Recruiting - 2022

[bauman]

With one scholarship remaining and a clear need for a D. Jones type back up PG, I would think there are quite a few PGs who have one year of eligibility remaining who would like to be a part of a top 20-25 , NCAA qualifying team for their last year.

While it's only on paper, I think today's 2 commitments solidify that preseason expectation.

[Cowboy II]

-let's see if the rotation expands

[bauman]

17 hours ago, Cowboy II said:

-let's see if the rotation expands

I'm thinking in this new CBB world with the transfer portal and immediate eligibility that Travis might need to be rethinking his love of the 8 man rotation system.  I think he might need to start using 10-12 players on a regular basis or face losing prospects with potential such as Andre L and M Strickland.

[billiken_roy]

6 minutes ago, bauman said:

I'm thinking in this new CBB world with the transfer portal and immediate eligibility that Travis might need to be rethinking his love of the 8 man rotation system.  I think he might need to start using 10-12 players on a regular basis or face losing prospects with potential such as Andre L and M Strickland.

as much as i agree with you  i will believe it when i see it in conference play and against the top non-conference teams.   sure he will tease us vs the buy teams, but then when it counts i will be pleasantly shocked when he continues playing fast and rotating in near the complete roster.   hope i am wrong.

[slufanskip]

2 minutes ago, bauman said:

I'm thinking in this new CBB world with the transfer portal and immediate eligibility that Travis might need to be rethinking his love of the 8 man rotation system.  I think he might need to start using 10-12 players on a regular basis or face losing prospects with potential such as Andre L and M Strickland.

Imo they both had 2 years. If you can’t earn many minutes other than mop up even with an 8 man rotation it’s probably best you look for a better fit. 
 

How many teams actually have 10 players avg more than 10 mpg? Very few. Probably less than half have more than 8 avg over 15 mpg. Why? Because the 9th guy in his 3rd minute is probably not better than the 5th guy in his 32nd minute. 
 

I honestly don’t get this desire to play 10+ guys real minutes. Maybe 9 but more often than not I want my top 3-4 guys getting 30+

[billiken_roy]

Just now, slufanskip said:

Imo they both had 2 years. If you can’t earn many minutes other than mop up even with an 8 man rotation it’s probably best you look for a better fit. 
 

How many teams actually have 10 players avg more than 10 mpg? Very few. Probably less than half have more than 8 avg over 15 mpg. Why? Because the 9th guy in his 3rd minute is probably not better than the 5th guy in his 32nd minute. 
 

I honestly don’t get this desire to play 10+ guys real minutes. Maybe 9 but more often than not I want my top 3-4 guys getting 30+

not if you are playing fast on both ends.   you will have to sub. 

 only when we play walk it up the floor and use the entire shot clock is the 30+ mpg top 5 player the choice. 

[SShoe]

17 hours ago, bauman said:

With one scholarship remaining and a clear need for a D. Jones type back up PG, I would think there are quite a few PGs who have one year of eligibility remaining who would like to be a part of a top 20-25 , NCAA qualifying team for their last year.

While it's only on paper, I think today's 2 commitments solidify that preseason expectation.

Don't know who's out there, but I'd probably prefer a freshman PG.  Someone that's willing to sit a year and learn.

[wgstl]

24 minutes ago, SShoe said:

Don't know who's out there, but I'd probably prefer a freshman PG.  Someone that's willing to sit a year and learn.

If I have learned one thing, unless that player is from the area, that player has a one year contract that is eligible for renewal.  Id prefer a freshman or sophomore who has already transferred once. 

[dennis_w]

Games are not that long and you want your best players on the floor as much as possible, the bottom your roster is not often your best chance of winning, very rare anyone plays 10 or even nine

[3star_recruit]

27 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

Imo they both had 2 years. If you can’t earn many minutes other than mop up even with an 8 man rotation it’s probably best you look for a better fit. 
 

How many teams actually have 10 players avg more than 10 mpg? Very few. Probably less than half have more than 8 avg over 15 mpg. Why? Because the 9th guy in his 3rd minute is probably not better than the 5th guy in his 32nd minute. 
 

I honestly don’t get this desire to play 10+ guys real minutes. Maybe 9 but more often than not I want my top 3-4 guys getting 30+

Some folks on this board have been watching basketball for 50+ years.  They know that most teams play 8 man rotations.  They know that the guys at the end of your bench are easily replaceable.  Why are they picking this hill to die on?

[ACE]

52 minutes ago, bauman said:

I'm thinking in this new CBB world with the transfer portal and immediate eligibility that Travis might need to be rethinking his love of the 8 man rotation system.  I think he might need to start using 10-12 players on a regular basis or face losing prospects with potential such as Andre L and M Strickland.

Who cares about losing Andre and Strickland. They had two years to show what they can do. If it's not good enough, time to move on. No hard feelings. No big deal. That's college bball in 2022.

[wgstl]

4 minutes ago, ACE said:

Who cares about losing Andre and Strickland. They had two years to show what they can do. If it's not good enough, time to move on. No hard feelings. No big deal. That's college bball in 2022.

I'll be honest, Im glad Andre and Markhi stuck around for 2 seasons.  That will be extremely rare in a year or 2. 

[Young Charles]

I am not saying one is better than the other but, IF you have quality talent on the bench why not use it. Great example of this is Texas Tech, fresh legs constantly subbing 3 to 4 guys at a time allowing them to pressure you on defense the whole game. They had 10 guys over 10 mpg... if you can count the 9.9

I will say this is one of the only teams off the top of my head that I could think of this past year that would be in this discussion. 

[majerus mojo]

1 hour ago, bauman said:

I'm thinking in this new CBB world with the transfer portal and immediate eligibility that Travis might need to be rethinking his love of the 8 man rotation system.  I think he might need to start using 10-12 players on a regular basis or face losing prospects with potential such as Andre L and M Strickland.

At least in relation to Cisse, I’m sure a bulk of his pitch was all of the available minutes once Okoro graduates. If he can also come in for 5-10 minutes here and there this season, and be effective when needed, that’s a win too. 
 

He probably pointed at Osunniyi and said, “All of those blocks will soon be yours.” 

 

[GOSLU68]

11 minutes ago, Young Charles said:

I am not saying one is better than the other but, IF you have quality talent on the bench why not use it. Great example of this is Texas Tech, fresh legs constantly subbing 3 to 4 guys at a time allowing them to pressure you on defense the whole game. They had 10 guys over 10 mpg... if you can count the 9.9

I will say this is one of the only teams off the top of my head that I could think of this past year that would be in this discussion. 

Players being recruited would really have to buy in as few would be setting records or making the pro circuit notice them with 10-15 minutes each

[wgstl]

11 minutes ago, Young Charles said:

I am not saying one is better than the other but, IF you have quality talent on the bench why not use it. Great example of this is Texas Tech, fresh legs constantly subbing 3 to 4 guys at a time allowing them to pressure you on defense the whole game. They had 10 guys over 10 mpg... if you can count the 9.9

I will say this is one of the only teams off the top of my head that I could think of this past year that would be in this discussion. 

not to nitpick, but few players racked up a ton of minutes when McCullar and especially Shannon were out for long periods.  I get your point still. A lot of teams do play that deep, but a lot is like 30 or 40 of 364 teams. WVU is another example, they went 10 deep over 10 minutes or more. 

[billiken_roy]

if you truly have the athletes use them.   particularly if you have plans for them.   why let them get disgruntled.   yes, you want your top players on the court as much as possible, but if they do get temporarily fatigued, their quality of play will suffer until they get a chance to have a quick rest.   i'm not saying take them out the rest of the half or for a long stretch.   

second, there is no doubt playing fast is a far better watch for the fans.    a team scoring lots of points and giving the fans lots of action will put butts in the seats.   

i do agree that the vast majority of teams in college basketball dont do this and st bona is proof that a short bench works as well.  but if we continue to bring in fantastic athletes and then bury them on the bench we are going to see big turnovers every year.   hey maybe that will work out great.   no one really gets what is trending with the stupid rules that are now in effect.   myself, i dont like an ever changing roster.   no chance to develop those fan relationships that make college basketball fun (assuming the players are producing good players).   the days of "next year...." will be over.  as we wont know year to year what next year will resemble.   

but i have said recently a lot, i've now given up on that dream.   i will accept that the billikens are never going to be the likes of the playing fast teams like texas tech or west virginia.  ford is what he is.  it could be a hell of a lot worse.   crewsplatt and ekkertime are still embedded in my brain and i would prefer to take ford with whatever weaknesses i see than ever experience those bad days again.   you all have to admit, ford has done well with this roster fill dilemna it appears.  not many coaches can do that.  

[slufan13]

12 minutes ago, wgstl said:

not to nitpick, but few players racked up a ton of minutes when McCullar and especially Shannon were out for long periods.  I get your point still. A lot of teams do play that deep, but a lot is like 30 or 40 of 364 teams. WVU is another example, they went 10 deep over 10 minutes or more. 

And in Texas Tech's Sweet 16 game against Duke, all 5 starters played 34 or more minutes. It's just how it works now. The good teams play short rotations 

[slufanskip]

25 minutes ago, Young Charles said:

I am not saying one is better than the other but, IF you have quality talent on the bench why not use it. Great example of this is Texas Tech, fresh legs constantly subbing 3 to 4 guys at a time allowing them to pressure you on defense the whole game. They had 10 guys over 10 mpg... if you can count the 9.9

I will say this is one of the only teams off the top of my head that I could think of this past year that would be in this discussion. 

How many minutes would D Jones, R Williams, Markhi, or even Hargrove have gotten for TTU? 

 

 

 

[slu72]

I just hope the lure of SLU for MOMO was 23-24 season when we lose Franco and Forrester. Get him minutes for sure if he’s earned them, but the important thing is get him thinking longer term, ie you can be a 2-3 year starter. Of course, if he’s a Jabbar or Walton from day 1, well, he starts immediately. I don’t expect that will be the case. 

[slufanskip]

8 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

if you truly have the athletes use them.   particularly if you have plans for them.   why let them get disgruntled.   yes, you want your top players on the court as much as possible, but if they do get temporarily fatigued, their quality of play will suffer until they get a chance to have a quick rest.   i'm not saying take them out the rest of the half or for a long stretch.   

second, there is no doubt playing fast is a far better watch for the fans.    a team scoring lots of points and giving the fans lots of action will put butts in the seats.   

i do agree that the vast majority of teams in college basketball dont do this and st bona is proof that a short bench works as well.  but if we continue to bring in fantastic athletes and then bury them on the bench we are going to see big turnovers every year.   hey maybe that will work out great.   no one really gets what is trending with the stupid rules that are now in effect.   myself, i dont like an ever changing roster.   no chance to develop those fan relationships that make college basketball fun (assuming the players are producing good players).   the days of "next year...." will be over.  as we wont know year to year what next year will resemble.   

but i have said recently a lot, i've now given up on that dream.   i will accept that the billikens are never going to be the likes of the playing fast teams like texas tech or west virginia.  ford is what he is.  it could be a hell of a lot worse.   crewsplatt and ekkertime are still embedded in my brain and i would prefer to take ford with whatever weaknesses i see than ever experience those bad days again.   you all have to admit, ford has done well with this roster fill dilemna it appears.  not many coaches can do that.  

Just because you think Ford should do something different his not doing isn’t automatically a weakness. 

[SLUMedBilliken15]

1 hour ago, bauman said:

I'm thinking in this new CBB world with the transfer portal and immediate eligibility that Travis might need to be rethinking his love of the 8 man rotation system.  I think he might need to start using 10-12 players on a regular basis or face losing prospects with potential such as Andre L and M Strickland.

Honestly, I'm not opposed to losing prospects such as Andre L and M Strickland.

[slufanskip]

39 minutes ago, Young Charles said:

I am not saying one is better than the other but, IF you have quality talent on the bench why not use it. Great example of this is Texas Tech, fresh legs constantly subbing 3 to 4 guys at a time allowing them to pressure you on defense the whole game. They had 10 guys over 10 mpg... if you can count the 9.9

I will say this is one of the only teams off the top of my head that I could think of this past year that would be in this discussion. 

And TTU was 145th in scoring. SLU was almost 100 places higher at 48th

[Littlebill]

42 minutes ago, Young Charles said:

I am not saying one is better than the other but, IF you have quality talent on the bench why not use it. Great example of this is Texas Tech, fresh legs constantly subbing 3 to 4 guys at a time allowing them to pressure you on defense the whole game. They had 10 guys over 10 mpg... if you can count the 9.9

I will say this is one of the only teams off the top of my head that I could think of this past year that would be in this discussion. 

That roster is different gravy though as far as depth goes. They have an all-a10 guy as their 8th guy

[Young Charles]

7 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

How many minutes would D Jones, R Williams, Markhi, or even Hargrove have gotten for TTU? 

I was solely pointing out that there are teams that play with more depth. 

 

1 minute ago, slufanskip said:

And TTU was 145th in scoring. SLU was almost 100 places higher at 48th

Texas Tech was Number 2 in defensive efficiency... anyway not the point of the post.