bank or use

[bilsu]

The problem with taking a late flyer is the potential of using up a scholarship for four years on a marginal player. I was trying to think of the last 4 year player that never started at MU. Last year all three graduates were starters. The year before all four graduates were starters. Kinsella never started, but he was not a four year player. Fitz started some games. I would consider Fitz and Acker as four year players, since they tied up a scholarship for four years. Does anybody know who was the last four year recruit who stayed four years and never started? In my mind it seems like the marginal players never stayed in the Crean era. If that is the case, is it so bad to give a scholarship to someone who has potential? The closest I can come up with is Patrick Hazel. I do not think he ever started and probably would have stayed all four years, if he did not get into trouble, but he ended up being here only three years.

[OhioGoldenEagle]

Bank!  There will be guys available in spring, ie. Transfers, decomitts, JuCo, etc.  I'm not too worried.

[bilsu]

I would hold to spring also, but I do not consider that banking. I am still trying to figure out who the last 4 year player now starter was.

[Henry Sugar]

Sign the best available player and then drop him from the team if you find someone better in the Spring.

Too honest?

[Marquette84]

The problem with taking a late flyer is the potential of using up a scholarship for four years on a marginal player. I was trying to think of the last 4 year player that never started at MU. Last year all three graduates were starters. The year before all four graduates were starters. Kinsella never started, but he was not a four year player. Fitz started some games. I would consider Fitz and Acker as four year players, since they tied up a scholarship for four years. Does anybody know who was the last four year recruit who stayed four years and never started? In my mind it seems like the marginal players never stayed in the Crean era. If that is the case, is it so bad to give a scholarship to someone who has potential? The closest I can come up with is Patrick Hazel. I do not think he ever started and probably would have stayed all four years, if he did not get into trouble, but he ended up being here only three years.

Why would you want a four year reserve?  The fact that we don't have many such players is a feature, not a bug.  

There's a word for coaches who keep their recruiting mistakes on the roster for four years: Unemployed.

A program like MU should be recruiting only four types of players:
1.  Those capable of starting instantly (Amigos, Hayward, DJO)
2.  Those capable of starting in the future (Burke, Williams)
3.  Projects that have the potential to become game-changers (Mbao, Kinsella)
4.  Role players--ideally those who won't use a scholarship for 4 years (Lott, Blackledge, maybe Buycks).

Once you recruit a player, he deserves at least one season to show promise.  After that, scholarships are one-year-renewable for a reason.

Finally, I don't know whether you're trying to provoke some sort of argument by singling out Crean with your statement that "the marginal players never stayed in the Crean era."  I could respond by pointing out that we're well down the same path with Buzz (have you forgotten about Roseboro and Mbao)?

None of the so-called marginal players were marginal at the time they were recruited.  Kinsella was a JUCO AA and a 7 footer with 3 point range--worth a gamble.  Mbao was even taller with good quickness--also worth a gamble.  Blackledge was brought in to fill a role--never intended to be in the main rotation.  Christian and Bell were regarded as promising players in HS who were thought to be able to develop into starters--as was Roseboro.

So now the question becomes what do you do with a player who can't rise to the level he was recruited for.  Do you eat the mistake and use two or three more years of a scholarship?  Or do you make the change right away?  I think Buzz and Crean both have the philosophy of bringing out the hook quickly--Buzz probably has even less patience than Crean).  Deane was probably at the extreme opposite end of the scale.  

Finally, to address the question of banking a scholarship, let me remind everyone of what happened last season.  On the last day of the spring singing period in 2009, we had a full complement of 13 players on scholarship.  By the end of the season, we were playing a six or seven man rotation.  You can never have too many players.

[4everwarriors]

Buzz will use all available schollies by Spring. In today's recruiting environment, coaches don't bank them to the next year. You can always jettison a player or two later.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Sign the best available player and then drop him from the team if you find someone better in the Spring.

Too honest?

Too sad

[bilsu]

I am not calling out any coach. Players leave, because they want to play. I see that as a fact of life. My basic premise is that if you think a player (Mbao) has potential you recruit him. If he is not happy with his playing time he will leave. The worst case is that a player stays, but in the end the 13th player on the team no matter how good is not going to play. Given that, I do not think you leave the scholarship unfilled. We have enough very good young players to complete a nine man rotation although we could use some size. However, a recruit must have some potential to be a starter by time he is a senior. I do not see it as a negative question, I am just trying to find out who the last four year player was who did not start at least one game, because I cannot remember who it was.

[bilsu]

Too sad

I have to think this is part of Buzz's problem this year. The one thing a coach should never do is burn a bridge and give other coaches a negative thing to use against you. My feeling is that jettisoning Newbill was a hugh mistake on Buzz's part. Sure we got Wilson, but maybe Wilson being here is keeping Hood or Shaw from coming. We will never know

[Litehouse]

I do not see it as a negative question, I am just trying to find out who the last four year player was who did not start at least one game, because I cannot remember who it was.

Dwaine Streater?

[MuMark]

Chris Grimm

[Litehouse]

David Diggs only started 1 game his Freshman year.  Would he count?
http://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/men_s_basketball/david_diggs

Grimm started 9 games as a Jr. and 2 games as a Sr.
http://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/men_s_basketball/chris_grimm

[MarkCharles]

Sign the best available player and then drop him from the team if you find someone better in the Spring.

Too honest?

Not too sad, just reality. Assuming we come up empty this week, I say we take a flyer on a guy with potential this fall, then get the best big guy we can from the JUCO ranks in the spring. If we get caught in another Roseboro situation, I may be upset for a bit, but I will live. Let the Badger fans worry about how many guys we "buzzcut". As ugly as the situation was, I don't think too many of us would rather have Newbill over Wilson right now. However, if we give a guy a flier, I would rather that we gave the guy a year on the roster to prove himself before asking him to move on, unless someone truly special comes along (like Wilson) and we need a spot.

The depth of the roster allows us to take a chance on someone, and I like Buzz's track record.

[tower912]

Fitz and Mo were not on the roster for 4 years.   Both transfers. 

[Litehouse]

Bart Miller started 5 games his Jr. year.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/marquette/bart-miller

If Diggs doesn't count because he started 1 game, then it has to be Streater.

[Litehouse]

Polonowski started 15 games, he's the only other one I could think of.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/marquette/john-polonowski

[ChicosBailBonds]

Not too sad, just reality. Assuming we come up empty this week, I say we take a flyer on a guy with potential this fall, then get the best big guy we can from the JUCO ranks in the spring. If we get caught in another Roseboro situation, I may be upset for a bit, but I will live. Let the Badger fans worry about how many guys we "buzzcut". As ugly as the situation was, I don't think too many of us would rather have Newbill over Wilson right now. However, if we give a guy a flier, I would rather that we gave the guy a year on the roster to prove himself before asking him to move on, unless someone truly special comes along (like Wilson) and we need a spot.

The depth of the roster allows us to take a chance on someone, and I like Buzz's track record.

We make our own reality.  There are plenty of top level teams that don't do what we did, so it's a reality we have chosen not given to us.

Secondly, I do agree that we would rather have Wilson than Newbill, but try telling that to a potential recruit who may be a 3 star kid....is the message that you're going to develop me to reach my potential or is the message that you're here to fit a roster spot until we can kick you to the curb next year?  Now, that answer may very well be the former and not the latter, but the way this whole thing was handled opens up that line of thinking for any recruit to ponder.

[Marquette84]

I am not calling out any coach. Players leave, because they want to play. I see that as a fact of life. My basic premise is that if you think a player (Mbao) has potential you recruit him. If he is not happy with his playing time he will leave. The worst case is that a player stays, but in the end the 13th player on the team no matter how good is not going to play. Given that, I do not think you leave the scholarship unfilled. We have enough very good young players to complete a nine man rotation although we could use some size. However, a recruit must have some potential to be a starter by time he is a senior. I do not see it as a negative question, I am just trying to find out who the last four year player was who did not start at least one game, because I cannot remember who it was.

Fair enough on the calling out any coach--I think every top-level team is going to do the same thing.

Its not enough for the player to want to leave for more playing time--if the player had his shot on MU's roster, and the coach believes he's not going to develop enough to become a future contributor, I think the coach has both a self-interest and an obligation to the rest of the team to encourage that player to move on.

I agree the 13th player won't see playing time--however, I think the coach would rather that player be a freshman project than a player who had a year and now content to be a cheerleader.

Finally, I did just a cursory check--we'd have to go back further than Majerus.  Even Bart Miller, Polo and Claussen started games for us.

It wouldn't surprise me if we have to go back to Don Smolinski. .

[bilsu]

Thanks, it looks like in most cases a player that stays will start at least once in his career. As long as the coach thinks the player will work hard, be a good student and citizen with the potential to start as a senior, than I think he should recruit him. I also have no problem cutting the player, if he does not work hard or becomes a bad citizen. My guess is that most of the players that have transferred decided they did not want to work as hard as Crean or Buzz demanded, especially, if they were not going to play. I bleive that was the case with Roseborro. I not sure what happen with Newbill, although I feel his failure to submit paper work was a bad sign to Buzz.

[bilsu]

Fitz and Mo were not on the roster for 4 years.   Both transfers. 

They both sat out a year and then played three, so they used a scholarship for four years. That is why I said they were four year players for MU.