Recruiting - 2019

[3star_recruit]

13 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

OK, i am confused.  Some on the board have railed against how horrible it is that Ford has had so much turnover.  Now the idea of having imbalanced classes as no big deal and it will take care of itself by people moving on is OK.  

It's not OK but there's not much Coach can do about  it.  We're going to have a huge recruiting class that results in turnover whether it includes a couple of token grad transfers or not.  I can co-sign a grad transfer big because Bell is a project.   But a grad transfer guard just cuts back development time for our talented freshman guards.  For what end?  If we get back to the tournament while Goodwin and French are Billikens it will be in tandem with the guards we've already signed.   Let's get this party started.

If we're going to take a transfer,  how about a two-year transfer from a P5 program? It's been a great fit for Tyler Cavanaugh, BJ Johnson and our own Javon Bess.

[willie]

2 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

It's not OK but there's not much Coach can do about  it.  We're going to have a huge recruiting class that results in turnover whether it includes a couple of token grad transfers or not.  I can co-sign a grad transfer big because Bell is a project.   But a grad transfer guard just cuts back development time for our talented freshman guards.  For what end?  If we get back to the tournament while Goodwin and French are Billikens it will be in tandem with the guards we've already signed.   Let's get this party started.

If we're going to take a transfer,  how about a two-year transfer from a P5 program? It's been a great fit for Tyler Cavanaugh, BJ Johnson and our own Javon Bess.

Obvious statement. If a Kassus Robertson (spelling) type player is available you take him . 

 

 While not a board favorite an Isabell has saved this team. I understand your point but if a grad helps you win today you do it. 

[Clocktoweraccords2004]

1 hour ago, billiken_roy said:

Im against a coach running a player off.   If a player initiates leaving thats up to the player.  Their is a huge difference.

I would say some players need to be run off. Conduct, poor performance due to lack of effort and accountability, being a cancer in the lockeroom..... A scholarship is not a welfare check handout, it is earned and is renewed year to year. Once it is earned, it needs to be continued to be earned. 

[billiken_roy]

9 minutes ago, Clocktoweraccords2004 said:

I would say some players need to be run off. Conduct, poor performance due to lack of effort and accountability, being a cancer in the lockeroom..... A scholarship is not a welfare check handout, it is earned and is renewed year to year. Once it is earned, it needs to be continued to be earned. 

I normally  add assuming the player is a good student, good teammate and good citizen, the coach that recruited that player should not run off the player 

[Clocktoweraccords2004]

3 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

I normally  add assuming the player is a good student, good teammate and good citizen, the coach that recruited that player should not run off the player 

Agreed. 

[Clock_Tower]

1 hour ago, 3star_recruit said:

It's not OK but there's not much Coach can do about  it.  We're going to have a huge recruiting class that results in turnover whether it includes a couple of token grad transfers or not.  I can co-sign a grad transfer big because Bell is a project.   But a grad transfer guard just cuts back development time for our talented freshman guards.  For what end?  If we get back to the tournament while Goodwin and French are Billikens it will be in tandem with the guards we've already signed.   Let's get this party started.

If we're going to take a transfer,  how about a two-year transfer from a P5 program? It's been a great fit for Tyler Cavanaugh, BJ Johnson and our own Javon Bess.

Tough decisions for Coach Ford. Frankly, no matter what we say, it all comes down to what Coach Ford thinks, wants and how he currently rates both our 5 returners and our 5 incoming guys.  Will all 5 return, any been recruited over, what is Ford's plan for them next year?  Same questions for the 5 incoming guys -- who will play next year and who will need a year to develop.  And I presume he and his coaches knows best.

1.. Grad transfers and saving scholarships keeps class balance

2.  Transfers must sit out for a year and then come back for their remaining 2 to 3 years, so no help next year but possibly another Bess in the future.

3.  Take additional freshmen, up to 3 more, and wait for the cream to rise to the top as 2 to 4 will be gone 13 months from now.

4.  Take additional freshman and then redshirt 1 or 2 of them.  If so, no help next year but possible help in the future.

If Coach Ford wants to go with his returning 5, and his incoming 5, then you (3 Star) may be correct -- a GT or another high school guard could just get in the way.  And because a 4th/5th year has additional years of experience, has increased size and strength, it is always tough for a youngster to beat out such a guy for playing time even though the GT may not bring much more to the team.  If so, then why would we be looking at another  6'6" guard such as Carpenter?  Would he not take time away from Thatch/Jacobs/Yuri/Hargrove, etc.?  If everyone is satisfied with our 10 guys, then maybe we take 2 more bigs (a GT or JUCO and another Freshman) and then save the last scholarship for next year. The fact that Ford is still looking for a guy like Carpenter tells me that he is not sold on his current 10.

 

[slu72]

This topic is really about recruiting over kids currently on the roster and the incoming recruits. Coaches are trying to keep their high paying jobs and looking to either get more from their current school or moving on. Therefore, they will always do what they think is best for their careers, which is win. Win at all costs. 

Hypothetical, a player, whether he be a GT, transfer, JUCO, or FR, is way better than say JGood and will make him a role player, is the coach expected to pass on this super player solely because we fans happen to love JGood. He'd be an idiot not to go after him, because it's all about the talent. You can't win w/o talent.  

I hope Ford, and know he will, seek out and sign the best talent he can. If that means he recruits over one of our favorites, so be it. It's up to the player to win his right to playing time. That's what creates a winning program. 

[Coach314]

26 minutes ago, slu72 said:

This topic is really about recruiting over kids currently on the roster and the incoming recruits. Coaches are trying to keep their high paying jobs and looking to either get more from their current school or moving on. Therefore, they will always do what they think is best for their careers, which is win. Win at all costs. 

Hypothetical, a player, whether he be a GT, transfer, JUCO, or FR, is way better than say JGood and will make him a role player, is the coach expected to pass on this super player solely because we fans happen to love JGood. He'd be an idiot not to go after him, because it's all about the talent. You can't win w/o talent.  

I hope Ford, and know he will, seek out and sign the best talent he can. If that means he recruits over one of our favorites, so be it. It's up to the player to win his right to playing time. That's what creates a winning program. 

Hypothetically,  let's say Ford recruited Jimerson, Perkins, Hargrove and Collins with the promise of playing time being available.  They sign and Coach then brings in Grad Transfers that take those available minutes.  What are your thoughts on that?  Just curious 

[cheeseman]

3 hours ago, 3star_recruit said:

It's not OK but there's not much Coach can do about  it.  We're going to have a huge recruiting class that results in turnover whether it includes a couple of token grad transfers or not.  I can co-sign a grad transfer big because Bell is a project.   But a grad transfer guard just cuts back development time for our talented freshman guards.  For what end?  If we get back to the tournament while Goodwin and French are Billikens it will be in tandem with the guards we've already signed.   Let's get this party started.

If we're going to take a transfer,  how about a two-year transfer from a P5 program? It's been a great fit for Tyler Cavanaugh, BJ Johnson and our own Javon Bess.

I understand.  My post was pointed at those who complain about Ford's turn over of players.  B the way I think 314 Coach asks a good question.

[Clocktoweraccords2004]

Remember Mike Crawford’s interview or is 1 week too long for people to remember?

lets go back to what he said in terms of team dynamic. Crews brought in what 5-6 new recruits and they were all treated different and were all latched onto each other, while the others were separate. While I don’t believe Ford would treat them different, there is something to be said with freshmen classes bonding together vs the rest of the team. That can be really good or really bad if things don’t go right. 

Again I am not saying this is the same at all with Crews as with Ford, but adding a 6th player or 7th to a freshmen class would be a waste of scholarships since you 100% can’t keep 7 players in a class happy enough to stay all 4 years.

If we add the 6th or 7th we would be doing so knowing that we would be holding unofficial tryouts with that class for the next 2 years. It’s just not sustainable. 

 

Edit: I’m pushing for 2 sit out transfers or a gt 

[dennis_w]

30 minutes ago, Coach314 said:

Hypothetically,  let's say Ford recruited Jimerson, Perkins, Hargrove and Collins with the promise of playing time being available.  They sign and Coach then brings in Grad Transfers that take those available minutes.  What are your thoughts on that?  Just curious 

I dont think a coach can make pt promises and then stop recruiting, that would be in no one's best interest. I dont know what ford's sales pitch is but i doubt he promise x number of minutes if you come here. Bring on the best players you can get and try to win now

[3star_recruit]

7 hours ago, dennis_w said:

I dont think a coach can make pt promises and then stop recruiting, that would be in no one's best interest. I dont know what ford's sales pitch is but i doubt he promise x number of minutes if you come here. Bring on the best players you can get and try to win now

If bringing in grad transfers at the last minute to take away minutes from freshmen becomes the norm, there really is no point to signing in the fall.  It's been standard practice for decades for kids and their families to look at what teams are losing to determine if a kid is likely to play. 

By and large the teams that are successful are not using multiple grad transfers.  They are building with 2 and 4 year players, the same as they always have. 

 

7 hours ago, Clocktoweraccords2004 said:

Remember Mike Crawford’s interview or is 1 week too long for people to remember?

lets go back to what he said in terms of team dynamic. Crews brought in what 5-6 new recruits and they were all treated different and were all latched onto each other, while the others were separate. While I don’t believe Ford would treat them different, there is something to be said with freshmen classes bonding together vs the rest of the team. That can be really good or really bad if things don’t go right. 

Again I am not saying this is the same at all with Crews as with Ford, but adding a 6th player or 7th to a freshmen class would be a waste of scholarships since you 100% can’t keep 7 players in a class happy enough to stay all 4 years.

If we add the 6th or 7th we would be doing so knowing that we would be holding unofficial tryouts with that class for the next 2 years. It’s just not sustainable. 

 

Edit: I’m pushing for 2 sit out transfers or a gt 

Excellent point that holding unofficial tryouts for the next 2 years is not sustainable. That's why huge classes don't stay intact, no matter what their makeup.  

So either 1) Don't sign a huge class.  2) Redshirt multiple guys and effectively turn it into two classes.  3) Let the class fall apart organically over 18 months.

The decision has been made to continue signing players so the ship has sailed on the first option.  The second option only dresses 10-11 guys which most MBMs wouldn't like. So you're left with the third option.  We're just debating the best way to keep the players we do want when it happens.  And I think signing multiple grad transfers at the last minute is the worst way to keep the players you do want.  

 

 

[Old guy]

I agree, we need to develop the talent we have. We have been offering little playing time to some of our new players who then leave. Internal development of players takes time, and grad transfers are presumably ready to go. If we did not have Isabell and Wiley, Hankton and Jacobs would most likely be doing much better by now. I would like to believe the same could be said for Gudmundsson, but between his late arrival and his appendicitis (which he had to recover from), we cannot be sure how much he might have played. We might have retained Johnson if we had not gone for the grad transfers. Of course all of this is speculation. Surely we could have lost a couple of extra games without Isabell and Wiley. The decision of how to handle this issue is not a straightforward one.

So far this year our record is 19 wins 11 losses. We have managed to win 63% of all games we have played so far with a much tougher pre-season schedule this season than for the prior season. The prior season we managed to win over 50% of all games played by the slimmest of margins, 1 single additional win. This year we have performed better than the prior year despite our losses to injury and any other causes. Would we have a much worse record at this time if we had chosen to develop internally without graduate transfers? Would we be in better shape for next season at this time if we had chosen to go without grad transfers? I do not think we can answer either question? We have to trust Ford in this regard.

[slu72]

8 hours ago, Coach314 said:

Hypothetically,  let's say Ford recruited Jimerson, Perkins, Hargrove and Collins with the promise of playing time being available.  They sign and Coach then brings in Grad Transfers that take those available minutes.  What are your thoughts on that?  Just curious 

Well, first I don't believe a coach should be making a promise other than you'll be given every opportunity to earn your minutes. But if he does as you say, then it will be up to the player to decide whether he's going to stay or go, see Jalen Johnson.  I think the coach's first obligation is to his employer and the fans to put the best product on the floor at all times. Coach's know these situations will arise and should stay away from guaranteeing anything other than every player will be judged on their performance, effort, and commitment to the program. My guess is they do make such early promises and then renege, hence, the reasons for the high number of transfers we see these days. 

[BIG BILL FAN]

47 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

If bringing in grad transfers at the last minute to take away minutes from freshmen becomes the norm, there really is no point to signing in the fall.  It's been standard practice for decades for kids and their families to look at what teams are losing to determine if a kid is likely to play. 

By and large the teams that are successful are not using multiple grad transfers.  They are building with 2 and 4 year players, the same as they always have. 

 

Excellent point that holding unofficial tryouts for the next 2 years is not sustainable. That's why huge classes don't stay intact, no matter what their makeup.  

So either 1) Don't sign a huge class.  2) Redshirt multiple guys and effectively turn it into two classes.  3) Let the class fall apart organically over 18 months.

The decision has been made to continue signing players so the ship has sailed on the first option.  The second option only dresses 10-11 guys which most MBMs wouldn't like. So you're left with the third option.  We're just debating the best way to keep the players we do want when it happens.  And I think signing multiple grad transfers at the last minute is the worst way to keep the players you do want.  

 

 

BS, there are always going to be unhappy players, that’s why the coach never stops recruiting. Your argument that a GT is going to discourage someone makes no sense anyway. Competition is what drives this game, and the coach better realize it or he soon will be out of a job. This is D1 basketball, not D3. 

[3star_recruit]

21 minutes ago, BIG BILL FAN said:

BS, there are always going to be unhappy players, that’s why the coach never stops recruiting. Your argument that a GT is going to discourage someone makes no sense anyway. Competition is what drives this game, and the coach better realize it or he soon will be out of a job. This is D1 basketball, not D3. 

So Coach Ford is going to be out of a job if he brings in top recruiting classes every year and plays them?  Really?

[slufanskip]

9 hours ago, Coach314 said:

Hypothetically,  let's say Ford recruited Jimerson, Perkins, Hargrove and Collins with the promise of playing time being available.  They sign and Coach then brings in Grad Transfers that take those available minutes.  What are your thoughts on that?  Just curious 

Recruiting one player does not take away the opportunity to win playing time from another

 

 

[slu72]

Adding a thought on GT's, or the mercenaries as Taj Mahal 79 calls them. Why does a coach want a one year rent a player?

1)He needs some backup filler at a certain position. Example: Anthony last year. We were short handed on the inside. He didn't do much but was there in case of an emergency. Kind of like that stupid cheapo spare tire to get you to a repair shop. 

2) He can make an impact on a position or need the coach sees as a weakness in his current roster. Example: Wiley and Isabell. After losing Henriquez, Bishop, and Grey to sit 2, Ford saw a glaring need at the guard positions for a scorer. Yes, he had Johnson, but after him he had two unproven FR (Thatch and Jacobs) who would take time to develop and adjust to D1 ball. Wiley may have been viewed as a filler, but Isabell was an immediate upgrade to fix this weakness, a proven big time scorer. Their addition scared off Johnson, which is a shame, and stymied Jacobs' development. On the other side of the coin, he bolstered what he felt was a legit dance team roster. Can't fault him for that. 

Does this mean he should or would do it again this year at the expense of delaying the development of our FR? I think it depends on if he believes adding a GT like Isabell would propel us to the dance next season. Tough decision but why he gets the big bucks and we don't. 

All this said, I do think he needs to add a GT big to fill a gaping hole in our roster. It's doubtful he will find an Isabell equivalent big, so he's got to be hunting for  an upgrade over an Anthony type. 

 

[BIG BILL FAN]

8 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

So Coach Ford is going to be out of a job if he brings in top recruiting classes every year and plays them?  Really?

Where did you get that nonsense from my post? I said bring in the best players and quit worrying about everyone’s feelings! 

[Clock_Tower]

Not sure where the concept of -- grad transfers are only to be used as a final piece for a team to win a championship.  How about to fill a short term gap?

I feel bad for incoming Fall recruits who make decisions based upon the then expected roster - but I would suggest that a GT who has only 1 year left is sure better than a JUCO -- 2 years left or a transfer - who might have 2 to 3 years left, or another fellow freshman at your same position who might keep you from playing all of your 4 years.

We have 5 returning players.  Depending on when an incoming kid made his verbal or written commitment, we still may have had Santos, Gordon and Thor.  Our team was definitely in flux as all recruits knew we were graduating 5 guys and that 1or 2 transfers is common in all of college basketball.  So we went from filling 5 scholarships to filling 8 scholarships -- and to not sue grad transfers (or to only use grad transfers for bigs) is not fair to Coach Ford.  Works both way.  Kids committed in the Fall assuming that Santos, Gordon and Thor would still be here. We lost a pure shooter (Thor) mid season who had 3 years left so what's the harm if we replace Thor with a pure shooting grad transfer?

 

[billiken_roy]

13 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

We lost a pure shooter (Thor) mid season who had 3 years left so what's the harm if we replace Thor with a pure shooting grad transfer?

 

yeah that 40 footer was something to remember.  pure shooter.

[3star_recruit]

1 hour ago, BIG BILL FAN said:

Where did you get that nonsense from my post? I said bring in the best players and quit worrying about everyone’s feelings! 

The point is Coach Ford already is bringing in a top recruiting class and has been doing so ever since he was hired. We don't have a talent problem. We have a retention problem. If he did nothing but bring in top 3 recruiting classes for three straight years and retain his best young players, we would get old and stay old.

That's the key to long term success. Don't take my word for it. Just look at practically any successful program that has emerged over the past 20 years.

[Taj79]

On TV the other night, Troy Robertson relayed the story on how Larry Hughes was penciled in to the starting lineup as the 2-guard while still in high school.  Troy relayed he took umbrage at that and went out all summer, pulling a Rocky Balboa searching for a Conklin Summer to dispel such nonsense that a high schooler was taking his spot.  In the first practice of the next year, Hughes schooled Robertson and dunked over him.  Robertson said "right there and then I knew he was the starting 2-guard." 

As stated before, I believe every kid sees themselves as the next Jordan (for you younger guys, the next LeBron).  I think each kid, deep down, believes they've got what it takes and will rise to the top and start when the preseason is all said and done.  Problem is, that is not always the case.  The reasons, real and or perceived, are many.  Some (Gordon) then choose to transfer.  Some chose to go pro (Ingvi).    Some get dismissed (Robinson).  Some just up and quit (Irvin, Skinner, Cotto).  I don't know if its a problem today or a trend or whatever, but it just seems kids are quicker to choose flight over fight.  But that is the new world of college basketball. 

Right now, Verbal Commits shows about 133 transfers declared on the market.  Most are like Gordon to DePaul or Johnson to Dayton.  For transfers they list 46 currently available and 28 of those are "eligible" because they are transferring out of D1.  So not grad transfers.  The remaining 14 come from powerhouses like Columbia, Central Connecticut State, Northern Illinois, Lafayette, McNeese State, Boston U., Penn, SC State, and so on.  Not exactly powerhouses.  More will come.

Given this 'new age' in college basketball, I think the dyas of knowing just what you have will never be the case and change constantly.  You have to do what you have to do.

[HoosierPal]

10 hours ago, Coach314 said:

Hypothetically,  let's say Ford recruited Jimerson, Perkins, Hargrove and Collins with the promise of playing time being available.  They sign and Coach then brings in Grad Transfers that take those available minutes.  What are your thoughts on that?  Just curious 

Promising that playing time is available is much different than promising playing time.  Any coach who promises playing time, or as GloryDays stated promises a starting position by simply showing up, isn't going to succeed in the long run.  You promise results based on performance in practice and games.  You earn your playing time and your position.  Frankly, I wouldn't want a player here who believes he deserves playing time or a starting position by simply showing up.  If a player doesn't have the desire to perform in practice, then he needs to go elsewhere. These recruits can figure it out on their own.  They know who is on the roster, who is coming in and what they need to do to play.

Also, I would be giddy if Ford recruits over Goodwin and French.  Imagine if we truly had two players next season better than those two and they came off the bench.  My guess is the Goodwin and French would relish the opportunity to fight for a job and to be on a pretty darn good team.

[NYBilliken]

Good discussion. With increased transfer rate, it sounds like a coach should look to play a deep rotation to develop the entire roster, keep younger players from looking elsewhere and encourage recruits. This allows for fast paced offense and aggressive defense because regulars players would get more rest. Which is good because it increases opportunities to score - another factor players care about. Under this theory, a restricted rotation and slow paced games in this era might contribute to increased player turnover.  I have read here that Coach Ford historically has played a limited number of players even when he has more available - maybe he should change this ways to adapt to current era?