Current Talent and Incoming Talent | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Current Talent and Incoming Talent

BFieldHusky said:
Besides Jalen we are losing Tarin, Cobb, Yakwe and Kwitin. 1 starter, 3 role players and a guy who doesn't play. We bring in a lot more than we lose.
Expand ...

And that starter is a massive negative in the intangibles. Big-time Ewing Theory potential.
 
Tex-Lager93 said:
Maybe a bit of both - we had a run of single digit team recruiting years but normally landed in the 15-35 range. In addition to those above, Louisville, Arizona, Texas, Mich St, Syracuse, etc were consistently ahead of us. Okafor was high 90's - as was Kemba and Shabazz. Yet, we're the one with 4 championships - because they stayed and developed for 3+ years.
Expand ...
Bazz also reclassified
 
If we avoid bringing in anymore “ project” level
Bigs, we’ll be fine. Too many “ project” 4’s and 5’s on the roster. It’s ok to have some but not all.
 
What's the story with Dimon Carrigan? Is he a fall back option still or has staff moved on?
 
.-.
if it adds some objectivity to the conversation about current versus incoming talent, here's the roster for this year and next (projected) with their 247 sports composite star ranks in parentheses. like it or not these things are what the class ranks are based on:

2018- (four 4 stars & six 3 stars)
gilbert (4)---smith (3)
j. adams (4)-b. adams (3)
vital (3)-----wilson (4)
polley (3)---yakwe (4*)
carlton (3)--cobb (3)

2019- (five 4 stars & five 3 stars)
gilbert (4)-----gaffney (3*)
bouknight (4)-adams (3)
vital (3)-------wilson (4)
akok (4)------polley (3)
cockburn (4)-carlton (3)

Even assuming we get Kofi that's only a net gain of one 4 star player for next year, but most everyone here agrees gaffney is underrated and yakwe turned out to be very overrated. So it would be more like a net gain of three 4 star players (from 3 to 6).

i'm not one to gripe about a roster with six 4 star and four 3 star recruits on it and am confident the turnaround will be much more noticeable starting next year
 
Last edited:
Yeah I kind of discussed this in another thread, but the reality is this year was to kind of hope we could keep the players we had here, and replace the exits with real, bonafide talent.

Right now we have 2-3 guys who have the talent levels to either start or make a real impact over four years. The rest are kind of one tool guys we need more than one tool from and reality is we're just not gonna get that from them. and entire half of the roster are kind of lucky to have scholarships. It's hard to really even see growth with that.

Next year the freshman/inexperienced guys we have this year will probably be real contributers and be more starter-ish. And we'll have another wave of guys as talented, maybe a little more talented who instead of being leaned on all the time - will come off the bench and rotate through more like they should. And we'll be able to better leverage some one-tool guys. Bad players who see the court this year, won't next year. But in that mix, you'll see major bumps and likely the end result is a record similar to this year's squad, but with actual growth from your key guys.

It's that next year where you've got bonafide talented starters and then ANOTHER good wave of talent to fill out your bench with some one tool guys who really should be pretty good. Then - well you'll see a tournament caliber team.

I'm going to be really interested in this year's roster turnover. It'll be interested to see if Cobb cooks off. I don't think Whaley has a home here. Those are two spots that open up and who knows - maybe a late commit but more likely a transfer that can be used to fill a hole. But they could be really important slots to fit that you MIGHT be able to upgrade a bit. I think that's where you have a chance to add depth.
 
GuardU said:
To be clear, I'm neither pro Hurley or Ollie, I just think this fan base deserves a respectable product that doesn't tarnish it's reputation, of what's left that is. Occasional NCAA tournament misses can be dealt with, but it would appear we're further away from MAKING an NCAA tournament again than we care to admit as a fan base.

Obviously Hurley deserves a couple years beyond this year to prove he can assemble a respectable UConn team, but I don't think it's next year like a lot of you think.

For starters, what was the purpose of wasting a 4 yr scholarship on B Adams? I get that he's a freshman, but if the consensus is that we need to infuse the roster with "UConn level talent" I don't think B Adams was a good way to kick off the Hurley regime. What does he do well?

Bouknight, Gaffney, and Akok are obviously a great start to rebuilding this program, but not one of these guys is physically ready to play in a high-level D1 game. All 3 essentially have the build of Sid, which will continue the trend of rolling out boys vs. men. The nice thing is all 3 can shoot, which will add a missing dimension next year, but I'm anticipating similar rebounding struggles that will carry into next year, until we gain commitmentS for big men in next year's class.

Strength and shooting need to be the priority in our talent evaluations moving forward. Both of which should be pretty easy to identify.
Expand ...
I agree to an extent. I don't think this team has much talent and I'm including JA in that assessment. Im not sure JA will even be on an NBA roster in 3 years. This team has guys starting who wouldn't get off the bench if they were here before 2011. Im watching this season to watch Hurley and get a feel for him as a coach and I like what I see from him. There will be bumps in the road but I think when he gets all his guys in here you'll really start to see this thing turn around but you have to start somewhere and so far next years class is off to a good start but the following couple seasons will really tell the story of where this program will be a decade from now.
 
ThabeetDown said:
Give me Kofi and everything will be fine. That's a man to play against men.
Expand ...
We are a very different team with Kofi. We have a lot of points to replace when Jalen leaves and front court scoring/rebounding will be key.
 
.-.
coachn said:
B Adams will be a very good player at UCONN contrary to what U says-he deserves to have significant time right now from what I have observed. Love his game and attitude. Guards playing ahead of him he's better than all of them.
Expand ...

Not yet he isn't. He won't be better than Adams, Gilbert, Smith and Vital until they leave.
 
joober jones said:
People made similar comments about Donnell Beverly but that worked out pretty well for us. Never a star, but a big part of our championship run nonetheless.
Expand ...

It was great to see him play meaningful minutes against Syracuse in game 4 of the 2011 Big East Tournament. Forgot he played that much, same for Coombes-McDaniel.
 
Towney007 said:
Yeah I kind of discussed this in another thread, but the reality is this year was to kind of hope we could keep the players we had here, and replace the exits with real, bonafide talent.

Right now we have 2-3 guys who have the talent levels to either start or make a real impact over four years. The rest are kind of one tool guys we need more than one tool from and reality is we're just not gonna get that from them. and entire half of the roster are kind of lucky to have scholarships. It's hard to really even see growth with that.

Next year the freshman/inexperienced guys we have this year will probably be real contributers and be more starter-ish. And we'll have another wave of guys as talented, maybe a little more talented who instead of being leaned on all the time - will come off the bench and rotate through more like they should. And we'll be able to better leverage some one-tool guys. Bad players who see the court this year, won't next year. But in that mix, you'll see major bumps and likely the end result is a record similar to this year's squad, but with actual growth from your key guys.

It's that next year where you've got bonafide talented starters and then ANOTHER good wave of talent to fill out your bench with some one tool guys who really should be pretty good. Then - well you'll see a tournament caliber team.

I'm going to be really interested in this year's roster turnover. It'll be interested to see if Cobb cooks off. I don't think Whaley has a home here. Those are two spots that open up and who knows - maybe a late commit but more likely a transfer that can be used to fill a hole. But they could be really important slots to fit that you MIGHT be able to upgrade a bit. I think that's where you have a chance to add depth.
Expand ...
I pray CV stays. His ranking no longer matters. He is playing over that now. I do get your point. We have to recruit better. Turnover for 19 - 20 is fine by me in the right places.
 
Our problems can be fixed with some decent bigs, everyone will be better.
 
Get some good bigs in & it should even potentially boost production from our current bigs. Iron sharpens iron, unfortunately right now we’re rubbing cotton balls together this season
 
Tex-Lager93 said:
Maybe a bit of both - we had a run of single digit team recruiting years but normally landed in the 15-35 range. In addition to those above, Louisville, Arizona, Texas, Mich St, Syracuse, etc were consistently ahead of us. Okafor was high 90's - as was Kemba and Shabazz. Yet, we're the one with 4 championships - because they stayed and developed for 3+ years.
Expand ...
Kemba was a McD All Am.
 
.-.
jibsey said:
Our problems can be fixed with some decent bigs, everyone will be better.
Expand ...
This is simplistic. In the second half on Wednesday we got outplayed at every spot on the floor, particularly noticeable at the guard spot, by Rideau and Collins.
 
This is pretty close to a total rebuild and talent is desperately needed. That is clear just from the eye test. I know it gets progressively harder to deal with as bad years string together, but all you can really do is see what Hurley does. Losses like the one to South Florida are just part of it all, and really shouldn't be that surprising as when you aren't a good team, you can lose to anyone.

Hurley is clearly more engaged than KO was and it is hard to believe that he won't be fielding good teams in a couple of years.
 
Stainmaster said:
Adams will be fine long-term. If you wanted instant-impact freshmen from Day 1, you're spoiled.
Expand ...
This sounds a lot like your the program couldn’t do better than Ollie rhetoric Stain. This program was used to excellence and recruits who either performed at a high level their first year or showed exciting promise. Being okay with no impact from freshmen is a loser mentality.
 
tentoes4rings said:
This sounds a lot like your the program couldn’t do better than Ollie rhetoric Stain. This program was used to excellence and recruits who either performed at a high level their first year or showed exciting promise. Being okay with no impact from freshmen is a loser mentality.
Expand ...

Completely false. There are plenty of key contributors who were non factors their freshman year over the past 25 years
 
.-.
tentoes4rings said:
This sounds a lot like your the program couldn’t do better than Ollie rhetoric Stain. This program was used to excellence and recruits who either performed at a high level their first year or showed exciting promise. Being okay with no impact from freshmen is a loser mentality.
Expand ...

This is revisionist history.
 
KenPom and others have done work and found that on average non-top 30 freshman are often not important to team success in their first year. That's the expected cutoff for consistently positively affecting winning. So that's not just showing flashes, but being an important net positive contributor.

Always exceptions, etc. But take Akinjo. He's a low top 100 recruit, thrust into a big role at Georgetown. It seems like he's blossoming as a freshman, but he's got a 27% turnover rate and despite better shooting of late he's shooting 42% on 2s so he has a sub 100 ORTG.

Akok and Kofi are on the fringe of top 30, and would probably be good contributors with a neutral overall impact as freshmen. Precious would likely swing the needle a good deal.
 
auror said:
Always exceptions, etc.
Expand ...

we depend on those non-top 30 freshmen exceptions:

boatright- #55
shabazz- #82
jeremy lamb- #86
brimah- #241
giffey- unranked

all these guys played big roles their first year. i chalk that up to good recruiting beyond the ranking lists and great coaching. i'm not arguing about the stats you cite- i can't- i'm just saying we've had more success than the average program in getting the most out of guys early on. hopefully hurley can continue that practice
 
Last edited:
yukonfan4 said:
we depend on those non-top 30 freshmen exceptions:

boatright- #55
shabazz- #82
jeremy lamb- #86
brimah- #241
giffey- unranked

all these guys played big roles their first year. i chalk that up to good recruiting beyond the ranking lists and great coaching
Expand ...

They've definitely helped, but not something we should EXPECT. For every 1 that hits, there will be multiple that are net negatives.

As it is, Lamb was the genuine exception. He was awesome. Brimah was really good as well, although in limited minutes. Shabazz was a neutral contributor as a freshman, maybe slightly positive with defense factored in. Boatright would probably count as a net positive as well. Giffey was a negative, though.
 
methodology said:
Completely false. There are plenty of key contributors who were non factors their freshman year over the past 25 years
Expand ...
No. I’m not saying it happened with all of the top guys. There were plenty of guys like Hilton and Thabeet who went from non contributors to stars their final years but to say we’re spoiled because we expect a freshman to make an impact is ridiculous. Top programs have some freshmen who make a big impact, we’ll need some of that too to get back to what we were accustomed to.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,347
Messages
4,566,266
Members
10,468
Latest member
ADD3LA


Top Bottom