The New Recruiting Paradigm

[pj]

I really like where Ollie seems to be heading with recruiting and his roster building strategy.

Traditionally, in college basketball, the 13 scholarships go to 5 guards, 3 wings, and 5 big men. The guards are split into 2 point guards, 2 shooting guards, and a versatile combo guard. The wings can be anything from 6'3" shooting guards who don't have the handle to be a primary ballhandler, to long athletic forwards.

The top coaches have often varied from this formula. JC had his best success with two point guards on the floor at the same time, and shifted toward this formula, requiring 3 solid point guards on the roster. Mike Krzyzewski in the 1990s when he began to be able to recruit at a very high level filled his team with 6'8" players -- look at the length of his teams, e.g. the 1999 team. In the 2000s when UConn recruiting picked up JC increasingly went for length and size as well.

It looks to me like KO has begun to zero in on a roster strategy that fits his style of play:
- Athleticism at every position; length at every position except point guard; an emphasis on defense over offense. The Boneyard was calling for shooters, but we let Vance go and are seeking athletes who can defend.
- Commitment to the two point guard style of play. Jalen, Alterique, MAL, maybe also a Blake Harris or 2018 PG. These are guys with PG skills who can score. Some of them (Jalen, MAL) have the size to defend at 3 spots. If you really want to have 2 PG on the floor at all times, you need at least 3 who play big (20+ minutes) which means you need 4 on the roster.
- Commitment to a "stretch 4" philosophy in which we have long, athletic combo forwards who have enough perimeter skills to play the wing and enough size and athleticism and toughness to defend either the 3 or 4 interchangeably.

So the new model of roster building seems to be:
- 4 PGs who can score, at least 2 with size (~6'3") to defend taller shooting guards.
- 4 athletic wings who are versatile, long, quick, and athletic enough to defend a 2, 3, or 4 and can play inside or outside on both ends.
- 5 big men. We don't need so many in this style of play but we have not recruited top talents successfully and it looks like we need this much roster space, for the time being, in order to ensure we have the 2 capable big men we need.

In this roster the traditional "shooting guard" role has almost disappeared, becoming a longer athletic wing or a tall point guard who can create and distribute or score.

I think when KO gets the roster he wants, this is going to work very well. It will be a great defensive lineup and, with the multiple point guards, creative offensively. It should be able to push the tempo and get out in transition. It should be a fun style of play, for fans and players both.

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

"We let Vance go"

 

[GemParty]

Any names you prefer for the final 3 spots with this plan?

 

[Doctor Hoop]

I really like where Ollie seems to be heading with recruiting and his roster building strategy.

Traditionally, in college basketball, the 13 scholarships go to 5 guards, 3 wings, and 5 big men. The guards are split into 2 point guards, 2 shooting guards, and a versatile combo guard. The wings can be anything from 6'3" shooting guards who don't have the handle to be a primary ballhandler, to long athletic forwards.

The top coaches have often varied from this formula. JC had his best success with two point guards on the floor at the same time, and shifted toward this formula, requiring 3 solid point guards on the roster. Mike Krzyzewski in the 1990s when he began to be able to recruit at a very high level filled his team with 6'8" players -- look at the length of his teams, e.g. the 1999 team. In the 2000s when UConn recruiting picked up JC increasingly went for length and size as well.

It looks to me like KO has begun to zero in on a roster strategy that fits his style of play:
- Athleticism at every position; length at every position except point guard; an emphasis on defense over offense. The Boneyard was calling for shooters, but we let Vance go and are seeking athletes who can defend.
- Commitment to the two point guard style of play. Jalen, Alterique, MAL, maybe also a Blake Harris or 2018 PG. These are guys with PG skills who can score. Some of them (Jalen, MAL) have the size to defend at 3 spots. If you really want to have 2 PG on the floor at all times, you need at least 3 who play big (20+ minutes) which means you need 4 on the roster.
- Commitment to a "stretch 4" philosophy in which we have long, athletic combo forwards who have enough perimeter skills to play the wing and enough size and athleticism and toughness to defend either the 3 or 4 interchangeably.

So the new model of roster building seems to be:
- 4 PGs who can score, at least 2 with size (~6'3") to defend taller shooting guards.
- 4 athletic wings who are versatile, long, quick, and athletic enough to defend a 2, 3, or 4 and can play inside or outside on both ends.
- 5 big men. We don't need so many in this style of play but we have not recruited top talents successfully and it looks like we need this much roster space, for the time being, in order to ensure we have the 2 capable big men we need.

In this roster the traditional "shooting guard" role has almost disappeared, becoming a longer athletic wing or a tall point guard who can create and distribute or score.

I think when KO gets the roster he wants, this is going to work very well. It will be a great defensive lineup and, with the multiple point guards, creative offensively. It should be able to push the tempo and get out in transition. It should be a fun style of play, for fans and players both.

NBA. Brad Stevens in Boston, and see what Milwaukee did in Boston the other night.

 

[upstater]

The difficulty with this kind of roster is waiting for the stretch 4 to develop.

I was reading an article about Giannis A. for the Bucks the other day which focused on the fact that, at the age of 22, he is working hard on his elbow jumper, because once that comes, he will be impossible to defend.

Seems to me that the "stretch" part of the stretch 4 takes some time.

 

[husky429]

The difficulty with this kind of roster is waiting for the stretch 4 to develop.

I was reading an article about Giannis A. for the Bucks the other day which focused on the fact that, at the age of 22, he is working hard on his elbow jumper, because once that comes, he will be impossible to defend.

Seems to me that the "stretch" part of the stretch 4 takes some time.

I don't think Giannis is a good example. Dude isn't a stretch-4 anyways. He plays PG for that team, and guards the 4. He's taller than boogie, Andre, and Dwight Howard's for christs sake. He literally is a freak of human nature.

I do agree with the overall point though.

 

[upstater]

I don't think Giannis is a good example. Dude isn't a stretch-4 anyways. He plays PG for that team, and guards the 4. He's taller than boogie, Andre, and Dwight Howard's for christs sake. He literally is a freak of human nature.

I do agree with the overall point though.

Well, the point I was making is that for kids this size, making outside shots (not necessarily 3s) may come along later.

 

[UConn3432]

The 2 point guard approach only works when one or both of the point guards are very good to great three point shooters. The guards remaining on the roster need to do whatever kemba did last offseason to learn how to shoot the three ball.

 

[Yankees32123]

"We let Vance go"

Something tells me KO didn't put up a fight when Vance told him.

 

[Hugo]

I really like where Ollie seems to be heading with recruiting and his roster building strategy.

Traditionally, in college basketball, the 13 scholarships go to 5 guards, 3 wings, and 5 big men. The guards are split into 2 point guards, 2 shooting guards, and a versatile combo guard. The wings can be anything from 6'3" shooting guards who don't have the handle to be a primary ballhandler, to long athletic forwards.

The top coaches have often varied from this formula. JC had his best success with two point guards on the floor at the same time, and shifted toward this formula, requiring 3 solid point guards on the roster. Mike Krzyzewski in the 1990s when he began to be able to recruit at a very high level filled his team with 6'8" players -- look at the length of his teams, e.g. the 1999 team. In the 2000s when UConn recruiting picked up JC increasingly went for length and size as well.

It looks to me like KO has begun to zero in on a roster strategy that fits his style of play:
- Athleticism at every position; length at every position except point guard; an emphasis on defense over offense. The Boneyard was calling for shooters, but we let Vance go and are seeking athletes who can defend.
- Commitment to the two point guard style of play. Jalen, Alterique, MAL, maybe also a Blake Harris or 2018 PG. These are guys with PG skills who can score. Some of them (Jalen, MAL) have the size to defend at 3 spots. If you really want to have 2 PG on the floor at all times, you need at least 3 who play big (20+ minutes) which means you need 4 on the
roster.
- Commitment to a "stretch 4" philosophy in which we have long, athletic combo forwards who have enough perimeter skills to play the wing and enough size and athleticism and toughness to defend either the 3 or 4 interchangeably.

So the new model of roster building seems to be:
- 4 PGs who can score, at least 2 with size (~6'3") to defend taller shooting guards.
- 4 athletic wings who are versatile, long, quick, and athletic enough to defend a 2, 3, or 4 and can play inside or outside on both ends.
- 5 big men. We don't need so many in this style of play but we have not recruited top talents successfully and it looks like we need this much roster space, for the time being, in order to ensure we have the 2 capable big men we need.

In this roster the traditional "shooting guard" role has almost disappeared, becoming a longer athletic wing or a tall point guard who can create and distribute or score.

I think when KO gets the roster he wants, this is going to work very well. It will be a great defensive lineup and, with the multiple point guards, creative offensively. It should be able to push the tempo and get out in transition. It should be a fun style of play, for fans and players both.

Easier said than done. You are outlining an ideal roster that most coaches would beg to have, but few can actually put on the floor. Nothing earth-shattering here, just very difficult to accomplish while maintaining team chemistry. But while you're at it, add high BB IQ to the list, because we have been sorely missing this. And IMO we still need a lock-down shooter or two, whether they are a 2 or a 3 especially without any post game. Not to be a PITA on this, but 5 years into his term here and you believe he's just developing a roster strategy ? I'm sure he already has one, but it's hard to discern what it might be lately.

 

[Candyman]

I don't like sacrificing a shooter for a slasher. A zone will shut down a slasher all day. A zone takes away dribble penetration. The first two games last year when fully healthy with two point guards and a good wing in Larrier couldn't make a three if our life depended on it. With no inside scorer and outside shooter this team is easy to defend against.

 

[intlzncster]

NBA. Brad Stevens in Boston, and see what Milwaukee did in Boston the other night.

What exactly is your point? They won a game? At a totally different level which plays a totally different game.

 

[intlzncster]

Not to be a PITA on this, but 5 years into his term here and you believe he's just developing a roster strategy ? I'm sure he already has one, but it's hard to discern what it might be lately.

Actually yeah. Sure hope so anyway. I think he's finding out what works for him through trial and error. What works being mitigated by who he is able to land recruiting-wise. He's a young coach with little HC experience, and is (hopefully) constantly changing and growing into who he will become as a coach. This particular offseason is an indication of that.

 

[intlzncster]

I don't like sacrificing a shooter for a slasher. A zone will shut down a slasher all day. A zone takes away dribble penetration. The first two games last year when fully healthy with two point guards and a good wing in Larrier couldn't make a three if our life depended on it. With no inside scorer and outside shooter this team is easy to defend against.

Yeah but you can extrapolate nothing, nor learn anything, from only two games. At the start of the season no less.

Alterique might be a 40% shooter. You just don't know. Jalen was 35% this year with NO help in that regard. Without such a load this coming year, and the practice he'll undoubtedly put in, I can easily envision 40%.

 

[Doctor Hoop]

What exactly is your point? They won a game? At a totally different level which plays a totally different game.

Style of play and team structure.

 

[UConn_Top_Dog]

Can we just have Coach Calhoun on the staff strictly as a recruiter?

 

[Stainmaster]

Can we just have Coach Calhoun on the staff strictly as a recruiter?

Would he want to?

 

[intlzncster]

Can we just have Coach Calhoun on the staff strictly as a recruiter?

As good as he was, that wasn't even his strength. His greatest strength in a nutshell was bending kids and teams to his will.

 

[sled dog]

I really like where Ollie seems to be heading with recruiting and his roster building strategy.

Traditionally, in college basketball, the 13 scholarships go to 5 guards, 3 wings, and 5 big men. The guards are split into 2 point guards, 2 shooting guards, and a versatile combo guard. The wings can be anything from 6'3" shooting guards who don't have the handle to be a primary ballhandler, to long athletic forwards.

The top coaches have often varied from this formula. JC had his best success with two point guards on the floor at the same time, and shifted toward this formula, requiring 3 solid point guards on the roster. Mike Krzyzewski in the 1990s when he began to be able to recruit at a very high level filled his team with 6'8" players -- look at the length of his teams, e.g. the 1999 team. In the 2000s when UConn recruiting picked up JC increasingly went for length and size as well.

It looks to me like KO has begun to zero in on a roster strategy that fits his style of play:
- Athleticism at every position; length at every position except point guard; an emphasis on defense over offense. The Boneyard was calling for shooters, but we let Vance go and are seeking athletes who can defend.
- Commitment to the two point guard style of play. Jalen, Alterique, MAL, maybe also a Blake Harris or 2018 PG. These are guys with PG skills who can score. Some of them (Jalen, MAL) have the size to defend at 3 spots. If you really want to have 2 PG on the floor at all times, you need at least 3 who play big (20+ minutes) which means you need 4 on the roster.
- Commitment to a "stretch 4" philosophy in which we have long, athletic combo forwards who have enough perimeter skills to play the wing and enough size and athleticism and toughness to defend either the 3 or 4 interchangeably.

So the new model of roster building seems to be:
- 4 PGs who can score, at least 2 with size (~6'3") to defend taller shooting guards.
- 4 athletic wings who are versatile, long, quick, and athletic enough to defend a 2, 3, or 4 and can play inside or outside on both ends.
- 5 big men. We don't need so many in this style of play but we have not recruited top talents successfully and it looks like we need this much roster space, for the time being, in order to ensure we have the 2 capable big men we need.

In this roster the traditional "shooting guard" role has almost disappeared, becoming a longer athletic wing or a tall point guard who can create and distribute or score.

I think when KO gets the roster he wants, this is going to work very well. It will be a great defensive lineup and, with the multiple point guards, creative offensively. It should be able to push the tempo and get out in transition. It should be a fun style of play, for fans and players both.

We need kids who can play basketball- just athletic is not going to get it done.