He broke the streak, but I think they’re still “under” the hump based on the seasons since
Would You Be Mad if Collins Left?
- Thread starter 7th Cir. Cat
- Start date
Catreporter, you know better than to consider realistic market factors in this discussion.
The ongoing bitching about his B10 mid-range salary continually answers my question about whether the NU community would want to overpay someone else. Of course, it's always ignored that Collins was paid bargain basement for the first four years.
That seems plausible. I agree that getting guys in that 50-150 range, getting them to stick around and gel together, and having an experienced squad of talented guys where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts is a long run formula that could prove successful at NU.
Do you think that many more football players are able to qualify academically at NU than basketball players? I guess if you don't have any data to back up your contention, we'll have to agree to disagree.
Looks like I struck a nerve asking a sincere question. I think 320 is probably closer to the mark in terms of what our issue has been than basketball players being too influenced by AAU coaches and uninterested in academics as compared to their football brethren.
Struck a nerve? Lol. I asked the sincere question after you dismissed another posters opinion.
Whatever the recruiting rankings say, this kind of Northwestern basketball looks no different to me compared to Northwestern basketball for most of the last 20 years, which is to say, not competitive. I'll always appreciate Collins. And I don't have any idea what went wrong with him at NU. No, I wouldn't be sad, except that I never thought it would end that way in failure. I thought he had all the makings.
Collins had no head coaching experience and accepted a head coaching job in the best conference in the nation. What were the chances this was going to go well over the long haul?
As for the numerical recruiting rankings, that's easy to explain. Twenty or thirty years ago, you basically had Bob Gibbons' rankings. Occasionally someone might reference The Sporting News rankings, but that was about it. You had Van Coleman, but he was basically a Midwest guy, and you had Clark Francis, who was a laughingstock. Now, you have, what three different major numerical rankings companies? And within each, you have perhaps a dozen "scouts" ranking players? And, on top of that, the people who rank players for each of those services varies from year-to-year. Now they "average" them, so what if you have a player who is rated no. 70 in one service, and no. 110 by another, and then no. 120 in the third? Voila, you have yourselves a "top 100" recruit! Yes, "one of the highest rated in program history!" Similarly, if one service rates your recruit a top 100 player, while the other two don't even have him in the top 150, you can still claim him as a "top 100 recruit."
I really wish people would use their brains before reacting to these rankings.
I’d be disappointed because I think: (1) he has some serious talent to build with, should be able to recruit more as well, and I want to see what he can do with it in the next couple of seasons; and, (2) if he can figure out how to get his team to close out games they should/could win, this alone will get him up to “pretty darn good” in my eyes.
As for (1) above, if players start bailing out on him I will change my mind. As for (2) above, he should have overcome THAT shortcoming by now, so that’s problematic.
Hey, here’s a wild thought. If Coach K wants to become the unanimous all-time best college coach (Move over John Wooden), he should come to NU and get us into the Sweet Sixteen year after year. Then Coach Collins could take the Duke job!
Your definitely right about NU BB looing bad for 20 plus years. Still you missed one major obstacle, ADMISSIONS. NU will continue to finish near the bottom of the conference because they can only recruit 10% of players, who are recruited by the other Big Ten programs. Answer? Loosen up admissions? Leave the Big Ten? Cheat?
I didn't dismiss his opinion. I asked for data to back up his speculative assertions and expressed skepticism of their validity. That really set you off though, huh?
Looks like I struck a nerve by saying I struck a nerve.
No, I would not be angry. A little more than a year ago, as last year started to head south, I remember saying that it would not surprise me if Collins left in the not too distant future to become an assistant in the NBA as his college options were becoming limited and he might feel the need to rebuild his reputation with success there. I think the odds have increased that he will do so at the end of the year based on this year’s results.
I said at that time I would not be upset if he left: I was grateful he had been able to build a tournament team, but that he had done that largely by using his Duke and Collins family pedigrees in the early going, which gave NU some recruits they normally would not get (BMac in particular), but thought he did not bring an approach to NU basketball that was sustainable in the long run. It seems to me that his strength is coaching defense, and that he wants to build a team in the Duke mode. To be successful, he needs players like Gaines who can also shoot, and after his first class, he has had little success in doing so, with Boo Buie maybe being the only one since then. He has been able to build a team that is competent defensively, but they haven’t had the offense skill set to compete in the B1G.
I really feel that with the recruiting limitations the Cats face coupled with the lack of history, a team based on a philosophy of strong interior defense coupled with a few guys who can shoot, that is, following the design of Wisconsin under Bennett rather than Duke under Coach K is the way to go forward and build success at NU. Basically, I think it is easier to recruit some big guys who can bulk up over four years than quick guys as it is tougher to develop quickness. In a way, Miller Kopp is a prime example of a player NU can recruit who could thrive in a Bennett type system but not as much presently, as his defensive limitations have in part forced Collins away from his extended man defense to a zone that decent teams have punctured with relative impunity. As the final factor, I think CCC is at best an average game day coach. With the limitations at NU for top end recruiting, this skill could tip the balance to competitiveness, but unfortunately doesn’t.
I may be wrong, and maybe CCC will stay one more year and next year’s team will be competitive, but I would not bet on it. If he does stay and the Cats are good enough to make the NIT next year, I would be very happy, and hope it starts an upward arc. On the other hand, if he leaves, rather than be angry, I think with the gym renovation and tournament team that happened under Collins’s watch the Cats could find the right up and coming coach to build a consistently competitive team, which would also make me happy.
I said at that time I would not be upset if he left: I was grateful he had been able to build a tournament team, but that he had done that largely by using his Duke and Collins family pedigrees in the early going, which gave NU some recruits they normally would not get (BMac in particular), but thought he did not bring an approach to NU basketball that was sustainable in the long run. It seems to me that his strength is coaching defense, and that he wants to build a team in the Duke mode. To be successful, he needs players like Gaines who can also shoot, and after his first class, he has had little success in doing so, with Boo Buie maybe being the only one since then. He has been able to build a team that is competent defensively, but they haven’t had the offense skill set to compete in the B1G.
I really feel that with the recruiting limitations the Cats face coupled with the lack of history, a team based on a philosophy of strong interior defense coupled with a few guys who can shoot, that is, following the design of Wisconsin under Bennett rather than Duke under Coach K is the way to go forward and build success at NU. Basically, I think it is easier to recruit some big guys who can bulk up over four years than quick guys as it is tougher to develop quickness. In a way, Miller Kopp is a prime example of a player NU can recruit who could thrive in a Bennett type system but not as much presently, as his defensive limitations have in part forced Collins away from his extended man defense to a zone that decent teams have punctured with relative impunity. As the final factor, I think CCC is at best an average game day coach. With the limitations at NU for top end recruiting, this skill could tip the balance to competitiveness, but unfortunately doesn’t.
I may be wrong, and maybe CCC will stay one more year and next year’s team will be competitive, but I would not bet on it. If he does stay and the Cats are good enough to make the NIT next year, I would be very happy, and hope it starts an upward arc. On the other hand, if he leaves, rather than be angry, I think with the gym renovation and tournament team that happened under Collins’s watch the Cats could find the right up and coming coach to build a consistently competitive team, which would also make me happy.
Yeah, you struck a nerve but saying you struck a nerve. You very well know there is no possible way he could support a comment that a higher percentage of football players would gain admissions to NU than basketball players. No different than you could refute his point with data. If not public.I didn't dismiss his opinion. I asked for data to back up his speculative assertions and expressed skepticism of their validity. That really set you off though, huh?
Looks like I struck a nerve by saying I struck a nerve.
comparing football to basketball is fools play. A recruiting miss hurts basketball, 2-3 kill a team. In football you typically get at least the same percentage of misses and I would argue more. NU has a horrendous 2016 class, that is what CCC and team is paying for now. There was only one recruit in 2017. Gaines isn’t a star but he is a decent player and this team misses his toughness. So the last 3 classes, I don’t think CCC has had a miss. You might argue, Greer, but under the circumstances, I have no issue with him. He doesn’t have an all big ten player either.
Basketball is a star game. Until NU gets a few NBA players, they will not consistently win. Look at the Fighting Undies. They are in first place because they have 2 NBA players. One of those players we recruited and allegedly couldn’t get admitted. CCC has recruited well in 5 of his 7 classes. The problem was the miss years were disasters and NU never has the star power to cover up for errors on the youth. Last night in crunch time NU melted down with 4 of the 5 guys on the court in their first year of college basketball. The other was in his second.
So, next year I see NU improving to the 6-7 win range in the B1G. Totally on balance and they will lose games when the star player of the other team wills them to a win. The vultures will predictably come out and cite CCC should be doing better with the best recruits in NU history and completely overlook what the obvious that NU’s best player isn’t as good as their B1G’s best player in 80% of their games.
So tell me your theory again?
You nailed it PPD. Until NU can recruit on equal footing, or close to it with the other 13 programs, they will continue to struggle and finish toward the bottom of the league. I imagine you are referring to Ayo,
Theory on what? On why basketball can't compete the way that football has? I don't have a theory for that because I don't believe it is true. That sounds like excuses to me and I don't see CCC as an excuse-maker.
However, I think you seem to be in agreement to some degree with 320's post that I think sounds reasonable. We had a string of unsuccessful recruiting classes that we are paying for now.
Sounds like you disagree with 320 (and me) that the path to future success will be found in consistently recruiting in the 50-150 range with guys who stick around and build a program where the sum is greater than the individual parts. Sounds like you want a couple of NBA guys every year. Have to agree to disagree there. I don't think that is likely or sustainable here in the foreseeable future.
Sorry that I struck such a nerve. It really vexes you when people ask questions, huh?
No it vexes me, when they people ask for data and then support a theory with no data to support. Pot meet kettle. HUH? Why don’t you at least have the balls to say it is on CCC instead of implying it?
Think BC would have taken the 'Cats to the Tourney eventually (say, w/ better luck on the injury front).
Never saw it as an either-or thing.
And CC has yet to do so w/ entirely his own recruits.
The program under BC would have been more consistent (going forward), but would have had a lower ceiling (the recruiting pool is further limited by the PO).
Under CC, thought that there would be more ups and downs, but that there was potential for the program to do greater things.
But stated at the time that CC simply recruiting better wouldn't be enough, but that he had to significantly recruit better (as there would be no advantage in scheme to help mitigate the disparity in talent).
The history and facilities were a good bit worse when BC took over.
Don't think CC ever had to mumble some excuse as for why a recruit couldn't see the every-day BB facilities (after that modest renovation, they went from embarrassing to barely passable).
Yes, CC ultimately broke the streak, but we're also talking about 5 losing seasons out of 7.
Now, the good thing is that there is some young talent on the roster w/ a couple of more on the way.
The bad thing is that the program is in the situation that it is in due to too many misses in recruiting (poor management of the make-up of the team), not helped by CC being stubborn in his ways (not dissimilar to Fitz).
The fear is that Berry, Nicholson and Audige won't be enough (odds are that all 3 won't pan out) and that future recruits won't see beyond the W-L record.
A lot depends on how the 2021 recruiting class pans out.
Last edited:
Actually, if he left with 4 minutes to go and the Cats leading they'd probably have a better record, so I'd be in favor of that.......
I'm not sure how pot meets kettle because I'm not vexed, Purp. I'm curious and excited about NU athletics. Let's recap.
Reporter's theory didn't seem very plausible to me so I asked if he had any data to support it (because then maybe it would sound more plausible to me.) There is loads of aggregate academic data on NCAA student-athletes, so I thought maybe he had seen some that compared academics between football and basketball. Absent that, I was left with my original feeling that it didn't sound very plausible. Am I required to accept every theory thrown out here at face value? I guess the Earth must be flat, the impossible baby runs wild, and Coach Hank looks to wrassler for advice.
320's theory seemed more plausible to me and the limited data of NU success in basketball matches fairly well with what he suggested (hitting on recruits ranked in the 50-150 range who stick together for multiple years and create something greater than the sum of the parts.)
This all seems to go back to you getting really upset whenever anybody asks questions around here that make you uncomfortable. That sucks for you.
And I have no problem saying it...the success we've had under CCC is on him and the struggles we've had under CCC are on him. I'm 100% certain that he would agree with that because it's a loser mentality to put responsibility anywhere else. And CCC is most certainly not a loser. He's a super successful dude who is fighting hard for the players and this program. In fact, while this year is difficult, I think he's building the program the right way and that will bear fruit over the next few seasons. I'm sure that I'll have some questions about things he does over the next five years. I hope it doesn't vex you too much.
Look Boot, I would rather debate the merits of opinions in a decent manner than engage in a pissing match on the board. The question you specifically wondered was why the football program has been able to “crack the nut” for the most part and Basketball had not? After you asked for data to support an opinion of a poster that you thought was off base, I merely asked you the same question you asked the board? Surely, you have an opinion, you watch both teams year after year? I still have no idea why you thought this “struck a nerve”? Then you continued to double down.I'm not sure how pot meets kettle because I'm not vexed, Purp. I'm curious and excited about NU athletics. Let's recap.
Reporter's theory didn't seem very plausible to me so I asked if he had any data to support it (because then maybe it would sound more plausible to me.) There is loads of aggregate academic data on NCAA student-athletes, so I thought maybe he had seen some that compared academics between football and basketball. Absent that, I was left with my original feeling that it didn't sound very plausible. Am I required to accept every theory thrown out here at face value? I guess the Earth must be flat, the impossible baby runs wild, and Coach Hank looks to wrassler for advice.
320's theory seemed more plausible to me and the limited data of NU success in basketball matches fairly well with what he suggested (hitting on recruits ranked in the 50-150 range who stick together for multiple years and create something greater than the sum of the parts.)
This all seems to go back to you getting really upset whenever anybody asks questions around here that make you uncomfortable. That sucks for you.
And I have no problem saying it...the success we've had under CCC is on him and the struggles we've had under CCC are on him. I'm 100% certain that he would agree with that because it's a loser mentality to put responsibility anywhere else. And CCC is most certainly not a loser. He's a super successful dude who is fighting hard for the players and this program. In fact, while this year is difficult, I think he's building the program the right way and that will bear fruit over the next few seasons. I'm sure that I'll have some questions about things he does over the next five years. I hope it doesn't vex you too much.
So, back to your question. I absolutely think you need star players to be a championship team. NBA level. That’s my opinion, feel free to disagree. If I felt the need, I think I can provide data on championships and NBA players. NU has neither. MSU, Maryland, Michigan and even Purdue have both. I personally would love to get a whole team of players between 50-150 ranked. This IMO would get us potentially to the top third of the conference when everything goes well. It also would be bar far the most talent ever for NU. Way higher than right now. NU has never had a player ranked as high as 50 and 1-2 depending on rating service ranked under 100. This won’t get us to winning the championship. The top of the B1G all have top 50 recruits. NU can make the tourney with this 50-150 approach and I believe they can in a couple of years. That’s light years ahead of what we are watching, but NU just doesn’t get star power that is needed to be a big ten champion or make a final four. At this stage, I would gladly take being Iowa.
What's up with the 50-150 number? We just chose it and it's doable? How do we get to attract a kid ranked #51 in the country?
Let's go over some numbers, in the CC era, cause that has been, for now, our golden age of recruiting (using 247 data):
-Joe Bamisile was our highest rated commit, he was #69 and he bailed
-Lathon was #133 and was dismissed
-2014 class took us to the tournament: Law was #89, BMac was #214, Lindsey was #281. Vassar was #242 and Skelly was #362
-2015, Falzon was #114, Ash was #215 and Pardon was #300
-2016, Rap was #145 , Benson was #151 and Brown was #236
-2017, Gaines was #189
-2018, Nance was #88 , Greer was #342 , Young was #348 and Kopp was #115
-2019, Beran was #110, Buie was #327 and Jones was #225
-2020, Berry is #136 and Nicholson is #218
So we have 21 recruits, not counting Bamisile and Lathon.
2/21 were top 100, or 9.5%
7/21 were top 150, or 33.3%
The average is #212
The average since 2018, still #212
Consider this:
-There are 74 other P6 schools, who all have better history than we do and, other than Stanford, have loser admission standards
-There are, for the sake of argument, 8 other schools that have a recent history of attracting power talent: Cincy, Houston, Memphis, Nevada, Gonzaga, BYU, Saint Mary's, UConn. Debatable, but roll with it
So that 82 schools. Let's be nice and say 12 are a mess right now, like Vanderbilt, so 70 are in a better position on the recruiting trail than we are.
Let's say each recruits 3 players in a class. That's 210 players. I did not set this up, but this is really close to our average ranking of 212.
Rankings don't explain all. We know that. But hitting consistently on the 50-150 area is nearly impossible with our current program.
Well done Gato.
in addition, those top 50 players have to go somewhere and the B1G probably gets 4-5 a year and they aren’t coming to NU.
Last edited:
recruiting and other teams as an example - and the competition that play against each day in practice - most of the players are similarly ranked as NU on the rosters with the exception of below:
here is the highest rank and anyone ranked higher than 88 (nance's ranking)
MSU - highest rank marble 223
malik hall - 61
rocket watts - 39
josh langford - 19
cassius winston - 31
joey hauser - 52
ILL -
giorgi 373
kofi - 46
ayo - 32
feliz - 11
UM -
faulds - 322
johns - 70
simpson - 67
OSU -
diallo - 361
carton - 34
gaffney - 50
liddell - 44
muhammad - 79
wesson - 75
young - 80
PU -
stefanovic - 374
haarms - 352
eastern - 69
IU -
durham - 230
davis - 40
hunter - 59
jackson davis - 30
smith - 78
nebraska -
cross - 473
green - 17
cheatham - 75
mack - 27
minnesota -
several 400s
oturo - 50
wisconsin -
several 400s
Reuvers - 66
PSU -
several - 300s/400s
jones - 85
maryland -
hart - 467
ayala - 78
cowan - 62
mitchel - 69
morsell - 74
smith - 16
wiggins - 42
rutgers -
multiple 300/400s
carter - 12
iowa -
multiple 300s
wieskamp - 60
NU -
young - 348
audige - unranked
nance - 88
the main thing that separates NU from the other programs is most of the "middle of the pack" guys are generally "athletes" vs "skill kids" - iowa and wisconsin are the exceptions there
Thanks for the share!
Was pretty stunned at the Nebraska numbers. I knew Cheatem was probably ranked decently as he started at Marquette, before heading to Florida Guld Coast.
Turns out, both Mack and Green's rankings are as Juco players. Mack is an impressive player, imo
I'm super confused by your theory and what you're arguing for. You keep saying that NU needs those NBA studs, but then you say that NU isn't getting those NBA studs. So, you don't buy into your own theory? Regardless, I think you're right that NU probably doesn't get a ton of those guys. Maybe 1 once in a while, but IMHO thinking that we are going to build Duke style classes in the near future is silly.
I'll also humbly note that suggesting NU try to build around getting a couple of (the right fit) #50-150 players per class has precious little to do with getting those top 50 players you're talking about here. We have recruited 5 such players in the last five classes and have another coming in next year. It sure seems like CCC is onboard. And if we can increase that rate to maybe 6-7 guys over a four year period and get those guys to stick around and grow together, I think 320 is right that we'll see significant improvements. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
Yeah, pretty much. I don't think anyone is arguing that we turn down a kid because he's ranked #151 or #49 by somebody. I think the general idea is that we try to get a consistent level of talent, keep it around for a while, develop it so that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, and grow a program of consistency. There will always be ups and downs, but that seems to be the approach that has worked more consistently in football (continually try to upgrade the physical talent level while emphasizing building a "program" where the pieces fit together.) That seems like the approach that paid great dividends at Wisconsin for many years as well.
I'm super confused by your theory and what you're arguing for. You keep saying that NU needs those NBA studs, but then you say that NU isn't getting those NBA studs. So, you don't buy into your own theory? Regardless, I think you're right that NU probably doesn't get a ton of those guys. Maybe 1 once in a while, but IMHO thinking that we are going to build Duke style classes in the near future is silly.
I'll also humbly note that suggesting NU try to build around getting a couple of (the right fit) #50-150 players per class has precious little to do with getting those top 50 players you're talking about here. We have recruited 5 such players in the last five classes and have another coming in next year. It sure seems like CCC is onboard. And if we can increase that rate to maybe 6-7 guys over a four year period and get those guys to stick around and grow together, I think 320 is right that we'll see significant improvements. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
I could be confused, but I don’t we are disagreeing much. My point is IMO NU will not secure a B1G championship without an NBA level player(s). I would be thrilled with 7-8 guys knocking on a 100 or so ranking. Final 4 teams and B1G ten elite teams have pro players.
Since NU is dead ass last in the B1G it seems absurd to be talking about winning the B1G, but that has been the goal. I am all in on 320’s wish for players in the 50-150 range. Would be ecstatic, but that still would not make NU the most talented team in the conference. I think getting to this point would make NU a contender to get in the tourney. Maybe that is the best we can expect. After all, it has only happened once. However, I suspect CCC would still be taken behind the woodshed for not winning or contending for the conference title with the best talent in NU history. My point is it tough to win in this conference without that Elite player and look around the B1G and NU’s best player is worse than the opponent’s best player in nearly every game.
Yeah, as it all settles in, maybe we all aren't in disagreement that much. IMHO, we need to make postseason basketball more consistently before we can talk about B1G championships. And I think that absent recruiting those top 50 players (which we agree won't be an easy task at NU in the near future), trying to recruit "NBA" players is a nearly impossible task. Players make their way to the NBA at non-traditional powers because they develop in college and their teams are successful enough for them to get some spotlight. Frank Kaminsky was something like #250 in his class, but stayed through his senior year and led Wisconsin to the Final Four (he had Sam Dekker there as well and he was a top 25 recruit, but otherwise nobody on the team was somebody NU couldn't recruit). A couple of Wisconsin guys on that team got NBA sniffs, but it was mostly because of development and cohesion that the team was successful. We'll have elite players if we can get guys with good physical attributes who DEVELOP at NU.
I understood hitting consistently as in the majority or close to all our players should be in the range. But if it's one a year. That's doable. And CC has been doing a great job at getting them. Including 2 in the same year with Kopp and Nance.
Agree. I think the hope would be more like 1.5-2.0 per year, but I think the general idea is to try to inch up that 212 average you were talking about. If half our roster is in that range and we are more successful with the guys in the 150-300 range than we've been lately, we'll be more talented and will be more successful if we develop cohesion in that greater talent.
2 average would be great. But I would be tickled pink with 1.5. Like you said, it would give us 1/2 the roster in that range, with 3 upper classmen among them.
We can't speak it into existence though. One example, Butler, just because I go to most of their games. Their incoming class is being touted around here as the best ever for the program. And that's a program who had the golden years of the Brad Stevens era. Their 2020 class:
-138
-145
-147
-175
-305
Average: 182
I guess the point of bringing it up is that the 50-100 range is really really hard to get.
I get that, but Butler is an odd situation and that 305 really drags the average down. IMHO, most people still see Butler as that Horizon Conf school that got to the final four. It's only a relatively recent entry in the Big East and the national profile of the school doesn't really compare to most P5 schools. I'm an Indiana guy, so I'm not saying that it's a bad school by any stretch of the imagination and Hinkle is an amazing atmosphere. Just saying that it's not really a national recruiter the way most P5 schools are. That said, Butler does really well what we should want to be doing...recruit the right guys in that range to gel together and develop into something more than a bunch of guys who average at #182.
wisconsin - who is a type of school we are compared to,had a big run in the B1G and then made it to the championship game. numbers look pretty close with the except of 1 guy
their 247 numbers:
kaminsky - 247
hayes - 137
showalter - 247
jordan hill - 80 (as a transfer? https://247sports.com/Player/Jordan-Hill-22761/?pi=35987)
traevon jackson - 223
dukan - 199
gasser - 190
koenig - 110 (rivals 73)
vitto brown - 227
dekker - 12
also they are having a strong year and their make-up is:
4 - seniors (1 grad/5th)
5 - juniors (1 rs Jr.)
1 - soph
4 - frosh (2 rs FR)
of their avg minutes/game: 1 frosh, 1 soph, 8 other players with 3+ years of expperience
Smits - 10 min - 5th
Battle - 11 min - FR
baddley - 12 min - Sr.
christian - 14 min - JR
Golden - 20 min - SO
Tucker - 22 min - JR
Nze - 29 min - rs JR
baldwin - 31 min - SR
thompson - 32 min - JR
mcdermott - 32 min - rs SR
just reinforces how programs in our position struggle when young and the POTENTIAL to be a lot better as they get older (same with wisconsin even with #12 Dekkar)
You're on a roll looking stuff up! Well done!
The "get old stay old" is not just something people say. It is the recipe for success if you are not in the market for top 50 players. And Butler is a good example. They had a big leap from last year. And it helps a lot having a go to guy that can create a shot out of nothing: Baldwin.
I was curious so I went to see the ratings of their players. I'll stick to the ones below because they are the ones they use (right now Christian is out, so they are using Baddley more):
Starters:
Thompson - 175
Baldwin - 155
McDermott - 287
Nze - Unranked (transfer from Milwaukee)
Golden - 224
Bench
Tucker - 82
David - 195
They had Joey Brunk, ranked 107, who transferred to IU. And Smits transferred from Valpo, ranked 207
Kind of reinforces the "get old, stay old" above player rankings. But we know it's easier said than done. Misses in years, transfers, etc.
It's why 21-22 we should be in a position of being pretty good. We will be playing, as usual, against top 50 talent. But we will be experienced enough to be a contender.
