Jump to content

Recruiting talent or fit


IU Scott

Recommended Posts

Just looking at the teams still alive I think it is best for Archie to recruit more for fit than just looking at the best talent.  I look at Purdue and see two of their starters being Cline and Eifert who probably was not on any of the top teams recruiting radar but here they are starting for a sweet 16 team.  Tennessee does not have a top 100 player and their top two players were not in the top 150 of their classes.  I want players who will stay for a long period of time and players who will play to their roles on the team.  I think we as fans look at the star rating to much and unless you are UK or Duke who can get multiple top players it is bet to get players who fit the way you coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Just looking at the teams still alive I think it is best for Archie to recruit more for fit than just looking at the best talent.  I look at Purdue and see two of their starters being Cline and Eifert who probably was not on any of the top teams recruiting radar but here they are starting for a sweet 16 team.  Tennessee does not have a top 100 player and their top two players were not in the top 150 of their classes.  I want players who will stay for a long period of time and players who will play to their roles on the team.  I think we as fans look at the star rating to much and unless you are UK or Duke who can get multiple top players it is bet to get players who fit the way you coach.

Knight recruited the best some years and some years it looked like need. I dont think you lock yourself into either. Once the NBA gets the one and done thing straighten out, recruiting will be better. Teams will stay together longer. Now sure your question can be answered until then. We also have to remember Archie is still trying to figure this out as well. Recruiting to IU is much different than recruiting to Dayton. I'm sure it looks like someone handed him the keys to a candy store.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fiveoutofsix said:

It was my first time watching Houston last night.  They strong athletes that can play ball.  Not sure where those kids were on the rating schedule.  They made OSU look two steps slow.

I would recruit to more of the intangibles of a player over their rating or athletic ability.  I want to see if a player has the ability to be a great leader and if those players make their teammates better by playing with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Fiveoutofsix said:

It was my first time watching Houston last night.  They strong athletes that can play ball.  Not sure where those kids were on the rating schedule.  They made OSU look two steps slow.

Kelvin recruits the state pen. He's looking to film the BBall  version of the longest yard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would recruit both. I think it has to be combo. I believe the top in state guys most years would yield a good to great class.  It's not all about the stars but a good mix would be nice. Make all Indiana 5 stars a priority. Fill in with guys that want to be here play hard and hopefully shoot the ball well 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think that Archie in particular should lean towards fit. I think that he is an internally motivated guy who connects with and most naturally coaches towards guys who are also internally motivated. When I coached (just high school varsity) I was always confounded by people who didn't play hard or work on their own to get better. It made absolutely no sense to me because when I played no one ever had to ask me to do either...This current team is pretty mercurial and I think part of it is the fact that they are largely externally motivated and don't fit with the gritty personality of CAM....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coach SS said months ago on here that the pressure to get 5 star guys right away isn't necessarily the approach this staff wants. Much like Michigan....Archie wants to build a culture. Problem is at IU when you have talents like Romeo, TJD, Keion,etc....they have to be targeted as a head coach even if you know they aren't the right way to build a program. Call me crazy....but I'm glad 2020 class doesn't have 5 star OAD in state talent. Archie can keep laying the foundation. 

To me you couple the scenario that I just described along with having been forced to keep 3-4 guys because of APR issues....it's still an admin issue. Just have to give him time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott, I think this is a great topic and maybe should even be on the main board. It's not just about recruiting, it's about establishing the culture of IU basketball. This topic is everything right now. 

I was thinking of this while watching the tournament as well. If you take the one and done factories (Duke/UK) and the wannabe one and done factory (LSU) out of it, most of the successful teams left in the tournament have upperclassmen backcourts, and in general are older teams. Archie said when he was hired his goal was to get old and stay old, and I think when digging into the good teams still remaining, that's the model. Problem for new coaches is that it can take a few years for this to happen. 

I did some digging and if you look at the remaining teams outside of Duke, UK and LSU (13 teams), for all 13 at least 3 of their top 5 scorers are upperclassmen, and for 6 of the 13 at least 4 of their top 5 scorers are upperclassmen. Only 3 (Michigan, Oregon & UNC) of the 13 had a freshmen in their top 5 scorers. 

We also know that a good deal of success in college basketball is having good guards. When looking at these 13 teams I saw that 9 of the 13 have backcourts with all upperclassmen, and I believe UNC is the only one of the 13 with a freshmen in the backcourt. 

Now take a look at this years IU team, 4 of the top 6 scorers were underclassmen and the starting backcourt for most of the season was comprised of 2 freshmen and a sophomore (Phinisee, Langford, Durham). 

I get it, as the IU coach you have to recruit guys like Langford and Brooks. You just do. But based on what he's alluded to and how he's recruited, I think Archie would prefer to build a culture of getting older players who plan on staying several years. IU is never going to be a one and done factory, and trying to be would most likely result in very inconsistent results. I think Archie is best served recruiting in the MSU, UNC, UVA, Michigan mold where you're getting most of your guys in the 20-80 range and filling in the gaps with guys in the 100-150 range, while taking on the occasional one and done type guy but targeting the 15-25ish ranked Burger Boys. 

The beauty of MSU's 2016 class was that they got Bridges to stay two years but the rest of that class (Winston, Langford, Ward) were all top 50ish guys that you knew would be there 3-4 years. That's the range IMO. For IU, get the TJD's who are burger boys but most likely to stay 2-3 years and then recruit guys hard in the Jerome Hunter to Phinisee range. 

I'll be the first to admit, I got caught up in the rumors last Fall about a possible TJD/Brooks/Stewart/Franklin class. But, I actually think that would be the worst thing for IU/Archie long-term. I don't know how IU will do next year, it may be tough as the roster is still in transition, but I do beleive that if the fans can stay patient with Archie, that by the time Phinisee is an upperclassmen, IU could be really, really good. 

Not trying to get into the transfer talk, but I'm also torn on what I hope happens this offseason. There are a few guys that could be candidates to transfer, but is IU/Archie better served by having some of these guys stay, in an effort to get old and stay old, as opposed to bringing in a bunch of new guys? I think we desperately need some guard/shooting help, but do we really need more new guys? Is IU better served having players like Moore, Smith and Green in their 3rd year in the system, as opposed to a bunch of new guys?  I kind of feel like patience is the play here, but I'm not sure the fanbase can take it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Scott, I think this is a great topic and maybe should even be on the main board. It's not just about recruiting, it's about establishing the culture of IU basketball. This topic is everything right now. 

I was thinking of this while watching the tournament as well. If you take the one and done factories (Duke/UK) and the wannabe one and done factory (LSU) out of it, most of the successful teams left in the tournament have upperclassmen backcourts, and in general are older teams. Archie said when he was hired his goal was to get old and stay old, and I think when digging into the good teams still remaining, that's the model. Problem for new coaches is that it can take a few years for this to happen. 

I did some digging and if you look at the remaining teams outside of Duke, UK and LSU (13 teams), for all 13 at least 3 of their top 5 scorers are upperclassmen, and for 6 of the 13 at least 4 of their top 5 scorers are upperclassmen. Only 3 (Michigan, Oregon & UNC) of the 13 had a freshmen in their top 5 scorers. 

We also know that a good deal of success in college basketball is having good guards. When looking at these 13 teams I saw that 9 of the 13 have backcourts with all upperclassmen, and I believe UNC is the only one of the 13 with a freshmen in the backcourt. 

Now take a look at this years IU team, 4 of the top 6 scorers were underclassmen and the starting backcourt for most of the season was comprised of 2 freshmen and a sophomore (Phinisee, Langford, Durham). 

I get it, as the IU coach you have to recruit guys like Langford and Brooks. You just do. But based on what he's alluded to and how he's recruited, I think Archie would prefer to build a culture of getting older players who plan on staying several years. IU is never going to be a one and done factory, and trying to be would most likely result in very inconsistent results. I think Archie is best served recruiting in the MSU, UNC, UVA, Michigan mold where you're getting most of your guys in the 20-80 range and filling in the gaps with guys in the 100-150 range, while taking on the occasional one and done type guy but targeting the 15-25ish ranked Burger Boys. 

The beauty of MSU's 2016 class was that they got Bridges to stay two years but the rest of that class (Winston, Langford, Ward) were all top 50ish guys that you knew would be there 3-4 years. That's the range IMO. For IU, get the TJD's who are burger boys but most likely to stay 2-3 years and then recruit guys hard in the Jerome Hunter to Phinisee range. 

I'll be the first to admit, I got caught up in the rumors last Fall about a possible TJD/Brooks/Stewart/Franklin class. But, I actually think that would be the worst thing for IU/Archie long-term. I don't know how IU will do next year, it may be tough as the roster is still in transition, but I do beleive that if the fans can stay patient with Archie, that by the time Phinisee is an upperclassmen, IU could be really, really good. 

Not trying to get into the transfer talk, but I'm also torn on what I hope happens this offseason. There are a few guys that could be candidates to transfer, but is IU/Archie better served by having some of these guys stay, in an effort to get old and stay old, as opposed to bringing in a bunch of new guys? I think we desperately need some guard/shooting help, but do we really need more new guys? Is IU better served having players like Moore, Smith and Green in their 3rd year in the system, as opposed to a bunch of new guys?  I kind of feel like patience is the play here, but I'm not sure the fanbase can take it. 

I think for next year patience is the play on not trying to disrupt too much, although I would like to see one guard that can knock down shots added to the roster for depth assuming Romeo is gone. 

If guys like Moore and Forrester want to leave due to playing time I get it, but I think they can be an asset to our program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BGleas said:

Not trying to get into the transfer talk, but I'm also torn on what I hope happens this offseason. There are a few guys that could be candidates to transfer, but is IU/Archie better served by having some of these guys stay, in an effort to get old and stay old, as opposed to bringing in a bunch of new guys? I think we desperately need some guard/shooting help, but do we really need more new guys? Is IU better served having players like Moore, Smith and Green in their 3rd year in the system, as opposed to a bunch of new guys?  I kind of feel like patience is the play here, but I'm not sure the fanbase can take it. 

Good post and I'm very much with you on most of your thoughts.  I'm probably more on the side of (and more vocal about) hating transfers and developing who you have as long as they are good citizens who put in the work and show progress.  I hope anyone wishing a player gone eventually eats those words, much as many have already done regarding Devonte Green.  I can't remember when a transfer announcement didn't make me at least a little sad that things didn't work out...even with Grant Gelon even though I knew it was the right thing for the program (and probably the right thing for Grant).  I trust Archie to do his homework and not offer kids who can't contribute at the necessary level, but I understand that some kids will leave in search of more playing time.  I just know I personally will not wish a transfer on a kid who's putting in the effort and representing IU positively.  No reason every recruit going forward shouldn't be able to contribute by the time they are a junior or senior.  Get old and stay old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

Good post and I'm very much with you on most of your thoughts.  I'm probably more on the side of (and more vocal about) hating transfers and developing who you have as long as they are good citizens who put in the work and show progress.  I hope anyone wishing a player gone eventually eats those words, much as many have already done regarding Devonte Green.  I can't remember when a transfer announcement didn't make me at least a little sad that things didn't work out...even with Grant Gelon even though I knew it was the right thing for the program (and probably the right thing for Grant).  I trust Archie to do his homework and not offer kids who can't contribute at the necessary level, but I understand that some kids will leave in search of more playing time.  I just know I personally will not wish a transfer on a kid who's putting in the effort and representing IU positively.  No reason every recruit going forward shouldn't be able to contribute by the time they are a junior or senior.  Get old and stay old.

Thanks, and yes we're pretty aligned. I'm also with you in not liking to discuss specific names when it comes to transfers, but I think it's ok in the following sense. Lots of people have mentioned Smith looking unhappy, etc., and he's certainly struggled this season, but is this program better off with another new freshmen, or having Smith as a junior and senior with 3/4 years under his belt in Archie's system the next two years?

There's things that worry me about Smith's game for sure, but I keep going back to Archie saying "get old and stay old", as well as seeing all these veteran teams in the Sweet Sixteen. You don't become a veteran team by constantly having roster turnover. It's part of what got Crean in trouble.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Thanks, and yes we're pretty aligned. I'm also with you in not liking to discuss specific names when it comes to transfers, but I think it's ok in the following sense. Lots of people have mentioned Smith looking unhappy, etc., and he's certainly struggled this season, but is this program better off with another new freshmen, or having Smith as a junior and senior with 3/4 years under his belt in Archie's system the next two years?

There's things that worry me about Smith's game for sure, but I keep going back to Archie saying "get old and stay old", as well as seeing all these veteran teams in the Sweet Sixteen. You don't become a veteran team by constantly having roster turnover. It's part of what got Crean in trouble.  

I agree the team needs to get old but they also need the right guys to get old with the team. I hope the current guys improve their shooting and don't spend the whole summer ringing the bell in the weight room.  I guess we have to trust that the coach will assemble a team that can consistently compete for a big ten championship but losing 12 of 13 or whatever it was and giving up 22-0 runs to Rutgers should be unacceptable going forward.  Going in to his 3rd year we shouldn't have to put up with any attitude problems on this team.  Coach needs to purge anyone that's not totally onboard and bring in guys who will be, if necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Thanks, and yes we're pretty aligned. I'm also with you in not liking to discuss specific names when it comes to transfers, but I think it's ok in the following sense. Lots of people have mentioned Smith looking unhappy, etc., and he's certainly struggled this season, but is this program better off with another new freshmen, or having Smith as a junior and senior with 3/4 years under his belt in Archie's system the next two years?

There's things that worry me about Smith's game for sure, but I keep going back to Archie saying "get old and stay old", as well as seeing all these veteran teams in the Sweet Sixteen. You don't become a veteran team by constantly having roster turnover. It's part of what got Crean in trouble.  

Did Archie say that too?  I know Painter said “get old stay old” in one of his post game pressers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CrimsonV said:

Did Archie say that too?  I know Painter said “get old stay old” in one of his post game pressers.

Most who get old want to stay old as long as possible

 

“People ask me what I’d most appreciate getting for my eighty-seventh birthday. I tell them, a paternity suit.” – George Burns


 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, SpiderMonkey said:

This is an interesting read on roster construction of the final four teams.  

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/26411800/how-2019-final-four-teams-were-built

 

This is what I liked the most and think it could be this past year's freshmen class should everyone (other than Romeo) stay intact:

 

One can trace Auburn's deep and talented roster back to its 2015 recruiting class -- which, not so coincidentally, was Bruce Pearl's first full recruiting class in charge. Pearl was hired in the spring of 2014 to replace Tony Barbee, but he still had several months remaining on his three-year NCAA show-cause penalty when he joined the Tigers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IUALUM03 said:

This is what I liked the most and think it could be this past year's freshmen class should everyone (other than Romeo) stay intact:

 

One can trace Auburn's deep and talented roster back to its 2015 recruiting class -- which, not so coincidentally, was Bruce Pearl's first full recruiting class in charge. Pearl was hired in the spring of 2014 to replace Tony Barbee, but he still had several months remaining on his three-year NCAA show-cause penalty when he joined the Tigers.

Go back and look at Pearl’s first three years.  Year three he had better talent at Auburn and had a 5 star SG, two top 100 PGs, several top 100 players, top 35 center, #1 JUCO, starting PF this year was a frosh, and starting SG this year was a soph. He finished 11th in the SEC which was a bad conference at the time.  Things take time sometimes even when you have talent.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, IU_Realist said:

Go back and look at Pearl’s first three years.  Year three he had better talent at Auburn and had a 5 star SG, two top 100 PGs, several top 100 players, top 35 center, #1 JUCO, starting PF this year was a frosh, and starting SG this year was a soph. He finished 11th in the SEC which was a bad conference at the time.  Things take time sometimes even when you have talent.  

Was listening to DD at lunch interviewing Fran Frachilla and they were talking about MSU and how last year they were way more talented but this year they are a better team this year.  Got me thinking about our situation where we will probably lose our two best players from this year but maybe we could be a better team.  Fran said that talking to Izzo last year it was hard because he knew that Bridges and the 6'11 freshman from last year whose name I can't remember was NBA players. Izzo said he had to try to do what was best for them and trying to fit that with what was best for the team made it difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...