2015 Final Four contrasting approaches

Submitted by champswest on

There is more than one way to skin a cat or get to a Final Four. One way is to use the Duke/Kentucky/Kansas/UNC way of grabbing as many top 35 guys (or as in the case of Kentucky, top 25 guys) and then throw them out there for a year or two and try to out talent other teams and then move on to the next class of five stars as this year’s team heads to the NBA.  Or, you can use the MSU/Wisconsin/UCONN method of signing guys ranked in the 100-200 range (or as in the case of Wisconsin, 200+) and try to develop them over a 4-5 year period to become a well-oiled machine that can beat you with their system and efficiency. Of course, all coaches try to get as good of players as they can (you are trying, Wisconsin, right?), but somehow they seem hard to come by.

With that in mind, I looked at this past season’s final four teams (I threw in Michigan in case anyone was wondering how we compare).  I listed each team’s players in order of average minutes played per game, with the number of average minutes played appearing in the column representing the recruiting class that they were in.  I totaled the minutes by class for each team so that we could easily see how many minutes each team was getting from freshmen, sophomores, juniors and seniors. Because Kentucky went 10 deep, I included the top 10 players for each team. In the first column, I included each player’s 247 Sports Composite Ranking.

 

Duke

         

247 Sports

Fr.

Soph

Jr

Sr

RS Sr

Rank

Player

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

33

Cook

     

35.9

 

7

T. Jones

33.1

       

1

Okafor

30.7

       

13

Winslow

28.8

       

30

Jefferson

   

22.2

   

37

M. Jones

 

20.3

     

13

Saulaimon

   

19.3

   

26

Ojeleye

 

10.5

     

62

Plumlee

     

9.4

 

25

Allen

8.1

       

247

Total

100.7

30.8

41.5

45.3

0

             
 

Wisconsin

         

247 Sports

 

Fr.

Soph

Jr

Sr

RS Sr

Rank

Player

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

218

Kaminsky

     

32.6

 

145

Hayes

 

32.5

     

207

Gasser

     

 

32.1

12

Dekker

   

29.8

   

111

Koenig

 

27.6

     

201

Jackson

     

27.4

 

200

Dukan

     

 

16.6

239

Showalter

   

7.7

   

230

Brown

 

6.8

     

254

Dearring

 

2.8

     

1,817

Total

0

69.7

37.5

60

48.7

             
 

Kentucky

         

247 Sports

 

Fr.

Soph

Jr

Sr

RS Sr

Rank

Player

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

6

Arron Harrison

 

25.8

     

5

Andrew Harrison

 

25.4

     

43

Cauley-Stein

   

25.4

   

19

Ulis

22.9

       

10

Lyles

21.9

       

22

Booker

21.8

       

5

Towns

20.7

       

8

Polythress

   

20.3

   

10

Johnson

 

17.3

     

18

Lee

 

11.7

     

146

Total

87.3

80.2

45.7

0

0

             
 

Michigan State

       

247 Sports

 

Fr.

Soph

Jr

Sr

RS Sr

Rank

Player

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

105

Valentine

   

32.8

   

188

Trice

     

32.6

 

17

Dawson

     

29.8

 

290+

Forbes

   

27.1

 

 

92

Costello

   

20.1

   

104

Nairn

19.1

       

137

Schilling

 

17.4

     

149

Bess

11.4

       

219

Clark

11.1

       

290

Ellis

 

8.9

     

1,591

Total

41.6

26.3

80

62.4

0

             
 

Michigan

         

247 Sports

 

Fr.

Soph

Jr

Sr

RS Sr

Rank

Player

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

28

Irvin

 

36.1

     

215

LeVert

   

35.8

   

44

Walton

 

33.3

     

171

Albrecht

   

31.4

   

326

Dawkins

19.9

       

203

Doyle

18.7

       

385

Abdur-Rahkman

17.7

       

27

Chatman

15.3

       

253+

Bielfeldt

     

13.6

 

86

Donnal

 

11.3

     

1,738

Total

71.6

80.7

67.2

13.6

0

             
   

Fr.

Soph

Jr

Sr

RS Sr

   

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

247

Duke

100.7

30.8

41.5

45.3

0

1,817

Wisconsin

0

69.7

37.5

60

48.7

146

Kentucky

87.3

80.2

45.7

0

0

1,591

Michigan State

41.6

26.3

80

62.4

0

1,738

Michigan 

71.6

80.7

67.2

13.6

0

Duke got nearly 101 minutes from freshmen, Kentucky got over 87 and Wisconsin got zero.  On the other hand, Wisconsin Seniors contributed 109 minutes compared to Duke’s 45 and Kentucky’s zero.  If you compare the first and second year players against the upper classmen, Duke is 132/87, Kentucky is 168/46, Wisconsin is 70/146 and MSU is 68/142. 

If you compared Wisconsin’s player rankings against Kentucky and Duke, you might expect a 30-point Badger loss.  The fact that Wisconsin defeated the Wildcats and played the Blue Devils right down to the wire, speaks well for Bo Ryan’s system (and UCONN last year). On the other hand, Kentucky did go 38-1 and Duke won it all, both using more of the 5 star approach. For further contrast, note the total of each team’s player ranking. Kentucky’s total is only 146. MSU had 5 players with an individual ranking number higher than 146, Michigan had 6 and Wisconsin had 7.

Although these four coaches seem to be using different philosophies, they all have been successful.  MSU, Duke and Wisconsin have been in all of the last 16 tournaments, while Kentucky has been in 14.  Between them, they have 24 Elite Eight appearances, 17 Final Four appearances and 8 Championship Game appearances in those last 16 tournaments.

Comments

ruthmahner

May 3rd, 2015 at 5:58 PM ^

It would be interesting if Coach of the Year nominations took this kind of information into account, since true "coaching" (in my opinion) involves more than taking star talent and putting it on the floor.  Maybe they could divide the balloting into "recruiter of the year" and "coach of the year" designations, since I think someone like Beilein does a lot more real coaching and developing of his players than most of these other guys.

Michigan4Life

May 5th, 2015 at 11:37 PM ^

and just cruise to the NC.  An average coach would not have done as well as Coach Cal because it's all about managing personalities and egos. He got them to play together and was able to reach to the NC. Saying anybody can coach them to NC is false especially if they're not a people's person.

skegemogpoint

May 4th, 2015 at 8:55 AM ^

say what you want about UK and Calipari but it's pretty clear he was ahead of the curve and now more and more coaches (first Self, now Coach K) are adopting the same approach: go get as many 1 and Done's as possible and surround them with 2-3 really good players. Fact is though, not all schools can pull this off (odd to me that LSU is becoming successful at it.  I totally understand how UK, KU, Duke and UNC get it done).

If Izzo or Bo Ryan could land 3+ Top 50 players every year, they would do the same. Since they can't, their teams are made up of fewer (if any) 1 and Done's but they still get 4* types who will play 3-4 yrs.  Simple question: would you rather have a veteran team comprosed of 3* and 4* players or an inexperienced team made up of 5* peppered with a few 4*?  Been proven in recent years that both systems work.