Varying Methods Produce Different Assessments Of Indiana Transfer Portal Haul

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. – Let us get this disclaimer out of the way. It’s too early to properly assess transfer portal rankings. The window to go into the transfer portal isn’t closed yet and even if it was? Players can commit to their new schools whenever they want to.

So it’s too early, but is that going to stop various college basketball websites from ranking teams anyway? Of course it won’t.

If you search for “transfer portal rankings”, you get all manner of sites weighing in. Mostly it’s about individual players, but teams are ranked too.

Two popular websites – 247Sports and On3Sports – have their own team transfer portal rankings.

When you look at them, you see a very wide variance in how Indiana’s six-man-to-date ranking is assessed.

247Sports.com has Indiana’s transfer haul ranked No. 4. On3Sports.com has Indiana ranked 41st.

How can it be that the opinion and/or data creates such a wide variance in rank? It’s all about how each of these sites approaches their ranking system.

247Sports is purely ranking the incoming players only. By their estimation, Indiana’s six additions – Conor Enright, Tucker DeVries, Reed Bailey, Lamar Wilkerson, Jasai Miles and Tayton Conerway – were all ranked as four-star additions by the website.

That ranks Indiana fourth overall, trailing Michigan, Louisville and Kentucky.

The On3Sports.com method is different. They explain that their ranking takes into account not only the players that were added, but players that were lost too. On3 assigns a score based on what was gained and lost with a score of zero being a break-even proposition.

It also notes that it is not intended to be used as a comparison against other schools – though it doesn’t stop them from ranking the schools anyway.

Indiana comes out 41st partly because the Hoosiers are still in arrears as far as whom they’ve added versus whom they’ve lost.

Indiana has added six players and lost eight. So by On3’s method, Indiana’s net gain has been negligible so far based on what was lost. Indiana has a score of 3.

However, there’s good news in there. By On3’s system, Indiana lost four four-star players, but gained five in return. Indiana has lost two three-star players and gained one.

But with Indiana still having space on the roster to add players, their ranking should improve by this measure.

What’s interesting is the gain that On3 surmises from some of Indiana’s opponents. Michigan is also ranked No. 1 by On3’s ranking system with a score of 33.

Indiana’s opponents Kentucky (2nd), Wisconsin (5th), Washington (8th), Louisville (9th), Minnesota (11th), Maryland (12th), USC (18th), Nebraska (20th), Ohio State (22nd), Northwestern (30th), Oregon (31st), Purdue (37th) and Rutgers (40th) are all ahead of Indiana.

But again, that’s a reflection of where a team was coming from. Washington was a last place team in the Big Ten, so any improvement to their roster is going to reflect in a high ranking by On3’s method.

The individual player rankings also provide a window into the insight on Indiana’s portal class.

At 247Sports and on CBS Sports Network’s rankings, Indiana only gained one top 20 transfer portal recruit – Tucker DeVries. If you stretch it to the top 50, one more player is added – Wilkerson – and that’s it.

Of course, pure individual recruiting rankings don’t take into account player fit, system, etc. Indiana coach Darian DeVries has been adamant that he recruits fit, not star rankings.

Based on current scholarship/roster limits – a moving target given the changes in college athletics to this system – the Hoosiers should have at least six more roster spots to fill.

So if you don’t like Indiana’s ranking? Just be patient. It’s likely to change.

Related stories on Indiana basketball