My regional breakdown, still.
After I did that regional study of football talent production by state, Michael Elkon (Braves & Birds, SB Nation, regular HTTV contributor) asked if I'd do the same with hoops recruiting. I responded that I'd love to, but we just had our first child and I need some time to stare at her. This is also my response for why I didn't have any content last week. In fact it is my excuse for everything; to those who don't have kids I can say "you don't understand" and they have to shut up because this is the ultimate trump card. Those who are already parents keep quiet because they're in on it. Having kids is AWESOME!
Anyway it's back to work, and because it's me that means charts. So back to charts.
This is NOT exactly accurate
Data are from the Rivals (most easily accessible) databases since 2003. Putting lists of football and basketball recruits against each other is not a one-for-one comparison. Basketball has more teams, fewer recruits per team, way more international players, and players who went directly to the NBA or committed to Kentucky or some other stupid one before they're done with the pretense.
Top basketball players are also far more likely to go to prep schools, and these are often nowhere near their hometowns. The Rivals database lists actual hometowns for many prep players, but not international ones, so, e.g., Canadian from Canada Nik Stauskas registers as a Massachusetts recruit despite being from Canada. Where a hometown was noted I used that. Some states will appear disproportionately large because their prep programs draw kids from around the region, but that is also an advantage to the schools near the prep programs.
Talent Supply By Region
As with football, the Southeast appears to produce a disproportionate amount of talent compared to its population, but to nowhere near the extreme as it is with football. Observe:
| Region | % U.S. pop (2010) | % of Top ~400 Hoops Recruits | % of Top ~400 FB Recruits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Atlantic | 22% | 20% (-2) | 15% (-7) |
| Midwest | 18% | 18% ( - ) | 14% (-4) |
| Northeast | 5% | 6% (+1) | 1% (-4) |
| Pacific | 19% | 14% (-5) | 14% (-5) |
| Plains | 17% | 17% ( - ) | 18% (+1) |
| Southeast | 19% | 25% (+6) | 38% (+19) |
The Atlantic, Midwest, and Northeast are considerably better represented, suggesting a marginally higher basketball orientation than the national average. My guess is this has a lot to do with the fact that it doesn't snow in gyms.
The list of top states in proportionally producing more basketball talent was heavily influenced by the prep school effect: New Hampshire (more than 3x their share of hoops talent) was done by three schools: Tilton, New Hampton, and the Brewster Academy. Most of Nevada was Findlay Prep, and Bishop Gorman sent most of the rest. Leaving those aside, the big basketball states (proportional to their population) were Kansas (209%), D.C. (202%), Mississippi (185%), Georgia (183%), Iowa (172%), Virginia (166%), North Carolina (154%), and Indiana (150%).
| State | Hoops | Football | % Pop |
|---|---|---|---|
| Illinois | 28% | 21% | 23% |
| Indiana | 18% | 10% | 12% |
| Iowa | 10% | 2% | 6% |
| Michigan | 14% | 14% | 18% |
| Minnesota | 6% | 5% | 10% |
| Ohio | 17% | 45% | 21% |
| Wisconsin | 8% | 4% | 10% |
There's a reverse prep effect at the bottom: Vermont and Rhode Island were drained by New Hampshire it appears, and Delaware seems to have sent their kids to Virginia or D.C. The remainder to produce less than half as much talent as you would expect from their populations: Alaska (17%), Montana (25%), Colorado (34%), Nebraska (40%), New York (41%), South Dakota (45%), and New Mexico (47%).
Michigan (3% of the U.S. population, 2.4% of the top basketball talent) was about in the middle, about even with Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Missouri, Ohio, and Arizona. Straight-up Michigan is the 14th biggest producer of basketball talent, and the 12th biggest producer of football talent. I thought the more interesting stat was within the Midwest (that above table), where Ohio produces nearly half of the top football prospects the basketball talent is shared.
[jump for where they go]
Regional Retention
Basketball seemed to have way more kids leaving their home region than football:
| Chose School in Home Region | ||
|---|---|---|
| Region | Basketball | Football |
| Atlantic | 49% | 52% |
| Midwest | 65% | 75% |
| Northeast | 18% | 35% |
| Pacific | 58% | 75% |
| Plains | 54% | 72% |
| Southeast | 58% | 79% |
| ALL | 54% | 72% |
This makes sense considering there are so few spots, so many teams, and most of all coaches are looking for a lot more specific guys for their systems. Those numbers are still pretty jarring. The upside is you can see here where the Big Ten is getting an advantage: the highest regional retention in the country. It doesn't explain why the SEC is terrible. A breakdown of the Midwest vs the Southeast:
| Southeast Talent | Midwest Talent | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| To SEC | 32% | To Big Ten | 36% | |
| Other major | 39% | Other major | 35% | |
| Mid-major | 14% | Mid-major | 10% | |
| Minor (FCS) | 15% | Minor (FCS) | 19% | |
The retention story doesn't seem to be it either. Could it be the Big Ten just recruits nationally better than the others? Final table: destination of recruits who leave their home region (football FCS schools left out to get a better comparison):
| Conference | Basketball | Football |
|---|---|---|
| SEC | 15.2% | 19.3% |
| Big 12 | 14.3% | 9.2% |
| ACC | 12.9% | 20.8% |
| Pac-12 | 12.2% | 12.3% |
| Big East | 11.4% | - |
| American | 10.7% | 2.0% |
| Big Ten | 8.8% | 22.6% |
| C-USA | 6.8% | 1.3% |
| Mountain West | 3.0% | 1.2% |
| Sun Belt | 1.8% | 0.0% |
| Independent | 1.6% | 9.2% |
| MAC | 1.4% | 0.8% |
| FCS/minor | 14.8% | 1.3% |
Nope. The Big Ten since 2006 has dragged more talent to its arms than any other…in football. In basketball they're not doing anything different; it's the SEC in fact that's drawing kids from elsewhere. Culprits: the Big XII's big number is from West Virginia and Kansas, the #1 and #2 out-of-region destinations in the country. Kentucky, Missouri, UConn, Cincy, and Marquette were some other big national recruiters.
What's keeping the Big Ten in the pack is Michigan State, Wisconsin, Purdue, three programs that have historically recruited a lot of 3-, 4-, and 5-star players, 95% of whom were from the Midwest footprint. No other school with more than 15 recruits over the period was 90% regional. You don't get to SEC schools until you dip that to 70% (LSU and the Mississippi schools), where you'll also find the rest of the Big Ten except Minnesota.
Conclusion: It appears the Big Ten is doing something else. Maybe better coaching, longer development periods, ??? It doesn't seem to be a bigger talent base though.