ESPN Top 100 Player rankings....

[MHettel]

Just copying Big East guys right from the list...

99. Devion Smith- SJU
70. Wooga Poplar- Villanova
68. Freemantle- XU
67. Aiden Mahaney- UConn
48. Pop Isaacs- Creighton
28. Eric Dixon- Villanova
27. Liam McNeeley- UConn
26. Byrce Hopkins- Providence
15. Kadary Richmond- SJU
11. Kam Jones- Marquette
10. Alex Karaban- UConn
8. Ryan Kalkbrenner- Creighton


uh, sobering. The whole conference has 12 of the top 100 Players? Some of the other "power" conference are larger with 16 or more teams, but this is kinda shocking.

Seems like the BE is proportionally low. And no players in the top 7, but yet its a top 3 league, right? (notwithstanding that 3 bid disaster from last year). 4 guys between 8-15 I guess is good. 7 of the top 28.

[GoMuskies]

We have 11 of 79 power conference teams (13.9%). We have 12% of the top 100 players (according to this preseason guess from ESPN). Seems pretty close to where it should be (given that there are surely some non-power conference players on the list).

[Xville]

Just copying Big East guys right from the list...

99. Devion Smith- SJU
70. Wooga Poplar- Villanova
68. Freemantle- XU
67. Aiden Mahaney- UConn
48. Pop Isaacs- Creighton
28. Eric Dixon- Villanova
27. Liam McNeeley- UConn
26. Byrce Hopkins- Providence
15. Kadary Richmond- SJU
11. Kam Jones- Marquette
10. Alex Karaban- UConn
8. Ryan Kalkbrenner- Creighton


uh, sobering. The whole conference has 12 of the top 100 Players? Some of the other "power" conference are larger with 16 or more teams, but this is kinda shocking.

Seems like the BE is proportionally low. And no players in the top 7, but yet its a top 3 league, right? (notwithstanding that 3 bid disaster from last year). 4 guys between 8-15 I guess is good. 7 of the top 28.

It’s espn. Do you really think 1.) they have a clue? and 2.) that they are going to be favorable to the big East when other leagues are big partners of theirs?

[MHettel]

It’s espn. Do you really think 1.) they have a clue? and 2.) that they are going to be favorable to the big East when other leagues are big partners of theirs?

1). Yes
2). I don’t really think this concept of part of the equation.

Do you disagree with those answers?

Do you believe that ESPN (Jeff Borzello) doesn’t have a clue?

Do you believe that Disney, the parent company of ESPN has instructed the ESPN staff to drive revenue by undermining the competing networks that show BE (and other non ESPN league) games by omitting or underrating the players from those leagues? In this the world you live in?

[Xavier]

Does this matter? Did it matter last year or the year before? What’s the correlation between top 100 players and National championships?

[GoMuskies]

I counted them up, and 17 of the top 100 are from non-power conference teams (3 or 4 are from Gonzaga). So to recap, the Big East has 11 of 79 power conference teams (18 Big "10", 18 SEC, 16 ACC, 16 Big "12" and 11 Big East) or 13.9% of the power conference teams. The Big East has 12 of the top 83 power conference players, or 14.5%.

So what's the problem (other than from Xavier's perspective only having #68 and that being a guy who hasn't played in two years)?

[Xville]

1). Yes
2). I don’t really think this concept of part of the equation.

Do you disagree with those answers?

Do you believe that ESPN (Jeff Borzello) doesn’t have a clue?

Do you believe that Disney, the parent company of ESPN has instructed the ESPN staff to drive revenue by undermining the competing networks that show BE (and other non ESPN league) games by omitting or underrating the players from those leagues? In this the world you live in?

Do I disagree? I don’t care. These things are very subjective especially considering there are a lot of guys on new teams and some guys that have never played college bb before.

Jeff borzello have a clue? Not more than anyone else. He’s a writer, does that give him some kind of special basketball knowledge?

I 100% believe it’s possible that Disney would.

I think you find new and creative ways to whine, which is something.

[xu82]

ESPN is hot garbage when it comes to anything related to college basketball. I used to check their recruiting info and it was laughable. It looked like a middle schooler’s abandoned project with terribly out of date information. I generally don’t like or watch ESPN, but that was embarrassing and should have been taken down.

So no, I don’t give a rat’s ass what they think of anything.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

ESPN has had an intended or unintended bias in sports for years favoring the conferences they have affiliations. The SEC push for football has been criticized for years.

[GoMuskies]

OK, but where's the bias here? The Big East is overrepresented among power conferences.

[Xville]

OK, but where's the bias here? The Big East is overrepresented among power conferences.

Having a Duke player number 1 that hasn’t played a lick of colllege basketball and 2 a unc player that’s a good player but 2 in the country come on.

Flagg will be a good player but they love to jump on a guy and call him the next Jordan, lebron wtc. He’s fine from what I have seen, but nothing any better than a filipkowski.

ESPN loves their acc teams, especially those two and oh that just so happens to be their biggest bb partner.

[GoMuskies]

Find me the NBA mock draft site that DOESN'T list Cooper Flagg as the #1 pick in the 2025 draft.

CBS lists those 2 guys as #2 and #3 behind Mark Sears of Alabama.

[Xville]

Find me the NBA mock draft site that DOESN'T list Cooper Flagg as the #1 pick in the 2025 draft.

I agree, but we all know what nba drafts are based on and it’s not results. It’s ceiling. With that said, I think saying he’s the best college bb player in the country is flat out ridiculous.

[MHettel]

I agree, but we all know what nba drafts are based on and it’s not results. It’s ceiling. With that said, I think saying he’s the best college bb player in the country is flat out ridiculous.

Yeah, but you're kinda known to be way off on your predictions.

[Xville]

Yeah, but you're kinda known to be way off on your predictions.

Yeah sometimes I get things wrong. Fortunately, I admit it and don’t double down when wrong, like someone else I know.

You also really struggle with the difference between hope/ceiling and literal predictions


Will you now concede that the big East representation is not proportionally low like you indicated with your whine op

[drudy23]

Who cares, these rankings are meaningless.

[MHettel]

Yeah sometimes I get things wrong. Fortunately, I admit it and don’t double down when wrong, like someone else I know.

You also really struggle with the difference between hope/ceiling and literal predictions


Will you now concede that the big East representation is not proportionally low like you indicated with your whine op

I think I’ll recharacterize my initial comment by saying that I don’t think the BE is properly represented. Given its status and profile as an elite “basketball first and only” conference that has achieved 4 NCs in the last decade, I’d simply expect to see more player represented on a top 100 list.

Given the entire landscape of college basketball (375 teams), it’s pretty obvious that if randomized nearly 3 of 4 schools would not be represented at all. And a big power conference with 16 teams would expect about 4 players on the list.

But it’s not random. And the evidence has already been provided. Someone said 18 from the list are from non-power conferences of which there are what, about 25. So less than 1 per conference. Back out Gonzaga and it 15 players representing 25 conferences.

So basically you have 2 groups. The 5/6 “power” conferences which are all OVER represented, and the 25 mid major and low major conferences which are all UNDER represented.

So proportionally, really, no conference is properly represented. I wasn’t planning on having to explain that.


And frankly, when I think of XUs position among the basketball landscape, those 25 “other conferences” don’t really exist. If we are comparing ourselves to to the lower 2/3rds of the field, then we might as well just join them with that small time thinking.

I would like the BE and XU to be among the elite in college basketball. I kinda feel like they are. And yet if these rankings are even somewhat credible then I’ll need to reassess that view.

So proportionally low, relative to the ones we should measure ourselves against.

[MHettel]

Who cares, these rankings are meaningless.

You dont think it would be helpful to the program if we had a guy that was ranked in the top 10? I'm not talking about some other guy we dont have. But lets say Conwell (which is probably too high for him...much like 101 would be too low). You dont think that extra publicity and notoriety wouldnt benefit the program?

Do you like the Sean Miller Podcast? Do you think its existence helps the Program? what about this upcoming "Hard Knocks" type program that we will be seeing? Does that help? We'd get the same fan interest level and advertising opportunities and recruits whether or not these things existed?

[GoMuskies]

So proportionally low, relative to the ones we should measure ourselves against.

But it's not, though, for the Big East as a whole. We're overrepresented compared to the other power conferences.

Now, I don't love XAVIER having less representation than Princeton on the list. That's for sure.

[Xville]

But it's not, though, for the Big East as a whole. We're overrepresented compared to the other power conferences.

Now, I don't love XAVIER having less representation than Princeton on the list. That's for sure.

Exactly...just another move of the goalposts from Hett to not have to admit that he's wrong yet again. Seems that now We (Xavier) is now the problem, even though in the OP it was the BE as a whole.

[Xville]

You dont think it would be helpful to the program if we had a guy that was ranked in the top 10? I'm not talking about some other guy we dont have. But lets say Conwell (which is probably too high for him...much like 101 would be too low). You dont think that extra publicity and notoriety wouldnt benefit the program?

Do you like the Sean Miller Podcast? Do you think its existence helps the Program? what about this upcoming "Hard Knocks" type program that we will be seeing? Does that help? We'd get the same fan interest level and advertising opportunities and recruits whether or not these things existed?

These things help the program from a branding and marketing perspective because it shows who is heading the program, and gives an in depth look into everything within the basketball team.

A subjective list from a writer at ESPN does none of that.

In your original post, it was whining about the BE being proportionally low, I guess that since now that's been pointed out as being wrong, you can't just admit to it, and so now you move it to Xavier in your mind being underrepresented as the problem.

Again, who gives a shit? Subjective opinion from a writer that is heavily influenced by a broadcast network and probably watches less college basketball than most of us.

[drudy23]

You dont think it would be helpful to the program if we had a guy that was ranked in the top 10? I'm not talking about some other guy we dont have. But lets say Conwell (which is probably too high for him...much like 101 would be too low). You dont think that extra publicity and notoriety wouldnt benefit the program?

Do you like the Sean Miller Podcast? Do you think its existence helps the Program? what about this upcoming "Hard Knocks" type program that we will be seeing? Does that help? We'd get the same fan interest level and advertising opportunities and recruits whether or not these things existed?

Sure it helps, but who cares what this guy's opinion is. It's literally one person's opinion. Any one of us could have created a similar list with the same amount of credibility. It's literally meaningless.

It's 10x as meaningless as pre-season polls, and those are pretty meaningless.

[nuts4xu]

I think it's anecdotal information, but nothing to get worked up about.

Will it move the needle for X? It can't hurt but won't make a ton of difference.

Tough crowd on this thread.

[MHettel]

Exactly...just another move of the goalposts from Hett to not have to admit that he's wrong yet again. Seems that now We (Xavier) is now the problem, even though in the OP it was the BE as a whole.

Where did I say that "Xavier is now the problem"?

[GoMuskies]

Where did I say that "Xavier is now the problem"?

If Xavier is not the problem, and there actually is a problem, what exactly is it?

As mentioned upthread, the Big East has 13.9% of power conference programs and 14.5% of power conference players on this list.

[Xville]

I think I’ll recharacterize my initial comment by saying that I don’t think the BE is properly represented. Given its status and profile as an elite “basketball first and only” conference that has achieved 4 NCs in the last decade, I’d simply expect to see more player represented on a top 100 list.

Given the entire landscape of college basketball (375 teams), it’s pretty obvious that if randomized nearly 3 of 4 schools would not be represented at all. And a big power conference with 16 teams would expect about 4 players on the list.

But it’s not random. And the evidence has already been provided. Someone said 18 from the list are from non-power conferences of which there are what, about 25. So less than 1 per conference. Back out Gonzaga and it 15 players representing 25 conferences.

So basically you have 2 groups. The 5/6 “power” conferences which are all OVER represented, and the 25 mid major and low major conferences which are all UNDER represented.

So proportionally, really, no conference is properly represented. I wasn’t planning on having to explain that.


And frankly, when I think of XUs position among the basketball landscape, those 25 “other conferences” don’t really exist. If we are comparing ourselves to to the lower 2/3rds of the field, then we might as well just join them with that small time thinking.

I would like the BE and XU to be among the elite in college basketball. I kinda feel like they are. And yet if these rankings are even somewhat credible then I’ll need to reassess that view.

So proportionally low, relative to the ones we should measure ourselves against.

Uh you mentioned Xavier. So either you now think Xavier is the isssue or you’re doubling down on something that’s already been proven to be incorrect. Whatever way you wanna go

[MHettel]

Uh you mentioned Xavier. So either you now think Xavier is the isssue or you’re doubling down on something that’s already been proven to be incorrect. Whatever way you wanna go

This is a Xavier message board, right? And you think my original post about the BE representation on this list was somehow not related to Xavier?

I mean, had i wrote a post about the Mountain West representation on the list, it wouldn't be a leap to say that the post was unrelated to Xavier. But i probably would have posted that to a message board of a Mountain West team, right?

So a post on a Xavier message board about the conference that Xavier is in had nothing to do with Xavier until I explicitly mentioned Xavier's name ONCE in a subsequent response and then suddenly I've "moved the goalposts." Ok.

[Xville]

This is a Xavier message board, right? And you think my original post about the BE representation on this list was somehow not related to Xavier?

I mean, had i wrote a post about the Mountain West representation on the list, it wouldn't be a leap to say that the post was unrelated to Xavier. But i probably would have posted that to a message board of a Mountain West team, right?

So a post on a Xavier message board about the conference that Xavier is in had nothing to do with Xavier until I explicitly mentioned Xavier's name ONCE in a subsequent response and then suddenly I've "moved the goalposts." Ok.

Your op was about the big East, or are you so caught up in your web of trying not to be wrong, did ya forget that?

When you got called on it, you then mention Xavier. You then asked me when did you mention Xavier about being the problem implying that you never did.

lol you’re a funny person.It’d be a whole lot easier to say you effed up, and you’ll try better next time.

Still the same guy who thinks an fbi raid and subsequent penalties still means that players weren’t getting paid and nothing was ever out in the open lol.

[Xavier]

As mentioned upthread, the Big East has 13.9% of power conference programs and 14.5% of power conference players on this list.

Wonder if this gets addressed. Do I think a recruit looks at this list and flips his choice? No. I don’t think it moves the needle at all in any way. Certainly not more than pointing to the recent NC success the big east has had.

[Xville]

Find me the NBA mock draft site that DOESN'T list Cooper Flagg as the #1 pick in the 2025 draft.

CBS lists those 2 guys as #2 and #3 behind Mark Sears of Alabama.

I skimmed the cbs one… that list on the surface at least made some sense. We shall see if kam jones is any better than Conwell once the year starts. Conwell has to prove it, but from what I have seen so far he has the potential to be the best guard in the be.

In all though who cares. I want x in the second weekend with a chance at the final four.

[Xuperman]

I skimmed the cbs one… that list on the surface at least made some sense. We shall see if kam jones is any better than Conwell once the year starts. Conwell has to prove it, but from what I have seen so far he has the potential to be the best guard in the be.

There's a good chance Conwell will not be the best guard on the TEAM.....and that's a good thing!!

Hard to imagine a better BE guard than Kadary Richmond when all is said and done. Slick Rick will have him positioned for a MONSTER year.

[Xville]

There's a good chance Conwell will not be the best guard on the TEAM.....and that's a good thing!!

Hard to imagine a better BE guard than Kadary Richmond when all is said and done. Slick Rick will have him positioned for a MONSTER year.

X is indeed loaded in the backcourt but Conwell should be the best. It’s going to be fun to watch. It is nice that x seems to be back to having 8-9 guys that can make a significant impact from game to game.

[bleedXblue]

There's a good chance Conwell will not be the best guard on the TEAM.....and that's a good thing!!

Hard to imagine a better BE guard than Kadary Richmond when all is said and done. Slick Rick will have him positioned for a MONSTER year.

who is going to be better?

[Xuperman]

who is going to be better?

McKnight is until proven otherwise. A quick look at his numbers in BE play proves the jump in competition had no effect....guy was a high level producer across the board. Obviously Conwell has to live up to the hype playing against next level competition to be in the conversation. He will score, but can he contribute in other areas at a high clip? Can he effectively defend BE guards?

[bleedXblue]

McKnight is until proven otherwise. A quick look at his numbers in BE play proves the jump in competition had no effect....guy was a high level producer across the board. Obviously Conwell has to live up to the hype playing against next level competition to be in the conversation. He will score, but can he contribute in other areas at a high clip? Can he effectively defend BE guards?

they don't play the same position......agree McKinght was a solid player last year.

[drudy23]

A bunch of really good players is typically always better than 1-2 stand-outs. This team should be really hard to guard.

[bleedXblue]

A bunch of really good players is typically always better than 1-2 stand-outs. This team should be really hard to guard.

yep- agreed

Almost have a Villanova (of old) feel to this team. A bunch of shooters. Not overwhelming talent in the post- no disrespect to Free. 8-9 deep.

[MHettel]

yep- agreed

Almost have a Villanova (of old) feel to this team. A bunch of shooters. Not overwhelming talent in the post- no disrespect to Free. 8-9 deep.

This will come down to coaching. Plenty of talent, although very skewed towards the backcourt.

Last years frotncourt was afwul and the backcourt and wing positions (1,2,3) was a little thin or inexperienced. So we saw an approach where we ran as early and often as possible to stay out of the halfcourt offense that was ineffective. I'd like to see that exact gameplan. Our backcourt and wings are actually deeper and more experienced than last year, and our frontcourt is certainly better but we have a little less depth. So when we get into the halfcourt offense we can actually do some damage, but the high pace is suited for our guards (McKnight especially) and the depth will be key to closing out games while not being exhausted.

Last year would have required an ALL-TIME coaching performance to do much better than we did given that lousy roster. This year with this roster, frankly, could be coached to the dance by nearly anyone. An exceptional Coach can get 25 wins out of this team.

[Xville]

yep- agreed

Almost have a Villanova (of old) feel to this team. A bunch of shooters. Not overwhelming talent in the post- no disrespect to Free. 8-9 deep.

Kind of. I dunno if x has anyone as good defensively inside like nova had. That first team had ochefu. Second had paschal and spellman.

Looking at that 18 roster now…. Good gawd that team was freaking loaded.

[bleedXblue]

Kind of. I dunno if x has anyone as good defensively inside like nova had. That first team had ochefu. Second had paschal and spellman.

Looking at that 18 roster now…. Good gawd that team was freaking loaded.

Speaking offensively of course. Not defensively.......although our back court could be much better this year.......

[Xville]

Speaking offensively of course. Not defensively.......although our back court could be much better this year.......

Fair enough! Hopefully our guards can at least stay in front of their man, even two years ago our guards were horrible defensively.

[bleedXblue]

Fair enough! Hopefully our guards can at least stay in front of their man, even two years ago our guards were horrible defensively.

We have some bigger bodies and hoping guys like Swain can step up this year and be more physical. We shall see