Rivals 2013 Class Rankings

[SheagleHawk]

If you honestly can't admit that Niang is superior to Woodbury at this point I really don't care to listen to any opinions you have. The kid is painful to watch at this stage of his career. Hoepfully he will make strides and improve for Iowa's sake.

If you honestly think your opinion regarding talent is superior to that of Roy Williams, Thad Matta, Bo Ryan and Tubby Smith then you're a bigger Clown than I thought. Which would be impressive given your other great posts. Yeah, Niang had a good year and is a good player. Head to head, Adam had the better game. Adam night in and night out faced better competition than Niang. Playing better competition, believe it or not, effects your numbers. Not to mention the B1G plays much more physical basketball and basically allows players to be mugged. But I'm sure none of that had any effect on Adam's numbers.

 

[PalmettoHawkFan]

niang is as good as advertised and is a better player than woodbury right now

emphasis on :right now

niang is also an undersized pf who relies on guile and nice instincts. will be get better? sure. what's the likelihood of a player with that skillset getting a whole lot better? not high. that's why he was a low top 100 kid.

woodbury is a skilled seven footer who needs to develop physically (whereas niang is pretty filled out at this point) and adjust to the speed and physicality of the college game. when he does, he'll be a whole lot better, and a whole lot better than one georges niang. that's why he was a top 50 kid. (duh)

sometimes clones need concepts like growth and player development explained....

 

[fsanford]

That's the problem I have with his skill level and his rankings, honestly. All of the video highlights I have seen of him, the opposing defenders look very suspect. And as another poster mentioned. He doesn't have near the ball handling abilities, athleticism or the explosive first step to get to the rim of Babb, Lucious or Clyburn.
Clown fans are ripping me for saying he looks like a 3 pt specialist. That's what he is when you objectively compare his skill set with other ISU guards that have been mentioned. Unless one of these Clown fans can show me a video that I haven't seen, of Thomas abusing a guard with a D-1 offer list that matches his own, which is mysteriously missing offers from any of the elite programs, I'm standing by my statements.
Here are Thomas's list of offers:
Boston College
Creighton
Marquette
MINN
NW
Virginia
Wisconsin
Wis-GB
For a top 50 prospect and hands down the best shooter in college basketball, where are the offers from: Louisville, Duke, NC, MSU, MICH, OSU, Florida, Arizona, UCLA, Kansas, Texas, Indiana, Kentucky, UCONN, Georgetown, Syracuse, etc?
I just named 15 of what any basketball fan would describe as the Top 25 basketball programs in the country and not a single one of them offered a schollie to "the best shooter in the country"???
Am I the only one that sees the flaws here?

When a guy moves a significantly up the board only a few months before signing day, even the blue bloods have a hard time pivoting to try and take a kid last minute. ISU was on the kid pretty much from the day Hoiberg started.

Mike Gesell a top 75 player had offers from

Creighton, Drake, ISU, Nebraska, UNI, Stanford, Utah and Iowa.

Me I think he played this year like a top 75 recruit, heck Iowa fans were crying the blues when he was out hurt

By your logic since the kid did not get offered by a blue blood he was clearly overrated cuz usually top 75 kids have offers from blue blood programs normally.

Personally I if a school like ISU or Iowa are in on a top kid early on and the kid tells a blue blood program he is not going to waiver from a commit, most of them are not going to throw an offer out there, in hopes he changes his mind. They don't need to and it looks bad if they lose a kid to ISU or Iowa. There are exceptions, but for the most part why risk it and give lesser program any credibility.

Not claiming Thomas is the best shooter in the class, but he is very very good, and under Hoibergs system players will get open looks from 3 and will mostly likely raise their shooting percentage a few points.

Oh and to the Wilt Chamberlain poster is it true, you slept with all those women? Lucky bastard.

 

[deanvogs]

When a guy moves a significantly up the board only a few months before signing day, even the blue bloods have a hard time pivoting to try and take a kid last minute. ISU was on the kid pretty much from the day Hoiberg started.

Mike Gesell a top 75 player had offers from

Creighton, Drake, ISU, Nebraska, UNI, Stanford, Utah and Iowa.

Me I think he played this year like a top 75 recruit, heck Iowa fans were crying the blues when he was out hurt

By your logic since the kid did not get offered by a blue blood he was clearly overrated cuz usually top 75 kids have offers from blue blood programs normally.

Personally I if a school like ISU or Iowa are in on a top kid early on and the kid tells a blue blood program he is not going to waiver from a commit, most of them are not going to throw an offer out there, in hopes he changes his mind. They don't need to and it looks bad if they lose a kid to ISU or Iowa. There are exceptions, but for the most part why risk it and give lesser program any credibility.

Not claiming Thomas is the best shooter in the class, but he is very very good, and under Hoibergs system players will get open looks from 3 and will mostly likely raise their shooting percentage a few points.

Oh and to the Wilt Chamberlain poster is it true, you slept with all those women? Lucky bastard.

Not many kids come to college and shoot a higher % than they did in HS, so I doubt very much that will happen. You don't get much more wide open than being 7" taller than the opposing players, with little to no closing out speed. This don't get more open playing D1 college BB than they were in HS. '

If you really look at it, McGee and Lucious, and Allen for that matter took many bad shots. McGee still hit them, and so did Lucious and Allen (just not nearly at the rate as McGee did). I mean McGee was unreal actually in the % he shot, especially considering his shot selection. I'm sorry, but a kid who shoots 36% in HS, is not going to come close to matching what those guys were doing as SR.

I like Niang, wish he was a Hawk, he is a nice player. At the same time I am glad Woodbury is a Hawk. They play different positions, and the fact is Iowa is strong at the PF position, so we don't really need Niang. Conversely Fred doesn't really seem interested in playing a true C, so Woodbury isn't needed at ISU. Both schools have what they want in the players they have.

 

[lightning1]

When a guy moves a significantly up the board only a few months before signing day, even the blue bloods have a hard time pivoting to try and take a kid last minute. ISU was on the kid pretty much from the day Hoiberg started.

Mike Gesell a top 75 player had offers from

Creighton, Drake, ISU, Nebraska, UNI, Stanford, Utah and Iowa.

Me I think he played this year like a top 75 recruit, heck Iowa fans were crying the blues when he was out hurt

By your logic since the kid did not get offered by a blue blood he was clearly overrated cuz usually top 75 kids have offers from blue blood programs normally.

Personally I if a school like ISU or Iowa are in on a top kid early on and the kid tells a blue blood program he is not going to waiver from a commit, most of them are not going to throw an offer out there, in hopes he changes his mind. They don't need to and it looks bad if they lose a kid to ISU or Iowa. There are exceptions, but for the most part why risk it and give lesser program any credibility.

Not claiming Thomas is the best shooter in the class, but he is very very good, and under Hoibergs system players will get open looks from 3 and will mostly likely raise their shooting percentage a few points.

Oh and to the Wilt Chamberlain poster is it true, you slept with all those women? Lucky bastard.

You're trying to use a transitive argument on my post and attempting to make it mine. Don't do that.
I said that there is no way Thomas is a top 50 player and he has zero offers from top 15 programs.
If you would like to change the subject and discuss Gesell and his top 75 ranking, we can do that. Then you can address the opinions that I post and take ownership of. But that discussion has no bearing on Thomas. Nor do I want to hear excuses about how he blew up late and that kept the Blue Bloods from offering, blah blah. Tom Crean has proven that he will offer a player 1 week before signing day and cut an existing player from the roster, if he's good enough.

 

[fsanford]

You're trying to use a transitive argument on my post and attempting to make it mine. Don't do that.
I said that there is no way Thomas is a top 50 player and he has zero offers from top 15 programs.
If you would like to change the subject and discuss Gesell and his top 75 ranking, we can do that. Then you can address the opinions that I post and take ownership of. But that discussion has no bearing on Thomas. Nor do I want to hear excuses about how he blew up late and that kept the Blue Bloods from offering, blah blah. Tom Crean has proven that he will offer a player 1 week before signing day and cut an existing player from the roster, if he's good enough.

Simply providing examples how your logic might be slightly flawed if you think a kid without an offer from a specific set of programs cannot be a top 50 recruit.

And the Gesell argument absolutely applies or are you splitting hairs and saying Thomas is not top 50 but he is top 75?

I will give you another Allen Lazard, kids best offer is Stanford, nice program but not a blue blood program. I am guessing he will not get offers from Oregon, LSU, Michigan, Ohio State or others because he is saying he is sticking with lowly ISU.

Does it mean the guy is not a top recruit in your eyes?

 

[ForeverIowan]

If you honestly think your opinion regarding talent is superior to that of Roy Williams, Thad Matta, Bo Ryan and Tubby Smith then you're a bigger Clown than I thought. Which would be impressive given your other great posts. Yeah, Niang had a good year and is a good player. Head to head, Adam had the better game. Adam night in and night out faced better competition than Niang. Playing better competition, believe it or not, effects your numbers. Not to mention the B1G plays much more physical basketball and basically allows players to be mugged. ut I'm sure none of that had any effect on Adam's numbers.

I'll admit 100% entering last season I thought Woodbury would be the better player. The kid is 7 feet tall it's near impossible to find. He dominated in high school basketball due to his size alone. I can understand his offer list. Now that I've seen how his game translates to the next level I can honestly say I was wrong and I'm sure many of those coaches would say the same thing. He is slow, soft and uncoordinated. At times looks scared to shoot anything beyond a five footer.

Throw high school accolades out the window it's a new game. Great coaches miss on stars (i.e. Doug McDermott, Stephen Curry, etc...) all the time and they drool over potential that sometimes doesn't amount to much. It goes both ways. I'm sure they'll all admit they've made mistakes.

All I know is Woodbury has leaps and bounds to go before he is even a respectable player and Niang is being looked at as a dark horse for an All-American selection. Link Below. You're being ignorant and a homer if you don't recognize Niang is the far superior player. Just hearing you say Jok will be better than Thomas makes me smile because I expect the same scenario, different players : ) We'll see you back here next year.

Georges Niang - Men's College Basketball Nation Blog - ESPN

 

[WindsorHawk]

If you honestly think your opinion regarding talent is superior to that of Roy Williams, Thad Matta, Bo Ryan and Tubby Smith then you're a bigger Clown than I thought. Which would be impressive given your other great posts. Yeah, Niang had a good year and is a good player. Head to head, Adam had the better game. Adam night in and night out faced better competition than Niang. Playing better competition, believe it or not, effects your numbers. Not to mention the B1G plays much more physical basketball and basically allows players to be mugged. But I'm sure none of that had any effect on Adam's numbers.

I like Niang. He has a nice game and just plays...doesn't run his mouth like Ejim and too many ISU fans. I don't see his numbers getting any better next year. He was not the focal point of opposing defenses last year but will get more attention this year. I think Woodbury's numbers will improve substantially. I see no point in comparing the 2. It's apples and oranges.

 

[hawkfan33]

I like Niang. He has a nice game and just plays...doesn't run his mouth like Ejim and too many ISU fans. I don't see him numbers getting any better next year. He was not the focal point of opposing defenses last year but will get more attention this year. I think Woodbury's numbers will improve substantially. I see no point in comparing the 2. It's apples and oranges.

I don't think you know which one is which.

 

[woodyk1]

Does Niang get points for this?

 

[woodyk1]

Or this (because it was against ND)?

 

[lightning1]

Simply providing examples how your logic might be slightly flawed if you think a kid without an offer from a specific set of programs cannot be a top 50 recruit.

And the Gesell argument absolutely applies or are you splitting hairs and saying Thomas is not top 50 but he is top 75?

I will give you another Allen Lazard, kids best offer is Stanford, nice program but not a blue blood program. I am guessing he will not get offers from Oregon, LSU, Michigan, Ohio State or others because he is saying he is sticking with lowly ISU.

Does it mean the guy is not a top recruit in your eyes?

Once again, we are not talking about Gesell or Lizard. Do your self a favor stop comparing football recruiting to basketball recruiting. You'll only end up looking more foolish.
And your logic only applies if you are trying to change the subject. If you want to take the time to see the proof of my point, go thru any of the scouting services top 100 lists. Look at their offers list and come back and tell us how many of them don't have offers from at least one of the 15 programs I listed.
And yes, I doubt he is even top 75, from what I can tell. Looks more like Ogelsby than Hoiberg.

 

[lightning1]

Does Niang get points for this?

Looks like a Warden worthy player

 

[fsanford]

Once again, we are not talking about Gesell or Lizard. Do your self a favor stop comparing football recruiting to basketball recruiting. You'll only end up looking more foolish.
And your logic only applies if you are trying to change the subject. If you want to take the time to see the proof of my point, go thru any of the scouting services top 100 lists. Look at their offers list and come back and tell us how many of them don't have offers from at least one of the 15 programs I listed.
And yes, I doubt he is even top 75, from what I can tell. Looks more like Ogelsby than Hoiberg.

give you 2 examples that disprove your point, and you choose to ignore them you say they do not apply, why doesn't the Gesell example apply? Because it proves you wrong so you choose to ignore talk about looking foolish.

Okay here are some addition players in the top 100 that do not meet your criteria that being an offer from (I am sure you will figure out how to ignore them too..

Louisville, Duke, NC, MSU, MICH, OSU, Florida, Arizona, UCLA, Kansas, Texas, Indiana, Kentucky, UCONN, Georgetown, Syracuse


Texas is a bit of a stretch all of the others actually played for or won a national title. Marquette is more of a premier progam than is Texas, but I understand why you would not count them.

Kendall Wilson ranked #61 by Rivals no offers from the above.
Jordan Bell ranked #68 by Rivals no offers from the above schools
Christian Wood ranked # 40 by Rivals no offers from above
Kuran Austin ranked #28 by Rivals no offers from above.
Malcolm Hill ranked #62 by Rivals no offers from above
Kris Jenkins ranked #74 by Rivals no offers from above.
Jordan Matthew ranked 78 by Rivals no offers from above,
Mamadou Ndiaye ranke 80 by Rivals no offers from above.

MIKE GESELL 2012 RECRUIT NO OFFERS FROM ABOVE TOP 75 RECRUIT AND STILL A VERY GOOD PLAYER AT IOWA FRESHMEN YEAR


I can go on but it is just to easy at this point.

 

[ForeverIowan]

I like Niang. He has a nice game and just plays...doesn't run his mouth like Ejim and too many ISU fans. I don't see him numbers getting any better next year. He was not the focal point of opposing defenses last year but will get more attention this year. I think Woodbury's numbers will improve substantially. I see no point in comparing the 2. It's apples and oranges.[/QUOTEyou

You really have no clue what you're talking about do you? Niang runs his mouth nonstop on the court. I like that about him he wears his emotions on his sleeve. Ejim is the more silent, workman like player. Led the Big 12 in rebounds. You honestly think Woodbury's numbers will get better? Why? Iowa returns the exact same roster. Not only that Jok and the Wisky transfer will take minutes you'd think. I truly don't see Woodbury improving much on his 4 points per game and four rebounds per game average. Niang averaged 12 points and 4 rebounds per game and they lose KL, Babb, Mcgee and Clyburn. That's a lot of scoring and Niang and Ejim will be expected to carry the load...especpeially early on. I see Niang being around a 18-20 ppg, 6 rpg type player next year. I see woodbury around 5 ppg and 5-6 rpg type guy. Trust me, Niang has plenty of room to improve and he will! So I guess you're right...it is apples and oranges.

Did Woodbury break double digit scoring once all season? Maybe once? I just don't think he is a program changer just speaking the truth. Maybe he'll prove me wrong.

 

[deanvogs]

You really have no clue what you're talking about do you? Niang runs his mouth nonstop on the court. I like that about him he wears his emotions on his sleeve. Ejim is the more silent, workman like player. Led the Big 12 in rebounds. You honestly think Woodbury's numbers will get better? Why? Iowa returns the exact same roster. Not only that Jok and the Wisky transfer will take minutes you'd think. I truly don't see Woodbury improving much on his 4 points per game and four rebounds per game average. Niang averaged 12 points and 4 rebounds per game and they lose KL, Babb, Mcgee and Clyburn. That's a lot of scoring and Niang and Ejim will be expected to carry the load...especpeially early on. I see Niang being around a 18-20 ppg, 6 rpg type player next year. I see woodbury around 5 ppg and 5-6 rpg type guy. Trust me, Niang has plenty of room to improve and he will! So I guess you're right...it is apples and oranges.

Did Woodbury break double digit scoring once all season? Maybe once? I just don't think he is a program changer just speaking the truth. Maybe he'll prove me wrong.

Trey Burke 18.6 PPG
Russ Smith 18.7 PPG
Pierre Jackson 19.7 PPG
Deshaun Thomas 19.8 PPG
Eric Green 25 PPG

Those are some of he top scorers in the nation last year from a major conference (off the top of my head anyway).

I can see Niang scoring 14 PPG next year, I doubt very, very seriously that he approaches 18 PPG. I doubt it so much, I'd put my money where my mouth is......will you?

Please don't lecture others, saying they have no clue, when you are throwing out AVG. 18-20 PPG, and not realizing that would make him an elite scorer in a major conference. This is akin to old Herby's double double prediction for Gabe his Fr. year......

 

[SheagleHawk]

I'll admit 100% entering last season I thought Woodbury would be the better player. The kid is 7 feet tall it's near impossible to find. He dominated in high school basketball due to his size alone. I can understand his offer list. Now that I've seen how his game translates to the next level I can honestly say I was wrong and I'm sure many of those coaches would say the same thing. He is slow, soft and uncoordinated. At times looks scared to shoot anything beyond a five footer.

Throw high school accolades out the window it's a new game. Great coaches miss on stars (i.e. Doug McDermott, Stephen Curry, etc...) all the time and they drool over potential that sometimes doesn't amount to much. It goes both ways. I'm sure they'll all admit they've made mistakes.

All I know is Woodbury has leaps and bounds to go before he is even a respectable player and Niang is being looked at as a dark horse for an All-American selection. Link Below. You're being ignorant and a homer if you don't recognize Niang is the far superior player. Just hearing you say Jok will be better than Thomas makes me smile because I expect the same scenario, different players : ) We'll see you back here next year.

Georges Niang - Men's College Basketball Nation Blog - ESPN

Easy killer. I never said Jok will be better than Thomas. Others in the thread have said that, but I didn't. I simply found it comical that one the supposed "best shooters" in the country shot a mediocre 36% from 3 against some pretty terrible competition. And I sincerely can't wait to see you back after Niang avgs nowhere near 20pts. That right there is the VERY definition of a homer. You're forgetting who set Niang up on the vast majority of those points. You also conveniently forget that he was nowhere near the primary option for you, and therefore wasn't exactly a priority for the defense. If he was, D's would've sagged and let you chuck 3's all game.

 

[lightning1]

give you 2 examples that disprove your point, and you choose to ignore them you say they do not apply, why doesn't the Gesell example apply? Because it proves you wrong so you choose to ignore talk about looking foolish.

Okay here are some addition players in the top 100 that do not meet your criteria that being an offer from (I am sure you will figure out how to ignore them too..

Louisville, Duke, NC, MSU, MICH, OSU, Florida, Arizona, UCLA, Kansas, Texas, Indiana, Kentucky, UCONN, Georgetown, Syracuse


Texas is a bit of a stretch all of the others actually played for or won a national title. Marquette is more of a premier progam than is Texas, but I understand why you would not count them.

Kendall Wilson ranked #61 by Rivals no offers from the above.
Jordan Bell ranked #68 by Rivals no offers from the above schools
Christian Wood ranked # 40 by Rivals no offers from above
Kuran Austin ranked #28 by Rivals no offers from above.
Malcolm Hill ranked #62 by Rivals no offers from above
Kris Jenkins ranked #74 by Rivals no offers from above.
Jordan Matthew ranked 78 by Rivals no offers from above,
Mamadou Ndiaye ranke 80 by Rivals no offers from above.

MIKE GESELL 2012 RECRUIT NO OFFERS FROM ABOVE TOP 75 RECRUIT AND STILL A VERY GOOD PLAYER AT IOWA FRESHMEN YEAR


I can go on but it is just to easy at this point.

You managed to come up with 8. or 8%. The exception PROVES the rule my Clown friend.

 

[lightning1]

give you 2 examples that disprove your point, and you choose to ignore them you say they do not apply, why doesn't the Gesell example apply? Because it proves you wrong so you choose to ignore talk about looking foolish.

Okay here are some addition players in the top 100 that do not meet your criteria that being an offer from (I am sure you will figure out how to ignore them too..

Louisville, Duke, NC, MSU, MICH, OSU, Florida, Arizona, UCLA, Kansas, Texas, Indiana, Kentucky, UCONN, Georgetown, Syracuse


Texas is a bit of a stretch all of the others actually played for or won a national title. Marquette is more of a premier progam than is Texas, but I understand why you would not count them.

Kendall Wilson ranked #61 by Rivals no offers from the above.
Jordan Bell ranked #68 by Rivals no offers from the above schools
Christian Wood ranked # 40 by Rivals no offers from above
Kuran Austin ranked #28 by Rivals no offers from above.
Malcolm Hill ranked #62 by Rivals no offers from above
Kris Jenkins ranked #74 by Rivals no offers from above.
Jordan Matthew ranked 78 by Rivals no offers from above,
Mamadou Ndiaye ranke 80 by Rivals no offers from above.

MIKE GESELL 2012 RECRUIT NO OFFERS FROM ABOVE TOP 75 RECRUIT AND STILL A VERY GOOD PLAYER AT IOWA FRESHMEN YEAR


I can go on but it is just to easy at this point.

I don't know, Texas has 1 Final Four, 3 Great 8 and 5 Sweet 16 appearances since 2000. And I wouldn't consider Gesell a top 100 recruit, honestly. Does that mean I don't want him on my team? No. Would I rather have Jok than Gesell, if I had to make a choice? Yes.

 

[WindsorHawk]

Does Niang get points for this?

Sorry, I can't feel sorry for Craft in anything that gets physical. That's how Craft plays so he has to be able to take it if he's going to give it...which I think he does. I do remember when this happened and it wasn't necessary...but see my previous comment on Craft.