Any successful team needs talent to compete at a high level. It is as essential to determining how good a program can be as offensive and defensive systems, in-game strategy and adjustments, and preparation. It is extremely difficult to win without at least a couple of high-caliber players.
What often gets overlooked when discussions turn to recruiting is overall strategy and the execution of that strategy. It is the tendency of analysts to grade recruiting classes based on a numerical designation for each player. I read recruiting blogs all the time and I see analyses that say something like "Team X signed 3 Top 100 players for next year. They have the 6rd best recruiting class in the country." What I do not see often is commentary on how well the players who have signed with a school will fit into the system at that school. Even less common is commentary on executing a recruiting strategy for programs who don't sign the "best of the best" players.
Some schools go after the absolute creme de la creme and sign those players every year. A great example is North Carolina. Roy Williams and his staff go out and get a ton of top tier talent. Since 2008, UNC has successfully recruited 10 McDonald's All-Americans. Similarly, Duke has 10 McDonald's All-Americans since 2006. Obviously, those programs are two of the best in the country, because they bring in the talent and, most of the time, the players they get adjust to their system and are productive. Kansas is up there too. They have 5 MAM's since 2006. Not coincidentally, Duke, UNC, and Kansas are the last 3 NCAA Champions. While having top flight talent with regularity is advantageous, it isn't the only way to field a top tier team.
There are other programs which land the occasional McDonald's all American and recruit "second tier" players, but still enjoy great success. Syracuse, Connecticut, and Michigan State are good examples of teams who fit this mold. Boeheim likes to recruit players who work well in the 2-3 zone Syracuse plays. They always have rangy forwards who can challenge wing shooters, At least one enormous forward/center who clogs the lane and rebounds. They usually have at least one scoring guard as well. Syracuse has developed a system that serve them well and doesn't require top 50 recruits every year to sustain it.
UCONN always has a shot blocking center. They have deliberately sacrificed offensive polish for defensive presence at the center position with Hasheem Thabeet and Emeka Okafor as prime examples. Calhoun and his staff have assured defensive continuity over the years by bringing in raw centers who they develop over a couple of years. Thabeet stayed in college for 3 years and Okafor was at UCONN for 4 seasons. UCONN develops talent and supplements it with the occasional superstar. They find players who play their up tempo system and develop them. Calhoun has sent a ton of players to the NBA over the last 20 years.
Michigan State gets their McDonald's All-Americans, but they don't comprise the bulk of their teams. Tom Izzo is an unbelievable motivator, willing his Michigan State teams to 6 Final Fours in the last 12 years. Izzo's staff recruits regionally to put together their teams. The current Michigan State roster is comprised of players from 4 states only: Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Nine of their players are from Michigan alone. It is not all that surprising given that the style of basketball played in Michigan mirrors Izzo's style...tough and physical.
I believe the schools that deserve the most credit with regard to recruiting are the schools that don't get the top players and recruit diamonds in the rough out of necessity. These programs can't get the attention of the most heavily recruited players and don't waste their time trying to bag the elephant. Gonzaga, Butler, and Xavier operate their programs under this model. You see at least one of these programs in the Sweet Sixteen just about every year, yet they build their teams with talent comprised of players that are outside of the top 100 recruits. They are the teams that the basketball factories think twice about playing during the year for fear of being embarrassed by a team that they should beat given the overall talent levels of the two programs.
There are challenges to recruiting no matter what any school's situation is. The top schools may land the best players, but many of those players head for the NBA early, disrupting team chemistry. This has effected Duke and UNC at times (although, with over 60 McDonald's All-Americans since that game started in the 70's, Carolina can't complain). Other schools have to look for talent that can be developed into competitive players or talented players who were somehow overlooked by the powerhouse programs.
Nobody has it easy..recruiting is hard work for every program. However, what makes college basketball so much fun to watch is the parity...watching David beat Goliath during the early season tournaments and especially in March is what makes college basketball a better sport to watch than, say, college football in my opinion. That said, I'd like to tip my cap to all the small schools or mid-majors or whatever you call them for executing their recruiting strategies and making college basketball the best sport there is.
No comments:
Post a Comment