Best of the best NIL??Is the Kentucky staff really the “best of the best” though?
Best of the best NIL??Is the Kentucky staff really the “best of the best” though?
We have players that barely saw the court for whatever reason and playing time is a big factor.I agree with the general premise that nobody should be panicking. But I also think it would be awfully convenient if the 50% leaving happen to be the same 50% we hope leave. There's likely to be a painful departure or 2
I know the latter part is the reality of the sport now, but there’s certain guys I’m gonna have a really hard time with leaving given their roles this year and next year.I agree with the general premise that nobody should be panicking. But I also think it would be awfully convenient if the 50% leaving happen to be the same 50% we hope leave. There's likely to be a painful departure or 2
Portal gone bad
Interesting - definitely a Hurley mentalityTrilly says Braden Huff from Gonzaga is entering. I would be extremely interested in him.
I don't think UConn fans are "panicking" much at all about losing 50% of the current roster that is eligible to come back. The 50% that do come back are likely the ones contributing in big ways right now, if the other 50% don't come back they can be replaced....just the way things are now, year to year.
Although Dan Hurley says he wants them all back I doubt that's really the case, some spots need upgrades besides the incoming freshmen. It's a business now more than ever, they're all being paid something. Players have to go where they can play and make the most and UConn needs to put the best team it can on the floor every year....which means a mix of returning players, freshmen & portal to fill needs.
Big fan of GeorgeWe will probably recruit a big, but Ndongo will want more PT than we could offer.
Naithan George is the actual player we should keep an eye on from that team. Sophomore who averaged 13/4/7.
Rather have better athletic ability and we are already set up front for he most part. I wouldn't really want to see Huff and Reibe in a the same time. I know he is a PF but still rather have more athletic ability than what we have on the team now and so far for next year.Interesting - definitely a Hurley mentality
Do we have pt for a center? We have a sr Tarris and fr Reibe
I think we are going to be more involved with an athletic big PG and Swing man then another Center. We only have so much money to go around. Sometimes you just have to rely on some of these highly rated recruits to produce. He won't be asked to start.Reibe is a 4* player--borderline 5*--just like Nowell was. Normally, players in that range I'm fine relying on to contribute. Not for kids in the 50-100 range we've recruited historically.
But IMO it's different because he's a big. We MUST have a servicable backup big, and I'd be reluctant to put that much pressure on a freshman with a weak body and inconsistent game right now. There's a darn good shot he's a player, but we need guaranteed performance.
I'm very high on bigs from the portal for this reason.
Mostly played off the bench until recent games. Had a big and successful run against Saint Mary's one night ago. Strong inside player.Trilly says Braden Huff from Gonzaga is entering. I would be extremely interested in him.
Isn't UConn already set with Tarris and Eric Reibe (freshman next year)? This assumes Tarris doesn't enter the portal and I really hope he does not.Trilly says Braden Huff from Gonzaga is entering. I would be extremely interested in him.
Trilly says we’ll be after a PG and C in the portalI think we are going to be more involved with an athletic big PG and Swing man then another Center. We only have so much money to go around. Sometimes you just have to rely on some of these highly rated recruits to produce. He won't be asked to start.
I hope I’m wrong about what diving head first into this trend will do to our program.It's taken me a while to accept the business part, as I'm still nostalgic and hopeful of recruiting freshmen and having continuity for 2-3 years. But that's mostly dead now.
I'm now more attuned to the "we need the best player now" mentality, and honestly, if we lose five guys and replace them with five better guys and then replace those five guys with five equal or better guys the year after, then we will be more successful.
I'm going to assume we will try to bring in 3-4 stud freshmen every year, but chances are we'll just be hitting free agency pretty hard most years.
Things that make you go hmmmm. I don't think Trilly has the best source info at Uconn.Trilly says we’ll be after a PG and C in the portal
I honestly think the idea of how we built 2023/2024 is already an obsolete notion as portal system was not fully mature then. Now that it's here, and players, coaches and advisors all know how it works, it's truly a year to year deal for everyone. This is why I think the most sustainable way to win year to year is likely what Scheyer is doing - load up with top 15-20 freshmen studs annually and bring in 3-4 mature bodied transfers to balance out. You get the NBA talent that hopefully blossoms along with the insurance policy & leadership in seniority. I'm sure K and Scheyer ran through through Fuqua for analysisI hope I’m wrong about what diving head first into this trend will do to our program.
We have a talent advantage when it comes to recruiting. Stepping on our feet to bring in higher floor guys with not as much talent would hurt that.
Maybe I’ll end up wrong though we’ll see.
The best bigs we've ever had are in the 50-100 range and lower- Okafor, Clingan, Thabeet, Sanogo, Voskuhl, Boone.Reibe is a 4* player--borderline 5*--just like Nowell was. Normally, players in that range I'm fine relying on to contribute. Not for kids in the 50-100 range we've recruited historically.
But IMO it's different because he's a big. We MUST have a servicable backup big, and I'd be reluctant to put that much pressure on a freshman with a weak body and inconsistent game right now. There's a darn good shot he's a player, but we need guaranteed performance.
I'm very high on bigs from the portal for this reason.
Our team last year is now obsolete and you think the most sustainable way to win year to year is by being the best recruiting program in the country that gets their absolute pick of top freshmen and top transfers.I honestly think the idea of how we built 2023/2024 is already an obsolete notion as portal system was not fully mature then. Now that it's here, and players, coaches and advisors all know how it works, it's truly a year to year deal for everyone. This is why I think the most sustainable way to win year to year is likely what Scheyer is doing - load up with top 15-20 freshmen studs annually and bring in 3-4 mature bodied transfers to balance out. You get the NBA talent that hopefully blossoms along with the insurance policy & leadership in seniority. I'm sure K and Scheyer ran through through Fuqua for analysis.
I'm going to be dying to see if a kid like Braden Smith, who could likely command a fortune in the portal, tests it. I don't think he will, but boy it has to be tempting to find out what your market is when you have no NBA future.
I think the first coach that fully commits to the “obsolete” way and has great recruiting will have teams easily head and shoulders more talented than the rest of the field on top of having actual chemistry of playing together for years.I honestly think the idea of how we built 2023/2024 is already an obsolete notion as portal system was not fully mature then. Now that it's here, and players, coaches and advisors all know how it works, it's truly a year to year deal for everyone. This is why I think the most sustainable way to win year to year is likely what Scheyer is doing - load up with top 15-20 freshmen studs annually and bring in 3-4 mature bodied transfers to balance out. You get the NBA talent that hopefully blossoms along with the insurance policy & leadership in seniority. I'm sure K and Scheyer ran through through Fuqua for analysis.
The problem with your premise is that players are not going to stick around long enough to be developedI think the first coach that fully commits to the “obsolete” way and has great recruiting will have teams easily head and shoulders more talented than the rest of the field on top of having actual chemistry of playing together for years.
It will probably look similar to the back2backs ease wise. The talent pool is that weak right now in college because nobody is actually developing talented players. Just trying to buy players they don’t have to coach.
This is why I think the most sustainable way to win year to year is likely what Scheyer is doing - load up with top 15-20 freshmen studs annually and bring in 3-4 mature bodied transfers to balance out. You get the NBA talent that hopefully blossoms along with the insurance policy & leadership in seniority.
Exactly - 611 seems to see this from a program choice standpoint only. Kids will equally have choices and bolt to where they get PT & $$. You're not keeping a freshman for more than a year unless they have a clear sightline to starting year 2. There is really no replacement to develop then real playing time. So unless you're a coach that is willing to play a below grade player allowing and hoping they develop at the sake of fielding a bad team, you're going to lose them.The problem with your premise is that players are not going to stick around long enough to be developed
If a player isn’t in the rotation in his freshman year, he’s not going to stay
The 13 man roster and it’s completely outdated
I suspect going forward the coaches will be looking to have rosters of no more than 10 to 11 players
In today’s environment if you’re playing 8 to 9 players and then there’s two that aren’t going to be happy