A much too early look at the 18-19 Big Ten

[Paterfamilias]

With IU out of Tourney action this year, I've been working on roster updates while watching the games. Last time someone mentioned that verbalcommits.com was sometimes unreliable, so I'm now double checking each player.

The rosters have player ratings for the next 4 years, which allows you to get a better picture of roster building long term. The ratings are derived from a bunch of averages based on recruiting rankings from Rivals, Scout and ESPN. Some will not look very accurate (Carson Edwards for example), but it's okay that the scouts aren't always right. The game is great because we don't know what's going to happen.

I could change the ratings to be more in line with what we think might be accurate, but I like having it based solely on recruiting and experience level.

Romeo is a big question mark, but I've placed him on the IU roster for the time being.

I'm not sure if I can put it all in one post, so I'm breaking it into tiers. The first tier are the top contenders, which at the moment is a two horse race imo. IU belongs in the 2nd tier, but I'm listing them first for the key code.

... to be continued after I return a phone call

 

[Paterfamilias]

The 2nd tier...

 

[Paterfamilias]

 

[Paterfamilias]

Tier 3....

 

[IU Scott]

Wouldn't it be better to wait a few weeks to do this to see how the rosters play out. I noticed you did not have Wagner on UM and a few others that you have leaving for the NBA from MSU. Also there will be some transfers and I have seen that two from Iowa is already transferring. Also teams will still have the spring signing period to get more talent so to me it will be easier to predict the big ten in a few weeks.

 

[darkhawk returns]

I guess I may be reading it wrong, but are you saying you think IU will only have 4 players who can start in the B10? Are you saying none of the players you left in black will be solid contributors? Personally, I think you have to have either Phinisee or Green starting. I see you seem to have other team's roles more determined. Is this because you just aren't sure or because you think all those players will really only be bench level players not ready for the B10? Just curious...

 

[T.M.P.]

Wouldn't it be better to wait a few weeks to do this to see how the rosters play out. I noticed you did not have Wagner on UM and a few others that you have leaving for the NBA from MSU. Also there will be some transfers and I have seen that two from Iowa is already transferring. Also teams will still have the spring signing period to get more talent so to me it will be easier to predict the big ten in a few weeks.

I think that's what he meant by "much too early" instead of saying "early".

Words have meaning.

 

[T.M.P.]

The 2nd tier...

fwiw -
01. Michigan
02. Maryland
03. Michigan St.
04. Indiana
05. PSU
06. Nebraska
07. Wisconsin
08. Iowa
09. OSU
10. Purdue
11. Rutgers
12. Minnesota
13. Illinois
14. Northwestern

 

[boiler1987]

Tier 3....

So De’Ron Davis is a national award watch list guy and Carsen Edwards is only a power conference starter? I get Purdue loses a lot but Carsen isn’t going to go from a 2nd team AA this year to just a power conference starter. That’s crazy. And Morgan rated worse than Davis? No way.

 

[T.M.P.]

With IU out of Tourney action this year, I've been working on roster updates while watching the games. Last time someone mentioned that verbalcommits.com was sometimes unreliable, so I'm now double checking each player.

The rosters have player ratings for the next 4 years, which allows you to get a better picture of roster building long term. The ratings are derived from a bunch of averages based on recruiting rankings from Rivals, Scout and ESPN. Some will not look very accurate (Carson Edwards for example), but it's okay that the scouts aren't always right. The game is great because we don't know what's going to happen.

I could change the ratings to be more in line with what we think might be accurate, but I like having it based solely on recruiting and experience level.

Romeo is a big question mark, but I've placed him on the IU roster for the time being.

I'm not sure if I can put it all in one post, so I'm breaking it into tiers. The first tier are the top contenders, which at the moment is a two horse race imo. IU belongs in the 2nd tier, but I'm listing them first for the key code.

... to be continued after I return a phone call

Verbal commits is fine when it's players already on roster. Commits are never up to date until freshman. Unless you're finding differently?

 

[Paterfamilias]

I guess I may be reading it wrong, but are you saying you think IU will only have 4 players who can start in the B10? Are you saying none of the players you left in black will be solid contributors? Personally, I think you have to have either Phinisee or Green starting. I see you seem to have other team's roles more determined. Is this because you just aren't sure or because you think all those players will really only be bench level players not ready for the B10? Just curious...

I got tied up just as I was posting this and don't have time to answer questions, but it as all based on historical averages for players at their level of ranking and experience. I'm sure one or two will step up and be better than advertised.

 

[IndianaHoops]

fwiw -
01. Michigan
02. Maryland
03. Michigan St.
04. Indiana
05. PSU
06. Nebraska
07. Wisconsin
08. Iowa
09. OSU
10. Purdue
11. Rutgers
12. Minnesota
13. Illinois
14. Northwestern

I can agree

 

[T.M.P.]

Without Romeo

with ...

Mich with Wagner. MSU without Bridges/Jackson. OSU without Bate-Diop. Maryland with Jackson/Fernando.

 

[IndianaHoops]

with ...

Mich with Wagner. MSU without Bridges/Jackson. OSU without Bate-Diop. Maryland with Jackson.Fernando.

You really think they all stay? I guess...maybe.... I doubt it

Even Cook from Iowa is testing the waters.

 

[T.M.P.]

You really think they all stay? I guess...maybe.... I doubt it

Even Cook from Iowa is testing the waters.

Justin Jackson, Fernando and Wagner were not projected 1st round. It may change once they go through evaluation.

Cook can go to Europe. He won't be drafted.

 

[Paterfamilias]

Wouldn't it be better to wait a few weeks to do this to see how the rosters play out. I noticed you did not have Wagner on UM and a few others that you have leaving for the NBA from MSU. Also there will be some transfers and I have seen that two from Iowa is already transferring. Also teams will still have the spring signing period to get more talent so to me it will be easier to predict the big ten in a few weeks.

Yep, and I'll update as things materialize on my spreadsheet. I always start looking forward to the next season right away, and I figure there are more out there like me who might appreciate this kind of stuff. I'll actually have all of the major conferences finished soon, but in a format that's too esoteric for posting. I thought I would polish up the Big Ten and add some color for my good pals here on the forum

 

[IU Scott]

Yep, and I'll update as things materialize on my spreadsheet. I always start looking forward to the next season right away, and I figure there are more out there like me who might appreciate this kind of stuff. I'll actually have all of the major conferences finished soon, but in a format that's too esoteric for posting. I thought I would polish up the Big Ten and add some color for my good pals here on the forum

Sounds good and I wouldn't be surprised to see a few surprises of players leaving early like C. Edwards. I know he is small guard but he seems like he is confident in his skills and might think he is ready for the NBA. Also with Purdue losing 4 starters he might not want to come back for a rebuild.

 

[Paterfamilias]

I guess I may be reading it wrong, but are you saying you think IU will only have 4 players who can start in the B10? Are you saying none of the players you left in black will be solid contributors? Personally, I think you have to have either Phinisee or Green starting. I see you seem to have other team's roles more determined. Is this because you just aren't sure or because you think all those players will really only be bench level players not ready for the B10? Just curious...

I'm not really predicting anything at all. I think of it as an average development chart. Some will develop much faster and some much slower, but this is a pretty decent representation of what to expect from players as time passes.

IU has several players rated very similar. Anderson, Phinisee and Forrester are all rated as 4 star recruits by each of the 3 services. Even though they are all outside the RSCI top 100, these type of players have had a performance level very similar to the guys ranked 75-100. So similar in fact that I don't rate them any differently than Justin Smith.

I would probably expect them to have growing pains early in the season and begin to find themselves sometime during conference play. By the end of the season, they will be very close to their sophomore rating. Hopefully, we find that a couple of these guys are far above average on the development scale.

 

[Paterfamilias]

So De’Ron Davis is a national award watch list guy and Carsen Edwards is only a power conference starter? I get Purdue loses a lot but Carsen isn’t going to go from a 2nd team AA this year to just a power conference starter. That’s crazy. And Morgan rated worse than Davis? No way.

I love to watch Carsen Edwards play and am I founding member of the Morgan fan club. If you want to know how good a player is, there are plenty of places to look for stats and PER's. I could go through and start making adjustments, but I prefer that these rosters be based on something that is beyond my judgement. I use recruiting rankings and experience... very simple.

As for the Boilers, I think we got a sneak peek tonight of the potential one man band that they may be next year. Painter almost always outperforms my ratings though, which in my opinion either makes him an excellent coach or an excellent scout.

... I know it can't be that my roster ratings are bad

 

[Hausta01]

fwiw -
01. Michigan
02. Maryland
03. Michigan St.
04. Indiana
05. PSU
06. Nebraska
07. Wisconsin
08. Iowa
09. OSU
10. Purdue
11. Rutgers
12. Minnesota
13. Illinois
14. Northwestern

Illinois is too low and Penn State is too high IMO. I do like you put Crying Chris Collins at the bottom though!

 

[Paterfamilias]

fwiw -
01. Michigan
02. Maryland
03. Michigan St.
04. Indiana
05. PSU
06. Nebraska
07. Wisconsin
08. Iowa
09. OSU
10. Purdue
11. Rutgers
12. Minnesota
13. Illinois
14. Northwestern

The Minny, Illini, NW triumvirate aside, looks to fall in line with my roster ratings pretty well. Will be interesting to see the roster changes in the coming weeks!

 

[IndianaHoops]

Illinois is too low and Penn State is too high IMO. I do like you put Crying Chris Collins at the bottom though!

UI has already lost Smith and Black.

They have one 5 star guard coming in but will be very thin up front.

 

[iubud]

The Minny, Illini, NW triumvirate aside, looks to fall in line with my roster ratings pretty well. Will be interesting to see the roster changes in the coming weeks!

Analysis aside, I don't see UM and Iowa being as high as TMP has them. UM is on a good run, but loses steam after the season ends. Fran will disappoint fans and be out after next year.

 

[birdforbogey]

I think that's what he meant by "much too early" instead of saying "early".

Words have meaning.

Understanding words is also very overrated. vbg

 

[Paterfamilias]

Analysis aside, I don't see UM and Iowa being as high as TMP has them. UM is on a good run, but loses steam after the season ends. Fran will disappoint fans and be out after next year.

My exact order as of now (according to the roster scores) looks like this...

#1 Maryland
#2 MSU
#3 Indiana (dependent on Romeo and mostly healthy Deron)
#4 Michigan
#5 Penn St.
#6 Nebraska
#7 Minnesota
#8 Northwestern
#9 Wisconsin
#10 Illinos
#11 Iowa
#12 Ohio St.
#13 Purdue
#14 Rutgers

It looks like there is a distinct top 2 in Maryland and MSU, a distinct bottom 4... then everyone else looks somewhat interchangeable.

Indiana without Romeo or a healthy Deron, would be in the bottom 4 as well imo.

One thing I've noticed since I've been doing this is that pure point guards are most likely to walk on campus ready to play at upperclassmen levels. If IU can get that from Phinisee, it would be huge.

 

[Hatchets7times]

If Romeo doesn't come.
And Davis won't be great healthy or not..I see IU like 4th or 5th.
Now a very good transfer .Like a guy who averages 12 to 14 and Romeo.
Might push top three..Idk. We'll be ok.Ought to be at lest a bubble team .If not just get in.

 

[Paterfamilias]

If Romeo doesn't come.
And Davis won't be great healthy or not..I see IU like 4th or 5th.
Now a very good transfer .Like a guy who averages 12 to 14 and Romeo.
Might push top three..Idk. We'll be ok.Ought to be at lest a bubble team .If not just get in.

Without Romeo or Davis, my system actually has IU in last place in the Big. However, the future is bright as IU would have a Top 25 type roster score in 19-20, and Top 10-ish in the 20-21 season. If Archie adds impact players in the next 2 classes it gets brighter still.

Continuity is the key and maybe another year of patience.

 

[iubud]

My exact order as of now (according to the roster scores) looks like this...

#1 Maryland
#2 MSU
#3 Indiana (dependent on Romeo and mostly healthy Deron)
#4 Michigan
#5 Penn St.
#6 Nebraska
#7 Minnesota
#8 Northwestern
#9 Wisconsin
#10 Illinos
#11 Iowa
#12 Ohio St.
#13 Purdue
#14 Rutgers

It looks like there is a distinct top 2 in Maryland and MSU, a distinct bottom 4... then everyone else looks somewhat interchangeable.

Indiana without Romeo or a healthy Deron, would be in the bottom 4 as well imo.

One thing I've noticed since I've been doing this is that pure point guards are most likely to walk on campus ready to play at upperclassmen levels. If IU can get that from Phinisee, it would be huge.

I'm not counting on Phinisee to be the PG from day 1, but it will be a good sign if he is. Davis gives us length and experience to go along with Morgan. I would love to know how he is doing.

We need 2 shooting guards. Romeo and one of several options gets us to the top 5. I feel top 3 would require someone like Smith or Thompson breaking out in an expanded role. I've been disappointed in my expectations in players recently, so I am guarded in my optimism.

 

[bsmitty08]

I love to watch Carsen Edwards play and am I founding member of the Morgan fan club. If you want to know how good a player is, there are plenty of places to look for stats and PER's. I could go through and start making adjustments, but I prefer that these rosters be based on something that is beyond my judgement. I use recruiting rankings and experience... very simple.

As for the Boilers, I think we got a sneak peek tonight of the potential one man band that they may be next year. Painter almost always outperforms my ratings though, which in my opinion either makes him an excellent coach or an excellent scout.

... I know it can't be that my roster ratings are bad

Edwards will be the best player in the BIG next year

 

[TR32]

I appreciate the effort put in here. Lots of good effort.

However, a couple of things come readily to mind.

1.) There is tremendous bias in the assumptions of projected ability.
There is a somewhat tangible approach to using recruiting rankings because they are static and at least consistent in how they are compared each year by the same media who publish them. But "improvement" is nearly impossible to project on even one team, let alone the whole conference. Would anyone have placed Oladipo as a future NBA all star when he arrived without great handles or a jump shot in Bloomington? What about Anounoby starting for the Raptors in what would have been his junior year at IU after starting out ranked 150 or so out of high school.

Heck, the preseason Big Ten writers didn't have Bates-Diop in their top 25, let alone player of the year.

2.) The idea of "roster building" implies change more so than improvement of the players. Look at Michigan. They have built their current team through picking up a Kentucky transfer and a DIII transfer who are now a major part of their line up and success. Thus, the future depth and chemistry of a team can not really be projected at a single time. It is better to simply look at next year once we find out about signings and transfers.

 

[Paterfamilias]

I appreciate the effort put in here. Lots of good effort.

However, a couple of things come readily to mind.

1.) There is tremendous bias in the assumptions of projected ability.
There is a somewhat tangible approach to using recruiting rankings because they are static and at least consistent in how they are compared each year by the same media who publish them. But "improvement" is nearly impossible to project on even one team, let alone the whole conference. Would anyone have placed Oladipo as a future NBA all star when he arrived without great handles or a jump shot in Bloomington? What about Anounoby starting for the Raptors in what would have been his junior year at IU after starting out ranked 150 or so out of high school.

Heck, the preseason Big Ten writers didn't have Bates-Diop in their top 25, let alone player of the year.

2.) The idea of "roster building" implies change more so than improvement of the players. Look at Michigan. They have built their current team through picking up a Kentucky transfer and a DIII transfer who are now a major part of their line up and success. Thus, the future depth and chemistry of a team can not really be projected at a single time. It is better to simply look at next year once we find out about signings and transfers.

I don't disagree with much of what you are saying here. As for Bates-Diop, he was a redshirt senior, ranked #29 by RSCI as a recruit. That made him one of the top 5 players in the conference by my roster ratings.

I think of roster building as long term. Grabbing up grad transfers etc. just plugs up the holes of poor roster building.

 

[T.M.P.]

But "improvement" is nearly impossible to project on even one team,

Unless you track average PER per ranking position and role and apply those averages as average improvement,

 

[TR32]

I think of roster building as long term. Grabbing up grad transfers etc. just plugs up the holes of poor roster building.

In that regard, McSwain and McRoberts were pretty valuable for IU this year. Maryland had a talented roster but lost a player to injury and went on a slide.

 

[cshartle123]

I’m not overly concerned about the roster. Virginia does just fine in the ACC with average recruiting classes. The recipe for a title is getting two or three kids from Indiana each year, and coaching them up. Our players are good enough with or without Romeo. I do think Archie needs another year of teaching before we can start winning big games.

 

[IU Scott]

Just look at the elite 8 teams and most of their rosters are not made up of top high school players except for Duke. Even KU does not have many high school all americans on their roster this year. To me I want IU to build their roster like Villanova where they have a couple of high school all americans and the rest is made up of top 100 players.

 

[5morebanners]

Wouldn't it be better to wait a few weeks to do this to see how the rosters play out. I noticed you did not have Wagner on UM and a few others that you have leaving for the NBA from MSU. Also there will be some transfers and I have seen that two from Iowa is already transferring. Also teams will still have the spring signing period to get more talent so to me it will be easier to predict the big ten in a few weeks.

I think that's what he meant by "much too early" instead of saying "early".

Words have meaning.

No, words don't have meanings. They have usages.

 

[T.M.P.]

No, words don't have meanings. They have usages.

What was the usage of your post?

 

[kmathum]

fwiw -
01. Michigan
02. Maryland
03. Michigan St.
04. Indiana
05. PSU
06. Nebraska
07. Wisconsin
08. Iowa
09. OSU
10. Purdue
11. Rutgers
12. Minnesota
13. Illinois
14. Northwestern

michigan and maryland? forget it.

 

[T.M.P.]

michigan and maryland? forget it.

No.