Recruiting ?

[asuwish]

Uconn, like everyone else, is going to need a few post players in the next couple of years. I know we have 3 years of Bulter, but for foul trouble and injury sake we could probably use at least 2. They currently do not have a commitment from a true post player unless you think Boykin can play that role (Geno has used 6'2" players there before). 3 of the top 6 players in the class of 2016 are at least 6'3", and all 3 seem very talented.
Based upon what Kiah Stokes has done by changing the game on the defensive side I can't help wondering about another prospect. Does anyone knows if Uconn is recruiting 49th ranked, 6'9" Felicia Aiyeotan. She has about the same height advantage over Kiah that Kiah has over Saniya. She does not appear to be your average tall gangly slow footed big. She is athletic (can dunk) and looks to have a physically strong frame. She appears (from video) to be a physically bigger Brittany Griner (I'm not saying she will ever approach that level). Being someone who started playing at a later age she still has 2 years to sharpen her skills before going to college.
Here is what was written about her on the ESPN site
Emerging elite low-post prospect with soft touch, dominating shot-blocking ability; displays developing offensive back-to-basket game; has made significant progress, a potential game changer at next level. Keep in mind that most players ranked in the top 15 won't be labeled a "potential game changer". I know if she doesn't have the smarts or work ethic Geno won't care about the other things, but she is an interesting player to think about.

 

[EricLA]

UCONN supposedly had interest in her but UCONN is not on her list of 5, last I heard. Of course that can all change.

In 2016 UCONN is still recruiting Cox, McCoy, and Holmes, altho it's my personal belief that we have very little shot at Holmes, and only a slightly bigger shot at Cox. If Geno can get her up to visit the campus, our chances will go up obviously, but I see it as a long shot...

 

[Sluconn Husky]

I don't think a "big" player in the 6-5 range is a necessity. UConn will have plenty of height throughout the roster the next few years and tons of versatility and talent. That doesn't mean I wouldn't love to have Lauren Cox or Tori McCoy on the team though.

 

[DavidK]

Starting next year

Stewie for 1 year
Butler for 3 years
Tuck for 2 years
Williams for 3 years (She's a post undtil Geno says otherwise in my mind)

Besides that we have Boykin next year and Irwin the following coming in.

Yes Stokes is great but as Williams and tuck show it's always how big/tall you are but how big you play.

Butler averaged a double double as a freshman and has over a year of practice at Uconn before she even touches the floor for a game.

Fouls happen but I can't say I am worried we don't have enough bigs.

 

[HuskiesU]

UCONN supposedly had interest in her but UCONN is not on her list of 5, last I heard. Of course that can all change.

In 2016 UCONN is still recruiting Cox, McCoy, and Holmes, altho it's my personal belief that we have very little shot at Holmes, and only a slightly bigger shot at Cox. If Geno can get her up to visit the campus, our chances will go up obviously, but I see it as a long shot...

Do you know her top 5?

 

[Geno-ista]

Uconn, like everyone else, is going to need a few post players in the next couple of years. I know we have 3 years of Bulter, but for foul trouble and injury sake we could probably use at least 2. They currently do not have a commitment from a true post player unless you think Boykin can play that role (Geno has used 6'2" players there before). 3 of the top 6 players in the class of 2016 are at least 6'3", and all 3 seem very talented.
Based upon what Kiah Stokes has done by changing the game on the defensive side I can't help wondering about another prospect. Does anyone knows if Uconn is recruiting 49th ranked, 6'9" Felicia Aiyeotan. She has about the same height advantage over Kiah that Kiah has over Saniya. She does not appear to be your average tall gangly slow footed big. She is athletic (can dunk) and looks to have a physically strong frame. She appears (from video) to be a physically bigger Brittany Griner (I'm not saying she will ever approach that level). Being someone who started playing at a later age she still has 2 years to sharpen her skills before going to college.
Here is what was written about her on the ESPN site
Emerging elite low-post prospect with soft touch, dominating shot-blocking ability; displays developing offensive back-to-basket game; has made significant progress, a potential game changer at next level. Keep in mind that most players ranked in the top 15 won't be labeled a "potential game changer". I know if she doesn't have the smarts or work ethic Geno won't care about the other things, but she is an interesting player to think about.

Morgan is a potential post and/or back up post also. Undersized extremely athletic posts can become a match up nightmare for the opposition on the offensive end. But it does appear to be a concern re depth.

 

[asuwish]

I think Cox wants to be like Tuck or Stewie or Dolson. She is tall but wants to play all over the floor. Geno spaces his bigs all over the floor better than anyone else probably because he recruits bigs that are versatile. This is why Lauren will keep Uconn at the top of her list

 

[hoophuskee]

Uconn, like everyone else, is going to need a few post players in the next couple of years. I know we have 3 years of Bulter, but for foul trouble and injury sake we could probably use at least 2.

I don't agree with the "message" at all. Sure would love to have Lauren Cox etc but what we need is continued GREAT BASKETBALL PLAYERS. Superior team basketball players defeat size. There is such a paranoia about height. It was one of the most overrated things about the college game.

I'd much prefer to see another big time elite quick guard in case Nurse and "TheReaLDanger" get hurt if all things regarding the recruits were equal. But as slu said would love Cox and McCoy etc - and if they want to come - I got to have them. Not as much because of their size but because they are amazing, fabulous BASKETBALL PLAYERS from what I understand.

Notre Dame didn't have the greatest size last year. Tuck doesn't have a lot of size. Size can be so overrated. Griner won one title. One. One. In two of her NCAA defeats she wasn't defeated with size.

 

[Wbbfan1]

There are some who question Crystal Dangerfield and Espinoza-Hunter talent level. IMHO what the team needs is another stud guard that can start from Day one. Ideally around 6' tall. IMHO the front court is set for a few years and guard is where the potential questions are.

 

[alexrgct]

There are some who question Crystal Dangerfield and Espinoza-Hunter talent level. IMHO what the team needs is another stud guard that can start from Day one. Ideally around 6' tall. IMHO the front court is set for a few years and guard is where the potential questions are.

who on earth are these people questioning the talent level of Dangerfield and AEH?

 

[RockyMTblue2]

who on earth are these people questioning the talent level of Dangerfield and AEH?

I suspect Wbbfan1 is as bored as I am and just want's to rile up the faithful. I disagree with Wbb and want to see another tall, soft handed intelligent baller show up for 2016. And another in 2017. While we know that Geno and Co. has a history of using forwards effectively as centers, I have always felt that our offense in those situations was reduced by the defensive gas those really talented people had to use.

 

[hoophuskee]

There are some who question Crystal Dangerfield and Espinoza-Hunter talent level. IMHO what the team needs is another stud guard that can start from Day one. Ideally around 6' tall. IMHO the front court is set for a few years and guard is where the potential questions are.

I'm with you on this - absolutely. UCONN's best team ever imo was 2001-2002. Our best teams were an undersized Maya at the pf and not much of a tall backup for Tina. Ball movement and skill whips size imo. The beauty of ball movement and fastbreaks and skill is much more fun to watch and imo attracts the top-tier recruits to boot.

Just want to reiterate though- Cox and McCoy - they should be jumped at if we can get.

 

[huskeynut]

No matter what anyone says, you can't teach height.

We need another big post player. Gene knows how to utilize the talents of the players he recruits. Give him a 6' 4" or 6' 5" or taller post and watch the development into a potential AA.

 

[Geno-ista]

There are some who question Crystal Dangerfield and Espinoza-Hunter talent level. IMHO what the team needs is another stud guard that can start from Day one. Ideally around 6' tall. IMHO the front court is set for a few years and guard is where the potential questions are.

We are thin at true guards, real ball handlers! I don't think they need to be 6'. The men's team has proven you can win with shorter guards. What I've read and video I've seen of Dangerfield, I think she can be are starting pt guard as a freshman when Messiah leaves. I've heard that Espinoza-Hunter has great ratings, but don't know as much about her. But you are correct- guards are the priority, especially if Butler is as advertised.

 

[hoophuskee]

No matter what anyone says, you can't teach height.

We need another big post player. Gene knows how to utilize the talents of the players he recruits. Give him a 6' 4" or 6' 5" or taller post and watch the development into a potential AA.

Give me fundamentals of basketball and top basketball talent any day.

 

[Wally East]

It's not a coincidence that UConn's first title came with a 6'7 center and a 6'4 power forward.

 

[Buzzyboy]

It's not a coincidence that UConn's first title came with a 6'7 center and a 6'4 power forward.

Actually, it was a coincidence. They did happen to have one of the scrappiest guards in the history of women's basketball and it a pretty phenomenal guard/small forward named Nykesha Sales and it was far more the product of great team oriented play that won that title than it was just the physical size of the two above mentioned players. What was the size of the next national championship TEAMS that we won with. Your implication is we needed size for the first championship but for the next few, it was somewhat irrelevant. Wow, that surely makes a lot of sense.

 

[hoophuskee]

It's not a coincidence that UConn's first title came with a 6'7 center and a 6'4 power forward.

What is better team that team or 2001-2002? Would you say that team was better than the two titles Tina/Maya won? How many low post players did we have during Tina/Maya's 2 titles?

Who would you consider the greatest pf/ player that played the "4 position" to be in the history of UCONN women's basketball as of this moment?

 

[Wally East]

Actually, it was a coincidence.

Oh heavens, no. Not at all Your mistake is that you're looking backward. Start from the beginning and move forward.

The '91 team had a 6'2 center, a 5'11 PF, a 5'10 SF/PG, a 5'10 SG, a 5'5 PG, and a 5'8 SG. Same team-oriented play. A really scrappy guard. A phenomenal guard/forward, too. (Now, no, I'm not saying Debbie Baer and Laura Lishness are equal to Jen and Nykesha, but that's who was there in '91 and while they weren't All-Americans, they were very good.) Same coach. What was different in '95, what was different. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

That there were two All-American front-court players backstopping the defense for '95 team to the tune of more than 7 blocks per game and lead the team to the highest team RPG for one of Geno's teams is unimportant? Irrelevant? Hmm. Okay.

For me, I'm saying the All-American power forward and All-American center were a key to winning. Not the only reason the '95 team won the title, no, but, if Lobo or Wolters had been on the team in 1991, then THAT would've been their first title because the '91 team was *small*. See my point? If Lobo or Wolters had been on the '91 team, Bascom could've played PF and not had to guard the opposing center and gotten into foul trouble against the Burge twins and as a result spent most of the first half of national semi-final on the bench.

Lobo and Wolters allowed the '95 team to match-up with Tennessee's very tall and physical team. UConn definitely needed both of them. Just one would've left them short (pun intended, because HA! )

2000: I seem to remember *something* about someone recording, what was it, a championship-game record nine blocks? Was that something a 6'2 forward did? Or was it a 6'5 center? Huh, can't quite remember. (That team also had a 6'5 back-up center, too.)

Yes, you can win without height, obviously, and you can lose with it. But, it's easier to win with it.

Without height, it took the greatest backcourt in the game's history and 3 of the school's best forwards to win a title. With height? Two other very good players and two more good players.

 

[UcMiami]

On offense you really can play extremely good basketball without and true center but defense really is a different matter. Against teams with great low post players a great team will still struggle unless they can disrupt that low post play with some height or at least real bulk/strength. We saw that in the NC game last year with Achunwa missing from the ND team - they had no answer for the Uconn low post play. Uconn scored 52 of their 79 points in the paint (66%) and 52 of their 72 non free throw points (72%.) And Dolson and Stewart (who went 0-2 from 3) shot 18-26 or 69% inside the arc. I think Uconn would have still won easily, but a very good team with no center presence was completely exposed.
Tuck is great but put her against Dolson or Achunwa who are stronger taller and just as skilled and she would struggle. We have high hopes for Butler for the next 3 years and we have some nice height coming in next year (but no center) and Irwin the following year is intriguing but I sure would like one or two more center type players in the 16/17 classes. You can do it all without a center but the history of the NCAA champions suggests it is a lot easier with a good center - Dolson, Griner, Charles account for 5 of the last six. Adams is the exception but she was a bull of a player even if she was only 6'1.

 

[j66kicker]

Size matters. But you gotta have skill too. The recruiting draw of UCONN puts us in a position to get both. We should, and will.

 

[hoophuskee]

The '91 team had a 6'2 center, a 5'11 PF, a 5'10 SF/PG, a 5'10 SG, a 5'5 PG, and a 5'8 SG. Same team-oriented play. A really scrappy guard. A phenomenal guard/forward, too. (Now, no, I'm not saying Debbie Baer and Laura Lishness are equal to Jen and Nykesha, but that's who was there in '91 and while they weren't All-Americans, they were very good.) Same coach. What was different in '95, what was different. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I don’t agree with this analogy at all. This thread is taking about going forward what UCONN needs. You’re using an extreme example of 1991 when they had no height. How does the 1991 team you referred to compare to Butler, Boykins, KLS, Collier and Irwin? The fact is – the current UCONN team is miles ahead size-wise to your reference of the 1991 team.

For me, I'm saying the All-American power forward and All-American center were a key to winning.

And what I’m saying is that we had Maya Moore – hardly a post player with size. As of right now considered the greatest pf in UCONN History. Isn’t she?

Not the only reason the '95 team won the title, no, but, if Lobo or Wolters had been on the team in 1991, then THAT would've been their first title because the '91 team was *small*. See my point?

Sure- but this thread 1ts 1t sentence said we NEED to add posts as a top priority. If we could win two titls with 6’ 1 Maya at pf and Tina’s backup – McLaren was what 6’2? We won two tiles with a frontline of 6’4, 6’2, 6’1 - - and what made them so great? It was basketballalso a lot of basketball SKILL. See my point?

2000: I seem to remember *something* about someone recording, what was it, a championship-game record nine blocks? W
as that something a 6'2 forward did? Or was it a 6'5 center? Huh, can't quite remember. (That team also had a 6'5 back-up center, too.)

And Butler is as tall as Schuie isn’t she?

Yes, you can win without height, obviously, and you can lose with it. But, it's easier to win with it.

But UCONN has height going forward! That is the OP’s point. What do we need going forward? IMO we HAVE height. Should we take more? Sure! IMO as long as the “height” translates into overall a better basketball. From what I’ve read Cox’s skills are “madly” impressive more than just her height. IMO that is what should be keyed on.


Without height,

Final point – UCONN already has height. Obviously you can’t win with just height nor can you not have any of significance. I just happen to disagree that is so necessary that the current outlook in the future that a priority is needed to get height over getting another ELITE big guard. Maybe Andra can fill that which may change my opinion.

 

[Buzzyboy]

Oh heavens, no. Not at all Your mistake is that you're looking backward. Start from the beginning and move forward.

The '91 team had a 6'2 center, a 5'11 PF, a 5'10 SF/PG, a 5'10 SG, a 5'5 PG, and a 5'8 SG. Same team-oriented play. A really scrappy guard. A phenomenal guard/forward, too. (Now, no, I'm not saying Debbie Baer and Laura Lishness are equal to Jen and Nykesha, but that's who was there in '91 and while they weren't All-Americans, they were very good.) Same coach. What was different in '95, what was different. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

That there were two All-American front-court players backstopping the defense for '95 team to the tune of more than 7 blocks per game and lead the team to the highest team RPG for one of Geno's teams is unimportant? Irrelevant? Hmm. Okay.

For me, I'm saying the All-American power forward and All-American center were a key to winning. Not the only reason the '95 team won the title, no, but, if Lobo or Wolters had been on the team in 1991, then THAT would've been their first title because the '91 team was *small*. See my point? If Lobo or Wolters had been on the '91 team, Bascom could've played PF and not had to guard the opposing center and gotten into foul trouble against the Burge twins and as a result spent most of the first half of national semi-final on the bench.

Lobo and Wolters allowed the '95 team to match-up with Tennessee's very tall and physical team. UConn definitely needed both of them. Just one would've left them short (pun intended, because HA! )

2000: I seem to remember *something* about someone recording, what was it, a championship-game record nine blocks? Was that something a 6'2 forward did? Or was it a 6'5 center? Huh, can't quite remember. (That team also had a 6'5 back-up center, too.)

Yes, you can win without height, obviously, and you can lose with it. But, it's easier to win with it.

Without height, it took the greatest backcourt in the game's history and 3 of the school's best forwards to win a title. With height? Two other very good players and two more good players.

I'm just saying that their skill set was a key ingredient and it their size wasn't "as essential" as you seem to continue to want to make it. They happened to be highly skilled and team oriented players. Sounds similar to some of the kids from TAASK who were not overtly big. Your obsession with size being THE ingredient is totally false and has no bearing. The only time size could be totally a problem is if we recruited solely midgets who played extraordinarily well for their size. I'm pretty sure that isn't a criteria for Geno. Meanwhile, I think Geno might be a little ignorant of what kind of player he needs to accomplish what he needs to, meaning more great teams and potential national championships. Maybe you could help give him some advice as to how he's somewhat failed to get enough big girls to come to UConn. It's pretty apparent he has no clue! You continue to have this cause and effect thing going when it suits you, like 1995 and yet don't try and explain the correlation of the early 2000 national championships. Wasn't UConn a defending champion in 1996 with Kara and Nykesha and Jenn and other talented players and how well did they do with their size that year or the year after??? Wasn't UConn a smaller team when Maya and Tina won back to back championships and won a massive amount of games in a row. They had good size, NOT great size and they had talent and chemistry and that's WHY they won. Geno doesn't have an obsession with size but more to do with the talents of the players and their willingness to buy into his system of unselfish, team oriented basketball. So far, so good!

 

[Buzzyboy]

I'm just saying that their skill set was a key ingredient and it their size wasn't "as essential" as you seem to continue to want to make it. They happened to be highly skilled and team oriented players. Sounds similar to some of the kids from TAASK who were not overtly big. Your obsession with size being THE ingredient is totally false and has no bearing. The only time size could be totally a problem is if we recruited solely midgets who played extraordinarily well for their size. I'm pretty sure that isn't a criteria for Geno. Meanwhile, I think Geno might be a little ignorant of what kind of player he needs to accomplish what he needs to, meaning more great teams and potential national championships. Maybe you could help give him some advice as to how he's somewhat failed to get enough big girls to come to UConn. It's pretty apparent he has no clue! You continue to have this cause and effect thing going when it suits you, like 1995 and yet don't try and explain the correlation of the early 2000 national championships. Wasn't UConn a defending champion in 1996 with Kara and Nykesha and Jenn and other talented players and how well did they do with their size that year or the year after??? Wasn't UConn a smaller team when Maya and Tina won back to back championships and won a massive amount of games in a row. They had good size, NOT great size and they had talent and chemistry and that's WHY they won. Geno doesn't have an obsession with size but more to do with the talents of the players and their willingness to buy into his system of unselfish, team oriented basketball. So far, so good!

Kelly had the game of her life in that Tennessee national championship game and she was a solid player but no where close to a dominant center which you seem to feel we need. Not only that, but don't we presently have a shot blocking virtuoso (Kiah Stokes) that's appreciably smaller than your projected 6'5" criteria? If Butler were available right now, this team would probably be perfect. This year we could use another nice sized body, but not necessarily a 6'5" body but by next year, we'll have the size we need. Why didn't the 1996 team with virtually everyone except Rebecca back repeat or even the following year when Kara was still there? It takes a lot more than size to do the trick and I think Geno is doing fine with his efforts. Our recruiting class next year has three girls coming in with really nice size that can do a variety of things, reminding me of the same things that the TAASK group did. I have no doubt that Geno would LIKE a big dominant center but he surely isn't as concerned about it as you are or feel that his teams won't be as successful.

 

[Sonny44]

I don't agree with the "message" at all. Sure would love to have Lauren Cox etc but what we need is continued GREAT BASKETBALL PLAYERS. Superior team basketball players defeat size. There is such a paranoia about height. It was one of the most overrated things about the college game.

I'd much prefer to see another big time elite quick guard in case Nurse and "TheReaLDanger" get hurt if all things regarding the recruits were equal. But as slu said would love Cox and McCoy etc - and if they want to come - I got to have them. Not as much because of their size but because they are amazing, fabulous BASKETBALL PLAYERS from what I understand.

Notre Dame didn't have the greatest size last year. Tuck doesn't have a lot of size. Size can be so overrated. Griner won one title. One. One. In two of her NCAA defeats she wasn't defeated with size.

You raise some good points. However, I do believe that Dangerfield and possibly Espinoza will be great for us.