[Matt Velazquez] Wojciechowski not anxious to fill roster spot

[Jay Bee]

Yes, MU needs a power forward, and for the second year in a row Wojo has come up short  filling a need.

FYI, per the calendar most of us are on, it's only May.

[HoopsterBC]

FYI, per the calendar most of us are on, it's only May.

Yes there is still time for another player, maybe he gets it done.

[wadesworld]

As much is it is important to have 13 scholarship players, the bigger question is how you keep them all happy?  You only play at most 9 or 10 players so the 13th player
to accept a scholy to just a fill a spot is ridiculous.    Yes, MU needs a power forward, and for the second year in a row Wojo has come up short  filling a need.  I am having a hard time digesting his inability to close at the end.  Right now MU has more to sell in the future then 90% of the programs in America, not sure he is getting it done.  2 years new arena, first class facility right near campus where an NBA team and MU players will be able to work with each other.  I would think next year will be
a big year as well as the following year as the building goes up.  No excuses going forward in my book.  Lots to sell.

This entire post summed up in one sentence: "I need attention!"

[MU82]

I am having a hard time digesting his inability to close at the end.

I am having a hard time digesting your lack of knowledge about college basketball. Burp.

[bilsu]

There's no need to announce a policy. Its the policy of every single D1 college basketball program. If you are the worst player on any team with 13 scholarship players, and the team has a glaring need at another position, and there is a reasonable chance the team can get another player at that position, than you are likely going to be cut.

But again, as others have said, this isn't the whole story with Wally.

I would be surprised, if every college program folllows this. Certainly Crean does, but I suspect there are more programs that do not do this than there are that practice it. It is hard to tell, because a coach dumping a player that is a bad citizen is not the same as cutting a player that is not good. I do not agree with cutting players unless they are screwing up off the court. Cutting a player that is not good is just covering up the fact that the coach should not of given a player a scholarship in the first place. Coaches are much better at recognizing talent than the average poster here. Giving player X a scholarship when you know he is going to be the 13th player on the team is just foolish. Save the scholarship and have some confidence in your ability to sign a better recruit in the next class.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I would be surprised, if every college program folllows this. Certainly Crean does, but I suspect there are more programs that do not do this than there are that practice it. It is hard to tell, because a coach dumping a player that is a bad citizen is not the same as cutting a player that is not good. I do not agree with cutting players unless they are screwing up off the court. Cutting a player that is not good is just covering up the fact that the coach should not of given a player a scholarship in the first place. Coaches are much better at recognizing talent than the average poster here. Giving player X a scholarship when you know he is going to be the 13th player on the team is just foolish. Save the scholarship and have some confidence in your ability to sign a better recruit in the next class.

Every may be a strong word. But every program I've worked for, and every program I have networks at does. I'd be willing to bet every high major does and most D1 programs. They are one year contacts. It's a coaches job to find the best 13 players every year. If you have a chance to get a better player but are out of schollies it is the coaches responsibility to not renew the worst players scholarship and make the team better.

[Tugg Speedman]

Every may be a strong word. But every program I've worked for, and every program I have networks at does. I'd be willing to bet every high major does and most D1 programs. They are one year contacts. It's a coaches job to find the best 13 players every year. If you have a chance to get a better player but are out of schollies it is the coaches responsibility to not renew the worst players scholarship and make the team better.

this is morphing into 4 year contracts

[Lennys Tap]

Every may be a strong word. But every program I've worked for, and every program I have networks at does. I'd be willing to bet every high major does and most D1 programs. They are one year contacts. It's a coaches job to find the best 13 players every year. If you have a chance to get a better player but are out of schollies it is the coaches responsibility to not renew the worst players scholarship and make the team better.

If Henry had returned for his  sophomore year would it have been Wojo's responsibility not to renew our worst player's scholarship and make the team better? Maybe, but I'd bet 1,000 to 1 it wouldn't happen.

[MU82]

If Henry had returned for his  sophomore year would it have been Wojo's responsibility not to renew our worst player's scholarship and make the team better? Maybe, but I'd bet 1,000 to 1 it wouldn't happen.

Me, too. Even if Wally didn't "totally commit" to basketball.

When it comes to the Pol-axing of Wally, I'm in the "I can't get too outraged about this" camp. But I still acknowledge the optics aren't the greatest -- in other words, it looks bad, no matter how folks try to justify it.

[wadesworld]

If Henry had returned for his  sophomore year would it have been Wojo's responsibility not to renew our worst player's scholarship and make the team better? Maybe, but I'd bet 1,000 to 1 it wouldn't happen.

Henry never was going to come back for his sophomore season.

[Lennys Tap]

Me, too. Even if Wally didn't "totally commit" to basketball.

When it comes to the Pol-axing of Wally, I'm in the "I can't get too outraged about this" camp. But I still acknowledge the optics aren't the greatest -- in other words, it looks bad, no matter how folks try to justify it.

I'm with you, Mike. I don't object to Wojo spending 3 years worth of scholarships for 1 year of Henry. Nor would I have objected had Wojo spent 5 year's worth for 2 years worth of Henry (as he most assuredly would have to keep Henry for his sophomore  year). And I don't object that once Henry opted out Wojo decided not to give the Ellensons a 4th year of scholarship for Henry's 1 year of contributions. These are all business decisions and coaches at big time basketball schools are paid big $ to make them based on how they think their bottom line (winning!) will be affected.

Again, I don't object - but I don't pretend that it's not what it is - "Just win, baby". Do it well enough you're in the Hall of Fame (Al). Do it badly enough and you're dismissed in disgrace (Bob Dukiet). Both played "Just win, baby". One superbly, one poorly.

Wojo is "Just win, baby" too. They all are. I hope that like Al and Buzz he's good enough to achieve his objective - which (pardon my redundancy) is winning. If he is we will forgive every "heartless" decision he makes in its pursuit. If not, he'll be gone in a few years and nobody here will miss him. Some will even call him squirmy on the way out.

[ChicosBailBonds]

All coaches want to win, some will do things that are not needed. Some go even further, break the rules or have proxies do it for them.  Some cover up things...Baylor is a fun example of that currently, but hardly the first.   

The worst response.....but but but < X coach > used to do it.   Awesome, the response my kids gave when they were 7.

[MarquetteDano]

All coaches want to win, some will do things that are not needed. Some go even further, break the rules or have proxies do it for them.  Some cover up things...Baylor is a fun example of that currently, but hardly the first.   

The worst response.....but but but < X coach > used to do it.   Awesome, the response my kids gave when they were 7.

There are degrees.  There are winning coaches who break NCAA rules, undermine their own university rules, when there are no rules to follow do whatever is best in respect to winning with no thought as to the impact to others.

On the other side, there are winning coaches who bend the rules,  try their best to follow the university's codes, and also have integrity, though may fail, like we all do, from time to time.

Let's not pretend there is no difference between shoplifters and mass murderers and simply say they are all criminals.

p.s. not disagreeing with you Chicos,  just adding

[Lennys Tap]

The worst response.....but but but < X coach > used to do it.   Awesome, the response my kids gave when they were 7.

No, the worst response is demonizing coach X and defending coach Y when coach x and coach y are two peas in a pod. It's called hypocrisy. It's rarely seen in 7 year olds but they could learn it from their parents I suppose.

[Lennys Tap]

Let's not pretend there is no difference between shoplifters and mass murderers and simply say they are all criminals.

Very few "mass murderers" in college basketball, tons of "shoplifters". Our coaches from Al to the present fit the latter. My problem is with those who excuse one shoplifter and accuse another shoplifter of being a mass murderer. That's hypocrisy.

[Tugg Speedman]

I'm with you, Mike. I don't object to Wojo spending 3 years worth of scholarships for 1 year of Henry. Nor would I have objected had Wojo spent 5 year's worth for 2 years worth of Henry (as he most assuredly would have to keep Henry for his sophomore  year). And I don't object that once Henry opted out Wojo decided not to give the Ellensons a 4th year of scholarship for Henry's 1 year of contributions. These are all business decisions and coaches at big time basketball schools are paid big $ to make them based on how they think their bottom line (winning!) will be affected.

Again, I don't object - but I don't pretend that it's not what it is - "Just win, baby". Do it well enough you're in the Hall of Fame (Al). Do it badly enough and you're dismissed in disgrace (Bob Dukiet). Both played "Just win, baby". One superbly, one poorly.

Wojo is "Just win, baby" too. They all are. I hope that like Al and Buzz he's good enough to achieve his objective - which (pardon my redundancy) is winning. If he is we will forgive every "heartless" decision he makes in its pursuit. If not, he'll be gone in a few years and nobody here will miss him. Some willy even call him squirmy on the way out.

I still get the sense we are missing the larger issue.

Again, this is a business, so cutting Wally for a better player is fine.  I'm ok with it.

But when Wojo cuts Wally, whiffs of Gill and Young and then say he is not anxious to fill the roster spot, I get worried.  What was the point of cutting Wally if you replace him with no one?  Does an empty chair really make this team better?

Yes, we still time to find another transfer between now and October.  But at this point it seems that is more luck than a larger plan of cutting Wally to make room for a better player.  We have no better player in mind right now, just hope one will magically appear.

So this is about Wojos ability to recruit.  Or, maybe his reading (misreading) of recruits.

[MU82]

I still get the sense we are missing the larger issue.

Again, this is a business, so cutting Wally for a better player is fine.  I'm ok with it.

But when Wojo cuts Wally, whiffs of Gill and Young and then say he is not anxious to fill the roster spot, I get worried.  What was the point of cutting Wally if you replace him with no one?  Does an empty chair really make this team better?

Yes, we still time to find another transfer between now and October.  But at this point it seems that is more luck than a larger plan of cutting Wally to make room for a better player.  We have no better player in mind right now, just hope one will magically appear.

So this is about Wojos ability to recruit.  Or, maybe his reading (misreading) of recruits.

So far, Wojo's two recruiting classes have produced one top-10 team ranking and one top-20. Ipso fatso, I'm quite satisfied with Wojo's ability to recruit and to "read" recruits.

Landing numerous top targets and finishing second or third on a few others is similar to the kind of recruiting record blue-blood coaches have.

IMHO, while it's too early to judge Wojo a "blue-blood level" recruiter, it is FAR too early to question his ability to recruit.

All we can go on are facts. And the fact is that in his only two years at Marquette, he has recruited better than at least 95% of the coaches in America.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I still get the sense we are missing the larger issue.

But when Wojo cuts Wally, whiffs of Gill and Young and then say he is not anxious to fill the roster spot, I get worried.  What was the point of cutting Wally if you replace him with no one?  Does an empty chair really make this team better?

So this is about Wojos ability to recruit.  Or, maybe his reading (misreading) of recruits.

The answer in my mind is maybe it is a bad sign -- or maybe not. 

However, I don't think people are missing the larger point - being that we need to get back to post-season bball.  Wojo is in charge of recruiting and coaching.  He has landed some recruits that get people excited...he has missed some that we wished we had at the time. 

Him cutting a player for reasons we probably don't fully understand and him missing a recruit he targeted is just a teeny piece of a much bigger picture that will be judged in time on the court.

[NotAnAlum]

But when Wojo cuts Wally, whiffs of Gill and Young and then say he is not anxious to fill the roster spot, I get worried.  What was the point of cutting Wally if you replace him with no one?  Does an empty chair really make this team better?

You seem to have this expectation that for Wojo to be judged successful every plan he makes must be successful.  If so get ready to be disappointed a lot.  Even the bluebloods like Kansas and Duke make plans to get a certain recruit and then loose out on that recruit.  Its one of the major things that makes college basketball so interesting.
Look at it this way.  When the transfer season started Wojo saw the chance to bring in Reinhardt a proven scorer with experience that would help a team that last year suffered from a lack of experience and was losing its top scorer.  Now Wojo could have said "yes but Reinhardt is not a natural front court player; I need a front court player for my last scholarship so I'll have to pass on Reinhardt."  He could have planed that but he didn't.  Instead he took Reinhardt figuring that he'd cut Wally and put him on a track scholarship to "get back the last scholarship".  The last roster spot is still open making MU a very attractive spot for both these 2 PF candidates that he has in mind.  So everything goes as planned except neither candidate choses MU.  They chose other schools that in my opinion have a situation just as attractive as ours.  And of course we are still trying to find a 1 year PF which still may happen.
So what you need to ask yourself is would you rather Wojo just passed on Reinhardt, kept Wally on the team and then tried, and as we know now failed, to bring in a PF.  You'd still have an open scholarship but you'd have one year of Wally instead of one year of Reinhardt.  I'd rather have Reinhardt and I still hope we get a 1 year PF but if we don't we're better off with our current roster.  This is not a precise game that you want to make it.  You plan for certain things to happen but sometimes they don't because your targets have other options as well.   

[Lennys Tap]

I still get the sense we are missing the larger issue.

Again, this is a business, so cutting Wally for a better player is fine.  I'm ok with it.

But when Wojo cuts Wally, whiffs of Gill and Young and then say he is not anxious to fill the roster spot, I get worried.  What was the point of cutting Wally if you replace him with no one?  Does an empty chair really make this team better?

Yes, we still time to find another transfer between now and October.  But at this point it seems that is more luck than a larger plan of cutting Wally to make room for a better player.  We have no better player in mind right now, just hope one will magically appear.

So this is about Wojos ability to recruit.  Or, maybe his reading (misreading) of recruits.

I'm kind of with TAMU on this. You have to cut the guy you know won't help before you go after guys who will. Even if you miss on the guys you go after you're no worse off as Wally was looked upon as a non contributor.

[tower912]

Would having Wally on next year's team be the difference between making the tournament and not making the tournament?    I don't see how anyone can argue 'yes'.     Is Wally really going to suffer from this?    No.

[MarquetteDano]

Very few "mass murderers" in college basketball, tons of "shoplifters". Our coaches from Al to the present fit the latter. My problem is with those who excuse one shoplifter and accuse another shoplifter of being a mass murderer. That's hypocrisy.

Don't disagree.  However, there are still "shoplifters" who steal $500k worth of merchandise and those who lift $50.  Still a big difference in my book.

[wadesworld]

I still get the sense we are missing the larger issue.

Again, this is a business, so cutting Wally for a better player is fine.  I'm ok with it.

But when Wojo cuts Wally, whiffs of Gill and Young and then say he is not anxious to fill the roster spot, I get worried.  What was the point of cutting Wally if you replace him with no one?  Does an empty chair really make this team better?

Yes, we still time to find another transfer between now and October.  But at this point it seems that is more luck than a larger plan of cutting Wally to make room for a better player.  We have no better player in mind right now, just hope one will magically appear.

So this is about Wojos ability to recruit.  Or, maybe his reading (misreading) of recruits.

No, it's not.  It's about your inability to understand the situation and your need for attention.

[Tugg Speedman]

You seem to have this expectation that for Wojo to be judged successful every plan he makes must be successful.  If so get ready to be disappointed a lot.  Even the bluebloods like Kansas and Duke make plans to get a certain recruit and then loose out on that recruit.  Its one of the major things that makes college basketball so interesting.
Look at it this way.  When the transfer season started Wojo saw the chance to bring in Reinhardt a proven scorer with experience that would help a team that last year suffered from a lack of experience and was losing its top scorer.  Now Wojo could have said "yes but Reinhardt is not a natural front court player; I need a front court player for my last scholarship so I'll have to pass on Reinhardt."  He could have planed that but he didn't.  Instead he took Reinhardt figuring that he'd cut Wally and put him on a track scholarship to "get back the last scholarship".  The last roster spot is still open making MU a very attractive spot for both these 2 PF candidates that he has in mind.  So everything goes as planned except neither candidate choses MU.  They chose other schools that in my opinion have a situation just as attractive as ours.  And of course we are still trying to find a 1 year PF which still may happen.
So what you need to ask yourself is would you rather Wojo just passed on Reinhardt, kept Wally on the team and then tried, and as we know now failed, to bring in a PF.  You'd still have an open scholarship but you'd have one year of Wally instead of one year of Reinhardt.  I'd rather have Reinhardt and I still hope we get a 1 year PF but if we don't we're better off with our current roster.  This is not a precise game that you want to make it.  You plan for certain things to happen but sometimes they don't because your targets have other options as well.

Why not sign someone first, cut to make room for them second?  Does that make more sense?

[TedBaxter]

Why not sign someone first, cut to make room for them second?  Does that make more sense?

Does it make any sense for a college head coach to "cut" the brother of his star recruit and potential lottery pick? 

Do you think it's possible the head coach was giving a player an honest assessment of what the player could expect regarding minutes the following year and the player would have none of that and left the team?