On Paper, Best incoming recruiting classes in program history, ranked

[Matrim55]

As prompted by this post:

SF Justin Jackson (UNLV Decommit)

I'm thinking:

1991 (Donyell + 4 other top-100s, plus a couple of 3-stars; #2 class in the country behind the Fab Five)
2000 (Caron, 2 other top-25 players, a couple of 3-stars, and the JuCo player of the year)
2006 (Stanley, 2 other top-50s, and 2 guys right around 100 or so)
2011 (2 top-15 players and a top 50)
1996 (Rip, 2 other top-50 players, 2 3-stars and a high-rated JuCo transfer)

Those are the contenders. And I think our 2016 class can be right there with the best of them if we land Jackson. That would give us 4 top-50 talents (I consider Larrier to be both a top-50 talent and a part of this class, just like I consider Purvis & Hamilton to be part of the same recruiting class), two other 4-stars and a highly rated three-star as well.

On paper, this is an absolutely monstrous group. Let's hope they're more 1996 and less 2006 in terms of ROI.

 

[caw]

Napier, Giffey, Olander, Lamb, Smith have to be in conversation even if rankings didn't do them justice. They pulled off a championship as key supporters of Kemba and had two key leaders to a second championship. Plus three of them have more championships than Cuse.

 

[Matrim55]

Napier, Giffey, Olander, Lamb, Smith have to be in conversation even if rankings didn't do them justice. They pulled off a championship as key supporters of Kemba and had two key leaders to a second championship. Plus three of them have more championships than Cuse.

Yup - but that wasn't a great class on paper. Lots of us were lukewarm on it at best.

So the above list is of best classes on paper, heading into their respective careers.

 

[caw]

Yup - but that wasn't a great class on paper. Lots of us were lukewarm on it at best.

So the above list is of best classes on paper, heading into their respective careers.

Wasn't clear on best on paper.

 

[TheChamps990411]

Yup - but that wasn't a great class on paper. Lots of us were lukewarm on it at best.

So the above list is of best classes on paper, heading into their respective careers.

The game is played on the court not paper. `11 is the best class. they were balling from day one and they ended up besting UK and their super class.

 

[businesslawyer]

The game is played on the court not paper. `11 is the best class. they were balling from day one and they ended up besting UK and their super class.

This one million times. I understand wanting to discuss/debate our best class ever. Not so much our best class on paper ever.

 

[willie99]

I remember the 2011 class discussion like it was yesterday. This board was overwhelming down on that class. The wheels were falling off, the best recruits didn't like JC, and we got the wrong Lamb.

JC said he really liked his class, that was all I needed to know

 

[willie99]

I also don't put Caron's class in the list, save for Caron.

The Marshalls class on top, they were the first. The aforementioned 2011 class. 2001 with Meka & MSG,. 2003 was big, pun intended.

2016 is the best on paper, I expect success on the court to follow

 

[storrsroars]

This one million times. I understand wanting to discuss/debate our best class ever. Not so much our best class on paper ever.

Then there's no point discussing the current incoming class until next year or year after, is there?

 

[mauconnfan]

Then there's no point discussing the current incoming class until next year or year after, is there?

Classes by rankings/on paper vs. how their careers end up is important to the final ranking no doubt. However it is fun for everyone to discuss the potential of the Gilbert, Diarra, Jackson, Vital, Durham (and even transfer Larrier) and what it may eventually become in the long run.

 

[Excalibur]

This one million times. I understand wanting to discuss/debate our best class ever. Not so much our best class on paper ever.

The 2011 class wins only if you accept the NCAA tournament as the only measure of success. The '91 class lost all of four Big East games in their last two years.

 

[Scottzer]

Here's an unconventional pick - 2001. Yes, Emeka was about top 100. Ben Gordon was pretty high, and I thought Hazleton was fairly high. No recollection on Chad Wise. But - end of the day, we get draft picks 2 and 3, and two superstars might trump four top 100 players, especially after taking home a title. I know, this is sort of a hybrid between on paper and net results, but I have a hard time leaving out that class, even if only two players ended up being extremely significant contributors.

 

[ctchamps]

Wasn't clear on best on paper.

The game is played on the court not paper. `11 is the best class. they were balling from day one and they ended up besting UK and their super class.

This one million times. I understand wanting to discuss/debate our best class ever. Not so much our best class on paper ever.

OPer provided a link to a post from another thread in which a poster made a comment about the 2016 recruiting class being UConn's highest rated class. Taking that link into consideration, and since this is the offseason, it seems to me that the discussion was meant to rate incoming classes based on consensus rankings and not how those classes end up performing.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

1) Napier, Lamb, Giffey, Smith, Olander, Wolf (a couple of those guys left with two titles; that trumps everything).
2) Hamilton, Freeman, Voskuhl, LeBlanc (The first three were major contributors to our first title).
3) Okafor, Gordon, Wise (The first two were more than major contributors to our first title).
4) 2008 (That class had Kemba).
5) Marshall, Ollie, Marshall, Johnson, Fair, Willingham, Jeff Calhoun (They helped turn us from a one hit [1990] wonder to a top flight program).
6) Allen, Sheffer, King (This class bumped us from top flight program to continually ranked).
7) Boatright, Daniels, Drummond (Two vital pieces to title #4, our current highest profile NBA player).
8) Offseason 1986 - our then AD brought in a guy named Calhoun to run the basketball program.

After this there are some very good classes (Burrell & Henefeld; Chris Smith, Sellers, Cyrulik & Fleming; Boone, Williams & Villanueva; Rudy & AJ; Denham , Rashad & White; Thabeet, Robinson, Kelly, Dyson, Wiggins) that warrant some honorable mention.

 

[ctchamps]

What the tangent posts to the original posters intent indicate for me is that ranking of high school players are helpful in providing potential of outcomes but they are only probabilities of outcomes and not outcomes themselves.

 

[ctchamps]

As prompted by this post:

SF Justin Jackson (UNLV Decommit)

I'm thinking:

1991 (Donyell + 4 other top-100s, plus a couple of 3-stars; #2 class in the country behind the Fab Five)
2000 (Caron, 2 other top-25 players, a couple of 3-stars, and the JuCo player of the year)
2006 (Stanley, 2 other top-50s, and 2 guys right around 100 or so)
2011 (2 top-15 players and a top 50)
1996 (Rip, 2 other top-50 players, 2 3-stars and a high-rated JuCo transfer)

Those are the contenders. And I think our 2016 class can be right there with the best of them if we land Jackson. That would give us 4 top-50 talents (I consider Larrier to be both a top-50 talent and a part of this class, just like I consider Purvis & Hamilton to be part of the same recruiting class), two other 4-stars and a highly rated three-star as well.

On paper, this is an absolutely monstrous group. Let's hope they're more 1996 and less 2006 in terms of ROI.

You wanted to start a thread listing incoming classes based on recruiting rankings and not actual results and nearly every post following ignored this. I suggest you start a thread about best class outcomes and the Boneyard will make it into a thread about preseason incoming class rankings.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

a) Left out (brain fart on my part) Caron, Taliek, etc. As that class had a guy that carried us to an elite eight and one who started as PG on a title team, they belong somewhere ~ 4-5 on my above list.

b) Fleud, I've read the title of this thread over and over and still have not seen the words 'incoming' or 'recruiting rankings'.

I'm convinced that it is a generational thing (I'm 55 at the moment) but the way I see it too many are looking for the wrong things. I've seen many on here over the years talk more about the importance of highlight reel dunks than the importance of wins in critical games. I still remember a game during the 2005-2006 season that illustrates this (at least what I view as an) issue perfectly. We were playing PC in Providence and about eight minutes in Marcus hits Rudy with an alley-oop from ~ 35 feet away. They chest bump at mid court to celebrate as PC runs down the court for an easy layup, putting them up by something ;like 15-8. Our two guys were celebrating the wrong thing. Trailing in a game, regardless of time remaining or score, is in itself enough to place playing defense ahead of celebrating a highlight reel dunk.

 

[uconndogs]

Here's an unconventional pick - 2001. Yes, Emeka was about top 100. Ben Gordon was pretty high, and I thought Hazleton was fairly high. No recollection on Chad Wise. But - end of the day, we get draft picks 2 and 3, and two superstars might trump four top 100 players, especially after taking home a title. I know, this is sort of a hybrid between on paper and net results, but I have a hard time leaving out that class, even if only two players ended up being extremely significant contributors.

Emeka was an unbelievable steal. The moment he stepped on a collegiate court it was clear he could take over any game, and he did.

 

[Matrim55]

b) Fleud, I've read the title of this thread over and over and still have not seen the words 'incoming' or 'recruiting rankings'.

Yeah, I botched it on the title by not making it more clear, but the post I linked to (and cited as the inspiration for this thread) was a discussion about the on-paper quality of the incoming class.

And I then clarified it in my second post in this thread. I guess I thought folks would read one or both, but que sera sera. I suppose it's a generational thing -- old folks don't like to click extra links (seriously).

Anyway, this thread was supposed to be about the best on-paper classes coming into the program, which is and will always remain an interesting topic -- especially in the face of the "Ollie can't recruit!" conventional wisdom of last year, and the "AAC hamstrings us on the recruiting trail!" CW that is still part of every discussion.

 

[ctchamps]

a) Left out (brain fart on my part) Caron, Taliek, etc. As that class had a guy that carried us to an elite eight and one who started as PG on a title team, they belong somewhere ~ 4-5 on my above list.

b) Fleud, I've read the title of this thread over and over and still have not seen the words 'incoming' or 'recruiting rankings'.

I'm convinced that it is a generational thing (I'm 55 at the moment) but the way I see it too many are looking for the wrong things. I've seen many on here over the years talk more about the importance of highlight reel dunks than the importance of wins in critical games. I still remember a game during the 2005-2006 season that illustrates this (at least what I view as an) issue perfectly. We were playing PC in Providence and about eight minutes in Marcus hits Rudy with an alley-oop from ~ 35 feet away. They chest bump at mid court to celebrate as PC runs down the court for an easy layup, putting them up by something ;like 15-8. Our two guys were celebrating the wrong thing. Trailing in a game, regardless of time remaining or score, is in itself enough to place playing defense ahead of celebrating a highlight reel dunk.

 

[tykurez]

... especially in the face of the "Ollie can't recruit!" conventional wisdom of last year, and the "AAC hamstrings us on the recruiting trail!" CW that is still part of every discussion.

No intention to derail this topic but "on paper" Ollie has done a tremendous job with this incoming class and he appears to be on another great track for 2017. I cannot imagine what his recruiting might look like if our schedule was chock full of P5 teams instead of littered with Tulane, ECU and a couple directional Florida schools.

 

[Matrim55]

No intention to derail this topic but "on paper" Ollie has done a tremendous job with this incoming class and he appears to be on another great track for 2017. I cannot imagine what his recruiting might look like if our schedule was chock full of P5 teams instead of littered with Tulane, ECU and a couple directional Florida schools.

We'll find out in the next few years, I think.

 

[Scottzer]

Hmmm. Best classes on paper will tend to underperform (on an NCAA title basis), because 1) the vast majority of teams need at least a core of sophomores and juniors to compete for a title, and 2) most of these highly rated classes tend to lose key players to the draft before they can ascend to greatness. How many on paper top ranked classes actually win an NCAA championship?

When I think of things that way, and talk about how talented the incoming class is, all I can think is .... Doomed!

 

[FfldCntyFan]

View attachment 13667

Evidently someone altered the title to this thread. That said, substance will always be far more important than style.

 

[ctchamps]

Evidently someone altered the title to this thread. That said, substance will always be far more important than style.

Just having fun with you. The title was deficient, but the OP was not. Easy to overlook the parts in the OP that indicated @Matrim55's intent.