Matt EM

August 5th, 2018 at 9:09 AM ^

My hot take......while I think Jalen Wilson will produce more as a freshman and perhaps a sophomore, I think Bajema will ultimately be a better player at Michigan. 

TrueBlue2003

August 5th, 2018 at 12:44 PM ^

Stauskas never was (still isn't) a very good defender, but he was still a very valuable player for his offense.  Cole reminds me a lot more of what Stauskas became than what Caris was.  From his recruiting blurbs:

"with the way he shoots it, the way he handles it, the way he passes it...he can be a 6-7 creator"

That was Stauskas in year 2. 

Caris got on the floor as a freshman because he was a long, solid defender and then later developed his offensive game.  It sounds like it'd have to be the opposite for this guy if he were to become a Levert-like player and he probably doesn't have the length to be the steal-getter and general pest that Caris was.  Would be great if that were a part of his game too, but it probably won't be.

Matt EM

August 5th, 2018 at 10:31 AM ^

Being lethal in a pick and roll often comes down to being a triple threat - going around the hard hedge and finishing at the rim, finding the roll man for dumpoffs or shooters on kickouts, or hitting the midrange jumper when the defense shows the drop coverage.

Trey Burke mastered it, Stauskas was very good, Levert accomplished 2 of 3 (couldn't hit the midrange jumper off the dribble).

TrueBlue2003

August 5th, 2018 at 1:02 PM ^

More importantly (and more commonly) in modern basketball is hitting the pull up three when the defense drops.  And yes, Burke and Stauskas and Walton could do that. Burke had the pretty floater in the lane, and Stauskas the pull up mid-range jumper that made them sort of quadruple threats.

Mr Miggle

August 5th, 2018 at 9:26 AM ^

I know we were expecting a nice bump, but that really takes me by surprise. It doesn't mean much, but that makes him higher ranked than all five players in MSU's 2018 class.

Mr Miggle

August 5th, 2018 at 9:58 AM ^

That's definitely one way to look at it and could well be true.

Alternatively, you rank him this high because you think there's a legitimate chance he ends up even higher. Someone like MattD is much more knowledgeable on this topic, but I get the impression that rankings are usually a blend of the player's current level and his realistic ceiling.

Fast rising players must be hard to rank. Your looks at their current level of play might be limited to one setting and there's less confidence in their level a few months down the road.

 

Matt EM

August 5th, 2018 at 10:07 AM ^

For me, rankings are the intersection of productivity, upside, skill, athleticism and measurements. How much weight you place on one variable often correlates with the other variables.

 

To put this in specific context I’ll use Jalen Wilson as an example. When he committed he was a 5star on nearly every site. When I gave my input and ranking a few eyebrows were raised. A lot of my eval/ranking on Wilson is based on the fact that he’s already physically developed/has a college ready frame, yet he is t very athletic. That translates to being close to maxed out physically. You combine that with an above average skill set (as opposed to good) and it generally equates to a guy with a high floor and low ceiling in college. 

Other prospects, such as Jaden McDaniels, are tapping on elite status in nearly every one of the aforementioned variables.......hence him being #1 in my rankings months ago when he was a 40-80 type to every other site. 

DeepBlueC

August 5th, 2018 at 10:25 AM ^

Which just goes to show how much subjectivity and bandwagon jumping there is in the rankings, especially when you get below the level of the indisputably elite.  And there is definitely a tendency to create clickbait for teams with large, enthusiastic fan bases.  

Personally, I think it makes more sense to rank players only according to their relative talent levels at the moment, and adjust those rankings accordingly only if they actually start looking better or worse on the court.  Other people have different takes on that issue, obviously.  And there are certainly players who are underranked because they haven't gotten much notice, rather than because they're not that good.

Matt EM

August 5th, 2018 at 10:57 AM ^

I think the issue with ranking players according to their current talent level is that it becomes impossible to account for competition level. For instance, Joe Girard averaged nearly 50 points per game (or something absurd) as a junior for Glen Falls. But there's no chance in hell he's the #1 prospect in the country. He's averaging 50 points per game because he's playing against the functional equivalent of air in upstate New York.

I do put a lot of weight in current productivity, but comp level has to be accounted for.

DeepBlueC

August 5th, 2018 at 11:34 AM ^

Sure, but we're talking about physical talent and skill level, not raw, countable stats.  Nobody advocates ranking potential recruits based primarily on ppg or rpg, ever, and I know your evaluations are based on more fundamental things, things that don't change based on competition level.  A players lateral quickness, ball-handling and leaping ability are what they are, no matter who you're playing.  

Matt EM

August 5th, 2018 at 12:40 PM ^

Have to adamantly disagree here. A player’s handle, athleticism, shooting, lateral agility are all immensely impacted by competition level.

Again, I’ll use an example close to home to sort of illustrate this in context. Mark Donnal looked great in HS, running the floor, dunking at will, etc. At Michigan there were times it looked as if he couldn’t get more than a few inches off the ground and he was certainly one of the least athletic players in the B10.

Competition Level matters A LOT. It’s the precise reason that evaluation at any level is so difficult. In esssence my job is to project whether productivity will translate from one level to the next based on those aforementioned variables. 

DeepBlueC

August 5th, 2018 at 1:07 PM ^

There's a difference between a player's objective level of basketball skill and athleticism, and whether that level gives them an advantage and makes them look good against a particular opponent or not.  That's what you're missing here.  

Mark Donnal's vertical leap didn't suddenly go down by 6 inches from high school to college.  It just didn't, and I know you know that.  Maybe his confidence level went down, maybe he had trouble adjusting to more complicated offenses and defenses, but those are head problems (which are indeed very difficult to evaluate and predict), not problems with physical ability.  

Matt EM

August 5th, 2018 at 1:22 PM ^

Again have to disagree. His ability to leap did not decrease, but the space available in order for him to elevate decreased significantly when he arrived at UM.

 

in other words, Donnal only looked like a decent athlete when he had tons of space to get a running start. When forced to explode in tight spaces against legit competition, he simply wasn’t capable of doing it irrelevant of confidence or offensive complexity. 

All that to say comp level is often a determining factor in evaluation and ultimately projections. 

To illustrate this, Tim Hardsway Jr was a fine ‘run and jump’ athlete but he certainly didn’t have the quick twitch explosion of GR3 to elevate suddenly and in traffic.  

My apologies to the board for this side debate. This will be my final post on this particular topic.

 

MichiganStan

August 5th, 2018 at 6:06 PM ^

So you have thoroughly scouted Bejema in order to make the assessment that he is overrated? 

Im going to side with Beilein, 247, Virginia, and Xavier over you. Clearly these schools and 247 believe he's a top quality prospect or else they wouldn't bother wasting a scholly on him

MichiganStan

August 5th, 2018 at 6:04 PM ^

I hate how some Michigan fans feel the need to get a pot shot in at Harbaugh whenever something good happens for Beilein and mens basketball

Theres enough outsiders attacking Harbaugh for everything he does. We don't need supposed fans also doing it

outsidethebox

August 5th, 2018 at 9:24 PM ^

Naa. You and many others, certainly the haters, need to get a healthy and informed perspective with regards to the holistic purposes of the interscholastic athletic endeavor. Harbaugh needs to figure this game-day, college football coaching thing out a bit better but he is hitting the rest of the gig out of the park. I would send my D1 kid to him in a heartbeat...over anyone else.