To be fair- in real life coaching is actually a large factor.  In HD, OR and I could switch teams, and the more talented team would still win 90%+ of the time, not the better coached.

Butler and VCU did not have talent.  I'd be shocked if any of these 'great' Butler players last 3 years in the NBA.  They were very well coached, fundamentally sound teams that made it work.  Bob Knight's Indiana teams in the late 80's/early 90's were not really the most talented (Steve Alford, anyone?), but they played the system to perfection.

Ok call it IQ or say that the Butler/VCU teams had maxed out seniors with the more talented players still could improve more in the NBA, but you don't think if you gave Coach K Butler's players he could make them competitive in the ACC?

Obviously they wouldn't run the table like Stevens did in the horizon, but stevens in the ACC would be what like 4 games over .500 maybe? I think many coaches could do the same. Bo Ryan at Wisconsin never has as 'talented' of players but they are always top 3 in the big 10.

asher, before you could be a successful low/mid team with B/B- prestige and sign guys that, while they may not be 5-stars, would at least be within shouting distance, and could be in the same ballpark after a few seasons of development. Now those types of players are incredibly few and far between, and the huge gap in recruit generation is really hurting DI.

And yes, Bo Ryan is a good example.

Girt- I wasn't weighing in on either side, since I haven't really experienced it.  I just don't think the real life to HD example is always applicable, since real life coaches have much more control over gameplans and styles than we do, and for some of them (see Bo Ryan), their system is what makes them successful, not the recruiter they are.  In HD, you have to be a recruiter first, practice coach second, and gameplanner distant 3rd.

Wisconsin has had plenty of talent.  A lot of those guys are top-100 recruits.  Harris, Krabby, Butch, Bohannon, etc.  Hell, Rob Wilson was a 4-star, I think.  But I think this all goes back to the argument that the real life talent pool is much deeper than HD's.  

yeah, but just think how sweet it will be if/when you are able to crack into that upper echelon and ride the gravy train!

Posted by isack24 on 7/3/2011 12:20:00 AM (view original):
Wisconsin has had plenty of talent.  A lot of those guys are top-100 recruits.  Harris, Krabby, Butch, Bohannon, etc.  Hell, Rob Wilson was a 4-star, I think.  But I think this all goes back to the argument that the real life talent pool is much deeper than HD's.  

Butch was a McDonald's kid, and Krabby was pretty well recruited. Harris was talented as hell but not considered a big-time recruit.

I'm not suggesting we're making the NT every season with a bunch of HS rejects, but the guys we sign are consistently lower ranked than probably the top half of the Big Ten, and sometimes worse. Our results are far, far beyond what the actual talent would imply, believe me on that.

(Here's rival's Big Ten rankings for the following season, where we barely edge out hoops powerhouses Nebraska and Iowa ... worth noting that the schools we beat out for our class basically consist of DePaul, Clev State, Bradley, AZ State, So/No Illinois ... that speaks volumes):

Ranking the classes (national rank) 1. Ohio State (10)
2. Illinois (11)
3. Michigan State (19)
4. Indiana (26)
5. Michigan
6. Minnesota
7. Wisconsin
8. Nebraska
9. Iowa
10. Purdue
11. Penn State
12. Northwestern

guys watch for sam decker, incoming hs sr from sheboygan lutheran - ranked 30th nationally right now, bo signed him when he was unranked, we joke that bo probably would not recruit him now that he is great nationally, but I have read bo thinks he is the best player bo has ever recruited ..... 6'7" white kid who can shoot 3's, dunk with both hands at the national AAU level, and can play PG if he needs to - although he is a wing - my son thinks decker is going to be really good, I am thinking more along the lines of crabby - but decker on the national scene leaves most AAU tourny's as the tourny MVP - wins dunk contests, etc, he puts on quite a show from what I understand - I have seen him play 2-3 doz times and have coached against him a few - almost got him to play a few games for me, till he blew up in the national rankings .... recent notable Bo misses - most these guys were the state's best or 2nd best player when in HS:

wes matthew jr (not that recent, but a madison kid whose dad was a badger legend)
Jamil wilson (oregon, now marquette, milwaukee kid)
Maynon (marquette, transferred)
xander blue (marquette, committed to badgers, then pulled out)
corey luscios (mich state, bo threw him out of his office when CL tood a cell call during the interview)
JP Tokoto (decker's aau teammate, UNC)
Koening (Lacrosse HS, UNC)

One more bo thought, Bo does not over recruit athletic guards - almost seems to have an aversion to more than 1 or 2 on the roster at any give time, but seems to bring in 1-3 extra big men, out of that mess of big men, usually a couple emerge, might be bo's secret - other than a great first name.

Posted by atrain9954 on 6/29/2011 6:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jeffdrayer on 6/29/2011 7:42:00 AM (view original):
Well, that's a fair argument, though the situation now is that a small group of the rich get richer, rather than just one or two. But the example I mentioned -- Illinois -- in the 45 seasons before my example, they made 14 NTs: 5 1st rounds, 3 2nds, 3 s16 and 3 e8. They are 84th all-time in winning %, with more losing than winning seasons. If Duke did that, and then in the year 2056 we said, well, they've made the first or second round 5 of the last 6 years, no one would be saying how they'd finally reascended back their original glory of a half-century ago.

Why not finally do away with baseline prestige for schools, but keep it for conferences? It would still maintain the order of the game -- there would never be a world where the Metro constantly dominated the ACC -- but would still allow for gonzagas, while also allowing for the fact than in some worlds, Florida state would, through years of hard work and success, simply be a more desirable destination than Duke? A BCS could never fall below C- still, but which BCS school became an A+ would finally be decided by results and by history, rather than the world's opinion in the RL equivalent of 1960.

+1, sounds like a great idea.

+1 I like this idea too. I went up to D1 once, but didn't like it much because of this reason. I am going to try again soon. I like the above idea a lot too.

I'd be shocked if any of these 'great' Butler players last 3 years in the NBA.

Howard will absolutely last longer than 3 years...he'll be a rotation player for years to come.

Posted by abitaamber on 7/3/2011 11:15:00 AM (view original):
I'd be shocked if any of these 'great' Butler players last 3 years in the NBA.

Howard will absolutely last longer than 3 years...he'll be a rotation player for years to come.

I had to look it up, howard was not drafted, I am surprised, I only read one site, but they questioned his size & athleticism, that he really isn't 6'8", which makes some sense based on the times I have seen him live .... but I would have to think gordon heyward will be in the NBA a long time, and although sheldon mack is a bit flaky, he probably will be in the NBA a long time too.

abit - do you like howard more than john Leuer, a badger center who the bucks picked in the second round?  I have seen both play several times live, leuer is bigger (I guess he measured pretty close to 7 feet & was the 3rd tallest player measured for this draft), probably a better pure scorer, but howard has all the tricks of a 10 yr vet - i just wonder if all the flopping, up and unders, double clutches and such will work in the NBA?  It sure did in the national tourny - LOL  Howard would make a great boston celtic wouldn't he?

I for one absolutely think Leuer will be better than Howard. I think Leuer has a higher ceiling—which can be overvalued at times—but  he also has the smarts and the natural shot to be a great sixth man in the NBA, if not a starter. If he adds a little meat, I think he could absolutely become a better rebounder and inside presence, especially with his height.

Howard obviously improved his range in his senior season, but physically, he isn't very gifted and save his jumpshot, he has not improved greatly over his college career while Leuer clearly has stepped up his game season after season. As an NC State fan, I witnessed this first hand as the Badgers ripped us apart. 

And to add to that, I think Mack has a really solid career ahead of him. He shows the flashes that you want out of a 2nd round pick. There aren't going to be guys there that are dominant day in and day out, but he's getting there. 

I'd rate Wisconsin's level of recruits probably as 4th or maybe 5th in the BigTen under Ryan's tenure.  Definitely behind Ohio State and Michigan State, and probably behind Illinois as well.  It looks like Indiana will move back up now that Crean added the coach with AAU ties (Adams) as an assistant.

fyi as for how recruit rankings relate to the chance of being drafted;  over 95% of top 10 overall get drafted by the NBA.  For players ranked 11-30 it's about a 50% chance.  For 31-50th it drops to 17%, and 51-100th are at about 15%.

Ryan turns out an extremely solid college squad but may not do much to improve the players draft status.  I believe he's brought in about 12 top 100's and only Tucker and Landry have seen the NBA court, and that was only a 100 minutes or so.   And Wisconsin doesn't pay Ryan to focus on developing NBA talent. 
Were they just low level recruits that Bo coached up?  Or players that bought into and fit in a system?

I think the lack of Ryan's players to advance to the NBA is part of the reason Bo can't land the top end recruits.   He did get Dekker, but lost Tokoto to Carolina.  Tokoto said the main reason was the style of play.    I also don't think the Badgers will have a shot with the top soph-turning-junior in the state in Bronson Koenig. 

Keaton Nankivil was fairly highly rated coming out of high school and has created an excellent perimeter game to rival that of Matt Howard's.  But as for his offensive lowpost game, have I mentioned his strong perimeter game?   (I knew Bo should have spread those practice minutes around differently).   What's he doing this summer?  Working to develop more of an inside game.

Posted by girt25 on 7/3/2011 7:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 7/3/2011 12:20:00 AM (view original):
Wisconsin has had plenty of talent.  A lot of those guys are top-100 recruits.  Harris, Krabby, Butch, Bohannon, etc.  Hell, Rob Wilson was a 4-star, I think.  But I think this all goes back to the argument that the real life talent pool is much deeper than HD's.  

Butch was a McDonald's kid, and Krabby was pretty well recruited. Harris was talented as hell but not considered a big-time recruit.

I'm not suggesting we're making the NT every season with a bunch of HS rejects, but the guys we sign are consistently lower ranked than probably the top half of the Big Ten, and sometimes worse. Our results are far, far beyond what the actual talent would imply, believe me on that.

(Here's rival's Big Ten rankings for the following season, where we barely edge out hoops powerhouses Nebraska and Iowa ... worth noting that the schools we beat out for our class basically consist of DePaul, Clev State, Bradley, AZ State, So/No Illinois ... that speaks volumes):

Ranking the classes (national rank) 1. Ohio State (10)
2. Illinois (11)
3. Michigan State (19)
4. Indiana (26)
5. Michigan
6. Minnesota
7. Wisconsin
8. Nebraska
9. Iowa
10. Purdue
11. Penn State
12. Northwestern

The following players are scout four-star recruits since 2002 (Butch, as you know, was a five-star):

Alando Tucker
Boo Wade
Ray Nixon
Greg Steimsma
Joe Krabbenhoft
Marcus Landry
Jason Bohannon
Trevon Hughes
Jon Leuer
Keaton Nankivil
Jared Berggren
Rob Wilson
Evan Anderson

That's about half of UW's recuits (scholarship guys who played four years) since 2002.  They get plenty of talent.  What they don't get is top-ten talent like MSU and OSU (and occasionally Illinois).  I certainly wouldn't argue that they get more "talent" than those teams, but they also haven't been more successful. 

I love UW, I've been a fan since I was born, but I just because the guys they have are slow and white doesn't mean they aren't talented.  Frankly, although I think Ryan is a great coach, I think his teams consistently lose in the tourney to teams who have equal (not more) talent.  I also think there was a nice perfect storm in the mid-2000s when UW was going strong and the rest of the BT was down.