'19 MD PF Olivier Robinson-Nkamhoua (Signed 5/8/2019)

VOLINVONORE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
8,171
Likes
3,841
I agree...but we also can't assume that we're in a vacuum on talent level in SEC. Barnes crept up on every one two years ago...but talent across the board continues to get better and better, matching the better coaches being hired by most all SEC schools. It's going to get tougher and tougher. I really like where Barnes has brought the team, on the shoulders of lower rated, but well developed players...however, you get to the post season, and you start to see where teams like Auburn and KY had superior athlete depth, which paid off. We need to keep pace, but just think, unless Grant and/or Bone comes back, we're probably looking at a 4-6th finish in SEC next year, unless something changes with another addition or two (when Grant/Bone declare). We aren't going to be able to bang away at everyone w/ Admiral and probably Grant gone, and we don't have an outstanding perimeter game, as it stands right now. We aren't devoid of talent, but Barnes has his work cut out for him.
Talent of the rest of the SEC has also increased to the Conference has come one of the worst in College basketball to one of the best.
 

cwbytruckers

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2012
Messages
5,250
Likes
3,742
Barnes underachieved in the NCAAT in back-to-back years. Should have gone at least to Sweet 16 previous season and Elite 8 this past season. Barnes has historically not done well in the NCAAT. That has always been a knock on him.
Barnes doesn't play defense. These guys were lazy to many times on defense.
 

Lurker

"Never go against a Sicilian...."
Joined
Oct 2, 2008
Messages
325
Likes
447
Except we just had the best 2 year run in program history with a roster primarily made up of 3 stars, hmmm.

Honest question, would you rather Barnes have a bunch of 4&5 stars like his late years at Texas and be winning 20-24 games a year and getting bounced in the first or second rounds??? Or winning 30 games and making the S16?

My point being if his model is producing results I’m not sure why we ask him to change it?
I don't think the model is star oriented at all. He's looking for talent, no doubt. But he doesn't seem to be just recruiting 3*s v. 4 or 5*s. He seems to be looking for intelligent basketball players who are hungry to be coached and who display strong personalities and high character. The radio interview of Olivier that I heard yesterday was very similar to the way early Grant Williams or Admiral Schofield first presented themselves. Here's hoping he can play like them as well.

Obviously, I like this model and I think Barnes is about to take UT to a consistent level of success UT has not experienced previously. Whether that will be accompanied by an NC is unknown. I'm hopeful, but then again, I am one of the dumbs who thought last season was great and who doesn't measure success by only looking for Final Fours and NCs.
 

pimo1

Sad Panda
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
2,273
Likes
1,527
153+150= 303/2= 110
See how easy that was. o_O
as pointed out above your math needs a lot of work

the 24/7 composite looks at a number of rankings not just 247/espn and scout

from 247 site
The 247Sports Composite Rating is a proprietary algorithm that compiles prospect "rankings" and "ratings" listed in the public domain by the major media recruiting services. It converts average industry ranks and ratings into a linear composite index capping at 1.0000, which indicates a consensus No. 1 prospect across all services.

The 247Sports Composite Rating is the industry's most comprehensive and unbiased prospect ranking and is also used to generate 247Sports Team Recruiting Rankings.

All major media services share an equal percentage in the 247Sports Composite Rating.
 

thunder5

Cause I like to party
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
8,456
Likes
1,017
I can’t for the life of me find this kids profile on ESPN...as someone mentioned, they must have him rated pretty high because his Rivals and 247 ratings are both around 150
 

JoAllan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
2,934
Likes
1,921
as pointed out above your math needs a lot of work

the 24/7 composite looks at a number of rankings not just 247/espn and scout

from 247 site
The 247Sports Composite Rating is a proprietary algorithm that compiles prospect "rankings" and "ratings" listed in the public domain by the major media recruiting services. It converts average industry ranks and ratings into a linear composite index capping at 1.0000, which indicates a consensus No. 1 prospect across all services.

The 247Sports Composite Rating is the industry's most comprehensive and unbiased prospect ranking and is also used to generate 247Sports Team Recruiting Rankings.

All major media services share an equal percentage in the 247Sports Composite Rating.
Yes we have all read this.

The question is “what sites are giving these rankings?” If rivals has at 150, and 247 has at 153.........then some unheard of site has him at what #33 in the country?

Even if they were using 10 other “billy jo bob” sites then all 10 of them would have to have him ranked at like 100..........that’s some 50 spots better than rivals and 247 (known trusted sites).
 

BruinVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2011
Messages
48,913
Likes
15,067
Wow...there’s clearly a glitch in his composite ranking then
We've discussed this in the main thread in big detail. I think it's because the new rankings just came out and on his rivals individual page he doesn't have a Positional ranking which is used in the composite. There is no doubt a problem with it for sure
 

pimo1

Sad Panda
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
2,273
Likes
1,527
Yes we have all read this.

The question is “what sites are giving these rankings?” If rivals has at 150, and 247 has at 153.........then some unheard of site has him at what #33 in the country?

Even if they were using 10 other “billy jo bob” sites then all 10 of them would have to have him ranked at like 100..........that’s some 50 spots better than rivals and 247 (known trusted sites).
From personal experience in the metrics industry (I'm a server admin for a company that uses metrics of this sort but in the financial realm) their other sources likely come from the exact opposite of billy jo bob sites. There are more "pro" level scouting services out there that me and you don't have visibility on behind paywalls. These are the sources that Universities and pro teams are looking at for their reports.

By averaging them out it gives a more usable number as each site will have logistical issues getting info on every prospect. giving the public visibility of these sources in most cases is not productive. But as an example if you look back historically on the 247 composite even compared to 247's own rankings its more accurate than the others because it takes them all into account and corrects a lot of regional bias. but like any of the charts the further u get from that top 10 or so the more inaccurate its gonna be. The more data points u have the more accurate the list gets but always the further down the list u go the more drift you have.

If you got together a room of for instance 1000 NFL fans and asked them to all list all teams in order by record from last season very few of them would get it right. Aggregate all 1000 and chances are the final list will be correct.
 

bleedingTNorange

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
59,924
Likes
11,050
as pointed out above your math needs a lot of work

the 24/7 composite looks at a number of rankings not just 247/espn and scout

from 247 site
The 247Sports Composite Rating is a proprietary algorithm that compiles prospect "rankings" and "ratings" listed in the public domain by the major media recruiting services. It converts average industry ranks and ratings into a linear composite index capping at 1.0000, which indicates a consensus No. 1 prospect across all services.

The 247Sports Composite Rating is the industry's most comprehensive and unbiased prospect ranking and is also used to generate 247Sports Team Recruiting Rankings.

All major media services share an equal percentage in the 247Sports Composite Rating.
You know this how? Because what you quoted doesn’t say that at all?
 

JoAllan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
2,934
Likes
1,921
From personal experience in the metrics industry (I'm a server admin for a company that uses metrics of this sort but in the financial realm) their other sources likely come from the exact opposite of billy jo bob sites. There are more "pro" level scouting services out there that me and you don't have visibility on behind paywalls. These are the sources that Universities and pro teams are looking at for their reports.

By averaging them out it gives a more usable number as each site will have logistical issues getting info on every prospect. giving the public visibility of these sources in most cases is not productive. But as an example if you look back historically on the 247 composite even compared to 247's own rankings its more accurate than the others because it takes them all into account and corrects a lot of regional bias. but like any of the charts the further u get from that top 10 or so the more inaccurate its gonna be. The more data points u have the more accurate the list gets but always the further down the list u go the more drift you have.

If you got together a room of for instance 1000 NFL fans and asked them to all list all teams in order by record from last season very few of them would get it right. Aggregate all 1000 and chances are the final list will be correct.
I understand (seen a couple of these about 5 years ago or so). My problem comes with the wide variations (150 from one 100 from another).

My sons coach’s used 3 sites, but those would list hundreds of players from every position all ranked on a numerical scale (with stars....but the coach told me that was more for looks......”newspaper article, hey we landed a 3 star player.”)

I guess if it’s something along those lines and their ranking 400 maybe upwards of 1000 players the discrepancy would seem much less.
 

calban

We Are Relevant
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
11,729
Likes
3,338
I think the algorithm is not mathematical. It's what they see/what we see =nothing(just for show on a graph)
Their analysts grade the players and compare them to others already analyzed. Then they grade them 1.0 to .01 plug them in where they fit in rankings.
More subjective than mathematical.
 

VN Store



Sponsors
 

Top