Stone retweeting a lot about Wisconsin

[scrappy2.0]

I dont like these types of players. His mission is 1 and done. Id much rather have guys who can contribute and improve each year. Play a role than grow in the role. Thats what has helped Uconn win 4 NC not 1 1 and done player. We have foundational players who stay/ play improve. I'm not saying I wouldnt take him but I wont lose sleep if he doesnt come here. I wish we got that kid Providence got--he seems like a guy who couldve year by year helped us with Amida and Phil as they improve. We had an NBA top 3 center in Drummond and the chemistry was awful. I will always appreciate Drummond especially since hes pure CT, but it's hard on a team to have heavy turn over. Unless you are getting 7 of them like Kentucky each year--I dont think it works well.

 

[superjohn]

I dont like these types of players. His mission is 1 and done. Id much rather have guys who can contribute and improve each year. Play a role than grow in the role. Thats what has helped Uconn win 4 NC not 1 1 and done player. We have foundational players who stay/ play improve. I'm not saying I wouldnt take him but I wont lose sleep if he doesnt come here. I wish we got that kid Providence got--he seems like a guy who couldve year by year helped us with Amida and Phil as they improve. We had an NBA top 3 center in Drummond and the chemistry was awful. I will always appreciate Drummond especially since hes pure CT, but it's hard on a team to have heavy turn over. Unless you are getting 7 of them like Kentucky each year--I dont think it works well.

Facepalm.

 

[Fishy]

I dont like these types of players. His mission is 1 and done. Id much rather have guys who...

Oh, just shut --- up.

 

[donyell34]

One and done or well done I want him. The sky won't fall if we don't get hlm but man it would be so good.

 

[pj]

I dont like these types of players. His mission is 1 and done. ... Unless you are getting 7 of them like Kentucky each year--I dont think it works well.

Idiotic. You don't know him, he seems like a kid of great character who would be an outstanding teammate.

Every player's mission is to be the best they can be and get to the NBA as soon as they can. If he is good enough to do it at age 19, that only proves that he's better than others and more desirable for us.

How well has a team of one and dones worked out for Kentucky? Character and team play matter more than speed to the NBA.

 

[Hoophound]

I dont like these types of players. His mission is 1 and done. Id much rather have guys who can contribute and improve each year. Play a role than grow in the role. Thats what has helped Uconn win 4 NC not 1 1 and done player. We have foundational players who stay/ play improve. I'm not saying I wouldnt take him but I wont lose sleep if he doesnt come here. I wish we got that kid Providence got--he seems like a guy who couldve year by year helped us with Amida and Phil as they improve. We had an NBA top 3 center in Drummond and the chemistry was awful. I will always appreciate Drummond especially since hes pure CT, but it's hard on a team to have heavy turn over. Unless you are getting 7 of them like Kentucky each year--I dont think it works well.

Having a consistent stream of one and done guys is incredible for program marketing and notoriety. The more big stars we send to the NBA, the more we'll recruit. The other key element in having more nationally watched players is that we increase our fan base in other states. Kids love the big time names and that is great for UConn. More merchandise sales and more value in media deals. I'll take every 5 star I can get for that alone.

 

[DreamSeason]

Having a consistent stream of one and done guys is incredible for program marketing and notoriety. The more big stars we send to the NBA, the more we'll recruit. The other key element in having more nationally watched players is that we increase our fan base in other states. Kids love the big time names and that is great for UConn. More merchandise sales and more value in media deals. I'll take every 5 star I can get for that alone.

I get what some are saying about "the formula" and there is some truth to it but recruiting blue chips is all upside. There are programs that haven't accomplished half of what we have but are a bigger brand because of their recruiting. I want to continue what we've been doing but it's time to join the big boys in all facets of cbb. It will make our brand stronger and I have no doubt Ollie can make 5 stars take the stairs. Ten toes in.( and yes I know we get our fair share of 5 stars)

 

[husky99]

Oh, just shut --- up.

Wild, I agree with fishy twice in a week...

 

[Rocktheworld]

If we were in the B1G, I wonder how much better the current situation would be/look for us

 

[SubbaBub]

One and done means you are a lottery pick in that particular year. We've had a few of those and to a man they all worked out pretty well.

If said lottery pick is a freshman, terrific. Sundaes all around. If it takes him 2 or 3 years to become a lottery pick, then whipped cream and chocolate sprinkles.

 

[Hoophound]

If we were in the B1G, I wonder how much better the current situation would be/look for us

I think about that a lot. I'm not sure how beneficial it is. I think the ACC and SEC attract more top talent based on no facts or research whatsoever, just my perception.

The American is pretty decent in basketball. I'm not sure it is that much of a hinderance. We get tons of exposure and have good teams on top. Again, a closer on the recruiting trail could overcome conference objections fairly easily with what he'd have to work with. The easier games on the schedule provide a chance to fix problems, develop players and ease the body beating. The tough games are against very good programs and are nationally relevant. I don't hate the American from a bball standpoint, it is tolerable. However, it is killing the football fan base.

 

[Rocktheworld]

I think about that a lot. I'm not sure how beneficial it is. I think the ACC and SEC attract more top talent based on no facts or research whatsoever, just my perception.

The American is pretty decent in basketball. I'm not sure it is that much of a hinderance. We get tons of exposure and have good teams on top. Again, a closer on the recruiting trail could overcome conference objections fairly easily with what he'd have to work with. The easier games on the schedule provide a chance to fix problems, develop players and ease the body beating. The tough games are against very good programs and are nationally relevant. I don't hate the American from a bball standpoint, it is tolerable. However, it is killing the football fan base.

Not concerned the AAC is bad; just that if we were in the B1G, he'd get to go home at least once a year.

 

[Hoophound]

We can get him home once a year if that's what it takes. We just need one or two games against Green Bay, Stevens Point, Marquette etc. to be added to the schedule. He probably isn't a 3-4 year player anyway.

 

[bear]

I dont like these types of players. His mission is 1 and done. Id much rather have guys who can contribute and improve each year. Play a role than grow in the role. Thats what has helped Uconn win 4 NC not 1 1 and done player. We have foundational players who stay/ play improve. I'm not saying I wouldnt take him but I wont lose sleep if he doesnt come here. I wish we got that kid Providence got--he seems like a guy who couldve year by year helped us with Amida and Phil as they improve. We had an NBA top 3 center in Drummond and the chemistry was awful. I will always appreciate Drummond especially since hes pure CT, but it's hard on a team to have heavy turn over. Unless you are getting 7 of them like Kentucky each year--I dont think it works well.

He would be a freshman that can contribute immediately in the post. If Brimah went pro after his freshman year than we would have just won an NC with a one and done. If Lamb went pro after the 2011 season that would be another one. Nothing wrong with getting the occasional one and done and it has no bearing on winning NC's.

 

[J-dog]

I dont like these types of players. His mission is 1 and done. Id much rather have guys who can contribute and improve each year. Play a role than grow in the role. Thats what has helped Uconn win 4 NC not 1 1 and done player. We have foundational players who stay/ play improve. I'm not saying I wouldnt take him but I wont lose sleep if he doesnt come here. I wish we got that kid Providence got--he seems like a guy who couldve year by year helped us with Amida and Phil as they improve. We had an NBA top 3 center in Drummond and the chemistry was awful. I will always appreciate Drummond especially since hes pure CT, but it's hard on a team to have heavy turn over. Unless you are getting 7 of them like Kentucky each year--I dont think it works well.

I understand the concern…

The problem is big time programs don't recruit a particular player thinking he's a "role player". There's only so many scholarships to go around. The roles will define themselves (i.e. the best players will play; some guys will take time; some guys won't work out). It is not an exact science.

You can't recruit guys based on the fear that they might be one & dones. No coach is going to lament that his freshman are too good & might jump.

 

[tcf15]

I wish we got that kid Providence got--he seems like a guy who couldve year by year helped us with Amida and Phil as they improve.

We do have a player like that in Steve Enoch, along with Rakim Lubin.

 

[ctchamps]

I just want to see UConn win. Getting the best players at each position increases the odds of that happening. If the one and done player is team oriented and only needs to tweak his skills to accommodate the teams best chance of winning, I would be crazy to say we should turn away that player. The only thing I'd personally miss is the opportunity to see a player develop over several seasons.

Let's not forget there is an advantage to having upperclassman leadership. The question is can that leadership and experience overcome relatively inexperienced (at the college level) but more talented players? The argument for the upperclassman value can be made by the recent successes of UConn, Butler, Wisconsin. The argument for super talented "inexperienced" players can be made by Kentucky, Arizona, and Kansas.

Interestingly this conversation has changed in recent years. I can distinctly recall that many pundits valued a leader like Mateen Cleaves in forecasting a team's success. Dick Vitale certainly had a column on diaper dandies, and publications would comment on the potential of the best incoming recruits. But the excitement was primarily focused on the veteran teams (with the exception of Duke). You have to wonder how much of this conversation we're having is because we are being influenced by the latest media hype as opposed to an insightful conversation.

So with this preamble, and to get back on track with the thread, if I can only chose to recruit two players, we already have them. I wanted Adams and Enoch the most. If I can only get two more I want Stone and Mack. One for the polish he brings immediately and one who I believe is the best all around player at his position and is just reaching his potential.

Needless to say as long as KO is coaching for UConn I like the team's chances no matter what rendition of talent and experience that his teams have.

 

[scrappy2.0]

We do have a player like that in Steve Enoch, along with Rakim Lubin.

True we do have Enoch Lubin and Nolan with a chance to have Brimah back so I guess a player who would likely be a one and done in this case could just mesh for the year. I do have to remember that Brimah is one guy that is no lock to come back and hes our main rim protector.

 

[scrappy2.0]

Oh, just shut --- up.

Duke has had three one-and-dones since the 2010-11 season and during that time the Blue Devils are 2-3 in the NCAA Tournament with those players

No need for the teenage reply--I think there is some reasonable validity to what I said.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

Duke has had three one-and-dones since the 2010-11 season and during that time the Blue Devils are 2-3 in the NCAA Tournament with those players

No need for the teenage reply--I think there is some reasonable validity to what I said.

What you basically said is that Kevin Ollie is wrong for trying to recruit the best post player in the country. That is pretty silly.

 

[Fishy]

Duke has had three one-and-dones since the 2010-11 season and during that time the Blue Devils are 2-3 in the NCAA Tournament with those players

No need for the teenage reply--I think there is some reasonable validity to what I said.

1) Kentucky has had a bazillion one-and-dones since 2010-2011.

2) Kentucky has been to three Final Fours and won a title.

3) Correlation does not imply causation.

4) Now shut --- up.

 

[tcf15]

Also, bringing in a top 10 recruit opens the door for other highly rated recruits down the road. We want those players at UConn lol

 

[Walker11]

It makes sense that this guy doesn't want a one and done when he thinks a lightly regarded three star is undoubtedly going to become a Husky great.

The thing that hurts my brain is that this guy isn't the only person who holds this view.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

Also Andre Drummond, who appeared from a distance to be as likeable a kid as we've ever had, was not responsible for "killing team chemistry" while he was here.

 

[OkaForPrez]

Also Andre Drummond, who appeared from a distance to be as likeable a kid as we've ever had, was not responsible for "killing team chemistry" while he was here.

Maybe not directly, but he certainly was the fuse to the AO Tnt. And that is the risk of a 1 and done. You open the door for a guy who has been waiting his turn to drop down in the hierarchy to a freshman. It can splinter a team.


Boat on '12:

"We were probably the most talented team in the country. The chemistry just wasn't there."

(were guys thinking more about the NBA at the end of that season?)

"Maybe. I was a young guy. I was best friends with (Jeremy) Lamb and (Andre) Drummond. They thought about it, but they really wanted to win the national championship. It just wasn't there, man. I think everybody was just worried about individual goals."

 

[scrappy2.0]

1) Kentucky has had a bazillion one-and-dones since 2010-2011.

2) Kentucky has been to three Final Fours and won a title.

3) Correlation does not imply causation.

4) Now shut --- up.

I hate when people who have no idea who you are or what you look like have the cahones to say stuff on the Internet for no reason. Can you simply reply scrappy you might be off there imho--no you need to get personal and swear. If that makes you feel big--go for it but it's immature.

 

[scrappy2.0]

Also, bringing in a top 10 recruit opens the door for other highly rated recruits down the road. We want those players at UConn lol

You do want to get the best players that fit your system. I'm sure KO is on that. But in our rather successful history, our championships and our other great seasons have ALL been built on players who have stayed 3 and 4 years. Kentucky has a model where they end up getting 6-7 of these guys at a time and usually have 2-3 top notch guys who do stay. I do not see us like that--nor would I want our program to turn into that. I like what weve had over the years. You get to watch the players and teams grow and develop. I can see using a player to augment a year is fine--if that is what we are doing here--thats cool. But I would not want us to change our system and getting guys like Bridah Napier Boatright etc and winning big... is so awesome. It's really what has made Uconn a unique team for the ages.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

Maybe not directly, but he certainly was the fuse to the AO Tnt. And that is the risk of a 1 and done. You open the door for a guy who has been waiting his turn to drop down in the hierarchy to a freshman. It can splinter a team.


Boat on '12:

I know that the chemistry was bad in 2012, it just had very little to do with Andre Drummond. It was mostly because of a complete and utter lack of leadership and the fact that the head coach missed a boatload of games in the middle of the season. Boatright being jerked around by the NCAA didn't help either.

And for the record, Andre Drummond didn't skip to the front of the line as soon as he got to Uconn. In his first 5 games he played 12, 18, 27, 12, and 22 minutes. Tyler Olander played 37 minutes on opening night that year. So if you want to know why Oriakhi got into a season long funk, Calhoun's misplaced loyalty to Olander is much more to blame than Drummond.

 

[upstater]

I know that the chemistry was bad in 2012, it just had very little to do with Andre Drummond. It was mostly because of a complete and utter lack of leadership and the fact that the head coach missed a boatload of games in the middle of the season. Boatright being jerked around by the NCAA didn't help either.

And for the record, Andre Drummond didn't skip to the front of the line as soon as he got to Uconn. In his first 5 games he played 12, 18, 27, 12, and 22 minutes. Tyler Olander played 37 minutes on opening night that year. So if you want to know why Oriakhi got into a season long funk, Calhoun's misplaced loyalty to Olander is much more to blame than Drummond.

What kind of coach would Calhoun have been if he knuckled under to a mouthy mumu?

 

[J-dog]

What kind of coach would Calhoun have been if he knuckled under to a mouthy mumu?

Oriaki's issues started with the man in the mirror…

This is by no means meant to be a criticism of JC, but it would have been interesting to see how KO (head coach version) would have handled the situation. He seems to have a way of making the kids understand their own accountability. It's one of KO's best attributes...