• 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!

ACC Sports Journal tackles [Redacted]

Kent said:
Have you not read posts on the DS forum where DD and others say that players claiming a WFU offer on Scout and elsewhere do not actually have one? Do you seriously believe that the lists of offers for players (generally, not just ours) on Scout and elsewhere are completely accurate? If so, then you don't know how recruiting and sports journalism work. When some kid says he has an offer from XYZ, there is often no way to verify that. I'm amazed that you are getting all worked up over what are, essentially, well-known facts.

Let me simplify it for you. I am not saying these kids didn't have offers from Marshall, etc. and I'm not saying they weren't getting letters and calls from bigger programs. What I am saying, and try to stay with me here, is that calls and letters do not always equate to offers.

And yes, these guys could have received better offers had they waited. I just think the odds are better signing players that are already on the radar of the sort of schools we want to be competitive with.
Click to expand...

And I will simplify it for you.

Anthony Fields triumphantly posted on his twitter that he had received five offers from high majors. The likely schools are, along with us, Seton Hall, Oklahoma, Missouri and Penn State.

Daniel Green had offers from California, Marquette, Virginia Tech and Clemson. This has been confirmed by a number of articles, as well as his father.

Aaron Rountree's offer from Colorado was pretty much universally reported, even by scout (which is where it appears that Oettinger took his offer lists from).

If you want to assume they are all lying, then that's up to you. I don't know why you would though.
 
Or the lack of improvement during the season coudl stem from the fact that it often takes longer than 3-4 months for players lacking requisite fundamental skills to attain them. We'll have a better sense of where we are headed after our players have a full offseason in the weight room and working on building their skillset as they've been instructed.
 
Do you really believe that players at the ACC scholarship level don't have basic basketball skills learned in AAU ball, summer camps, high school. It is not rocket science but understanding how to blend skills into a team vision is where a true coach comes in. Wake forest looked as bad after 30 games as in their first 10--something is not right here!
 
Every year that goes by, more and more technology comes out. So, the ability to view, critique, communicate and otherwise stay in touch with regards to college athletics and recruiting is greatly increasing. The ability for a very good player to remain anonymous and under the radar is very difficult now (even compared to 5 years ago). This is even more true in basketball, where "recruiting gurus" have to evaluate a much smaller pool than compared to football (albeit, it is still quite large). While some exceptions do exist, if a player is going to be a contributing member of a high-level NCAA program, he is known through his high school and AAU play (and his ranking is generally going to be accurate).

Players do develop (or cease continuing to develop) and rankings must be changed. However, to believe that our 2* is going to become a 4* over the course of one summer/season is probably a bit too much to expect. The reality is that a 2* is likely a 2*. For every one outlier to their recruiting analysis, the gurus get most of them right.
 
Deacon4Life said:
Do you really believe that players at the ACC scholarship level don't have basic basketball skills learned in AAU ball, summer camps, high school. It is not rocket science but understanding how to blend skills into a team vision is where a true coach comes in. Wake forest looked as bad after 30 games as in their first 10--something is not right here!
Click to expand...

If you include dribbling, then yes.
 
IslandDeac said:
Every year that goes by, more and more technology comes out. So, the ability to view, critique, communicate and otherwise stay in touch with regards to college athletics and recruiting is greatly increasing. The ability for a very good player to remain anonymous and under the radar is very difficult now (even compared to 5 years ago). This is even more true in basketball, where "recruiting gurus" have to evaluate a much smaller pool than compared to football (albeit, it is still quite large). While some exceptions do exist, if a player is going to be a contributing member of a high-level NCAA program, he is known through his high school and AAU play (and his ranking is generally going to be accurate).

Players do develop (or cease continuing to develop) and rankings must be changed. However, to believe that our 2* is going to become a 4* over the course of one summer/season is probably a bit too much to expect. The reality is that a 2* is likely a 2*. For every one outlier to their recruiting analysis, the gurus get most of them right.
Click to expand...

This sounds good in theory, but I don't think it's accurate. Technology has made it easier for everyone to follow along -- and that means the rise of blogs like BSD. That's actually hurt the recruiting sites because they've had to cut back on staff.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
This sounds good in theory, but I don't think it's accurate. Technology has made it easier for everyone to follow along -- and that means the rise of blogs like BSD. That's actually hurt the recruiting sites because they've had to cut back on staff.
Click to expand...

But you increase the ability of people to get their opinions out there. So, while you do increase the ability of non-qualified people to post bad info, you also get a lot more opinions from people who know basketball and are able to evaluate the players.
 
This may just be me, but I respect Coach [Redacted]'s opinion on getting the right type of players for his system and in turn at Wake Forest. Until it is proven to me otherwise, I don't care what stars the players get.
 
The question for me is can we get back to the top 4 or so in the conference. Right now we don't have the post players we need to make a move in 2011 or 2012.
 
deaclite said:
The question for me is can we get back to the top 4 or so in the conference. Right now we don't have the post players we need to make a move in 2011 or 2012.
Click to expand...

Post players are certainly the biggest problem right now for us. Until we get a big guy that can actually rebound, we will continue to flounder. That is why getting Lekan or Andre Washington is so important.

It is also important that Ty and Carson continue to hit the weight room and get better this off-season. It is evident from both of their Twitter accounts that they are hitting the weight room at every chance they get. That is exactly what we need from them.
 
mebanedeac said:
Personally I think we did improve...even considerably. However, when it did not translate into wins, I think some of the players lost hope and essentially gave up. But there was a stretch in which we played much better basketball; however, it did not last. We played UNC and Duke better than anyone would have expected. Plus the first half of our 2nd Fla. State game showed substantial improvement (if I recall correctly Hamilton said that our offensive scheme caused them considerable problems for the 1st half). However for whatever reason, we could not play 2 strong halves and for some reason we gave up toward the end. Thus, in the end we appeared not to have improved; but again for a time we were much better on both ends of the court. Now, it could be argued that all of that was the coach's fault. There a possibility, however, that it is more on the players than the coach.

I doubt that any of us as fans actually know. So we either blame the coach and quit on him. Or, we sit on our fears and allow him space to recruit and to coach and to do the best he can for another season.
Click to expand...

I saw improvement in JT, Travis, and Ty in spurts but that's about it. Turnovers decreased later in the year, and rebounding picked up a bit. I could see schemes developing in the halfcourt, but the weakness in the post negated most of that. Our tall players were weak and ineffective, our shooters didn't shoot enough (G$) or well(everyone else), and we had no quickness anywhere.

Bz tried going to the matchup zone, tried the 1-2-1-1 press, tried to drive the ball to the goal in the absence of post play, but nothing worked. I can't blame him for that. The team was too inexperienced and physically undeveloped to compete.

He may have been a questionable hire, be lousy at PR, and be a weak recruiter, but to say he didn't coach well from the bench is incorrect. IMHO, he did the best he could with the hand he was dealt.
 
IslandDeac said:
But you increase the ability of people to get their opinions out there. So, while you do increase the ability of non-qualified people to post bad info, you also get a lot more opinions from people who know basketball and are able to evaluate the players.
Click to expand...

Right, but the actual recruiting sites aren't nearly as good as they were a few years ago when they actually had more manpower.
 
27, you are asking some good questions over at the other place. I look forward to getting your report from Raleigh on Sat.'s action.
 
deaclite said:
27, you are asking some good questions over at the other place. I look forward to getting your report from Raleigh on Sat.'s action.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm looking forward to it as well. One of the best times of the year for BSD and for viewing some of the best players in the state, as well as the country.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
And I will simplify it for you.

Anthony Fields triumphantly posted on his twitter that he had received five offers from high majors. The likely schools are, along with us, Seton Hall, Oklahoma, Missouri and Penn State.

Daniel Green had offers from California, Marquette, Virginia Tech and Clemson. This has been confirmed by a number of articles, as well as his father.

Aaron Rountree's offer from Colorado was pretty much universally reported, even by scout (which is where it appears that Oettinger took his offer lists from).

If you want to assume they are all lying, then that's up to you. I don't know why you would though.
Click to expand...

Can you post some links? Thanks!
 
Deacsfan27 said:
This may just be me, but I respect Coach [Redacted]'s opinion on getting the right type of players for his system and in turn at Wake Forest. Until it is proven to me otherwise, I don't care what stars the players get.
Click to expand...

Please tell me what are the "right type of players" for his system and how long are you willing to give him to implement it? What do the players he's bringing in have that the players this year were so lacking in? What makes the new recruits the right kinds of players for his system? And have you been able to figure out what exactly is this system is that he will be implementing? If you can't clearly explain to me exactly what his system is how do you know he's bringing in the right kinds of players for it? I know he's supposed to be a great x's and o's coach (that's what we heard ad nauseum before the season and this article mentions he's a "basketball geek") but with a few exceptions I saw little sign of his brilliance this season. Anyway, I hope he's able to knock our socks off with his system, whatever it is, next season. But I'm skeptical. After this season I see little room for optimism.
 
"Fields said Thursday he chose Wake Forest over offers from Oklahoma, Wright State and Seton Hall, and that Missouri, Boston College and Wichita State had showed great interest as well."

So only add Oklahoma to the Poop Sheet's list. Missou and BC hadn't offered yet.
 
BTW, there is nothing about this article on NKsports. I don't know if it is an oversight or if they deleted any thread about it. Either way, it is kinda funny.:rulz:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top