Stromboli

Beilein is the boy scout of NCAA. Clean as a whistle, and has a reputation for that. Michigan has definitely had a couple good runs here. I was on a UM board recently, I think when I was looking for information about DJ Carton. Looking through some old threads, their fanbase was not high on him at all before last year's run. Borderline hot seat type of stuff. Just one great run like last year, and he's mentioned with the best current coaches. I'm a fan of Beilein. Certainly I like UM way more than MSU. And way more than OSU.

Sooo... You want more attention, for blaming someone else for wanting more attention? Got it.

He only mentions the famous ones. He's obviously using them as a stepping stone. Naming dropping, basically. I'll agree with dbmhoosier, here.

You guys need to learn the changes to the NCAA tournament. RPI is no longer considered. The new system will give credit for good wins and bad losses, and ideally take the best of the old "SOS/RPI" data and incorporate it into the "NET Ranking." The old concern of playing a #353 team is mostly gone (not entirely gone, and I don't know that the algorithm has been published to know the exact extent). The "quadrant" wins will be huge again. We have enough opportunities for good quadrant wins. And now they'll look more into Net Efficiency. The bigger concern is whether or not we'll have opportunities for good wins. We have plenty of those. ITH did a great summary of our opportunities recently.

This kid has a higher composite ranking than all but one guard on our roster, including our 2019 class. And with Romeo we get him for a year. In case you missed it, we struck out on about 10 different Top 100 guards this year. That's great that people think Leal would be taking the spot of the next Smart, Oladipo, or DJ White. But get real. A bunch of us wanted Brandon Newman. Leal is more versatile, higher ranked, AND might be even better shooting. This is a no brainer to me. He's already got offers to Xavier, Maryland, Iowa, and likely others. I think he gets the offer soonish. I hope he takes it on the spot.

Well, actually most coaches want a 5* to visit, even if they know the kid will commit elsewhere. It's good for the program. There was some dirty football recruiting expose a couple years ago stating that kids can get paid $2500 just to show up for a visit, even if the coach knows they won't commit. It elevates a program's reputation when the top guys are visiting.

"He doesn't fit in Archie's system"

I don't want to sit here and repeat myself. It's just information available that can be utilized to help win a game. eFG% is one of the most important stats in the game, and a much better indicator of good shooting than just FG%. And shooting 2pt jumpers simply wrecks your eFG%. It doesn't matter that he's remarkably better at shooting 2pt jumpers than other players, when the other players have a better eFG% by shooting at the rim or behind the line instead. That's silly. You wouldn't ignore all the other attributes of a player (e.g. rebounding, defense). eFG% isn't the only stat that matters, but it is possibly the most important. Free throw rate, free throw percentage, and rebounding are all huge. We'll just keep talking about Tim Duncan. If you look at where he ranks in the NBA, he's at the top for blocks and rebounds, while still being very respectable (but not elite) in scoring. As a result, his PER (player efficiency rating, which takes into account everything) results in him being #4 in PER (adjusted for 48 minutes) in regular season, and #18 in the playoffs. I'm not saying Tim Duncan wasn't good. He was exceptional overall. But we're talking specifically of the value of 2pt jumpers. Tim Duncan's excellent PER was in spite of his poor shot selection, not because of it. He can still be one of the greatest players ever and also hurt his team by taking too many 2pt jumpers. NOW, of course there's more to the game. A good shooter attracts more attention, thereby opening opportunities for teammates. I get it. But to use analytics, I think a good coach would look at a 45% shooter from the long 2, and tell his guys to give up that shot, guard the drive or pass to the basket, and get ready to box out for the rebound. That is a better strategy over the long run. Maybe Brad Stevens is a great person to tie in here. The guy had the best first 6 years to a college coaching career ever. He was a total unknown when hired. And he was one of the first to utilize analytics in the college game. It worked. Now he's the hottest coach in the NBA, and it's still working. He was looking at eFG% and similar stats before it was cool. You look into it now, and he's also very interested in lineup analytics. For anyone that followed Yogi in Dallas, he was part of the Mavericks "death lineup" last year that was the most effective 5 man combination in the entire NBA, and it was mostly back-ups and Dirk. No one is putting you down. And please stay consistent. If you only care about wins/losses, then analytics are very important.

So, you're saying Zion Williamson, one of the most exciting above-the-rim prospects in recent memory, needs to shoot more 10-18' jump shots, because it will be more interesting for you? And that somehow that would not be forcing a square peg into a round hole? A 2pt shot from anywhere but at the rim is the worst shot in basketball. That's great that Karl Malone liked it. Let's just say I disagree. The NBA is more fun now than ever. Following along how the stats have impacted the game, and the way the teams that have embraced stats have succeeded, just makes the whole thing more fun . Those teams you're romanticizing would have gotten smoked by teams now. No shame in it, just that the league has gotten better. That's what we want, right? I think it's awesome that the game is changing for the better. And also, I think your memory is playing tricks on you. Malone and Duncan weren't quite as efficient as you remember. https://the-cauldron.com/most-valuable-shot-charts-613ae6f392cf (Click on each MVP season, and then you can click on the interactive image for percentages) In his MVP 02 season, Duncan was 58.9% at the rim, and that doesn't even account for a percentage that were uncontested. So the true "post up" percentage would be lower. Not only that, that percentage isn't significantly higher than league average. He was significantly better than the league average at a 2pt baseline jumper, but even then he only made 45% of them, making it a terrible shot to take. Every time Tim Duncan took a 2pt baseline jumper, he was hurting his team. Same goes for Malone. He did shoot significantly higher percentage on 2pt jump shots than the rest of the league, but even at 45%, he was hurting his team with every attempt.

My favorite take on this:

They didn't even mention Indiana. I don't know that we're leaders, but we're in it. Isn't he scheduled to come to the Indiana-Louisville game on December 8? Also he just said this week that he's nearing a decision. It was in the ESPN article about G league $125K salaries. Hard to decipher the timeline, but seems more current than this information: "I am already nearing a decision soon about which college to attend. I just feel that my class is already committed. Players are in their recruitment," he said. "Maybe there will be two or three players that will look into it. But I might be wrong."

Pretty serious over-reaction. Gather some information first.

It's a waste of your time? You've managed to make this about you. Who raised you to be self-centered? He's earned this. Just ignore it if it bothers you. Fair to say there's a big market for this stuff. I like the theory that he's going to have a 3 hat ceremony, and he needed the cut to make the numbers work.

247 Sports has him at #12 overall. He's #21 composite. So you've never seen him play? I saw him last year play for his high school team, and again at EYBL in April. He dominated EYBL, probably one of the best 5 players. He really controlled the floor, looked to involve others, and was just opportunistic to get his own points. He did look faaaar better than with his HS team. I've wondered elsewhere if part of his transfer to LaLu was so he could move to his more natural position of wing, instead of being the de facto PF. Will he be better than Hunter as a sophomore? Probably not. But Archie seems to want one primary ball handler, and then 4 rangy, multi-skilled combo forwards. He sells all of these guys that they'll have the opportunity to do some playmaking. Keion is good. I think in the right situation he'll do well.

Exactly. They create controversy and suspense so the clicks keep coming. Clicks equal advertising dollars. They know IU has a huge fan base, and that TJD will commit soon. Just want to cash in again real fast while they can.