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

[Scottzer]

Thanks thought he was with Rudy and those guys but was wrong.

Hmmm, so at some point in the early 90s, we had KO, Donyell, Donny, Travis, and Ray on the same team. I think only those 2004-6 teams had that number or greater NBA players (though this group had more lasting NBA longevity).

 

[Matrim55]

Hmmm, so at some point in the early 90s, we had KO, Donyell, Donny, Travis, and Ray on the same team. I think only those 2004-6 teams had that number or greater NBA players (though this group had more lasting NBA longevity).

That was the 1994 team.

The 2004 team had Emeka, Ben, Charlie V, Boone, Hilton, Denham and - for half a season - Marcus. Four lottery picks, two other first rounders, and a high second-rounder. I think the most future NBA talent on the floor during any UConn game, ever, was the Final 4 vs Duke (Deng, Reddick, Williams, Duhon, Randolph) in 04.

 

[UConnSwag11]

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.

the title of the thread says on paper

 

[Chief00]

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.

I would agree just Emeka and Ben put the class right up there.

 

[businesslawyer]

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

Didn't and wouldn't go that far. I obviously understand trying to figure out what you have before they show up. I just don't understand once you've seen them why you care any more about how rating services saw them.

But that's just me. Talk about whatever you like. I was just cheering someone who talked about focusing on accomplishments after they got here, not censoring anyone.

 

[Matrim55]

Didn't and wouldn't go that far. I obviously understand trying to figure out what you have before they show up. I just don't understand once you've seen them why you care any more about how rating services saw them.

But that's just me. Talk about whatever you like. I was just cheering someone who talked about focusing on accomplishments after they got here, not censoring anyone.

For what it's worth I took your comment in that spirit, and definitely prefer the "accomplishment" to "perspective" analysis.

That said, changing the perspective around our program has become a necessity in the wake of CR, Nate Miles & APR issues, and heightening that new perception is (I believe) crucial to our recruiting success going forward. And while on-paper recruiting success is not a guarantee of on-court success, I do think they're pretty strongly linked.

So to me, it's a fun conversation/armchair analysis to see where the incoming class for 2016 fits A) nationally, and B) all-time in program history. And hopefully, four years from now, we list them in the top two along with the 2010 group...

 

[Mooch82]

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.

Hazelton was in the Caron/Taliek/Selvie class, not the Emeka/Ben class. Mike Hayes and Chad Wise came in with Emeka and Ben. While the class obviously turned out to be great because of those two, on paper it initially looked pretty poor for UConn standards.

The original intent of the post was about how the class looked going in, not necessarily how it turned out, which are two completely different discussions. For a 4 man class, the Caron class may have been the best, with 2 McD's AA's (albeit Hazelton should not have been one, but still a top 50 recruit), a top 10 player in Caron who was a post grad and therefore could not be a McD AA, and the JuCo player of the year in Selvie.

If we get Jackson, this one will definitely be up there. If you compare it to other "big" classes (6 plus), this would be ahead of the Shabazz/Roscoe/Lamb class (only one top 50 guy in Roscoe, Shabazz/Lamb both top 100 as would have Giffey been if he was ranked). I think a good comparison is the 2006 class of Stanley/Hasheem/Kelly/Dyson, etc. Stanley was top 25 even though he wasn't a burger boy, and Hasheem I believe ended up in the top 30 (was tough to rank since he hadn't been in the US long). Kelly was top 50, Dyson and Wiggins were both top 70 type guys, and even Mandeldove was a borderline top 100 guy. Eaves and Edwards were lower ranked 3 star types, similar to Diarra and Vital although I think Diarra and Vital are better.

Justin would give us four top 75 type guys and two top 150 guys, compared to five top 75 guys, a top 125ish guy, and two top 250 type guys.

 

[Matrim55]

Justin would give us four top 75 type guys and two top 150 guys, compared to five top 75 guys, a top 125ish guy, and two top 250 type guys.

I actually consider Larrier to be part of this class since his UConn career starts at the same time (and landing him as a recruit surely affected our strategy and targets).

Thus if we land Jackson, we have five top-75 guys coming in, four of whom were generally ranked from 30-45:

Gilbert (~30ish PG)
Larrier (~40ish SF)
Durham (~35ish PF)
J. Jackson (~45ish SF)
V. Jackson (~75ish SF)

It's a hell of a haul.

 

[Mooch82]

I actually consider Larrier to be part of this class since his UConn career starts at the same time (and landing him as a recruit surely affected our strategy and targets).

Thus if we land Jackson, we have five top-75 guys coming in, four of whom were generally ranked from 30-45:

Gilbert (~30ish PG)
Larrier (~40ish SF)
Durham (~35ish PF)
J. Jackson (~45ish SF)
V. Jackson (~75ish SF)

It's a hell of a haul.

Yeah I always struggle as to where to slot transfers in when it comes to recruiting class rankings, especially "regular" transfers that sit out a year since they sort of span two classes. But yes, if you add Larrier in it becomes even more formidable.

 

[Jaybo]

I'm not sold on this class despite thier ranking.a lot of the ranking has to do with Durham who may not play. Honestly Gilbert and Jackson are the two guys we need to make an impact.darria and vital will see limited play time unless thier just diamonds in the rough that havnt been found.larrier will see the court plenty,I just hope he has grown since his freshman year and the game had slowed down for him even though he has sat a year.but looking beyond this season it looks very promising.