Why are we looking at 0 and 2 star players?

Donate To GopherHole



From the Barn

I was checking out your blog and ran across the entry below from your write up on EE:

The Gophers have two scholarships left heading into 2010 with one reserved for Cory Joseph if he wants it. With the Gophers depth, don’t be surprised if the Gophers carry the scholarships into 2011 if Joseph doesn’t take it. These aren’t the Monson years, and scholarships are too valuable to give to whoever is left.

Just curious if you still feel these words hold true.
 

bamor5229 said:
I was checking out your blog and ran across the entry below from your write up on EE:

The Gophers have two scholarships left heading into 2010 with one reserved for Cory Joseph if he wants it. With the Gophers depth, don’t be surprised if the Gophers carry the scholarships into 2011 if Joseph doesn’t take it. These aren’t the Monson years, and scholarships are too valuable to give to whoever is left.

Just curious if you still feel these words hold true.
Click to expand...

Burn. I am regarding this years recruiting class as a complete disaster.
 


bamor5229 said:
I was checking out your blog and ran across the entry below from your write up on EE:

The Gophers have two scholarships left heading into 2010 with one reserved for Cory Joseph if he wants it. With the Gophers depth, don’t be surprised if the Gophers carry the scholarships into 2011 if Joseph doesn’t take it. These aren’t the Monson years, and scholarships are too valuable to give to whoever is left.

Just curious if you still feel these words hold true.
Click to expand...

I won't speak for FTB, but it looks like we are still banking a scholly for next year, or at least that's how it appears right now. You can't bank 3 scholarships though, that's just ridiculous.
 

Undoubtedly the coaching staff would prefer to give a scholarship to Cory Joseph rather than Maverick. They also seem to prefer signing Maverick as opposed to whoever else was available. As someone else already stated, to go into next year without offering another guard would be reckless. Nolen might not be eligible. What if Hoff or Devoe gets hurt? This could be a pretty good team next year with a strong frontcourt. There is no sense risking a ruined season because of no backcourt depth. The coaching staff had no choice. They felt Maverick was their best option. As things now stand there will be three available scholarships for 2011. I bet more will open up.
 

Monty519 said:
looks like we are still banking a scholly for next year, or at least that's how it appears right now./QUOTE]

Bank it and let Dawson have it or split it with a walk-on for a year. I like the 2011 recruiting talent, bye-bye Royce.

n109162739123223_344.jpg
Click to expand...
 

JackiO said:
Burn. I am regarding this years recruiting class as a complete disaster.
Click to expand...

Did I write that? I'm not the only author.

I'm all for banking scholarships as long as there aren't gaping roster holes. Without Oto or Maverick there would have been the very real possibility of only one point guard and and one small forward on the roster. Scary stuff.
 



You're fairly certain that a top 15 center in the country playing on the best high school team in the country received only a single scholarship offer? Not that the recruiting sites are always correct, but you're saying they were all wrong about the offers listed and that Maurice himself was wrong about the offers that he said he had in interviews?

Plinnius said:
I wasn't being sarcastic. He really didn't have those offers. I'm fairly certain that Minnesota was his only offer.
Click to expand...
 

underground629 said:
underground629 said:
Not that the recruiting sites are always correct, but you're saying they were all wrong about the offers listed and that Maurice himself was wrong about the offers that he said he had in interviews?
Click to expand...

10/5/09 Rivlas article: Walker lists an offer list of Pitt, Georgetown, Kansas, Marquette, and A&M.

10/12/09 Scout article: Talks to Walker's coach. Walker has offers from Pitt, Marquette, Seton Hall, and A&M. UConn, Kansas, and Georgetown have not offered and they hope he waits until spring.

11/22/09 Rivals article: Jerry Mayers says, "The big fella didn't have much of an impact on the game as his minutes were limited. Part of the limited minutes is due to his need to be in better condition, but there is no denying that he is a post player with impressive size and good skill set."


2/22/10 Zagsblog: Walker has a list of Marquette, St. John's, Pitt, Georgetown, and Seton Hall. Walker's dad explains that those schools have interest in Walker, but doesn't mention any actual offers.

2/22/10 Rivals article: Walker no longer knows about Pitt because they have filled up their scholarships. The article lists Oklahoma (only time Oklahoma was ever mentioned), Georgetown, Rutgers, and Seton Hall as offers.

2/25/10: Walker trims his list to Pitt, Georgetown, Seton Hall, Rutgers.

3/17/10: Seton Hall coach Bobby Gonzalez is fired.

3/25/10 Zagsblog: Walker claims he has offers from Minnesota, Pitt, Virginia, Marquette, Penn State, and Providence. Minnesota and Pitt are favorites.

3/29/10 Rivals article: Walker tells Ryan James that Seton Hall, Rutgers, and Minnesota are recruiting him the hardest.

--Minnesota quickly jumped to the top his list when they gave him a solid offer.

--I believe Tubby was the only coach to pay Walker an in-home visit and, other than Pitt, Minnesota was his only other visit.

--Seton Hall, Rutgers, and Minnesota "recruiting him the hardest" sounds like the only schools legitimately recruiting him.

--Walker's first list trimming included Rutgers, Seton Hall, and two teams that definitely didn't offer him (Pitt and Georgetown).

--Seton Hall's offer, if he indeed had one, likely vanished with Bobby Gonzalez's firing.

My reasoned inference: Walker had a lot of interest and perhaps even more offers early on, but teams were ultimately turned off some big red flags: weight, lack of athleticism, and awful conditioning. He's talented, but he needs to get in much better shape. Definitely a project.
Click to expand...
 

I still see more than one offer in there but I see your point. I still don't see how he's a project though, at least not for his freshman year. Maybe if he were being asked to step in and play a lot than I would. It sounds like his main problem is conditioning. I'm sure that can be taken care of. He won't be getting many minutes anyway, so conditioning wouldn't really be a problem in the game.

Plinnius said:
underground629 said:
10/5/09 Rivlas article: Walker lists an offer list of Pitt, Georgetown, Kansas, Marquette, and A&M.

10/12/09 Scout article: Talks to Walker's coach. Walker has offers from Pitt, Marquette, Seton Hall, and A&M. UConn, Kansas, and Georgetown have not offered and they hope he waits until spring.

11/22/09 Rivals article: Jerry Mayers says, "The big fella didn't have much of an impact on the game as his minutes were limited. Part of the limited minutes is due to his need to be in better condition, but there is no denying that he is a post player with impressive size and good skill set."


2/22/10 Zagsblog: Walker has a list of Marquette, St. John's, Pitt, Georgetown, and Seton Hall. Walker's dad explains that those schools have interest in Walker, but doesn't mention any actual offers.

2/22/10 Rivals article: Walker no longer knows about Pitt because they have filled up their scholarships. The article lists Oklahoma (only time Oklahoma was ever mentioned), Georgetown, Rutgers, and Seton Hall as offers.

2/25/10: Walker trims his list to Pitt, Georgetown, Seton Hall, Rutgers.

3/17/10: Seton Hall coach Bobby Gonzalez is fired.

3/25/10 Zagsblog: Walker claims he has offers from Minnesota, Pitt, Virginia, Marquette, Penn State, and Providence. Minnesota and Pitt are favorites.

3/29/10 Rivals article: Walker tells Ryan James that Seton Hall, Rutgers, and Minnesota are recruiting him the hardest.

--Minnesota quickly jumped to the top his list when they gave him a solid offer.

--I believe Tubby was the only coach to pay Walker an in-home visit and, other than Pitt, Minnesota was his only other visit.

--Seton Hall, Rutgers, and Minnesota "recruiting him the hardest" sounds like the only schools legitimately recruiting him.

--Walker's first list trimming included Rutgers, Seton Hall, and two teams that definitely didn't offer him (Pitt and Georgetown).

--Seton Hall's offer, if he indeed had one, likely vanished with Bobby Gonzalez's firing.

My reasoned inference: Walker had a lot of interest and perhaps even more offers early on, but teams were ultimately turned off some big red flags: weight, lack of athleticism, and awful conditioning. He's talented, but he needs to get in much better shape. Definitely a project.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 

Updated Rating Numbers By ESPN Scouts Inc

I'm no fan of ratings or number but for those who are:

Minnesota 2010 Player Commitments
NAME POS STATE GRADE STATUS NOTES
Maurice Walker C CAN 92 Signed
Austin Hollins SG TN 89 Signed
Elliott Eliason C NE 87 Signed
Oto Osenieks PF IL 87 Signed
Maverick Ahanmisi SG CA 84 Signed
 



A lot of arguing here, but I doubt anybody can realistically see this group as one that will compete for a B10 title in 3-4 years. We're bringing in 5 guys which means in 3 years they'll be the juniors on this team (or RS sophs) and our only senior will be Rodney Williams. Compare that to the hauls the rest of the conference is bringing in (obviously some of the top guys are candidates to leave before 4 years) and their current frosh and anyone that thinks this is a top 4-5 team in conference at that time without getting a major talent influx in the next few classes is kidding themselves. We can play the 'some guys are diamonds in the rough' and 'you never know how guys will turn out' game all you want but from the information we have available, this is a very very poor class for a program that aspires to compete for the conference. PSU would be ok with this class, NW may be ok with this class. But everyone else in the B10, even Iowa, would be either mildy dissapointed or horrified with this class. Of course I wish these guys well and I hope they all turn out to be beasts but the truth is I don't see it. Hollins seems to have the potential to be a good role player that can defend and hit open shots, Eliason can be a decent big that can maybe score in the paint a bit, Oto can shoot but probably can't defend anyone unless he has a Hoff like basketball IQ, and Walker may one day blossom, but none of them look like surefire B10 starters.

This is Mason like talent to be honest and I'm pretty disapointed in the results of recruiting this year. I'll never criticize the effort or the strategy since I'm not in the know but at this point this class is very underwhelming and its reasonable to question why they are taking 5 players instead of banking some. Did we really need to go after another big (Walker)? Did we need to sign a wing that may struggle on D and isn't a ball handler (Oto)? Should we have put all our eggs in the CJ basket at PG (Maverick)? These kids may turn into players but if not we've just committed 3 roster spots and scholarships to guys when we could've waited a year and gone after some more (seemingly) talented players.

Maybe I'm pessimistic but at this point I see no reason to be optimistic about this team next year. We lose our best defensive player, best scorer, and best glue guy IMO and don't bring in a single player that looks to have the ability to make an immediate impact. Maybe Mbakwe will help but we have a ton of bigs yet completely under utilize the post in our offense while we'll only have 2 ball handlers (Joseph and Nolen) and 2 guys I trust to take open jumpers (Joseph and Hoff). We also don't have a single perimeter player that can consistently create shots for himself or others
 

The Reason Gophers Signed 5 Recruits

Lots of uncertainty. White quit. Carter transferred. Cobbs may transfer. Nolen may not be back. Ditto Mbakwe. Hence 5 recruits. Pretty simple really.

Clipped from Gopher AD press release announcing Ahanmisi signed with Gophers:

The Minnesota men's basketball program today announced the signing of Maverick Ahanmisi (a-hawn-ME-see) to a National Letter of Intent. Ahanmisi will be eligible to compete during the 2010-11 season, joining fall signees Elliott Eliason (Chadron, Neb.) and Austin Hollins (Memphis, Tenn.) and fellow spring signees Oto Osenieks (Riga, Latvia) and Maurice Walker (Scarborough, Ontario).

"Maverick is a very good shooter from the perimeter and will help us by stretching the defense," said Gopher Head Coach Tubby Smith. "He is a year older and more experienced having played in prep school this past season. He will balance this year's recruiting class that already includes two post players, a forward and a wing. We welcome him to the Golden Gopher family."

Ahanmisi averaged 20.0 points this season at Stoneridge Prep in Simi Valley, Calif. A 6-2 senior guard, Ahanmisi originally attended and graduated from Golden Valley High School in Santa Clarita, Calif. Ahanmisi averaged 12.5 points as a sophomore, 15.8 points as a junior and 20.2 points as a senior and finished his scholastic career as the all-time leading scorer and three-point shooter at GVHS. He also maintained a 3.5 grade point average.
 

I love when everyone defends offering players with low ratings by listing the few diamonds that have emerged. How about the 90% that don't pan out, while at least 50% of the 4 and 5 star players become very good college players. Is it not ok to scratch our heads and wonder? Were our expectations to high? When Minnesota has a down year for seniors is this what we can look forward to? All these are valid questions.
 

march madness said:
I love when everyone defends offering players with low ratings by listing the few diamonds that have emerged. How about the 90% that don't pan out, while at least 50% of the 4 and 5 star players become very good college players. Is it not ok to scratch our heads and wonder? Were our expectations to high? When Minnesota has a down year for seniors is this what we can look forward to? All these are valid questions.
Click to expand...

exactly. The funny thing about 'diamonds in the rough' is that their in the rough. They're hard to find because the vast majority of guys ranked low and that are still available at this point are available because other teams didn't think they're good enough or they have serious question marks about their game or personality that teams didn't feel was worth the risk with their talent level. People love to point to the mid major guys but then they forget that many of the mid major stars get that way because their talent level is similar or a bit higher than their teammates and opponents so they get PT and gain confidence against lesser talented players which then carries over when they get to the big time. Many of those guys would've rode the bench for 2 years at a major college and never developed as they did. The truth is both Eliason and Hollins were seen by even the most optimistic people as potentially solid role players, and nothing can really be expected of any of the other 3 for at least 2 years. I would've rather gone into the season a bit short handed with the possibility to upgrade the talent level in the next class then throw scholarships at guys that may never be B10 players. You don't always need to play 11 players. You can survive a season just fine with an 8 man rotation.
 

march madness said:
I love when everyone defends offering players with low ratings by listing the few diamonds that have emerged. How about the 90% that don't pan out, while at least 50% of the 4 and 5 star players become very good college players. Is it not ok to scratch our heads and wonder? Were our expectations to high? When Minnesota has a down year for seniors is this what we can look forward to? All these are valid questions.
Click to expand...

Gotta link to those % or did you make them up?
 

oleboy41 said:
exactly. The funny thing about 'diamonds in the rough' is that their in the rough. They're hard to find because the vast majority of guys ranked low and that are still available at this point are available because other teams didn't think they're good enough or they have serious question marks about their game or personality that teams didn't feel was worth the risk with their talent level. People love to point to the mid major guys but then they forget that many of the mid major stars get that way because their talent level is similar or a bit higher than their teammates and opponents so they get PT and gain confidence against lesser talented players which then carries over when they get to the big time. Many of those guys would've rode the bench for 2 years at a major college and never developed as they did. The truth is both Eliason and Hollins were seen by even the most optimistic people as potentially solid role players, and nothing can really be expected of any of the other 3 for at least 2 years. I would've rather gone into the season a bit short handed with the possibility to upgrade the talent level in the next class then throw scholarships at guys that may never be B10 players. You don't always need to play 11 players. You can survive a season just fine with an 8 man rotation.
Click to expand...

Let's look SPECIFICALLY to the 2 signed by Gophers this spring.

Osenieks is a foreign player who only came to USA this year. He played at relatively new Prep school in southern Illinois so few, if any recruiting analysts saw him play.

Ahanmisi is a 5th year Prep who was All-CIF as HS Sr but his intentions to attend Boise St were tripped up by NCAA Clearinghouse paperwork. His Prep school didn't play that many games and his 20 ppg average was pale in comparison to teammate Enes Kanter (who averaged between 30 and 40 ppg).

Both are decent prospects. Sure things, no. But decent spring recruits, you betcha!
 



march madness said:
I love when everyone defends offering players with low ratings by listing the few diamonds that have emerged. How about the 90% that don't pan out, while at least 50% of the 4 and 5 star players become very good college players. Is it not ok to scratch our heads and wonder? Were our expectations to high? When Minnesota has a down year for seniors is this what we can look forward to? All these are valid questions.
Click to expand...

The reason people are "defending" these players with low ratings is because it's premature to call this reacruiting class a failure or anything else. Yes, generally 4-star guys are better than 2-star guys. But nobody knows how good or bad any of these guys will be. This recruiting season has been dissapointing, but it's not a failure. At least not yet. It could turn out to be pretty good in a few years. We just don't know.
 

It seems that needs were filled, I would have to guess that the coaching staff can evaluate talent and these guys will be able to play. Mbwake is still an unknown so there may be four scholerships available next year.

Recruiting ratings is based on AAU basketball and the last two signed didn't play AAU last year so they are probably a little unkown. Time will tell, the fear of Monson type recruits still lingers.

Minnesota has decently rated players for 2011. Hope we can land a couple of them.
 

oleboy41 said:
A lot of arguing here, but I doubt anybody can realistically see this group as one that will compete for a B10 title in 3-4 years. We're bringing in 5 guys which means in 3 years they'll be the juniors on this team (or RS sophs) and our only senior will be Rodney Williams. Compare that to the hauls the rest of the conference is bringing in (obviously some of the top guys are candidates to leave before 4 years) and their current frosh and anyone that thinks this is a top 4-5 team in conference at that time without getting a major talent influx in the next few classes is kidding themselves. We can play the 'some guys are diamonds in the rough' and 'you never know how guys will turn out' game all you want but from the information we have available, this is a very very poor class for a program that aspires to compete for the conference. PSU would be ok with this class, NW may be ok with this class. But everyone else in the B10, even Iowa, would be either mildy dissapointed or horrified with this class. Of course I wish these guys well and I hope they all turn out to be beasts but the truth is I don't see it. Hollins seems to have the potential to be a good role player that can defend and hit open shots, Eliason can be a decent big that can maybe score in the paint a bit, Oto can shoot but probably can't defend anyone unless he has a Hoff like basketball IQ, and Walker may one day blossom, but none of them look like surefire B10 starters.

This is Mason like talent to be honest and I'm pretty disapointed in the results of recruiting this year. I'll never criticize the effort or the strategy since I'm not in the know but at this point this class is very underwhelming and its reasonable to question why they are taking 5 players instead of banking some. Did we really need to go after another big (Walker)? Did we need to sign a wing that may struggle on D and isn't a ball handler (Oto)? Should we have put all our eggs in the CJ basket at PG (Maverick)? These kids may turn into players but if not we've just committed 3 roster spots and scholarships to guys when we could've waited a year and gone after some more (seemingly) talented players.

Maybe I'm pessimistic but at this point I see no reason to be optimistic about this team next year. We lose our best defensive player, best scorer, and best glue guy IMO and don't bring in a single player that looks to have the ability to make an immediate impact. Maybe Mbakwe will help but we have a ton of bigs yet completely under utilize the post in our offense while we'll only have 2 ball handlers (Joseph and Nolen) and 2 guys I trust to take open jumpers (Joseph and Hoff). We also don't have a single perimeter player that can consistently create shots for himself or others
Click to expand...

I agree with some of this post, especially the part I bolded. Saying Iowa would be even mildly disappointed with this class is going way too far...they would be thrilled with it. The bottom line is that I think Tubby has earned a pass to have one disappointing recruiting year. If everyone we planned on having in 2010 (White,Mbakwe, Carter, Cobbs) could be counted on, I don't think 2010's class/strategy would look that bad. We'd have landed a C who was happy redshirting and devloping behind Sampson/Iverson and a SG who had offers from Arkansas and Memphis. The staff had one scholarship left and went after a big fish in Cory Joseph and missed out. We are going to swing and miss with top level recruits sometimes. Where the disappointment comes from is the spring recruiting and the sheer volume of this class. Instead of briging in 2 recruits who both would have been candidates to redshirt given the potential depth of the 2010-2011 team, the Gophers instead brought in five recruits and now need some of these guys to contribute immediately. When you bring in 3 guys in the spring, it's unlikely that more than one of them is going to be a big time (on paper) player...unless you are UNC or Kentucky.

I hope that 1-2 of these guys are "diamonds in the rough" and that Tubby brings in a class we are all signifantly more excited about in 2011. The Gophers have to bring in some top talent because Ohio State, Purdue, Illinios, and Michigan State are doing it on a yearly basis.
 

How many scholarships do you think we should have banked? It sounds like you wouldn't mind risking being really thin at a position in case of injury. We also need enough guys in practice.

I agree that the diamond in the rough argument is kind of stupid, but I think you might be underestimating the effects that Royce, Paul, Justin, Nolen, and Trevor had on our recruiting.

oleboy41 said:
exactly. The funny thing about 'diamonds in the rough' is that their in the rough. They're hard to find because the vast majority of guys ranked low and that are still available at this point are available because other teams didn't think they're good enough or they have serious question marks about their game or personality that teams didn't feel was worth the risk with their talent level. People love to point to the mid major guys but then they forget that many of the mid major stars get that way because their talent level is similar or a bit higher than their teammates and opponents so they get PT and gain confidence against lesser talented players which then carries over when they get to the big time. Many of those guys would've rode the bench for 2 years at a major college and never developed as they did. The truth is both Eliason and Hollins were seen by even the most optimistic people as potentially solid role players, and nothing can really be expected of any of the other 3 for at least 2 years. I would've rather gone into the season a bit short handed with the possibility to upgrade the talent level in the next class then throw scholarships at guys that may never be B10 players. You don't always need to play 11 players. You can survive a season just fine with an 8 man rotation.
Click to expand...
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom