Recruits

[texaswarrior74]

^ I was referring to the type of project MU has taken in the past....a REAL project not #38 or 39.....Mbao type....you know what I mean...and 2012 is loaded with quality bigs.

[seakm4]

Don't these centers get that they would get a lot of playing time and turn a good team into a great one?

No they don't they'd rather go to a school like Syracuse hoping to be the next Derrick Coleman

[mug644]

No they don't they'd rather go to a school like Syracuse hoping to be the next Derrick Coleman

As a player, Derrick Coleman did pretty well for himself. If I was a young guy, dreaming of a future in basketball, a career like Coleman's would look pretty good to me.

First pick in the NBA draft coming out of Syracuse, 15 years in the NBA...solid career despite off the court questions and issues.

In fact, I was in Syracuse when MU played Syracuse and Coleman had his numbered retired. I graduated MU just a couple of years before he was drafted, so I remember him playing there. I stood and applauded him as strongly as most Syracuse fans.

[HoopsMalone]

Not kidding. Give me a clone of mbao barro and grim and I would be happy with the three scholarships.  I am not expecting a top hundred kid but we Project nicely at guard and wing

[Dawson Rental]

We flat out need size.  At least 2 if not all 3 need to be PF or C.  I would be picky.

So, you want quality AND quantity at the hardest positions to find players for.  Makes "In Buzz we trust", a serious understatement.

[HoopsMalone]

So, you want quality AND quantity at the hardest positions to find players for.  Makes "In Buzz we trust", a serious understatement.

No, just quantity of bigs.  What I meant by picky is not to sign 3 three guards.  Unlike the last few years where Buzz did not have 13 players mostly due to the coaching change, Buzz now has 13 guys who look like they can play.  He should recruit need.

Just get two or three guys in the ballpark of Otule, Liam, Mbao, Gardner, Barro, Burke, etc.  It would be great to do better, but we need depth up front.  Having two Barros, for example, would have made a difference on some of those teams.  The scout team in practice would at least look like the other team size wise with added big men projects as well.

[CAINMUTINY]

all I can say is I have faith in buzz, I mean the guy just delivered Vander Blue and Jamil wilson and has also found two diamonds in the rough in Jimmy Butler and DJO.  Needless to say the cat can recruit, now we just need to put the rest together and it's sea shells and balloons!

[Marquette84]

Unlike the last few years where Buzz did not have 13 players mostly due to the coaching change, Buzz now has 13 guys who look like they can play.  He should recruit need.

How were the injuries to McMorrow, Cadougan, Otule, Mbao and Fulce, plus the transfer of Maymon and Roseboro  related to the coaching change?

[NersEllenson]

How were the injuries to McMorrow, Cadougan, Otule, Mbao and Fulce, plus the transfer of Maymon and Roseboro  related to the coaching change?

3 things:
1)The original post you quote said "mostly" due to the coaching change - not entirely. 
2) In year 1 under Buzz..we all know Taylor and Nick Williams didn't honor their LOI's.  Also had the transfer of Christopherson and Mbawke.
3) Congrats on making a reply that was only 2 sentences long, and not multi-quoting/dissecting each sentence of an original poster's reply.  Keep up the good work.

[Marquette84]

 
3 things:
1)The original post you quote said "mostly" due to the coaching change - not entirely.  
2) In year 1 under Buzz..we all know Taylor and Nick Williams didn't honor their LOI's.  Also had the transfer of Christopherson and Mbawke.
3) Congrats on making a reply that was only 2 sentences long, and not multi-quoting/dissecting each sentence of an original poster's reply.  Keep up the good work.

Yeah. The point is that "Mostly" is wrong.

1. Taylor and Nick Williams didn't cause a short roster because their scholarships were filled almost immediately by Butler & McMorrow.
2. Given that we were over-signed by one at the time of the coaching change, Christopherson's departure didn't leave us short.  
3. Mbakwe's departure likely had nothing to do with the coaching change--but even if it did, that's just one player compared with five injuries and two unrelated transfers over the last several years.

[tower912]

someone has a case of the angries.   wow.   

[wadesworld]

Yeah. The point is that "Mostly" is wrong.

1. Taylor and Nick Williams didn't cause a short roster because their scholarships were filled almost immediately by Butler & McMorrow.
2. Given that we were over-signed by one at the time of the coaching change, Christopherson's departure didn't leave us short.  
3. Mbakwe's departure likely had nothing to do with the coaching change--but even if it did, that's just one player compared with five injuries and two unrelated transfers over the last several years.

So had there been no coaching change Taylor and Williams end up at Marquette and not McMorrow, so there is one player that was on the roster because of the coaching change that was unable to play, and if Crean did not leave Mbakwe would not have left at that time either, so that left Buzz two players short as a result of the coaching change, thus a short roster because of the coaching change.

[Marquette84]

So had there been no coaching change Taylor and Williams end up at Marquette and not McMorrow, so there is one player that was on the roster because of the coaching change that was unable to play, and if Crean did not leave Mbakwe would not have left at that time either, so that left Buzz two players short as a result of the coaching change, thus a short roster because of the coaching change.

I think those two are debatable--it was Buzz's choice to take McMorrow over a player that would be available right away, and Mbakwe didn't leave for five months after the change for reasons that appear to be unrelated to who the MU coach was.

But even if those two WERE a direct result of the coaching change, they still don't come close to refuting the point that our short roster was MOSTLY due to the number of injuries and unrelated transfers. 

[bilsu]

There are two effects of a short roster. One the number of players that can play in a game and more importantly the number of players that can practice. McMorrow could not play in games and that was known by Buzz when he signed him. He was needed for practice. However, both McMorrow and Otule broke their foot. Fulce ended up with a split knee and Mbakwe bolts before the start of the season. Result was that we at one point were down 4 players for practice. Same problem last year. Maymon and Roseborro jump ship and Cadougan, Otule and Mbao get injured severly limited the amount of practice players. At least his year barring a significant number of injuries we will have enough players to practice.

[HoopsMalone]

The coaching change hurt hurt because it left MU with no depth.  Buzz walked into a relatively good situation with 4 good experienced players, a solid option inside in Burke, a nice backup PG in Acker, and Buzz recruited Jimmy who was able to contribute immediately.  It hurt us that season because the big 4 had to average about 38 mins/game.  Foul trouble (particularly to Lazar at times) hurt.  Also, more minutes means more chance of injury and that was the most unfortunate thing.  Taylor could have spelled the guards a lot more than just having Acker and Coobs at times did.  The Amigos as seniors and Taylor and Williams as freshman was an ideal setup for a transition at MU.  The coaching change brought adversity there fore sure.

Then, the coaching change really hurt last year as we lost 4 starters to graduation and the roster was cleared of all but 3 Crean era players in one year after Crean left.  Very little off the bench, players had to play out of position, and Buzz unfortunately had injury and transfer problems.

This lead to Buzz having to recruit a high quantity of players.  Getting 5-7 guys committed is a tough task.  Buzz has admittedly been a bull in a china shop at times when trying to fill that 6th or 7th spot of the recruiting class.  He is a first time coach and getting that many players would be hard to do perfectly.  But, now that Buzz can go into summers only needing 3 or 4 recruits, it gets easier.   He is more experienced/polished hopefully and he is not in as tough of a situation. 

So yea, I think the coaching change brought recruiting adversity. 

The players made it easier, though.  I really appreciate the way guys like Wes, Jimmy, and Lazar played big (and it hasn't hurt their wallets...) and a guy like Junior came back earlier than he maybe should have to make up for lack of depth at positions.  I also really appreciate that Acker came back and Cubillan stuck it out.  It would have been easy for these guys to transfer or quit when Buzz came.  We are lucky to have a lot of players with character like these guys.

[Marquette84]

The coaching change hurt hurt because it left MU with no depth.  Buzz walked into a relatively good situation with 4 good experienced players, a solid option inside in Burke, a nice backup PG in Acker, and Buzz recruited Jimmy who was able to contribute immediately.  It hurt us that season because the big 4 had to average about 38 mins/game.  Foul trouble (particularly to Lazar at times) hurt.  Also, more minutes means more chance of injury and that was the most unfortunate thing.  Taylor could have spelled the guards a lot more than just having Acker and Coobs at times did.  The Amigos as seniors and Taylor and Williams as freshman was an ideal setup for a transition at MU.  The coaching change brought adversity there fore sure.

Then, the coaching change really hurt last year as we lost 4 starters to graduation and the roster was cleared of all but 3 Crean era players in one year after Crean left.  Very little off the bench, players had to play out of position, and Buzz unfortunately had injury and transfer problems.

This lead to Buzz having to recruit a high quantity of players.  Getting 5-7 guys committed is a tough task.  Buzz has admittedly been a bull in a china shop at times when trying to fill that 6th or 7th spot of the recruiting class.  He is a first time coach and getting that many players would be hard to do perfectly.  But, now that Buzz can go into summers only needing 3 or 4 recruits, it gets easier.   He is more experienced/polished hopefully and he is not in as tough of a situation. 

So yea, I think the coaching change brought recruiting adversity. 

The players made it easier, though.  I really appreciate the way guys like Wes, Jimmy, and Lazar played big (and it hasn't hurt their wallets...) and a guy like Junior came back earlier than he maybe should have to make up for lack of depth at positions.  I also really appreciate that Acker came back and Cubillan stuck it out.  It would have been easy for these guys to transfer or quit when Buzz came.  We are lucky to have a lot of players with character like these guys.

Three issues to address:

1.  You changed the subject.  Your initial claim was that we didn't have enough players mostly because of the coaching change.  You're now saying it was difficult to fill all those spots.   

Maybe it was difficult, maybe it wasn't--nonetheless Buzz WAS able to recruit to fill those spots.  We weren't short because the coaching change left us shorthanded, as was implied in your initial argument.

2.  Your premise that it is tough to get 5-7 guys committed is laughable in light of the back-to-back top 20 recruiting classes!

When Buzz had 7 spots to fill, he didn't have any problem at all landing a class that included two first team Juco all-Americans and three top 100 HS players. 

I think your argument is false in general--when Crean had a large class to fill,  he was able to land the Amigos, plus a JUCO AA, plus another role player.  When O'Neill had a large class to fill, he landed McIlvaine, Key, Logtermann and Brakes. 

It appears that having a lot of scholarships to give makes for stronger recruiting--not weaker.  Better recruits see plenty of playing time.  Coaches don't have have to choose between a PG they need or a higher rated PF--they can take both. Busts are overshadowed by the players that perform well. 

3.  Your post had several factual errors:

--Big 4 averaged 38 mpg: False.   McNeal was tops on the team (7th in the league) with 36 mpg.  James only averaged 31 mpg. 

--Only Three players returning?  Nope.  Fulce and Otule were signed prior to Buzz becoming coach.  That's five.   Plus we had signed Butler the year before. While you seem to think its a big deal that Buzz signed him and not Crean, he's still a returning player with experience.

--More minutes mean more injury?  Again, not consistent with fact.
James' mpg was lower than McNeal, Matthews and Hayward--yet he was one out of those four who was injured.  Otule last year played token minutes in three games before he was injured.  Mbao played in even fewer. Cadougan none at all before his injury.

We have seen most of our injuries in practice--and that extends over a long time.  Given that practice includes all players equally, the average MPG would not be an indicator of the likelihood of injury. 

[HoopsMalone]

Three issues to address:

1.  You changed the subject.  Your initial claim was that we didn't have enough players mostly because of the coaching change.  You're now saying it was difficult to fill all those spots.   

Maybe it was difficult, maybe it wasn't--nonetheless Buzz WAS able to recruit to fill those spots.  We weren't short because the coaching change left us shorthanded, as was implied in your initial argument.

2.  Your premise that it is tough to get 5-7 guys committed is laughable in light of the back-to-back top 20 recruiting classes!

When Buzz had 7 spots to fill, he didn't have any problem at all landing a class that included two first team Juco all-Americans and three top 100 HS players. 

I think your argument is false in general--when Crean had a large class to fill,  he was able to land the Amigos, plus a JUCO AA, plus another role player.  When O'Neill had a large class to fill, he landed McIlvaine, Key, Logtermann and Brakes. 

It appears that having a lot of scholarships to give makes for stronger recruiting--not weaker.  Better recruits see plenty of playing time.  Coaches don't have have to choose between a PG they need or a higher rated PF--they can take both. Busts are overshadowed by the players that perform well. 

[/quote]


3.  Your post had several factual errors:

--Big 4 averaged 38 mpg: False.   McNeal was tops on the team (7th in the league) with 36 mpg.  James only averaged 31 mpg. 

--Only Three players returning?  Nope.  Fulce and Otule were signed prior to Buzz becoming coach.  That's five.   Plus we had signed Butler the year before. While you seem to think its a big deal that Buzz signed him and not Crean, he's still a returning player with experience.

--More minutes mean more injury?  Again, not consistent with fact.
James' mpg was lower than McNeal, Matthews and Hayward--yet he was one out of those four who was injured.  Otule last year played token minutes in three games before he was injured.  Mbao played in even fewer. Cadougan none at all before his injury.

We have seen most of our injuries in practice--and that extends over a long time.  Given that practice includes all players equally, the average MPG would not be an indicator of the likelihood of injury. 

[/quote] 


I mean, I really have no idea what you are getting at?  Are you just trying to say "gotcha" or something, but this is pretty nitpicky. 

I guess I will respond to each number because I have a second.

1-  I have no idea what you are saying in this and it just seems like you are completely reaching just to be disagreeable.  Crean left 7 players total to a coach without experience and no depth inside. 

2- Buzz was able to physically find players but there were not many there.  He had a 6 man rotation basically for 2 years.  He found the warm bodies of Mbao, Roseboro, Maymon, etc. but was really reaching to fill a big recruiting class due to the high turnover during the coaching change.

And then you restated exactly what i thought I said?  Buzz was able to find players to fill the usual three or four spots (and then you cited when previous coaches were also able to find 3 or 4 good players in a class) and then struggled to find the last few.  It was a tough spot for him and he has made some mistakes with guys like Roseboro and Newbill unfortunately.  I am going to be patient as a fan for the first time coach, but it doesn't make it right for them.

3-  I did not look up the Amigos mpg but just do not remember them coming out of the game by the end of the year.  More minutes usually do make one more likely to injury.  Practice is usually more aroebic than physical and in the game you get pushed around a lot more.  The physical contact really tires you out.  A 20 year old running up and down the court for a few hours is not as tiring as the game.  So, I am pretty sure in general that the more fatigued one is, the more likely one is to get an injury because the body is a little more prone to it when fatigued than not.  But maybe you looked that up.

And there is not necessarily a linear relationship between minutes played and injury, meaning that if DJ player 15 mins and got injured and McNeal player 17 minutes he MUST have been injured.  I have no idea if that is what you were saying.  I won't assign you logical flaws like you do, but that really isn't true...  Injuries can happen walking down the street or rolling out of bed, but fatigue is a factor.  You can't look at something I said where the gist was that fatigue is a factor in injuries and then say that player X played more minutes than player Y and player X did not have a major injury and make the original premise wrong. 

[bilsu]

It seems logical that the more minutes you play the more likely you are going to be injured. More opportunity for injury and more tired body parts. However, what might some what offset this is that I pretty sure that a player that is playing 36 minutes a game is stronger and better conditioned than someone who gets only 5 minutes a game. A weak player will never be able to play 36 minutes a game without being injured.

[Marquette84]

I mean, I really have no idea what you are getting at?  Are you just trying to say "gotcha" or something, but this is pretty nitpicky. 

I guess I will respond to each number because I have a second.

1-  I have no idea what you are saying in this and it just seems like you are completely reaching just to be disagreeable.  Crean left 7 players total to a coach without experience and no depth inside. 

There are a lot of people who have the mistaken impression that Buzz inherited a depleted roster. 

The fact is, mainly because of his skills as a great recruiter, he actually filled all those spots, and his recruiting record speaks for itself.

The notion that you think he scraped the bottom of the barrel to come up with Butler simply because he needed a warm body, then "struggled" to find McMorrow says a lot about your opinion of Buzz's recruiting.

He played short because of injuries and unrelated transfers.

[Marquette84]

It seems logical that the more minutes you play the more likely you are going to be injured. More opportunity for injury and more tired body parts. However, what might some what offset this is that I pretty sure that a player that is playing 36 minutes a game is stronger and better conditioned than someone who gets only 5 minutes a game. A weak player will never be able to play 36 minutes a game without being injured.

Everything I've heard of both Crean and Buzz suggests to me that games are a cakewalk compared to the intensity of practice.  I don't think I've seen anything like "boot camp" in a real game.

But even if practice is only equally as intense as games, comparing 2 hours of practice a day to 30 to 35 minutes of game play once or twice a week, it stands to reason that there will be more injuries in practice.  And everyone practices.

And that seems to be borne out by reality--more of our injuries have occurred in practice compared to games.