Recent MBB Recruiting and Tournament history.

Submitted by champswest on

There has been a lot of criticism and defense of the Michigan basketball program in recent weeks, especially concerning recruiting and team performance. Some of it has been factual and valid and some of it not so much. When the comments are based on expectations or personal preference, they are hard to defend or criticize. But there is information available that documents where Michigan ranks versus other Big Ten Schools and other accepted basketball powers. My intent is to provide statistical facts and to minimize personal opinion. I will let you, the reader, use this information to support your own point of view, change your point of view or debunk other posters point of view with whom you disagree. What fun!

First, some historical facts about Michigan basketball.

John Beilein arrived for the 2007-08 season. It had been 21 years since Michigan last won a Big Ten championship. Beilein has won two in his 9 years here. It had been 9 years (1998) since UM had appeared in the NCAA tournament. Beilein took the team to the tournament in his second year and in six of his 9 seasons with seeds of 10, 8, 4, 4, 2 & 11. It had been 12 years since our last sweet sixteen and elite eight, Beilein has made two. 1998 was the last time Michigan finished in the final AP Top 25 Poll, finishing 12th. Since Beilein, we have finished 13 in 2011-12, tied for 10th in 20112-13 and 7th in 2013-14. He was voted Big Ten Coach of the Year in 2014. He recruited and coached two of Michigan's five B1G POYs in Burke and Stauskas (others were Tarpley, Grant & Rice). Burke, along with Russell are Michigan's two National POYs.

To evaluate recruiting, I looked at team recruiting rankings using 247 Sports Composite rankings from 2003 (the first year of comprehensive data) through 2015. The 2016 classes are not yet complete. The method used was to add the team recruiting rankings for those 13 years and compute the average annual ranking for the teams. I listed the teams in order of average rank for that period selected. I also listed each team's best and worst ranking and how many times they finished in the top ten and top 25 ranked classes.You will notice that just about every team had a bad year or more. Caveat: When I got to teams ranked in high double digits or triple digits, I noticed that it was often due to small class size (one or two players, even if they were four and five star players). For that reason, I dropped years where a team was ranked above 99 and if there were more than four such years out of the 13 used, I dropped that team from this analysis. I capped the list at 50 teams. Obviously, this looks only at recruiting and does not account for transfers or early attrition.

For performance, I used the NCAA tournament. I listed results for the period 2004 (first year that the 2003 class would have played) through 2016. I listed the number of tournament appearances, sweet sixteens, elite eights, final fours and championships.

    Avg     # Of # Of   NCAA        
    Class Best Worst Top 10 Top  25   Tourn. Sweet Elite Final  
  Team Rank Rank Rank Classes Classes   Appear. Sixteen Eight Four Champs
1 Kentucky 10 1 37 8 11   11 6 6 4 1
2 Duke 13 1 55 8 11   13 9 4 3 2
3 Kansas 13 1 44 5 12   13 8 6 2 1
4 Florida 13 4 95 3 10   9 6 6 3 2
5 UNC 14 1 67 9 10   12 8 7 4 2
6 Arizona 15 3 69 6 11   11 6 4 1 0
7 Syracuse 17 3 36 5 8   10 6 3 2 0
8 Memphis 19 3 59 7 9   9 4 3 1 0
9 UCONN 20 3 44 5 9   9 5 5 4 3
10 Texas 20 2 46 5 8   12 3 2 0 0
11 Ohio State 22 2 89 7 8   9 5 3 2 0
12 UCLA 23 1 64 4 10   9 5 3 3 0
13 Michigan St 26 10 76 2 7   13 8 5 4 0
14 NC State 26 6 65 3 8   7 3 0 0 0
15 Florida St 27 4 58 2 7   4 1 0 0 0
16 Louisville 28 1 69 6 9   11 7 6 3 1
17 Alabama 28 8 68 2 9   4 1 1 0 0
18 Oklahoma St 28 1 47 1 3   7 2 1 1 0
19 Georgetown 29 7 89 2 6   8 2 1 1 0
20 LSU 29 2 63 3 5   4 1 1 1 0
21 Illinois 30 11 55 0 5   7 2 1 1 0
22 Michigan   31 7 73 2 3   6 2 2 1 0
23 Washington 31 5 89 3 6   6 3 0 0 0
24 Indiana 32 4 80 4 6   7 3 0 0 0
25 Tennessee 32 5 66 2 4   7 4 1 0 0
26 Baylor 32 6 72 2 7   6 3 2 0 0
27 Missouri 33 11 58 0 5   5 1 1 0 0
28 Arkansas 34 6 97 2 6   4 0 0 0 0
29 Oregon 34 9 80 1 5   6 3 2 0 0
30 Villanova 35 5 76 1 2   11 5 3 2 1
31 Mississippi St 35 4 85 2 5   4 0 0 0 0
32 Maryland 36 7 83 1 3   6 1 0 0 0
33 Virginia 36 1 71 1 5   5 2 1 0 0
34 Texas AM 38 4 79 1 4   7 2 0 0 0
35 Standford 39 11 82 0 3   5 2 0 0 0
36 Pittsburgh 39 11 84 0 4   11 3 1 0 0
37 Wisconsin 40 22 57 0 1   13 7 3 2 0
38 Oklahoma   40 7 83 1 3   8 3 2 1 0
39 Auburn 40 15 70 0 2   0 0 0 0 0
40 Cincinnati 41 19 86 0 4   8 1 0 0 0
41 Purdue 41 7 86 1 2   8 2 0 0 0
41 UNLV 42 4 93 2 4   6 1 0 0 0
43 Notre Dame 43 15 67 0 2   8 2 2 0 0
44 Marquette 44 7 96 1 5   8 3 1 0 0
45 Xavier 45 17 87 0 3   11 6 2 0 0
46 South Carolina 45 20 84 0 2   1 0 0 0 0
47 California 46 4 98 1 2   6 0 0 0 0
48 Va. Tech 46 12 92 0 3   1 0 0 0 0
49 West Virginia 46 14 94 0 2   9 5 2 1 0
50 Miami 50 14 86 0 3   3 2 0 0 0

For Big Ten teams, I did a second recap that looked only at the years Beilein has been at Michigan (2008-2016). I didn't include the 2007 class because that wasn't his class and I did include 2016, even though it isn't final, because many complain about recent results. I am listing the team and their average recruiting ranking for this period and the number of B1G regular season championships won. (1) Illinois 25, 0 (2T) Ohio State 26, 3 (2T) Michigan State 26, 3 (4) Indiana 27, 2 (5) Michigan 32, 2 (6) Maryland 38, 0 (7) Wisconsin 47, 2 (8T) Purdue 48, 1 (8T) Minnesota 48, 0 (10) Iowa 59, 0.  Maryland, along with Rutgers and Nebraska have not been full time members. PSU? Who cares? I will point out that Beilein's first class in 2008, which he got a late start on, was his worst ranked at #73. It was comprised of Cronin, Novak and Douglass. If you drop that class from this analysis, Michigan's average ranking rises to 26.

Where's the bump? Many complain that we didn't get a bump from our run in 2013 & 2014. The  2014 class was #28 (and was pretty well finalized prior to the run), 2015 was a class of one (4* Wagner) and 2016 is currently at #27. That is an improvement over our average of 32, but not a huge leap. I am not sure there is such a thing as a bump from a deep two-year tournament run. It is hard to find comparable teams to compare it to. Feel free to give it a shot.

On a final note, I found this interesting. Leading up to Villanova's championship run this year, their last four classes were ranked #38, #32, #46 & #30. Oklahoma, who they beat in the semis, had classes of #45, #83, #39 & #54. Wisconsin made it to the championship game in 2014 with classes of #50, #39, #120 & #46. Likewise, MSU's final four finish in 2014 was with classes ranked #21, #12, #76 & #48. And for Michigan in 2013 it was #35, #48, #21 & #7. Top ranked players is one way to get there and experienced teams of upper classmen works also,

 

 

 

Comments

WindyCityBlue

April 7th, 2016 at 5:09 PM ^

As I've said in previous posts...

...but looking back at historical numbers have little to no impact on how we can be going forward. It's fun to look back and reminisce, but what BF, SF, BE or even TA did means little to JB, especially since he is 10 years into his tenure. People look back too much and don't look forward enough. I wish people would take a look at our:
1. Resources (facilities, what we pay JB)
2. Brand (ugh, I know)
3. Recent success
4. Recruiting footprint

Then ask yourself, "how good can we be going forward?" The answer to this has little to nothing to do with our past. If you think what we have currently and associated trajectory is acceptable, then we would just have to agree to disagree.

I will say that I agree with a general theme in your post. Recruiting matters, but rankings largely don't. I generally don't care what our recruits rank. But I am concerned that we don't recruit players with enough upside (with some exceptions of course).




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

jrblue

April 7th, 2016 at 6:05 PM ^

Data:  the top 9 recruiting schools notched 11 national championships within the time frame, while the rest of the field notched 2

Lesson: having a great coach with the best talent wins you the tournament. 

Shocking

 

UMinSF

April 7th, 2016 at 6:15 PM ^

Interesting.

Surprised OSU's average class ranking was so low; seems Matta usually brings in pretty highly ranked guys.

Loved that you completely omitted NW - they are the BIG's "unmentionables" in hoops.

christinawilson

April 8th, 2016 at 1:31 AM ^

Alleppey is known for its lovely backwaters, shorelines and fish. While setting out to the city, we were somewhat perplexed as we didn't see any water bodies with the exception of the Vembanad lake which we crossed in transit. The city is swarmed clamoring with heaps of lodgings, eateries, sightseers, shops and so on however when you choose to take a pontoon and head towards the backwater waterways, you appear to overlook everything. It is so peaceful and entrancing that the whole outing gets to be worth coming here.Make a trip to Allepey by using a taxi service from Kochi. As the taxi drivers from Kochi knows well about the places in Allepey. They will help you to visit each and every tourist spots at Allepey.  Cochi to Alleppey taxi price is calculated according to distance. If required the taxi drivers arranged the place for your accommodation also.

MGlobules

April 8th, 2016 at 9:56 AM ^

slap some people over at umhoops upside their cocos with it every time they get out of hand. Thanks much.

On a side note, the schlep to Alleppey looks like it might well be worth it.

spartanfan123

April 8th, 2016 at 4:43 PM ^

Butler leading up to their back-to-back NCG appearances

 

2006 - 160

2007 - 65

2008 - 104

2009 - 213 (1 commit)

2010 - 63 - NCG APPEARANCE

2011 - 61 - NCG Appearance

Since then: 

2012: 70

2013: 50

2014: 63

2015: 103

2016: 49

 

 

Steves_Wolverines

April 8th, 2016 at 6:54 PM ^

Thank you for sharing.

I'm actually putting together an identical study right now. Work got in the way, but I should have a similar diarty posted in a week or so. I might steal some of your data if that's cool. 

saslolohid

April 9th, 2016 at 9:00 AM ^

My roomate cousin makes $40 every hour on the internet .She has been out of a job for 4 months but last month her paycheck was $6500 just working on the internet for a few hours. You can also try at this.NJU004

====> www.alpha-careers.com

UMForLife

April 10th, 2016 at 10:33 AM ^

This is awesome. Thanks for doing this. We have a really good coach and if we can bump up that recruiting class to around OSU, we might even be in the top 3 or 4 in B1G each year. It is clear that having a good coach is a must and just the recruiting class, as shown by Illinois. So, if we can recruit a little better and have upperclassmen stay and develop, we should be on to something. I am a lot more optimistic about future because of the development I saw with MAAR and Wagner. Hope we can reel in a couple of top 50 players in the next two recruiting cycles. We have the facilities and name to do it. Go Blue.

Richard75

April 10th, 2016 at 5:56 PM ^

Agreed. The OP did a solid job making this a fact-based discussion. That said, it's still a backward-looking one.

The issue isn't Beilein's resume. It's where is this team headed from here. These defenses of Beilein seem fixated on proving that he's accomplished a lot, and thus doesn't deserve all this criticism. But those accomplishments have no bearing on where the team is going.

As for recruiting, rankings aren't so much a concern as head-to-head outcomes. You can't whiff on every major target as U-M has done the past couple of years and expect success. Sure, there are countless instances of guys like Trey Burke that made one program look smarter than all the rest. On the whole, though, it's illogical to believe you can outperform good competition long-term with material they passed over. I mean, do we honestly think John Beilein is smarter than Tom Izzo?




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

JCV16

April 12th, 2016 at 10:43 AM ^

The first paragraph is just a bunch of cherry picked stats to make beilein look as good as possible. The recruiting window starts at the nadir of michigan basketball and ignores all the excellent recruiting before that. It's fine to make that case, but presenting this as "just the facts" is ridiculous.