What is a pallet?
oh boyā¦
Purdue has a whopping 2 players in the NBA. Ivey and Trevion Williams (who letās be honest probably wonāt be in the nba long)
Iowa has 3 (Garza, Murray, and Weiskamp)
For reference Juwan has coached 5 current NBA players (Simpson, Livers, Wagner, Diabate, Houstan)
4 Likes
What Virginia guys have been successful? Brogdon?
Who is Izzoās best product - the one and done JJJ? After that itsā¦Gary Harris?
Rick Barnes has a bunch of prosā¦
Obviously calling what Calipari and Coach K ādevelopmentā strains the definition of the word, and I know the coaches that produced these numbers arenāt currently in place (notably K and Roy), but, schools with the most players on last years opening day rosters:
Kentucky - 27
Duke - 22
Kansas/Texas - 13
UNC/UCLA - 12
USC - 10
Gonzaga/Michigan/MSU/Villanova - 9
Iowa at 3 (Iowa Stste 6)
Purdue 0 (Indiana 7)
3 Likes
Development can mean a number of things. It would entail more than the number of nba players one coaches. I def wouldnāt put Cal on any development list tho. Juwan is mostly an NA in this respect. Not enough info for him to be on here
Katzās list is a popularity contest. The true list of the coaches who develop players the best would include a lot of coaches that arenāt household names. But who would read that list? It sure wouldnāt gather a lot of eyeballs on Twitter. Helping players to be NBA ready should count, but it is lower on the list for me. Helping players maximize their talent is harder to measure though.
4 Likes
Havenāt we already concluded that Andy Katzās hair gel has seeped into his brain and resulted in the most non sensical rankings lists of anyone ever?
Obviously thereās no real way to create a true list like this and any name you pick is flawed. But woof is this all over the place. I will pick on the Izzo selection. Izzo is a good coach, solid recruiter, and good at developing some system guys. But the list of players who truly experienced meaningful development is shorter than the guys who failed to develop - in part perhaps because of how he manipulates playing time.
In recent years Gabe Brown, Henry, Hauser, Hall, Langford, Watts, Bingham all plateaued early. Winston and Tillman were success stories and whatever voodoo he used to make Goins a good player should be studied in a lab.
6 Likes
Looking forward to opening night, is this the worst opening night schedule weāve had in recent years? Looking through those Monday night games, I donāt see a single high major vs high major matchup. The intriguing high majors vs mid major matchups from a name perspective are Memphis vs Vandy, Syracuse vs Lehigh and Oregon State vs Tulsa?
And even beyond Monday the entire weekās schedule is rough. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday are all super light from a quantity perspective, and there are still 0 high major vs high major matchups I can find. Friday the 11th has a few notable high major games (highlighted by MSU-Gonzaga), but Saturday is barren again. Sunday has 1 high major game, Monday night has a couple with the Gavitt Games, and then Tuesday the 15th we really get in the swing of things with the Gavitt Games and the Champions Classic.
Obviously 2020 was different and not comparable, but last year we opened with the Champions Classic on Tuesday, went quiet for a few days before getting Nova @ UCLA, Texas @ Gonzaga, and some other solid games.
In 2019 we had the Champions Classic on opening night, plus the debut of the ACC Network so multiple ACC conference games, plus games like Saint Maryās vs Wisconsin.
2018 had the Champions Classic on opening night plus Florida @ FSU, and then BYU @ Nevada and OSU @ Cinci the next day.
I get why the Champions Classic is being moved off of opening night like it was previously, and I get why teams donāt like putting big games to open the season. But as a fan of the sport it sucks that even when the season starts, thereās really only one night of basketball in the first 8 nights that will really get some national attention. The rest of the time will just be going full Sickos mode or hoping for upsets.
1 Like
This is a pretty common college hoops complaint, Iād say. Especially now with the CC moved back a week.
I think you just have to consider the first week of the season more of an extended preseason. Teams donāt really want to play their first game against a great team.
Feast Week is what we all want, we just have to wait a couple of weeks (and really this starts early with Gavitt, smaller tourneys, etc.)
6 Likes
November saturdays are usually lighter due to college football right?
2 Likes
weāre at peak offszn. I donāt have crazy takes but at first blush Nova is too high
2 Likes
Louisville seems like the big one out of place to me. They had a great stretch in the early/mid 80s (2 titles and 4 Final Fours in the span of 6 years), and then obviously Pitinoās tenure. But outside of that not much program history to speak for. The fans have incredibly high expectations while being the second best school in their state, and playing in a conference thatās generally incredibly tough. But it was only like a decade ago that theyāre werenāt even in a major conference, and if conference realignment continues the way we expect they could be a major loser. Obviously there are positives but top 10 seems wild to me.
3 Likes
Louisville is pretty consensus top job on these rankings I feel like. Huge fanbase, lots of investment. Seem to be ahead in NIL stuff
1 Like
Michigan feels ā¦ overrated on here? Basically a product of recent success and good coaching hires more than environmental things that I would say rank the ājobā but maybe they are considering recent success.
1 Like
Yeah, my question with Villanova and MSU (Gonzaga too) is: Are those jobs that are going to be top programs regardless of who is coaching there? Or is their program success largely a byproduct of having elite coaching?
3 Likes
I would say weāre ranked pretty accurately given the programās history. I do think we are a top 15 program historically, by top 15 i mean probably closer to 15 than 13.
I mean Michigan is one of the biggest national ābrandsā in the country and has been historically (and recently) successful. They also have an athletic department with money and really nice facilities. However, I understand saying they are overrated if your biggest factors in what makes a good program involve having a fanatical fanbase and great home environment though. Michigan barely cracks the top 15 in the 14 team Big Ten based on that category.
5 Likes
Maybe thatās fair as far as money, resources and facilities, but it is one of the only schools on the list where hoops is secondary institutionally.
I just donāt think success is guaranteed (as recent history shows) as much as the more recent success has been a product of really good coaches.
Most of the other schools on the list have some pretty serious institutional advantages (how many others are competing against another school on this list for most of their top local recruits?).
2 Likes
My thoughts as well. Maybe even add Duke to that list because who knows what a post-K Duke looks like. Curious to see what happens with both Duke and Villanova here in the next few years since they both went with āprogramā guys to replace their legendary coaches.
Feel like Washington is the ultimate, how the heck do they keep recruiting at such a high level program
3 Likes
The Mike Hopkins quote is funny
8 Likes