Chillious recruiting connections

[upstater]

They never do much of anything in the tournament but without looking it up I think Cincy has a better record than us in the AAC every season since it's formation. SMU is even worse in the tournament but they also always seem to have a better conference record than us. We simply have to step it up.

I don't care if they had a better record if Uconn beats them in the conference tournament and then advances more than they did in the NCAA.

 

[JMick]

I don't care if they had a better record if UConn beats them in the conference tournament and then advances more than they did in the NCAA.

when we make the tournament....

 

[Vuce]

Gonzaga plays in a crap conference and they are in the tourney every year and a decent seed. Conference affiliation will hurt but darn it we should be better than the Zags.

 

[upstater]

when we make the tournament....

???

We made it in 2 of those 3 years.

 

[uconnbill]

You have to recruit the right players for the system you are running. That has been part of the problem alone with problems within the program this past season with players leaving and and coaching changes

 

[superjohn]

I don't care if they had a better record if UConn beats them in the conference tournament and then advances more than they did in the NCAA.

I care about us finishing 6th in this conference, it hurts our recruiting and national perception while also hurting the conference. We should be treating this league like Memphis treated it's league under Calipari. We do that and no doubt we will be getting the top recruits.

 

[upstater]

I care about us finishing 6th in this conference, it hurts our recruiting and national perception while also hueting the conference. We should be treating this league like Memphis did under Calipari. We do that and no doubt we will be getting the top recruits.

I don't think people notice as much as you imagine. Winning the conference tournament, or the national championship, or heck even winning a tournament game is much more noticeable to the rest of the nation.

 

[superjohn]

I don't think people notice as much as you imagine. Winning the conference tournament, or the national championship, or heck even winning a tournament game is much more noticeable to the rest of the nation.

It's just another tool being used against us by other coaches and kids notice not seeing UConn ranked in the top 25. It just has to get better.

 

[intlzncster]

It's just another tool being used against us by other coaches and kids notice not seeing UConn ranked in the top 25. It just has to get better.

You're both kinda right. Where we finish in this conference is totally irrelevant, as long as we are Top 20. If we finish 4th, but are the 15th ranked team, that's fantastic. That's not likely happening of course, as the league doesn't support that.

In terms of national consciousness/perception, the most important things are National Ranking and tournament success. In striving to improving those two metrics, winning this league is just something that falls into place. It's a cause and effect thing.

 

[Paesano]

Dude, it's been two months man. Do you even know how recruiting works?

Guys sometimes follow head coaches to other programs. Assistants, not as much. There's really 3 players we are talking about. One followed his dad and ex head coach (Porter), one wanted to follow his ex head coach and stud teammate (Harris), and one who was a down to the wire loss to a conference rival (Diarra).

What magical hats did you think Chillious would pull rabbits out of this quickly and this late in the game?

That's fine but then you can't say he has made a big difference. Maybe, later, we will see that he has made a big difference. But, as of right now, there is no data upon which to stake that claim. I am not knocking him for not having made a big difference yet. I am just pointing out that it is difficult to support a claim that he has.

 

[Huskybass]

I don't think people notice as much as you imagine. Winning the conference tournament, or the national championship, or heck even winning a tournament game is much more noticeable to the rest of the nation.

Being unranked all season long certainly keeps UConn out of the spotlight. We simply have to have better regular seasons to be relevant on the national scene.

 

[UConnSwag11]

Our conference is the biggest hurdle in recruiting. I miss the days going to Cuse,Pitt and ND. Now we are left w Memphis and Temple , Cincy as the biggest games. Not to mention no more MSG tournament.No thanks. I don't blame kids looking elsewhere and it's an uphill battle for Ollie.

No. Winning is the biggest hurdle. We win it solves everything

 

[TitleTown]

You have to recruit the right players for the system you are running. That has been part of the problem alone with problems within the program this past season with players leaving and and coaching changes

The system we run is also a big problem as well.

 

[HuskiesAllDay]

You have to recruit the right players for the system you are running. That has been part of the problem alone with problems within the program this past season with players leaving and and coaching changes

I think the problem is that we don't have a system, and/or say we have a certain system when in reality we are doing the exact opposite. How can you recruit the "right" players to fit a system that doesn't actually exist?

We market ourselves/ have a perception of running a "position less", free flowing, nba, fast paced style. In theory Facey, Brimah, Durmah etc would be perfect fits due to their length, speed, and athleticism etc.

Except that isn't at all how we actually play. The reality is that we play a slow paced offense with three guys standing behind the 3 point line pounding the ball into submission with occasional half-a** screen attempts..

This system requires a lot of shooters (which we never actually seem to try to recruit). And would be best used with a big man down low who has post moves so we can feed it into him and then he can kick it out to said 3 guys standing behind the 3 point line (which we rarely recruit, although Carlton is a nice step in the right direction).

So we either need to acknowledge the system that we actually run and then recruit those types of players. Or recruit guys that fit this hypothetical system that we say we run, and then actually play that way.

But when you tell recruits you are going to play a certain style and then do the exact opposite, well its no wonder they might want to leave.

 

[LStudfellow]

The system we run is also a big problem as well.

To use an excellent word from BigErn - this calling out the system Ollie is trying to run as "a big problem" is a total canard.

KO is trying to run NBA-style pro sets. That is what high school kids want to hear and see. Obviously they have dreams of playing in the NBA, so this is a positive selling point, not a negative. Additionally, when he has a full compliment of players he wants to run largely a man-to-man defense. Again, a positive selling point versus, say, Syracuse, who runs their 2-3 zone.

Although we did not run our sets well at all last year, the philosophy is not the issue. The execution definitely is. That is on the coaches and the players.

Now, if we were running Tony Bennett's archaic offensive system at the University of Virginia, I would agree with you.

Edit: Good points by HuskiesAllDay and Uconnbill right before my post.

 

[HuskiesAllDay]

To use an excellent word from BigErn - this calling out the system Ollie is trying to run as "a big problem" is a total canard.

KO is trying to run NBA-style pro sets. That is what high school kids want to hear and see. Obviously they have dreams of playing in the NBA, so this is a positive selling point, not a negative. Additionally, when he has a full compliment of players he wants to run largely a man-to-man defense. Again, a positive selling point versus, say, Syracuse, who runs their 2-3 zone.

Although we did not run our sets well at all last year, the philosophy is not the issue. The execution definitely is. That is on the coaches and the players.

Now, if we were running Tony Bennett's archaic offensive system at the University of Virginia, I would agree with you.

Edit: Good points by HuskiesAllDay and Uconnbill right before my post.

You obviously missed the entire point of my post.

Execution is a problem, but for me, clearly defining said system is the larger issue. Its not so much an issue of execution as not knowing exactly what you are supposed to execute on.

You say that KO is trying to run pro style sets, but where is the evidence of this? Nobody even moves off the ball in our "sets".

Tony Bennett is at least recruiting the right kids for his "archaic system" which btw has resulted in a heck of a lot more winning lately than our"appealing" one.

 

[husky429]

I think the problem is that we don't have a system, and/or say we have a certain system when in reality we are doing the exact opposite. How can you recruit the "right" players to fit a system that doesn't actually exist?

We market ourselves/ have a perception of running a "position less", free flowing, nba, fast paced style. In theory Facey, Brimah, Durmah etc would be perfect fits due to their length, speed, and athleticism etc.

Except that isn't at all how we actually play. The reality is that we play a slow paced offense with three guys standing behind the 3 point line pounding the ball into submission with occasional half-a** screen attempts..

This system requires a lot of shooters (which we never actually seem to try to recruit). And would be best used with a big man down low who has post moves so we can feed it into him and then he can kick it out to said 3 guys standing behind the 3 point line (which we rarely recruit, although Carlton is a nice step in the right direction).

So we either need to acknowledge the system that we actually run and then recruit those types of players. Or recruit guys that fit this hypothetical system that we say we run, and then actually play that way.

But when you tell recruits you are going to play a certain style and then do the exact opposite, well its no wonder they might want to leave.

I don't know how you can possibly think we're not recruiting players to fit our system--particularly your comment about shooters. Ollie has CERTAINLY been recruiting versatile players and shooters.

- Vance
- Vital
- The rest of the top 5... while they ultimately left they were recruited.
- Our top recruits for 2018? Jalen Carey--an elite shooter. Simi Shittu--great shooter for a PF and a super versatile player. Iggy, shooter.

The illusion that our offense stinks has been overblown in my mind. Have we been ineffecient, yes. That's partly because our lack of skilled big men. I think Ollie has been targetting more skilled, less athletic bigs to try to avoid this recently. Cobb and Carlton couldn't be farther from Brimah and Facey offensively.

We are running NBA sets. They work very, very well for our guards. That's a fact. We haven't had the personnel to make this work with 100% effeciency. Or even close. The offense has been pretty bad. Could it change, YES. We could use some more sets that play to our players strengths. But we DO NOT need a complete and utter overhaul as you seem to suggest.

Our sets out of timeouts have been some of the most effecient in the country under ollie. People constantly seem to forget that one here.

 

[HuskiesAllDay]

I don't know how you can possibly think we're not recruiting players to fit our system--particularly your comment about shooters. Ollie has CERTAINLY been recruiting versatile players and shooters.

- Vance
- Vital
- The rest of the top 5... while they ultimately left they were recruited.
- Our top recruits for 2018? Jalen Carey--an elite shooter. Simi Shittu--great shooter for a PF and a super versatile player. Iggy, shooter.

The illusion that our offense stinks has been overblown in my mind. Have we been ineffecient, yes. That's partly because our lack of skilled big men. I think Ollie has been targetting more skilled, less athletic bigs to try to avoid this recently. Cobb and Carlton couldn't be farther from Brimah and Facey offensively.

We are running NBA sets. They work very, very well for our guards. That's a fact. We haven't had the personnel to make this work with 100% effeciency. Or even close. The offense has been pretty bad. Could it change, YES. We could use some more sets that play to our players strengths. But we DO NOT need a complete and utter overhaul as you seem to suggest.

Our sets out of timeouts have been some of the most effecient in the country under ollie. People constantly seem to forget that one here.

1.) I agree he has been recruiting versatile players. But we havent actual run the right system to fit them. Which is exactly my entire point!

2.) Our timeout sets and inbound plays have been nothing short of dreadful the last few years.

3.) Our offense has not been good the last few years. Kenpom offensive efficiency rankings last 5 years: 156, 59, 100, 39, 55. Average of 82.

3.) Jalen Adams waiting until there is 5 seconds left on the shot clock and then using his great athleticism blow by ability to get a hoop does not mean we are running great sets for our guards. Or Shabazz making some prayer 3 because he is great.

4.) Vance Jackson was a shooter yes. But he was likely told he would be playing in a free flowing versatile system rather one that required him to stand in the corner. VJ is too slow and athletic to play in this make believe versatile system.

He actually exemplifies all of my points. He thought he was coming to play in a certain system (which he isn't actually cut out for due to lack of quickness and versatility). When we didn't play that way he wasn't happy and left. Ironically Vance ended up fitting the system we actually played much better than the system we told him we were going to play. But he wasn't recruited to do so!

This clearly highlights the problem which is lacking a clearly defined system and then actually playing that way. Only then can we actually recruit the right type of players.

 

[mauconnfan]

Being unranked all season long certainly keeps UConn out of the spotlight. We simply have to have better regular seasons to be relevant on the national scene.

Yeah it was tough to watch ESPN and see the Top 25 scores and not see our guys up there unless they were playing someone relevant. That needs to stop as no one is used to that and media markets you as well.

 

[mauconnfan]

The system we run is also a big problem as well.

During JC's tenure when he had an off year his "system" was questioned.

Just win, the "system" will work too.

 

[LStudfellow]

You obviously missed the entire point of my post.

Execution is a problem, but for me, clearly defining said system is the larger issue. Its not so much an issue of execution as not knowing exactly what you are supposed to execute on.

You say that KO is trying to run pro style sets, but where is the evidence of this? Nobody even moves off the ball in our "sets".

Tony Bennett is at least recruiting the right kids for his "archaic system" which btw has resulted in a heck of a lot more winning lately than our"appealing" one.

HuskiesAllDay, I was debating the point made by TitleTown about our system being a big problem in recruiting, of which there is ample proof that this is not true. Go back and watch the games (easily done thanks to tcf15). Yes, there are way too many breakdowns that turn into 1-on-1 play and passive passing around the perimeter. But that is not what Ollie is trying to get accomplished.

My choice of Tony Bennett was not about whether he was successful or not (he is - regular season. Not so much in the tournament though). But just that if we were running that same type of system then you could point to it as one of our problems.

Unfortunately, our big men kept showing over and over again that they were unable to handle even the simplest of dump down passes. Therefore, the guards started to shy away from dumping it down to them on any consistent basis. Example: loved Brimah's positive attitude, but he has some of the worst hands we have ever seen on a UConn big man.

You want to blame Ollie for the recruiting results of our big men, fine. But to say it is the offensive system we are trying to run is hogwash. A decent system can and does get bogged down and look really bad when the guys trying to run it are failing at even the simplest of tasks. Case in point: our offense this last year, which was unwatchable much of the year.

 

[husky429]

you pretty much got every point wrong.

1.) I agree he has been recruiting versatile players. But we havent actual run the right system to fit them. Which is exactly my entire point!

2.) Our timeout sets and inbound plays have been nothing short of dreadful the last few years.

3.) Our offense has not been good the last few years. Kenpom offensive efficiency rankings last 5 years: 156, 59, 100, 39, 55. Average of 82.

3.) Jalen Adams waiting until there is 5 seconds left on the shot clock and then using his great athleticism blow by ability to get a hoop does not mean we are running great sets for our guards. Or Shabazz making some prayer 3 because he is great.

4.) Vance Jackson was a shooter yes. But he was likely told he would be playing in a free flowing versatile system rather one that required him to stand in the corner. VJ is too slow and athletic to play in this make believe versatile system.

He actually exemplifies all of my points. He thought he was coming to play in a certain system (which he isn't actually cut out for due to lack of quickness and versatility). When we didn't play that way he wasn't happy and left. Ironically Vance ended up fitting the system we actually played much better than the system we told him we were going to play. But he wasn't recruited to do so!

This clearly highlights the problem which is lacking a clearly defined system and then actually playing that way. Only then can we actually recruit the right type of players.

1.) We have the right system for versatile players, but we have had offensive black holes at the 4 and the 5 for years. NBA pick and roll sets are DESIGNED for versatile players, dude.

2) You need to re-check your facts. Facts are that we have been one of the most effecient teams out of time outs. I don't have a subscription to find you the info any more. If someone does, please enlighten.

3) It is not just Jalen waiting and blowing by everyone on the court. Ollie's strength is match ups because of his NBA background. Using screens and motions to get Jalen a solid mismatch, or Shonn Miller on the block 1 on 1, or Brimah an Alleyoop off of the overplay on Adams is an EXCELLENT play. That is not just random blowby's. It's an articulated offense that these players have practiced for years to perfect. You're underselling how much of a skill good screen setting, offensive footwork, and spacing are.

4) Vance came to UConn and should have expected to play the role of a versatile role. He didn't want to play the 4. He left. Simple as that, with some Ollie negativity from Dad thrown in there, some chemistry issues and voi la. he's gone.

Ollie is not a perfect offensive mind--he is certainly not Brad Stevens. But the sets he is running are not terrible as you might suggest. He needs to use similar sets but change the STYLE if you will. The fact that you're speaking in absolutes about a very non-absolute game shows me that you probably don't know very much about the complexities of the sport. "casual fan" maybe?

I have had my team practice diagramming UConn's plays for years. They're a little different under Ollie, but they work well. Ollie's 1-2-2 box weave against a zone in particular has the chance to be very, very successful if we get the right personnel. I think you're simplifying what happens on the court too much.

 

[HuskiesAllDay]

HuskiesAllDay, I was debating the point made by TitleTown about our system being a big problem in recruiting, of which there is ample proof that this is not true. Go back and watch the games (easily done thanks to tcf15). Yes, there are way too many breakdowns that turn into 1-on-1 play and passive passing around the perimeter. But that is not what Ollie is trying to get accomplished.

My choice of Tony Bennett was not about whether he was successful or not (he is - regular season. Not so much in the tournament though). But just that if we were running that same type of system then you could point to it as one of our problems.

Unfortunately, our big men kept showing over and over again that they were unable to handle even the simplest of dump down passes. Therefore, the guards started to shy away from dumping it down to them on any consistent basis. Example: loved Brimah's positive attitude, but he has some of the worst hands we have ever seen on a UConn big man.

You want to blame Ollie for the recruiting results of our big men, fine. But to say it is the offensive system we are trying to run is hogwash. A decent system can and does get bogged down and look really bad when the guys trying to run it are failing at even the simplest of tasks. Case in point: our offense this last year, which was unwatchable much of the year.

I wasn't blaming Ollie for poor recruiting and I wasn't even saying our system is hogwash. I saying its inconsistent with what we tell recruits and the media etc.

My point is that Ollie is actually hamstringing himself because what we tell recruits is not the system that we actually run.

And because of this, it makes it difficult to find the right type of players which makes developing them challenging. And it makes it hard to keep them happy because what they were told doesn't end up happening.

If you tell VJ he will play a versatile role and then he stands in the corner (which is actually the correct role for him) this will make it tough to develop him and to keep him happy.

 

[HuskiesAllDay]

1.) We have the right system for versatile players, but we have had offensive black holes at the 4 and the 5 for years. NBA pick and roll sets are DESIGNED for versatile players, dude.

2) You need to re-check your facts. Facts are that we have been one of the most effecient teams out of time outs. I don't have a subscription to find you the info any more. If someone does, please enlighten.

3) It is not just Jalen waiting and blowing by everyone on the court. Ollie's strength is match ups because of his NBA background. Using screens and motions to get Jalen a solid mismatch, or Shonn Miller on the block 1 on 1, or Brimah an Alleyoop off of the overplay on Adams is an EXCELLENT play. That is not just random blowby's. It's an articulated offense that these players have practiced for years to perfect. You're underselling how much of a skill good screen setting, offensive footwork, and spacing are.

4) Vance came to UConn and should have expected to play the role of a versatile role. He didn't want to play the 4. He left. Simple as that, with some Ollie negativity from Dad thrown in there, some chemistry issues and voi la. he's gone.

Ollie is not a perfect offensive mind--he is certainly not Brad Stevens. But the sets he is running are not terrible as you might suggest. He needs to use similar sets but change the STYLE if you will. The fact that you're speaking in absolutes about a very non-absolute game shows me that you probably don't know very much about the complexities of the sport. "casual fan" maybe?

I have had my team practice diagramming UConn's plays for years. They're a little different under Ollie, but they work well. Ollie's 1-2-2 box weave against a zone in particular has the chance to be very, very successful if we get the right personnel. I think you're simplifying what happens on the court too much.

1.) Respectfully, if we have offensive black holes, then they aren't the right type of players for a versatile system.

2.) could def be wrong on the inbound sets. I don't have data on this, but the eye test indicates otherwise. But this is very objective and non factual so I concede this point if thats what the data says.

3.) the stats that i just posted indicate that we are not, in fact, running great offensive sets. this really isn't arguable. In fact you are sort of contradicting yourself. If we have the right players, and are running great sets, then how can we have such mediocre/poor offensive numbers?

Makes me think we don't have the right players for our offense which was my initial point.

4.) I agree. And this supports my claim that there is an issue with communication/expectations and what actually transpires. This was my other initial point.

I think you are actually agreeing with me, but you don't really realize it.

Either way appreciate the back and forth.

 

[TitleTown]

To use an excellent word from BigErn - this calling out the system Ollie is trying to run as "a big problem" is a total canard.

KO is trying to run NBA-style pro sets. That is what high school kids want to hear and see. Obviously they have dreams of playing in the NBA, so this is a positive selling point, not a negative. Additionally, when he has a full compliment of players he wants to run largely a man-to-man defense. Again, a positive selling point versus, say, Syracuse, who runs their 2-3 zone.

Although we did not run our sets well at all last year, the philosophy is not the issue. The execution definitely is. That is on the coaches and the players.

Now, if we were running Tony Bennett's archaic offensive system at the University of Virginia, I would agree with you.

Edit: Good points by HuskiesAllDay and Uconnbill right before my post.

Yeah, because Wright, Calipari, Coach K, etc have a hard time recruiting and winning with their predominately motion offenses. The pro style offense only works if you have the right players and recently UConn has not had them.

 

[KembaStepback]

UConn has had 7 4 star recruits in the last 3 years and has finished 6th, 6th and 6th in the AAC the last 3 years. How are 5 other schools out recruiting UConn in conference? FYI - all 5 aren't.

And yet Gonzaga has 4 4 star recruits in the last 3 years playing in the mighty WCC and a deep NCAA 2 out of the last 3 years.

Recruiting doesn't seem to be an issue at all except this year.

Weird...could have sworn we made the Final game 3 of the last 4 yrs and won once...

 

[Bonehead]

Weird...could have sworn we made the Final game 3 of the last 4 yrs and won once...

You are comparing gonzaga deep runs in NCAA to uconn 2nd in aac tourney Gosh I didn't think of making that comparison.

 

[Huskybass]

1.) We have the right system for versatile players, but we have had offensive black holes at the 4 and the 5 for years. NBA pick and roll sets are DESIGNED for versatile players, dude.

2) You need to re-check your facts. Facts are that we have been one of the most effecient teams out of time outs. I don't have a subscription to find you the info any more. If someone does, please enlighten.

3) It is not just Jalen waiting and blowing by everyone on the court. Ollie's strength is match ups because of his NBA background. Using screens and motions to get Jalen a solid mismatch, or Shonn Miller on the block 1 on 1, or Brimah an Alleyoop off of the overplay on Adams is an EXCELLENT play. That is not just random blowby's. It's an articulated offense that these players have practiced for years to perfect. You're underselling how much of a skill good screen setting, offensive footwork, and spacing are.

4) Vance came to UConn and should have expected to play the role of a versatile role. He didn't want to play the 4. He left. Simple as that, with some Ollie negativity from Dad thrown in there, some chemistry issues and voi la. he's gone.

Ollie is not a perfect offensive mind--he is certainly not Brad Stevens. But the sets he is running are not terrible as you might suggest. He needs to use similar sets but change the STYLE if you will. The fact that you're speaking in absolutes about a very non-absolute game shows me that you probably don't know very much about the complexities of the sport. "casual fan" maybe?

I have had my team practice diagramming UConn's plays for years. They're a little different under Ollie, but they work well. Ollie's 1-2-2 box weave against a zone in particular has the chance to be very, very successful if we get the right personnel. I think you're simplifying what happens on the court too much.

What a load of crap. Shonn Miller was a great player at power forward in 2015-16. I never once thought of him as a black hole.

 

[husky429]

What a load of crap. Shonn Miller was a great player at power forward in 2015-16. I never once thought of him as a black hole.

I was really referring to facey. Miller was very efficient on the block--notice i said later that setting him up 1 0n 1 was a great play for Ollie.

Im not sure you know what a black hole in this comtext is. Black hole means "nothing comes out" ... That's what a black hole is in space. An object so dense nothing comes out (except hawking radiation lol). That doesn't have much to do with the scoring of the player or anything, just passing. I can't even recall how Miller was as a passer.

Edit: he was .9 assist per game. Sort of actually was a "black hole" in that way. But most bigs are.

Brimah is THE black hole. He was an awful passer and inconsistent back to the basket. If he could have learned to pass back out it would have masked many of his 1v1 deficiencies. I hope he picks that up in the pros because he could be a power with his athleticism and blocking

 

[pj]

I was really referring to facey. Miller was very efficient on the block--notice i said later that setting him up 1 0n 1 was a great play for Ollie.

Im not sure you know what a black hole in this comtext is. Black hole means "nothing comes out" ... That's what a black hole is in space. An object so dense nothing comes out (except hawking radiation lol). That doesn't have much to do with the scoring of the player or anything, just passing. I can't even recall how Miller was as a passer.

Edit: he was .9 assist per game. Sort of actually was a "black hole" in that way. But most bigs are.

Brimah is THE black hole. He was an awful passer and inconsistent back to the basket. If he could have learned to pass back out it would have masked many of his 1v1 deficiencies. I hope he picks that up in the pros because he could be a power with his athleticism and blocking

The worst black holes are ones where a pass in is converted to a turnover or missed shot. Enoch was a massive black hole. Turnover on one third of his touches and missed shots on most of the rest.