Recruits List

[kshoe]

I surely never called Ian a recruiting miss. Not sure where that came from and I seem to remember a Cusumano features on Ian that basically said that Ian was very talented big-man and if he had been a U.S. player SLU probably wouldn't have been able to get him because he would have gone to a "big-time" program. I know I never questioned Brad's recruitment there.

I don't question Brad's recruitment of AK or HD because they were badly needed but for us to just blindly believe that these two big-men who went unsigned in the fall session are going to be studs for us in the future...well I just have my doubts. Of course one of them could be a diamond in the rough but its far more likely that they are role players at best.

"Or it could mean that 5-6 players are slightly more productive offensively, turning last year's 3 point losses into 3 point victories."

Your right, Tommie improving (or lack thereof) will not be a major determinant to this years success (or lack thereof). Right.

"We don't even know how productive our starting 5 will be this year and you're already putting Tommie in the NBA dismissing the productivity of an imagined starting five a year from now?"

I'm conceeding to the rose colored glasses team that even if everything goes great this year it likely won't be so great in the future without Ian and potentially without Tommie. Lisch can't do it all.

Recruiting is not an exact science but typically players in the top 25 have more success than the top 100 guys who have more success than the top 300 guys and so on. Yes, we can all point out those examples where players surprise or disapoint but when you are consistently recruiting players during the spring as we have the last two years it is a high likelihood that those players will underachieve the performance of schools like Xavier, Dayton and St. Joes that sign recruits in the fall.

[tseugnekillib]

is a top 25 recruit that signs in the Fall better than a top 25 player that signs in the Spring?

is a top 100 recruit that signs in the Fall better than a top 100 player that signs in the Spring?

is a top 200 recruit that signs in the Fall better than a top 200 player that signs in the Spring?

is a totally unknown juco that signs in the Fall better than a virtually unknown juco that signs in the Spring?

[3star_recruit]

>I surely never called Ian a recruiting miss. Not sure where

>that came from and I seem to remember a Cusumano features on

>Ian that basically said that Ian was very talented big-man

>and if he had been a U.S. player SLU probably wouldn't have

>been able to get him because he would have gone to a

>"big-time" program. I know I never questioned Brad's

>recruitment there.

You didn't question the recruitment of a player who averaged 2 ppg as a freshman but you think "it's far more likely" that two kids who've yet to play a season of college ball or undergo a college training program will be "role players at best" during their careers? Based on what?

>

>Your right, Tommie improving (or lack thereof) will not be a

>major determinant to this years success (or lack thereof).

>Right.

Of course I expect Tommie to improve, I just don't think it "stands to reason that Tommie will have improved his game a bunch" if we compile an NCAA worthy win total. Slight improvement by multiple players could accomplish the same thing.

>I'm conceeding to the rose colored glasses team that even if

>everything goes great this year it likely won't be so great

>in the future without Ian and potentially without Tommie.

>Lisch can't do it all.

And I'm conceding to the sky is falling crowd that their premature placement of Tommie into the NBA is based on him suddenly turning into Larry Hughes when his floor game is more like Sammy Mejia.

>Recruiting is not an exact science but typically players in

>the top 25 have more success than the top 100 guys who have

>more success than the top 300 guys and so on. Yes, we can

>all point out those examples where players surprise or

>disapoint but when you are consistently recruiting players

>during the spring as we have the last two years it is a high

>likelihood that those players will underachieve the

>performance of schools like Xavier, Dayton and St. Joes that

>sign recruits in the fall.

If we make the NCAA tournament I'd be kinda surprised if we still had trouble signing recruits in the fall. I guess we'll see.

[kshoe]

in the spring. I'd wajor that about 80-90% of those two categories are gone by the spring and the 10-20% that remain are going to be extra heavily recruited by the big boys trying to fill out their rosters.

A perfect example is Stemmler who was recruited by Indiana only in the spring as they were looking to pick up the "best of the remaining" power forwards out there.

[kshoe]

"You didn't question the recruitment of a player who averaged 2 ppg as a freshman but you think "it's far more likely" that two kids who've yet to play a season of college ball or undergo a college training program will be "role players at best" during their careers? Based on what? "

Not sure how many times I need to say it but based on the fact that nobody else wanted them. It is understandable for a foreigner that late in the process decides he wants to play in the U.S. to fall into your lap but its highly unlikely that two U.S. kids with size will be left un-recruited by BCS caliber schools unless there are significant questions about their games.

Why don't you tell me why you have such confidence that these two will be "the next Ian." I'm sure you have a good reason for such a belief other than "lightening can strike twice".

[tseugnekillib]

It's getting past my bedtime, but I'll try this one more time.

is a Top 350 recruit signed in the Fall better than a Top 350 recruit sign in the Spring?

if SMS had signed Bruce Ahearn in the Spring, would he have been a better recruit if he would have been signed in the Fall?

if you sign a really good player that fills a positional need....does it really matter what month he commits or what month he signs?

[kshoe]

Let me try this again...where are you going to find top 25, top 100 or top 350 players in the Spring? All the good ones are already gone! Blake Ahearn doesn't exist in the spring because he's too good to not get an offer from a MVC type school in the fall. The few that do fall through the cracks are going to be highly coveted not just by SLU but by the BCS big-boys.

IF SLU doesn't have any committments this fall I just don't see how you guys can all say "Its OK, Brad will pull a rabbit out of the hat in the spring and sign some quality players" when in reality all the quality players are already spoken for. It really is time to take of the rose-colored glasses, folks in regards to last years and this years potential recruiting classes.

[3star_recruit]

Why don't you tell me why you have such confidence that these two will be "the next Ian."

That such a thing is required is your assertion, not mine. If the team simply improves overall to pick up the slack, there won't be any need for these two to be "the next Ian".

I don't recall any Musketeer becoming the next David West but somehow they managed to keep on winning the year after he left. As did NC State after Julius Hodges left. And so on. If we're interested in being a winning program, the players already on the team have to step up, year after year.

[3star_recruit]

>Let me try this again...where are you going to find top 25,

>top 100 or top 350 players in the Spring? All the good ones

>are already gone!

No, they're not.

Chris Lowe, the leading assist man in the A10 as a freshman, was signed in the spring by UMass.

Dustin Salisbery, who scored double digits as a sophomore at Temple, signed in the spring.

Marcus Stout, who has averaged over 13 ppg through his first two seasons at Fordham, was signed in the spring.

And that's just the performances by underclassmen on three teams in the A-10.

[Risky1]

He has graduated every one of his players. It makes me proud that every player as the ability to balance their lives in order to give their best in the class room and on the court. SLU players have a future ahead of them. Can you say that about Missouri? Or Memphis? Or Kentucky? Or even Kansas or Indiana? Or any Huggins team? Tat is what Brad has done well so far!

[TheRaginCajun]

Risky, I agree with that statement and sometimes I think I get too caught up in the wins and losses to realize that these players may not have left SLU with a ton of oncourt success, but they are leaving with something much more valuable and thats a diploma. I am proud of the fact that all of Brad's players have graduated, but now I am ready for some wins and this better be the year, I dont how much more I can take.

[slufanskip]

Lets start at the top with the easy stuff. He has a team that many think will make the NCAA tourney and fight for the A10 title.

SLU has had 4 teams make the NCAA tourney over the last 40 years. I understand we haven't made it yet and it isn't a sure thing, but we have made the NIT's 2 out of 4 ... which is probably a percentage at least equal to the past 40 years ... and I can't imagine anyone will say we don't have a team on the upswing.

Of course UB gets no credit for these guys ... but we had 2 1st team rookie A10 performers and the A10 rookie of the year, along with a Jr all A10 player. We have 2 players who mentioned as NBA posibilities, along with another player that may go down as one of the best Billikens ever.

We came into this year needing a shooter and a couple of PF's, he filled both needs. Now of course I realize AK and HD will never be more than role players due to the fact they signed late, so using the same analysis DM will be a star ... he signed pretty early.

Again ... I think very few people are saying UB is perfect. What I am saying and what I thi nk most are saying is that the team seems to be on an upswing ... lets let it play out

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman

[brianstl]

3 Star, it doesn't matter how many examples you give people they will just ignore or discount them. They think they have all the answers and Brad is not one of them. They state that no top 50 program would have put up with only one fall signing, losing Stremler, and a couple spring signings. Then you point out that Marquette had only one fall signing, lost out on Stremler, and had three spring signings. They just ignore it. They complain about not offering marginal (at best) players that sign with SEMO and Western IL. Yet, they say we should go after every top 50 player in the country and expect to get them. Then they complain about holding a spot for a local top 50 player, because it cost you a much lower rated player. They talk out of both sides of their mouths. They will contradict their own points in the same thread, if they think it helps their argument. It is just a complete joke.

[billiken_roy]

i am still waiting for one of the brad naysayers to explain how it is possible that we apparently have a pretty good team, a team that compares to the claggett highmark teams, the bonner teams, the hughes team and the love team and we have a coach that cant recruit or evaluate talent. that to me is just mind boggling. the fact that our anti-brad folks have yet to explain. all we are getting now is a prediction of gloom after ian and tommie are gone.

[NashvilleBilliken]

Well said, Skip. I'm labeled as one of the "kool-aid" drinkers, but in no way, shape, or form do I believe Brad has been perfect, nor do I think he should be given a free pass. But given our history and where the team is today, I think Brad is the right person for the job. I believe he is BUILDING something. I'm not going to argue that Huggy could come in here and get us a top recruiting class. But, I think that comes at the expense at other things I value at SLU. I think too many people are wooed by the Carmelo's of the world. These are the same people who hate the NBA because of an apparent lack of basketball skills. Things that are developed over four years. A good team, IMO, is a one where the juniors and seniors get the bulk of the minutes and freshman develop. That's why I don't place much emphasis on recruiting...when somebody signs or where they are ranked. I believe Brad can DEVELOP.

I take the example of Tommie. Does everybody remember when the Great Romar proclaimed that it was too late in Floyd McClain's career to rework his shot (after freshman year)? Well, Brad is so confident in his ability to coach that he completely broke down the best player on our team and taught him the right stuff. Now, as reported, he has become a shooter. I believe Luke, Danny, and DP are going to emerge this year. I believe Bryce will become a very capable center...one that will work well with a gaurd oriented team. And I believe that by the end of this year, those who want Brad fired will be singing a different tune.

[slufanskip]

We are not a top 50 program ... so we should be looking at what the teams did that were not top 50, but have become top 50 on a consistent basis. Teams that are in our type of league ... not the teams that are top 50. Teams that already are and have been consistent top 50 have a huge recruiting advantage over us and others like us. It can be done and has been done, but it isn't as easy as some make it seem. For example just offer the 3 pg's you want and tell them the 1st to commit gets the scholly. That's laughable, but you can't argue it, because the people that have decided that UB sucks ... don't seem to have any objectivity. I bet there are alot of recruiters that wish it was that easy.

You know what else is funny ... we seem to have plenty of time to consider what happens if we flop this year, even though most think we won't ... why don't we ever discuss what to do about UB if he makes the tourney ... what happens if he wins a game ... how about 2.

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman

[kshoe]

I'm sure you "randomly" selected those teams when deciding when random stats "prove" that there are still good players available in the spring.

Of course you can find isolated examples of players that have had success as Spring recruits (remember I said 80-90% of the good ones were gone so by definition 10-20% are still left) but finding random examples that fit into your viewpoint is ignoring that fact that most of the good ones are already gone.

So I randomly chose a website through google and with more than a month to go before the signing period looked at the top 100 list. 24 players remain uncommitted and 76 already know where they are going. That is 76% with more than a month to go. If I check back after the signing period that % will probably be more like 90%.

http://scout.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=9&c=4&pi...&cfg=bb&yr=2007

The definition of insanity it to continue the same experiment and expect a different result. How many times are you guys going to believe that if we don't sign anybody in the fall its ok because we are going to sign a blue-chipper in the spring and everything will be fine. Meanwhile, we end up signing guys like VN and missing on guys like LS because of the increased attnetion for the few left that can actually play. Its insane.

[billiken_roy]

first, it is yet to be seen that stemler is more than newborne. let's let that one play out. if stemler plays pf in the big ten it wont be pretty imo.

second, while i agree getting blue chip players is awesome. talent makes any coaches job easier. conversely there is a lot to be said about making sure the pieces fit together as well. this current team is about as neat of a puzzle as we have seen in a long time.

i am with skip, why are we talking about when we will fail when most seem to believe just the opposite is about to happen. if success is at the doorstep and coach soderberg has demonstrated he is not a shortcut kind of guy and is all about the long range plan, why cant we let this all play out?

btw, kshoe, you still havent explained how it is possible we have gotten to this point if coach soderberg is a bad recruiter and a bad talent evaluator. please help us all understand how it is possible we have one of the strongest rosters that the billikens have ever had with a coach that has those two apparent weaknesses.

[brianstl]

I think anybody that has been following the program for a long period of time knows you have to be pantient.

The first big mistake was the Grawer firing. Some fans got a little jumpy after one year after he had the best recruiting class SLU has ever had.

They bring in Spoon, who after Grawers kids graduate, decides he doesn't want to work at recruiting any longer. We get lucky landing Larry, because Spoon doesn't have to leave town to get him. Those early teams would have ended up dancing with Grawer as coach and would have advance further. They would have kept Winfield and K. Grawer. One went on to start and the other the first guy off the bench for teams that went further in the tournament. Grawer would have also kept a pipeline open to the city public and minority public county high schools. That hire didn't do a damn thing to help the program, unless you are a booster that sells pasta.

They then hire Romar, who I think is a great coach and recruiter. The problem with him is this job was a stepping stone for him. You can keep hiring guys like him but you are willing to keep on rebuilding every five our six years.

If you are looking to build for the long term Brad is your guy right now. You need somebody that wants to stay here for a while.

Compare his start to Martelli's start. With the exception of the first and second year when he had someone else's players it took him five years to get it rolling.

http://graphics.fansonly.com/photos/school...rtelliBio07.pdf

[Billiken Rich]

That's how it looked to this, very, very unconnected, outside observer. Grawer appeared (to me) to have lost control and appeared (to me) to need to go.

Charlie and ESPECIALLY Romar weren't the best choices in retrospect.

I'm with Brad to this point.

[brianstl]

He knew he was gone. The team knew he was gone. He knew Yow and certain boosters wanted his head. Yow wanted to bring in a coach that she thought would cement her resume for the next level. Some boosters didn't like the fact that he wasn't the best spokesmen for their products. He had to win now and the team was built for it. So he had to take some chances on players that had some talent to go along with some major problems.

I really do enjoy the fact that we can now sit here and argue about what needs to be done for this to be a top 50 program. If it wasn't for Grawer this would now be a division 3 program. I don't know how many people really know how close the school was to dropping all atheletics to D-3.

[billiken_roy]

while i am on record of totally agreeing with a lot of what you are saying, i will say that spoon was an upgrade on grawer.

spoon is one of the best game coaches i ever saw and obviously he was also very good at developing talent.

it is a shame he lost his zeal for recruiting. and agreed, it led to his downfall.

i am also on record for supporting romar. i think he left for one of the two jobs (the other being ucla) he would have left slu for. had we reached a higher level before washington was open, who knows if that would have changed or not.

i have long preached we need to get out of this starting over every 4-5 years rut. and i agree brad soderberg is the long term guy that can give this program stability. somewhere though he has to win over the naysayers that complain he cant recruit or evaluate talent. that will only be accomplished by doing something in march that hasnt been done since easy ed or at least larry hughes. when that happens, maybe he shuts up the negative so called fans and is allowed to continue his quest.

[Billiken Rich]

I'm not attacking Grawer. I'm asking a question. If you'd care to comment on your "pasta" innuendo I'd be interested in that too.

Truth be told Grawer always looked wrung out during the season. He looked like an aids patient the year he was fired. I find it hard to believe though that the pressure on him to win was any different than any other coach. Please enlighten me. I've never heard this before.

[3star_recruit]

"So I randomly chose a website through google and with more than a month to go before the signing period looked at the top 100 list. 24 players remain uncommitted and 76 already know where they are going. That is 76% with more than a month to go."

Every player but one either signed with (A) a team in a BCS conference or ( a top 25 program. How many players have committed out of the Top 100 isn't really germaine to a discussion of A-10 recruiting. That's not the pool we're drawing from.

[kshoe]

since you insist on making me out as a Brad hater (rather than somebody that just hates the way our recruiting went last year and is going this year but isn't willing to make excuses for it) I'll play along and give you the argument for how we've gotten here.

1) The recruitment of Ian was luck. Brad has said himself he just fell in our laps and he has been surprised how it all worked out. Where would this team be without Ian?

2) We haven't won squat yet. You keep talking about this team like is 93-95 again. We all hope it is but it hasn't happened yet. An injury to any of the big three and you can kiss the dance goodbye. Lets save the pats on the back for Brad until we actually make the dance instead of 1 projection from an internet site. As I told skip, and he pretty much agreed, us in the dance is a 50/50 propostion so until that happens lets quit the talk of "greatest Billiken team since..."

3) How much better would this team be if the now obvious recruiting mistakes hadn't been made on guys like Ahearn, Shaw, Stemmler etc. This program could be so much better if those guys were in the fold. SLU's success will always be largely beholden to the local talent in the area. all of the great past teams have thrived on this talent. While Brad has been commended for landing KL and TL his misses on the three named above should not be overlooked.

In short, we may be good enough for the dance next year but we have blown the opportunity to have a team that is a "lock" for the dance or that can be expected to perform as well after Ian graduates.