ACE Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 How would a recruiting class of Shaw, Liddell, Polk, and Meyer shape up? Would this fill our needs for the future? If not, realistically what would be your ideal recruiting class? Any predictions on who we will sign? I'd love to get Liddell. We need a dynamic, quality local player who can score. Bonner, Douglass, Gray, Hughes, Upchurch (oops!) and Liddell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeSmetBilliken Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 I'd be happy with that class. It would give us 4 quality local players, and we would also have the added bonus that we wouldn't get slammed for not recruiting local players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 imo from the front side, it would be the best class since hughes, baniak, tatum and heinrich. of course with larry legend leaving early and the other three never living up to expectations, even that pales. it would probably be on par with highmark, winfield, claggett, grawer, bickel and grant as well. it is nice they are all local, but to be honest, local means very little to me. if we have gotten justin cerasoli instead of luke meyer, i would have traded that in a second. now if the best you can get away from home is no better than st louis, fine. but dont not take the out-of-towner just because he is out of town. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUDrew Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 Besides the obvious talent of that class, I think the best aspect of it would be that future top tier recruits out of St. Louis would look at SLU in a whole new light. We wouldn't just get the kids who wanted to stay close to home, but also the kids who wanted to be part of a winning program. In my opinion it all starts with putting up a fence around St. Louis. Obviously I am not advocating ignoring out of town prospects, but really pushing for the kids in the area to stay right here and play for the Bills Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 This class would be great because: (i) It would fill all of our needs (i.e., a power forward, a point guard, and swingmen) (ii) All of the players fit the mold Brad is recruiting (i.e., good all-around skills) (iii) The kids are all local (which will increase the program's local exposure and interest) and appear to be good people. I would be estatic with those four players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 Those are some good points. While I certainly wouldn't want Brad to turn his back on recruits from outside the St. Louis area (and I don't think he ever would), I do think that successful St. Louis recruiting is a major key to our future success, just like it has been to the majority of our past success. Like Roy has said, the local kids who stay here to play really seem to be embraced by the fans and the community, and that's got to be a selling point for us. I'll take Liddell and Shaw in a heartbeat! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikan Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Nark, I am delighted to see that you would be very happy with the four local players--I would be very happy if we could land those or similar players. However, I question your comments in light of many comments you made last year re our need to recruit top 50 and top 100 players. I recall that you said it was a must for the Bills to get several of those ranked players in order to compete in D1 basketball at a significant level. I think there is a chance that none of these players will be ranked for the reasons that others have mentioned. I for one do not care about those rankings because the people doing the rankings admit they are influenced by what teams are recruiting them, the aau team they play on, the attitudes of the "gurus" and hangers on who frequent the camps, etc. My point is that we could have an excellent recruiting year and yet not be ranked nationally at all. Nark, it appears that you now feel you can live with that -- but it sure seemed last year that you were pushing the rankings as the key indicator of a good recruiting class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 well actually that didnt happen. what is percieved as the two best recruits in the area, price and grimes, both went elsewhere. so we didnt put a fence up around anything. one could say we got the leftovers. the day we take the best and hand the leftovers to missouri or purdue is the day your point will be well taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 If SLU wants to achieve true long-term success (i.e., being a regular top 25 team), then it will need to land top 100 recruits with regularity. No regular top 25 programs get by without doing so (even Xavier and Gonzaga land top 100 recruits with regularity these days). In order to get to that level, however, SLU needs to find away to develop some very good teams without landing blue chippers. We will be off to a good start if we sign a smart and athletic player who was ranked in the top 75 pre-injury (Polk), a player who would probably be in the top 100 had he participated in the high profile events this summer (Lidell), and two smart, well-rounded, and hardworking players. Plus, local talent builds local interest. The other important thing is to recruit players who fit a program's needs and system. Each of these players appears to fit both. I don't remember what I said in my earlier posts; however, if I implied that the only path to success is through blue chip recruits, then I take back my earlier comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikan Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Is Price really a better player than Liddell? Based upon what I have heard and read I thought Liddell was the better player. You have obviously seen them both several times--what is your opinion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikan Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 I agree wholeheartedly with your comments--we will need some top 100 talent--but you can have top 100 talent that is not ranked that way by the so called gurus. Also, with the international players they might be very good but they will never be ranked in the US unless they play here in high school or at the camps. So far I trust Brad to bring in players who have talent and who fit the profile of what he is looking for in a hard nosed team player. It will be interesting to see who blossoms out of these new players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetorch Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Lidell is better. Hands down, better ballhandler, better defender, better distributor. Price may have him on outside shooting but they are both pretty good. Liddell has fallen off the radar but Bob Gibbons said he was top 50 caliber in 04 class, Price is about 75. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 If Lisch never plays summer ball, he may never be ranked in the top 100. It's going to be tough for Kyle Kirk to get in the top 100 now that he'll be playing for the Springfield Heat rather than the St. Louis Eagles. But they are definitely top 100 players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Those type of players--who fly a little under the radar--are the perfect type of players for Brad to recruit until he becomes a little more established. Once the shovel is in the ground for the new arena and the conference shake-up is settled, SLU should be an easier program to sell to recruits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Law Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Liddell fell off the radar because he didn't play summer ball. That's where rankings are set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 If you are interested in player rankings, then check out http://home.nc.rr.com/rsci/ This site compiles the most well-known recruiting rankings. The only local player ranked in the top 100 on their most recent ranking is Kalen Grimes, who is 55. I have posted this before, but the only SLU player who has cracked the top 100 is Marque Perry, who was ranked 89th in 1999. (The first year of the site was 1998.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schasz Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 If we can add Liddell and Shaw then I believe we would have a nice recruiting class, and certainly something to build future recruiting classes. So far, I have been pretty impressed with Coach Soderberg's ability to analyze talent. He has a system, and I like the way he has gone about his business getting kids that can play in that system. I believe success for our program could be right around the corner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 liddell is the better player. just as shaw is better than grimes imo. but the point is that slu didnt seal the borders as far as the world knows. the impression is that the best left for other schools and we got the leftovers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 while i believe shaw and liddell are the better players, the fact is that price is a far superior athlete and grimes is a physical specimen deluxe. thus that potential maybe enters into the ratings and perceptions by the national rankings folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Ranking Marque 89th ... tells you how little these rankings mean in assessing a recruits potential. If they had to go back and rerank that class based upon college results... Marque would obviously be much higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 On the other hand, Marque has been the best Billiken since 1998 and the only Billiken to be ranked since 1998. From that perspective, the rankings accurately reflect the relative value of our recruits over the last five years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p diddy Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 word on the street is that kyle kirk will still play for the eagles during the summer. bad boyz for life 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.