Major Majerus Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 There has been a lot of angst during the recent signing period on this board - fueled even more by Brad's comments at the dinner. In retrospect, what else could he have said? He has no power over prospective recruits; all he can control is to do what has worked for him in the past. What else could he say except that he was prepared to go with what he had? In the meantime, he appears to have hit two home runs. We can't see the future, but I think we're all pretty happy with the potential. Think about who he's brought in since he's had a whole season to recruit - any unhappiness over DP, LM, and DB? Look at who he's added since then - anybody think he's on the wrong track? The glass is half full, and we're still adding, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 i do not see the advantage of leading everyone to believe that he wasnt looking to sign anyone. sure he cant lie or assume that it is a done deal, but he can tell boosters he is working on some great kids etc and hopes to have a few players signed soon, etc. i truly see nothing good in the cia like approach he takes in recruiting. one would think an occasional leak would create some enthusiasm and excitement for the program. at a time when we are starved to add boosters and funds, enthusiasm and excitement is invaluable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetorch Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 Then he also runs the risk of further dissapointment which could serve to dampen efforts at fundrasing and even his recruiting. I have had enough of SLU officials making grand statements and then not backing them up. Announcing things when they are signed sealed and delivered for me is much more desireable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUBALL Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 Half empty in my opinion. We signed a player that had not recieved one Divsion 1 scholarship other than ours. He is packaged as a 3pt shooter we so desparatly need yet he shoots only 36% from behind the arc and plays with his back to the basket the majority of time. SLU signs another player with a severe enough injury that every big time school who was after him backed off. You can give Brad a free pass if you want but frankly I expect more. As for as DP,LM,DB. DP shot awful all year long especially from the three. Could not make a free throw at the end of the game. If you remember he was not on the floor for long stretches during the last third of the season. Word on the street is that with Lisch and Liddell he may be the third best PG. LM was so good it took the coaching staff until the year was half over to decide he was good enough to play. The jury is still out on his future contributions but he is defintly moving in the right direction. DB I like DB but everyone was ready to replace him with a guy that averaged 3pts a game for a bad Purdue team. Now you want to prop him up as a great find. You can't have it both ways. I am tired of losing and unless things start improving I don't see that changing in the near future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetorch Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 I don't have as much of a pessimistic view as you do but suffice it to say I will not be predicting any postseason berths for this year as I did last. With DP, LM, TL, KL and now Dustin SLU is now getting the very best players in the region. That is what excites me. If we can consistently get the top 2 or 3 players form St. Louis, which is improving their bball greatly in the past few years, we can be at least be a year in year out contender for the A-10 title. History shows that the area talent can carry us that far. With Mizzou down and Illinois focusing on higher recruits SLU can gain control of the area. At thsi stage coming off a very poor year and having some parts of our roster either being depleted or exceedingly young and /or inexperienced we are going to have to take some risks on incoming recruits. These risks like Obi will have to pan out. Until we have sustained some success we will have to continue playing this game. Then of course when ground is broken on the arena that will also serve to even the playing field for us. I am not convinced that it will happen but if it does we will be in good shape. The arena would make us superior to the Valley teams vying for area talent that we are having to compete with and unfortunately in the recent past losing much of our potential area talent pool to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Majerus Posted May 11, 2005 Author Share Posted May 11, 2005 The point is we all "knew" he was working on some great kids, and the proof is the last 2 commitments. I can't believe that vague references would pump us up any more than the actual results. Brad has delivered the goods so far and we have a bright future - that's enough for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 With regards to DM, isn't this the ideal situation? We recruit a kid early, he gives us an oral commitment before he has a big senior season and the big programs start recruiting him? I think landing DM early is a chance that we had to take. So was signing Obi. After last season, getting blue chippers is a virtual impossibility so Brad has to take some calculated risks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUMS81 Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 Do you think that Brad can't tell the difference between an excellent player and a mediocre player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 while i am not against the maguire signing, dont put me in the enthralled category either. i am having a real hard time picturing maguire guarding a wind. he never has dont it as far as i know. at least in the games i have seen him play. civic has two fellow juniors that are very good guards and have good speed, thus he never has to at the high school level. i have seen him shoot well from the outside, and i concede he has potential. i have mentioned before i can see him as somewhat of a steve novak type that guards a big but can step out and hit the three or bang inside. but defensively, i am puzzled if the plan is strictly as a wing. my first choice would have been one of the two more athletic junior class wings either hill from vashon or leonard. maybe they were, but have indicated they want to wait. and if that is the case, it would be clearer. of couse at slu-cia, we dont know. i dont know the makeup of maguire's aau team. it will be interesting to hear what position he is playing for them and how he fares if he is playing a wing this summer. he wont play the wing again next fall, so maybe our picture can become clearer over the summer with his aau team if he is playing a wing for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 Maguire was the 8th highest scorer among 2006 players at the ABCD camp last summer and was Gateway's leading scorer playing on the wing exclusively. He was also MVP of the Spiece Memorial Day Classic last summer. It's only during the high school season that he plays in the post. Bobby Hill is a nice athlete but signing him would do absolutely nothing to bolster our scoring in a half-court set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 So is the knock on Maguire that he's a Steve Novak-like player but without the height? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 3 star, if you are telling me he can guard the wings, that is good enough for me. since i have only seen him play high school ball, i havent seen that and he doesnt give one the impression of anything but average athleticism. my love of hill is the pure athleticism angle. the more athletes we have in the fold, the sooner we can possibly break the "plodder team" image. it will be interesting to see the remaining 2006 recruiting class unfold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 "3 star, if you are telling me he can guard the wings," Nope, not saying that. Saying that he will at least make an effort and that may be enough to pacify Brad if he is making his jump shots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 >"3 star, if you are telling me he can guard the wings," > >Nope, not saying that. Saying that he will at least make an >effort and that may be enough to pacify Brad if he is making >his jump shots. He sounds a lot like Scott Highmark. I wonder if Scott could have played enough defense to make Coach Soderberg happy? Even if Macguire is more of a roll player giving you 15 minutes of offense a game good for 5 points per ... that would be a significant contribution. Just having another shooter on the bench to bust zones is worth a scholarship IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillikenButch Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 How is he different than Drew Diener? Size, speed, shot, athleticism, b-ball IQ...is one player clearly different than the other? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 if past actions are any indications, an "effort" wont be good enough for brad soderberg. i believe after watching his "pack defense now for 3 seasons, that defense is only as good as the sum of the parts. one crack in the wall was disasterous. besides if what you are saying is true, then the whole ahearn being ignored thing becomes even more puzzling. because he definitely would have fit that bill plus probably played more credible defense than what maguire is going to play then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 highmark was one tough sob and actually a better athlete than maguire. other than the same shooter/scorer mentality, in no way is maguire highmark imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 while i know drew was listed at 6'5", from the games i have watched, maguire looks bigger than drew diener. i can only assume diener wasnt, maguire isnt, or that maguire's size is skewed because i always see him guarding high school centers that are 6'3". and while drew wont be confused with bob cousy or curly neal, i havent seen maguire put the ball on the floor much either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 Drew was a "thick" 6'5 - the guy had cankles and a definite lack of foot speed. Does DM have a leaner build than DD? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 maguire is bigger than diener. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 At the Eagles Invitational last summer, Maguire threw down a one- hand alley-oop verus the Eagles. Shocked the crap out of me. I think he's just as athletic as Luke Meyer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 What? my understanding from reading this board was that Ahearn was the worst defensive player to ever play basketball in the western hemisphere ... now Maguire is? I'm confused Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 i dont know how good of defender he is on the perimeter. i have never seen him play on the perimeter. so dont put words in my mouth on that one skip. where you been skip? havent posted much lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlecat455 Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 How about we let Maguire be Maguire? The comparisons are not that instructive since they played in different systems. Why is Ahearn even an issue? He doesn't play here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 battlecat said, "How about we let Maguire be Maguire? The comparisons are not that instructive since they played in different systems. Why is Ahearn even an issue? He doesn't play here." battlecat, that is the nature and fun of messageboards. a collection of thoughts and opinions to help each other understand a big picture and generate conversation based on our same interests. most of the readers and posters here i would venture havent seen maguire play. and to just generically describe his play doesnt always paint a picture. so it is helpful if players that we are all familiar with are thrown out there and compared or explained why they dont seem similar and what traits are different. i dont see what is so wrong with that. as to ahearn, i only brought his name up in this string because if defense ends up being an issue, it is confusing that maguire was offered so early and ahearn was actually shunned when it sure seems the same strengths and weaknesses are key. again, conversation sakes. the question i have for you, what do you see the purpose of a message board like this if we dont discuss the afforementioned? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.