• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

BBall Recruiting Thread 2k16- SJM, Washington, Childress & Mitchell sign NLIs; 2017?

I personally still think we land Giles, but I admit I don't know how it would be possible that he gave a silent verbal which is already becoming quasi-public knowledge. If he wanted to keep it silent, he wouldn't have shared it, and anyone on Wake's side who did so would be jeopardizing the whole thing. Makes no sense - not that WFU basketball has made any for a long time.
 
DeacDaddy said:
I personally still think we land Giles, but I admit I don't know how it would be possible that he gave a silent verbal which is already becoming quasi-public knowledge. If he wanted to keep it silent, he wouldn't have shared it, and anyone on Wake's side who did so would be jeopardizing the whole thing. Makes no sense - not that WFU basketball has made any for a long time.
Click to expand...

532b3a77a261a.image.jpg
 
CharlotteDeac1 said:
I guess I'm just a very firm believer in the "there isn't much of a difference between a low four star and high three star" idea, and if our class was three low four stars rather than the high three stars then I assume everyone would be ecstatic.
Click to expand...

There may be a few posters who think that, though I think the board collectively had matured to the point of appreciating that rival offers are a better (if not the best) general indicator of a prospect's projected contribution, and that we can use composite numerical rankings to assign more precise values to a kid than simply "3-star vs. 4-star."
 
As we see in every instance, some posters cling to positive info and exaggerate it while others cling to any negative info and overplay it.

At the end of the day I think we all can agree that through 3 commits this has been an underwhelming class that we have to hope plays above their recruiting rankings. Add Giles and everyone will be excited at first. Then we'll have a divide again with the "yeah, but" guys vs those who are just happy we'll be somewhat relevant again.

It's all a matter of your expectations and comparison points and wanting instant turnarounds vs patience.
 
Just tack on Giles and a center. Problem solved. Justifies every move so far. Otherwise of course this is a disappointing class on paper - but if Manning can pull a kid like Dinos out of thin air who knows where we'll end up. I'm surprised scratching together what he could when he arrived and then winning some nice recruits last year hasn't earned him a little more good will around here. I guess the cynicism is just too high, which is understandable.
 
I don't have stats for Washington, but I followed him pretty closely when I heard Manning was so high on him over the summer. He played on Team Loaded VA with top talent, against top talent, and I saw twice in three days that he put up 20+ in games. The information came from twitter from a couple different recruiting analysts. I believe he hit 7 threes in one game but I'm not 100% sure about that. Basically, Manning saw them produce against the nation's best in the summer showcase tournaments and wanted to get them before they blew up like the other "under the radar" guys that ended up exploding.
 
KidA23 said:
There may be a few posters who think that, though I think the board collectively had matured to the point of appreciating that rival offers are a better (if not the best) general indicator of a prospect's projected contribution, and that we can use composite numerical rankings to assign more precise values to a kid than simply "3-star vs. 4-star."
Click to expand...

Yes, many of us older, more beaten-down WFU fans got tired of fighting math. It kept inviting us to the party with outliers and then kicking our asses with probability.
 
TheIshThatSaved WakeForest said:
As we see in every instance, some posters cling to positive info and exaggerate it while others cling to any negative info and overplay it.

At the end of the day I think we all can agree that through 3 commits this has been an underwhelming class that we have to hope plays above their recruiting rankings. Add Giles and everyone will be excited at first. Then we'll have a divide again with the "yeah, but" guys vs those who are just happy we'll be somewhat relevant again.

It's all a matter of your expectations and comparison points and wanting instant turnarounds vs patience.
Click to expand...

I was with you until the straw man in your last sentence. One can be excited about scoring the #1 player in the entire class while at the same time express some disappointment we weren't able to capitalize on that commitment by surrounding him with other highly ranked players capable of making a deep NCAA tournament run, particularly given that the star in question is a local kid who grew up a Wake fan and that it could be decades before another transcendent talent grows up a Wake fan in our very own backyard.
 
Making the big assumption that we actually get Giles, you can't really plan around that. If he committed in July and then does some recruiting himself and we can sell it, then yeah. But we didn't have that luxury. We spent a lot of time and resources on him and our other 4* options fell through. If we don't recruit anyone else and he goes to Duke, then we are even more screwed.
 
TheIshThatSaved WakeForest said:
It's all a matter of your expectations and comparison points and wanting instant turnarounds vs patience.
Click to expand...

If you switched our '15 class and current '16 class, I think people would be a lot happier. On paper, the '16 class is not a good one, but fairly reasonable given where we were in the wake of the Bz disaster. The '15 class is a solid, if not spectacular, one even by Odom/Skip-standards, and I think the fact that Manning was able to pull them in so quickly and without anything near a full recruiting cycle raised expectations significantly about what Manning would be able to accomplish in '16. He hasn't lived up to those expectations so far in '16, even though I'd say his recruiting on the whole has met or exceeded expectations to date.
 
OldGoldBeard said:
If you switched our '15 class and current '16 class, I think people would be a lot happier. On paper, the '16 class is not a good one, but fairly reasonable given where we were in the wake of the Bz disaster. The '15 class is a solid, if not spectacular, one even by Odom/Skip-standards, and I think the fact that Manning was able to pull them in so quickly and without anything near a full recruiting cycle raised expectations significantly about what Manning would be able to accomplish in '16. He hasn't lived up to those expectations so far in '16, even though I'd say his recruiting on the whole has met or exceeded expectations to date.
Click to expand...

Yep. The thing about a diamond in the rough class is the odds are low that half the players are actually diamonds. Take the 2014 class. One diamond in Dinos. Odds are maybe one of Childress, Washington, and Mitchell pan out. That's not how you build a program.
 
DCDeac said:
Just tack on Giles and a center. Problem solved. Justifies every move so far. Otherwise of course this is a disappointing class on paper - but if Manning can pull a kid like Dinos out of thin air who knows where we'll end up. I'm surprised scratching together what he could when he arrived and then winning some nice recruits last year hasn't earned him a little more good will around here. I guess the cynicism is just too high, which is understandable.
Click to expand...

Which problem? We may be pretty good and win some games that year but it won't be much above average for an ACC team and then he'll be gone. We are still left with a team full of 3 stars (however immature that understanding of recruiting may be). So if we recruit some 4s and 5s that stick around a while because of Harry, that would be great...but then we're just saying the same thing: We need more talented players.
 
PhDeac said:
Yep. The thing about a diamond in the rough class is the odds are low that half the players are actually diamonds. Take the 2014 class. One diamond in Dinos. Odds are maybe one of Childress, Washington, and Mitchell pan out. That's not how you build a program.
Click to expand...

You don't think Crab is a solid ACC role player? Maybe not a "diamond" but certainly seems good enough. Wilbekin too for that matter.
 
DCDeac said:
Just tack on Giles and a center. Problem solved. Justifies every move so far. Otherwise of course this is a disappointing class on paper - but if Manning can pull a kid like Dinos out of thin air who knows where we'll end up. I'm surprised scratching together what he could when he arrived and then winning some nice recruits last year hasn't earned him a little more good will around here. I guess the cynicism is just too high, which is understandable.
Click to expand...

This is probably the most objective thing that's been said in this thread in a while. Land Giles and a center and the moves made up to this point make a lot more sense. Of course we would prefer DSJ or some other stud guards over what's been brought in so far, but it looks like the game plan right now is to load up on shooters and put the rest of our eggs in the Giles basket.

But, like TITSWF, pointed out, if Giles commits to Duke and we're left standing there with our dick in our hands then we're fucked.
 
Frosty said:
This is probably the most objective thing that's been said in this thread in a while. Land Giles and a center and the moves made up to this point make a lot more sense. Of course we would prefer DSJ or some other stud guards over what's been brought in so far, but it looks like the game plan right now is to load up on shooters and put the rest of our eggs in the Giles basket.

But, like TITSWF, pointed out, if Giles commits to Duke and we're left standing there with our dick in our hands then we're fucked.
Click to expand...

Terrible plan. Don't think for a second we didn't want a better class all around. We're not getting them. Giles would be salvaging this class, but it doesn't make it a good one. Most of these guys won't be making an impact the year we (theoretically) had Giles and many of them will stick around alot longer. Are we going to need to sign the #1 recruit in every class to compliment our host of 3* shooting guards?
 
Turd Ferguson said:
Which problem? We may be pretty good and win some games that year but it won't be much above average for an ACC team and then he'll be gone. We are still left with a team full of 3 stars (however immature that understanding of recruiting may be). So if we recruit some 4s and 5s that stick around a while because of Harry, that would be great...but then we're just saying the same thing: We need more talented players.
Click to expand...

Landing Giles and a legit center would definitely make this team considerably above average in the ACC. I agree with the other part of this, though. The commitments so far don't really set us up well for 2017 onward, Giles or not. If we somehow land Giles, then it's crucial to capitalize on any potential recruiting bump that comes with that. The idea of kicking the can down the road to 2017 with the hope of landing Giles is concerning. A Giles-less class at this point will be very disappointing and not just because we lost the number 1 player in the country, but because of the long-term implications of whiffing everywhere else.
 
CharlotteDeac1 said:
I don't have stats for Washington, but I followed him pretty closely when I heard Manning was so high on him over the summer. He played on Team Loaded VA with top talent, against top talent, and I saw twice in three days that he put up 20+ in games. The information came from twitter from a couple different recruiting analysts. I believe he hit 7 threes in one game but I'm not 100% sure about that. Basically, Manning saw them produce against the nation's best in the summer showcase tournaments and wanted to get them before they blew up like the other "under the radar" guys that ended up exploding.
Click to expand...

And if he liked what he saw, that's good enough for me. Just crack up at the number of folks on this board who fret about the # of stars that a high school player has. Manning thought that Dinos, Hudson, and Wilbekin could make contributions - and was right. They will make greater contributions this upcoming season. We've got a coach who won a National Championship as a player and also had a multi-year NBA career. I trust his evaluative skills far more than the clown who was calling the shots previously - and I strongly believe he's got things moving in the right direction whether or not we get Giles. Obviously, getting Giles will move things quicker. Have a hunch we're going to add Froling to the mix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top