foot-5 doesn't mean you shoot up the lists on that alone.

Good info - explains why some player who is 1st team all league may not make the cut.

 

[bunnyhopninja]

Good info - explains why some player who is 1st team all league may not make the cut.

It’s simply not possible for NCP to evaluate every player out there. I suspect it’s more the case that someone at NCP watches a game or hears something about a particular player and puts her on the list without having seen other players play.

 

[Marcskit]

NCP Player Rankings have always been based on college potential. That said, there is a balance we try to hit between potential and production. For example, a 5-foot-10 post who puts up big numbers in HS is going to struggle to be ranked high, but just because you are 6-foot-5 doesn't mean you shoot up the lists on that alone.

Don't want to nitpick, but originally it was more high school forward.

Here's wishing you great hoops

 

[Streak One]

Don't want to nitpick, but originally it was more high school forward.

Here's wishing you great hoops

I'll rephrase. It has been at least college potential since I started contributing, which was 2007-2008

 

[Streak One]

It’s simply not possible for NCP to evaluate every player out there. I suspect it’s more the case that someone at NCP watches a game or hears something about a particular player and puts her on the list without having seen other players play.

How the process works: We have a group of people who watch HS and club games. In addition to takeaways from these games, we also reach out to coaches in the area to pick their brains about what they see and know. From there, we put it all together and start piecing together an order.

Yes, it isn't possible to watch every player and every time they play. But I think we put together a pretty good list on what the region has the offer in a given class.

I like the suggestion of adding some descriptions on the players and why players are slotted where. Will shoot to do that in our next update in August.

 

[ClayK]

Re first-team all-league: All-league meetings are a political horse-trading gathering that use ability as only part of the process. I recall that Sabrina Ionescu was not POY in the league because of bargaining back and forth that resulted in a girl from Dublin, who never played after high school, I believe, getting POY.

In some years, there's one good team in a league -- especially in the lower leagues -- where three or four of the girls should be first-team. But that never happens, and a couple of the good players are relegated to second team. And sometimes new coaches don't understand the voting system (which is different for each league) and wind up skewing the results.

In short, all-league isn't really much of a measure of talent. You really have to watch them play, ideally more than once.

 

[Gmaaleyah]

She certainly has a good case and you laid it out well. These lists are always evolving as more games are watched and more people are talked to. Does she run track too?

Yes she does run track