BBall Recruiting - Rivals 2019 Updated Rankings
Jalen Wilson - drops from 36 to 43. As I anticipated, he's likely going to end up a 40-60 prospect by all services when all is said and done.
Cole Bajema - moves up to 92 from 99. I thinks he's more of a 40-60 type prospect, but his lack of high-end competition in HS probably precludes a ranking that high.
January 29th, 2019 at 9:41 AM ^
The future looks bright! We'll probably be worrying about them leaving for the NBA early in a couple of years!
January 29th, 2019 at 9:43 AM ^
Beilein + Sanderson + Coaching + Development > Stars and rankings.
January 29th, 2019 at 9:51 AM ^
and yack attack
January 29th, 2019 at 12:44 PM ^
Player development implies returning multi-year players which many fans (especially the *5 star stargazers*) don't understand.
Hence, 5 star one and done players don't interest me.
Look at Romeo Langford. He's almost certainly an OAD and his freshman year will ultimately be a footnote in IU bball history.
If we can add a 5 star caliber talent (like Iggy) who fits well to a championship core, then great!
Look at the breakdown of all Final four teams sice the OAD era started in the mid 2000s. The overwhelming majority of teams that reach the Final four are upperclassmen laden. Experience matters during the NCAAT.
January 29th, 2019 at 1:16 PM ^
I would say the exception to this, or counterpoint, would be having a One And Done type super elite freshman every 3-4 years, and be the type of player that pushes an already-senior laden team over the edge for a title. Imagine next year's solid core, and then adding an elite super frosh power forward - the guy is gone in a year but ups our natty odds exponentially. It still isnt a concept to build a program on, I agree on that for sure
January 29th, 2019 at 1:16 PM ^
5 Star talent definitely interests me lol. Sure, a lot of the teams are upperclassmen laden, but 2009 Memphis, 2010 Kentucky, 2012 Kentucky, 2015 Duke, 2015 Kentucky, are all some of the best teams in the past few years and were primarily underclassmen driven. The 2013 Michigan team was led by Sophomores and Freshman. There's no fool proof way to win a title, but I do get what you're saying, in that sometimes it's better to have top 100 guys stick around 2-3 years than have a top 10 guy stick around for 1, unless you're a Duke or Kentucky that can consistently replenish the talent level.
January 29th, 2019 at 2:11 PM ^
I 100% agree with this take. I lived through the mid 90's basketball era at Michigan and the true OAD kids who already have one eye on the NBA before they step on campus are a different type of player. You can't replicate their talent, but you also have to run your program completely different if you're going to build around them. (Most of the time you also have to work hard to stay away of the NCAA auditors too....)
I like the recruits in the 50-100 range who are 2 or 3 year players that have something to prove, fit your system, etc. Mix those guys with some 4-year glue guys and you have the makings of a sustainable high level program. Despite Beilein's great track record at Michigan with multiple banners and tons of NBA picks we haven't had a OAD guy yet. I'm okay with that.
The other example I always use is MSU. Setting aside our jokes about Izzo, his best teams have been made up with guys that are those 2-3 year players and not lottery pick guys. Not only is this evident the past two seasons, but it was also true early in his career. He won the 2000 title with guys like Mateen Cleaves and Morris Peterson. In the two years after the title he signed four top-30 recruits but consistently flamed out early just like last year. It takes the right program and right coach to sustain the OAD culture.
January 29th, 2019 at 6:31 PM ^
Four star, top 100 guys aren't 5 stars but they're obviously really, really good.
And they're clearly the perfect fit for the coaching and development of this program.
Give me all the four stars if their career trajectory looks like this: ride bench and learn as freshman, become valuable contributor as sophomore, become all-conference level player as junior.
Remember how down everyone was on Michigan's 2016 class? Teske could barely walk and chew gum and Z was playable but highly limited offensively.
Now they're all-conference level players and in the convo as the best defenders at their positions in all of college basketball (hail Yaklich).
What a coaching staff we have now. Please, please, please pay Yaklich.
January 29th, 2019 at 9:53 AM ^
Does anybody really still worry about BBall rankings of recruits with Beilein? It's now a matter of public record that virtually ALL of the big name, "one and done" recruits are getting paid a significant amount of money to sign their LOI and we believe (for good reason) that coach B doesnt play that game.
So knowing we're out of the running for the top guys before anything starts means he's going to have to find guys under the radar who arent getting paid. And so far he's done a FANTASTIC job of finding them.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:07 AM ^
I think Coach Beilein has certainly improved our recruiting profile starting in 2017. We're no longer putting together classes full of 3 or 4 'who that' types sprinkled in with 1 legitimate talent. We're consistently landing legit, upper tier, prospects that are generally in the 40-80 range and I think that's a great recipe for success in college because those are the exact type of prospects that I referenced roughly a week ago - guys that are likely to be fringe NBA/2nd rd picks that stick around for a few years.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:10 AM ^
Yeah, these are highly regarded guys he is landing now. It is true that the Zion Williamson's of the world are not coming to Michigan but frankly that kind of roster does not interest me. I want to be watching and rooting for "my team" and not a collection of one year rentals.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:42 AM ^
Call me crazy but I’d be all for watching Zion Williamson for one year.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:47 AM ^
I mean, if he committed here I certainly would not protest. But part of the reason I enjoy Michigan basketball as much as I do is that I get to see these kids improve and mature year after year. Would I enjoy college basketball as much if Michigan was largely a one and done model program? Probably not. I am sure I would like the winning but Michigan is winning this way.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:13 AM ^
Exactly, it's also funny these same people have no problem watching all the one and dones the hockey team signs. I think because Beilein doesn't recruit 1 and dones people rationalize to themselves that they don't want them, which is absolutely crazy.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:19 AM ^
I don't know that fans are exactly enjoying watching hockey these days. The Michigan program has taken quite a fall. I think part of the reason for this, is that players left early.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:43 AM ^
Uh, Michigan hockey played in the frozen 4 last year. Also it wasn't exactly a secret that Berenson's recruiting fell off near the end of his tenure and Mel needs some time to correct that given how early hockey prospects typically make their decisions. There's a reason the USA U-18's are kicking the crap out of college teams this year, just go look at a NHL mock draft. Michigan hockey historically has recruited as well or better than any program in the nation, that's why they have more alumni in the NHL than any other program. If your argument is UM hockey would be better off without one and dones like Kyle Connor, Dylan Larkin, Max Pacioretty, Jacob Trouba, etc then I don't know what to tell you. In fact it's been their ability to convince 1 and done talents like Quinn Hughes, Jack Johnson, Mike Komisarek, Zach Weresnki, etc to stay an extra year that has helped make them even more successful. Unless you want UM to be signing 21 year old freshman this is what they have to do to have an elite hockey program. So lets stop with the revisionist history please.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:44 AM ^
The hockey team typically has maybe 1 or 2 guys a year who could qualify for one and done, maybe 1 or 2 more who could do 2-and-done
January 29th, 2019 at 11:47 AM ^
That's not the point, and it's certainly not for lack of trying either.
January 29th, 2019 at 1:01 PM ^
Mel pursues a distinct two-pronged recruiting strategy: Go after top-end NHL prospect types like the Hughes brothers, and also secure a number of later-entry guys like the ones he was signing in Houghton to ensure a solid roster of guys he wants from year to year when some NHL prospects either never come or leave early.
I think it's wise, but it may take some time to bear real fruit.
Red made at least one crucial transition in his career. His 90s monster-teams were 50% Canadian, many of the key players guys who wanted to go to college rather than go through major junior. With the rise of American hockey prospects and non-coincidental rise of the NTDP, he pivoted to a focus on American prospects with just the occasional Canadian star talent. The 1996 team was led by Canadians like Morrison, Botterill, Madden, Turco, and Halko; by 2001 the team's stars were guys like Hilbert, Jillson, Komisarek, Ortmeyer, and Shouneyia, all Americans, with the Canadian star (one of only two Canadians on the roster) being Mike Cammalleri.
As time has moved on, it is clear that simply landing NHL prospects isn't going to cut it alone, because you lose too many guys early. Minnesota has struggled with this a great deal, and of course Michigan has as well. It's worth noting that one-and-done situations as exemplified by Trouba, Larkin, and Connor, were not the norm in the 00s and when it began to happen the program suffered significantly. I don't think it helped that Red had lost his fastball by then.
January 29th, 2019 at 3:26 PM ^
“All the one and dones the hockey team signs.”
You could count on one hand the number of one and dones that the hockey team has signed this decade. Trouba, Larkin, Pacioretty, and Kyle Connor....
Michigan hockey largely makes its killing getting exactly what was mentioned. Getting those guys who take a few years before being ready for the pros but are still highly talented for the college level.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:26 AM ^
I like winning this way--and even sometimes losing this way--better. Would find it hard being a KS- or KY-style overdog, have to clean the slime off of those trophies.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:17 AM ^
It's also arguably better to sign a bunch of 50-100 prospects and have them around for 2-4 years than to sign some top-20 prospects and have them for a year. We've seen the leaps guys take after a year or two in Beilein's system.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:21 AM ^
Bingo. If you're landing top 20 prospects you need the recruiting profile to withstand early entry/one and dones. We're not at that level yet because most of our incoming signees need at least a year before becoming impact rotation players. We can withstand 2 and dones since our recruiting profile has improved the last 3 years. Great recipe in my opinion. In many ways, we've become MSU-esque recently.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:29 AM ^
I'm not sure I like that last sentence.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:36 AM ^
It does leave a sour taste! But it's true to a certain extent - we're landing kids with some toughness that are best suited attacking the paint off the dribble, with some outside shooting sprinkled in.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:57 AM ^
Thanks for the updates, always appreciate reading your hoops recruiting insights. I do take a bit of offense to the idea recruiting like msu. I always thought their model was to recruit 4/5 stars then berate them to the point that their skills decline and they need to stay all four years (a la kelvin torbert, paul davis, etc...) a sort of msu Stockholm syndrome, if you will. Lucky for Jaren Jackson he escaped the msu bench soon enough to still be a lottery pick and productive nba player!
January 29th, 2019 at 12:46 PM ^
Pretty much the same way I see MSU, or Izzo, to be more exact.
January 29th, 2019 at 6:45 PM ^
I really just think this is more that someone is holding players accountable on defense and the boards so they are playing "tougher" but I don't think it's simply the nature of the kids, I think it's mostly the coaching.
Pre-Donlon/Yaklich, defense and rebounding was entirely dependent on the nature of the kid, his motor (your fave word) and his HS coaching. So kids like Stu, Novak, Jmo and McGary were "tough". But kids like GR3, Hardaway, Stauskas and others were often justifiably labeled "soft".
I have no doubt that DJ Wilson, Moe Wagner, Duncan Robinson, Jordan Poole, et al, would have remained similarly "soft" players and wouldn't have improved their defense or rebounding in their time here, and the team would have topped out at good but not great on defense if not for Donlon and moreso Yaklich.
Iggy commented on this recently. Yaklich is constantly on them. Defense and rebounding is largely about effort and focus once you pass a threshold of athleticism. Yaklich makes sure the effort and focus is there every play (Poole is still working on this though - I would like to be a fly on the wall in video sessions between those two).
January 29th, 2019 at 11:34 AM ^
I agree with this and even some top 20 prospects aren't really that valuable in college during their one season. Mo Bamba was a top 5 recruit and a top 5 draft pick based on potential, his NBA potential. Bol Bol might have been good for Oregon if he stayed healthy, but he essentially quit the team.
If you're tall and athletic enough, the NBA covets you and your recruiting ranking will reflect that. It's best to recruit players based on their potential to help your own team.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:21 PM ^
One other issue is ACADEMICS. I don't understand how Duke one and done recruits can enroll there unless they have special courses. Michigan tries to graduate as many student athletes as possible to set them up for success in life and after basketball.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:00 AM ^
We have the best coach in the business, can you imagine if he had a couple of 5 stars a year?
For that matter, how much better would the fab 5 have been with him as coach?
I trust coach B!!!
January 29th, 2019 at 10:13 AM ^
Last time he did, Mcgary and GR3 (both were 5 stars to some services), we went to the national championship.
January 29th, 2019 at 6:19 PM ^
True, though GR3 was not a 5-star when he signed and was much lower rated.
We also made it to the title game last year with this bunch of players:
- Matthews & Simpson rated in the 50s
- Wagner & Poole rated in the 90s
- Teske & Livers with mediocre ratings
- Rahk & Robinson not rated at all
I like what MattD said earlier - consistently fill out the roster with guys ranked from 50-100 with minimal "who dat?" recruits and you'll combine the 2-4 years with those guys under Beilein into a rafters worth of banners.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:01 AM ^
Who do we think makes the biggest jumps next year? Presumably, (assuming Iggy is a 2-and-done, and nobody transfers out) Iggy moves full-time to the three with Matthews departing, and we have a very experienced, senior-laden squad. Simpson - Poole - Iggy - Livers - Teske in the starting five, with Brooks being the only current bench piece still there.
Will Brooks transition to more of a full-time 2 with DDJ getting the backup pg mins? Seems like a little clog there.
Brooks/DDJ; Nunez; Wilson/Bajema; Johns/Castleton/Davis.... Really there's a lot of flexibility, especially if we see Johns as more of a 4 in the future. I think establishing Nunez defensively, even if he is JAS on offense, would be huge for this team
January 29th, 2019 at 10:09 AM ^
The biggest jump is relative, because its predicated on a given player's floor. For me, I think Castleton has the highest ceiling of our recent signees and we may be looking at a guy that makes a serious impact as soon as next year.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:14 AM ^
Castleton impressed me in the few minutes we've seen him on the floor, he just really really needs a year of S&C.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:54 PM ^
Agree, but I think he can certainly be heavy and strong enough to play serious back up minutes to Teske next year. Is so, that would free up Johns to play, maybe start, at the 4. Then you could have Livers getting 20+ minutes a game backing up the 3 and 4. That would make us really strong at the 3-5 without even having to use the freshmen.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:18 AM ^
I would urge a bit of caution in thinking Castleton makes a serious impact next year. That will be might hard to do with Teske on the roster. There just won't be many minutes for him to play, and he is still going to be undersized relative to the majority of centers in the league. I think we should be hoping for 10 minutes a game where he doesn't look overwhelmed and keeps his foul rate below 5/game.
January 29th, 2019 at 10:24 AM ^
Impact is relative, meaning its not necessarily limited to minutes only. Jon Teske didn't play a ton of minutes last year, but he certainly made a big impact in those minutes. You could argue his impact was just as big as Wagner, with the type of impact being different in relation to Mo.
January 29th, 2019 at 1:37 PM ^
A number of people wrote Teske off two years ago; wrote Simpson off, too.
It's hard to tell what someone will become in year one, especially with Beilein's coaching.
January 29th, 2019 at 11:46 AM ^
Castleton is the clear backup 5 next year unless Iggy and Matthews both stay and you consider Livers a 5.
With some weight/strength, Castleton will be way better than Davis.
At the beginning of the year, I didn't think there was a chance in hell Matthews came back, now I'm starting to feel like he may as well return...he seems like a G League player whether he leaves or says, it's just a matter of whether he wants a degree or to get a decent paycheck and make basketball his job.
I'm going to see EITHER Matthews OR Iggy returns...with that said...
C: Teske - 25 minutes
Backup C: Castleton - 7 minutes
Backup C: Livers - 5 minutes
Backup C: Davis - 3 minutes
PF: Livers - 20 minutes
Backup PF: Johns - 10 minutes
Backup PF: Wilson - 7 minutes
SF: Iggy/Matthews - 33 minutes
Backup SF: Wilson - 5 minutes
Backup SF: Bajema - 7 minutes
SG: Poole - 33 minutes
Backup SG: Nunez - 5 minutes
Backup SF: Bajema - 5 minutes
PG: Brooks - 25 minutes
Backup PG: DeJulius - 10 minutes
January 29th, 2019 at 11:49 AM ^
Dude....think you may have forgotten a certain someone in your minutes break down.
January 29th, 2019 at 12:23 PM ^
Like Zavier Simpson?
January 29th, 2019 at 12:38 PM ^
I assume they, like I, always forget that Simpson isn't a senior. It feels like he's been running the point so effectively so long, I just kinda assume he's due to graduate.
January 29th, 2019 at 1:21 PM ^
Holy shit...he really is Aaron Craft 2.0 but much cooler cause he went to Michigan...there is NO WAY I would've thought Simpson would be back next year...let me adjust.
January 29th, 2019 at 1:31 PM ^
C: Teske - 25 minutes
Backup C: Castleton - 7 minutes
Backup C: Livers - 3 minutes
PF: Livers - 20 minutes
Backup PF: Johns - 7 minutes
Backup PF: Wilson - 7 minutes
SF: Iggy/Matthews - 33 minutes
Backup SF: Bajema - 5 minutes
Backup SF: Wilson - 3 minutes
SG: Poole - 33 minutes
Backup SG: Nunez - 3 minutes
Backup SF: Bajema - 3 minutes
PG: Simpson - 33 minutes
Brooks - 13 minutes
Backup PG: DeJulius - 5 minutes
January 29th, 2019 at 1:43 PM ^
That's an 11 man rotation so not gonna happen most likely. Only one of Nunez or Bajema will get minutes at the 2, and thats ignoring the possibility that Brooks or Dejulius takes those minutes also (which I would bet on). So if you take those 2 out it becomes a much more manageable 9 man rotation.
January 29th, 2019 at 3:24 PM ^
That's not an 11-man rotation.
3 mpg is not in the rotation.
5 mpg is not in the rotation.
That's barely a 9-man rotation with 2 other players who get nominal minutes at random times like blowouts, foul trouble, injuries, etc.
Brandon Johns is averaging 4.2 mpg right now...do you consider him in our rotation now? DeJulius averages 3mpg...what about him? Davis is 4.8 mpg...do you get my point?
January 29th, 2019 at 2:24 PM ^
Teske will still play 30+ minutes a game. JB will not have 10+ guys in the rotation. 2 key reserves and then 1 or 2 guys that play in a pinch or due to specific match ups. Badjema and Nunez will not play atall next year.
January 29th, 2019 at 3:30 PM ^
Teske will NOT play 30+ mpg...
This is BULLSHIT. Give me one post player under JB that's played 30 mpg. Name ONE.
Mo Wagner played 24 mpg then 27.5 mpg in his last 2 years at Michigan. You think Teske is going to play MORE? He's 7'1.
Also, can you read? Nunez is 3 mpg, that's not in the rotation. He will see time. Go look at what DeJulius, Johns and Davis are getting this year...it's about 3, 4 and 5 mpg. Those are NOT rotation players.
Nunez at 3 mpg is not in the rotation. Neither is DeJulius at 5 mpg. Johns at 7mpg and Bajema at 8mpg aren't much more.
In the rotation is at least 10 minutes per game - Eli Brooks BARELY got that last year year. This year he's at 15 mpg.
You guys see a name and instantly you think all of those guys are playing major minutes...read the number beside the name.