Walking Boot of Doom

We'll see. Like I said, I fully expect overall improvement due to Archie, but we are still talking about the same players with the same tendencies and decision making they've learned over X years.

While playing in a different system could help, the players still made decisions that lead to turnovers. I'm skeptical that we will see many sudden significant individual improvements, but I do expect Archie's teaching and system to lower the TO rate.

I try to support my beliefs in an educated manner. Crean could not get out of his own way. I actually met Coach Miller the other night, talked to him for a bit, and heard him talk about his high level approach for the program. I've found that my first impression of people tends to be accurate, and I walked away impressed by CAM. He's extremely level and direct, and communicates his message clearly. I've found messaging and clear communication to be the most important leadership quality, and I think the program will be in great shape as long as he's head coach.

Not positive, but I believe the game cheerleaders and the competition cheerleaders are different.

Yup, I took longer to come around. Was probably blinded as I was in school 2010-2014 which were probably the highs of the Crean era.

Can't even change my name to Sand Pit of Doom. Maybe Frown of Concealed Joy? Maybe just go back to Crean Apologist or Jurkin on the Court

Must be getting cold and lonely up there...

1) No he doesn't. Your point from the start has been "ratings are crap". Wayne directly refutes that claim in his post. 2) Look through this thread without trying to justify your position and try to understand that my argument does not invalidate any of your examples. It also doesn't invalidate the fact that Garry Donna might have been putting out crap ratings, because he is one guy and ratings are much more of a consensus measurement. 3) Robert Phinisee is nothing except a player ranked in the 100-200 range by most services, who we hope and believe has potential to outplay his ranking. We'll see what he is starting next year. 4) There's psychological concept of heuristics and hubris. Your personal experiences have driven your conclusion and your overconfidence that your experiences are representative of the entire population.

Your story is very interesting, and kudos on your evaluations. You provide good info here. I think you are saying rankings have no impact on recruiting (which they don't) and mdn is saying what I've been arguing the whole time that the rankings derived from professionals' evaluation of players are good indicators of success (which they are). This entire thread appears to be more complicated by base misunderstandings.

This is the point I made from the beginning. Even acknowledged that Phinisee could be totally undervalued. Glad someone has reading comprehension ability...

Didn't realize responding to your comment on my post is stalking. All of the points you made in bold have gone unsupported, so I don't know from where you draw those conclusions. The data based evidence I've provided you has demonstrated that your examples are indeed outliers. Finally, I'm defending a point that I've made. That is the purpose of debate, and that is why you post and respond as well. I think if you posted in a less condescending manner you would have far fewer posters "stalking" you on the board.

1) The articles I provided also demonstrated the correlation between those outside of the top 25 and whatever success factor they measured 2) "Rankings have almost zero impact on your basketball career." .... Does this even need to be said? Agreed, and video game ratings have almost zero impact on professional athletes. Talk about arguing a point I'm not making. Thanks for the Steph Curry pick. Your one additional outlier has once again overruled all other evidence.

Figured out how to multi-quote to a different thread. Sorry for the disruption!

Here you go OF. I've quoted my post again where I provided three difference sources who analyzed ranking data from Rivals and Scout, dating as far back as 2002, with all articles using at least ten years of data. Each article compared these complete multi-year data sets to three different measurements of success, and all three found strong positive correlation. Your list of players probably fall within the ~15% of players the data driven analysis in the articles found were inaccurately ranked per their defined success factors. Essentially, for every one example of a improperly ranked player you list, I could provide five or six counter examples. If you are incapable of understanding why the evidence I provided is stronger, then I cannot help you and no meaningful debate can be had with you.

Have any comparisons to recent PGs? Not necessarily IU players. Sorry if you've already provided that info.

I linked a few articles that provide more scenario based non-statistical regressions about a page back if you're interested.

Any chance this kid is told he can commit if Player X does not?

Looking forward to hearing your assessment. Have you seen him play yet?

Old Friend speaks as if he holds the only truth. I provided direct statistical evidence that contradicts his claims that rankings are crap. It's easier to believe talking heads telling you what to believe than to actually look at data and facts.

It shouldn't be tho. Alaska is one of the most beautiful places in the country.

TLDR; there is a strong correlation between rankings and draft success, NBA success, and NCAA championships. See articles below for additional supporting evidence. The bold portion of your quote is all I was really looking for. You are correct thought, your entire post is cherry picking and you could go on and on forever and ever because people will ALWAYS be incorrectly ranked when you have the present day results to assess against. Human error and statistics help explain that. You've also provided a lot of great examples of those outliers. Here are links to articles I've read that helped inform my opinion that rankings are a strong tool for evaluating the potential success and impact of a player, which you can read if you're still bored: NCAA Champs: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2127165-how-much-do-recruiting-rankings-factor-into-ncaa-basketball-success NBA Draft Success: https://basketballrecruiting.rivals.com/news/crunching-the-numbers-recruiting-rankings-and-the-nba-draft NBA Success: https://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/233037/Do-High-School-Stars-Lead-To-NBA-Success All of this said, I fully believe your assessment and that of others that Phinisee is underrated and possibly under valued in the rankings. Still don't get this idea that the rankings are garbage. Someone else believed he could outsmart the experts on a consistent basis. I'm sure he has plenty of time to support his theories if you get in touch with him!

Your assessment of each player is based off of the talent you perceive they have based on game tape, highlight tapes, watching games in person, etc. I'm going to guess that you are doing this as a hobby in your spare time or you are retired and spend even more time doing so. I bet your assessments are pretty strong and credible. I'm also willing to bet that the guys at 247 who are paid to evaluate as many players a possible are just as good or better than you at evaluating talent. Additionally, I bet they have a larger pool of player evaluations they personal conducted to compare other players to. So you either believe the paid folks conducting evaluations to create informed ratings are incompetent or that there is so much under the table influence that the rankings are a scam. Either way, I don't understand your vendetta against the rankings. They're actually quite accurate predictors. I do understand that it's very likely that Phinisee outshines his ranking while at Indiana, and cannot argue against your assessment of RP as I am certain I have not spent nearly as much time as you evaluating him.

Id recommend noting that everything he puts on the board is uninformed optimism.

I'd like to have someone who has played the PG position on the team versus trying to mold shooting guards and wings into floor generals. We have the room for RP, come on down. Take what you can get, and hope that stronger PG options are available in 2018/2019. If they aren't, hope it's because RP out did his ranking.

i looked it up