With Parham coming off a fine freshman season, with a top-15 recruiting class signed, with Sheek committed, and with Shaka having a legit shot at a couple other nice 2026 recruits, I'm as bullish as ever on our program.
(I didn't even mention Lowery and Owens each potentially taking a next big step, though I probably should have.)
If everybody stays - as has been the uniquely Marquette case since the portal/NIL era started - and if the success rate of player development is even the average of what it has been during Shaka's tenure, our 2026-27 and 2027-28 teams could be really, really good.
I'm not throwing away next season's team, which I think is generally underrated here, but the slightly more long-term outlook seems especially promising to me.
We Are Marquette!
Agreed.
It's the exact reason why I'm not going to be particularly concerned if this year's squad is hanging around the bubble (I don't think this will be the case but obviously it's a possibility).
I also think the Portal Posse™ should take note that both Pearson and Johnston made it very clear that's Marquette's culture and approach to the portal were key reasons why they committed.
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on May 13, 2025, 10:44:27 AMI also think the Portal Posse™ should take note that both Pearson and Johnston made it very clear that's Marquette's culture and approach to the portal were key reasons why they committed.
Both receiving $3M in NIL for saying that
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on May 13, 2025, 10:44:27 AMAgreed.
It's the exact reason why I'm not going to be particularly concerned if this year's squad is hanging around the bubble (I don't think this will be the case but obviously it's a possibility).
I also think the Portal Posse™ should take note that both Pearson and Johnston made it very clear that's Marquette's culture and approach to the portal were key reasons why they committed.
As did the 2025 recruits.
I think it still doesn't mean Shaka should steadfastly reject the portal entirely, and folks in the know here say he has been open to the "right" portal additions. But I actually like that Marquette can stand out as something different - even special - among the crowd.
I don't think a committment of a Top 80 and Top 150 kid validates the lack of Portal use. Those are typical MU recruits.
What will validate it, is consistent winning.
So far I think the results show Shaka's philosophy works.
Quote from: MU82 on May 13, 2025, 10:27:47 AMWith Parham coming off a fine freshman season, with a top-15 recruiting class signed, with Sheek committed, and with Shaka having a legit shot at a couple other nice 2026 recruits, I'm as bullish as ever on our program.
(I didn't even mention Lowery and Owens each potentially taking a next big step, though I probably should have.)
If everybody stays - as has been the uniquely Marquette case since the portal/NIL era started - and if the success rate of player development is even the average of what it has been during Shaka's tenure, our 2026-27 and 2027-28 teams could be really, really good.
I'm not throwing away next season's team, which I think is generally underrated here, but the slightly more long-term outlook seems especially promising to me.
We Are Marquette!
With no portal, and non linear development an occasional step back will occur. This would be that year because I agree that the following years could be really good if everyone with eligibility sticks around.
It will be fun to watch the development this year. If Shaka gets them to the tournament somehow, even better.
Quote from: Shooter McGavin on May 13, 2025, 02:15:06 PMWith no portal, and non linear development an occasional step back will occur.
Even with transfers, occasional step backs can occur (e.g., bad fit, injuries, whatever else..).. it's up to us as Scoopers to determine the underlying reasons for any step backs (e.g., bad portal / no portal philosophy; no "true point guard"; small neck size; no air craft carrier; improperly elite offense; etc.).
What strikes me is that Shaka's philosophy is resonating with recruits. Developing relationships. Focusing on growth and development of the players he recruits out of high school. Their acceptance that it is a process and they will have to do the work. And the trust in Shaka and his assistants.
Quote from: tower912 on May 13, 2025, 02:59:47 PMWhat strikes me is that Shaka's philosophy is resonating with recruits. Developing relationships. Focusing on growth and development of the players he recruits out of high school. Their acceptance that it is a process and they will have to do the work. And the trust in Shaka and his assistants.
Agree. And the recruits obviously interact with guys on the team and get the real lowdown on everything (including NIL reality at MU).
We just hit on two really big wins for 2026. Our 2025 class oozes potential. It's no secret Shaka is banking on growth for these teams--it is the lifeblood of what he does.
Love the talent he is bringing into the fold. The kids are buying into it. This plays more into the Brad Stevens wworld of "will this kid compete at all levels" and I love the kids we seem to get with that philosophy.
Quote from: tower912 on May 13, 2025, 02:59:47 PMWhat strikes me is that Shaka's philosophy is resonating with recruits. Developing relationships. Focusing on growth and development of the players he recruits out of high school. Their acceptance that it is a process and they will have to do the work. And the trust in Shaka and his assistants.
It apparently is resonating with the same level of recruits we've historically landed (yay). Which likely leads to similar results that we've seen (yay).
All of which I guess is ok, but I remain skeptical this approach brings any kind of real advantage in recruiting versus any other, one that will get MU to be considered by that highest tier of recruit. Hopefully I am wrong and Shaka finds a few that buy in and takes us to the next level as a program.
Getting Pearson is a step in the right direction. My biggest qualm with Shaka's recruiting previously has been the lack of higher profile bigs and guys not panning out. Of course the jury is out on a couple of the current guys who I hope turn out to be solid MU players. I know top big men don't grow on trees and there's only so many. If Shaka can consistently get top 100 big men then I won't be clamoring for the portal much. Despite growing pains, it will be interesting to see which guys come out on top as far as production on the court.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on May 13, 2025, 04:15:51 PMIt apparently is resonating with the same level of recruits we've historically landed (yay). Which likely leads to similar results that we've seen (yay).
All of which I guess is ok, but I remain skeptical this approach brings any kind of real advantage in recruiting versus any other, one that will get MU to be considered by that highest tier of recruit. Hopefully I am wrong and Shaka finds a few that buy in and takes us to the next level as a program.
Shaka got the big names at Texas. It didn't go well.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on May 13, 2025, 04:15:51 PMIt apparently is resonating with the same level of recruits we've historically landed (yay). Which likely leads to similar results that we've seen (yay).
All of which I guess is ok, but I remain skeptical this approach brings any kind of real advantage in recruiting versus any other, one that will get MU to be considered by that highest tier of recruit. Hopefully I am wrong and Shaka finds a few that buy in and takes us to the next level as a program.
Let's start with the obvious: All of us, especially Shaka and the players - would like to win more NCAAT games and, ultimately, championships.
The way to have any shot at that is to make the NCAAT regularly and to score high seeds occasionally. Shaka has done that - 4-for-4 and 2-for-4 (yay). And I think most here agree that we had enough talent for deeper runs in '23 and '24 (yay), but unfortunately lost due to injury, poor shooting, etc (boo).
Not many here are claiming that recruit/develop/retain gives Marquette an "advantage." What many are saying is that it's worked pretty well so far (yay), that it is unique and could eventually prove advantageous, and that we're willing to be patient to see if it can be a long-term recipe for big-time success (yay).
I've said that the next 2-3 years will tell us a lot about whether Shaka's philosophy can be all that as it competes with more portal-oriented programs.
Personally, I've really enjoyed the vast majority of these last 4 seasons (yay), and I am excited about the future. Sorry if some Scoopers don't feel that way (boo).
I don't think highly ranked recruits are what Shaka is aiming for. I think his sweet spot is in the 50 -150 range. Probably feels they'll buy into the culture more readily. Not to say that if he found one within the top tier that he wouldn't recruit him.
He recruited Kon.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on May 13, 2025, 04:15:51 PMIt apparently is resonating with the same level of recruits we've historically landed (yay). Which likely leads to similar results that we've seen (yay).
All of which I guess is ok, but I remain skeptical this approach brings any kind of real advantage in recruiting versus any other, one that will get MU to be considered by that highest tier of recruit. Hopefully I am wrong and Shaka finds a few that buy in and takes us to the next level as a program.
Are you really sarcastically "yay'ing" two 2-seeds in 4 years?
One aspect of the portal that I hate is the lack of continuity of teams year to year. The reality is that the guys at Marquette who just graduated are likable guys. It was great to see them grow within Shaka's system and flourish. I really like knowing who the players are year-to-year. I think it makes a difference to MU fans that they recognize the faces and know who they are rooting for.
I love the grow and develop model. It may not bring us a championship but at least I know who the guys are when I watch games.
Quote from: The Thing on May 13, 2025, 07:18:48 PMOne aspect of the portal that I hate is the lack of continuity of teams year to year. The reality is that the guys at Marquette who just graduated are likable guys. It was great to see them grow within Shaka's system and flourish. I really like knowing who the players are year-to-year. I think it makes a difference to MU fans that they recognize the faces and know who they are rooting for.
I love the grow and develop model. It may not bring us a championship but at least I know who the guys are when I watch games.
To play devil's advocate, would adding 1-2 transfers who are the "right fit" for a season change that feeling for you?
Did adding Robert Jackson for one season make the 2002-03 team less likable in any way?
Quote from: Jay Bee on May 13, 2025, 02:51:39 PMEven with transfers, occasional step backs can occur (e.g., bad fit, injuries, whatever else..).. .
The portal is like the sacrifice bunt in Baseball. "Why don't you just bunt the guy over a base to set up a base hit or fly ball to score a run?"
Everyone just assumes that the sac bunt is a forgone conclusion and 100% successful every time. But it is much harder to complete successfully than we think.
Same with the portal. "Just go out a sign a big or shooter or whatever and we will have a deep run in the tourney." But there are plenty of examples out there that show that it doesn't always work successfully and is much more difficult than it appears.
Quote from: IrwinFletcher on May 13, 2025, 08:16:09 PMThe portal is like the sacrifice bunt in Baseball. "Why don't you just bunt the guy over a base to set up a base hit or fly ball to score a run?"
Everyone just assumes that the sac bunt is a forgone conclusion and 100% successful every time. But it is much harder to complete successfully than we think.
Same with the portal. "Just go out a sign a big or shooter or whatever and we will have a deep run in the tourney." But there are plenty of examples out there that show that it doesn't always work successfully and is much more difficult than it appears.
Since every team other than MU got players from the portal, and the same number of teams had unsuccessful seasons as had unsuccessful season prior to the portal, isn't it reasonable to conclude that the portal is a tool, not a panacea, and that talent, coaching, and chemistry dictate outcomes?
In other words, how many teams hit the portal hard and still stunk?
Quote from: MU82 on May 13, 2025, 07:22:09 PMTo play devil's advocate, would adding 1-2 transfers who are the "right fit" for a season change that feeling for you?
Did adding Robert Jackson for one season make the 2002-03 team less likable in any way?
Valid point. Short answer is no. I'm thinking more about teams that essentially rebuild their entire roster year to year.
10 of the top 25 transfer classes(according to On 3) didn't make the NCAA Tournament......including 4 of the top 10.
Quote from: MuMark on May 13, 2025, 08:32:09 PM10 of the top 25 transfer classes(according to On 3) didn't make the NCAA Tournament......including 4 of the top 10.
Portal Potty
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on May 13, 2025, 04:15:51 PMone that will get MU to be considered by that highest tier of recruit.
I agree I'd love a team of our 247 list of all time top recruits Henry, Dawson, Markus (original ranking), JJJ, and Vander. 20 soft wins, a guy who couldn't even showcase himself at UNC, a guy posters called a cancer, a guy who was lost as a freshman then continued to be kinda ok at best senior year, and a guy who at his best after three years averaged a hot 14.8, 2 & 3. Don't forget the sixth man who transferred because the cancer hurt his feelings.
Yep if only we could get these guys all the time.
Quote from: wiscwarrior on May 13, 2025, 06:06:26 PMI don't think highly ranked recruits are what Shaka is aiming for. I think his sweet spot is in the 50 -150 range. Probably feels they'll buy into the culture more readily. Not to say that if he found one within the top tier that he wouldn't recruit him.
Several reasons for this, but I'm not quite sure buying into the culture is as high as you think
I suspect that originally Shaka came to Marquette with the plan of recruiting 50-150 range kids in order to get old and stay old, in other words in order to keep kids around for 4 years and build a culture of sorts. As an immediate necessity he did that with talented kids like TyKo and OMax thru transfer, and then developed them all and established his culture.
Now, a big part is $ and the pay structure Marquette seems to have- where first year guys are in a set range and 4th year guys are in their set range with the upperclassman stars getting the biggest piece of the pie- not being very conducive to top 50 guys looking for top dollar.
I'm sure there is still some truth to the idea that Shaka wants a majority of guys in the 50-150 range who are willing to buy in (long term, that's the key) and willing to do that because given their talents and abilities they are ok with being at Marquette long term and developing.
I've always thought that at some point he would turn up the gears and shoot higher into the top 50 talent pool- he did with Kon, this year with JJ, and is in on future top 50s.
I think money and structure are more at play with him not getting one so far, but I do think he will very soon.
I've said before that I think MU will have to structure "outlier" type payments for top 40 freshmen recruits like Kon or JJ Andrews- and I have no idea if they have or will but I think they should.
However, if Shaka doesn't think so then it won't happen, and that's all that matters.
This year's senior class is a great example of guys that shouldn't quite earn what Kam or Tyler earned imo- it is now a business after all. I think that extra should be pooled towards a high end recruit or transfer as needed.
What I mean by that is that even though Chase should be compensated nicely for his abilities and dedication to MU, he shouldn't get what Kam or Kolek got. Ditto with Ben in comparison to Stevie or Jop.
The same can be said for the Jr class given their past contributions.
Just my two cents, and I'd be curious to find out if Shaka and the program agree and adjust the distributions. Don't think we will ever know.