A Petition (& rant) to Seble: Fix Recruiting NOW!! Topic

coach_billyg
Posts: 2072 (0)
Hall of Famer
92
Pro
i have long wanted elite recruits, but i always thought they had to come hand in hand with a change to allow national recruiting. maybe top 5 players at a position have fixed cost home and campus visits or something, if the whole system was not reworked (which i would be in favor of, i think national recruiting needs to play a bigger part). also, i definitely agree that the gap is too big - i like the elite player concept, but there need to be more players who are good/very good, where as right now there is a small amount of elite player, a roughly equal amount of very good players, and then a roughly equal amount of good players... and a thousand bad to horrible players. i think there needs to be a small bump in very good players and a big bump in good players - the curve is just too steep for too long.
8/18/2010 12:59 PM
moy23
Posts: 13754 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 57 251 112
Prospect
I think instead of making the curve more linear (increasing the mid-level/good talent) it should be a steeper drop at the top (decresing the elite talent). for instance, Instead of 50 recruits over 700, maybe it should be 35 or so. I still think if anything there are too many "elite" players.
8/18/2010 3:13 PM (edited)
acn24
Posts: 1020 (0)
Hall of Famer
260 357 172
Rookie
Posted by coach_billyg on 8/18/2010 12:59:00 PM (view original):
i have long wanted elite recruits, but i always thought they had to come hand in hand with a change to allow national recruiting. maybe top 5 players at a position have fixed cost home and campus visits or something, if the whole system was not reworked (which i would be in favor of, i think national recruiting needs to play a bigger part). also, i definitely agree that the gap is too big - i like the elite player concept, but there need to be more players who are good/very good, where as right now there is a small amount of elite player, a roughly equal amount of very good players, and then a roughly equal amount of good players... and a thousand bad to horrible players. i think there needs to be a small bump in very good players and a big bump in good players - the curve is just too steep for too long.

Speaking of national recruiting - aporter had a plan where recruiting costs were based on player ranking/stars rather than distance.  I don't know if he ever wrote it up as a ticket or if it went beyond "Thanks for the suggestion, we compile them monthly, blah, blah, blah."  Interesting concept, and it had the added benefit to addressing some of the issues related to recruit location.

8/18/2010 3:15 PM
daalter
Posts: 326 (0)
Hall of Famer
40
Prospect
Posted by moy23 on 8/18/2010 3:13:00 PM (view original):
I think instead of making the curve more linear (increasing the mid-level/good talent) it should be a steeper drop at the top (decresing the elite talent). for instance, Instead of 50 recruits over 700, maybe it should be 35 or so. I still think if anything there are too many "elite" players.
Disagree. (You're shocked, I know.)

If there are 50 recruits over 700, that's about eight total for each of the power conferences. That's not a lot.
8/18/2010 3:23 PM
moy23
Posts: 13754 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 57 251 112
Prospect
Posted by daalter on 8/18/2010 3:23:00 PM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 8/18/2010 3:13:00 PM (view original):
I think instead of making the curve more linear (increasing the mid-level/good talent) it should be a steeper drop at the top (decresing the elite talent). for instance, Instead of 50 recruits over 700, maybe it should be 35 or so. I still think if anything there are too many "elite" players.
Disagree. (You're shocked, I know.)

If there are 50 recruits over 700, that's about eight total for each of the power conferences. That's not a lot.
Then my alternative suggestion would be to flatten out the curve near the middle end of the recruits. Ie raising more 580s to the 600 mark rather than 640s to the 660 mark. Id still like to see a nice gap between the 700s and the rest of the more average recruits. a curve with the avg recruits being an extended flat portion of the curve before it drops again. Hope that makes sense without drawing it out. My fear is bumping up too many recruits too close to the above avg and high end will negate the purpose for the change in the first place. Jmo
8/18/2010 5:19 PM
acn24
Posts: 1020 (0)
Hall of Famer
260 357 172
Rookie

For those thinking that early entries might even things out a little, initial evidence is not so much.

One freshman declared early in Tark (#1 PF, #4 Overall recruit, NFOY, started for the national champ) - beyond that the usual collection of Juniors (with the surprising exception of the NPOY).

8/19/2010 8:35 AM
daalter
Posts: 326 (0)
Hall of Famer
40
Prospect
Did a lot of freshmen stay that had better ratings than the juniors who declared?

I still think it should be mostly based on ratings, so if the junior is clearly better than a frosh, that's who should leave. And I still think it should be harder to lose a frosh than a junior.
8/19/2010 10:06 AM
acn24
Posts: 1020 (0)
Hall of Famer
260 357 172
Rookie
I hope this isn't coming off as a whining theme from me because it isn't - I admit I had 3 EEs, Couto was a bit of a surprise, but Echols and Swift were expected once I got to the Elite 8 and beyond. 

I think it is still based too heavily on postseason success - SG Paul Cudney left after LSU went to the Final Four, but National Player of the Year Charles Edwards returned after a 1st round loss.  Is Cudney better than Gary Porter, whose team lost in the Sweet 16?  David Swift left after the National Championship, but Joseph Williams stays after a 2nd round loss.

For FR v. JR, I could make a point that either John Factor or Dustin Riffe are better than early entry Jacob Gayman. 

Ultimately though, if EEs are going to attempt to allow IQs to make up for the talent gap between the very best recruits and the somewhat similar mass of players below, the very best need to be leaving after FR/SO seasons - not JR seasons.  I don't think the difference between A/A+ IQ and B+/A- IQ IS NOT enough to overcome a 15% or higher difference in ability.
8/19/2010 10:38 AM
a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 667 3
Pro
ACN: The EE isn't accurate left because the old players hae not yet cycled out, so the feild the potential EE's are competing against isn't the same as it will be.  By the time that first batch of freshmen are seniors, the ratings around them will be lower making them stand out more and, thus, be more likely to go EE.
8/19/2010 10:50 AM
acn24
Posts: 1020 (0)
Hall of Famer
260 357 172
Rookie
Posted by a_in_the_b on 8/19/2010 10:50:00 AM (view original):
ACN: The EE isn't accurate left because the old players hae not yet cycled out, so the feild the potential EE's are competing against isn't the same as it will be.  By the time that first batch of freshmen are seniors, the ratings around them will be lower making them stand out more and, thus, be more likely to go EE.
I'm well aware of that.  It will take a couple of more seasons in Tark before we start getting a complete picture.  However - we can start tracking some data points now to see how this trends. 

Also, I showed 2 examples of FR who are currently better than an early entry PG.  And if the EE logic continues to have team postseason success play a major role, with ratings, stats, player personality as supporting roles, rather than ratings playing the major part and postseason success, stats and player personality as supporting  factors, it probably won't do a great job of evening things out either.
8/19/2010 11:03 AM
dilo
Posts: 80 (0)
Hall of Famer
20 3 2 18 161 106 179
Prospect
About recruit potential .... I have a senior SF with a work ethic of 98, that capped out last season (as a junior) his potential in virtually every category ... his skill numbers (i.e. low post, perimeter, ball handling, passing) are all in the 40s and 50s ... I get what they are going for on this, but I do find it unrealistic to think a junior/senior would not get even marginally better at some of these things over the course of two full seasons ... 
8/19/2010 11:04 AM
oldresorter
Posts: 646 (0)
Hall of Famer
1110 1
Prospect
Posted by a_in_the_b on 8/19/2010 10:50:00 AM (view original):
ACN: The EE isn't accurate left because the old players hae not yet cycled out, so the feild the potential EE's are competing against isn't the same as it will be.  By the time that first batch of freshmen are seniors, the ratings around them will be lower making them stand out more and, thus, be more likely to go EE.
this is 100% true, right now the old school juniors & seniors are competing in tark with I am pretty sure are the impotent frosh and  sophs to be EE's, I also am almost sure that tark is going to hit the finish line for the experiment first, next season we will have 3 classes of impotent recruiting under our belts, and the next season it will be all 4.

One observation about my own team and elites, it appears that the increased red will hold back alot of the elites from going early, here is a player of mine who was for sure an elite, top 5 at his position, might have been #2 and rated about a 750 when he showed up, after his soph season he is still only a 792, and although he started this past season due to low stamina he only played 15 minutes a game - he scored very well in those 15 minutes

http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=1592658

by the way, he is a 6'5" 194 lb, 99 ath, 50 something speed guy who can't play more than 15-18 minutes per game, big picture, is this realistic from what you guys know about basketball?  Almost all my teams now have a player like that, all I can say, I try to avoid it in recruiting, but not to the extent I will recruit a 580 guy instead?

I probably at some point will try playing him at very tired or something like that, but in the past, that has really not worked out very well, plus, from what I can tell on teams I play against, very tired still is not working out too well.




8/19/2010 11:04 AM
oldresorter
Posts: 646 (0)
Hall of Famer
1110 1
Prospect
The math does not work out in EE's favor, with only 60 or so drafted, some seniors will go, this time in tark it was 45 seniors and 15 underclassmen if I counted right.

There are probably 40-60 elites in each recruiting class, that makes round numbers 200 elite recruits entering the college ball every 4 seasons.  One way EE's get pulled out is if each season the elites automatically go, all 50 of them as frosh, along with 10 misc players.  Another way would be if 30 frosh and 30 sophs went each season, with no misc players.

Again, I thought the goal was 'real life', in real life some non top 10 by position college players get drafted, and so do some jrs and seniors.  That will be the case here too, so I am pretty sure that EE's will not clear out the elite players.

An old debating trick on this forum, used both by me and against me, is the real life card gets played very selectively - unfortunately, often by those in charge.  Think about it
8/19/2010 11:38 AM (edited)
namshub
Posts: 280 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 3 308 2 37
Rookie
the bottom line in this thread seems to be that some strongly think that you can no longer build a successful team at a mid-level school with the current recruit distribution.  am i right in consolidating this whole thread into that theory?  if so, i have an interesting proposition for one of the proponents of this theory.  let me know.
8/19/2010 12:16 PM
dilo
Posts: 80 (0)
Hall of Famer
20 3 2 18 161 106 179
Prospect
that is my understanding
8/19/2010 12:45 PM
◂ Prev 1...19|20|21|22|23...28 Next ▸
A Petition (& rant) to Seble: Fix Recruiting NOW!! Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.