IU 2026-7 freshman comps

[RaceToTheTop]

Mentioned in another thread where I had said it's a mistake to assume that freshman won't/aren't going to play much.

First comps:  Karvala.  SF, ranked #52.

Best comparisons in 2025 and 2024:  SF ranked between 44 and 60.

Player 1:  2025 freshman Amari Evans, SF, Tennessee (47).  Averaged 14.4 min/game, 3.2 reb, 4.1 points.

Player 2:  2025 freshman Jordan Scott, SF, Michigan State (54).  20.8 min/game, 3.1 reb, 5.8 points

Player 3:  2025 freshman Hudson Greer, SF, Creighton (58). 13.7 min/game, 2 reb, 4.7 points

Player 4:  2024 Rakesse Passmore, SF, Kansas (50).  Redshirted.

Player 5:  2024 Naas Cunningham, SF, Alabama (44).   13.3 min/game, 1.1 reb, 5 points.

Average (removing the one player that redshirted):  15.6 min/game, 2.4 reb, 4.9 points.

[RaceToTheTop]

Manhertz, SF, ranked 66.

1.  25 Hudson Greer, SF, Creighton (58).  13.7 min, 2 reb, 4.7 pts

2.  25 Amari Allen, SF, Alabama (64).  28.3 min, 6.9 reb, 11.4 pts

3.  25 Jacob Wilkins, SF, Georgia (68).  10.2 min, 1.8 reb, 4.9 pts

4.  24 Jankl Howard, SF, Auburn (62).  Redshirted

5.  24 Isiah Elohim, SF, USC (69).  5.7 min, 0.8 reb, 2.1 pts

AVERAGE (one redshirt removed):  11.6 min, 2.3 reb, 4.6 pts

[RaceToTheTop]

Moody comps:  CG, 81 ranking

Player 1:  25 Chris Jeffrey, Villanova, CG (73).  8.2 min, 1 reb, 1 AST, 3 pts

Player 2: 25 Adrien Stevens, Marquette, CG (78).  26.1 min, 2.6 reb, 1.6 AST, 7.9 pts

Player 3:  25 Neiko Mundy, CG (87).  Ended up reclassifying to 26.

Player 4:  24 Gicari Harris, Purdue, CG (75).  15 min, 1.9 reb, .8 AST, 3.8 pts

Player 5:  23 Reed Sheppard, Kentucky, CG (79).  28.9 min, 4.1 reb, 4.5 AST, 12.5 pts

Averages:  19.6 min, 2.5 reb, 2 AST, 6.8 pts

[ronzo4IU]

Tks for the comps..so we can expect some descent minutes/production for where their ranking numbers are.

I feel like Moody will be on the higher end of the spectrum.  
 

[RaceToTheTop]

16 minutes ago, ronzo4IU said:

Tks for the comps..so we can expect some descent minutes/production for where their ranking numbers are.

I feel like Moody will be on the higher end of the spectrum.  
 

When I've done comps of players in the past, guards on average tended to do better than forwards or centers. 

[ronzo4IU]

12 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

When I've done comps of players in the past, guards on average tended to do better than forwards or centers. 

True, and the point guard/shooting guard thing is overblown imo…if Lindsay has good court vision, a good handle and can distribute/shoot then he could run the show if Burton goes down.  Moody the same as he builds his game with combo guard attributes.  
nMy concern is one more playable big.

[HoosierHoopster]

56 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

When I've done comps of players in the past, guards on average tended to do better than forwards or centers. 

The comps are interesting and thanks for posting, but if we’re just or mostly looking at common rank that will ignore body, strength / physique - general readiness for college/ B1G play - Moody is one of the lowest ranked but most consider him the most likely to be ready to contribute. Makes sense guards are more likely to pan out with the comps - bigs whose bodies aren’t really ready won’t play much, etc. 

[RaceToTheTop]

1 hour ago, HoosierHoopster said:

The comps are interesting and thanks for posting, but if we’re just or mostly looking at common rank that will ignore body, strength / physique - general readiness for college/ B1G play - Moody is one of the lowest ranked but most consider him the most likely to be ready to contribute. Makes sense guards are more likely to pan out with the comps - bigs whose bodies aren’t really ready won’t play much, etc. 

I would disagree that body/physique/readiness for college isn’t already accounted for in the player’s rank.

[BA47591]

I'm high on Karvala. I see some Davis Fogle similarities. He has a pretty jumper, albeit streaky and he has a lot more bounce. I think if anyone of the 3/4 freshmen crack the rotation it will be him. Manhertz will need to show up shooting lights out to overcome the physical disadvantages he has. Moody could be a sleeper. 

 

[HoosierHoopster]

14 hours ago, RaceToTheTop said:

I would disagree that body/physique/readiness for college isn’t already accounted for in the player’s rank.

Sometimes it is sometimes it isn’t. Rankings, call it composite, can be based on any number of things in a player, shooting, overall standout play, floor vision / lead guard play, athleticism, sometimes on pro “potential” based on raw athleticism (think Hanner etc), rim protection, etc. but lots of players are ranked on skills who do not have college ready bodies and strength, that happens regularly. Just because a player is ranked high doesn’t mean he’s physically ready to bang with college vets.

[str8baller]

Looking at those comps, I think we’d have to be pretty unlucky to not have at least one decent rotation piece. There are also a couple of nice starters on that list. If we get that our whole minutes conversation takes on a different context. 

[go iu bb]

17 hours ago, str8baller said:

Looking at those comps, I think we’d have to be pretty unlucky to not have at least one decent rotation piece. There are also a couple of nice starters on that list. If we get that our whole minutes conversation takes on a different context. 

If that were the case, I'm not sure "unlucky" is how I would describe it. I think I'd go with "coaching failure." Having all 3 fail to be even be a decent rotation piece would point to misses on evaluating talent/fit and/or failure to develop at least 1 of them.

[WayneFleekHoosier]

4 hours ago, go iu bb said:

If that were the case, I'm not sure "unlucky" is how I would describe it. I think I'd go with "coaching failure." Having all 3 fail to be even be a decent rotation piece would point to misses on evaluating talent/fit and/or failure to develop at least 1 of them.

Not sure I agree. It’s a huge jump for freshman in general.  Relying on players ranked outside the top 25-50 is a wildcard.  Getting them on campus and slowly adjusted the game is what id expect as Normal at a program trying to compete and win at the top.  
 

Where I do agree, is there are Fragers, and Waglers out there that can be good as a freshman and not highly ranked.  Indiana has historically been awful at identifying these types of players.  Really, really hoping for this to change. 

[go iu bb]

51 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Not sure I agree. It’s a huge jump for freshman in general.  Relying on players ranked outside the top 25-50 is a wildcard.  Getting them on campus and slowly adjusted the game is what id expect as Normal at a program trying to compete and win at the top.  
 

Where I do agree, is there are Fragers, and Waglers out there that can be good as a freshman and not highly ranked.  Indiana has historically been awful at identifying these types of players.  Really, really hoping for this to change. 

The comment I was replying to was talking about being unlucky if all 3 did not get to what are basically Sisley freshman year levels of production. We weren't talking about Wagler levels of production. I stand by my statement that if none can achieve that, it is a failure of coaching rather than a matter of luck.

But if none turn out to be the next Wagler, I guess I would agree with unlucky. I don't expect to be lucky.

[str8baller]

6 hours ago, go iu bb said:

If that were the case, I'm not sure "unlucky" is how I would describe it. I think I'd go with "coaching failure." Having all 3 fail to be even be a decent rotation piece would point to misses on evaluating talent/fit and/or failure to develop at least 1 of them.

Recruiting has always been a bit of a crap shoot. I’m not absolving the staff of anything in that scenario but it could certainly be a case of bad luck too. Great HoF coaches often have as many recruiting misses as they do successes.