Just looking at BIG recruiting

[hdhntr1]

And it seems to be at the highest level I can remember. Most recruits for this year are 4 stars and since that level starts at around 120, it means every team is getting top 120 recruits. Only a couple out of all the recruits I saw were rated below 4 star. Is this because BIG recruiting that well or is it because of some star inflation such as we saw occur between 2 and 3 star in FB? Seems less likely as they are also top 120 but...

Out of 17 total commitments to the BIG so far for 2018, 14 4 star, 1 5 star and only 2 three star athletes. 3 teams have no recruits yet. Yes we are doing great but are we doing as well as we think?

 

[Max_Power]

And it seems to be at the highest level I can remember. Most recruits for this year are 4 stars and since that level starts at around 120, it means every team is getting top 120 recruits. Only a couple out of all the recruits I saw were rated below 4 star. Is this because BIG recruiting that well or is it because of some star inflation such as we saw occur between 2 and 3 star in FB? Seems less likely as they are also top 120 but...

Out of 17 total commitments to the BIG so far for 2018, 14 4 star, 1 5 star and only 2 three star athletes. 3 teams have no recruits yet. Yes we are doing great but are we doing as well as we think?

Yes, the Cats are recruiting as well as we think. Trust the process.

 

[backdoorpass]

Out of 17 total commitments to the BIG so far for 2018, 14 4 star, 1 5 star and only 2 three star athletes. 3 teams have no recruits yet. Yes we are doing great but are we doing as well as we think?

First, yes, we are doing as well as we think. Having two verbal commitments from four-star recruits is great for any team.

And you are right that, on the whole, the B1G is getting commitments from big time prospects. Going by the 247 rankings and info:

Year.....5-stars .....4-stars.....3-stars.....<3-stars
2018......0...............15.............2................0
2017......1...............23............12...............2
2016......2...............18............25...............2
2015......3...............24............23...............1
2014......2...............14............34...............2

The balance of 4-star commitments vs. 3-star commitments in the ongoing recruiting class is striking. However, it also seems logical that teams are stilled focused on their top priorities (4-star players) and haven't yet had to settle for lower rated recruits. Still, with the majority of Top 120 recruits still uncommitted, it looks like there is a very good chance that the total number of 4+ star recruits committing to B1G schools will go up in this recruiting class.

 

[chicagocatfan24]

Rivals had an article on this and said the B1G as a whole has by far the best recruiting momentum in hoops for 2018 so far

 

[scru]

Overall coaching quality in the B1G has improved in recent years which could contribute to better overall recruiting. Going to be a lot of parity in the conference which should make for exciting games and even more TV coverage. I have to think the BTN has something to do with this. Lots of exposure on a national level.

 

[Deeringfish]

Overall coaching quality in the B1G has improved in recent years which could contribute to better overall recruiting. Going to be a lot of parity in the conference which should make for exciting games and even more TV coverage. I have to think the BTN has something to do with this. Lots of exposure on a national level.

I think there is a loud mantra of, "if you want to improve your game you have to play the best possible opposition". This seems louder every year so the momentum for the B1G is promising.

 

[hdhntr1]

First, yes, we are doing as well as we think. Having two verbal commitments from four-star recruits is great for any team.

And you are right that, on the whole, the B1G is getting commitments from big time prospects. Going by the 247 rankings and info:

Year.....5-stars .....4-stars.....3-stars.....<3-stars
2018......0...............15.............2................0
2017......1...............23............12...............2
2016......2...............18............25...............2
2015......3...............24............23...............1
2014......2...............14............34...............2

The balance of 4-star commitments vs. 3-star commitments in the ongoing recruiting class is striking. However, it also seems logical that teams are stilled focused on their top priorities (4-star players) and haven't yet had to settle for lower rated recruits. Still, with the majority of Top 120 recruits still uncommitted, it looks like there is a very good chance that the total number of 4+ star recruits committing to B1G schools will go up in this recruiting class.

MD has a 5 star that you do not have listed but you have 15 4 stars so maybe same guy

 

[backdoorpass]

MD has a 5 star that you do not have listed

According to 247 rankings (which is the list I referenced), Maryland 2 four-star recruits, no five-star recruits: http://247sports.com/Season/2018-Basketball/CompositeTeamRankings?Conference=Big-Ten

 

[hdhntr1]

According to 247 rankings (which is the list I referenced), Maryland 2 four-star recruits, no five-star recruits: http://247sports.com/Season/2018-Basketball/CompositeTeamRankings?Conference=Big-Ten

I was looking at the Rivals ratings so that might explain. Have the criteria for 4 star ratings changed over the years? Now it appears to be about top 120. Was it a lower number in the past? We have seen star inflation in FB. Just wanted to make sure the perception of better recruiting for the BIG is not just based on that.

 

[YesterdaysCat]

And it seems to be at the highest level I can remember. Most recruits for this year are 4 stars and since that level starts at around 120, it means every team is getting top 120 recruits. Only a couple out of all the recruits I saw were rated below 4 star. Is this because BIG recruiting that well or is it because of some star inflation such as we saw occur between 2 and 3 star in FB? Seems less likely as they are also top 120 but...

Out of 17 total commitments to the BIG so far for 2018, 14 4 star, 1 5 star and only 2 three star athletes. 3 teams have no recruits yet. Yes we are doing great but are we doing as well as we think?

Fortunately for us, there is a lot of player turnover at the other Big Ten schools. So while MSU or Michigan might pick up some highly rated guys, those kids could leave early for the NBA Draft or transfer. Our guys tend to stay for four years and that leads to a lot of great development time when you have an excellent staff, which we do. By keeping our guys happy enough to stay for the duration, we mitigate the fact that a state school might sign up a guy higher ranked than one of ours.

 

[hdhntr1]

Fortunately for us, there is a lot of player turnover at the other Big Ten schools. So while MSU or Michigan might pick up some highly rated guys, those kids could leave early for the NBA Draft or transfer. Our guys tend to stay for four years and that leads to a lot of great development time when you have an excellent staff, which we do. By keeping our guys happy enough to stay for the duration, we mitigate the fact that a state school might sign up a guy higher ranked than one of ours.

Just saying that potential increase in numbers means average BIG team will have 7-8 4-5 stars on the roster at any one time. Is it that BIG recruiting is going that well or that there is some star inflation? Last year we had about two able to play (a high for us) and the year after this we could have as many as 6-8.

 

[Walker Fan]

I think the number of 5-star recruits (top 20-25 in the nation for each respective year) in the Big 10 is not high at all. Maybe MSU has Bridges and Jaren Jackson, but I do not think that a lot of 5-stars are coming to or are in the Big 10. As for 7-8 4 stars on the team for each year, that might be a little high, but that would mean an average of two 4-stars per year which does not seem too high for the teams in contention for the tourney every year. 8-10 Big 10 teams fit that bill.

 

[hdhntr1]

I think the number of 5-star recruits (top 20-25 in the nation for each respective year) in the Big 10 is not high at all. Maybe MSU has Bridges and Jaren Jackson, but I do not think that a lot of 5-stars are coming to or are in the Big 10. As for 7-8 4 stars on the team for each year, that might be a little high, but that would mean an average of two 4-stars per year which does not seem too high for the teams in contention for the tourney every year. 8-10 Big 10 teams fit that bill.

It is higher than at any time I remember. Generally you would see no more than a couple on the roster of more than half of the BIG teams. with a couple programs having higher numbers. For example prior to Law's arrival, we had none (Cobb was rated at one time) Now in 2018, we will have 6-8 or more than half the roster. Prior to the entrance of the 2015 class MN had no 4 stars on roster. Since then they have added several. IA was similar. Just saying it looks like recruiting in BIG is overall improving quite a bit.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

It is higher than at any time I remember. Generally you would see no more than a couple on the roster of more than half of the BIG teams. with a couple programs having higher numbers. For example prior to Law's arrival, we had none (Cobb was rated at one time) Now in 2018, we will have 6-8 or more than half the roster. Prior to the entrance of the 2015 class MN had no 4 stars on roster. Since then they have added several. IA was similar. Just saying it looks like recruiting in BIG is overall improving quite a bit.

Yet many pundits indicated the B1G was down last year.

 

[NJCat]

Yet many pundits indicated the B1G was down last year.

It was down last year. Just look at how the Big 10 fared in the Tournament.

 

[YesterdaysCat]

Yet many pundits indicated the B1G was down last year.

Only because the big dogs like OSU and IU were down. That's all that matters to the media.

 

[NURoseBowl]

It was down last year. Just look at how the Big 10 fared in the Tournament.

I understand this line of thinking, Fitz, I really do. And I don't dismiss it out of hand, either. Now, I'm not debating the significance of the Tournament; that speaks for itself . . . but for me, if the question is the overall strength of the conference, a few games - however important these games may be - by a small handful of teams over a period of a week doesn't necessarily accurately reflect the strength of the conference, from top to bottom, over the course of the entire season. It may be a fine point, but I'd argue that what these teams do in March reflects the level of SUCCESS that the conference is perceived to have had, but NOT necessarily the overall strength of the conference as a whole through the entire season. JMO.

 

[hdhntr1]

I understand this line of thinking, Fitz, I really do. And I don't dismiss it out of hand, either. Now, I'm not debating the significance of the Tournament; that speaks for itself . . . but for me, if the question is the overall strength of the conference, a few games - however important these games may be - by a small handful of teams over a period of a week doesn't necessarily accurately reflect the strength of the conference, from top to bottom, over the course of the entire season. It may be a fine point, but I'd argue that what these teams do in March reflects the level of SUCCESS that the conference is perceived to have had, but NOT necessarily the overall strength of the conference as a whole through the entire season. JMO.

Also if you look at players that are most important, upper classmen, you have to go back to recruiting classes of 2014 when only 14 4 stars (two 5 stars, possibly gone) were added to rosters. Not sure what was recruited in 2013 or 2012 but if similar, it would seem that a lack of high level talent might be indicative of that weakness. The significant improvement in numbers of high level athletes since might indicate a rise to higher level performances going forward.