There was a gentleman by the name of Hummel that was here for 5 years.
Aaron Wheeler showing all of his skills (May 2018)
- Thread starter LionBulldog83
- Start date
There was a gentleman by the name of Hummel that was here for 5 years.
If that's the best you can do I think you just made my point. He was hurt part of his junior season and all his senior year. He was a medical red shirt. Has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
And I know Brian Cardinal who graduated 18 years ago was redshirted and played 5 years.
No one with Painter. John Hart red-shirted, stayed for four yrs. Did the grad transfer and did not stay for the fifth yr.
When Painter redshirted Wheeler, I don' think he expected Eden Ewing to be kicked off the team and Jacquil Taylor to suffer yet another injury setback
Had he known both of those were going to happen, highly doubt Aaron Wheeler would have been shirted.
But had Ewing and Jacquil both been healthy and played all season, this year spent adding muscle and bulk on Wheelers skinny frame would've been a no brainer considering he would not have been lifting as heavily in season were he playing.
Had he known both of those were going to happen, highly doubt Aaron Wheeler would have been shirted.
But had Ewing and Jacquil both been healthy and played all season, this year spent adding muscle and bulk on Wheelers skinny frame would've been a no brainer considering he would not have been lifting as heavily in season were he playing.
I think you answered your own question.
There's a reason you called them "garbage minutes".
I think your question is best directed toward Jay Wright, who holds 2 of the last 3 National Championships. He reportedly had 6 (!) RS players on his 2018 NC team . . . RS before they made their first NC run . . . few are expected to stay for their full eligibility.
Why would he do that? Not sure, but from an outsider's perspective I think it's had a significant (positive) effect on his culture and their performance overall. No?
Couldn’t have Painter pulled his redshirt after the situation with Ewing and Taylor?
Whoa there, hoss!
Wright was able to recruit 2 5-star players over '14, '15, '16 and '17. That's only one more 5-star than we've had in that same time period. Otherwise, Wright's recruiting classes look strangely similar to Painter's!
Yes, they have another incoming 5-star, but that hardly affected their decision to RS SIX PLAYERS on their recent National Championship roster!
Clearly, the guy building a dynasty before our very eyes sees some value to doing it, other than just grabbing a 5th year of eligibility for players who won't be around. And it's paying dividends, big time!
He could have, but I'm not sure it makes a ton of sense big picture when Vince is playing 32 mins a game and Nojel is basically a college 4 man who happened to play point guard in high school.
Would suck to completely abandon a redshirt plan to see a kid MAYBE play 8 mins a game? Or maybe he wouldn't have played at all.
He can make that offer, but my expectation is, that decision isn't solely Painter's. If I'm a player and already in a RS year, I'm thinking twice before pulling it.
Jay Wright doesn't even fill all his scholarships every season. 7 man rotation with 2 randoms who play sporadically when theres foul trouble or an injury is his strategy.
And he did it this year by playing multiple guys 25+ mins per game who were ranked as 3 stars outside the top 120(Donte Divencenzo and Eric Paschall).
Recruiting rankings do not matter even slightly, they are fools gold and bring out the suckers who don't understand basketball.
Development is what is king in college basketball.
I know we are all excited about his 3 point shot but I hope he has a solid mid range jumper he is working on as well.
One thing we will miss is Vincent and Dakota's abilities from inside the arc.
One thing we will miss is Vincent and Dakota's abilities from inside the arc.
None of these reasons to shirt have to do with any expectations of a future fifth year. They tend to center on the first year issues and have almost no connection to what might happen in these kids' last year of school. Hence my position that the "fifth year" is not a factor in the decision to red shirt.
Ok, I know Villanova is great, Jay Wright is great, they have won 2 straight Championships. But all this talk of his RS strategy and how it built his championship team is overblown. Have any of you actually looked into the cause of those redshirts?
- Spellman (#18 class of 2016) was redshirted because he was academically ineligible in the 16-17 season.
- Paschall (#210 class of 2014) - Transferred from Fordam, so had to sit out a year.
- DiVincenzo (#120 class of 2015) - Suffered a broken foot eight games into the 2016 season
- Bridges (#82 class of 2014) - Didn't get any playing time his freshman year so they decided to redshirt him.
- Booth (#92 class of 2014) - Season ending knee injury.
So, Bridges was the only one of those RS players that was red-shirted because of a lack of minutes. The rest were purely by freak injuries, transfers and academic issues. It's not like Jay Wright came up with this awesome formula for taking great players and red-shirting them so that he could have a super team in a couple years. This doesn't mean other teams should try to pattern this behavior by having a bunch of RS players.
Fair enough, but the issue isn't only the "why" for the RS year, the issue is the results achieved.
The results achieved are due to bringing in good 4 years players, with a sprinkling of a couple studs, and then a fantastic coach and player developer helping them reach their potential. All those kids who had freak injuries and had to redshirt didn't get all these great benefits of extra practice and training, they had to use that time to recover from season ending injuries.
It sure seems that every National Champion over the last couple of decades has recruited pretty well...
The Painter vs Wright recruiting discussion has already been brought up this off season, and I provided the average recruit rankings for each coach. Wright had an average player ranking of 98 and Painter had an average ranking of 148. I even took out the outliers from Painter's classes like John Hart.
So Nova's average recruit ranks 50 spots higher than Purdue's. That's a very significant gap.
Again, for anyone who still cares about recruiting rankings. They'e fools gold that exposes suckers. Development is the key. Here is the data to back it up.
http://dribblehandoff.com/stories/recruit-and-develop-the-wright-way
"
The actual rank within the top 100 rankings doesn’t matter too much anyway – the graphic below shows they’re a fairly inaccurate measure. Recruiting analysts are successful at identifying the top 20 players amongst the group, but struggle to differentiate the rest. "
http://dribblehandoff.com/stories/recruit-and-develop-the-wright-way
"
The actual rank within the top 100 rankings doesn’t matter too much anyway – the graphic below shows they’re a fairly inaccurate measure. Recruiting analysts are successful at identifying the top 20 players amongst the group, but struggle to differentiate the rest. "
Except the evidence is to the contrary.
Since 1988 Maryland is the only team to win a NCAA title without a McDonald's All American on their roster.
http://www.maxpreps.com/news/XKQ2C028vkmbBFX1iQKP_w/how-many-mcdonald’s-all-americans-does-it-take-to-win-the-ncaa-tournament.htm
You are choosing to use this article to defend your "rankings don't matter" argument?
The article clearly states and provides evidence that top 20 ranked players are the best players to have in college basketball. It goes further to state that 21-40 ranked players are the next best tier in college basketball (shocker).
I think you are trying to base your argument on the fact that they provided evidence that 41-100 ranked players all perform similarly. That fact is true, but even that isn't the Purdue model. On this year's team we have ONE player that was ranked in the 41-100 range. We have no players that were ranked 1-40. Please provide a study showing that living in the 100-150 range is the way to go in college basketball. Until then, you have provided no evidence to suggest we are on the right path on the recruiting trail.
Here - the recruiting ranks of the rotation of Novas championship team
The main theme is that, beyond backup guars Gillespie, they'e all multi year guys at Nova who developed.
That is what the articles data shows - development is key.
Paschall scored 27 vs Kansas and was perfect from the field in the first final four game. 3 star unranked guy.
Donte Divencenzo scored 31 in the championship and won Final Four Most Outstanding Player - 3 star 120th in his class.
These rankings didn' mean anything. It was all about their development
The main theme is that, beyond backup guars Gillespie, they'e all multi year guys at Nova who developed.
That is what the articles data shows - development is key.
Paschall scored 27 vs Kansas and was perfect from the field in the first final four game. 3 star unranked guy.
Donte Divencenzo scored 31 in the championship and won Final Four Most Outstanding Player - 3 star 120th in his class.
These rankings didn' mean anything. It was all about their development
Not disagreeing about need for development but amount of development needed for a Spellman or Brunson is significantly lower than a Paschall.
I am by no means saying the rankings are infallible but for the top 50/ 75 range, they are pretty good at figuring those guys out and what their potential is.
Why? Think about the number of camps, auditions, games etc they play throughout the summer against other elite talent and how often someone is watching them improve their game.
According to the article:
Players 1-20 are almost never around to hit their junior years.
Players 41-100 as juniors perform just as well as the frosh ranked 1-20, who almost all go pro after one year.
To relate this to Purdue and it's recruiting/development - there was no class of 2016 guard recruit ranked 1-20 who outperformed Carsen Edwards last season.
There were even a couple still playing:
Rawle Alkins
Josh Langford (lol)
Mustapha Herron
Well, Brunson was in the same class as 120th Donte Divencenzo and they're both leaving early to the draft, Divencenzo the F4 MOP and Brunson the NPoTY.
Your first fact is true, but it doesn't support your argument.
According to the article, average career BPM is 7.01 for players ranked in the top 20. The next closest are players ranked 21-40 with a career BPM of 5.8 (not even close to the top 20 group). However, you are arguing for 41-100. The average career BPM in that group is 5.04. You are an advanced metrics guy. Listen to what the data is telling you. Top 20 players are astronomically better than 41-100 players.
Even then, you still have yet to provide data for 101-150 ranked players (Purdue level talent).
Yes, we lucked out with Carsen. He is the exception not the rule.
In general, higher ranked players perform better.
I've not searched out data on talent 101-150 because there appears to be no real distinction between a guy ranked 60th and a guy ranked 120th at all. It's like, at what point would I even draw the line and stop?
Most Purdue players are between 101-150. So getting data for 101-150 and comparing it to three tiers of the top 100 would actually be beneficial. As it stands, you have provided data that applies to exactly one of our current players (Nojel). You have also not backed up your argument claiming rankings don't matter. The data you provided shows there is a clear advantage to getting higher ranked players.
If you are going to come on here and call those of us that believe recruiting rankings matter suckers, then you better be able to back it up. So far.. you haven't been close.
I hate when people want to turn this into a data mining contest instead of just discussing the matter, because then you have to go look up stats to fit your narrative to win a random internet argument.
For example, here you go BoilerIron
2017-18 Box +/-
Dakota Mathias 10.5
Matt HAARMS 10.5
Carsen Edwards 9.0
PJ Thompson 9.0
Vince Edwards 8.9
Isaac Haas 6.7
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/purdue/2018.html
All of those players performed above average than the typical 5 star 1-20's career Box +/- except for Haas who was right there at a typical 5 star 1-20.
So Painter could have pulled a Calipari and rented a bunch of OAD 1-20 5 stars, or developed all those guys over the course of multiple years. For reference, Purdue was a superior team to Kentucky this season, and by a solid amount.
You made this about data. I'm not an advanced metric guy. I know you are though.
Yes, Purdue was better than UK this season. However, UK is generally better than we are. As I said, in general a team that has better talent will be the better team. Sure, you can cherry pick data like you just did with Purdue and UK, but I can also point to Duke, Kansas, and Nova that all had higher ranked players than we did and performed better because of it.
From time to time Purdue's strategy will "allow the stars to align", but it isnt a strategy that can have consistent championship contenders. You will see this next year when we take a major step back.
So @Purdue85 and @northside100 I had to pull and check the numbers just out of curiosity on players sticking around. Granted these aren't Purdue specific just in general talking about guys sticking around for their 5th year.
2018 there were 703 transfers according to Verbal Commits.
Of that 703 - 15% or 160 were listed as RS Jr or Seniors.
Granted that doesn't tell the full story but if you look at all RS guys transferring it is only 195 which seems odd.
Maybe the guys who refuse to redshirt transfer as Freshman or Sophomore and sit out a year? That number is 338 so almost half.
I don't know what any of this means but it is interesting to crunch some of the numbers and see how many kids transfer each year.
That number is around 15%. This is based on 347 DI colleges times 13 scholarships divided by 706 transfers this year.
2018 there were 703 transfers according to Verbal Commits.
Of that 703 - 15% or 160 were listed as RS Jr or Seniors.
Granted that doesn't tell the full story but if you look at all RS guys transferring it is only 195 which seems odd.
Maybe the guys who refuse to redshirt transfer as Freshman or Sophomore and sit out a year? That number is 338 so almost half.
I don't know what any of this means but it is interesting to crunch some of the numbers and see how many kids transfer each year.
That number is around 15%. This is based on 347 DI colleges times 13 scholarships divided by 706 transfers this year.
Well, Painter tried the whole grab as many top ranked guys as you can thing and that didn't work for Purdue with Kendall, Bryson, Terone, Basil, etc.
When he recruited to his system and quit paying attention to meaningless rankings with guys like the 2014 class is when Purdue became a top 5 team
Purdue lost their top 20 5 star and took a major step forward this year.
Any time a team is top 5, they'e likely to take a step back.
I'm not sure having a top 5 team, when healthy obviously since Haas went down, going into the tournament is even worthy of criticism. Grabbing a 5 star top 20 guy like Herron, Alkins, or Langford to replace Carsen Edwards isn't going to change that.
Continuing to recruit to your system and develop the way Jay Wright does is Painters path to success.
I don't understand why you're so hung up on getting a very specifically ranked recruit by a third party, especially after this team just rolled for the majority of the year.
You act like Painter doesn't continue to try and recruit top talent with your first statement about the duds that were Kendall, Bryson, and Basil (Terone was good). He just doesn't have the ability to land top talent.
Carsen will be on the team next year when we take a step back, so that doesn't make sense about having those other guys replace him??
Painter doesn't recruit at Jay Wright's level, so again a bad point.
The team that "rolled" most of the year flopped when it mattered. As I said, the 2014 class developed into the "stars aligned team". However, we will struggle for the next few years while the next round of players is being developed. Getting top talent helps bridge that gap and keep the team competitive every year.
Why am I so hung up on getting top talent? Because you need top talent to compete year in and year out.
The point I was responding to was that Wright's RS strategy was due to all those 5-stars he recruited.
That was demonstrably wrong.
Purdue made yet another sweet 16 when their most efficient offensive player went down in round 1. Saying they "flopped when it mattered" is just outright disingenuous.
And Purdue had top talent. I just showed you their Box +/- for the roster this season. They had as much talent as nearly anyone this year, what they didn't have was health during the most important time of year.
Purdue and Painter have recruited on a nearly similar level to Villanova.
As has been pointed out, Wright has only redshirted one player that wasn't injured, or a transfer (bridges).
Your last statement is completely wrong.
Wright's average recruit: 98
Painter's average recruit: 148
Wright: 3 final 4s and 2 championships.
Painter:
Wright gets better talent and does more with it. Saying Wright and Painter are similar is borderline laughable.
It was reported that Taylor was hurt on an article on October 6 and Ewing was never in the rotation even before he was kicked off the team.
Well, a few things here:
1.
Class of 2016
Nova 45th
Purdue outside top 50
Class of 2015
https://247sports.com/Season/2015-Basketball/CompositeTeamRankings
Nova 29th
Purdue 37th
Class of 2014
https://247sports.com/Season/2014-Basketball/CompositeTeamRankings
Nova 48th
Purdue 33rd
2. If the best class Villanova has had is outside the top 25, and they'e literally.won 2 of the past 3 national titles, how can you sit here and still assert recruiting rankings matter when Nova gets out recruited year in and year out?
Going to take major mental gymnastics for you to justify that.
45th, 29th, 48th
2 of the last 3 national titles. Yet, you are still claming recruiting rankings matter.
