Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread (December 2020)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#231      
You really think so? I feel like we are set with Curbelo for the next four years. Going for combo guards or shooting guards makes a lot of sense to me.

I'd agree you need to balance scorers with guys who can create. That said, I think any college basketball coach wants to avoid putting too many eggs in one basket. There's different types of facilitators --for example, I'm hoping Coleman Hawkins may be the first big we have that can really execute the pinch post. If you think in terms of fast break, secondary, etc., down to full half court sets, you need as much facilitating as you can possibly get, both on ball, and off. 2005 had guys who really bought in and understood how to force lapses in defenses by relentless hard cuts and commitment to recognizing breakdowns.

Curbelo is kind of mind-blowing, and I think he'll make guys around him better and better. Lotta freshman mistakes yet to be made, but he's fun to watch.

I'd take a clone of him in a second.
 
#236      
I don't want to start a debate but Wisconsin, especially under Bo, had much higher rated recruits than people gave him credit for.
Don't disagree, though I think player development was always more instrumental to Wisconsin's success. Just don't think you can chalk it up to recruiting their state well. Outside of Sam Dekker, in the last 10 years it looks to me like a lot of their highest rated recruits tend to be from MN, IL, MI and other Midwestern states, and they've missed on a lot of very highly rated Wisconsin prospects. Their success rate in WI is honestly probably not that different from ours in IL (which is where this original discussion started...I think)
 
#237      
Don't disagree, though I think player development was always more instrumental to Wisconsin's success. Just don't think you can chalk it up to recruiting their state well. Outside of Sam Dekker, in the last 10 years it looks to me like a lot of their highest rated recruits tend to be from MN, IL, MI and other Midwestern states, and they've missed on a lot of very highly rated Wisconsin prospects. Their success rate in WI is honestly probably not that different from ours in IL (which is where this original discussion started...I think)

Oh, I agree they haven't been any better than us at keeping the elite kids home. Dekker, Butch, and to a lesser degree Stiemsma (didn't amount to much, but highly rated) are really the only top 50 kids from Wisconsin to go to Wisconsin that I can think of in the last 20 years.

They're roster is usually loaded with 4 star talent though and as you said, they do a killer job of developing and cultivating that talent. But there is a misconception out there that some people have that they don't get a lot of talent and that's really not all that accurate.
 
#238      

skyIdub

Winged Warrior
I mean, you guys have been to Wisconsin, right? As far as in state talent, outside of Milwaukee you are recruiting for the top snowmobilers, beer drinkers, ice fishermen, bar fly's, fish fryers, and cow milker's. Maybe some 4 Star butter churners in there too.
 
#239      
I mean, you guys have been to Wisconsin, right? As far as in state talent, outside of Milwaukee you are recruiting for the top snowmobilers, beer drinkers, ice fishermen, bar fly's, fish fryers, and cow milker's. Maybe some 4 Star butter churners in there too.
Don't forget deer hunters, canoe paddlers, beaver trappers, cheese head makers, and Sasquatch trackers.
 
#240      
I mean, you guys have been to Wisconsin, right? As far as in state talent, outside of Milwaukee you are recruiting for the top snowmobilers, beer drinkers, ice fishermen, bar fly's, fish fryers, and cow milker's. Maybe some 4 Star butter churners in there too.
Maybe best post of all time.CDRUSN, too!!
 
#241      

skyIdub

Winged Warrior
Don't forget deer hunters, canoe paddlers, beaver trappers, cheese head makers, and Sasquatch trackers.

Meh, mostly Division II and JUCO deer hunters and Squatch trackers. No $$ in the other stuff.
 
#243      
Iowa has 8 players from the state of Iowa on their foster this year.
Anyone remember anything about the Garza recruitment? (Washington DC to Iowa) 4-5 years ago?S
 
#244      
Iowa has 8 players from the state of Iowa on their foster this year.
Anyone remember anything about the Garza recruitment? (Washington DC to Iowa) 4-5 years ago?S
Lefty Driesel, whose son coached Garza, tried to get every coach he knew to take a look. The only one who bit was the Iowa coach. Everything Garza is doing right now Driesel predicted he would do five years ago.
 
#246      
Lefty Driesel, whose son coached Garza, tried to get every coach he knew to take a look. The only one who bit was the Iowa coach. Everything Garza is doing right now Driesel predicted he would do five years ago.

His recruiting page indicates he was ranked 118 player in the country. (#10 Center)

George Washington, DePaul, ST. Joseph's, LaSalle, American, Loyola, James Madison, Navy, Penn St, Alabama, Louisville, Nebraska, Indiana, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Indiana, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Georgia.... All made offers.

In addition to Iowa, he took official visits to Notre Dame, Georgia, Alabama.

Under-rated? yes. Un-noticed? No
 
#247      
the only top 50 kids from Wisconsin

I thought Bo was one of the best coaches in the country at illustrating how little recruiting rankings mean. The only evaluation that matters is how a player fits into, and can be developed, in your system. On average, the rankings are a decent indicator of success, but 'on average' means little to a coach who has to actually figure out how good a particular kid will be in his program, and help produce wins on the court. OTOH, our highest impact guys are all highly rated, so I can't really argue against the rankings.

I think an interesting indicator is how the staff prioritizes guys in the recruiting cycle. We don't have a ton of insight into that, but there's some info out there to get an idea of where they're spending their time.
 
#248      
I thought Bo was one of the best coaches in the country at illustrating how little recruiting rankings mean. The only evaluation that matters is how a player fits into, and can be developed, in your system. On average, the rankings are a decent indicator of success, but 'on average' means little to a coach who has to actually figure out how good a particular kid will be in his program, and help produce wins on the court. OTOH, our highest impact guys are all highly rated, so I can't really argue against the rankings.

I think an interesting indicator is how the staff prioritizes guys in the recruiting cycle. We don't have a ton of insight into that, but there's some info out there to get an idea of where they're spending their time.

The vast majority of True Stars seem to be Top 50 in the rankings. That said, a lot of Top 50 will turn into only decent players. From 50-200, what you get out of the players is way more about coaching, fit, and the players attitude than anything else.
 
#250      
I thought Bo was one of the best coaches in the country at illustrating how little recruiting rankings mean. The only evaluation that matters is how a player fits into, and can be developed, in your system. On average, the rankings are a decent indicator of success, but 'on average' means little to a coach who has to actually figure out how good a particular kid will be in his program, and help produce wins on the court. OTOH, our highest impact guys are all highly rated, so I can't really argue against the rankings.

I think an interesting indicator is how the staff prioritizes guys in the recruiting cycle. We don't have a ton of insight into that, but there's some info out there to get an idea of where they're spending their time.
I think Bo was great at evaluating players, including for fit. I could be off base here, as I don’t follow Wisconsin that closely. But it seems like his 4 star recruits generally lived up to expectations and he consistently had unheralded recruits exceed expectations.

I’m a believer in recruiting rankings on a macro level, as in more 4 star recruits end up being good college players than 3 star recruits. But some 4 star recruits end up being busts either because they were overrated or weren’t a good fit for the program and system. That’s where evaluation is critical to recruiting.

Bo seemed to avoid too many of the 4 star busts while finding 2 and 3 star players that were solid contributors on good teams.

Whereas Illinois had a long run of underperformance compared to recruiting rankings because so many of our 4 star players did not end up contributing for us for one reason or another.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.