Mamoudou Diarra update

[TRest]

I like this. It means a decision will come soon. Will provide KO some clarity on 2017 recruiting.

I eagerly await the flood of commits that will follow.

 

[BUConn10]

Nothing is a done deal until the kid is on campus, we have learned that lesson many times. If a kid was a done deal, the deal would be done.

 

[businesslawyer]

For the millionth time, we need bodies. Are you comfortable we will have a full roster of capable guys for next season or you're satisfied rolling with 8 guys and Foxen getting rotation minutes?

Stop. Please. Not a single person here has said that they are "comfortable" with how we would line up next season at this moment. Intelligence understands that you cam be uncomfortable with the present, and still be trying to avoid steps that you think are likely to be train wrecks in the future.

 

[Tenspro2002]

I, like @pj, find it hard to believe he would be told he's a 5. If they did tell him that, it's a huge and inexplicable mistake. Diarra may sign elsewhere anyway, but I hope OZ is wrong about the reason.

Agreed. He looks like a 4 in the Kentan Facey mold, maybe even a little more perimeter oriented. That's also a position of need next year and in the future.

I don't know why KO would tell him he'd be a 5.

 

[UConniki]

Agreed. He looks like a 4 in the Kentan Facey mold, maybe even a little more perimeter oriented. That's also a position of need next year and in the future.

I don't know why KO would tell him he'd be a 5.

The answer to that ? is becoming clearer everyday.

 

[superjohn]

Stop. Please. Not a single person here has said that they are "comfortable" with how we would line up next season at this moment. Intelligence understands that you cam be uncomfortable with the present, and still be trying to avoid steps that you think are likely to be train wrecks in the future.

Going into next season with 9 players, only a handful of which we actually know can play is absolutely a trainwreck. This is a kid who was supposed to be in the bag for us, if Ollie was telling him he could only play the 5 here it is malpractice on KO's part.

 

[AntG168]

Inexplicable. He's not a 5 smh. I hope KO knows what he is doing....

 

[pj]

Agreed. He looks like a 4 in the Kentan Facey mold, maybe even a little more perimeter oriented. That's also a position of need next year and in the future.

I don't know why KO would tell him he'd be a 5.

It is puzzling. I'm going to guess:
- KO is committed to going away from the longer lineups that JC preferred to more of a small ball system.
- KO is serious about wanting all 5 players to be versatile in their ability to defend multiple player types and to shoot, pass, dribble. He wants a 5 with footspeed and point guard and transition/perimeter skills. Therefore he is seeking to find 3/4 types with size who are willing to play inside.
- This desire on KO's part conflicts with the desire seemingly all players have to play one position outside, e.g. 4s to be 3s, 3s, to be 2s, 2s to be 1s. In effect KO wants to find a guy willing to play 2 positions up from where he sees himself and at least 1 position up from where other coaches are pitching the player.
- I wonder if Chillious the sales guy is going to have friction with KO the anti-sales guy. If sales is finding out what the person wants to buy, and offering it to them, then KO is not selling. He's offering to buy a particular type of player and searching for willing sellers. That's a very different approach to recruiting.
- We may have a hard time finding 5s.

 

[djct1999]

Going into next season with 9 players, only a handful of which we actually know can play is absolutely a trainwreck. This is a kid who was supposed to be in the bag for us, if Ollie was telling him he could only play the 5 here it is malpractice on KO's part.

Adding Diarra would not do much for 2017. Especially if he wants to play the 3. I would like to think over the next 3 years, UConn could do much better with the scholarship they would have awarded Diarra. As I mentioned in another thread, I personally appreciate that UConn doesn't seem to be making the same mistake it has in the past. With Diarra in particular, holding firm on position is a huge first step. If he doesn't like, which it appears he doesn't, so be it. UConn can do 100x better at the position he thinks he can play.

 

[AntG168]

Adding Diarra would not do much for 2017. Especially if he wants to play the 3. I would like to think over the next 3 years, UConn could do much better with the scholarship they would have awarded Diarra. As I mentioned in another thread, I personally appreciate that UConn doesn't seem to be making the same mistake it has in the past. With Diarra in particular, holding firm on position is a huge first step. If he doesn't like, which it appears he doesn't, so be it. UConn can do 100x better at the position he thinks he can play.

That's a way to look at it. I just feel we need bodies everywhere. But the staff may feel they are ok on the wing. I juat hope they are correct in their assessment

 

[Mooch82]

Inexplicable. He's not a 5 smh. I hope KO knows what he is doing....

Agreed...not only is he not a 5, but this is very contradictory to Ollie's theory of "positionless basketball". I don't think he's a 3 either...but we could definitely sell him as a 4 with the possibility of playing the 3.

 

[superjohn]

Adding Diarra would not do much for 2017. Especially if he wants to play the 3. I would like to think over the next 3 years, UConn could do much better with the scholarship they would have awarded Diarra. As I mentioned in another thread, I personally appreciate that UConn doesn't seem to be making the same mistake it has in the past. With Diarra in particular, holding firm on position is a huge first step. If he doesn't like, which it appears he doesn't, so be it. UConn can do 100x better at the position he thinks he can play.

I can see why you don't think Diarra is a 3 but you do realize he's not a 5, right? I disagree he wouldn't do much for 2017, any guy 6'7 plus with a pulse would help us next year at this point.

 

[AntG168]

Agreed...not only is he not a 5, but this is very contradictory to Ollie's theory of "positionless basketball". I don't think he's a 3 either...but we could definitely sell him as a 4 with the possibility of playing the 3.

Maybe the reason durham left is because he told him he was a 5 too. Lol. Idk man not a big deal i guess. But we need someone to fill this roster out for 2017

 

[djct1999]

I can see why you don't think Diarra is a 3 but you do realize he's not a 5, right? I disagree he wouldn't do much for 2017, any guy 6'7 plus with a pulse would help us next year at this point.

I certainly agree that he is a not a prototypical 5, but that doesn't mean he isn't a 5 in the type of offense KO wants to run. Especially if we play small.

 

[tzznandrew]

I can see why you don't think Diarra is a 3 but you do realize he's not a 5, right? I disagree he wouldn't do much for 2017, any guy 6'7 plus with a pulse would help us next year at this point.

We played Giffey at the 5 at moments. If positions don't matter on offense, they still sort of do on defense.

I'm not going to read too much into this because the idea that KO said "You're a 5 in the traditional sense, end of story" is so insane that it's either we're looking at the quote after a game of telephone (and likely through Diarra's point of view) or KO is so bad at understanding basketball that it's unfathomable.

Occam's Razor tells me that this is the former.

 

[SouthBayHusky]

I like this. It means a decision will come soon. Will provide KO some clarity on 2017 recruiting.

Yep. Wonderful news

 

[RayIsTheGOAT]

I have so many questions if we were recruiting him solely to a position that he didn't want to play.
Which makes me think there's more to all of this.
Vance left because "Ollie didn't use him right", Enoch left because he thought he "doesn't fit into Ollie's guard oriented offense", and now when we are desperate to replace these players, they are recruiting players out of their preferred position? Something doesn't add up.

I can't imagine why the staff wouldn't recruit Diarra as a DeAndre Daniels-type stretch 4. Someone who can shoot from the wing, but also develop a post game and rebound.

At some point you can't look at the players/parents. There's a common theme here. And it's not the players.
I won't pass judgement on Ollie or the staff until we roll out a team on the court in the Fall, but we are consistently swinging and missing, and it's extremely concerning.

 

[donyell34]

Damm, and so much drama. Was optimistic as most of us were 2 weeks ago but doesn't seem like we're getting him.

 

[huskyharry]

[QUOTE="superjohn, post: 2172541, member: 1522"any guy 6'7 plus with a pulse would help us next year at this point.[/QUOTE]
Agree, time to fill slots with some tall guys with a pulse, preferably grad transfers

 

[UCDaveD]

Looks like Cincy has a good shot at landing Carlton Bragg since NC St. and Xavier are out according to Jon Rothstein's twitter. Looks like it's down to them, ASU, and Illinois.

Could possibly impact Diarra's choice.

 

[AntG168]

All you "anti-Ollie" guys are a freaking echo chamber. Ok, so just because 3 people who have no concrete proof that Ollie is recruiting him as a 5 are saying it does not make it any more factual than 1.

Frankly, your group has ruined many of the recruiting threads recently with this same crap. Instead of talking about what a loser Oz has proven to be, you automatically parrot what he says because it fits your narrative... even when there is ample proof otherwise.

People can say many things about Ollie on here - but certainly the guy is not a liar. And yet you act like Oz, Chev and Husky99 are some paragons of truth and knowledge.

And a bunch of you call Stairmaster a "Strawman"? What you Ollie bashers are doing in each of these threads is the very definition of being Strawmen. You take speculation, act like it is fact, and then make assessments as if they are logical conclusions based upon the original baseless speculation.

When 3Uconn used to post on here, HE was obviously an insider. He proved that through dozens of factual, supported posts. Chev, Husky99, Oz and most others have proven only one thing... they don't know s$!t.

Your so off here. @husky99 is very credible, as is @chevtheman. Oz maybe a jerk but he clearly has ties to KO. Im a huge Ollie guy but this rant was weird and uninformed

 

[BUConn10]

All you "anti-Ollie" guys are a freaking echo chamber. Ok, so just because 3 people who have no concrete proof that Ollie is recruiting him as a 5 are saying it does not make it any more factual than 1.

Frankly, your group has ruined many of the recruiting threads recently with this same crap. Instead of talking about what a loser Oz has proven to be, you automatically parrot what he says because it fits your narrative... even when there is ample proof otherwise.

People can say many things about Ollie on here - but certainly the guy is not a liar. Why would he all of a sudden pigeon hole this recruit when he has stated, and shown in game plans (particularly in 2014), that he recruits guys to be positionless? And yet you act like Oz, Chev and Husky99 are some paragons of truth and knowledge.

And a bunch of you call Stairmaster a "Strawman"? What you Ollie bashers are doing in each of these threads is the very definition of being Strawmen. You take speculation, act like it is fact, and then make assessments as if they are logical conclusions based upon the original baseless speculation.

"Lather. Rinse. Repeat."

When 3Uconn used to post on here, HE was obviously an insider. He proved that through dozens of factual, supported posts. Chev, Husky99, Oz and most others have proven only one thing... they don't know s$!t.

Nailed it.

 

[BFieldHusky]

Your so off here. @husky99 is very credible, as is @chevtheman. Oz maybe a jerk but he clearly has ties to KO. Im a huge Ollie guy but this rant was weird and uninformed

99 info is solid. He has been on everything since middle of season.

 

[King Husky]

Is it possible the "5" rumor was lost in translation? What he actually said was "play in the post?" Or "If you want playing time next year it will probably have to be at the 5"

Normally this would sound so wrong to me and I know Ollie knows better, but then again we do really need 5s, maybe Ollie is set on making him to be like a Boucher type?

 

[LStudfellow]

Ok... so why would Ollie recruit this guy... or anyone else as a 5... when he has stated and shown that is not what he wants? That is nonsensical.

As I said and I stand by it... if you are going to offer speculation like that... then offer proof.

I have read through most recruiting threads on here over the last several months, and they flow in this similar manner. Take the time to read through them and you will see exactly what I mean. I will be happy to follow this post up with a post with multiple links to prove my point.

The threads that are particularly weird are the ones where we were not even linked to the recruit... but then people go off as if Ollie should have done something about it.

And I ask you and everyone else... how can there be so many "insiders" who act as if they know what Ollie is doing and thinking, when everyone around the program acknowledges that Ollie has been aloof and distant?

I, for one, am tired of the Hot Take crowd who takes every opportunity to take shots at Ollie without ever calling out the speculators.

That is neither "weird" or "uninformed". I have been reading through the threads on here a lot lately, looking for actual fact-based information on who we are trying to bring here... and that is the same way practically every recruiting thread has turned on here. Not uninformed... fact.