Spring Crean-ing continues: Jeremiah April leaving IU bball

Spring Crean-ing continues: Jeremiah April leaving IU bball

Submitted by ypsituckyboy on May 1st, 2015 at 4:22 PM

In news that will surprise no one, another Indiana basketball player, Jeremiah April, was told has decided to leave the program. Tom Crean now has the ability to bring in another 4-star who will be forced out voluntary transfer before contributing in any meaningful way.

April is the third player to leave the IU basketball program this year, following in the footsteps of Max Hoetzel and Stanford Robinson. In 2014, three other players also transferred - Peter Jurkin, Austin Etherington, and Jeremy Hollowell.

In case you were wondering which B1G coach is the worst, let me remind you that it's Tom Crean. Tom Crean is the worst.

College basketball is for suckers/Jaylen Brown likely to Kentucky negbang

College basketball is for suckers/Jaylen Brown likely to Kentucky negbang

Submitted by Erik_in_Dayton on May 1st, 2015 at 3:22 PM

Following college basketball means Michigan having to take down two Final Four banners when Duke has twice made the Final Four while (likely) playing ineligible players.  http://straighthoops.com/articles_9.html

Following college basketball means losing Mitch McGary for a year b/c he tested positive for marijuana once even when McGary's punishment in AA for being caught with a small amount of the stuff would have cost him nothing more than a $25 fine.

Following college basketball means losing recruits to a school - Kentucky - that openly flaunts the luxury apartments that its players live in.  http://larrybrownsports.com/college-basketball/kentuckys-housing-chef-flat-screens/153247

I'm mad as heck, and I'm...going to sit here and be mad for a few more minutes!  I say this calls for a negbang! 

Kentucky Rumored to be leading for Jaylen Brown

Kentucky Rumored to be leading for Jaylen Brown

Submitted by poppinfresh on May 1st, 2015 at 12:19 PM

No bueno...Kentucky Sports Radio reporting

They got an anonymous text from an ATL area code (678) last night that UK leads for Jaylen Brown.
 

Also seems the scout guys have changed attitude to one of concern regarding Jaylen and that Kentucky now leading. 

 

OT: Which two Michigan basketball teams would you draft vs. yourself

OT: Which two Michigan basketball teams would you draft vs. yourself

Submitted by michfan4borw on May 1st, 2015 at 11:33 AM

Pick from the current roster; that means D. Robinson, but no Jaylen Brown, please.  Team 1 gets first pick, Team 2 gets next two picks, and then back and forth from there until the current roster is depleted.  I'll edit this thread with my picks if enough people play and after I do my draft picks.

Player Pool:

C. Levert, Z. Irvin, D. Walton, S. Albrecht, R. Doyle, M. Donnal, A. Dawkins, M. Abdur-Rahkman, K. Chatman, D.J. Wilson, D. Robinson, A. Dakich, S. Lonergan, M. Wagner,

 

 

Team 1 (MAIZE): 

Doyle, Walton, Dawkins, Robinson, Chatman, Wagner, Dakich

Team 2 (BLUE):

Levert, Irvin, Albrecht, Abdur-Rahkman, Donnal, Wilson, Lonergan

 

[edit: IMO, Maize team wins 5-7 times out of every 10 games played, because it's more well-rounded with proven quality at the 1 position and 5 position]

Kenny Williams No Longer Considering Michigan

Kenny Williams No Longer Considering Michigan

Submitted by Moe on April 30th, 2015 at 4:48 PM

Does this mean good news on the Jaylen Brown front?

 

Former VCU signee Kenny Williams tells me he is no longer considering Michigan.

— Alejandro Zúñiga (@ByAZuniga) April 30, 2015

Former VCU signee Kenny Williams tells ESPN he is down to Virginia and North Carolina.

— Jeff Borzello (@jeffborzello) April 30, 2015

MBB Recruiting: 2015 4* G Kenny Williams to visit May 18th

MBB Recruiting: 2015 4* G Kenny Williams to visit May 18th

Submitted by ypsituckyboy on April 29th, 2015 at 9:38 AM

Looks like Kenny Williams has set his visit date set for Michigan as May 18th. May 20th is the last day of the late signing period, so Jaylen Brown will almost assuredly have decided by then.

Williams is down to Florida, UVa, UNC, and Michigan. I'm not sure if the impending departure of Billy Donovan will impact his decision much, since Williams probably has UVa and UNC ranked higher.

Sam Webb article on Jaylen Brown

Sam Webb article on Jaylen Brown

Submitted by GVSUGoBlue on April 29th, 2015 at 8:44 AM

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/201…

 

Some good Wednesday morning reading.

"Talking to Coach Beilein, he's like an offensive genius," Brown told Scout. "The way he gets these guys that aren't really ranked high to be lottery picks in the draft is amazing. It's definitely something that drew my attention."

Is Michigan BB getting their fair share of top Recruits?

Is Michigan BB getting their fair share of top Recruits?

Submitted by champswest on April 28th, 2015 at 11:54 PM

There has been much discussion of late about the success (or lack there of) of Michigan’s basketball recruiting. Specifically, that we are not getting our fair share of upper level recruits given our recent tournament success. This suggests that a teams NCAA tournament success should immediately result in an up-tick in recruiting success. This theory may well be true, but there are many other reasons for a player to pick a particular school, such as academics, location, coaching staff, chemistry with current players, style of play, legacy and so on.

But, if we are going to focus on tournament success, we must first look at said results to determine where Michigan stands in relation to other schools that we are recruiting against.  As many have said, we may not win many head-to-head battles with Duke and Kentucky, but we should be on the same level as the second tier of schools (or third tier?).  If we assume that most kids start paying attention to sports when they are 8 or 10 years old and committing to their college of choice when they are 16 or 17, does anything that happened more than 8 or 10 years ago mean that much to them?  And if we are talking about Michigan’s 2013 title game appearance, maybe we should only look at the last 3 years. Can we agree that a 3-year sample size is too small to be relevant? I chose to look at this century’s results only, 2000 – 2015, sixteen years of NCAA tournaments.

In order to be included in the analysis, a school had to appear in the Sweet Sixteen at least once in those 16 years.  That reduced the field to 65. I then awarded each of those teams 1 point for each tournament bid, 2 points for each Sweet Sixteen appearance, 3 for an Elite Eight, 4 for a Final Four and 5 for a Championship Game appearance. There was no additional bonus for actually winning the championship. I realize that this is an arbitrary system that may or may not be fair or totally accurate, but I wanted to keep this somewhat simple, while still meaningful. I then totaled the points for each school and ranked them in order. It may surprise some to learn that the school at the top of the list is MSU followed by the usual suspects: Kansas, Duke, Kentucky, Florida, North Carolina and UCONN.  Michigan finished 27th, surrounded by Oklahoma State, Pittsburg, Tennessee and Georgetown.

Chart of NCAA Tournament Success

School Bids 16 8 4 Ch. G. Total   School Bids 16 8 4 Ch. G. Total
Michigan State 16 11 8 6 2 96   Wichita St 5 3 1 1 0 18
Kansas 16 10 7 4 3 88   Purdue 9 3 1 0 0 18
Duke 16 12 5 4 3 86   LSU 6 2 1 1 0 17
Kentucky 14 9 7 4 2 79   VCU 8 1 1 1 0 17
Florida 13 7 7 4 3 79   Notre Dame 10 2 1 0 0 17
North Carolina 13 8 7 4 2 76   Xavier 6 2 2 0 0 16
UCONN 11 7 6 4 3 74   Cincinnati 11 2 0 0 0 15
Louisville 13 7 6 3 1 62   N. Carolina St 9 3 0 0 0 15
Wisconsin 16 8 4 3 1 61   Iowa State 7 2 1 0 0 14
Arizona 14 9 6 1 1 59   BYU 11 1 0 0 0 13
UCLA 12 7 3 3 1 52   USC 6 2 1 0 0 13
Butler 10 8 2 2 2 50   Temple 8 1 1 0 0 13
Syracuse 12 7 3 2 1 48   San Diego St 8 2 0 0 0 12
Ohio State 12 5 3 2 1 44   Washington 6 3 0 0 0 12
Texas 15 5 3 1 0 38   Kansas St 6 1 1 0 0 11
Memphis 10 4 3 1 1 36   Utah 7 2 0 0 0 11
Illinois 11 4 2 1 1 34   Davidson 6 1 1 0 0 11
Maryland 8 3 2 2 1 33   Dayton 6 1 1 0 0 11
Oklahoma   11 4 3 1 0 32   Vanderbilt 6 2 0 0 0 10
Gonzaga 16 5 1 0 0 29   St Josephs 5 1 1 0 0 10
Indiana 10 3 1 1 1 28   Wake Forrest 7 1 0 0 0 9
Villanova 10 4 2 1 0 28   UNLV 7 1 0 0 0 9
Marquette 10 4 2 1 0 28   Boston College 7 1 0 0 0 9
West Virginia 8 5 2 1 0 28   Tulsa 4 1 1 0 0 9
Oklahoma St. 11 3 2 1 0 27   Alabama 6 1 0 0 0 8
Pittsburg 12 5 1 0 0 25   Texas A&M 6 1 0 0 0 8
Michigan   5 2 2 1 1 24   Virginia 5 1 0 0 0 7
Tennessee 9 5 1 0 0 22   UAB 5 1 0 0 0 7
Gerogetown 9 3 1 1 0 22   Florida St 4 1 0 0 0 6
Oregon 8 3 2 0 0 20   Texas Tech 4 1 0 0 0 6
Missouri 9 2 2 0 0 19   Ohio 3 1 0 0 0 5
Georgia Tech 5 1 1 1 1 19   La Salle 1 1 0 0 0 3
Stanford 9 3 1 0 0 18                

Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Men’s_Division_1_Tournament_bids_by_school

Many of us think that Michigan should be a 5 Star destination school because we were a bad call or two away from a National Championship just two years ago.  However, as you can see, we have only played in 5 of the last 16 tournaments, which is surpassed by 55 other schools on this list.  Even in our own conference, Maryland has 8, Purdue 9, Indiana 10, Illinois 11, OSU 12 and Wisconsin and MSU with all 16. We have been kind of late to the party.

Next, I looked at recruiting results.  Since we are talking about the bounce from Michigan’s title game appearance, I only looked at the last three years, 2013, 2014 and 2015. I question how significant 2013 is since that class was probably well put to bed before the tournament was completed.  In fact, 2014 recruiting was well underway already and may have only been partially affected by our near championship.  However, the premise is that we should be benefiting from that run, so onward and upward.

Using 247 Sports Composite Player Rankings for each year, I broke the top 100 ranked players into 4 equal parts.  The A column is for the 1-25 ranked players, B = 26-50, C =51-75 and D = 76-100. The chart lists the teams in the same order as the previous chart (tournament success).  For each of the three years, I recorded how many players each school signed from each A, B, C, D category.  For example, in 2013, Kansas had 3 A players, 2 B players and zero C and D. 

Note: The number of 5* and 4* players varies by year.  In these 3 specific years, 2013 had 23 5* and 4* went to #115, in 2014 there were only 22 5* but 4* went to #124, and in 2015 it is 23 5* and 4* up to 122.  Since I cut it off at 100, not all four-star players will be included in this analysis.

I then assigned a value of 4 points to A players, 3 points to B, 2 to C and 1 point to D players.  Again, an arbitrary system, but it is simple and serves the purpose.  The last three columns show how many top 100 players each school signed over the 3 year period, how many total points they were worth and where each school ranked based on total number of points.  Michigan, which ranked 27 in tournament success, signed 4 top 100 players over the next 3 years, which yielded 10 points and resulted in a ranking of tied for 23. This would suggest that we are having recruiting results that are similar to our tournament success. This analysis is not intended as the final word or to silence the debate, only to add some actual data to the arguments. I think Paul Simon got it right when he penned, “Still, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.”

Note: As of this writing, there are still 8 uncommitted top 100 players in the 2015 class; #3 Jaylen Brown, #9 Thon Maker, #56 Tevin Mack, #82 George Papagiannis, #88 Kobe Eubanks, #89 Kenny Williams and #91 Marcus Lovett.  If we were to get Brown, our total points would increase from 10 to 14 and move us up to a tie for 16th place (assuming other teams remain static).

Chart of Player Rankings by School

 

      2 0 1 3   2 0 1 4   2 0 1 5   # of    
Rank School   A B C D   A B C D   A B C D   Players Pts Rank
1 Michigan State                       2   1     3 10 23t
2 Kansas   3 2       2     1   2         10 35 3
3 Duke   1 2       4         4         1 42 2
4t Kentucky   6         4         2   1     13 50 1
4t Florida   2         1 2           2 1   8 23 7t
6 North Carolina   1   1     2 1                 5 17 13
7 UCON         1   1         1     1   4 10 23t
8 Louisville     1 1       2 1 1     3       9 23 7t
9 Wisconsin                             1   1 1 49t
10 Arizona   2     1   1 1 1     2 1 1     10 31 4
11 UCLA   1   1     1 2         1 1     7 21 10t
12 Butler                                 0 0  
13 Syracuse   1 1   1   1 1         1 2 1   9 23 7t
14 Ohio State     2       1 1 1       3   1   9 25 5t
15 Texas             1           1 1     3 9 29
16 Memphis   1 2   2               1       6 15 15
17 Illinois       2       1         1 1     5 12 19t
18 Maryland     1         1 1 1   1         5 13 17t
19 Oklahoma                                 0 0  
20 Gonzaga                 1               1 2 44t
21t Indiana   1   2 1   1 1       1         7 20 12
21t Villanova         2         2   1         5 8 30t
21t Marquette     2 1         1     1   1     6 16 14
21t West Virginia       2                   1     3 6 33t
25 Oklahoma St       1         1 1     1       4 8 30t
26 Pittsburg         1                   1   2 2 44t
27 Michigan       2   1     1                 4 10 23t
28t Tennessee   1               1             2 5 35t
28t Georgetown         1   1   2       1   1   6 13 17t
30 Oregon                   1     1   1   3 5 35t
31t Missouri     1 1       1 1               4 10 23t
31t Georgia Tech                   1             1 1 49t
33t Stanford   1           1 1 1             4 10 23t
33t Wichita St                                 0 0  
33t Purdue       1 1         1             3 4 39t
36t LSU   1 1 1     1   1     2   1     8 25 5t
36t VCU               1                 1 3 41t
36t Notre Dame     1 1                         2 5 35t
39 Xavier         1     1   1             3 5 35t
40t Cincinnati   1                             1 4 39t
40t N. Carolina St   1   1 1     1 2               6 14 16
42 Iowa St       1 1                       2 3 41t
43t BYU     1 1           1             3 6 33t
43t USC               1 1       1 1     4 10 23t
43t Temple                                 0 0  
46t San Diego St         1       2 1       1     5 8 30t
46t Washington     1                   1 2 1   5 11 21t
48t Kansas St                   1             1 1 49t
48t Utah                 1               1 2 44t
48t Davidson                                 0 0  
48t Dayton                                 0 0  
52t Vanderbilt         1         1             2 2 44t
52t St Josephs                                 0 0  
54t Wake Forrest                           1 1   2 3 41t
54t UNLV     1       2 1       1 1       6 21 10t
54t Boston College                                 0 0  
54t Tulsa                                 0 0  
58t Alabama       1                         1 2 44t
58t Texas A&M                 1       3   1   5 12 19t
60t Virginia                   1             1 1 49t
60t UAB                                 0 0  
62t Florida St     1                 1 1   1   4 11 21t
62t Texas Tech                                 0 0  
64 Ohio                                 0 0  
65 Le Salle                                 0 0  
                                         

There is some interesting date here, if you have the time.  Despite MSU ranking at the top in tournament success, they have only signed 3 top 100 players in this 3-year period, which is still better than Wisconsin who also made every tournament and has signed only one.  It will probably not surprise you to see that Indiana is better at getting talent than using it.  What is up with LSU?

Bonus Michigan Recruiting Chart

 

    247Sports  Composite Player Rankings  
Year 1 to 25 26 to 50 51 to 75 76 to 100  Other
2010       77 Smotrycz 166 Hardaway
          219 Horford
2011       87 Brundidge  
        93 Burke  
2012 16 Robinson 28 McGary   82 Stauskas 171 Albrecht
          215 LeVert
2013   28 Irvin 44 Walton 86 Donnal  
2014   27 Chatman     123 Wilson
          203 Doyle
          326 Dawkins
          385 MAAR
2015         147 Wagner
2016       100 Teske 182 Davis

A few final thoughts.

Butler appeared in back-to-back championship games in 2010 and 2011 and yet has only signed one top 100 player since, #90 Dunham a four star in 2012.  Small bounce.

Maybe star ratings are not worth worrying about.  Some pretty good players who didn’t crack the top 100: #105 Denzell Valentine, #137 Victor Oladipo, #145 Nigel Hayes, #166 Tim Hardaway Jr., #188 Travis Trice, #215 Caris LeVert, #218 Frank Kaminsky and #326 Aubrey Dawkins.