Re: Who's Next
Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:23 pm
Definitely appears to be settling and the implications of posters comments above supports that.
We have 4-5 PG candidates... and we are now pushing the lowest ranked candidate. Not that rankings are infallible, but
the inference is that we will push for the guy who seems easiest to get.
Benson is a good recruit, and surely the coaches like him, or they would not have offered. Nairn, Cohen, Perkins are very good
recruits who have also been offered, seemingly with higher level game and upsides, but Benson is now our top candidate?
This guy is too highly ranked, that guy is a Marquette lean, and so forth, whittling away, chipping the armor of higher rated guys
in order to support a candidate further down the listing. Why bother to offer upper level recruits if we are actually more
interested in the Top 120 -150 guys
We have 4-5 PG candidates... and we are now pushing the lowest ranked candidate. Not that rankings are infallible, but
the inference is that we will push for the guy who seems easiest to get.
Benson is a good recruit, and surely the coaches like him, or they would not have offered. Nairn, Cohen, Perkins are very good
recruits who have also been offered, seemingly with higher level game and upsides, but Benson is now our top candidate?
This guy is too highly ranked, that guy is a Marquette lean, and so forth, whittling away, chipping the armor of higher rated guys
in order to support a candidate further down the listing. Why bother to offer upper level recruits if we are actually more
interested in the Top 120 -150 guys
Re: Who's Next
Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:36 pm
gtmoBlue wrote:Definitely appears to be settling and the implications of posters comments above supports that.
We have 4-5 PG candidates... and we are now pushing the lowest ranked candidate. Not that rankings are infallible, but
the inference is that we will push for the guy who seems easiest to get.
Benson is a good recruit, and surely the coaches like him, or they would not have offered. Nairn, Cohen, Perkins are very good
recruits who have also been offered, seemingly with higher level game and upsides, but Benson is now our top candidate?
This guy is too highly ranked, that guy is a Marquette lean, and so forth, whittling away, chipping the armor of higher rated guys
in order to support a candidate further down the listing. Why bother to offer upper level recruits if we are actually more
interested in the Top 120 -150 guys
How is Panama?
Re: Who's Next
Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:40 pm
gtmoBlue wrote:Definitely appears to be settling and the implications of posters comments above supports that.
Well, with infallible proof like that, who is to question your analysis?
gtmoBlue wrote:We have 4-5 PG candidates... and we are now pushing the lowest ranked candidate. Not that rankings are infallible, but
the inference is that we will push for the guy who seems easiest to get.
Benson is a good recruit, and surely the coaches like him, or they would not have offered. Nairn, Cohen, Perkins are very good
recruits who have also been offered, seemingly with higher level game and upsides, but Benson is now our top candidate?
This guy is too highly ranked, that guy is a Marquette lean, and so forth, whittling away, chipping the armor of higher rated guys
in order to support a candidate further down the listing. Why bother to offer upper level recruits if we are actually more
interested in the Top 120 -150 guys
Your love affair with the Rivals rating system is well documented on this site. However, those ratings are full of problems - see Bock, Andrew. By the way, our current all american wasn't a four or five star, nor was he a member of the Rivals 150.
What you seem to either forget, or discount heavily, is that fit is an important component as well. I can certainly think of one recent recruit who was pretty highly ranked, but flamed out gloriously before his eligibility e'xpired and never won a conference title, a conference tourney title or even played in an NCAA tourney game.
Your rants would seemingly make more sense if we were abandoning ranked kids all together and only chasing two stars or something. I think everyone agrees that we have to step up our recruiting. However, you are apparently throwing a fit because the top 150 kids the coaches covet aren't high enough on the 150 list for your liking?!?!?!? Goodness.
Re: Who's Next
Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:49 pm
Panama is a lot like the US. Warm, beautiful, business minded. Uses the US Dollar as its currency, and has over 100 years of accomodating US citizens, military, etc. A great little place. GNP growing at 8% annually and they are very short on technical and management personnel at this time. Pres Martinelli (Harvard or Yale) has a new
decree out begging for foreigners to come and work or build businesses. http://www.internationalliving.com or http://www.escapeartist.com or www.Panamcham.org.
As a Big East member it has been said we will need to elevate our level of recruiting, capturing 1 or 2 recruits which are a higher level of creighton-type recruits.
This is as good a time as any to begin that process, with the 2014 class. No time for settling for less, recruiting-wise. DMD was not, but Gregory was a Top 50 recruit.
AA. You have stated several times in various posts about the need to capture top recruits as we progress forward in the new conference. I am merely agreeing with that sentiment.
Kids flameout all the time, high level recruit or otherwise...hence we have a 500 person list of annual transfers.
decree out begging for foreigners to come and work or build businesses. http://www.internationalliving.com or http://www.escapeartist.com or www.Panamcham.org.
As a Big East member it has been said we will need to elevate our level of recruiting, capturing 1 or 2 recruits which are a higher level of creighton-type recruits.
This is as good a time as any to begin that process, with the 2014 class. No time for settling for less, recruiting-wise. DMD was not, but Gregory was a Top 50 recruit.
AA. You have stated several times in various posts about the need to capture top recruits as we progress forward in the new conference. I am merely agreeing with that sentiment.
Kids flameout all the time, high level recruit or otherwise...hence we have a 500 person list of annual transfers.
Re: Who's Next
Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Just to follow up with my post above, Dana once told me that the top 25 guys are pretty obvious. In fact, his exact words were, "even Reva could pick them out."
He continued by saying, "After that, there isn't much difference between the next hundred or so guys." In other words, the difference between say guy #57 and guy # 117 is hardly even discernible, if discernible at all.
He then added something about having to make a determination as to whether they will fit into your system, have a solid work ethic, etc.
Lesson: use the rankings as a guide, not as gospel.
He continued by saying, "After that, there isn't much difference between the next hundred or so guys." In other words, the difference between say guy #57 and guy # 117 is hardly even discernible, if discernible at all.
He then added something about having to make a determination as to whether they will fit into your system, have a solid work ethic, etc.
Lesson: use the rankings as a guide, not as gospel.
Re: Who's Next
Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:56 pm
Re: Who's Next
Mon Jun 17, 2013 5:05 pm
"Chipping away at the armor of higher rated players"? WTF?
What we have is limited resources. We can only have a legitimate physical presence in a limited number of homes. How much of our time should be spent chasing guys who have <5% of winding up here? Prospecting is fine, but when guys start to get the Kentuckys and Kansases of the world sniffing around, guess what? It's a less than 5% shot, and probably a lot less than that.
By now the staff knows which Gregory Echenique might show out of all our listed offers to top players, and which won't. They won't be soft pedaling someone who's truly interested.
If you want to tilt every windmill in the top 100 then fine, but do it on your own time. What I'm guessing is that the staff knows far more than any of us do, and one of the reasons that Coach Mac is going hard after Benson is because they know that a good shot at a terrific player is better than trying for the other names listed who may (or may not) be slightly to somewhat better, but whose chances of appearing in a Bluejay uni are very remote at the least.
Oh and one man's 70th rated player is another man's 120th. For me, once you're south of 30-40 and down to 125-150, fit becomes more important than who's 25 spots ahead.
**Edited to add, AttyAlum beat me to the last point.
What we have is limited resources. We can only have a legitimate physical presence in a limited number of homes. How much of our time should be spent chasing guys who have <5% of winding up here? Prospecting is fine, but when guys start to get the Kentuckys and Kansases of the world sniffing around, guess what? It's a less than 5% shot, and probably a lot less than that.
By now the staff knows which Gregory Echenique might show out of all our listed offers to top players, and which won't. They won't be soft pedaling someone who's truly interested.
If you want to tilt every windmill in the top 100 then fine, but do it on your own time. What I'm guessing is that the staff knows far more than any of us do, and one of the reasons that Coach Mac is going hard after Benson is because they know that a good shot at a terrific player is better than trying for the other names listed who may (or may not) be slightly to somewhat better, but whose chances of appearing in a Bluejay uni are very remote at the least.
Oh and one man's 70th rated player is another man's 120th. For me, once you're south of 30-40 and down to 125-150, fit becomes more important than who's 25 spots ahead.
**Edited to add, AttyAlum beat me to the last point.
Re: Who's Next
Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:17 pm
HandDownManDown wrote:"Chipping away at the armor of higher rated players"? WTF?
What we have is limited resources. We can only have a legitimate physical presence in a limited number of homes. How much of our time should be spent chasing guys who have <5% of winding up here? Prospecting is fine, but when guys start to get the Kentuckys and Kansases of the world sniffing around, guess what? It's a less than 5% shot, and probably a lot less than that.
By now the staff knows which Gregory Echenique might show out of all our listed offers to top players, and which won't. They won't be soft pedaling someone who's truly interested.
If you want to tilt every windmill in the top 100 then fine, but do it on your own time. What I'm guessing is that the staff knows far more than any of us do, and one of the reasons that Coach Mac is going hard after Benson is because they know that a good shot at a terrific player is better than trying for the other names listed who may (or may not) be slightly to somewhat better, but whose chances of appearing in a Bluejay uni are very remote at the least.
Oh and one man's 70th rated player is another man's 120th. For me, once you're south of 30-40 and down to 125-150, fit becomes more important than who's 25 spots ahead.
**Edited to add, AttyAlum beat me to the last point.
I agree 100% that our coaching staff know far more than we do. They have seen them play, talked to them, etc.
Re: Who's Next
Tue Jun 18, 2013 2:48 pm
Today, with the Norton decommit we now have 3 scholies available.
I am merely hoping the staff gets new commits, from the best talent available
which as shown reciprocal interest in CU.
ESPN:Gasaway Article on B1G -doing more with less...
http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college ... basketball
I am merely hoping the staff gets new commits, from the best talent available
which as shown reciprocal interest in CU.
ESPN:Gasaway Article on B1G -doing more with less...
http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college ... basketball
(Bold/italics:mine)No, recruiting rankings aren't everything, but they are a reasonable facsimile of how well programs and conferences are performing in pursuit of the players who are perceived to be the most valuable prospects coming out of high school. While coaches often speak of a player being a good fit for their program, past experience shows you'll do better in the long run with players who fit and are highly rated by recruiting analysts.
Re: Who's Next
Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:02 pm
gtmoBlue wrote:Today, with the Norton decommit we now have 3 scholies available.
I am merely hoping the staff gets new commits, from the best talent available
which as shown reciprocal interest in CU.
ESPN:Gasaway Article on B1G -doing more with less...
http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college ... basketball(Bold/italics:mine)No, recruiting rankings aren't everything, but they are a reasonable facsimile of how well programs and conferences are performing in pursuit of the players who are perceived to be the most valuable prospects coming out of high school. While coaches often speak of a player being a good fit for their program, past experience shows you'll do better in the long run with players who fit and are highly rated by recruiting analysts.
Well that is a duh statement. That's assuming you get to have your cake and eat it too with every recruit you pursue. Would you rather have the #30 ranked player that is Shabazz Muhammad, me-first type player? Or the # 65 player that buys into your system?