WBB 2015 #1 recruiting class

[stillcrazie]

http://espn.go.com/high-school/girls...ngs?class=2015

[uh_no]

http://espn.go.com/high-school/girls...ngs?class=2015

certainly a good class.

the biggest problems with these rankings, though, is they put a lot of weight on quantity.

THe top of teh class in overall rank is
5 9 and 43

As comparison, the top of connecticut's class is
1 6 and 23

Given the amount that the top couple of recruits excel above the rest of the class in women's ball, I would much rather have connecticut's class, even 2 people smaller.

[roywhite]

Glad to see such a strong class for Duke.

Thought the program might be declining a bit, but this infusion of talent esp. in the backcourt should help greatly.

[MCFinARL]

Glad to see such a strong class for Duke.

Thought the program might be declining a bit, but this infusion of talent esp. in the backcourt should help greatly.

I don't know that the program has been declining in terms of recruiting--Duke has been bringing in solid classes every year--according to ESPN, Duke had the 3rd ranked class in 2014 and the 2nd ranked class in 2013.

I don't especially want to re-open the often contentious debate about whether or not the program has been declining otherwise. I'll just note that, with the advent of Notre Dame and Louisville, the ACC has become a much tougher women's basketball league, so the team could be just as good as, say, 4-5 years ago and win fewer ACC championships.

Agreed the backcourt was thin this year after the loss of Chelsea Gray to graduation and Alexis Jones to injury/transfer, and bringing in new guards should give the team a boost.

Uh_no raises an interesting point--is it better to have fewer players, but with higher rankings, or more slightly lower-ranked players? A lot of that, of course, depends on chemistry within a team and on how things work out at the next level. Certainly Geno Auriemma has shown the ability to identify players who can live up to their high rankings at the college level.

[Kedsy]

Uh_no raises an interesting point--is it better to have fewer players, but with higher rankings, or more slightly lower-ranked players? A lot of that, of course, depends on chemistry within a team and on how things work out at the next level. Certainly Geno Auriemma has shown the ability to identify players who can live up to their high rankings at the college level.

I agree with Uh_no. I had that same thought when I first looked at the various classes. I'd rather have UConn's 2015 class than Duke's. Especially in women's basketball, #1 and #6 is quite a bit better than #5 and #9 (assuming the rankings are accurate, which of course isn't always true). Also, Duke's 3rd, 4th, and 5th best recruits are rated between #43 and #53. That's not "slightly lower-ranked" than UConn's recruits. That's significantly lower-ranked.

That said, Duke's class is a great complement to our returning personnel. If Duke gets healthy and stays healthy, and we don't suffer any unexpected personnel losses, Duke should be a top five team for the next several years.

[Papa John]

Uh_no raises an interesting point--is it better to have fewer players, but with higher rankings, or more slightly lower-ranked players? A lot of that, of course, depends on chemistry within a team and on how things work out at the next level. Certainly Geno Auriemma has shown the ability to identify players who can live up to their high rankings at the college level.

This largely depends upon what you have returning and your style of play. UConn's women's team always seems to have top-flight talent across the board, and given that you don't see women's players jumping ship early to go pro, that translates to depth of talent as well. So they really only need a handful of new top-flight recruits in each class to replace graduating seniors (as opposed to what we see with a team like Calipari's UK teams, where you have mass migrations of talent to the NBA each season requiring larger incoming classes).

[aswewere]

Our X and Os' just hasn't complimented our recruiting is as polite as I can say it.

[Bluedog]

Our X and Os' just hasn't complimented our recruiting is as polite as I can say it.

Our X and Os not saying nice things to our recruiting is indeed not polite! Sorry, just couldn't resist -- the juxtaposition of those two words in the same sentence was perfect.

[MCFinARL]

I agree with Uh_no. I had that same thought when I first looked at the various classes. I'd rather have UConn's 2015 class than Duke's. Especially in women's basketball, #1 and #6 is quite a bit better than #5 and #9 (assuming the rankings are accurate, which of course isn't always true). Also, Duke's 3rd, 4th, and 5th best recruits are rated between #43 and #53. That's not "slightly lower-ranked" than UConn's recruits. That's significantly lower-ranked.

That said, Duke's class is a great complement to our returning personnel. If Duke gets healthy and stays healthy, and we don't suffer any unexpected personnel losses, Duke should be a top five team for the next several years.

I don't disagree--and my "slightly lower ranked" phrasing was more hypothetical than specific to this comparison. I could make an argument, if a mostly semantic one, that "slightly" is apt for the #1 #6 versus #5 #9 part of the comparison, although as you note, that would probably be a stronger argument in men's basketball than in women's.

Re getting and staying healthy, that would be nice, and about time. Duke has been a bit star-crossed the past few years on that front.

This largely depends upon what you have returning and your style of play. UConn's women's team always seems to have top-flight talent across the board, and given that you don't see women's players jumping ship early to go pro, that translates to depth of talent as well. So they really only need a handful of new top-flight recruits in each class to replace graduating seniors (as opposed to what we see with a team like Calipari's UK teams, where you have mass migrations of talent to the NBA each season requiring larger incoming classes).

You are absolutely right about this--and given that this year Connecticut is returning almost its entire national championship lineup, there is no need for Auriemma to recruit more than three players, especially when they are as high quality as these. In the abstract, one can see an argument that a bigger class is a "better" class, but in specific context it seems clear that UConn's class is "better" than Duke's and second-ranked Louisville's (which has #2, #26, #40, #61, and #99 coming in).

[burnspbesq]

Duke addressed its needs. We go from no point guards at all to two potentially dominant PGs with Salvadores and Lambert. We get two very athletic wing players in Gorecki and Suggs. We return three quality inside players. We return the biggest matchup nightmare not named Stewart. We have crazy depth (10-person rotation? why not?). We can go small. We can go huge. There's no reason why our small lineup can't play man.

[stillcrazie]

Duke addressed its needs. We go from no point guards at all to two potentially dominant PGs with Salvadores and Lambert. We get two very athletic wing players in Gorecki and Suggs. We return three quality inside players. We return the biggest matchup nightmare not named Stewart. We have crazy depth (10-person rotation? why not?). We can go small. We can go huge. There's no reason why our small lineup can't play man.

Agreed. Whether or not Duke's class is better than UConn's, I think this is the key. We have positioned ourselves well. Now onto the X's and O's...

[Kedsy]

Duke addressed its needs. We go from no point guards at all to two potentially dominant PGs with Salvadores and Lambert. We get two very athletic wing players in Gorecki and Suggs. We return three quality inside players. We return the biggest matchup nightmare not named Stewart. We have crazy depth (10-person rotation? why not?). We can go small. We can go huge. There's no reason why our small lineup can't play man.

I completely agree and attempted to say as much in my earlier post.

I'm not concerned about X's and O's. I believe our "issues" the past few years have been almost exclusively health.

[uh_no]

I completely agree and attempted to say as much in my earlier post.

I'm not concerned about X's and O's. I believe our "issues" the past few years have been almost exclusively health.

I think we can all agree:

here's to excellent health of our duke women's team so that we can find out for sure

[Kedsy]

I think we can all agree:

here's to excellent health of our duke women's team so that we can find out for sure

I'll drink to that.

[-bdbd]

Boy, it sure seems like there's less than an ideal amount of optimism around the WBB program. The coaching staff secures what is, worst case, the second-best recruiting class in the nation and right away we turn to "but I'd rather have Connecticut's..." Talk about looking at half-empty glasses - or in this case 1% empty...

It IS ok to celebrate a little folks! That is some damn fine recruiting, and certainly fills a couple of clear needs. While it is certainly a legit argument that CT's might have more immediate impact, this class should serve to put Duke WBB back on the map, or at least back into the upper echelon (if we ever left it...).

I'll drink to that "good health" as well!! We are certainly due!

[MCFinARL]

Boy, it sure seems like there's less than an ideal amount of optimism around the WBB program. The coaching staff secures what is, worst case, the second-best recruiting class in the nation and right away we turn to "but I'd rather have Connecticut's..." Talk about looking at half-empty glasses - or in this case 1% empty...

It IS ok to celebrate a little folks! That is some damn fine recruiting, and certainly fills a couple of clear needs. While it is certainly a legit argument that CT's might have more immediate impact, this class should serve to put Duke WBB back on the map, or at least back into the upper echelon (if we ever left it...).

I'll drink to that "good health" as well!! We are certainly due!

Agreed we have a lot to be happy about here. UConn's class may be "better" in some senses, especially in that if you already have what Connecticut has coming back, it's clearly better to get three very highly ranked players than to get five players who aren't quite so highly ranked. But as burnspbesq and others have noted, Duke's class meets Duke's current needs very well.

[sagegrouse]

Boy, it sure seems like there's less than an ideal amount of optimism around the WBB program. The coaching staff secures what is, worst case, the second-best recruiting class in the nation and right away we turn to "but I'd rather have Connecticut's..." Talk about looking at half-empty glasses - or in this case 1% empty...

It IS ok to celebrate a little folks! That is some damn fine recruiting, and certainly fills a couple of clear needs. While it is certainly a legit argument that CT's might have more immediate impact, this class should serve to put Duke WBB back on the map, or at least back into the upper echelon (if we ever left it...).

I'll drink to that "good health" as well!! We are certainly due!

It obeys the Internet blog maxim: "Every silver lining has a gray cloud."