cthoya16
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 112
|
Post by cthoya16 on Apr 27, 2020 10:29:49 GMT -5
so tired of unc bullying us on the recruiting trail
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Apr 27, 2020 10:44:38 GMT -5
If you watch this kid's tape you can easily see where he ends up high 3*-low 4* after another year in the recruiting cycle... So our staff and this board are the only ones that see this? I get sometimes recruiting can create a “group think” problem where a guy’s status gets inflated, but I also find it hard to believe that they are no other major schools with this “vision” that this kid goes from unranked to 4 star. Recruiting is far too competitive to think every unranked kid we give an offer to is a diamond in the rough and becomes the next Markus Howard. I know morale is low here, but we can’t keep convincing ourselves the talent is better than the rest of college basketball universe thinks. If you look at our conference, we are the only team that has committed a scholarship to an unranked player (Harris) in 2020 Now we are clamoring for another? Again I couldn’t tell you what makes a player rank 250 vs 400, as it’s probably very subjective. But you are only as good as the company you keep, and when our conference peers aren’t making these moves why are we? Certainly based on recent results we should be trying to emulate them more, not less. Are we resigned to having to get guys who our peer schools wouldn’t touch? There aren’t enough “talent evaluators” out there to keep track of all these high school recruits. Additionally, some kids explicitly seek out exposure and some prefer to work behind closed doors. Unless you give off an awesome great first impression at 15/16, late junior year and senior year is when serious recruitment actually picks up. So he didn’t go through the most important evaluation process. Add to that, a lot of these “talent evaluators/scouts” have less credentials than people on this board. They are stuck chasing high school kids from gym to gym because they can’t get the big boy job. Not to mention like anything else in life, the majority of them are barely adequate and just going through the motions. Our staff has much more incentive and experience from which to conduct talent evaluations. Beyond that, the high school and college games are different, and sometimes the factors that are conducive to success (like attitude/will that Ewing prioritizes) aren’t captured in recruiting methods. That’s all besides the fact though, this conversation is just window dressing. Just watch his tape. If you know what to look for, good. If not, too bad. But to act like listening to someone else’s evaluation of the kids game is somehow a mystic evaluation gives these people too much credit. There are levels to everything, especially in talent evaluation. Considering the fact that most of Ewing’s recruits have actually out produced their hs rankings (even if marginally) is evidence that they’re doing a decent job in that department. That’s not by accident.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Apr 27, 2020 10:46:01 GMT -5
So our staff and this board are the only ones that see this? I get sometimes recruiting can create a “group think” problem where a guy’s status gets inflated, but I also find it hard to believe that they are no other major schools with this “vision” that this kid goes from unranked to 4 star. Recruiting is far too competitive to think every unranked kid we give an offer to is a diamond in the rough and becomes the next Markus Howard. I know morale is low here, but we can’t keep convincing ourselves the talent is better than the rest of college basketball universe thinks. If you look at our conference, we are the only team that has committed a scholarship to an unranked player (Harris) in 2020 Now we are clamoring for another? Again I couldn’t tell you what makes a player rank 250 vs 400, as it’s probably very subjective. But you are only as good as the company you keep, and when our conference peers aren’t making these moves why are we? Certainly based on recent results we should be trying to emulate them more, not less. Are we resigned to having to get guys who our peer schools wouldn’t touch? Playing devil's advocate here, how many times was our staff one of the first to identify talent early (prior to recruiting sites and the blue bloods) and then a kid blows up and we loose out in the end. If we can snag some of these early looks quickly, before the others come around, I am fine with it. I trust in the staff's eye for talent. Exactly. Some people seem to forget so thanks for the reminder.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,459
|
Post by TC on Apr 27, 2020 10:56:22 GMT -5
Give the staff some edit for chasing him hard, but it always seemed like a long shot. Hopefully we see what plan B is soon. We're on Plan F or G by now after missing on Murray and all the SG/SF grad transfers.
|
|
|
Post by DownTownJoeyBrown on Apr 27, 2020 11:00:47 GMT -5
So our staff and this board are the only ones that see this? I get sometimes recruiting can create a “group think” problem where a guy’s status gets inflated, but I also find it hard to believe that they are no other major schools with this “vision” that this kid goes from unranked to 4 star. Recruiting is far too competitive to think every unranked kid we give an offer to is a diamond in the rough and becomes the next Markus Howard. I know morale is low here, but we can’t keep convincing ourselves the talent is better than the rest of college basketball universe thinks. If you look at our conference, we are the only team that has committed a scholarship to an unranked player (Harris) in 2020 Now we are clamoring for another? Again I couldn’t tell you what makes a player rank 250 vs 400, as it’s probably very subjective. But you are only as good as the company you keep, and when our conference peers aren’t making these moves why are we? Certainly based on recent results we should be trying to emulate them more, not less. Are we resigned to having to get guys who our peer schools wouldn’t touch? Playing devil's advocate here, how many times was our staff one of the first to identify talent early (prior to recruiting sites and the blue bloods) and then a kid blows up and we loose out in the end. If we can snag some of these early looks quickly, before the others come around, I am fine with it. I trust in the staff's eye for talent. I trust their eye for talent. Their ability to land anyone that isn't a plan B or C is entirely another story. Until Ewing can attract some talent that doesn't transfer the mediocrity will continue. And the diamond in the rough recruiting argument bolstered with evidence like "player x was great this year cause he average 15 points a game, what a find" doesn't work when the team isn't winning. Someone has gotta score the points. Heck, Jameis Winston threw 50 TDs last year and is now a backup QB.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Apr 27, 2020 11:41:00 GMT -5
Playing devil's advocate here, how many times was our staff one of the first to identify talent early (prior to recruiting sites and the blue bloods) and then a kid blows up and we loose out in the end. If we can snag some of these early looks quickly, before the others come around, I am fine with it. I trust in the staff's eye for talent. I trust their eye for talent. Their ability to land anyone that isn't a plan B or C is entirely another story. Until Ewing can attract some talent that doesn't transfer the mediocrity will continue. And the diamond in the rough recruiting argument bolstered with evidence like "player x was great this year cause he average 15 points a game, what a find" doesn't work when the team isn't winning. Someone has gotta score the points. Heck, Jameis Winston threw 50 TDs last year and is now a backup QB. Okay, but the bottom line is even with plan B and C recruits they’re doing better than the alternative. Ewe aren’t pulling in plan As because of our lack of winning, there’s only so much Ewing or any coach can sell when team performance isn’t objectively pointing upward. It’s very easy for coaches to recruit negatively against us right now, particularly when we are targeting 4 stars who are being recruited by the upper echelon schools.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,961
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 27, 2020 11:45:12 GMT -5
So our staff and this board are the only ones that see this? I get sometimes recruiting can create a “group think” problem where a guy’s status gets inflated, but I also find it hard to believe that they are no other major schools with this “vision” that this kid goes from unranked to 4 star. Recruiting is far too competitive to think every unranked kid we give an offer to is a diamond in the rough and becomes the next Markus Howard. I know morale is low here, but we can’t keep convincing ourselves the talent is better than the rest of college basketball universe thinks. If you look at our conference, we are the only team that has committed a scholarship to an unranked player (Harris) in 2020 Now we are clamoring for another? Again I couldn’t tell you what makes a player rank 250 vs 400, as it’s probably very subjective. But you are only as good as the company you keep, and when our conference peers aren’t making these moves why are we? Certainly based on recent results we should be trying to emulate them more, not less. Are we resigned to having to get guys who our peer schools wouldn’t touch? Playing devil's advocate here, how many times was our staff one of the first to identify talent early (prior to recruiting sites and the blue bloods) and then a kid blows up and we loose out in the end. If we can snag some of these early looks quickly, before the others come around, I am fine with it. I trust in the staff's eye for talent. How many? I read this narrative a lot on the board but I'm not sure how accurate it actually is...
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,877
|
Post by CTHoya08 on Apr 27, 2020 11:45:20 GMT -5
Give the staff some edit for chasing him hard, but it always seemed like a long shot. Hopefully we see what plan B is soon. We're on Plan F or G by now after missing on Murray and all the SG/SF grad transfers. Come on down, SRD.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,352
|
Post by daveg023 on Apr 27, 2020 11:53:38 GMT -5
Playing devil's advocate here, how many times was our staff one of the first to identify talent early (prior to recruiting sites and the blue bloods) and then a kid blows up and we loose out in the end. If we can snag some of these early looks quickly, before the others come around, I am fine with it. I trust in the staff's eye for talent. Exactly. Some people seem to forget so thanks for the reminder. Don’t disagree that the staff has had an eye on kids early before we lose them to blue bloods. But this is a results business, there’s no prizes for finders fees. If the argument is we need to aim lower and hope mid major guys only blow up into major guys, then I really think getting back to relevance is further than we think. In the opinion of this board, what is Ewing’s biggest recruiting coup in 4 years? McClung (who was a decommit)? Wahab? Probably was Akinjo in my opinion but obviously we aren’t harvesting that fully. You can’t go 4 recruiting cycles without any impactful recruits (including retaining them) and think you are going to change the trajectory of a failing program. We all said when Ewing got hired his recruiting would make or break him, and sorry to say it has not panned out by any measure one could have. Do I think he has an eye for talent? Yes. But this isn’t a scouting exercise, this is program building. And unless you can sign (and keep) and develop players, you aren’t going to do anything but tread water. Whether or not we can’t make the final pitch or we are targeting the wrong kids, the approach has to change or we’ll be left scrambling with back up plans every year.
|
|
hoopsmccan
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,429
|
Post by hoopsmccan on Apr 27, 2020 11:59:10 GMT -5
Playing devil's advocate here, how many times was our staff one of the first to identify talent early (prior to recruiting sites and the blue bloods) and then a kid blows up and we loose out in the end. If we can snag some of these early looks quickly, before the others come around, I am fine with it. I trust in the staff's eye for talent. How many? I read this narrative a lot on the board but I'm not sure how accurate it actually is... For the love of all that is holy, please no one bite on this. You will be tempted to throw out a name...Etomicb is already sitting on tweets to show that URI or some other school "identified" the recruit earlier. Rinse, repeat. Please don't do it. hm
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,459
|
Post by TC on Apr 27, 2020 12:05:13 GMT -5
How many? I read this narrative a lot on the board but I'm not sure how accurate it actually is... For the love of all that is holy, please no one bite on this. You will be tempted to throw out a name...Etomicb is already sitting on tweets to show that URI or some other school "identified" the recruit earlier. Rinse, repeat. Please don't do it. Who cares who is first? It's like someone jumping in a thread to type "first poster!" It doesn't matter when you can't close the deal on any of them, and it certainly doesn't matter here when you only get involved with Kerwin Walton in January because you spent too much time chasing RJ Davis around. Talent identification doesn't matter when you can't prioritize realistically or close the deal.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,961
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 27, 2020 12:06:51 GMT -5
How many? I read this narrative a lot on the board but I'm not sure how accurate it actually is... For the love of all that is holy, please no one bite on this. You will be tempted to throw out a name...Etomicb is already sitting on tweets to show that URI or some other school "identified" the recruit earlier. Rinse, repeat. Please don't do it. hm LOL! I can never understand why you're so snarky all the time, why not add to the conversation or move on? Such irony when you type "rinse, repeat".
|
|
blazers32
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 194
|
Post by blazers32 on Apr 27, 2020 12:08:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tribeninerhoya on Apr 27, 2020 12:17:52 GMT -5
Roy needs to find a better tailor.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,961
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 27, 2020 12:23:30 GMT -5
Exactly. Some people seem to forget so thanks for the reminder. Don’t disagree that the staff has had an eye on kids early before we lose them to blue bloods. But this is a results business, there’s no prizes for finders fees. If the argument is we need to aim lower and hope mid major guys only blow up into major guys, then I really think getting back to relevance is further than we think. In the opinion of this board, what is Ewing’s biggest recruiting coup in 4 years? McClung (who was a decommit)? Wahab? Probably was Akinjo in my opinion but obviously we aren’t harvesting that fully. You can’t go 4 recruiting cycles without any impactful recruits (including retaining them) and think you are going to change the trajectory of a failing program. We all said when Ewing got hired his recruiting would make or break him, and sorry to say it has not panned out by any measure one could have.Do I think he has an eye for talent? Yes. But this isn’t a scouting exercise, this is program building. And unless you can sign (and keep) and develop players, you aren’t going to do anything but tread water. Whether or not we can’t make the final pitch or we are targeting the wrong kids, the approach has to change or we’ll be left scrambling with back up plans every year. I think LeBlanc was his biggest get, he chose Gtown over some good SEC schools... The staff's recruiting has been pretty good overall, it's retention that has derailed PE so far. Plus player development has been average at best so far as well, hard to make progress if the staff can't keep kids & get them better...
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Apr 27, 2020 12:28:38 GMT -5
For the love of all that is holy, please no one bite on this. You will be tempted to throw out a name...Etomicb is already sitting on tweets to show that URI or some other school "identified" the recruit earlier. Rinse, repeat. Please don't do it. Who cares who is first? It's like someone jumping in a thread to type "first poster!" It doesn't matter when you can't close the deal on any of them, and it certainly doesn't matter here when you only get involved with Kerwin Walton in January because you spent too much time chasing RJ Davis around. Talent identification doesn't matter when you can't prioritize realistically or close the deal. No, no it’s not. And just a side note recruiting is an art, it’s not like herding cows. There are many variables/priorities at play that are never even made public. Listen to Jagan talk about he knew GU was a fit because he had them in his top 10 or so from the time he was a freshman. Sometimes these kids have an idea of where they want to land from the time they pick up a basketball, long before coaches come into the picture. And if kids are meeting their own expectations (I.e. developing properly) then they’ll be more likely to land with their targets so to speak, rather than have to readjust and assess other options if not. At the end of the day it’s hard to recruit when we aren’t winning. Results are tbd, but I think it’s still a little early to tell because the staff keeps improving and learning. We were are no longer a sexy pick for an ooc upset against the likes of Arkansas St....we all would love this rebuild to be as quick as possible, but I think some people around here adjusted their expectations after an ahead-of-schedule, above average year last year and expect it to be a linear climb. Growth isn’t often linear, especially when you are trying to put work in and do things the right way. It’s a process.
|
|
|
Post by njhoyalawya on Apr 27, 2020 12:30:21 GMT -5
For the love of all that is holy, please no one bite on this. You will be tempted to throw out a name...Etomicb is already sitting on tweets to show that URI or some other school "identified" the recruit earlier. Rinse, repeat. Please don't do it. hm LOL! I can never understand why you're so snarky all the time, why not add to the conversation or move on? Such irony when you type "rinse, repeat". The point is that the staff has a good eye for talent, so let's not so harshly judge the incoming players before even giving them a chance to prove themselves.
|
|
tupac
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 220
|
Post by tupac on Apr 27, 2020 12:44:43 GMT -5
LOL! I can never understand why you're so snarky all the time, why not add to the conversation or move on? Such irony when you type "rinse, repeat". The point is that the staff has a good eye for talent, so let's not so harshly judge the incoming players before even giving them a chance to prove themselves. Exactly
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Apr 27, 2020 12:45:54 GMT -5
So our staff and this board are the only ones that see this? I get sometimes recruiting can create a “group think” problem where a guy’s status gets inflated, but I also find it hard to believe that they are no other major schools with this “vision” that this kid goes from unranked to 4 star. Recruiting is far too competitive to think every unranked kid we give an offer to is a diamond in the rough and becomes the next Markus Howard. I know morale is low here, but we can’t keep convincing ourselves the talent is better than the rest of college basketball universe thinks. If you look at our conference, we are the only team that has committed a scholarship to an unranked player (Harris) in 2020 Now we are clamoring for another? Again I couldn’t tell you what makes a player rank 250 vs 400, as it’s probably very subjective. But you are only as good as the company you keep, and when our conference peers aren’t making these moves why are we? Certainly based on recent results we should be trying to emulate them more, not less. Are we resigned to having to get guys who our peer schools wouldn’t touch? Playing devil's advocate here, how many times was our staff one of the first to identify talent early (prior to recruiting sites and the blue bloods) and then a kid blows up and we loose out in the end. If we can snag some of these early looks quickly, before the others come around, I am fine with it. I trust in the staff's eye for talent. This is a common myth on here. We are very rarely if ever the 1st big school to offer these "under the radar" guy. Yes they get a bump after we offer but that is because others offered first and it makes the evaluators notice.
|
|
|
Post by DownTownJoeyBrown on Apr 27, 2020 12:51:24 GMT -5
LOL! I can never understand why you're so snarky all the time, why not add to the conversation or move on? Such irony when you type "rinse, repeat". The point is that the staff has a good eye for talent, so let's not so harshly judge the incoming players before even giving them a chance to prove themselves. This is fair, but let's also not claim they're a success (not pointing out anyone in particular) if they come in and put up numbers but the team still loses. Lots of players can put up numbers on losing teams (more opportunity, garbage time, low pressure shots, etc.). I'll call these low radar recruits good when the produce and win, which I think is going to be a lot harder than just producing. To boil it down, I have a feeling may have a team full of decent talent but not enough to actually make any noise. We are missing on the recruits that could help us get to that next level and replacing them with Plan B & C's that are going to produce because of opportunity.
|
|