All we need is a time machine :tsk:
I don't think a time Machine would have done any good...family had Nebraska ties and moved here from Lincoln!
All we need is a time machine :tsk:
It's not that we recruit those players better, it's that there are more of them. High level bigs are few and far between. In reality Groce has done fairly well grabeing Morgan, Black, Finke, and now Tilmon (not to mention transfers like Thorne).
On Smith, I'm in favor of offering him, but I do wonder how much the pressure on Groce plays a role in the decision. Groce knows how important short term progress is, so getting a big class in now is probably more important to his status than long term class balance.
Thinking about our current roster situation, I think we'll aggressively recruit 5th year bigs for next season. I also think it's highly likely that someone leaves the program and we recruit a second transfer - likely a wing who can shoot from outside.
If Smith were to commit, next year's roster would look like this:
Te'Jon Lucas - Sophomore - PG
Trent Frazier - Freshman - CG
Da'Monte Williams - Freshman - CG
Mark Smith - Freshman - CG
Jalen Coleman-Lands - Junior - SG
Aaron Jordan - Junior - SG
Javon Pickett - Freshman - SF
DJ Williams - Junior - SF/PF?
Kipper Nichols - Sophomore - SF/PF
Leron Black - Junior - PF
Michael Finke - Junior - PF/C
Jeremiah Tilmon - Freshman - C
1 Open Scholarship
Observations: we'll be young and relatively inexperienced. We'll need to get another big - preferably a 5th year center who can provide interior defense and post scoring off the bench for 10-20 minutes/game behind Tilmon (who will be good, but likely inconsistent and foul-prone).
JCL, Finke, and Black project to be starting caliber B1G players as upperclassmen based on what they've shown so far. Lucas, DJW, Jordan, and Kipper are unproven and DJ is the only one who's shown enough flashes to be somewhat projectable. Among the freshmen, Tilmon is the only one who will almost certainly be able to produce immediately. I'm guessing that Frazier and/or Smith (should he come) will contribute right away - either start at PG or settle into the 8th/9th spot(s) in the rotation.
Would love to see a line up of TJL/Frazier, JCL/Damonte, DJW/Kipper, Black/Finke, Timon. I think DJW will take a big step up next year and Frazier will provide a big spark off the bench. Just my opinion.
If we can land Pumba, look out!
If we can land Pumba, look out!
I am asking this question from a place of major ignorance, so please let me know what I am missing. Trying to learn, not criticize. I haven't seen either player actually play.
Why was Groce (and the board, generally) ok with pulling out of the Paul Scruggs recruitment after landing Trent Frazier, yet we are going back after Mark Smith, who appears to be a similar player (big, athletic PG)?
Are they actually very different players?
Is it a "protecting the home state" type thing?
Has the recruiting scene changed enough since then (Goodwin going to SLU, Wilkes going to UCLA, other PF/C recruits going elsewhere) to make a major difference?
Scruggs was not coming to Illinois. Best guess, coaches honestly asked him if they had a real shot and he gave them an answer that made them believe pursuing him wasn't worth the investment.I am asking this question from a place of major ignorance, so please let me know what I am missing. Trying to learn, not criticize. I haven't seen either player actually play.
Why was Groce (and the board, generally) ok with pulling out of the Paul Scruggs recruitment after landing Trent Frazier, yet we are going back after Mark Smith, who appears to be a similar player (big, athletic PG)?
Are they actually very different players?
Is it a "protecting the home state" type thing?
Has the recruiting scene changed enough since then (Goodwin going to SLU, Wilkes going to UCLA, other PF/C recruits going elsewhere) to make a major difference?
It'll mean no worries for the rest of our days
The consensus prior to this high school season started was that Scruggs was a more consistent Damonte. Damonte seemed as good as ever before he got hurt. Getting Trent definitely made Scruggs less of a priority as well.I am asking this question from a place of major ignorance, so please let me know what I am missing. Trying to learn, not criticize. I haven't seen either player actually play.
Why was Groce (and the board, generally) ok with pulling out of the Paul Scruggs recruitment after landing Trent Frazier, yet we are going back after Mark Smith, who appears to be a similar player (big, athletic PG)?
Are they actually very different players?
Is it a "protecting the home state" type thing?
Has the recruiting scene changed enough since then (Goodwin going to SLU, Wilkes going to UCLA, other PF/C recruits going elsewhere) to make a major difference?
Not sure I agree with Finke. I love having him come off the bench to supply a little different look, I love his shot, his quick release, and his occasional ability to rebound. However, he may well be the worst defender in the conference and I just don't think you can play him that long unless his defense improves.
It has to have a lot to do with either or both of a) Frazier committed partly due to its telling him that we'd stop recruiting Scruggs, b) Scruggs lost some interest due to the Frazier commitment (thought we would try to use him @ off guard), c) we knew we no longer had a realistic shot and were saving face.My best guess is the drama involved in the Paul Scruggs recruitment.
Mark Smith is a stud.. From Edwardsville.. Likes the state school...
He won't even be Top 100...rankings are basically all done at this point.
What if he had 13 freshmen? Who would he play?
Not sure I understand this recruitment. Only seen video, so there's a LOT I'm missing about how good he may be. He reminded me of Sergio --kind of a bruising look to him. However, I don't even see him on 247, and rivals has him without a rating. The only offer I'm seeing was from DePaul. From my look at the roster, we need a big, not an unrated SG (or combo if that's what he is -only saw him listed as a SG).
Does anyone else share this view? Or are we universally happy with this?