Final Portal Rankings - Comparing Metric Ratings v. National Rankings

[Eight_Banners]

I have compiled a spreadsheet of the top 180 (178) transfers in the portal, based on rankings from several sources. First, I have pulled all of the statistics from 2023-24 per 100 possessions from Sports Reference for College Basketball, and each player's PER from the same site. I have used only the top 178 players, because there's only so much time in the day. The teams that are listed are the only teams that have a player in the top 178 based on information from the following sources: Analytics from the aforementioned Sports Reference Site, and rankings from CBS Sports, The Athletic, On3, 247Sports.com, and Rivals Rankings. There are a variety of ways this information could be used to compile the "best" team compiled through the transfer portal. The first way of ranking the teams is by taking the overall average of the players' ratings from the national sports sites listed above.

Here would be the final portal rankings for teams using every commitment's rating, regardless of how lower commitments lower the overall score of the teams. For example, Washington's Great Osobor has an average national rating of 20.2, whereas their second commitment, Mekhi Mason, has an average rating of 150.4. So, Washington's rating is lowered because one of their two players wasn't in the top 150. Likewise, Kentucky will be affected by the fact that they have eight commitments, as opposed to the second most teams having only five or less. This brings down a lot of their overall scores, but this is only comparing portal commitments, not the rest of the players on each of the teams. I will try to account for that later. Finally, some players were unranked. CBS Sports' ratings only had eighty players. When they were unranked or weren't on CBS's ratings site, I gave each player the same rating of one number past the lowest ranking (i.e. players not on CBS's list were given an 81).



Here are the team rankings based on national sites averaged player ratings across CBS, On3, Rivals, etc.:

Here are the team rankings based on player PER averages (see more about these ratings here and here). Keep in mind, Kentucky has 8 players, so their PER is going to be drastically altered by a couple who have lower PERs than others (Kriisa and Butler bring UK's down), especially compared to those teams who have only Cs, PFs, and SFs, whose PERs are generally higher than guards:

Here are team rankings based on Offensive Efficiency Rating averages:

Here are the team rankings based on Defensive Efficiency Rating averages:

Here are the team rankings based on players' Overall Efficiency Rating (OERtg) ... more about this calculation here

Here are the team rankings based on players' Overall Metric Averages. For example, Player #1 is ranked #20 in PER, #1 in ORtg, #50 in DRtg, #30 in OERtg, they would have an average metric rating of 25.3. Thus, each player has an average, and each team has an average based on player averages.

Here is the best portal pick up for each team based on overall metric rating average:

Here are the 5-man rosters (Kentucky, Louisville, Arkansas, UCLA, and Michigan) based on players' overall metric ratings. I have taken away Lamont Butler, Ansley Almonor, and Kerr Kriisa, because they are the lowest ranking of our roster, giving UK five players to match the other four schools who have five players committed:

Top 40 defensive players (with uncommitted included):

Top 40 offensive players (with uncommitted included):

Top 40 PER players (with uncommitted included):

Here are the top available players based on metrics averages ratings:

Here are the top available players based on national site rankings:

Let me know how else you would like to see these rankings and I will see what I can do.

 

[ruppsrunt66]

That is a ton of info.

thanks for your endeavors--much appreciated.

rr

 

[ganner918]

tldr?

 

[Eight_Banners]

tldr?

Most of it is just screenshots of lists of teams based on various ratings. Not much to read.

 

[dl51344]

The problem is a team which gets one or two good players will push their rankings to the top. Recruiting a whole team has a different effect. Also, pure ranking doesn't tell anything about how that player fits into the system the coach is building. Fitting is more important, I think, than ranking. Also, a player who averaged 25 pts per game doesn't tell you that he is better than one who averaged 12 pts per game. There are many other factors to consider.

 

[ukfan1622]

I have a couple thoughts:
1. Thanks for putting in the work; it's very interesting.
2. According to all metrics our players don't rank as well as I thought they would. I hope Pope is better at player evaluation than the sites making the portal rankings and we better hope he can coach a team up to appearing better than the sum of their parts. Also, considering the projected strength of the SEC next year, we need to get back to winning at Rupp most of the time even when we aren't the better team.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

@Eight_Banners , as always, I appreciate your info, sir.

Well done!

 

[UK67KU59]

I was going to ask you do do this exact analysis but figured you would anyway 😂

 

[ukypug]

Coaching makes a difference. Am not worried one bit. Super excited tbh!

 

[Eight_Banners]

I have a couple thoughts:
1. Thanks for putting in the work; it's very interesting.
2. According to all metrics our players don't rank as well as I thought they would. I hope Pope is better at player evaluation than the sites making the portal rankings and we better hope he can coach a team up to appearing better than the sum of their parts. Also, considering the projected strength of the SEC next year, we need to get back to winning at Rupp most of the time even when we aren't the better team.

Well, we have 3 top-40 defensive players, two top-40 offensive players, and a top-40 player in PER. That's pretty good, especially considering you can put those 5 players on the floor at the same time.

Also, with the teams that committed five or more players, we have the best five of those teams.

 

[Eight_Banners]

I have a couple thoughts:
1. Thanks for putting in the work; it's very interesting.
2. According to all metrics our players don't rank as well as I thought they would. I hope Pope is better at player evaluation than the sites making the portal rankings and we better hope he can coach a team up to appearing better than the sum of their parts. Also, considering the projected strength of the SEC next year, we need to get back to winning at Rupp most of the time even when we aren't the better team.

Also, we have an opportunity to add another top-40 offensive player and top-40 PER in Chaz Lanier.

 

[ukfan1622]

Well, we have 3 top-40 defensive players, two top-40 offensive players, and a top-40 player in PER. That's pretty good, especially considering you can put those 5 players on the floor at the same time.

Also, with the teams that committed five or more players, we have the best five of those teams.

Thanks again. I didn't know that last part and it's encouraging. Also, all the pieces seem to fit together so far to me so I'm very happy with what Pope has done.

 

[Eight_Banners]

Thanks again. I didn't know that last part and it's encouraging. Also, all the pieces seem to fit together so far to me so I'm very happy with what Pope has done.

He really couldn't have done better than he has done in the last month. Sure, in UK dream world, the best portal player at every position could have committed to Pope, but here on earth, he did about as good as he could have.

If we land Lanier, watch out. I'm not as high on Jaxson Robinson. I'd rather have Jaylen Wells. Chaz Lanier is the guy Pope needs to land for us to be comfortably in the top-25 in 2024-25.

 

[moses1uk]

This info solidifies why every expert has UK not ranked

 

[Eight_Banners]

This info solidifies why every expert has UK not ranked

I think this is a top-25 team, sooner rather than later. Pope's 2023-24 BYU team's highest AP rating was 12. Here is how these portal players compare:


BYU 2023-24

Name	PER	ORtg	DRtg	OERtg
Dallin Hall	14.5	117.6	103.6	14
Spencer Johnson	17.1	114.9	100.5	14.4
Jaxson Robinson	16.3	110.2	103.9	6.3
Trevin Knell	16.8	127.7	103.1	24.6
Noah Waterman	17.1	126	101.2	24.8
Richie Saunders	21.2	132.5	100.7	31.8
Aly Khalifa	13.2	118.2	102.4	15.8
Fousseyni Traore	27.5	119.9	97.5	22.4
Trey Stewart	10.8	95.9	97.8	-1.9
AVG:	16.9	116.8	100.9	15.9

I cheated a little bit and used the best version of our portal players over their careers. I'm assuming they are going to be playing a high level of basketball because of the competition by which they will be surrounded.

Kentucky 2024-25, Portal players only:

Name	PER	ORtg	DRtg	OERtg
Amari Williams	28.5	109.5	84	25.5
Andrew Carr	20.8	127.6	102.4	25.2
Koby Brea	18.3	134.5	98.7	35.8
Ansley Almonor	18	115.1	108	7.1
Brandon Garrison	17.8	108.6	101.2	7.4
Otega Oweh	17.5	104.7	95.2	9.5
Lamont Butler, Jr.	14.3	105.3	89.1	16.2
Kerr Kriisa	12.1	107.6	101.4	6.2
AVG:	18.4	114.1	97.5	16.6

The BYU team was better offensively. This Kentucky team has players with potential to be better in every category than that team that reached top-15 levels. As we all know, UK needs to add an offensive juggernaut, go-get-a-basket player, and we will be a legitimate top-25 team and contender. Plus, I think Pope's offense is what made BYU so good offensively, which should cause these players to improve their ORtg metric as well.

 

[susan2361]

I have compiled a spreadsheet of the top 180 (178) transfers in the portal, based on rankings from several sources. First, I have pulled all of the statistics from 2023-24 per 100 possessions from Sports Reference for College Basketball, and each player's PER from the same site. I have used only the top 178 players, because there's only so much time in the day. The teams that are listed are the only teams that have a player in the top 178 based on information from the following sources: Analytics from the aforementioned Sports Reference Site, and rankings from CBS Sports, The Athletic, On3, 247Sports.com, and Rivals Rankings. There are a variety of ways this information could be used to compile the "best" team compiled through the transfer portal. The first way of ranking the teams is by taking the overall average of the players' ratings from the national sports sites listed above.

Here would be the final portal rankings for teams using every commitment's rating, regardless of how lower commitments lower the overall score of the teams. For example, Washington's Great Osobor has an average national rating of 20.2, whereas their second commitment, Mekhi Mason, has an average rating of 150.4. So, Washington's rating is lowered because one of their two players wasn't in the top 150. Likewise, Kentucky will be affected by the fact that they have eight commitments, as opposed to the second most teams having only five or less. This brings down a lot of their overall scores, but this is only comparing portal commitments, not the rest of the players on each of the teams. I will try to account for that later. Finally, some players were unranked. CBS Sports' ratings only had eighty players. When they were unranked or weren't on CBS's ratings site, I gave each player the same rating of one number past the lowest ranking (i.e. players not on CBS's list were given an 81).



Here are the team rankings based on national sites averaged player ratings across CBS, On3, Rivals, etc.:

Here are the team rankings based on player PER averages (see more about these ratings here and here). Keep in mind, Kentucky has 8 players, so their PER is going to be drastically altered by a couple who have lower PERs than others (Kriisa and Butler bring UK's down), especially compared to those teams who have only Cs, PFs, and SFs, whose PERs are generally higher than guards:

Here are team rankings based on Offensive Efficiency Rating averages:

Here are the team rankings based on Defensive Efficiency Rating averages:

Here are the team rankings based on players' Overall Efficiency Rating (OERtg) ... more about this calculation here

Here are the team rankings based on players' Overall Metric Averages. For example, Player #1 is ranked #20 in PER, #1 in ORtg, #50 in DRtg, #30 in OERtg, they would have an average metric rating of 25.3. Thus, each player has an average, and each team has an average based on player averages.

Here is the best portal pick up for each team based on overall metric rating average:

Here are the 5-man rosters (Kentucky, Louisville, Arkansas, UCLA, and Michigan) based on players' overall metric ratings. I have taken away Lamont Butler, Ansley Almonor, and Kerr Kriisa, because they are the lowest ranking of our roster, giving UK five players to match the other four schools who have five players committed:

Top 40 defensive players (with uncommitted included):

Top 40 offensive players (with uncommitted included):

Top 40 PER players (with uncommitted included):

Here are the top available players based on metrics averages ratings:

Here are the top available players based on national site rankings:

Let me know how else you would like to see these rankings and I will see what I can do.

WOW!!! What amazing work!!! There is so much information there. Thank you, THANK YOU!!!!

GO BIG BLUE AND
COACH POPE, TOO!!!💙💙💙

 

[TucsonCat]

Well, we have 3 top-40 defensive players, two top-40 offensive players, and a top-40 player in PER. That's pretty good, especially considering you can put those 5 players on the floor at the same time.

Also, with the teams that committed five or more players, we have the best five of those teams.

I'm no stat head.
But you're telling me that the 3rd leading scorer at Dayton, who didn't start, and averaged 11 points a game is the 4th best offensive player?
And Aaron Bradshaw is the 14th best offensive player? In the entire nation?
Then I gotta say that ranking is useless and having 2 top 40 offensive players is of little comfort.

 

[Eight_Banners]

I'm no stat head.
But you're telling me that the 3rd leading scorer at Dayton, who didn't start, and averaged 11 points a game is the 4th best offensive player?
And Aaron Bradshaw is the 14th best offensive player? In the entire nation?
Then I gotta say that ranking is useless and having 2 top 40 offensive players is of little comfort.

That's actually a good catch on Bradshaw. As I have been working with these numbers, I usually filter out the players who played less than 750 minutes, or less than 450 minutes. The average starter plays somewhere in the ranger of 700 minutes+. The average role player, seeing significant minutes, plays north of 450 minutes per season. Bradshaw was at 350, thus his numbers are probably too high. Then again, Calipari was bringing Dillingham and Sheppard off the bench, who were clearly two of the three best players on our team. Maybe metrics tell us a story about Bradshaw that the naked eye couldn't see. Or maybe not.

 

[Eight_Banners]

I'm no stat head.
But you're telling me that the 3rd leading scorer at Dayton, who didn't start, and averaged 11 points a game is the 4th best offensive player?
And Aaron Bradshaw is the 14th best offensive player? In the entire nation?
Then I gotta say that ranking is useless and having 2 top 40 offensive players is of little comfort.

Here's the top-40 filtering out those who played less than 450 minutes:

It's interesting to note how few of those guys started every game for their respective team. However, if you're not sold on a guy who shot 50% from 3, and hit 100 total 3s in a single season, then I don't know what to tell you. That guy is who I want taking shots on my team. I mean, we were excited about CJ Fredrick, who only hit 140 3-pointers in his career and had only hit 83 before coming to UK. Kellen Grady would be a good comparison, and prior to his lone year at UK, had hit a career high of 73 3-pointers in his freshman year at Davidson. His one year at Kentucky, which was pretty dang good, he hit 88. Antonio Reeves' career highs were 80 and 84, both at UK. His first two years at Illinois State, he only shot 105 (2020) and 108 (2021). Koby Brea made 100 3s last year.

I wouldn't lose sleep over Brea's low overall scoring total and the fact that he came off the bench. He is an efficient offensive threat. I don't know that he shoots it at 50% for another season, but it can't hurt his offense to have four other guys around him shooting at 37% or higher (Kriisa, Carr, Almonor, and Oweh), forcing the opponent to focus on more than just Brea as a three-point threat.

 

[BlueSince92]

I think I’m finally coming around to seeing the full statistical picture on Chaz Lanier. Lower offensive rating than Brea, but he was his team’s highest scorer, with the defenses all keying on him. (Brea was Dayton’s number three scorer). Averaged nearly twice as many points as Brea under those circumstances and was still 95.8% as efficient as Brea.

Did it against a much much weaker schedule, though. Brea Dayton SOS 5.73, which it seems was 77% as strong as our SOS was last year (Kentucky 7.46). Vs. Lanier SOS, which was -4.84. I don’t even know what a negative SOS is, but if Dayton’s SOS is 77% as strong as Kentucky’s SOS, then that says to me it’s a long way down to zero and then North Florida kept going a good way down from there.

Compared to Jaxson Robinson, Lanier also scored about 25% more points, and with higher efficiency, than Jaxson Robinson. Even though both were their team’s best scorers with the defenses keying on them. Once again, did it against vastly weaker competition, as what Robinson faced in the Big 12 was even tougher than SEC and Kentucky nonconference average (BYU SOS 7.86 last year).

BUT, Lanier’s efficiency was higher in combine games than Robinson’s, even though neither did great. Which tells me that offensively he’s probably at worst a push compared to Robinson despite the difference in college SOS.

Defensively, with a rating of 111.0 last year per Fox Sports, Lanier doesn’t look like a pretty picture. That would make him worse than any guy on our incoming team defensively AND worse than anyone at BYU last year.

All of which to say, I think we do fine if we land either Lanier or Robinson. Both highly efficient scorers, dangerous from range, comfortable with defenses keying on them. If we get Lanier he’s probably got a higher ceiling offensively, as indicated by their combine results despite the college SOS differential. If we get Robinson, he’ll help the whole team learn our offense and our total defense will probably be a good sight better. (Because however bad Lanier’s defense is, we will not be able to keep him off the floor much.)

I do sure wish we get one of them.

 

[Dead Cat Bounce]

I’ve come out of lurking to thank you for this amazing work. I agree with your assessment that this is a problem:

“Here would be the final portal rankings for teams using every commitment's rating, regardless of how lower commitments lower the overall score of the teams.”

I can’t possibly ask you for more effort, but I would love to see the data presented this way:

A ranked list of teams that acquired X number of portal players, based on those X players’ rankings alone, where X is equal to or fewer than the number of players Kentucky acquired, and where only those X players are included in the rankings. You pick the X.

So, for example, UK’s top 3 Vs other schools’ top 3. Or 4. Or 5 …

My apologies if you’ve already posted the data in this fashion but I missed it among your many excellent tables. EDIT: I *think* what I am asking for is a version of the data you’ve presented at “Here are the 5-man rosters,” but with roster rankings in addition to raw scores and with the table narrowed to four- and three-man rosters. IF I am reading that table correctly, Kentucky ranks first among teams that took five (at least among the teams listed).

Back to lurking for me but I remain grateful for posts like these.

 

[BigBlueManSouthCentralKY]

As of today, 247 has us starting out at number seven in the league. They said if we want them to move us up we need to get at least one other if not two really good players. Surprising to me with all the proven older players we have and a good variety of shooters and defenders. Also, they had TN and AR ahead of us. If you look at their rosters and compare to ours how could you put those two ahead of us?

 

[Eight_Banners]

As of today, 247 has us starting out at number seven in the league. They said if we want them to move us up we need to get at least one other if not two really good players. Surprising to me with all the proven older players we have and a good variety of shooters and defenders. Also, they had TN and AR ahead of us. If you look at their rosters and compare to ours how could you put those two ahead of us?

I actually had DJ Wagner penciled in as an Arkansas commit. It seemed his recruitment was trending in that direction. I have no idea how Arkansas' roster would be ranked ahead of Kentucky's. Here are the comparisons:

Player	PER	ORtg	DRtg
Zvonimir Ivisic	23.9	119.8	102.5
Jonas Aidoo	23	115.4	93.8
Johnell Davis	22.7	116.4	103.6
Adou Thiero	17.7	124.9	106.8
Boogie Fland
Billy Richmond
Karter Knox
AVG	21.83	119.13	101.68

That's a pretty good four-man start to the roster, with freshmen that will contribute. However, here is the 2023-24 Kentucky Wildcats roster for comparison (sorted by Minutes Played):

Player	PER	ORtg	DRtg
Antonio Reeves	23.6	129.2	112.9
Reed Sheppard	23.6	129.4	103.1
Tre Mitchell	17.1	120.9	108.1
D. J. Wagner	12.7	105.6	113.6
Rob Dillingham	23.5	118	109.8
Justin Edwards	16.2	119.2	110.4
Adou Thiero	17.7	124.9	106.8
Ugonna Onyenso	15.9	116.5	104
Aaron Bradshaw	17.6	128.5	108.3
Zvonimir Ivisic	23.9	119.8	102.5
AVG:	19.2	121.2	108

*Red highlights are those players who are below average defensively. This just shows how bad of a defensive team UK was last year.

I don't see how the Arkansas team will be better, or even equal to, the Kentucky team from last year. I suppose Zvonimir could become an offensive juggernaut, but they lost Reeves, Sheppard, and Dillingham, and those guys aren't replaced with anyone remotely close. Aidoo and Davis have good PER numbers, but Davis is not above average offensively or defensively, and Aidoo is only above average defensively. A PER of 23 is actually pretty low for a center, the portal players' average being 22.68. He's slightly above average. Compare that with Amari Williams, whose PER was 28.5.

That said, I think Arkansas' roster is better than Tennessee's. Tennessee lost:

Dalton Knecht
Jonas Aidoo
Josaiah Jordan-James
Santiago Vescovi
Tobe Awaka
DJ Jefferson
Freddie Dilione V

Replacements and returners:

Felix Okpara
Igor Milicic Jr.
Darlinstone Dubar
Zakai Zeigler
Jordan Gainey
Jahmai Mashack
J. P. Estrella
Cameron Carr
Cade Phillips
Colin Coyne
Grant Hurst
Kaylan Makan

Only Zeigler and Gainey had significant contributions to Tennessee last year.

Right now, the SEC looks like it's Alabama's for the taking. Hopefully Kentucky can get it done with a 2nd place finish, or surprise us and win.

 

[BigBlueManSouthCentralKY]

I actually had DJ Wagner penciled in as an Arkansas commit. It seemed his recruitment was trending in that direction. I have no idea how Arkansas' roster would be ranked ahead of Kentucky's. Here are the comparisons:

Player	PER	ORtg	DRtg
Zvonimir Ivisic	23.9	119.8	102.5
Jonas Aidoo	23	115.4	93.8
Johnell Davis	22.7	116.4	103.6
Adou Thiero	17.7	124.9	106.8
Boogie Fland
Billy Richmond
Karter Knox
AVG	21.83	119.13	101.68

That's a pretty good four-man start to the roster, with freshmen that will contribute. However, here is the 2023-24 Kentucky Wildcats roster for comparison (sorted by Minutes Played):

Player	PER	ORtg	DRtg
Antonio Reeves	23.6	129.2	112.9
Reed Sheppard	23.6	129.4	103.1
Tre Mitchell	17.1	120.9	108.1
D. J. Wagner	12.7	105.6	113.6
Rob Dillingham	23.5	118	109.8
Justin Edwards	16.2	119.2	110.4
Adou Thiero	17.7	124.9	106.8
Ugonna Onyenso	15.9	116.5	104
Aaron Bradshaw	17.6	128.5	108.3
Zvonimir Ivisic	23.9	119.8	102.5
AVG:	19.2	121.2	108

*Red highlights are those players who are below average defensively. This just shows how bad of a defensive team UK was last year.

I don't see how the Arkansas team will be better, or even equal to, the Kentucky team from last year. I suppose Zvonimir could become an offensive juggernaut, but they lost Reeves, Sheppard, and Dillingham, and those guys aren't replaced with anyone remotely close. Aidoo and Davis have good PER numbers, but Davis is not above average offensively or defensively, and Aidoo is only above average defensively. A PER of 23 is actually pretty low for a center, the portal players' average being 22.68. He's slightly above average. Compare that with Amari Williams, whose PER was 28.5.

That said, I think Arkansas' roster is better than Tennessee's. Tennessee lost:

Dalton Knecht
Jonas Aidoo
Josaiah Jordan-James
Santiago Vescovi
Tobe Awaka
DJ Jefferson
Freddie Dilione V

Replacements and returners:

Felix Okpara
Igor Milicic Jr.
Darlinstone Dubar
Zakai Zeigler
Jordan Gainey
Jahmai Mashack
J. P. Estrella
Cameron Carr
Cade Phillips
Colin Coyne
Grant Hurst
Kaylan Makan

Only Zeigler and Gainey had significant contributions to Tennessee last year.

Right now, the SEC looks like it's Alabama's for the taking. Hopefully Kentucky can get it done with a 2nd place finish, or surprise us and win.

They have AU #1, TN around 3rd or 4th? and AR at 6th right ahead of us. Really don't understand the TN love. Without Lanier I think they have a very mediocre year compared to last year. Barnes has been raving about Igor and Dubar will probably be a good scorer. But their experienced quality depth is nothing like ours. We have no weak players on the roster right now. I can see AL being ahead of us. And with AR they must think that Davis is going to dominate everyone. I mean, look and compare our roster with theirs. They may pick up a couple of good players late and close that gap but right now there is no comparison.

 

[Eight_Banners]

That have AU #1, TN around 3rd or 4th? and AR at 6th right ahead of us. Really don't understand the TN love. Without Lanier I think they have a very mediocre year compared to last year. Barnes has been raving about Igor and Dubar will probably be a good scorer. But their experienced quality depth is nothing like ours. We have no weak players on the roster right now. I can see AL being ahead of us. And with AR they must think that Davis is going to dominate everyone. I mean, look and compare our roster with theirs. They may pick up a couple of good players late and close that gap but right now there is no comparison.

Ole Miss will be very good too. I haven't run the numbers, but their four commitments from the portal would be better than the best four from our portal commitments.