MUScoop

Projecting 2012-13 (Part 4 of 4): Projecting the top 100 teams and top 2000 players for the 2012-13 season

Written by: noreply@blogger.com (bamamarquettefan1)

The following are the projected Top 100 basketball teams for the 2012-13 season based on Value Add projects, which are explained below the table.  The number to the left of each team indicates where the team would rank if they sign the key recruit(s) they are in contention for (“?recruit” on the link) and kept any player on the fence on entering the NBA draft (“?draft”), while there is a note on how far they would fall if they do not.  The following are the links to the top 2000 players for 2012-13:


Air Force to Furman projected top 2000 players for 2012-13 season (http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/04/air-force-to-furman-projected-top-2000.html)

Gardner Webb to Marist projected top 2000 players for 2012-13 season (http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/04/gardner-webb-to-marist-projected-top.html)

Marquette to Syracuse projected top 2000 players for 2012-13 season (http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/04/marquette-to-syracuse-projected-top.html)

Temple to Youngstown State projected top 2000 players for 2012-13 season (http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/04/temple-to-youngstown-state-projected.html)

And here are the top 100 teams:

table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}
.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}


If get/keep all 50/50s recruits & NBA prospectsValue Add best caseIf lose/don't get any 50/50sValue Add worst case[/tr]

1	Indiana	47.30	drops to 17th	31.13
2	Duke	42.93	drops to 42nd	23.88
3	UCLA	39.03	drops to 34th	25.96
4	North Carolina St.	37.80	drops to 29th	27.50
5	Texas	37.10	drops to 16th	32.61
6	Kentucky	35.91	drops to 78th	17.66
7	Georgetown	35.71	drops to 36th	25.38
8	Louisville	35.58	drops to 23rd	29.24
9	Notre Dame	35.51	solid - at least 9th	35.51
10	Baylor	34.23	drops to 18th	31.57
11	Pittsburgh	33.66	drops to 30th	33.66
12	Florida	33.54	drops to 30th	27.46
13	Ohio St.	33.23	drops to 75th	18.73
14	Missouri	33.01	drops to 26th	28.52
15	Memphis	32.97	drops to 29th	27.85
16	Michigan St.	31.72	solid - at least 16th	31.72
17	Minnesota	31.63	drops to 19th	30.22
18	Providence	30.36	solid - at least 18th	30.36
19	Kansas	30.34	drops to 54th	22.12
20	Nevada Las Vegas	29.95	drops to 38th	25.23
21	Creighton	29.74	solid - at least 21st	29.74
22	Oregon St.	29.41	solid - at least 22nd	29.41
23	Syracuse	29.00	solid - at least 23rd	29.00
24	Wisconsin	28.86	solid - at least 24th	28.86
25	Tennessee	28.64	solid - at least 25th	28.64
26	California	28.42	solid - at least 26th	28.42
27	Iowa St.	28.37	solid - at least 27th	28.37
28	Michigan	28.01	drops to 98th	15.72
29	Gonzaga	27.48	drops to 53rd	22.37
30	Villanova	26.80	drop to 57th	21.27
31	Connecticut	26.38	drop out of top 100	12.56
32	Iowa	26.24	solid - at least 33rd	26.24
33	Marquette	26.22	solid - at least 33rd, as high as 24th	26.22
34	Saint Joseph's	26.10	solid - at least 34th	26.10
35	Temple	25.49	solid - at least 35th	25.49
36	New Mexico	25.32	solid - at least 36th	25.32
37	Alabama	25.28	drop to 62nd	20.78
38	Kansas St.	24.86	solid - at least 38th	24.86
39	Illinois St.	24.54	solid	24.54
40	Colorado	24.11	solid	24.11
41	Arizona	23.99	solid	23.99
42	La Salle	23.84	solid	23.84
43	North Carolina	23.72	drops to 91st	16.82
44	Virginia Commonwealth	23.72	solid	23.72
45	Richmond	23.70	solid	23.70
46	Davidson	23.40	solid	23.40
47	San Diego St.	23.26	drop to 76th	18.39
48	Rutgers	23.08	solid	23.08
49	Stanford	23.06	solid	23.06
50	Maryland	22.82	solid	22.82
51	West Virginia	22.80	solid	22.80
52	St. Louis	22.80	solid	22.80
53	South Dakota St.	22.37	solid	22.37
54	Northwestern	21.96	solid	21.96
55	Harvard	21.74	solid	21.74
56	Ohio	21.40	solid	21.40
57	Colorado St.	21.35	solid	21.35
58	Virginia Tech	21.34	solid	21.34
59	Miami FL	21.28	drop to 75th	18.22
60	Houston	21.23	solid	21.23
61	St. Mary's	20.83	solid	20.83
62	Oklahoma St.	20.75	solid	20.75
63	Seton Hall	20.56	drop to 77th	18.03
64	South Carolina Upstate	19.90	solid	19.90
65	Oklahoma	19.68	solid	19.68
66	Northern Iowa	19.60	solid	19.60
67	Oregon	19.49		14.77
68	Washington	19.43		14.71
69	Drexel	19.27	solid	19.27
70	Texas Tech	19.18	solid	19.18
71	Akron	19.04	solid	19.04
72	Bucknell	19.04	solid	19.04
73	Mississippi	19.01	solid	19.01
74	Belmont	18.90	solid	18.90
75	Massachusetts	18.72	solid	18.72
76	Virginia	18.29	solid	18.29
77	Utah St.	17.76	solid	17.76
78	Murray St.	17.65	drop out of top 100	9.57
79	Southern California	17.64	drop out of top 100	15.10
80	Georgia	17.58	drop out of top 100	14.55
81	South Florida	17.55	solid	17.55
82	Valparaiso	17.40	solid	17.40
83	Vermont	17.33	solid	17.33
84	Butler	17.32	solid	17.32
85	Denver	17.28	solid	17.28
86	Central Florida	17.24	solid	17.24
87	Xavier	17.19	solid	17.19
88	Washington St.	17.14	solid	17.14
89	South Carolina	17.09	solid	17.09
90	Middle Tennessee	16.89	solid	16.89
91	Mercer	16.80	solid	16.80
92	Georgia Tech	16.42	solid	16.42
93	Robert Morris	16.29	solid	16.29
94	Mississippi St.	16.14	solid	16.14
95	East Carolina	16.06	solid	16.06
96	Detroit	15.95	solid	15.95
97	Cleveland St.	15.78	solid	15.78
98	Arkansas	15.55	solid	15.55
99	Northeastern	15.54	solid	15.54
100	Tulsa	15.51	solid	15.51

As an example, if Duke signs Shabazz Muhammad, Tony Parker and Amile Jefferson, and Mason Plumlee stays for another year before going to the draft, then based on Value Add Duke would rank No. 2 in the country.  However, if none of those players play for Duke next year then they would drop all the way to 42nd.  

If you have questions on how any players performance was projected, you can refer back to the first three parts of this series on; 1, red shirts returning to action (http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/04/projecting-2012-13-part-1-of-4-otule.html), 2, the average improvement of players from the 2010-11 seaso (http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/04/projecting-2012-13-part-2-of-4-kentucky.html)n, and 3) incoming freshmen (http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/04/projecting-2012-13-part-3-of-4-after.html).  There were few final calculations for players, such as adding the defensive penalty for players who show no value on defense and are part of a team that gives up more than 1.025 points per trip down the court against and average offense, and there are some slight changes in players ranks from the Part 2 article because we have now grouped all returning players into one ranking.

Indiana would rank No. 1 in the country if Cody Zeller and Christian Watford stay, but even if they both left Indiana would rank as the 17th best team in the country.  

Other teams like Marquette appear set for the 2012-13 season, so they are just waiting to see which teams near them in the standings get recruits to improve themselves.  Based on only players who are “definitely” playing right now, Marquette is the 24th best team in the country based on projected Value Add.  However, if every team behind Marquette were to get every player they were pursuing or trying to keep, then Marquette could fall as low as 33rd place.

I personally believe that Marquette is a solid top 20 team, because these numbers are based on the typical improvement a college player makes between his freshman and sophomore year, junior and senior year, etc.  The fact is that players under Buzz Williams have progressed at a much better pace than anticipated, resulting in McNeal and Matthews going from pretty good players to 2nd team All-American and highest paid 2nd year player in the NBA respectively; Lazar Hayward went from the 2nd best player on his high school team to a 1st round NBA pick; Jimmy Butler went from a ZERO star recruit to first round NBA pick, and Jae Crowder went from being projected as the 48th most valuable player this year to actually becoming the 2nd most valuable.

With potential for so many players to take it to another level this year under Buzz, I believe some combination of Davante Gardner, Jamil Wilson, Vander Blue, Todd Mayo will jump well past the projected Value Add and push Marquette solidly into the Top 20.

As noted on each link to the players, please post a comment or email to jpudner@concentricgrasstops.com to point out any errors or changes.

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/04/projecting-2012-13-part-4-of-4.html

This is awesome stuff as usual bama - did you do anything like this last year?  If so, how did it stack up to this year's results?

I ask because I have a good amount of friends that went to UMass and they don't care about their hoops team or college basketball in general.  I had to force them to watch the semifinal game of the A10 tournament then a few of UMAss's games in the NIT and they ended up getting into it a bit.  I keep telling them that next year UMass is going to the NCAA tournament since they were so young this year and only lose one player to graduation (granted, probably their best).  I was a little disappointed to see them in the mid 70's on this list, basically the same as they finished this year ranked by the computers.  I'm trying to give them as much positive reinforcement as possible to follow the team for the whole year next year so I can talk college basketball with more people.  Are there any teams you can point to that greatly overachieved your preseason rankings last year and made the tournament somewhat unexpectedly (without the autobid) so I can tell them UMass is this year's _______?

Thanks for reading!  When the conference tournaments were winding down I noted that the big surprises - Louisville, Cincinnati, Florida St., Vanderbilt and Michigan State were all in the Sweet 16 I put out last June here:

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2011/06/value-add-sweet-16-for-2011-12.html

Sports Illustrated noted that if Mich St were more than an also ran it would really show Value Add was a good predictive tool, and of course the won the B10.

On UMass, your friends should definitely go!  That tiny point guard Chaz Williams is the 35th best returning player in the country, and has good size and good players to distribute too.  The problem is the A10 looks like it will really be the extra "High Major" or "BCS Conference" this year.  I felt bad that TJ McConnell got lured away from Duquesne after I calculated him as one of the best 20 players in the country - but while the conference doesn't have any one team to match resurgent UCLA and Arizona as the Pac10 come back, but UMass still has 5 A10 teams to chase in my overall rankings, so some great basketbal:

Saint Joseph's 34th nationally
Temple 35th (last basketball season before joining Big East)
La Salle 42nd
Richmond 45th
St. Louis 52nd
UMass 65th
Xavier 87th
Dayton 101st

Thanks for reading!

I love this type of stuff.  I can't wait to see what it looks like once the rosters are settled for next year.  I also do a projection that I first got the idea for from reading a past years post by you (I think) on win credits.  I don't do calculations for other teams so I average out where Marquette would finish in years prior, but it comes out with a similar prediction of a top 25-30 team for next year.

Thanks, and yes the Win Credits was my first basic approach.  Thanks for reading.  April 29 will be a big day with who is in the NBA draft determined, but we will just have to see how quickly the high school guys select while Caliprari is flying around the country.

The reason I like these approaches is that we know our guys and love them to death seeing how good they could be - but sometimes we need to take a step back and realize the competition has a lot of talent too, and if we only knew as much about our guys as we know about them where would we rank?

Thanks for reading.

Hummm... is that Aaron Durley with a perdicted ranking above Jamil Jones and TJ Taylor?