Mar 1, 2015
1,417
2,113

anigif_enhanced-buzz-7468-1385565319-12%5B1%5D.gif
 

VCU Heel

Top Member
Aug 7, 2012
11,040
12,457
If you have a chance, then you should listen to the interview. Easily available on YouTube. He didn’t always get 5 star guys either. It’s like Ol’ Roy saying he never pays attention to advanced stats. I’m sure someone on his staff probably does, but the overriding theme I have heard from many of the top coaches in multiple sports is this: advanced stats and recruiting stars are a tool. They are not basing their team and program solely on either. They look at many more things to evaluate players, playing decisions, etc.

Far too many people now look solely at advanced stats and recruiting stars without considering other aspects. For example, Player A has advanced stats that are better than Player B, so Player A should be on the floor more. There is so much more to playing time that just some advanced stat. We should recruit player Y over Player Z, because Player Y is 4 star and player Z is 3 star. It’s not that simple. So much more goes into it, and should, than just the number of stars. That’s the point I think both Roy, Saban and many other top coaches I’ve heard, are trying to make. We as fans want to simplify it into a stat or the number of stars, and it isn’t that simple.
Dean Smith and Bill Guthridge (two math majors in college) pretty much invented advanced stats in their early days at UNC. They weren’t as advanced as things have become now, but they were using them decades ago. And UNC still gives awards each game to players that perform the best, like defensive player of the game. Those awards are partly based on analytics, so you’re correct that there was definitely someone paying attention to it, though I doubt Roy did himself. He’s a very different kind of coach/person from Dean.

With recruiting rankings, I think they are extremely valuable and pretty damned accurate. They aren’t always right, but the top 25 basketball players in each class as a group will outperform any group of 25 three star players that any college coach could pick out after evaluations. A big part of that is that the ranking are based largely on college coaches’ evaluations and the offers they give recruits.
 

HBK

Top Member
Mar 29, 2010
4,817
10,676
Dean Smith and Bill Guthridge (two math majors in college) pretty much invented advanced stats in their early days at UNC. They weren’t as advanced as things have become now, but they were using them decades ago. And UNC still gives awards each game to players that perform the best, like defensive player of the game. Those awards are partly based on analytics, so you’re correct that there was definitely someone paying attention to it, though I doubt Roy did himself. He’s a very different kind of coach/person from Dean.

With recruiting rankings, I think they are extremely valuable and pretty damned accurate. They aren’t always right, but the top 25 basketball players in each class as a group will outperform any group of 25 three star players that any college coach could pick out after evaluations. A big part of that is that the ranking are based largely on college coaches’ evaluations and the offers they give recruits.
On recruiting rankings, I think they are much more accurate in basketball than in football. There are just so many variables in football with 22 guys on the field at once.
 

VCU Heel

Top Member
Aug 7, 2012
11,040
12,457
On recruiting rankings, I think they are much more accurate in basketball than in football. There are just so many variables in football with 22 guys on the field at once.
There are more players in football, so the field is deeper, but football rankings are still pretty good. In fact, I’d say they are even more important in football than basketball.

There’s a reason why Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Notre Dame have had 22 of the 28 spots in the College Football Playoff in the 7 years it’s existed. Eleven teams have made the football Final Four in 7 years. The other 6 spots were LSU, Georgia, Florida State, Michigan State, Oregon, and Washington. Four teams have won titles in 7 years (Alabama with 3, Clemson with 2, and Ohio State and LSU with one each). The teams that are at the top of the recruiting rankings actually do better in football than basketball.

Imagine if the Final Four for the last 7 years had 5 teams getting 22 of the 28 spots. A quick glance and it looks like there were 22 teams that have made the Final Four in the last 7 events with UNC, Villanova, Kentucky, Gonzaga, Michigan State, and Wisconsin being the only teams to have made it twice and no one winning more than one title.
 
Last edited: