Looking Back: 2016 Big Ten Point Guard Class driving the success this year

Submitted by Champeen on February 20th, 2020 at 11:02 AM

Point Guard drives college basketball.  The Big Ten is the undisputed best conference in basketball right now, and a lot of it has to do with the 2016 PG haul.  This is pretty crazy....

#5, #31 overall Cassius Winston, MSU
#8, #51 overall Tony Carr, PSU
#11, #62 overall Anthony Cowan, MD
#13, #67 overall Zavier Simpson, UM
#25, #118 overall Carsen Edwards, PU (DRAFTED)

That is a pretty damn impressive list.
 

MGoBoard
Basketball

UMFanatic96

February 20th, 2020 at 11:13 AM ^

And what's even more impressive is that there's an argument the lowest rated player on that list has an argument of being the best player overall. My ranking would be the below:

1.) Carsen Edwards

2.) Cassius Winston

3.) Zavier Simpson

4.) Anthony Cowan

5.) Tony Carr

Joined: 06/21/2016

MGoPoints: 6348

Watching From Afar

February 20th, 2020 at 12:15 PM ^

Hard to compare the 3 guys because they are vastly different players.

Edwards was a chucker and less efficient than Winston, but when he was on he lit teams on fire and single-handedly pushed Purdue to shares of Big Ten titles and conference tournament championship games. Wasn't a complete sieve on defense but pretty average.

Winston is more efficient and takes less shots (kind of redundant). Also has 2X the assists that Edwards had per 100 possessions. Not a great defender either.

Simpson doesn't have the shot the other 2 have. Higher 2P% than both. More assists than Edwards but less than Winston. Best defender of the 3 and has more steals with less turnovers. More consistent offensive output over his career, but he has never been asked to shoulder the load from a scoring perspective. Has led Michigan as the best of the 3 programs over their overlapping careers.

The offense the other 2 guys have is hard to compete with. Simpson could not be switched with Edwards and lead Purdue to similar heights because they needed a ton of points from the PG spot given the players on the floor. Simpson on MSU would cause issues this year because they can't shoot, but overall he'd probably do alright. Put Edwards on Michigan (ignoring he'd have to give up the ball more on a Beilein coached team) and Michigan's offense rakes but the defense and general swagger they had takes a dip. Winston could be plugged in and the offense would rise but the defense would take a hit.

Really comes down to what type of PG you want. Defense and facilitator (Simpson). Total offensive package (Winston). Offensive dynamite meaning could explode in both good and bad ways (Edwards).

Joined: 10/10/2016

MGoPoints: 15981

Watching From Afar

February 20th, 2020 at 1:26 PM ^

At no point did I say Simpson = Edwards/WInston. I'm responding to a post discussing the best player overall and going through the argument.

Each of the 3 players have their strengths and weaknesses. Basketball is a team sport so if you don't have a perfectly well rounded player that can excel at every facet of offense, defense, leadership, etc then you have to look at which type of player you want to fit your system.

As I said, putting Simpson on Purdue instead of Edwards makes Purdue worse because he can't carry the load on offense without the shot making ability Edwards had. Putting Edwards on Michigan probably doesn't drastically lower their ceiling overall, but he isn't as good of a defender or facilitator as Simpson so instead of Michigan winning games 65-59, they would have needed to win games 79-76. That's assuming Edwards doesn't have a cold night where he shoots his team out of the building like he did a lot last season.

Offense is flashy and therefore garners more attention. That's why Edwards was as spectacular as he was. I personally wouldn't want my PG to be jacking up 20 shots/game under 40% like he did last season (and that's with his late season surge pulling his numbers up). Winston and Simpson shoot less and at a higher %. Is that "better overall" or is scoring 25 point/game?

Is being a better scorer/worse defender/worse facilitator better overall than worse scorer/better defender/better facilitator? In a vacuum? Probably. Specific to coaching philosophies and measured outcomes we can look at, maybe not.

Joined: 10/10/2016

MGoPoints: 15981

GoBlue96

February 20th, 2020 at 12:16 PM ^

To me best depth equals best conference.  For sure for this year since there are really no great teams.  If you have one or two teams at the top of conference beating up on a lot of bad teams, that doesn't say much for the conference.

I think the big ten will get a team in the final four.  Teams are beating up on each in conference play but they'll be better prepared for the tournament.

Joined: 07/01/2008

MGoPoints: 55707

OwenGoBlue

February 20th, 2020 at 1:40 PM ^

There’s debate but it’s the B1G this year. I’ve always liked Big East basketball and they’re having a great year but they’re not quite on the same level in terms of non conference results and they lost the Gavitt Games despite the B1G rolling out Northwestern (and NW won!)  

ACC just doesn’t have enough at the top or enough depth this year to make the case. A down UNC hurts that league a lot.  

 

Joined: 04/03/2016

MGoPoints: 31529

MH20

February 20th, 2020 at 11:29 AM ^

Big Ten is surely the deepest conference but I don't see an NCAA champion in its midst. Final Four, perhaps, but I think it's more likely you see the champ from the B12/ACC/Gonzaga.

Joined: 10/30/2008

MGoPoints: 40584

UMAmaizinBlue

February 20th, 2020 at 12:09 PM ^

Maybe not crazy, but basketball is different than football when it comes to talent distribution across the power 5.

1) Blue bloods like Kansas, Duke, and Kentucky hoard talent in a way that leaves less for other teams in most recruiting cycles.

2) Unlike in football, teams outside the power 5 can recruit well, e.g. - Xavier, Villanova, Gonzaga, and Marquette.

Basketball recruiting isn't as simple as "Power 5 and Everyone Else" like it is in football, so one conference having 1/5 of the top talent in a position across 5 different teams is pretty darn cool.

Joined: 09/23/2009

MGoPoints: 36258

potomacduc

February 20th, 2020 at 2:20 PM ^

To add some numbers to your (apparently correct) statements:

According to 247 (which it appears is what the OP used),

ACC led the way with 6 top 25 PGs in 2016

B1G and Non-P5 had 5 each

SEC, P12 and Big XII had 3 each

20 of the top 25 went to P5 conferences. That works out to an "average" of 4 per conference and Michigan got 5. That's not crazy, but notable. The phenomenon of top players going to non P5 schools in hoops but not in football seems to hold, at least by one quick check

In 2018, not one of the top 25 ranked QBs went to a non-P5 conference school.(I am counting ND as P5)

 

 

 

Joined: 03/18/2009

MGoPoints: 3143

Qmatic

February 20th, 2020 at 2:12 PM ^

2019: Ty Jerome (4 year player; 1st round pick)

2018: Jalen Brunson (Junior; NPOY)

2017: Joel Berry (Junior)

2016: Villanova really had 3 guys who could play the point in Brunson (Fr at the time); Arcidiacono (Sr), Josh Hart (Sr)

 

Goes to show that solid PG play is key in March. There have been some stellar PG's the last 5 years who didn't make the final 4 even. De'Aaron Fox, Colin Sexton, Lonzo Ball, Donovan Mitchell, and Dennis Smith Jr to name a few.

Joined: 01/09/2013

MGoPoints: 32780

We called them…

February 20th, 2020 at 1:07 PM ^

I don't get this post.  Most of those guys are pretty mediocre in terms of recruiting ranking.  I agree that they have each turned into solid to great college players, but do they constitute a recruiting haul?

The top 5 PGs that year don't show a lot of correlation with team success (although none of them are still on those teams.) 

#3 Lonzo Ball (UCLA)

#5 Markelle Fultz (Washington)

#6 De'Aaron Fox (Kentucky)

#7 Dennis Smith (NC State)

#13 Frank Jackson (Duke)

Joined: 09/14/2017

MGoPoints: 721