Michigan Rankings All-Access

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Introduction</h2>   Our staff at PGH Michigan has had a BLAST providing in-person media and written coverage of tournaments, elite camps, shootouts, showcases, and team camps. We will continue to set the standard for finding as many next-level prospects as possible in our state, providing extensive written and social media coverage to promote our girls. This article explains the process by which we rank and what to expect from these rankings. Please use the link below to read a more comprehensive explanation of the national Prep Girls Hoops rankings standards.   <a href="https://prepgirlshoops.com/how-we-rank/">How We Rank Explanation</a>   <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Michigan College Commitment Data</h2>   Our goal with every class is to accurately group prospects into the correct categories of college potential/projection. By the end of senior year, each class breaks down into clear categories: Power Four/D1+, D1/D2+, D2/NAIA+/D3+/JUCO+, NAIA/D3/JUCO, and NAIA/D3 reserve. As I've written many times, the levels of college basketball intersect, cross, and differ in competitive ability throughout all the divisions. All high school classes do not have the same size, talent, or level of college talent. However, based on my tracking of commitments the past three years, there appears to be a predictable trend in Michigan.   Based on data from the 2024, 2025, and 2026 classes, there could be approximately 410 prospects per grade who can play at some level of college basketball. There will always be multisport athletes who don't play travel basketball or play in some remote area where we just don't get the opportunity to identify them for our rankings, despite our best efforts. Using averages from the past three classes, my expectations moving forward are that there could be anywhere from 10-20 D1 commits, 20-30 D2 commits, and 125-140 NAIA/D3/JUCO commits in a particular class. Applying that understanding to our rankings basically means that, depending on the class, the top 20 ranked prospects project as D1/D2+, 21-50 D2/NAIA+/D3+/JUCO+, 51 and beyond could range anywhere from NAIA/D3 varsity, NAIA/D3 reserve, or JUCO, depending on the college program.   <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Rankings Explained</h2>   We are very intentional about covering as many of Michigan's travel teams and prospects as humanly possible. Whether it's independent tournaments or the major live period events. Our staff makes an intentional effort to observe as many high school, individual, and travel events as possible. How a player performs against college-level competition is what carries the most weight when evaluating. Height, athleticism, advantages in multiple offensive categories, defensive footwork/ability to guard your projected position, coachability/attitude/work ethic are all taken into account for our rankings. The position assigned to each prospect is where we believe, based on observations during the HS and Grassroots season, that girl is projected to be recruited to play at the college level based on their current skill set. Our rankings reflect what we believe colleges value based on conversations with college coaches and evaluating JUCO, D3, NAIA, D2, and D1 prospects who compete on the court at those levels. We believe that to understand what level a high school player projects to at the next level, we must attend and watch college players currently competing at that level in-game and practice situations: that is exactly what we prioritize doing as we evaluate high school prospects. There are different competitive levels of D1, D2, D3, and JUCO programs in college. Not all levels are equal in skill or performance, similar to grassroots travel programs and high school. When evaluating and ranking prospects, we use a method of rating each prospect as HM+ to MM to LM D1/D2+, D2/NAIA+/JUCO+, NAIA/D3/JUCO, and NAIA/D3 Reserve/JV. JUCO pulls prospects from all levels because of a variety of factors, and there are D1 and D2 JUCO programs. It's important to know that during this Rating process, our goal is to rank each prospect by the position they will be most effective at in college and sort the prospects into their appropriate college level. By the end of their senior year, we expect to see a clear college commitment/offer distribution from the top of our rankings to the end of our rankings that accurately reflects a prospect's college ability. The levels and competitiveness of the colleges from which the majority of the offers are from should reflect where we have a prospect ranked and how we have them rated as far as their level. JUCO is an outlier, as explained earlier.   Limitations: Perhaps we have only seen a prospect play one position during the high school or travel season, and therefore do not know about their versatility. This is why we evaluate prospects in as many environments as possible and why observing skill-focused drills is valuable for evaluation. It's possible that some girls have been seen more than others despite our best efforts and, therefore, may have a more complete evaluation. We believe that it is crucial to see a player compete in high school and travel against different levels of competition to form an accurate evaluation. Some girls may not compete in travel; therefore, we prioritize seeing them more during the high school season. Girls who we feel need to be evaluated further to form a complete evaluation or who have not performed at a level to be ranked within the current range being released at this time will be placed on the Watch List.   Rankings Updates: The list of ranked players will grow with each rankings update according to our release calendar, but if a prospect demonstrates traits that show there is no doubt they deserve to be ranked ahead of players currently ranked at their position, they will be immediately moved upt to the appropriate ranking. If players want certainty about being evaluated by our staff, we recommend competing in PGH showcases and at our travel circuit tournaments. Participating and attending these events does not guarantee an increase in your ranking; however, it increases the likelihood that you will be seen by our scouts and that our evaluation of your current ability and college projection will be most accurate.   Conclusion: It is important to understand that the overall ranking of prospects is subjective, especially as you move down the list. To say that the best PG prospect in Michigan is less of a college prospect than our top-ranked PF is completely preferential because both prospects are being recruited to play at different positions in college. To a college team loaded with guards, they will value the PF more, and to a forward-heavy team, they will value the PG more. However, length/height, athleticism, basketball IQ, defense, and advanced fundamental skills are all sought after at every college level. The rankings by position is the best place to understand where a prospect ranks, based on our evaluations, in comparison to those likely to be recruited at that position. Looking at your numerical ranking can provide insight into where your college projection is, especially as senior year approaches. Value and fit are up to the college coaches to decide. As a general rule, it is important to understand that at the college level, and this is for EVERY level in college: height, speed, shooting efficiency, defense, physical strength, decision making, etc., are much more demanding than the high school level. This is why I highly recommend attending college scrimmages, practices, and games, because there is a misunderstanding of how difficult it is for a high school prospect to step in and excel at any college level immediately. These factors influence recruitment and are what we recommend emphasizing to increase perspective about the college level. We hope this resource has provided insight into the process, and we are excited for our upcoming rankings releases!