• 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!

CMM and Rountree now 4 star, top 100 on Scout

Well, I think the hope is that we have some success and Bzzz can up his recruiting stature.
 
buckets said:
But don't tell me this class is exactly what we need when we are looking at two more years of all giant question marks in the frontcourt.

I am impressed and happy with Roundtree and especially CMM.
Click to expand...

DUDE IT'S ROUNTREE...not RounDtree.

Also, unless we are going to get the #1 center in the class (and even then), big guys are always a HUGE question mark.
 
Sorry for the typo... all I know is that it looks like we have two more years at least of layup lines against our defense unless something drastically changes.
 
If Tabb is back (6'8, 240), pluis Green, Carson, Washington should be decent interior D.
 
In fairness to Coach [Redacted], I glady, and humbly eat my words about the lower star recruiting. Congrats Coach and staff on your hard work, and congrats to the players who are obviously continuing to work hard to develop their skills. I'm sure if they keep working hard we'll all be proud and happy at the results!
 
buckets said:
Sorry for the typo... all I know is that it looks like we have two more years at least of layup lines against our defense unless something drastically changes.
Click to expand...

No 2012 center could help us next year; that much is obvious.

How many 2012 centers would significantly shore up our defense in 2012 (i.e their freshman year)? I'm genuinely asking, looking for a number. How many centers in the 2012 class do you feel would make a significant impact as a freshman?
 
Stormz- 6 of the Top 7 players in 2012 on Scout are centers. There are 12 centers in the Top 45.

There are close to twenty in the Top 100.

2012 is an odd year. There are a ton of really good big men.
 
RJKarl said:
Stormz- 6 of the Top 7 players in 2012 on Scout are centers. There are 12 centers in the Top 45.

There are close to twenty in the Top 100.

2012 is an odd year. There are a ton of really good big men.
Click to expand...

I see how many are in the top 100. That is not what I am asking though.

What I want to know (specifically from buckets) is how many 2012 centers he expects to be a major contributor as freshmen.

Carson was the #9 center according to scout for his year and made little impact (came off the bench, played less than half of available minutes, only used ~15% of possessions while on the court, and did so inefficiently. He did not make a major impact on defense when he was on the court).

#8 center James Johnson redshirted iirc.
#6 center Meyers Leonard had little impact on Illinois.
#5 center Adreian Payne had little impact on Michigan St.
#4 center Fab Melo had little impact on Syracuse.

So even if you count Kanter (he almost definitely would have had a major impact) the list is very short. Kanter, Sullinger, Jones, Smith, and maybe a couple of others I am forgetting.

The point is that freshman bigs should almost never be expected to make a significant impact. The reason we are going to get hammered inside next year and probably in 2012 is because of the 2008 and 2009 classes, which combined to produce 0 good bigs who remained on the team for four years.
 
PhDeac said:
Offering 2* players who move up to a 4* after verballing means that those of us who thought we were going to focus on sleepers were dead on. The fear was that instead of waiting for players to prove themselves over the summer, we were going to roll the dice on getting them early with hopes that they were actually better than that.

That's what happened.

It also means those 2* players woke up. That's a good thing, but that strategy long-term isn't going to lead to consistent results on the court.

The Grobe comparison is a positive as long as those sleepers are like Aaron Curry. And even the sleepers like Curry and Arnoux were balanced with highly rated recruits (for Wake football) players like Phonz and Jeremy Thompson that we had to win some recruiting battles for.

The Grobe comparison is also a negative considering how people have been just blaming the talent for the recent dropoff. We've had a lot of 2* sleepers who were only 2* players for good reason.
Click to expand...

yeah, i mean we were on johnson and teague early and look how that worked out
 
I'm not BuzzIn or BuzzOut, but recruiting 2-star talent that turn in to 4-stars after committing is not the same as recruiting 4-5 stars that the top programs are after from Day 1.
 
right. we were on teague and johnson before they "blew up"
 
Great news. I agree with RJ that the best thing that could happen for next season is if Tabb comes back and contributes. He is a space-eater if nothing else.
 
Stormz, 2012 is a very, very strong year for big men.
 
I think that Milhouse is dead on. The Wake recruiting strategy has always been to get to guys first and then hope they blow up. Some became four stars immediately while others took some time. We all gave Skip the benefit of the doubt because he had a solid track record. Bz has/had yet to earn that same benefit but if the next two classes continue to rise like that, I'll be happy to trust in his eye for talent
 
DownEastDeac said:
I'm not BuzzIn or BuzzOut, but recruiting 2-star talent that turn in to 4-stars after committing is not the same as recruiting 4-5 stars that the top programs are after from Day 1.
Click to expand...

Why does it matter? I mean obviously I want Bzz to be able to go toe to toe with the big boys, but at the end of the day, we have verbals from two players ranked higher than Jank. You'd rather have Jank because the big boys were on him early too? You'd be more impressed with Bzz if he beat out BCS programs for him?

I don't care if we beat people to the punch and sign a Top 75 kid or we were on him from day 1 with everyone else and beat them out. We've had just as much success, if not more, recruiting sleepers who turn into legit players than grabbing 4* kids early who committed to us over big programs.
 
DownEastDeac said:
I'm not BuzzIn or BuzzOut, but recruiting 2-star talent that turn in to 4-stars after committing is not the same as recruiting 4-5 stars that the top programs are after from Day 1.
Click to expand...

It's also not the same as recruiting guys that were rated 2-stars at one point, raised the level of their games, and then were recruited prior to their star-rating being updated. It's not like they suddenly became much better players today when their rankings were updated. Today just validated the fact that they had raised their level of play.
 
I am hoping that Washington coming in a year older than most freshman, combined with the fact he seems to be moving up right now, anyway, will allow him to be more ready to contribute immediately. I think him reclass-ing and having that extra year of physical development is going to be big.
 
The Stig said:
I think that Milhouse is dead on. The Wake recruiting strategy has always been to get to guys first and then hope they blow up. Some became four stars immediately while others took some time. We all gave Skip the benefit of the doubt because he had a solid track record. Bz has/had yet to earn that same benefit but if the next two classes continue to rise like that, I'll be happy to trust in his eye for talent
Click to expand...

I'm a Buzz-inner, but I continue to find it laughable that these recruiting opines concentrate solely on Bzd and our recruit's rankings.

The one constant is Jeff Battle, so any similarities between a Johnson/Teague and a Miller-hyphen and Rountree should at least include him in the conversation.

I also think PHDeac implied that these kids suddenly woke up and that it is a role of the dice that they will wake up. I think PH is intuiting up the wrong tree. Most often, it has nothing to do with the player "waking up" or "playing better." It is about exposure, period. James Johnson didn't suddenly wake up a stud. He traveled from Cody Wyoming or wherever to Chicago for a Nike weekend and blew everyone away.

So, I would argue that Battle and team do their homework and scout out basketball talent outside the big tourney weekends that many programs use to initiate contact with talent. There is a big difference.
 
Coaches look at tons of players, and they offer the ones they think are good. I really do think it's that simple. They don't pay much attention to what the recruiting analysts think are good at the time, and they don't offer players that aren't currently good but they hope will develop.
 
jaybone said:
I'm a Buzz-inner, but I continue to find it laughable that these recruiting opines concentrate solely on Bzd and our recruit's rankings.

The one constant is Jeff Battle, so any similarities between a Johnson/Teague and a Miller-hyphen and Rountree should at least include him in the conversation.

So, I would argue that Battle and team do their homework and scout out basketball talent outside the big tourney weekends that many programs use to initiate contact with talent. There is a big difference.
Click to expand...

*Not singling you out with this one* We can claim that Dino is a great recruiter despite not being the lead guy for any of our major acquisitions (all contributed to Kelsey or Battle) but we have to acknowledge that Bz sucks at recruiting because Battle is the one who got these guys. I feel like Bz has to do a lot to prove that he's even a decent head coach but the fact that, assuming you are right and this is 100% Battle, he is listening to and offering the guys that the assistants want is a good step.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top