Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread (September 2018)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#26      
Well it's pretty much indisputable that he's elevated the program. Your numbers show that so I don't get why you say he didn't.

Long term who knows. I'd bet on illinois too but bama will still have made significant progress with their hire.


I simply stated he didn't significantly elevate the program, his pedigree/name/background being hired elevated the program for a single year...it has remained stagnant since that time for the most part?

He is 553% winning overall and 481% in conference, if that is elevating the program well hell we should of all simply loved 559% (Hint: Groce) instead of griping how much he screwed up the program....Numbers show the same % both ways, did Groce elevate Illinois....NO he didn't and Johnson has not done that for Alabama, only his name did briefly.
 
#27      
Nnaji might already be off the table if Arizona truly wants him...the ladies basketball team just offered his sister.
 
#31      

Joel Goodson

respect my decision™
Anthony Walker attends Brewster Academy which is a boarding school in NH. All Brewster returning students have to report to campus this weekend, so he can't schedule an official visit this weekend, so he planned his visit before he reports back to school.

Eureka! Thanks for clearing up the mystery.
 
#32      
I simply stated he didn't significantly elevate the program, his pedigree/name/background being hired elevated the program for a single year...it has remained stagnant since that time for the most part?

He is 553% winning overall and 481% in conference, if that is elevating the program well hell we should of all simply loved 559% (Hint: Groce) instead of griping how much he screwed up the program....Numbers show the same % both ways, did Groce elevate Illinois....NO he didn't and Johnson has not done that for Alabama, only his name did briefly.

With those percentages we’re looking at the two best coaches in college basketball history.
 
#34      
I looked up our OV list, and they all are predicted to go elsewhere on 247. We're either really stealthy with our recruiting, or, um something else....
 
#35      
I looked up our OV list, and they all are predicted to go elsewhere on 247. We're either really stealthy with our recruiting, or, um something else....

Right. To which the old mantra about needing to be told "no" a lot applies, sure, but getting told "no" a lot after expending official visits creates a very specific resource allocation problem.

We better not run out again.
 
#39      

sacraig

The desert
Right. To which the old mantra about needing to be told "no" a lot applies, sure, but getting told "no" a lot after expending official visits creates a very specific resource allocation problem.

We better not run out again.

I mean, we might as well not even try then, at this point. If we bring in a recruit on an official visit, we might fail to land him and lose one of our official visits. We should just stop so we can save them for a different recruit that we aren't going to invite, because we might fail to land him and lose one of our official visits.

a7Yyjg8.gif
 
#40      
I mean, we might as well not even try then, at this point. If we bring in a recruit on an official visit, we might fail to land him and lose one of our official visits. We should just stop so we can save them for a different recruit that we aren't going to invite, because we might fail to land him and lose one of our official visits.

Gets a like from me just for the gif, but let's clarify this here.

The unstated assumption in your posts is that every (or most) players recruitments involve a relatively open battle between relatively evenly matched suitors which takes place during the fall recruiting season on official visits. That's not really true. Lots of players commit before their OV's, and others take OV's to schools where it's a fait accompli that they'll commit. There are legitimate reasons why a school might offer an OV to a recruit who they are highly unlikely to get, but given the limitations on the numbers, you've gotta be judicious about that. That's all I'm saying. OV's are a scarce resource and the early returns from our staff's "smoke 'em if you got 'em" approach is troubling.
 
#42      
Gets a like from me just for the gif, but let's clarify this here.

The unstated assumption in your posts is that every (or most) players recruitments involve a relatively open battle between relatively evenly matched suitors which takes place during the fall recruiting season on official visits. That's not really true. Lots of players commit before their OV's, and others take OV's to schools where it's a fait accompli that they'll commit. There are legitimate reasons why a school might offer an OV to a recruit who they are highly unlikely to get, but given the limitations on the numbers, you've gotta be judicious about that. That's all I'm saying. OV's are a scarce resource and the early returns from our staff's "smoke 'em if you got 'em" approach is troubling.

So you're basically saying you think that our staff should make good decisions in recruiting and not bad decisions?
 
#45      
When Jaylon Tate committed, there was an interview where he mentioned that the staff was done recruiting point guards for the foreseeable future due to his commitment. This is unrelated to what's being discussed, but still a little relevant in that we can't always trust what is being said when it comes to recruiting. Coaches use coach speak when they're recruiting just as much as they use it when talking to the media. I have no doubt that Tate was told this at some point or at the very least led to believe that it was true.

I don't think there's an extreme example like that with Underwood, but fans still struggle to decipher coach speak. So far, Underwood has said that he doesn't worry about rankings, yet our first few months of recruiting is spent on top ranked targets. Underwood has also said that he's not to worried about the frontcourt, but he's also made comments about wanting recruits that are taller than him. We're never going to outright hear a coach say that they're panicking about getting some B1G caliber bigs because it'll hurt the morale of the second tier bigs that we are able to get. The good news is that we have visits with a lot of good bigs coming up, but S&C brings up a good point in that we aren't favored for any of those guys. We aren't in panic mode just yet, but if we miss out on all of those guys and have to recruit some plan B guys in the spring, Underwood will be in trouble whether he acknowledges it or not.
 
#48      

Deleted member 643761

D
Guest
Gets a like from me just for the gif, but let's clarify this here.

The unstated assumption in your posts is that every (or most) players recruitments involve a relatively open battle between relatively evenly matched suitors which takes place during the fall recruiting season on official visits. That's not really true. Lots of players commit before their OV's, and others take OV's to schools where it's a fait accompli that they'll commit. There are legitimate reasons why a school might offer an OV to a recruit who they are highly unlikely to get, but given the limitations on the numbers, you've gotta be judicious about that. That's all I'm saying. OV's are a scarce resource and the early returns from our staff's "smoke 'em if you got 'em" approach is troubling.

Well, clearly they didn't have a "smoke em if you've got em" approach. They brought in people for OVs who by every outside indicator we had a good shot at.

Lost in all this by the hand wringing crowd is how easy it is to have OVs turn into commits and how easy it is to get early commitments. You just make offers to mediocre players and tell them they won't be recruited over. VOILA!

As you review last year's recruitments and OVs, which of the OVs do you feel went to a player we were "highly unlikely" to get?
 
#49      
As you review last year's recruitments and OVs, which of the OVs do you feel went to a player we were "highly unlikely" to get?

Elias Valtonen, who committed elsewhere about 30 seconds after leaving campus was the paradigmatic case. Does anyone have that list that someone compiled? There was a whole chunk of them at about this part of the year that were all pretty shaky. Which is perfectly forgivable in isolation for a new staff that wants to get going in recruiting.

I'm just saying that we've got to be careful and judicious, and I have some concern that the upcoming list does not reflect that. And not just in terms of running out of OV's, every man-hour spent chasing a lost cause is a man-hour not spent scouting the player you are actually going to have on your team for four years.

In guys like Tevian, Kane and especially Higgs I think our staff did a remarkable job of unearthing real gems with limited time resources. I wouldn't want to press our luck on that though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.