Draft Lottery High School Ratings

Cappy3

Walk On
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
41
Like
59
I think it’s just hilarious that the almost certain #2 pick in the lottery was totally unranked out of high school just two years ago. And two other probable lottery picks (Culver and Hayes) weren’t top 100. Yet people continue to insist that guys not ranked in the top 25 just can’t play.
 

SWC75

Bored Historian
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,927
Like
30,887
I've always said that high school ratings are a snap shot of a player at a particular moment in time. It's like looking at a frame of film and trying to determine if the butler did it.

163274
 

OttoinGrotto

Professor Irwin Corey
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
27,905
Like
52,197
I think it’s just hilarious that the almost certain #2 pick in the lottery was totally unranked out of high school just two years ago. And two other probable lottery picks (Culver and Hayes) weren’t top 100. Yet people continue to insist that guys not ranked in the top 25 just can’t play.
Who's saying guys not ranked in the top 25 can't play?
 

Trueblue25

Cali Award Magistrate
Joined
Apr 16, 2013
Messages
22,064
Like
32,496
My concern is our player development whether we receive the 10th ranked recruit or 383rd.
 

721Comstock

All American
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
4,903
Like
14,573
My concern is our player development whether we receive the 10th ranked recruit or 383rd.
HUH??

How many NOT Top-25 guys does JB have to send to the league in just the past 5 years -
early & unexpectedly -
before this BS narrative about lack of player development dies a fiery death??

Ennis
Jerami
Mali
Lydon

Meanwhile, K & Cal get a conga line of Top 10 guys, many of whom go on to NOT make it to the league.
Where's the player development there?? :rolleyes:
 

DeGrozz

All Conference
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
2,974
Like
4,499
I think it’s just hilarious that the almost certain #2 pick in the lottery was totally unranked out of high school just two years ago. And two other probable lottery picks (Culver and Hayes) weren’t top 100. Yet people continue to insist that guys not ranked in the top 25 just can’t play.
Another way to look at it is out of the hundreds of 3 stars or lower in the past 5 years only one will go in the top-3. The other two in the top-3 are the two top players from 2018’s class.

The odds are a heck of a lot better that you’re getting a guy that can play with the highly rated guys.
 

Cappy3

Walk On
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
41
Like
59
Another way to look at it is out of the hundreds of 3 stars or lower in the past 5 years only one will go in the top-3. The other two in the top-3 are the two top players from 2018’s class.

The odds are a heck of a lot better that you’re getting a guy that can play with the highly rated guys.
And out of the 125 top 25 from the last five years, maybe 10 will be lottery picks. Not that great a ratio for “certainties”. Everyone knows the top 25 can play. People keep downgrading guys rated higher than 50, saying they can’t play. As I pointed out at least 3 of the lottery picks weren’t even top 100. Might be four if Clarke of Zaga makes it, since he, like Morant, was totally unranked. Point is you can’t say with any certainty that a guy ranked below 100 can’t play.
 

DeGrozz

All Conference
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
2,974
Like
4,499
And out of the 125 top 25 from the last five years, maybe 10 will be lottery picks. Not that great a ratio for “certainties”. Everyone knows the top 25 can play. People keep downgrading guys rated higher than 50, saying they can’t play. As I pointed out at least 3 of the lottery picks weren’t even top 100. Might be four if Clarke of Zaga makes it, since he, like Morant, was totally unranked. Point is you can’t say with any certainty that a guy ranked below 100 can’t play.
You can't just make up numbers, dude.

2014 Top 25 Prospects drafted in the lottery:

1 - Emmanuel Mudiay
2 - Karl Anthony Towns
3 - Stanley Johnson
4 - Jahlil Okafor
5 - Myles turner
6 - Justise Winslow
7 - Trey Lyles
8 - Devin Booker

On top of that you had another 5 first rounders and 3 second rounders.

2015 Top 25 Prospects drafted in the lottery

1- Ben Simmons
2 - Brandon Ingram
3 - Jaylen Brown
4 - Jamal Murray
5 - Luke Kennard

On top of that you had another 2 first rounders and 8 second rounders.

2016 Top 25 Prospects drafted in the lottery

1 - Josh Jackson
2 - Markelle Fultz
3 - Lonzo Ball
4 - De'aaron Fox
5 - Dennis Smith Jr
6 - Jayson Tatum
7 - Jonathan Isaac
8 - Malik Monk
9 - Miles Bridges
10 - Bam Adebayo
11 - Thon Maker
12 - Lauri Markkanen
13 - Zach Collins

On top of that you had another 4 first rounders and 2 second rounders.

At this point, I think it is fair to stop. I looked at 75 players over 3 years. You got 26 players who were lottery picks. There are only 14 lottery spots each year.

On top of that, 16/25 players were drafted from 2014, 15/25 players were drafted in 2015, and 19/25 players were drafted from 2016. And that doesn't count kids who had career ending/impeding injuries, guys who are sticking around on NBA contracts after being undrafted, and a handful on non-quals who gave up on hoops. You don't get those types of numbers when you look at players even ranked 26-50.

No one is saying there's not a diamond in the rough here and there, but it's really a crap shoot the higher you get.
 
Last edited:

OrangeDW

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 8, 2012
Messages
22,207
Like
49,102
HUH??

How many NOT Top-25 guys does JB have to send to the league in just the past 5 years -
early & unexpectedly -
before this BS narrative about lack of player development dies a fiery death??

Ennis
Jerami
Mali
Lydon

Meanwhile, K & Cal get a conga line of Top 10 guys, many of whom go on to NOT make it to the league.
Where's the player development there?? :rolleyes:
Kaleb and Moyer’s performance at other schools so far suggests it was more recruiting rankings overrating them than our player development.

The main guys who I can think of that were here the whole time and didn’t end up living up to expectations are Coleman(injuries) and Roberson(decent player for 3 years, still).
 

Cappy3

Walk On
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
41
Like
59
You can't just make up numbers, dude.

2014 Top 25 Prospects drafted in the lottery:

1 - Emmanuel Mudiay
2 - Karl Anthony Towns
3 - Stanley Johnson
4 - Jahlil Okafor
5 - Myles turner
6 - Justise Winslow
7 - Trey Lyles
8 - Devin Booker

On top of that you had another 5 first rounders and 3 second rounders.

2015 Top 25 Prospects drafted in the lottery

1- Ben Simmons
2 - Brandon Ingram
3 - Jaylen Brown
4 - Jamal Murray
5 - Luke Kennard

On top of that you had another 2 first rounders and 8 second rounders.

2016 Top 25 Prospects drafted in the lottery

1 - Josh Jackson
2 - Markelle Fultz
3 - Lonzo Ball
4 - De'aaron Fox
5 - Dennis Smith Jr
6 - Jayson Tatum
7 - Jonathan Isaac
8 - Malik Monk
9 - Miles Bridges
10 - Bam Adebayo
11 - Thon Maker
12 - Lauri Markkanen
13 - Zach Collins

On top of that you had another 4 first rounders and 2 second rounders.

At this point, I think it is fair to stop. I looked at 75 players over 3 years. You got 26 players who were lottery picks. There are only 14 lottery spots each year.

On top of that, 16/25 players were drafted from 2014, 15/25 players were drafted in 2015, and 19/25 players were drafted from 2016. And that doesn't count kids who had career ending/impeding injuries, guys who are sticking around on NBA contracts after being undrafted, and a handful on non-quals who gave up on hoops. You don't get those types of numbers when you look at players even ranked 26-50.

No one is saying there's not a diamond in the rough here and there, but it's really a crap shoot the higher you get.
You miss my point entirely. As I said, everyone knows the top 25 can play. No surprise there. But whenever we sign someone, you are certain to see posters saying he can’t help because he isn’t rated high enough. The point isn’t that every guy rated below the top 25 is as good as they are, but that you simply cannot assume because a guy isn’t top 100 (or rated at all in the case of Morant and Clarke) that they will be unable to play at a high enough level to help SU. The ratings get less and less reliable after the top 10-12 guys, and some are total misses.
 

DeGrozz

All Conference
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
2,974
Like
4,499
You miss my point entirely. As I said, everyone knows the top 25 can play. No surprise there. But whenever we sign someone, you are certain to see posters saying he can’t help because he isn’t rated high enough. The point isn’t that every guy rated below the top 25 is as good as they are, but that you simply cannot assume because a guy isn’t top 100 (or rated at all in the case of Morant and Clarke) that they will be unable to play at a high enough level to help SU. The ratings get less and less reliable after the top 10-12 guys, and some are total misses.
I'm sorry - but what I said was that you were much more likely to get an elite player if that player is highly rated.

Yes, some kids unranked or two stars may blow-up and be huge, and even be a top-3 pick, but there are hundreds if not thousands of those lower rated guys every year, the Ja Morants are the rare exception, not the rule.

You responded with ridiculous "alternative facts" to try to dispute that, which I called out.

Everyone knows that a two-star can blow up and be a draft pick. We've seen it with some of our own players (Rautins, for example). But if you are arguing that we should be content if we keep getting needle in a haystack type players, I don't think that is a good long-term recruiting strategy. I'm sure some people on this board still have Scott Shafer's number -- you could probably get in contact with him and see how diamond in the rough recruiting plans work out.
 

Cappy3

Walk On
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
41
Like
59
I'm sorry - but what I said was that you were much more likely to get an elite player if that player is highly rated.

Yes, some kids unranked or two stars may blow-up and be huge, and even be a top-3 pick, but there are hundreds if not thousands of those lower rated guys every year, the Ja Morants are the rare exception, not the rule.

You responded with ridiculous "alternative facts" to try to dispute that, which I called out.

Everyone knows that a two-star can blow up and be a draft pick. We've seen it with some of our own players (Rautins, for example). But if you are arguing that we should be content if we keep getting needle in a haystack type players, I don't think that is a good long-term recruiting strategy. I'm sure some people on this board still have Scott Shafer's number -- you could probably get in contact with him and see how diamond in the rough recruiting plans work out.
Sure, it’s great to get top ten recruits. But my point continues to be not getting them isn’t a death knell. Texas Tech just went to the FF without a single top 100 recruits on their roster. I simply get sick of some people posting with unmitigated certainly that low rated recruits can’t play. Simply not true.
 

two3zone

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
13,007
Like
17,346
Sure, it’s great to get top ten recruits. But my point continues to be not getting them isn’t a death knell. Texas Tech just went to the FF without a single top 100 recruits on their roster. I simply get sick of some people posting with unmitigated certainly that low rated recruits can’t play. Simply not true.
Just because TT did it doesn't mean it's a recipe for success.
 

doc05

Starter
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
1,384
Like
2,107
Our mediocre recruiting of late (for our standards) is really getting to some people on here.
 

DeGrozz

All Conference
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
2,974
Like
4,499
lol.

Guy 1: Hold on while I pull a made up fact out of my butt.

Guy 2: Excuse me your butt fact is wrong and here’s the data:

Guy 1: YOU MISSED MY POINT

Ladies and gentlemen message boards.
Pretty happy to be Guy 2 in this case
 

SBU72

All Conference
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
2,557
Like
1,769
A good take away is having the top recruiting class does not guarantee a NC, just ask Duke and Kentucky, even having the top 4 recruits. Of course those teams were exciting to watch. And because I don't know, are all of those 4 kids going pro and will be lottery picks?
 

CusefanATL

2018 Iggy Post Season Record NCAA Winner
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
9,920
Like
10,422
I think it’s just hilarious that the almost certain #2 pick in the lottery was totally unranked out of high school just two years ago. And two other probable lottery picks (Culver and Hayes) weren’t top 100. Yet people continue to insist that guys not ranked in the top 25 just can’t play.
i agree wtih your overarching point... but at the same time need to play devils advocate here...

generally speaking the top 25 players fare better than the non top 25 do.
 

SWC75

Bored Historian
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,927
Like
30,887
We sometimes debate things that aren't mutually exclusive. A higher percentage of Top 10, 25, 50, 100 guys will "make it" in college than those ranked lower that that. But not all higher ranked players make it and not all lower ranked players don't. You put that with the fact that the coaches know more about these players than the people doing the ratings and that they may be choosing players based on their system and what they already have and it's best not to panic over the ratings. A bigger question is: did the coaches get their #1 choice at that position or did they have settle for #2, (who's probably not bad), #3 or #4?
 

Cappy3

Walk On
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
41
Like
59
i agree wtih your overarching point... but at the same time need to play devils advocate here...

generally speaking the top 25 players fare better than the non top 25 do.
No one seriously doubts that the top 10-15 guys are the best players. The issue is how accurate are the rankings the further down you go? I’m not sure there’s that much difference between number 30 and 130. It’s one thing for a great player to have been maybe 40. But for guys like Morant, Steph Curry and Fredette all to have been sub 200 makes me doubt how far the truly accurate ratings go.
 

CusefanATL

2018 Iggy Post Season Record NCAA Winner
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
9,920
Like
10,422
No one seriously doubts that the top 10-15 guys are the best players. The issue is how accurate are the rankings the further down you go? I’m not sure there’s that much difference between number 30 and 130. It’s one thing for a great player to have been maybe 40. But for guys like Morant, Steph Curry and Fredette all to have been sub 200 makes me doubt how far the truly accurate ratings go.
there will always be diamonds in the rough in every facet of life. that will never change.

as i said - generally speaking looking at the aggregate of the top 25 vs non top 25 - the top 25 is going to hold its own more often than not. but there will always be outliers of underrated and overrated.

these rankings are also 15-17 year old kids so A LOT can change. i grew over an inch at Syracuse University. I grew at least 4 inches from 15 to 18. and im an average white dude.

in majors of little league, the last 2 years of the little fields - i was by far best player in my league. But i couldnt catch up to the difference in field size when we went to the big field and i became a decent player. A lot changes from high school to college with speed and physicality. AAU has good players but its not a real game.
 

Cusefan0307

A very millennial millennial
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
20,877
Like
39,165
The problem is recently not enough of the top 25 guys stick around long enough to gel and mature in college as a dominant team.
 

SWC75

Bored Historian
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,927
Like
30,887
The problem is recently not enough of the top 25 guys stick around long enough to gel and mature in college as a dominant team.

And our problem is that we get the sort of non- Top 25 players who in four years could do for us what Connecticut and Louisville and Villanova's and Virginia's players have done for them. But they don't stay for for four years. They leave to become marginal NBA players. yeah, they are making money but might they not wind up making more of it if they had stayed? Is there some other reason we seem to lose so many of them?
 

Cusefan0307

A very millennial millennial
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
20,877
Like
39,165
And our problem is that we get the sort of non- Top 25 players who in four years could do for us what Connecticut and Louisville and Villanova's and Virginia's players have done for them. But they don't stay for for four years. They leave to become marginal NBA players. yeah, they are making money but might they not wind up making more of it if they had stayed? Is there some other reason we seem to lose so many of them?
Well there's a good chance Nwora leaves this year so...and none of UVA's guys were on the NBA radar really until this year.
 

Online statistics

Members online
204
Guests online
559
Total visitors
763

Top Bottom