Analysis of NCAAW Recruiting Part Three: Who are the best recruiting schools in the country?

[Carnac]

In part three of our study, we examine what schools bring in the top prospects and analyze how different programs approach recruiting.

"If you asked me where Coach Wooden’s pyramid of success was, I couldn’t name you one of them. So my pyramid of success is the same as his. His was [Lew] Alcindor, [Bill] Walton and Gail Goodrich and you name them down the line. Mine is Diana [Taurasi], Maya [Moore] and Stewie [Breanna Stewart]. That's my pyramid of success." – Geno Auriemma.

Analysis of NCAAW Recruiting Part Three: Who are the best recruiting schools in the country?

In part three of our study, we examine what schools bring in the top prospects and analyze how different programs approach recruiting.

herhoopstats.substack.com

 

[nwhoopfan]

Interesting pointing out that top 10 group has 32 of the last 40 Final 4 appearances...but Texas and Tennessee have none of those, correct?

That next 20 group is really hit and miss though. For some of them, recruiting success has had pretty much no correlation to on court success. USC, Vandy, Georgia Tech? It's a 10 year period, so maybe some schools started off stronger but are trending downward during that period (Oklahoma for example).

So...where is Mississippi St., Oregon St. and Oregon? Those 3 have been punching way above their weight class when you consider their absence from even being in the top 30 for recruiting over the last 10 years.

 

[eebmg]

The implication is that the Women's game is pretty top heavy. Is the men's game really that different statistically as far as recruiting ??

 

[nwhoopfan]

The implication is that the Women's game is pretty top heavy. Is the men's game really that different statistically as far as recruiting ??

I think it's so apples and oranges, can't really compare. Recruiting success in men's hoops means a steady stream of one and done players, so no continuity. Talent, even young talent, is good to have, but in recent years it seems like the veteran teams without a bunch of NBA lottery picks are making the most noise in the Tourney. I think Duke is without a doubt the king of the hill in recruiting in mbb the last decade, but what do they really have to show for it? Counting this year, even though there was no Tourney, in the last decade they have 1 National Championship, but NO other Final 4's and unbelievably haven't won the ACC regular season title even once. It's strange, but I think winning in recruiting is about bragging rights for how many players you send to the NBA and how quickly you get them there. It's really not even about winning Championships anymore. Seems really backward, but that's how I see it. I think Calipari started that, but after initially speaking out against it, Coach K is now 100% on board with it.

I'm not gonna look it up, but there's no way the top 10 schools in recruiting have accumulated 32 of 40 Final Four slots in men's hoops, it's more spread out than that.

 

[eebmg]

I think it's so apples and oranges, can't really compare. Recruiting success in men's hoops means a steady stream of one and done players, so no continuity. Talent, even young talent, is good to have, but in recent years it seems like the veteran teams without a bunch of NBA lottery picks are making the most noise in the Tourney. I think Duke is without a doubt the king of the hill in recruiting in mbb the last decade, but what do they really have to show for it? Counting this year, even though there was no Tourney, in the last decade they have 1 National Championship, but NO other Final 4's and unbelievably haven't won the ACC regular season title even once. It's strange, but I think winning in recruiting is about bragging rights for how many players you send to the NBA and how quickly you get them there. It's really not even about winning Championships anymore. Seems really backward, but that's how I see it. I think Calipari started that, but after initially speaking out against it, Coach K is now 100% on board with it.

I'm not gonna look it up, but there's no way the top 10 schools in recruiting have accumulated 32 of 40 Final Four slots in men's hoops, it's more spread out than that.

Very good points.

 

[TheFarmFan]

What I find most interesting is that the two schools with the most top 100 recruits, Duke and Stanford, are probably two of the only schools where I'd be relatively sanguine about riding the bench even though I could easily start at a slightly less competitive D1 school. For both, those recruits are walking away with a free degree from one of the tippy top universities in the country, with a pathway to professional schools, start-ups, consulting, banking, and other lucrative non-athletic professional careers.

UConn, by contrast, has fewer Top 100 recruits than Stanford but triple the top 10, which makes sense: if your realistic goal is to be a top pro prospect, there's no better place to go. In this sense, I really wasn't too upset when KLS picked UConn over Stanford, because it was clear she was much more focused on becoming a WNBA player than either of her sisters.

Whereas Duke and its ten top 10 recruits and almost no notable post-season to show for it is, uh, a head-scratcher. Any insights, @triaddukefan?

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

I think Duke is without a doubt the king of the hill in recruiting in mbb the last decade, but what do they really have to show for it? Counting this year, even though there was no Tourney, in the last decade they have 1 National Championship, but NO other Final 4's and unbelievably haven't won the ACC regular season title even once.

Very good points.

A few points of clarification...

• Of the last 10 NCAA Tournaments played (2010-2019), Duke made 5 Elite Eight appearances, with 2 Final Fours that resulted in 2 national titles.
• During the ten seasons before this past one (2010-2019), Duke has 1 regular season ACC title and 3 ACC Tournament Championships.

 

[triaddukefan]

What I find most interesting is that the two schools with the most top 100 recruits, Duke and Stanford, are probably two of the only schools where I'd be relatively sanguine about riding the bench even though I could easily start at a slightly less competitive D1 school. For both, those recruits are walking away with a free degree from one of the tippy top universities in the country, with a pathway to professional schools, start-ups, consulting, banking, and other lucrative non-athletic professional careers.

Whereas Duke and its ten top 10 recruits and almost no notable post-season to show for it is, uh, a head-scratcher. Any insights, @triaddukefan?

 

[SECbbfan24]

Whereas Duke and its ten top 10 recruits

At least Duke is getting top 10 recruits unlike some schools. All the proof in the world between her, Holly and Aston that you can be grossly incompetent and still get big players.