Top 100 Recruits - The last 5 seasons

duckboy33

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2009
39,049
11,905
113
Eugene, OR
Team
Oregon
What conferences did they choose to play in? Using teams current conferences

2020:
SEC - 24
ACC - 23
Big Ten - 13
Big 12 - 10
PAC 12 - 8
Big East - 8
WCC - 4
AAC - 2

2019:
ACC - 18
SEC - 16
PAC 12 - 15
Big 12 - 13
Big East - 11
Big Ten - 10
AAC - 6
WCC - 4
A10 - 2
Patriot - 1
Ivy - 1

2018:
ACC - 19
PAC 12 - 19
SEC - 18
Big Ten - 14
Big 12 - 12
Big East - 7
CUSA - 2
A10 - 2
WCC - 2
MWC - 1
MVC - 1
Ivy - 1

2017:
SEC - 22
ACC - 20
PAC 12 - 20
Big 12 - 11
Big Ten - 11
Big East - 11
CUSA - 2
A10 - 2
MWC - 1

2016:
ACC - 25
SEC - 17
PAC 12 - 16
Big Ten - 15
Big East - 10
Big 12 - 8
WCC - 2
A10 - 2
AAC - 1
Ivy - 1
MWC - 1

Totals:
ACC - 105
SEC - 97
PAC 12 - 78
Big Ten - 63
Big 12 - 54
Big East - 47
 
  • Like
Reactions: jhmossy

duckboy33

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2009
39,049
11,905
113
Eugene, OR
Team
Oregon
2017-2019 Draft Picks by Conference:

2017:
ACC - 14
PAC 12 - 13
Big 12 - 6
SEC - 4
Big Ten - 4
Big East - 3
AAC - 3
WCC - 2
Horizon - 1

2018:
ACC - 10
Big Ten - 8
PAC 12 - 7
SEC - 7
Big 12 - 6
Big East - 5
AAC - 4
MWC - 1
MVC - 1
Sun Belt - 1
A10 - 1

2019:
ACC - 13
SEC - 12
Big Ten - 6
PAC 12 - 6
Big 12 - 4
MWC - 3
OVC - 2
WCC - 2
CAA - 2
Big East - 1
Ivy - 1

Totals:
ACC - 37
PAC 12 - 26
SEC - 23
Big Ten - 18
Big 12 - 16
Big East - 9
 

MGC_07

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jun 29, 2016
3,882
2,837
113
What conferences did they choose to play in? Using teams current conferences

2020:
SEC - 24
ACC - 23
Big Ten - 13
Big 12 - 10
PAC 12 - 8
Big East - 8
WCC - 4
AAC - 2

2019:
ACC - 18
SEC - 16
PAC 12 - 15
Big 12 - 13
Big East - 11
Big Ten - 10
AAC - 6
WCC - 4
A10 - 2
Patriot - 1
Ivy - 1

2018:
ACC - 19
PAC 12 - 19
SEC - 18
Big Ten - 14
Big 12 - 12
Big East - 7
CUSA - 2
A10 - 2
WCC - 2
MWC - 1
MVC - 1
Ivy - 1

2017:
SEC - 22
ACC - 20
PAC 12 - 20
Big 12 - 11
Big Ten - 11
Big East - 11
CUSA - 2
A10 - 2
MWC - 1

2016:
ACC - 25
SEC - 17
PAC 12 - 16
Big Ten - 15
Big East - 10
Big 12 - 8
WCC - 2
A10 - 2
AAC - 1
Ivy - 1
MWC - 1

Totals:
ACC - 105
SEC - 97
PAC 12 - 78
Big Ten - 63
Big 12 - 54
Big East - 47
The Big Ten is at a disadvantage from the get in terms of recruiting. You’re a lot more likely to get a kid from Iowa to move to California or North Carolina than Vice versa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: duckboy33

duckboy33

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2009
39,049
11,905
113
Eugene, OR
Team
Oregon
The Big Ten is at a disadvantage from the get in terms of recruiting. You’re a lot more likely to get a kid from Iowa to move to California or North Carolina than Vice versa.
You can tell more about how good the coaching is in each conference. Look at the big 12, not a super talented conference but they compete with the best of them. Why? Best group of coaches in the country IMO. Also illustrates the lack there of out west. Coaching, particularly at a couple of schools, has held the pac 12 back
 
  • Like
Reactions: KisteK and wesr

Noahtogo24

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2015
2,734
1,856
113
Going to be interesting to see the numbers related to the ACC after K, Roy, Boeheim and Hamilton all retire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: duckboy33

MrBaracus

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
May 2, 2015
5,781
3,531
113
Team
Kansas
You can tell more about how good the coaching is in each conference. Look at the big 12, not a super talented conference but they compete with the best of them. Why? Best group of coaches in the country IMO. Also illustrates the lack there of out west. Coaching, particularly at a couple of schools, has held the pac 12 back
The size of each league is a big factor though. The difference between the ACC and Big 12 isn’t as drastic as it seems when you factor in 5 extra teams. It breaks down to about 1.5 more top 100 players per team over 5 years.
 

duckboy33

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2009
39,049
11,905
113
Eugene, OR
Team
Oregon
The size of each league is a big factor though. The difference between the ACC and Big 12 isn’t as drastic as it seems when you factor in 5 extra teams. It breaks down to about 1.5 more top 100 players per team over 5 years.
To some extent this is true
 

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
27,248
10,686
113
The size of each league is a big factor though. The difference between the ACC and Big 12 isn’t as drastic as it seems when you factor in 5 extra teams. It breaks down to about 1.5 more top 100 players per team over 5 years.
Yeah, but the draft picks are a massive difference. ACC rules in March and June.
 

MrBaracus

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
May 2, 2015
5,781
3,531
113
Team
Kansas
One per team is 20% of a starting 5. That’s significant.
If team A had one more draft choice than team B over a five year period, I don’t think anyone would say that team A was significantly more talented.

Plus, we don’t know the average draft placement. Not that I think that would favor the Big 12, but who knows.
 

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
27,248
10,686
113
If team A had one more draft choice than team B over a five year period, I don’t think anyone would say that team A was significantly more talented.

Plus, we don’t know the average draft placement. Not that I think that would favor the Big 12, but who knows.
1 over 5 years, you’re right. I was thinking 1 a year.

But let’s be a little more specific. The reality is, it’s really just a handful of teams in each conference contributing to the majority of the picks (yes, there are a few random other picks here and there).

ACC - Duke, UNC, UVA, FSU, Miami, Cuse
Big 12 - Kansas, Texas, Oklahoma, Baylor, Iowa State (Texas Tech is getting there).

So from that perspective the differences in NBA talent are pretty wide.
 
  • Like
Reactions: duckboy33

MileHighSpartan

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2014
3,493
3,736
113
Look at the big 12, not a super talented conference but they compete with the best of them. Why? Best group of coaches in the country IMO
Besides Self, who?

Scott Drew hasn't been past the S16 in 8 years, and has only made the NCATT 8x in his 17 seasons there. Baylor hasn't won a conf title since 1950.

Bruce Weber has made it past the Round of 64 just one time in his 8 years there, and has missed the tournament completely 3x. They were 11-21 this year...

Lon Kruger old and fading, with 3 sub-500 seasons out of the last 3 and has never finished higher than 2nd in 9 seasons. Only made it to the S16 or better twice in 8 seasons.

Steve Prohm is trash. Boyton is trash. Jamie Dixon is trash. Shaka Smart is trash.

So that leaves Self, Huggy (who has seen better days...), and Chris Beard who had 2 good years but wasn't looking too promising this year.
 

duckboy33

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2009
39,049
11,905
113
Eugene, OR
Team
Oregon
Besides Self, who?

Scott Drew hasn't been past the S16 in 8 years, and has only made the NCATT 8x in his 17 seasons there. Baylor hasn't won a conf title since 1950.

Bruce Weber has made it past the Round of 64 just one time in his 8 years there, and has missed the tournament completely 3x. They were 11-21 this year...

Lon Kruger old and fading, with 3 sub-500 seasons out of the last 3 and has never finished higher than 2nd in 9 seasons. Only made it to the S16 or better twice in 8 seasons.

Steve Prohm is trash. Boyton is trash. Jamie Dixon is trash. Shaka Smart is trash.

So that leaves Self, Huggy (who has seen better days...), and Chris Beard who had 2 good years but wasn't looking too promising this year.
I disagree. Scott Drew has done amazing job turning around Baylor and making them a contender. Bruce Weber and Lon Kruger are veteran coaches who have probably forgotten more about hoops than most coaches know. Jamie Dixon is also a great coach, just in a tough situation down at TCU. Chris Beard is probably the best up and coming coaches in the country. Even Shaka and Boyton are good recruiters.
 

Kronic22

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
19,310
1,303
113
Besides Self, who?

Scott Drew hasn't been past the S16 in 8 years, and has only made the NCATT 8x in his 17 seasons there. Baylor hasn't won a conf title since 1950.

Bruce Weber has made it past the Round of 64 just one time in his 8 years there, and has missed the tournament completely 3x. They were 11-21 this year...

Lon Kruger old and fading, with 3 sub-500 seasons out of the last 3 and has never finished higher than 2nd in 9 seasons. Only made it to the S16 or better twice in 8 seasons.

Steve Prohm is trash. Boyton is trash. Jamie Dixon is trash. Shaka Smart is trash.

So that leaves Self, Huggy (who has seen better days...), and Chris Beard who had 2 good years but wasn't looking too promising this year.
As much as I hate to say this, Drew has done amazing things at Baylor.

He took them over when they were basically on death row. This year being cancelled was bad luck, as I think this was his best yet, a true contender.

Jamie Dixon has also done ac admirable job at TCU. I think his Tcu teams, while never great, would have made the tourney more often from the other p5 conferences, the big 12 is just too balanced.

Kruger and Weber are above average coaches.

Smart is garbage, worst coach in the league, but still a top notch recruiter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GE Nole

Kevin Bryan

Moderator
Moderator
Apr 30, 2011
10,478
9,371
113
What conferences did they choose to play in? Using teams current conferences

2020:
SEC - 24
ACC - 23
Big Ten - 13
Big 12 - 10
PAC 12 - 8
Big East - 8
WCC - 4
AAC - 2

Note: UConn has 2 top 100 commits for the Big East in 2020.
2019:
ACC - 18
SEC - 16
PAC 12 - 15
Big 12 - 13
Big East - 11
Big Ten - 10
AAC - 6
WCC - 4
A10 - 2
Patriot - 1
Ivy - 1

2018:
ACC - 19
PAC 12 - 19
SEC - 18
Big Ten - 14
Big 12 - 12
Big East - 7
CUSA - 2
A10 - 2
WCC - 2
MWC - 1
MVC - 1
Ivy - 1

2017:
SEC - 22
ACC - 20
PAC 12 - 20
Big 12 - 11
Big Ten - 11
Big East - 11
CUSA - 2
A10 - 2
MWC - 1

2016:
ACC - 25
SEC - 17
PAC 12 - 16
Big Ten - 15
Big East - 10
Big 12 - 8
WCC - 2
A10 - 2
AAC - 1
Ivy - 1
MWC - 1

Totals:
ACC - 105
SEC - 97
PAC 12 - 78
Big Ten - 63
Big 12 - 54
Big East - 47
I just took it one further and divided by number of teams in each conference:
ACC - 105/15= 7
SEC
- 97/14= 6.9
PAC 12
- 78/12= 6.5
Big 12
- 54/10= 5.4
Big East
- 47/10= 4.7
Big Ten
- 63/14= 4.5

Note:
UConn has 2 top 100 commits in 2020. Not sure if those are factored in for the Big East. There are also a handful of 2020 top 100 players that are still undecided.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bert Higginbotha

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
27,248
10,686
113
I just took it one further and divided by number of teams in each conference:
ACC - 105/15= 7
SEC
- 97/14= 6.9
PAC 12
- 78/12= 6.5
Big 12
- 54/10= 5.4
Big East
- 47/10= 4.7
Big Ten
- 63/14= 4.5

Note:
UConn has 2 top 100 commits in 2020. Not sure if those are factored in for the Big East. There are also a handful of 2020 top 100 players that are still undecided.
Good breakdown. Man, the SEC (outside of Kentucky and Auburn) sure seems to be wasting a lot of talent. Bad coaching? Bad luck? Both?
 

MrBaracus

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
May 2, 2015
5,781
3,531
113
Team
Kansas
Besides Self, who?

Scott Drew hasn't been past the S16 in 8 years, and has only made the NCATT 8x in his 17 seasons there. Baylor hasn't won a conf title since 1950.

Bruce Weber has made it past the Round of 64 just one time in his 8 years there, and has missed the tournament completely 3x. They were 11-21 this year...

Lon Kruger old and fading, with 3 sub-500 seasons out of the last 3 and has never finished higher than 2nd in 9 seasons. Only made it to the S16 or better twice in 8 seasons.

Steve Prohm is trash. Boyton is trash. Jamie Dixon is trash. Shaka Smart is trash.

So that leaves Self, Huggy (who has seen better days...), and Chris Beard who had 2 good years but wasn't looking too promising this year.
Not sure how you can say anything negative about what Beard has done. In one year, he made a garbage Little Rock team competitive. The next year they returned to the norm. In his second year at a garbage Tech program, he had them in the top 10 and elite 8. In the third year, they almost won it all with a roster full of no-names.

I'd like to see the list of coaches that you think could pull that off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: duckboy33

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
27,248
10,686
113
Not sure how you can say anything negative about what Beard has done. In one year, he made a garbage Little Rock team competitive. The next year they returned to the norm. In his second year at a garbage Tech program, he had them in the top 10 and elite 8. In the third year, they almost won it all with a roster full of no-names.

I'd like to see the list of coaches that you think could pull that off.
It certainly wasn’t a roster full of no names. But I agree that Chris Beard is on his way to having a hell of a career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Noahtogo24

duckboy33

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2009
39,049
11,905
113
Eugene, OR
Team
Oregon
Not sure how you can say anything negative about what Beard has done. In one year, he made a garbage Little Rock team competitive. The next year they returned to the norm. In his second year at a garbage Tech program, he had them in the top 10 and elite 8. In the third year, they almost won it all with a roster full of no-names.

I'd like to see the list of coaches that you think could pull that off.
Too many people let the programs drive their ideas about the coach. All programs aren't equal. Texas Tech is not a program that can lose all of their key players and be a national championship contender again. Chris Beard is doing better than anyone else could even imagine at Texas Tech
 

MrBaracus

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
May 2, 2015
5,781
3,531
113
Team
Kansas
It certainly wasn’t a roster full of no names. But I agree that Chris Beard is on his way to having a hell of a career.
Not sure what your definition of a "no name" is. Culver was by far the most hyped player on the roster and he was a 3 star recruit. I don't think they had a single top 100 player.
 

duckboy33

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2009
39,049
11,905
113
Eugene, OR
Team
Oregon
Not sure what your definition of a "no name" is. Culver was by far the most hyped player on the roster and he was a 3 star recruit. I don't think they had a single top 100 player.
He's a great evaluator and great game coach. He will be an elite coach for a long time.
 

Kevin Bryan

Moderator
Moderator
Apr 30, 2011
10,478
9,371
113
Good breakdown. Man, the SEC (outside of Kentucky and Auburn) sure seems to be wasting a lot of talent. Bad coaching? Bad luck? Both?
Most of those players are going to Kentucky or Auburn. But yes, it's a combination. Mike White, for example, has gotten plenty of talent at Florida, with nothing to show for it.
 

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
27,248
10,686
113
Not sure what your definition of a "no name" is. Culver was by far the most hyped player on the roster and he was a 3 star recruit. I don't think they had a single top 100 player.
Brandone Francis was a high 4 star, top 35 kid. Huge battle for him as a recruit.

Khavon Moore (admittedly didn’t impact their March run) was a top 60 kid.

Tariq Owens was a top 200 kid who was a high profile transfer and well sought after for his shot blocking ability.

Matt Mooney was also a highly sought after transfer who averaged almost 17ppg the year prior.

And Culver, as you said, was a lotto pick. Regardless of his status as a recruit, he was a stud on their 27 win team the year before. Not some unknown “no name” guy.
 

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
27,248
10,686
113
Most of those players are going to Kentucky or Auburn. But yes, it's a combination. Mike White, for example, has gotten plenty of talent at Florida, with nothing to show for it.
97 players is a ton. There’s no way “most” are going to Auburn and UK. Probably 20-25 went to those two schools. What about the other 75?

UF is wasting talent, as you said. Bama has been wasting talent. LSU has been wasting talent. They didn’t even make the Dance with Ben Simmons.

Just seems like a ton of underachieving going on outside of Auburn and Kentucky.
 

Kevin Bryan

Moderator
Moderator
Apr 30, 2011
10,478
9,371
113
97 players is a ton. There’s no way “most” are going to Auburn and UK. Probably 20-25 went to those two schools. What about the other 75?

UF is wasting talent, as you said. Bama has been wasting talent. LSU has been wasting talent. They didn’t even make the Dance with Ben Simmons.

Just seems like a ton of underachieving going on outside of Auburn and Kentucky.
29 went to UK. Auburn has to have double digits. LSU and Florida are probably next and the rest sprinkled in among the rest of the teams.
 

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
27,248
10,686
113
29 went to UK. Auburn has to have double digits. LSU and Florida are probably next and the rest sprinkled in among the rest of the teams.
I wasn’t sure if the ones coming in this year are included or not. But 29 is incredible for UK. Kudos.

Nonetheless, the majority of 97 are not just going to Auburn and UK. I would imagine Bama has at least 6-8 in that time frame. The two underachievers you mentioned are at least at 8-10 as well.
 

Kevin Bryan

Moderator
Moderator
Apr 30, 2011
10,478
9,371
113
I wasn’t sure if the ones coming in this year are included or not. But 29 is incredible for UK. Kudos.

Nonetheless, the majority of 97 are not just going to Auburn and UK. I would imagine Bama has at least 6-8 in that time frame. The two underachievers you mentioned are at least at 8-10 as well.
With UK, Auburn, LSU, and Florida you are looking at about 60 players among 4 teams. That leaves less than 40 among the other 10 teams over a 5 year period.
 

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
27,248
10,686
113
With UK, Auburn, LSU, and Florida you are looking at about 60 players among 4 teams. That leaves less than 40 among the other 10 teams over a 5 year period.
Yes, I would agree that those 4 teams are the majority. Which means half of them are underachieving. Which is the whole reason I said “outside of Auburn and UK, feels like a lot of wasted talent” in the first place.

To be honest, it’s probably 75 players from 7-8 teams and 20 or so from the other 6.
 

MrBaracus

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
May 2, 2015
5,781
3,531
113
Team
Kansas
Brandone Francis was a high 4 star, top 35 kid. Huge battle for him as a recruit.

Khavon Moore (admittedly didn’t impact their March run) was a top 60 kid.

Tariq Owens was a top 200 kid who was a high profile transfer and well sought after for his shot blocking ability.

Matt Mooney was also a highly sought after transfer who averaged almost 17ppg the year prior.

And Culver, as you said, was a lotto pick. Regardless of his status as a recruit, he was a stud on their 27 win team the year before. Not some unknown “no name” guy.
Didn't realize that Francis was top 50, but he also wasn't exactly a huge piece that year. Had a nice game vs Virginia but averaged 5 ppg.

Mooney chose Tech over Northwestern and Creighton. Not sure he qualified as a big name. Became a bigger name at Tech of course.

The point is that this roster was hardly what you'd expect to see on a team that nearly won a national title.
 

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
27,248
10,686
113
Didn't realize that Francis was top 50, but he also wasn't exactly a huge piece that year. Had a nice game vs Virginia but averaged 5 ppg.

Mooney chose Tech over Northwestern and Creighton. Not sure he qualified as a big name. Became a bigger name at Tech of course.

The point is that this roster was hardly what you'd expect to see on a team that nearly won a national title.
I think choosing between a Big 10, Big East, and Big 12 school indicates a pretty sought after guy.

Yes, I got your overall point and agreed with it. Just didn’t think it was fair to call it a “no name” roster.