Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, SLU_Lax said:

A really impressive list.....now to be "that guy" that nitpicks and adds subjective opinions....

 

2019 French > 2019 Isabell

Yep.  I mostly just took the top 3 scorers.  Adding French instead of Isabell doesn't change the local / non-local math.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

IMO star rankings are garbage and are even more garbage once you get past the 4 and 5 star guys and into the more typical 3 or less guys that SLU has generally landed.

If you look at our best players since the start of the Soderberg era and ignore the flawed star rankings, most of them have actually been non-locals.  Here is my subjective ranking of the top 3 players each year with non-local in bold

2003: Perry, Fisher, Sloan

2004: Bryant, Fisher, Sloan

2005: Bryant, Ohannon, Drejaj

2006: Vouyoukas, Lisch, Liddell

2007: Vouyoukas, Lisch, Liddell

2008: Lisch, Liddell, Meyer

2009: Lisch, Liddell, Mitchell

2010: Mitchell, Reed, Ellis

2011: McCall, Conklin, Evans

2012: Conklin, Mitchell, Ellis

2013: Evans, Mitchell, Ellis

2014: Evans, Jett, Loe

2015: Yarbrough, Yacoubou, Crawford

2016: Yacoubou, Crawford, Bishop

2017: Roby, Bishop, Crawford

2018: Bess, Goodwin, Roby

2019: Bess, Isabell, Goodwin

2020: Goodwin, French, Perkins

I agree with the point that it is easier for a program like SLU (or like SLU has been in the past) to land a highly rated recruit if that recruit is local.  A highly rated non-local recruit had almost no incentive to look at SLU whereas a local who does want to stay home will give SLU a look.  However, that does not mean SLU should put more focus on recruiting higher level locals because those highly rated guys who want to stay home will be (or have been in the past) few & far between.  We've gotten burned in the past seemingly focusing too much of our resources on a highly rated local who decided to go elsewhere (Scott Suggs under Brad and Tatum under Crews).

-nice list, I have not looked in depth to see if I agree with your top 3 players each year but very interesting

-my take on players, find the best ones, local, national or international that want to Be Billikens, with this I trust CFord and Company (but reserve the right to ask questions about some)

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

IMO star rankings are garbage and are even more garbage once you get past the 4 and 5 star guys and into the more typical 3 or less guys that SLU has generally landed.

If you look at our best players since the start of the Soderberg era and ignore the flawed star rankings, most of them have actually been non-locals.  Here is my subjective ranking of the top 3 players each year with non-local in bold

2003: Perry, Fisher, Sloan

2004: Bryant, Fisher, Sloan

2005: Bryant, Ohannon, Drejaj

2006: Vouyoukas, Lisch, Liddell

2007: Vouyoukas, Lisch, Liddell

2008: Lisch, Liddell, Meyer

2009: Lisch, Liddell, Mitchell

2010: Mitchell, Reed, Ellis

2011: McCall, Conklin, Evans

2012: Conklin, Mitchell, Ellis

2013: Evans, Mitchell, Ellis

2014: Evans, Jett, Loe

2015: Yarbrough, Yacoubou, Crawford

2016: Yacoubou, Crawford, Bishop

2017: Roby, Bishop, Crawford

2018: Bess, Goodwin, Roby

2019: Bess, Isabell, Goodwin

2020: Goodwin, French, Perkins

I agree with the point that it is easier for a program like SLU (or like SLU has been in the past) to land a highly rated recruit if that recruit is local.  A highly rated non-local recruit had almost no incentive to look at SLU whereas a local who does want to stay home will give SLU a look.  However, that does not mean SLU should put more focus on recruiting higher level locals because those highly rated guys who want to stay home will be (or have been in the past) few & far between.  We've gotten burned in the past seemingly focusing too much of our resources on a highly rated local who decided to go elsewhere (Scott Suggs under Brad and Tatum under Crews).

Everyone always says star rankings are garbage, and I get why. No coach worth his salt should let rankings guide his recruiting decisions, and there are countless examples of lower-ranked players having amazing college (and pro) careers. But if you look at the big picture, higher-ranked kids tend to do pretty well in college, especially at schools like SLU where they are almost guaranteed to get playing time.

The issue with your list is that there have been several periods where we barely had any local players, so it's not really a true comparison of anything. Another way to look at it would be to say that of the metro areas represented on that list, St. Louis has significantly more presence than any other region. I could just also note that of the top 10 all time scorers in Billiken history, 9 are from St. Louis. But those kinds of anecdotes don't help us win games next year, or the year after that.

You get the best fit for your program, regardless of where they are from or what they are ranked. If you have good local relationships (like we currently do) it can make it a lot easier to land kids from St. Louis that will help you win. But, if you have good relationships elsewhere (Australia / New Zealand with Harriman, Chicago with Porter Moser, New York area with Van Macon) you have to use those to help you win. 

Overall, I disagree with anyone who says it's harder to get good recruits from St. Louis, or that we have been burned by focusing on St. Louis recruits. But I also think it would be stupid to suggest we should only focus on local kids in recruiting. In order to reach our ceiling as a program, we need to have a consistent pipeline in St. Louis as well as the broader Midwest, and also be able to recruit nationally when the player is the right fit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, almaman said:

Wasn't father of FBLHJ a 4*?

Wasn't he a top 5 player nationally? For some reason I remember him as the 3rd rated player in the country. Anyone who had him as a 4 star should have immediately quit the recruiting ranking game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm standing by my contention that with rare exceptions, and the list above proves it, we don't get the best of the locals. Please note, I also said with rate exceptions; ie JGood, Gordon (wouldn't call him a real big get as it turns out). But now with Yurimania, Perkins, Hargrove, Thatch (not metro), we're making some inroads. Still, the 4 and 5 stars from St. L,  which has turned into a hotbed of good recruits,  has not benefitted us that much. For example, I was surprised Kusabake didn't stay at home. It wasn't like UNC or Duke was offering. He turned us down for KSU.  

The above said, I do think if Travis can make us nationally relevant, we'll start keeping a few of these guys at home. Get us to a couple of sweet 16's or elite 8's and get the Fetz rocking, and SLU will be fine. I'd also add that some of the guys who bought into the bright lights and find they're not as bright as they thought might well give us a second look with the new transfer rule. Not all these guys are going to be the brightest stars at their P5 schools. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, slu72 said:

I'm standing by my contention that with rare exceptions, and the list above proves it, we don't get the best of the locals. Please note, I also said with rate exceptions; ie JGood, Gordon (wouldn't call him a real big get as it turns out). But now with Yurimania, Perkins, Hargrove, Thatch (not metro), we're making some inroads. Still, the 4 and 5 stars from St. L,  which has turned into a hotbed of good recruits,  has not benefitted us that much. For example, I was surprised Kusabake didn't stay at home. It wasn't like UNC or Duke was offering. He turned us down for KSU.  

The above said, I do think if Travis can make us nationally relevant, we'll start keeping a few of these guys at home. Get us to a couple of sweet 16's or elite 8's and get the Fetz rocking, and SLU will be fine. I'd also add that some of the guys who bought into the bright lights and find they're not as bright as they thought might well give us a second look with the new transfer rule. Not all these guys are going to be the brightest stars at their P5 schools. 

This post would have been spot on 3 years ago. However, Travis has already started getting enough of the high-level (top 300) local recruits to stay home. Showing that our best 3 players over the past ~17 years tended to be non-local players is largely irrelevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BilliesBy40 said:

This post would have been spot on 3 years ago. However, Travis has already started getting enough of the high-level (top 300) local recruits to stay home. Showing that our best 3 players over the past ~17 years tended to be non-local players is largely irrelevant.

Exactly.  If previous regimes had been able to beat out Bradley and SIU for regional 3 star players in the 1999-2009 period, we would be the top mid-major program in the Midwest by now.  The first decade of the 21st century wouldn't have become a lost decade -- we would have been building that entire time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

David Kvidahl was on Frank’s radio show to talk about the All Decade list today. Toward the end of the interview Frank asked him if he thought Nesbitt and Kern would be Billikens. He said he couldn’t say for sure, but he knows that Ford has made some serious inroads with local recruiting. He said if the team is as good as they should be next year they shouldn’t have trouble recruiting players who are interested in staying home. With a winning program and top notch facilities, what more can they ask for?

He also said that Nesbitt and Kern are probably the two best seniors in the area next year. He’s not sure if Nesbitt wants to stay home or not. He thinks Kern is really good, but it will be interesting to see how he performs as “the man” next season. Irons usually does a good job preparing players for that role though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, slu72 said:

I'm standing by my contention that with rare exceptions, and the list above proves it, we don't get the best of the locals. Please note, I also said with rate exceptions; ie JGood, Gordon (wouldn't call him a real big get as it turns out). But now with Yurimania, Perkins, Hargrove, Thatch (not metro), we're making some inroads. Still, the 4 and 5 stars from St. L,  which has turned into a hotbed of good recruits,  has not benefitted us that much. For example, I was surprised Kusabake didn't stay at home. It wasn't like UNC or Duke was offering. He turned us down for KSU.  

The above said, I do think if Travis can make us nationally relevant, we'll start keeping a few of these guys at home. Get us to a couple of sweet 16's or elite 8's and get the Fetz rocking, and SLU will be fine. I'd also add that some of the guys who bought into the bright lights and find they're not as bright as they thought might well give us a second look with the new transfer rule. Not all these guys are going to be the brightest stars at their P5 schools. 

We don't get the best of the locals the same way we don't get the best of any region? Heck, we weren't even getting the highest ranked player in a given class in Australia when we had that pipeline. When you're not a power 6 school it's almost always going to be impossible to land the highest-regarded talent, so you have to make up for it in different ways (finding hidden gems, player development, etc.). But we can get generally be more competitive in St. Louis than we can anywhere else, since inevitably some kids will want to stay home. We've gotten as many or more of the top-tier St. Louis recruits as any other school in the nation over the past couple of years, so I don't really see want the issue is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, slufanskip said:

Wasn't he a top 5 player nationally? For some reason I remember him as the 3rd rated player in the country. Anyone who had him as a 4 star should have immediately quit the recruiting ranking game. 

I wasn't following recruiting then and others know better than I do, but he was a Mcdonald's All-American, so I think it's safe to say that you're correct and that he was a consensus top player in the country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, slufanskip said:

Wasn't he a top 5 player nationally? For some reason I remember him as the 3rd rated player in the country. Anyone who had him as a 4 star should have immediately quit the recruiting ranking game. 

I'm forgetting is there a 5 * player? and that he was one?

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, NH said:

We don't get the best of the locals the same way we don't get the best of any region? Heck, we weren't even getting the highest ranked player in a given class in Australia when we had that pipeline. When you're not a power 6 school it's almost always going to be impossible to land the highest-regarded talent, so you have to make up for it in different ways (finding hidden gems, player development, etc.). But we can get generally be more competitive in St. Louis than we can anywhere else, since inevitably some kids will want to stay home. We've gotten as many or more of the top-tier St. Louis recruits as any other school in the nation over the past couple of years, so I don't really see want the issue is. 

No argument with this. Travis has done wonders with locals. I’ve said as much, JGood and Gordon (who knew he was a whacko). But we are still not where we need to be to keep the superstars at home. We may never get there, but no one can complain about the makeup of  next season’s team. No matter where he got them from. If he keeps doing that going forward, it’s a court of dreams; “build it and they will come.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, almaman said:

I'm forgetting is there a 5 * player? and that he was one?

Yes.  5* is McDonald's All-American.  Top 25.  And, yes, Larry Hughes Sr. was a McDonald's All-American in 1997.  In the Nike Hoop Summit game that year he was the top player.  Were you following hoops then?

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Yes.  5* is McDonald's All-American.  Top 25.  And, yes, Larry Hughes Sr. was a McDonald's All-American in 1997.  In the Nike Hoop Summit game that year he was the top player.  Were you following hoops then?

Wasn’t he the MVP of the all star game?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.  Every year we need to be in the running for our very best local players - whether they are 4* or 5^ McDonald's All Americans.  And the better our program, the more they will consider staying home to play for us.  And every once in awhile, a few will select us.  At the same time, this is not the method for us to build and maintain our program.  We lack the national TV exposure (lucky to just be able to watch our games on computers!) and the A10 is not on par with the ACC, etc.   A strong head coach, with strong assistants/recruiters, and a combination of 3* and diamonds in the rough - who are both locals and non-locals - is our path.  We have been through this for years:   Chris Carrawell (Duke), Jahidi White (G-Town), Loren Woods (Wake Forest) used their skills to go to some of the best basketball and academic programs.   Same recently with Caleb Love (UNC) and Fletcher (Kentucky).  Keeping these kids in town, year after year, is not realistic.   Having a strong, NCAA bound program each year as a local alternative is.     

Link to post
Share on other sites

Travis Ford has done well in recruiting with a lot of obstacles...one of which is the A10. As Clock said above me, the A10 doesn't have the cache of the Football Conferences or the Big East. If a kid puts A10 offers on Instagram, do casual fans even think he's getting D1 interest? That kind of thing is a big deal to high school kids.

This team has to win, and win big....and Travis has the Billikens set up for that. I hope we never end up as low as the Jim Crews reign of error again. Another thing I like about Ford is he has been able to get players from varied areas to come together and play well as #TeamBlue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, JettFlight5 said:

Travis Ford has done well in recruiting with a lot of obstacles...one of which is the A10. As Clock said above me, the A10 doesn't have the cache of the Football Conferences or the Big East. If a kid puts A10 offers on Instagram, do casual fans even think he's getting D1 interest? That kind of thing is a big deal to high school kids.

This team has to win, and win big....and Travis has the Billikens set up for that. I hope we never end up as low as the Jim Crews reign of error again. Another thing I like about Ford is he has been able to get players from varied areas to come together and play well as #TeamBlue. 

You can’t be serious with the bolded part.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, JettFlight5 said:

If a kid puts A10 offers on Instagram, do casual fans even think he's getting D1 interest? That kind of thing is a big deal to high school kids.

 

If a fan outside of the A10 seems fordham or LaSalle, then I see your point in that im sure it down plays his level of skill.  But when a player sees interest from a St Joes or bonnies, most fans know what that means as far as skill, If those fans see Dayton, VCU etc they think hes legit. 

 

Which brings up a good point, fans who dont follow the league probably think VCU is still good elite, and dont realize where vcu finished this year and is headed for next year.  Winning games in march is a POWERFUL thing years after.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the only good rivalry we have is with Dayton. Otherwise, it's circumstantial, although I like playing teams that are private schools with nice basketball history, like Davidson, St. Joes, and Richmond.

Still, that's no competition to being in a league with Marquette, Creighton, DePaul, Butler, and Xavier. Those are schools, esp. the first two, where SLU kids have friends they went to HS with, or they visited. There's no point being in an East Coast league without the benefit of those kinds of teams. Otherwise I'd prefer a Midwest dream conference that will never happen (Wichita St., Memphis, SIU, Valpo, etc..)

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, slu72 said:

Dare I say it? It's why getting into the Beast is critical as we go forward. How to do that? Build a nice tourney resume. How to do that? Keep Travis Ford very happy. 

It is, but who knows if the chance will come. We all know SLU needs to go on a big run in terms of both making tournaments and getting deeper into them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the OBC of billikens.com used to dream all the time of a midwest papal conference being formed.    it could have been tremendous.    Saint Louis, Dayton, Depaul, Marquette, Loyola, Notre Dame, Creighton etc.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BilliesBy40 said:

You can’t be serious with the bolded part.

Don’t want to speak for him, but I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve been asked by casual sports fans if SLU is D1.  We’ve got a long way to go to become the Gonzaga of the Midwest, as I think many of us hope we will. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...