SF V.J. King (Louisville Commit)

[Stainmaster]

If this is who I think it is, he won't be happy unless we pay the top 13 on ESPN's list to come in every year. Don't bother trying to convince him that any other alternative is reasonable.

 

[Walker11]

Funny that you decided to pick the only recruiting site that fits your narrative.

Jalen Adams
Rivals: 5*
Scout: 5*
247: 5*
Composite: 5*

Daniel Hamilton
Rivals: 5*
Scout: 5*
247: 5*
Composite: 5*

This right here is like a king responding to peasant. C'mon man, get your ignore list in order.

 

[tcf15]

This right here is like a king responding to peasant. C'mon man, get your ignore list in order.

I had him on ignore already, but I saw it and felt compelled to respond.

 

[Walker11]

I had him on ignore already, but I saw it and felt compelled to respond.

As did I, but I was intrigued enough by your comment enough to "show ignored content."

I sometimes wish we had sh!ttier mods who simply deleted dumb users.

 

[David 76]

Not my paeson, paesono

 

[Rocktheworld]

Is Paesano really Freescooter?

 

[UConnSwag11]

Is Paesano really Freescooter?

HFD

 

[mets1090]

Some of you really don't get it.

Welcome to "How Not to Start a Post 101." I'm your professor, Dr. Paesano.

 

[Brochacho]

I concede Hamilton and Adams appear to be consensus 5 star players but they were clearly not unanimous.

- sees 4 out of 5 recruiting sites have Hams/Adams at 5 stars -
- sees Hams is #1 4 star ranked 30th in the nation on ESPN and Jalen Adams is #6 4 star and 23rd in nation -
- still attempts to continue argument -

 

[huskiesNhoos]

Fair response. But I didn't exclude Purvis or Larrier. I said the staff acquired a decent group of transfers and grad students before I explicitly moved on to recruiting losses for three classes of high school seniors. I picked ESPN because it was the first to pop up. I concede Hamilton and Adams appear to be consensus 5 star players but they were clearly not unanimous. Either way, we have still lost a ton of these battles. In my opinion, more than we should have. And I am not convinced one borderline 5 star guy a year plus some good transfers and grad students is enough. Ollie is a good coach so it might be. If so, this team should make the final four.

Here's some Rivals rankings for you since they go back to 2002 (5* guys in parentheses)

2002 - 1x 5* 3x 3* (rashad)
2003 - 1x 5*, 2x 4*, 1x 3* (charlie V)
2004 - 1x 5*, 2x 4*, 1x 3* (rudy)
2005 - 1x 5*, 2x 4*, 2x 3* (bynum never stepped on campus)
2006 - 2x 5*, 3x 4*, 3x 3* (curtis kelly, sticks)
2007 - 1x 3*
2008 - 2x 5*, 1x 4*, 2x 3* (kemba, majok)
2009 - 1x 5*, 2x 4*, 1x 3* (oriakhi)
2010 - 3x 4*, 2x 3*
2011 - 2x 5*, 1x 4* (drummond, daniels)
2012 - 1x 4*, 1x 3*
2013 - 1x 4*, 2x 3*
2014 - 1x 5* 2x 3* (hamilton)
2015 - 1x 5*, 1x 4* (adams)

Throw in some basic math over that time, and our average class every year is: 0.93x 5*, 1.36x 4*, 1.5x 3*

I'd say a 5* plus some good transfers (safe to say both are much better than their 3*, and NR out of high school), and enoch (4*) stacks up just fine

 

[LIUCHusky]

Fair response. But I didn't exclude Purvis or Larrier. I said the staff acquired a decent group of transfers and grad students before I explicitly moved on to recruiting losses for three classes of high school seniors. I picked ESPN because it was the first to pop up. I concede Hamilton and Adams appear to be consensus 5 star players but they were clearly not unanimous. Either way, we have still lost a ton of these battles. In my opinion, more than we should have. And I am not convinced one borderline 5 star guy a year plus some good transfers and grad students is enough. Ollie is a good coach so it might be. If so, this team should make the final four.

Using your logic, fans of every team should be disappointed. Every school loses a ton of these battles.

 

[Paesano]

Using your logic, fans of every team should be disappointed. Every school loses a ton of these battles.

How many of those fans are fans of a team that has won as many championships over the lifetime of these recruits as UConn has? If you are going to use my logic, be sure to use it right.

I never said we should win all of them. I said we lost more than we should have.

 

[Paesano]

Here's some Rivals rankings for you since they go back to 2002 (5* guys in parentheses)

2002 - 1x 5* 3x 3* (rashad)
2003 - 1x 5*, 2x 4*, 1x 3* (charlie V)
2004 - 1x 5*, 2x 4*, 1x 3* (rudy)
2005 - 1x 5*, 2x 4*, 2x 3* (bynum never stepped on campus)
2006 - 2x 5*, 3x 4*, 3x 3* (curtis kelly, sticks)
2007 - 1x 3*
2008 - 2x 5*, 1x 4*, 2x 3* (kemba, majok)
2009 - 1x 5*, 2x 4*, 1x 3* (oriakhi)
2010 - 3x 4*, 2x 3*
2011 - 2x 5*, 1x 4* (drummond, daniels)
2012 - 1x 4*, 1x 3*
2013 - 1x 4*, 2x 3*
2014 - 1x 5* 2x 3* (hamilton)
2015 - 1x 5*, 1x 4* (adams)

Throw in some basic math over that time, and our average class every year is: 0.93x 5*, 1.36x 4*, 1.5x 3*

I'd say a 5* plus some good transfers (safe to say both are much better than their 3*, and NR out of high school), and enoch (4*) stacks up just fine

And I repeat that Ollie is a great coach so it might be enough. Really, I just think there should be more. People are so quick to make excuses. We are UConn, damn it!

Also, the landscape has changed recently. A few teams are hoarding the best of the best like never before. Duke and UNC have been hoarders for a while but even those teams are stepping it up to compete with the squid. Hopefully the turnover of these kids will keep the impact of the talent differential low enough that our 1 5 star a year remains good enough. No one knows if it will be. Anyone that assumes it will us just too scared to think of the alternative.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Man, I love the Ignore list.

 

[OkaForPrez]

And I repeat that Ollie is a great coach so it might be enough. Really, I just think there should be more. People are so quick to make excuses. We are UConn, damn it!

Also, the landscape has changed recently. A few teams are hoarding the best of the best like never before. Duke and UNC have been hoarders for a while but even those teams are stepping it up to compete with the squid. Hopefully the turnover of these kids will keep the impact of the talent differential low enough that our 1 5 star a year remains good enough. No one knows if it will be. Anyone that assumes it will us just too scared to think of the alternative.

The thing that makes us Uconn is getting the right mix of guys and not stacking 5*'s who are only interested in showcasing talent and moving on. We're UConn, Damn It is the collective response of the forum to your posts at the moment.

 

[businesslawyer]

And I repeat that Ollie is a great coach so it might be enough. Really, I just think there should be more. People are so quick to make excuses. We are UConn, damn it!

Also, the landscape has changed recently. A few teams are hoarding the best of the best like never before. Duke and UNC have been hoarders for a while but even those teams are stepping it up to compete with the squid. Hopefully the turnover of these kids will keep the impact of the talent differential low enough that our 1 5 star a year remains good enough. No one knows if it will be. Anyone that assumes it will us just too scared to think of the alternative.

It is truly unfortunate that, since Calipari got to UK, we havent gotten to play them in a Final Four, with their advantage of 5 stars being put up against our fewer 5 stars but more continuity and maturity. Then, we could test your theory and if we, say, had beaten Kentucky 2 out of 2, you wouldn't be such a schmuck as to post something like this.

Or not.

 

[BUConn10]

It is truly unfortunate that, since Calipari got to UK, we havent gotten to play them in a Final Four, with their advantage of 5 stars being put up against our fewer 5 stars but more continuity and maturity. Then, we could test your theory and if we, say, had beaten Kentucky 2 out of 2, you wouldn't be such a schmuck as to post something like this.

Or not.

For the sake of playing devils advocate, would you say UConn has a better outlook for the next 5 years than UK? If both programs lost their head coaches tomorrow, who would get back to a final four first?

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

For the sake of playing devils advocate, would you say UConn has a better outlook for the next 5 years than UK? If both programs lost their head coaches tomorrow, who would get back to a final four first?

If you had left out the second question the answer would be UK, no question. But you'll note that Kentucky was a dumpster fire under Gillispie so if Cal bounced tomorrow I don't see any compelling reason why one would expect Kentucky's run to continue.

 

[businesslawyer]

For the sake of playing devils advocate, would you say UConn has a better outlook for the next 5 years than UK? If both programs lost their head coaches tomorrow, who would get back to a final four first?

Your point is unrelated to mine. Theis thread became about KO's "failure." KO not being unable to recruit 5 of the best 10 players year after year has nothing to do with whether he's failing.

I'd have no problem being able to recruit like UK. So?

 

[Leebo]

Guys, if you don't count any of the recruits that KO has gotten, we haven't won any recruiting battles in years!

 

[David 76]

Paesano,
If you wanted to make the point that there are 4-5 colleges that attract way more top 20 recruits than us, I would agree with you. There is a blue blood factor in attracting recruits that I think we should have, but don't. But it is not a knock on KO. It is the cultural and media love affair with those schools plus their success that creates that bias,
Outside of those 4-5 schools, there is no deficit in our recruiting that isn't easily explained by our recent ban and change in coaching.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

It is almost 9 o'clock, troll feeding ends at 9:00 pm Monday - Saturday, and 7:00 pm on Sundays. Troll feeding will resume promptly at 10:00 am tomorrow morning. Thank you.

 

[Paesano]

The thing that makes us Uconn is getting the right mix of guys and not stacking 5*'s who are only interested in showcasing talent and moving on. We're UConn, Damn It is the collective response of the forum to your posts at the moment.

No. If you want to define our recent past it would be that we were able to win with less talent. But do you think Ollie is intentionally losing these battles to keep us at some sort of optimal number of 5 star recruits?

It isn't like KO wouldn't have liked more talent on our team. And while we did beat Kentucky with less talent, you have to admit that thise Kentucky teams weren't as loaded as last year's team. Wisconsin's win over them was probably the most encouraging example. But they fell short to an equally monsterous Puke team because coach K can actually coach too. Using past examples of our successes is only marginally valid because the hoarding issues seems to be getting worse. We need to step it up, even if just a little, to keep up.

 

[UChusky916]

No. If you want to define our recent past it would be that we were able to win with less talent. But do you think Ollie is intentionally losing these battles to keep us at some sort of optimal number of 5 star recruits?

It isn't like KO wouldn't have liked more talent on our team. And while we did beat Kentucky with less talent, you have to admit that thise Kentucky teams weren't as loaded as last year's team. Wisconsin's win over them was probably the most encouraging example. But they fell short to an equally monsterous Puke team because coach K can actually coach too. Using past examples of our successes is only marginally valid because the hoarding issues seems to be getting worse. We need to step it up, even if just a little, to keep up.

You come in here and troll and then when you get called out you change your arguments as to why UConn needs to 'step it up' because we've been 'winning with less talent?' Jesus, dude.

You're a horrific poster.

 

[Paesano]

Paesano,
If you wanted to make the point that there are 4-5 colleges that attract way more top 20 recruits than us, I would agree with you. There is a blue blood factor in attracting recruits that I think we should have, but don't. But it is not a knock on KO. It is the cultural and media love affair with those schools plus their success that creates that bias,
Outside of those 4-5 schools, there is no deficit in our recruiting that isn't easily explained by our recent ban and change in coaching.

I agree with almost everything you said. But I don't believe those schools are able to pile up raw talent just because of their aura. As Fishy eluded to, it seems like we hear about our guys being out worked and this kid is just the latest example. Maybe KO just needs to hire a recruiter who is as good at recruiting as he is at coaching. Or, maybe the coaching staff has made a concious decision to not do what it would take to land some of these really top kids. Maybe it is a little of both.

Again, I am not saying we need to win every battle. I am well aware of the fact that we have a great coach who can do more with less. But it would be nice to win one more a year.