UCONN gets all the best recruits...

[mhshuskies]

If that is the case, then what about the following from the story about Loyd entering the draft:

"Loyd is projected to be among the top three selections in this year's draft, and if she is chosen that high, it would make Notre Dame the first school in the 19-year history of the WNBA college draft to produce lottery (top-four) picks in four consecutive years (2012-Devereaux Peters to Minnesota; 2013-Skylar Diggins to Tulsa; 2014-Kayla McBride to San Antonio - all with the No. 3 overall selection)."

If it was only about the players and not coaching, program, etc. then why no NC in those four years?

 

[HoopsFan21]

It may not be all about the players, but has UConn ever won a national championship without having the #1 recruit on the team? During this current run we've had two #1 recruits, and then we won when Maya and D were here and didn't once they weren't. Our coaches have a good eye for talent and developing that talent, but when Geno is building a team he is looking beyond basketball skills, and I think that is the difference.

 

[UcMiami]

Women's basketball recruiting is all about a rolling 4 year picture required to produce five starters and 1-3 bench rotational players - so an average of 2 players per recruiting class. There are usually 1-3 exceptional players in a HS class, followed by 10-15 really good players, followed by maybe 20 great role players and 5-10 surprise stars. And then there is a lot of cannon fodder that are OK players that fill in the rosters of the also rans and are the back bench for the top flight teams. For the top teams that leaves a pool of 36-50 players that they can really use (and around 25 of those are not 'guaranteed' quality but are the pleasant surprises.) The top teams are looking for 2-3 of those 36-50 players each year.

Where Uconn has excelled in recruiting the last 15 years or so is by accumulating a high percentage of those 1-3 exceptional players in each rolling 4 year window - KML four years ago and Stewart and Jefferson three years ago. The last two years they went after and missed on those 1-3 exceptional players, but they are replenishing that stock again with KLS this year. And they do a good job as well with the 10-15 really good players as well - Morgan with Stewart and Jefferson, Boykin and Collier with KLS, etc.

The numbers game suggests that there is a large enough talent pool for about 10 teams to do consistently well at recruiting and another 10 teams to get by with recruiting, and another probably 30 teams to get lucky every few years. And that is what we generally see - a consistent group of about 10 teams at the top with a rotating group of about 20 teams in the middle, and another group of about 30 that can be competitive some years. And the rankings generally bear that out - the last few in each group trading places with the first few in the next group year over year.

I think Uconn's dominance though has to do with the success rate at the very top of the recruiting pool Tina, Maya, (EDD), Breanna and Moriah, KLS, Danger (?) with an equal success rate in the next tier. Add in that the coaching staff usually gets as much or more out of the recruits as any coaching staff in the game, and the program's dedication to detail, and it leads to domination.

There are other teams that have had really good recruiting runs - TN, Duke, ND, SC to name a few, but where they probably fall a little short of Uconn is in that consistent flow of exceptional talent. And Uconn had a little dry spell as well in the middle of the last decade After DT, the only player until Tina that qualifies based on HS rank is Ann Strother until Tina committed. Uconn was still getting that second pool of players, just not the very top end talent.

 

[mhshuskies]

I guess my point was an answer to all the critics that say UCONN is only successful because they get all the best recruits.

 

[veryolddog]

Opinion: I think that UConn gets very good recruits who want and are willing to do whatever it takes to be the best. Just like the Navy Seals.

 

[Orangutan]

If that is the case, then what about the following from the story about Loyd entering the draft:

"Loyd is projected to be among the top three selections in this year's draft, and if she is chosen that high, it would make Notre Dame the first school in the 19-year history of the WNBA college draft to produce lottery (top-four) picks in four consecutive years (2012-Devereaux Peters to Minnesota; 2013-Skylar Diggins to Tulsa; 2014-Kayla McBride to San Antonio - all with the No. 3 overall selection)."

If it was only about the players and not coaching, program, etc. then why no NC in those four years?

Simple answer: Brittney Griner and Breanna Stewart is why. Diggins, Loyd, McBride, etc. are all great players but those two are on a different plane.

ND's run has coincided with two of the most dominant women's college basketball players of all time. Which is why losing Danielle Adams and Texas A&M is probably the one that stings Irish fans most in retrospect.

 

[Orangutan]

I think Uconn's dominance though has to do with the success rate at the very top of the recruiting pool Tina, Maya, (EDD), Breanna and Moriah, KLS, Danger (?) with an equal success rate in the next tier. Add in that the coaching staff usually gets as much or more out of the recruits as any coaching staff in the game, and the program's dedication to detail, and it leads to domination.

Perfect. Couldn't agree more.

 

[UcMiami]

Simple answer: Brittney Griner and Breanna Stewart is why. Diggins, Loyd, McBride, etc. are all great players but those two are on a different plane.

ND's run has coincided with two of the most dominant women's college basketball players of all time. Which is why losing Danielle Adams and Texas A&M is probably the one that stings Irish fans most in retrospect.

I think that one worked out in an unfortunate sequence for ND - everyone sort of felt the 'real' final was Uconn/ND once Baylor lost, and ND won that game - they then had 48 hours to come down off the high and play an 'anti-climactic' final. To some degree I think the same thing happen to Stanford a few years earlier - beating Uconn as an underdog, and then not really showing up against TN.

 

[Kibitzer]

There is yet another category of important roster players: practice players -- and I don't mean the guys that do this (but unlikely for every minute of Geno's log practices).

This was a key strategem of Red Auerbach's, as he felt it was vital to have guys who seldom played but were willing to bust a gut daily in practice.

Geno does this, too, whether intentionately or by chance. Think of Cassie Kerns, Heather Buck, Tahirah Williams, and several walk-ons, at least two of whom were awarded scholarships,

 

[HGN]

We never get all the best recruits............UConn just seemingly does more with the one's it does get.
Example , year before last , we got Saniya Chong. Just one recruit. And still won a NC. UConn didn't get EDD , Diamond , Russell , or Aj'a , and still won a NC.

UConn doesn't always get the top rated recruit , they just seem to be able to coach up the one's they do get into top flight players that win NC's better than any other coaching staffs. The proof is in the pudding. Or should I say in the Trophies.

 

[UcMiami]

There is yet another category of important roster players: practice players -- and I don't mean the guys that do this (but unlikely for every minute of Geno's log practices).

This was a key strategem of Red Auerbach's, as he felt it was vital to have guys who seldom played but were willing to bust a gut daily in practice.

Geno does this, too, whether intentionately or by chance. Think of Cassie Kerns, Heather Buck, Tahirah Williams, and several walk-ons, at least two of whom were awarded scholarships,

But generally these kids are not 'recruited' as such - they are the negative surprises in that third tier I described who should be significant role players, but for whatever reason never quite work out. Some enjoy the other aspects of the program and stay, and others leave for playing time elsewhere. There are exception to that - Gardler for example wasn't truly recruited, she recruited herself with the fore-knowledge that she probably would not get significant minutes in games.

Red was hiring people and could choose the right folks that no one else was going to give minutes to either.

 

[UcMiami]

We never get all the best recruits..UConn just seemingly does more with the one's it does get.
Example , year before last , we got Saniya Chong. Just one recruit. And still won a NC. UConn didn't get EDD , Diamond , Russell , or Aj'a , and still won a NC.

UConn doesn't always get the top rated recruit , they just seem to be able to coach up the one's they do get into top flight players that win NC's better than any other coaching staffs. The proof is in the pudding. Or should I say in the Trophies.

But with that four year picture you do not have to hit each year which is what I was trying to say. Sure we missed out on two years of those exceptional players but those two years we still fielded teams that had 3 of them, and we will next year as well.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Just going off the HoopGurlz top 20 for the last four years, it seems like there are four teams with a high volume of 5-6 of those 80 players. UTenn has gotten the most top-5 players with 4 and top-10 players with 6 and clearly has the least to show for it. UConn has three top-5 players and 4 top-10, and has done exceptionally well. Of the other FF teams, ND had a solid 3 top-5 players, USCar has 2 top-10 players, but MD would seem to have exceeded expectations with just two top-20 players.

Of the E8 teams, Dayton is clearly the biggest suprise with no top-20 players, FSU had just 1, Baylor had 2, and UTenn as indicated should have been expected to do better with 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 rankings for their recruits.

Of the S16 teams, Gonzaga and Arizona State had 0 top-20 recruits, Iowa had 1, Texas and Louisville had 2, UNC had 3, Stanford had 5 but none in the top-10, and Duke had 6 with 3 in the top-10.

Among the other teams, UCLA, KY, Cal, and USC had 3-4 top-20 recruits, but not able to get among the top 16 teams this year in the Tourney, though UCLA won the NIT.

So you can get pretty high results with few top recruits, and getting a bunch of elite players as with Duke and UTenn does not guarantee a strong run at an FF spot. If FSU had made the FF, a case could be made for them being one of the biggest overachievers among major teams in recent years based on their recruitment level.

 

[Bgillon]

Women's basketball recruiting is all about a rolling 4 year picture required to produce five starters and 1-3 bench rotational players - so an average of 2 players per recruiting class. There are usually 1-3 exceptional players in a HS class, followed by 10-15 really good players, followed by maybe 20 great role players and 5-10 surprise stars. And then there is a lot of cannon fodder that are OK players that fill in the rosters of the also rans and are the back bench for the top flight teams. For the top teams that leaves a pool of 36-50 players that they can really use (and around 25 of those are not 'guaranteed' quality but are the pleasant surprises.) The top teams are looking for 2-3 of those 36-50 players each year.

Where Uconn has excelled in recruiting the last 15 years or so is by accumulating a high percentage of those 1-3 exceptional players in each rolling 4 year window - KML four years ago and Stewart and Jefferson three years ago. The last two years they went after and missed on those 1-3 exceptional players, but they are replenishing that stock again with KLS this year. And they do a good job as well with the 10-15 really good players as well - Morgan with Stewart and Jefferson, Boykin and Collier with KLS, etc.

The numbers game suggests that there is a large enough talent pool for about 10 teams to do consistently well at recruiting and another 10 teams to get by with recruiting, and another probably 30 teams to get lucky every few years. And that is what we generally see - a consistent group of about 10 teams at the top with a rotating group of about 20 teams in the middle, and another group of about 30 that can be competitive some years. And the rankings generally bear that out - the last few in each group trading places with the first few in the next group year over year.

I think Uconn's dominance though has to do with the success rate at the very top of the recruiting pool Tina, Maya, (EDD), Breanna and Moriah, KLS, Danger (?) with an equal success rate in the next tier. Add in that the coaching staff usually gets as much or more out of the recruits as any coaching staff in the game, and the program's dedication to detail, and it leads to domination.

There are other teams that have had really good recruiting runs - TN, Duke, ND, SC to name a few, but where they probably fall a little short of Uconn is in that consistent flow of exceptional talent. And Uconn had a little dry spell as well in the middle of the last decade After DT, the only player until Tina that qualifies based on HS rank is Ann Strother until Tina committed. Uconn was still getting that second pool of players, just not the very top end talent.

Morgan was a top recruit, not a "really good player"! She was ranked ahead of Stewie at one point and was captain of her respective USA teams that included Stewie!!!

 

[Outside Shot]

Notre Dame is on an amazing run of having most of the greatest players in school history play together in a relatively short window of time.

 

[Aluminny69]

And Uconn had a little dry spell as well in the middle of the last decade After DT, the only player until Tina that qualifies based on HS rank is Ann Strother until Tina committed. Uconn was still getting that second pool of players, just not the very top end talent.

I believe Nicole Wolff was ranked #1 by some services, but was slowed by injuries. I believe Charde Houston was highly ranked, scoring over 3000 points in High School. Charde had difficulty working in Geno's system, plus she shuffled her feet getting more than her share of traveling calls. This contributed to UConn's "dry spell."

 

[UcMiami]

Morgan was a top recruit, not a "really good player"! She was ranked ahead of Stewie at one point and was captain of her respective USA teams that included Stewie!!!

But her senior year she was ranked top 10 but not top 3 because of her knee injuries which continued into her first two years of college - when healthy she is a great player. Williams dropped in rankings because of two years of injuries in HS, Ekmark dropped in rankings because she didn't play her senior year. And there are plenty of 'Surprises' in the folks ranked outside the top 1-3 players - No idea where Nina Davis was ranked, but she is definitely top ten in her class in college and probably top 5.

 

[Bgillon]

But her senior year she was ranked top 10 but not top 3 because of her knee injuries which continued into her first two years of college - when healthy she is a great player. Williams dropped in rankings because of two years of injuries in HS, Ekmark dropped in rankings because she didn't play her senior year. And there are plenty of 'Surprises' in the folks ranked outside the top 1-3 players - No idea where Nina Davis was ranked, but she is definitely top ten in her class in college and probably top 5.

Splitting hairs!

 

[UcMiami]

Splitting hairs!

I don't really think so - Stef Dolson - great player, but ranked in the 30's and one of those great surprises - if we re-rank she is probably top 5 certainly top 10 as the draft showed. And top ten are very talented players that have a good chance to be AAs and stars on their teams. But Jefferson and Stewart in their senior year had distanced themselves from everyone else in the rankings.

 

[Larry67]

Rebecca Lobo said it best during the Final Four. She said that any other coach with the same exact players would NOT have won 10 championships. It's the coaching, not just the players that make the difference.

 

[meyers7]

No idea where Nina Davis was ranked, but she is definitely top ten in her class in college and probably top 5.

ASGR #66, Bluestar #52, Hoopgurlz #52. Yea, they pretty much missed big time on her.

 

[BroadwayVa]

Opinion: I think that UConn gets very good recruits who want and are willing to do whatever it takes to be the best. Just like the Navy Seals.

Much of everything above I agree with--but since OUR women trained with the Marines--and I spent time in an Navy Hospital with 100 of them and RESPECT them I'd like to think Uconn does everything the Marine way and no one has beat them yet.

 

[BroadwayVa]

ASGR #66, Bluestar #52, Hoopgurlz #52. Yea, they pretty much missed big time on her.

I like everything about Nina Davis--she's a quiet assassin--she was missed by everyone except Mulkey.
Question--it may have been answered already ---I thought Shea and Marissa went out (maybe a few times) to look over "candidates", then maybe Christine Dailey then the closer Geno, who too may smooze them by view them a few times. Is this close to correct????

 

[EricLA]

I don't really think so - Stef Dolson - great player, but ranked in the 30's and one of those great surprises - if we re-rank she is probably top 5 certainly top 10 as the draft showed. And top ten are very talented players that have a good chance to be AAs and stars on their teams. But Jefferson and Stewart in their senior year had distanced themselves from everyone else in the rankings.

Don't necessarily disagree with you as Dolson was 39 per HG. However she was 12 per ASGR and in the low 20's per Blue Star and Peach State at the time. I think it's pretty clear that in years past, HG was terrible at ranking the UCONN players and was generally an outlier in the rankings.

For example, they had Stokes at #42 while the others had her at 14, 9, 6, and 10. Also Morgan was 4 per ASGR and Peach State so it's not like she wasn't a top 5 per anyone's rankings.

Having said that, I think the biggest knock against Dolson was her speed and lack of conditioning in HS, something that while a question mark coming to UCONN, was emphatically answered as she worked incredibly hard on her body and her game.

But going back and looking at great classes, UCONN went thru a lull after the Diana years (Annie was the last #1 player coming in 2002 until Charles graced our campus in 2006). Since then, IMHO composite top 5 players are as follows:

2006 - Tina
2007 - Maya
2008 - none (Doty and Hayes were right around 10, not top 5)
2009 - none (Faris was top 10 per 2 services and top 30 per 2 others)
2010 - none (although Hartley should have been top 5 as she was 6, 3, and 6 but HG had her at 14)
2011 - KML
2012 - Stewie, Jefferson, and Tuck (yeah I count her a top 5 kid)
2013 - none
2014 - none, although ASGR had Williams as #2
2015 - Samuelson, Collier
2016 - Dangerfield

So it seems that in recent history, UCONN will go 2 or so years and get at least 1 top player, then go a few years with good players, but not uber-elite. But I thin that changes a bit as I bet we land an uber elite in 2017 and maybe again in 2018...

 

[HuskyFan1125]

Has anyone decided who the über elite in 2016-2017-2018 classes are??