I do agree that we need more continuity. I suspect we will look back in a couple years and realize that the next group was already here. Sasha, Aaron, Tre, and Eric might be that next bunch. What has been missing are the players to bridge those gaps. The pattern might surges that Nojel and Newman are those important bridge players who provide the continuity.
Recruiting improvements?
- Thread starter Boilermaker
- Start date
In all fairness, we knew the 2007 and 2014 groups were special right off the bat. I think Gemini is referring to another group like that, not another batch of developmental prospects.
And to be even fairer, Newman is ranked between 125-150. While I'm not saying he won't be productive, but I doubt he's a game changer. Unfortunately, he fits the historic Painter recruiting model perfectly.
Let’s call it between 75 and 120....
“Newman is a 4-star recruit according to ESPN, a 4-star and No. 75 overall according to Rivals, and a 4-star and 118th overall according to 247.”
I think the more concerning factor is that our highest recruit is only #75.
That's what we've fallen to? Saying that we landed a recruit that was top 1% out of all high school basketball players?
It's a number and a valid point. Just like calling out a player rated only as a top 75 recruit.
It's certainly a number. It's not a valid point though. He's rated 124 by 247 composite which means that's his average recruiting ranking. I think he will be good dont get me wrong, it's just going to take a bit. He MIGHT be able to replace most of Cline's production next year.
So, you can tell the future? Rivals has him a top 75. I go by rivals not 247. So, I can play that game. You always have an argument with someone disagreeing with you on this board. Go over to your IU board, where you belong bud. You can see it's a valid point.
Lol classic. I go by 247 composite at all times. No, I can't see the future dipsh*t. One can make an educated guess based on watching a player play though. How many times have you seen Newman play? Have you ever seen more than just highlights?
You are probably one of those fans that hypes up every new player as "The next big thing". The fact is that Newman is a solid recruit, but not a program changer. We are likely losing 4 rotation players next season while bringing in Newman and a low 3* guard in IT. That's a major problem for a team that doesnt project to make the tournament.
You started the insults by calling me an IU fan. If you can't take it, dont dish it.
I'm sure you have your suspicions, but I can confirm that everything is playing out this way because the Athletic Department knows it absolutely drives you to conniptions.
That must be a mistake. He is 75 in Rivals and 118 in 247. What other ranking are they factoring in to come out at 124? If it’s ESPN, then they must have him at like 180 for the average to be 124.
And 180 would be ridiculous, which would throw the whole methodology into question.
I was thinking the same thing. One of the rankings has to be way off to end up at 124. Most of us know that people tend to use whatever stats support their narrative.
Yeah not really a fan of the 247 composite. It uses data points from other services that I find lacking. It’s a good idea in theory, but if you are including suspect data points it loses its value fast.
The two services I trust the most are Rivals and 247 (not the composite). And with that said, I think I’ve decided that Rivals is the best over the years at least with respect to Purdue players. As a recent example, I think Rivals nailed our 2014 class much better than 247:
Rivals: Haas=77, Edwards=124, Mathias=144
247Sports: Haas=144, Edwards=157, Mathias=210
Other examples:
2015: Swanigan, Rivals=19, 247Sports=32
Cline, Rivals=142, 247Sports=169
2016: C. Edwards, Rivals=91, 247Sports=139
I think in each case not only did Rivals get it more right based on actual college production (ok the Cline rating is debateable), but 247 showed a clear trend of under rating Purdue’s recruits. Based on that history I usually pay more attention to Rivals ratings.
The two services I trust the most are Rivals and 247 (not the composite). And with that said, I think I’ve decided that Rivals is the best over the years at least with respect to Purdue players. As a recent example, I think Rivals nailed our 2014 class much better than 247:
Rivals: Haas=77, Edwards=124, Mathias=144
247Sports: Haas=144, Edwards=157, Mathias=210
Other examples:
2015: Swanigan, Rivals=19, 247Sports=32
Cline, Rivals=142, 247Sports=169
2016: C. Edwards, Rivals=91, 247Sports=139
I think in each case not only did Rivals get it more right based on actual college production (ok the Cline rating is debateable), but 247 showed a clear trend of under rating Purdue’s recruits. Based on that history I usually pay more attention to Rivals ratings.
Last edited:
247 says the composite is based on a proprietary algo. so maybe weights their newman rank at 122 more
the latest rsci raw average from sept. ,
newman was not in the top 100 list
the latest rsci raw average from sept. ,
newman was not in the top 100 list
But the question isn’t where he rates among all high school boys b-ball players, it’s where he ranks among those with D1 or P5 talent.
My point about Newman’s ranking was more of a pint on Painters recruiting. His inability to land guys ranked in the top 50 or better means we’re probably a team destined to have a Sweet 16 ceiling.
Unfortunately, I don’t see a final four run in the next few years and Painters recruiting is foreshadowing that.
Unfortunately, I don’t see a final four run in the next few years and Painters recruiting is foreshadowing that.
Wow. That’s interesting. I do really like Newman. In fact, I was questioning what was taking us so long to offer, when he had a crap ton of other P5 offers already.
That's my problem with rankings it's an eye test. One opinion to the next could be totally different. I don't want to get into an argument about who and where I have coached. It's a kid to kid desire. I can tell you when biggie was a freshman he had zero drive and it clicked going into his sophomore year. His butt would be on the ground more than upright. Desire goes beyond a ranking and either you have it or you don't. This is why I don't necessarily like going off the eye test. Strictly my opinion.
Just out of curiosity, have you seen him play at all? Good news...he is physically big enough to play right away. Bad news...he has an incredibly long way to go before he will make any sort of impact in college. I have seen him twice now this year, and, could not have been less impressed after the second showing today against Zionsville.
I have said this for years if it is an Indiana kid that is homegrown and they are rated in the range of Newman you might as well add 20 positions to there ranking. These analysts (or so called analysts) have no clue how much the coaching homegrown indiana kids matter once they get into d1 ball
"an incredibly long way to go before he will make any sort of impact in college"...……..that's just a silly statement. Prior to the last two games he was averaging 36 pts. So he had a few less than stellar games. Give up the agenda.
No agenda at all...he scores a ton of garbage points and many just because he is physically stronger than most of his competition. He was the biggest and most gifted player on the floor today, yet, he was a total bust.
Totally different player than Cline certainly...I just could not believe how bad of a shooter he is as I thought that was supposed to be a strong point of his game. He is a big kid physically...definitely athletic...may actually have a bigger impact defensively initially because of his size and athleticism.
Still a silly statement. I'm sure some IU fans would even disagree with you. He played well at the Peach Jam...…..against elite talent.
I believe he did but there are many people on this board and not sure if it was ypu also who say that Davis did not play well in that tournament. If i would guess i would say that you probably did say that along with Davis being overrated cause he played bad in one tournament but now you use it for your advantage.
Grant Weatherford earned a (ridiculous) scholarship offer based on a performance in a tournament...Cline's scholarship was for a strong showing in a tournament...when you play on great teams with great players, it is not as difficult to stand out...it is one thing to be "the man" on such teams, another to be the guy(s) that benefit from not being such.
Newman is as I said, a bit of a physical specimen and a gifted kid, but, he was a bust today against what hardly qualifies as a tremendously talented Zionsville team. Granted, he does not have a ton of help, but, at the same time, his team gave him opportunity after opportunity...the truly elite players dominate regardless, especially in HS against far lesser-talented players and competition, and, he did not do that by any means.
I said it above...he may have more of an impact defensively initially due to his size and athleticism.
I am not saying that the kid is no good or won't be, but, I have seen him more than once now, and, he is not like a lot of guys whose name his has been mentioned with on here. Maybe Terone Johnson would be a fair comparison at this point.
Well, I 've asked a few times on what specifics generate star power and the weighting of those. So far nobody has answered and yet they are constantly referenced. How do we logically critique that which we do not know?
Because star power has been rated by an eye test and fluctuates from multiple people. Do you ever notice on 247 how the picks fluctuate? That's a perfect example. They know about is much as us on this board. I still say recruit to your system and CMP was pretty good at that. If you coach you would know that players that many think have the star power and it doesn't necessarily reflect either the system or the coach. CMP just needs to recruit to his system or he most likely will fail because the masses are telling him to change. If this is the case he might want to find another profession.
Purdue lands big time shooter in Newman
ByBrian Snow Sep 19, 8:21 PM
The Purdue Boilermakers worked hard, and on Wednesday night, they landed the commitment of four-star shooting guard Brandon Newman. Newman, who is one of the best shooters in the country picked the Boilermakers over Xavier in the end.
At 6-foot-5, Newman had a tremendous spring and summer running with Meanstreets in the Nike EYBL. Newman shot 39 percent from three point range and averaged an impressive 17.3 points per game.
In the end Newman focused on Indiana, Purdue, Ohio State and Xavier, but after thinking things over and visits being moved around, it was Purdue that came out on top.
Purdue brought in Newman for an official visit at the beginning of September, and worked hard the entire time to get his commitment. Now the Boilermakers have added a third in-state product to what is shaping up to be a very solid recruiting class.
ByBrian Snow Sep 19, 8:21 PM
The Purdue Boilermakers worked hard, and on Wednesday night, they landed the commitment of four-star shooting guard Brandon Newman. Newman, who is one of the best shooters in the country picked the Boilermakers over Xavier in the end.
At 6-foot-5, Newman had a tremendous spring and summer running with Meanstreets in the Nike EYBL. Newman shot 39 percent from three point range and averaged an impressive 17.3 points per game.
In the end Newman focused on Indiana, Purdue, Ohio State and Xavier, but after thinking things over and visits being moved around, it was Purdue that came out on top.
Purdue brought in Newman for an official visit at the beginning of September, and worked hard the entire time to get his commitment. Now the Boilermakers have added a third in-state product to what is shaping up to be a very solid recruiting class.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Judge allowing Jury to pick between 3 "crimes"- Latest: BuilderBob6
-
-
Purdue offers 2025 four-star guard Braylon Mullins
- Latest: Heads up BOILER