How do you think (basketball) recruits perceive a program's successfulness?
When we, readers of MGoBlog, consider the state of the basketball program, most of us pull from a very large bank of data and historical context. We sing praise to Coach Beilein for bringing the pogram back from the depths of basketball purgatory, for his infinite ability to recruit and coach-up diamonds in the rough, for his entertaining style of basketball, for a magical March Madness run, and now, this season, for crafting a top 5 offense despite having lost the best player in college basketball, another nba first-rounder, and a preseason all-american.
My question to you is: how much stock do you think basketball recruits put into any of that? Do you think 16 and 17-year olds look at Michigan and see the progress we've made, the consistency of Beilein's offense, how much we utilize freshmen and sophomores, etc.?
Basically, I'm asking you to play adolescent psychologist.
January 19th, 2014 at 1:15 PM ^
The truthfulness is, most kids are concerned about the "now" and not the "then" as the now has a tangible effect on how their career trajectory plays out. So having sustained success these days is a huge deal to these elite recruits. If you are not one f the 3-4 CBB blue bloods, it is all a "what have you done for me lately" deal.
January 19th, 2014 at 1:39 PM ^
Honestfulnessly, I think it is mostly about the "now" but it's the "now" defined over a longer period of time than just a year or two. It probably doesn't take long for a program to establish itself in the eyes of recruits as an excellent program rather than just an excellent team (these kids are only 14-17 years old, after all). Beilein is probably just a couple of seasons away from doing that.
January 19th, 2014 at 3:12 PM ^
successfulness is a word, and it seemed more appropriate than success.
January 19th, 2014 at 3:21 PM ^
Just giving you a hard time because it's a funny sounding word. Thanks for starting the thread.
January 19th, 2014 at 3:56 PM ^
success definitely word have worked better, b/c who has ever said/written successfulness.
fail
January 20th, 2014 at 6:05 AM ^
You should have said failfulness...
January 19th, 2014 at 1:21 PM ^
I have to believe that when a coach has a reputation for making players better it gets the attention of the prospects. More importantly it gets the attention of the HS coaches who are in the ear of the prospects as well.
There are one hundred things that go into prospects decisions. Every kid is different and some already know they are going for 1 year and they are out.
Playing in front of large crowds and being televised are a big deal.
Going to the NCAA's etc.
There isn't 1 way to answer this or to put a percentage on it but the more Michigan has sucess getting players to the leauge and being a consistent player in March will play a huge part in the perception of the coach and program.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:52 PM ^
January 19th, 2014 at 1:25 PM ^
January 19th, 2014 at 1:54 PM ^
I also agree, with NBA being an early entry that recruits look at which program is going to get the most attention, both from media attention and NBA scouts. When looking Kentucky and Dukes they are constantly getting the media attention which will allow kids to show their skills pushing them into NBA/
January 19th, 2014 at 4:04 PM ^
When coaches talk about recruiting, they say it's all about putting kids in the NBA. Beilein himself says that while they miss players taken in the NBA draft, it is better for the program long term to have a talented player taken in the first round than have him on the court. The angry troll to the West has said that recruits care more about who you've put in the NBA than Final Fours and Championships...but he could have just been crying for the sake of crying. He does that. I think for the guys outside the top 100 pregram success, academic reputation, facilities, and chemistry with the coaches probably plays a larger role.
January 19th, 2014 at 1:26 PM ^
No doubt recruits look at a whole list of things but the real interest is getting into the NBA. Every top 25 recruit believes they will play in the NBA at some point. Whether or not they r overrated or have a lingering injury thats priority #1 despite what some might say. I think sending players to the NBA and having the succeed is the biggest key. IMO a player leaving early to the draft (if they really r ready) is better for the program in the long run. Recruits can look at Michigan and see that Beilein can help them get to the NBA. Just think by 2015 Michigan could have 7 players in the NBA 6 of which are John Beilein recruits!! I think that plays the biggest role of all
January 19th, 2014 at 1:27 PM ^
in the 2015 class. We are in on a lot of top prospects, coming off the NC game appearance and playing well again this year. That should all come together to lure some top 50 players, but bball recruiting can be so odd at times so who knows.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:08 PM ^
If your gauge is top 50 players, Michigan has already started seeing success, as you put it. These are the RSCI consensus recruiting rankings for current or future Wolverines:
- #23 Robinson
- #26 McGary
- #29 Irvin
- #44 Walton
- #32 Chatman
I particularly don't understand why people continue to express disappointment in Michigan's 2014 class as if Chatman wasn't a major player to land.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:19 PM ^
but I believe we were 2nd fiddle for at least 2 other really big recruits. Booker and someone else.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:35 PM ^
But that's the nature of recruiting, especially when going after top players. You're going to miss out on more than you land.
January 19th, 2014 at 4:45 PM ^
Besides, those guys might be one and done players. The guys Beilien picked up will have a long, established career at Michigan (Wilson, Doyle) . Look at Stauskas, who probably stays at least one more year, and has become a great player and program guy.
January 19th, 2014 at 1:46 PM ^
Last year was the first time in about 20 years that we made the 2nd weekend of the tournament. We also just got modern facilities.
To compare, Calipari had made at least the Sweet 16 seven seasons in a row before last year (between Memphis and UK). In six of those seasons he made the Elite Eight. They were also a #1 or a #2 seed in six of those seasons (we've yet to be higher than a #4 under Beilein). When kids have to remember back before they started junior high to find a time when you weren't being talked up as a top-notch team/coach, you are in great shape. Guys like Self, Williams, Boeheim, and Coach K have that already. Coach Beilein needs time to get there.
We're just now seen as a team that makes the tourney just about every year. We've also just started to have some big NBA draft successs. If we can make another deep run and guys like GRIII, McGary, Stauskas, etc. end up in the pros, we'll start to push teams like UK, Kansas, Duke, etc. for the top guys even more often.
January 19th, 2014 at 5:00 PM ^
+1 to you because you made some great points, but DAMNIT I hate it when people compare any college basketball program to something Calipari is doing.
He's an undisputed cheat. I rest assured that he will leave UK in a tire fire.
January 19th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^
I think the one and done crowd, doesn't think about Beiilein and his proven ability to make his players better, trust freshmen with playing time, or his incredible final four run. I think a lot of those guys think about where they can go and get the most attention for a short while before they bolt to the NBA. I also think our coach, doesn't really recruit those guys too hard. It is totally different than Football recruiting, because of the one and done rule. Having said that, I am fine with us not getting the one year guys. Getting a guy who stays 2 or maybe even 3 years, watching him develop, and gain consistency is great.
The fact that this all happens while Michigan still has great success, makes it especillay pleasurable. I am really happy for guys like Morgan and Horford, who have stepped in for a much more heralded recruit and done well because of their time in the program. I am glad to see Trey Burke surpassing all expectations in the NBA (though I would be much happier if he were doing it in a Pistons uniform), and I am ecstatic that we can trust the evaluation of our coaches. I have totally forgotten about stars and recruit rankings when it comes to basketball. If our coaches like a player, I have full confidence that he will fit our system and excel.
We Michigan fans are often accused of being pompous, well that will soon extend to Basketball, as I think we are doing things the right way. I am also happy that whenever our coach steps down, he will leave the school as a premium destination for whoever follows him.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:05 PM ^
McGary, Robinson, and Burke all came very close to leaving after just one year. Burke and Morris both left after just two. Manny and THJ left early as well. Stauskas, GRIII, and McGary will almost certainly do the same if the NBA is interested.
The idea that we somehow aren't interested in the very best basketball players in the country or that our guys aren't willing to bolt for the NBA as soon as they think they've hit their peak draft position, is just silly and a way to act like we're somehow better than other programs even if we don't beat them.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:11 PM ^
the Andrew Wiggins and Jabari Parkers of the world, ie players that are coming in and will likely leave regardless of how they play their first year.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:14 PM ^
For every guy like that, there is a hyped recruit who isn't that great. Those guys are going pro because they are playing very well. Every guy we have who plays that well either leaves ASAP or seriously considers it and only comes back to move up the draft board.
We aren't special in that regard. The idea that we would take McGary and Robinson but wouldn't be interested in those guys is kind of silly.
January 20th, 2014 at 10:54 AM ^
I think Beilein wants talented kids. I don't think he minds going after the one and dones. I do think he does not want every top 100 player out there though. I remember reading an article about Bacari talking to the janitors at McGary's school to see what kind of character the kid had. I also know that he praised Burke and Hardaway a lot for being team players. Knowing they were top dogs last year, yet distributing the ball a lot, taking over games when they had to, but distributing when it was best for the team.
So I think he does place a lot on more than just talent. Seeing guys who are talented, and willing to put in the work, and be team players is the total formula. This means it makes sense that he might prefer a 70-80 ranked guy over a top 10, because of this formula.
I think this is why you see a lot of his guys improve so much so quickly. Yes, his coaching staff is tops in terms of teaching the game, but he also makes sure to pick kids that are willing to be coached.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:11 PM ^
If I'm a recruit, I look at a few things.
- Style of Play
- Facilities
- Coaching/NBA potential
- Winning
- Campus Life/Academics
- Exposure/Conference Prestige
As of lately, I think we offer the top of the line in all of these categories. We've always been able to boast 6 & 7. Michigan is always on National TV, even when we were bad. Big Ten is Grade A hoops. Ann Arbor is a cream of the crop college environment, with a diploma that means someting (if that's what you're into).
Our facilities are now top end. We have a coach who's proven he can develop no-names in to Pros, 3 stars into NBA picks and NCAA award winners, and 5 stars into projected lottery picks. We're percieved as a program who's expected to win now, which is funny because it's only been 3 years of sustained success. But it's a fact now. Welcome to stability. I think the bonus is style of play. There are a lot of teams that play pretty basketball, but Michigan is right up there with anyone. If I'm a scorer, shooter, or a point guard this is the place for me.
January 19th, 2014 at 3:45 PM ^
it looks like "benefits" is not on your list. very important to some high-ranked recruits.
January 19th, 2014 at 11:06 PM ^
If they can achieve #3, they'll pick up all the "benefits" they want. Just so they don't pick up something else as well.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:03 PM ^
January 19th, 2014 at 2:11 PM ^
We just went to the national title game. 2 of the 5 starters left early for the NBA draft. The other three are almost certainly going to be gone before their senior year (two came very close to leaving after just one season). And Darius Morris left after his sophomore season before them.
The idea that we are or can be really good without these kinds of players making up the bulk of the team is flat out dumb.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:43 PM ^
January 19th, 2014 at 3:16 PM ^
January 19th, 2014 at 2:16 PM ^
I wish there was a way to quantify this reliably because it would be an interesting thing to study. I suppose if we wanted to use something that broadly quantified success, we could take the overall win percentage year-to-year and see if there is some correlation to overall recruiting class rankings, although I would think it might vary quite a bit depending on the program and I could see how a there would be lag time between increasing / decreasing success and the rise and fall of rankings. That gap would be interesting to approximate however.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:27 PM ^
Better yet would be to come up with an "exposure rating" where doing something like making the Final Four or beating a #1 ranked team in the regular season would carry some weight as well. The 5 wins we had in the tourney last year were worth waaaay more than a random 5 game assortment during the season.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:31 PM ^
Seems to me that under Beilein Michigan does an amazing job developing kids between their freshmen and sophomore seasons. Morris, Burke, LeVert, Stauskas, and GR3 are all great examples. I'm not sure how many players look at a 2 year path to the NBA if they are top 25 recruits as they probably think they can get there in 1 but I don't know if any coach can claim to do more in 2 years that Beilein. I'm plenty happy with kids in the 25-75 range that have thrived as they are more likely to need 2 years and having experienced players is always helpful in college basketball.
January 19th, 2014 at 2:32 PM ^
really? ok, I think "success" would suffice, just sayin'.
Anyway, from the early 60's till the SUV flipped over, we were a perennial top 20/25 program, if not top 10. We had some lean years, not as bad as some make it out to be, we just got snubbed by the NCAA, particularly under Amaker, during 18-10 or 19-11 type seasons.
We are back and things have improved and will continue to improve, Beilein has us on the right track, look at this team this year, playing great ball despite the loss of key players from last year.
Beilein is doing a good job of recruiting guys that may leave within 2 years and guys that develop a bit longer, I believe that it's better to do that than going after top end guys only and having to turn over the squad every year.
While recruiting guys like Trey, GRIII and Mitch, you have guys like Morgan, Horford, Spike, Nik, etc., who will be there 3 or 4 yrs. plus. That helps a program stay strong for the long run, look at Izzo, his guys usually stay there a few years, he has had very few one and done guys and he seems to be doing just fine.
January 19th, 2014 at 4:14 PM ^
We had stretches in each decade from the 60s to the 90s when we were at least a top 25 team, but we also had stretches where we were bad in the 60s, 70s and 80s. We had a lot of losing seasons in the Big Ten before Ellerbe arrived.
January 19th, 2014 at 6:34 PM ^
January 19th, 2014 at 3:27 PM ^
January 19th, 2014 at 3:43 PM ^
only mcgary was given any chance at one and done. all of beilein's other recruits were mostly 3* guys when he started recruiting them. then they blew up their senior year and jumped up in the rankings. burke, hardaway, griii, morris are all examples of this.
that said, those were the types beilein was likely forced to go after, given the state of the program. i think it's obvious he's setting his sights on higher-rated recruits now; even potential one and dones.
January 19th, 2014 at 5:33 PM ^
it was GR3 and McGary who were given a chance at one and done. Both were projected to get drafted at lottery pick or 1st round.
January 19th, 2014 at 6:01 PM ^
January 19th, 2014 at 7:04 PM ^
rose up to #24 ranking in the country so it's very plausible that he would be one and done given his athleticism and pedigree (his dad).
January 19th, 2014 at 3:45 PM ^
IMO kids see first, "what are my own chances of shining and going to the league at _____?" I'd venture to say this window of judgement (via the presence of other players in the league from whatever school) would reach as far back as 9th grade for the most part. Second, "are we going to be winning at ___?" Seemingly the sameish time frame. Third, "will people see me on TV a lot?"
From there, they hear a bunch of old people say a lot of stuff about "back in my day", "blah blah blah", "books", and the like.For the Horfords of the world I'm sure more of these things are retained and matter. For the Manny Freshes, see the above.
January 19th, 2014 at 3:46 PM ^
undersung high school players, coaching them up, and not just making Michigan a Kentucky--even losing a few games now and then--I am totally cool with that. This guy is a Hall of Fame coach.
January 19th, 2014 at 7:59 PM ^
January 19th, 2014 at 5:42 PM ^
as both a guy who could win and recruit with lesser talent, not NBA-ready players that he was supposed to polish. He's just demonstrated that good coaches are even better with top shelf talent.
If you are old enough, and can recall the last golden age in Michigan bball, it occurred during the mid to late 80's with Johnny Orr and Bill Frieder as coaches, Roy Tarpley and Gary Grant, and then during the Glenn Rice period to the Fab Five era and the next class that came after before NCAA sanctions derailed the program through the Ellerbe and Amaker years. But even Ellerbe won the Big Ten tourney which no other Michigan coach and team have done.
I would rather have Belein because he is in the same category as the game's best and winningest coaches and he operates like a teacher with a simple aim of creating a team that improves as the season progresses.
I mean Izzo and Ryan run highly successful programs and their programs haven't been magnets for the kind of talent Michigan has gotten over time. It depends on the kind of player you are seeking and your intentions as a recruiter. Belein just wants coachable guys who want to be the best they can be and thrive under his system.
January 20th, 2014 at 11:24 AM ^
a while ago, they were interviewing some other coaches about Beilein. I remember them stating that he was an amazing coach, who had coached up a lot of players, but to really watch out once he has some real talent. I think we have already seen this, as he won the BIG with Novak, Morgan, and first year Trey, and then went to the Championship with second year Burke, Mcgary, GRIII, Stauskus, and Hardaway.
January 20th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
a while ago, they were interviewing some other coaches about Beilein. I remember them stating that he was an amazing coach, who had coached up a lot of players, but to really watch out once he has some real talent. I think we have already seen this, as he won the BIG with Novak, Morgan, and first year Trey, and then went to the Championship with second year Burke, Mcgary, GRIII, Stauskus, and Hardaway.
January 19th, 2014 at 6:39 PM ^
He puts such an emphasis on it and I think it shows in the unselfish attitude and the desire to succeed as a team. He gets guys who want to learn and improve whatever their abilities are coming in. He shows this himself with the praise he gives to his staff. I think this is what makes him so successful.