How Many 5*s for Dayton and Wisconsin?

Contributors tonight:

Dayton:
STARTERS PTS CLASS Ranking(Rivals)
Matt Kavanaugh 10 rsSR 3*
Devin Oliver 12 SR 2*
Dyshawn Pierre 6 SO N/R
Khari Price 2 SO N/R
Jordan Sibert 18 rsJR 4* transfer from Ohio St
BENCH PTS
Devon Scott 6 SO 3*
Jalen Robinson 4 SO 3*
Kendall Pollard 12 FR 3*
Vee Sanford 4 SR 3* transfer from Georgetown
Kyle Davis 3 FR 3*
Scoochie Smith 5 FR 4*

Wisky:
STARTERS PTS CLASS Ranking(Rivals -- since 24/7 hasn't been around)
Frank Kaminsky 19 JR 3*
Sam Dekker 7 SO 5* from Wisconsin
Josh Gasser 4 rsJR 3*
Ben Brust 14 SR 3*
Traevon Jackson 7 JR 3*
BENCH PTS
Duje Dukan 5 rsJR 3*
Nigel Hayes 10 FR 3*
Bronson Koenig 3 FR 4*

1 5* So starter and 1 4* Fr limited backup for Wisconsin
1 4* rsJR transfer starter and 1 4* Fr limited backup for Dayton

Common thread? Carried by a bunch of battle-tested upperclassmen -- and complemented by underclassmen. Average starter experience on those teams:
Dayton: 3.4 years
Wisconsin: 3.2 years

High basketball IQ , people that can shoot and defend. Really good Coaching.

How many stars do their coaches get? HC and assistants. What's the basketball environment at those two schools like? Do they place basketball #3 in the pecking order?

Stars in basketball are even more stupid than stars in football. Outside of the ESPN top 5 it's a crapshoot.

ETA: 2013 Rookie of the Year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esplanade91

Stars in basketball are even more stupid than stars in football. Outside of the ESPN top 5 it's a crapshoot.

---

No. They are perfect and mean everything. You can predict exactly what teams are going to be by the number of stars attached to recruits' names, even though none of these "scouts" ever saw them play a single game in person. And if you aren't chock full of 5*s and 4*s, you have no chance of success...

**

Dayton has (2)4* . Wisky (1 )4* and (1) 5*

We have no 4 or 5 stars . If anything this tells me Ray needs to recruit a couple of 4/5 stars on our roster if we want to make the dance

Ware was a 4-star.

Bo Ryan is an excellent coach and has had the Badgers in the big dance every year he has been there....let that sink in.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/...bo-ryan-1.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MSUTTT1

Bo Ryan is an excellent coach and has had the Badgers in the big dance every year he has been there....let that sink in.

---

He recruits very, VERY few 4*s and 5*s... That means he has no chance at real success**

Did either of these teams ever have a 13 game conference losing streak?

Ray has next year to make progress and I hope he does. He is a good fundamental coach that has had a major rebuilding job with the disaster he walked into.
But It's been hard to have an interest in a coach who was not the best candidate for the job but was the best fit for what the current administration was looking for.
especially when he buts up the results he has.

I'll never root for a MSU Coach to fail (well minus the Crooms last Egg Bowl) but he hasn't given me any reason to believe he can succeed yet.
and I liked Rick a lot as a person but the closer I got with his teams during my time at State, he needed to be forced out. So in no way did I want him to stay

13 game losing streaks in both seasons he was head coach. In fact with the way we started, you would have had to have a catastrophic collapse to finish the way we did. If he had gotten to 16-17 wins with no streak like that, no one would be having to defend him because no one would be complaining and we would see everyone's vision that things are looking better. But a 13 game losing streak in one of the worst conferences out there will bring with it their skeptics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

He recruits very, VERY few 4*s and 5*s... That means he has no chance at real success**

---

LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MSUTTT1

Bo Ryan is an excellent coach and has had the Badgers in the big dance every year he has been there....let that sink in.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/...bo-ryan-1.html

---

Big 10 coaches are in general better basketball coaches than SEC basketball coaches, IMO. Guys like Bo Ryan, Matt Painter, and Tom Izzo recruit to their systems. They do a great job at developing the players they get. They don't go after many guys who are one and done in college.

Compare that to John Calapari, who recruits the stars but does so only because he can't develop a player worth a damn. His x's and o's basketball coaching also sucks, and he needs 5 athletes to put on the floor just to make things work.

I personaly am glad that we have someone that was on Matt Painter's staff at Purdue as our coach.

This argument goes against you just as much as you may think it helps. Saying stars don't matter just throws us into a pile of 100 schools that recruit a bunch of 3 stars with the occasional 4 and hoping we emerge from this group as one of the few teams that wins big and makes deep tournament runs. Pointing our Wisconsin and Dayton success is merely just to give us the slightest bit of hope, but in reality they represent a very small portion of teams recruiting on that "star" level. I guess my point is a lot more goes into success than stars.

Here's what I think most of you who are on Ray's case do not understand. Games are won and lost due to the players on the court. There is only so much a coach can control when it comes to the game. He can draw up the best play in the right situation, but if the players don't execute the play, it won't work.

I'm not sure there was a worse situation for a coach to walk into than the one Rick Ray inherited at Mississippi State given the dumpster fire that Rick Stansbury left behind. The only one that is close and may actually have been worse was what Scott Drew went into at Baylor. Guess what. Scott Drew didn't have a winning season till his 5th year at Baylor. When he got the program built back up and started getting the players, Baylor started winning. Scott Drew is a heck of a coach, but coaches can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit.

Situations like this take time to recover from. This is why an established mid major coach did not want this job. They knew it would be a while before this team could win, and they weren't going to risk their careers by taking on this dumpster fire.

Really? You are comparing this situation to Baylor? It's bad enough people comparing this situation to the one at Indiana but let's go a step further. All I know whatever he does next year, it will be interesting to see how the boards and factions shake out. Should be entertaining for Coach, Dawgstudent, Paul, and Gene.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chef dixon

I guess my point is a lot more goes into success than stars.

---

Which is my point exactly.

You almost never see a young team go deep into March, sans a UK team that's basically an NBA team talent-wise. There are a handful of powerhouses that can go regardless of the makeup of their roster -- but in general -- age/experience > stars.

The common thread among those two teams are that they are veteran, battle-tested squads that are led by players have played together for a long time. If you look at the teams that make it even to the round of 32, they are almost always veteran teams full of juniors and seniors. Hell, even for the ones that make the tournament, that's generally true...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KB21

Big 10 coaches are in general better basketball coaches than SEC basketball coaches, IMO. Guys like Bo Ryan, Matt Painter, and Tom Izzo recruit to their systems. They do a great job at developing the players they get. They don't go after many guys who are one and done in college.

Compare that to John Calapari, who recruits the stars but does so only because he can't develop a player worth a damn. His x's and o's basketball coaching also sucks, and he needs 5 athletes to put on the floor just to make things work.

I personaly am glad that we have someone that was on Matt Painter's staff at Purdue as our coach.

---

and you loved Ron Polk two and wanted Tommy Raffo and railed against John Cohen--so please tell me why we should we believe you might know what the **** you are talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KB21

Here's what I think most of you who are on Ray's case do not understand. Games are won and lost due to the players on the court. There is only so much a coach can control when it comes to the game. He can draw up the best play in the right situation, but if the players don't execute the play, it won't work.

I'm not sure there was a worse situation for a coach to walk into than the one Rick Ray inherited at Mississippi State given the dumpster fire that Rick Stansbury left behind. The only one that is close and may actually have been worse was what Scott Drew went into at Baylor. Guess what. Scott Drew didn't have a winning season till his 5th year at Baylor. When he got the program built back up and started getting the players, Baylor started winning. Scott Drew is a heck of a coach, but coaches can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit.

Situations like this take time to recover from. This is why an established mid major coach did not want this job. They knew it would be a while before this team could win, and they weren't going to risk their careers by taking on this dumpster fire.

---

Scott Drew is a great recruiter. Not a good X's and O's guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

Which is my point exactly.

You almost never see a young team go deep into March, sans a UK team that's basically an NBA team talent-wise. There are a handful of powerhouses that can go regardless of the makeup of their roster -- but in general -- age/experience > stars.

The common thread among those two teams are that they are veteran, battle-tested squads that are led by players have played together for a long time. If you look at the teams that make it even to the round of 32, they are almost always veteran teams full of juniors and seniors. Hell, even for the ones that make the tournament, that's generally true...

---

Starting next year our team is suddenly not young anymore, so I hope it translates well for us. I'd bet we have the most returning career minutes in the conference next year, if not damn near close. I'm ok with saying stars in recruiting doesn't matter, but we've got miles to go to be on the level of a team like Wisconsin regardless of recruiting similarities. A good chunk of this has to be on the coach. I'm willing for wait since Ray has been given an unfair hand, but next year goes a long way in swaying my opinion in either direction given an experienced roster and a chance to see a number of recruits he's directly responsible for.