Nico's potential impact

[MU82]

I had posted this under the recruiting thread but decided to make it a stand-alone because I think it merits its own discussion ...

Many folks here have stated they are against the very concept of 1-and-dones. They have questioned how much a 1-and-done really helps a team other than the few bluebloods that can field a team full of future NBA players. Some even have said that while Wojo pretty much "had to take Henry" because you don't turn down a burger boy, us bringing in our only 1-and-done actually delayed the rebuilding process.

Are these valid concerns?

Why would Nico be different from Henry? Maybe because we'd have a better team around him, one with veteran leaders truly capable of a FF run?

Would there be any concerns that, like Henry, Nico would be mostly about showcasing Nico?

Would he be at best the third-best player on the court and, if so, would that sit well with him? Or is he so good that the seniors and juniors on the roster - including McEwen, who will have patiently waited for his turn to play PG - would willingly defer to a 19-year-old?

Do we care that he seems about as interested in playing defense as Rowsey was?

This will be a team that literally will have grown up together into a (hopefully) cohesive, successful group. Does bringing in a kid who expects to be gone in a year help or hurt the chemistry (if that even matters)?

All serious questions. I don't know a thing about Nico's game other than the few clips I've watched, and I know even less about him as a person.

In general, I'm all about bringing in the most talented players possible and trusting the head coach, the coaching staff and the leaders among the players to sort out any concerns. But I'd be interested in others' takes.

[Galway Eagle]

I personally am not for it. Greg would be a Jr, Koby would be a Jr, Howard would be a Sr. Even if Howard didn't play a lick of PG all year I'd still rather take my chances with McEwen and Elliott than being in Nico risking transfers that would potentially hurt us worse the following year or two.

[mu03eng]

I think the Nico thing and Henry thing are very different. Henry came in at a time when the talent cubbard was bare and I think it did delay the rebuilding process in combination raise expectations way too high. Bringing Nico into an established roster with staff continuity in place, recruits on deck on the outlying years is a non-factor from a concern standpoint plus if you can get talent that will lead you to a FF/NC with the roster we have in place you absolutely do it.

I have no idea how the idea of a super talented one and done joining a stacked roster hurts MU in any way.

[MUEng92]

I'll admit being extra tired this morning so I might not be thinking clearly but are:

"Would he be at best the third-best player on the court and, if so, would that sit well with him?"

and:

"I have no idea how the idea of a super talented one and done joining a stacked roster hurts MU in any way."

talking about the same player?

[jsglow]

I'm with Eng on this.  It's a different story for different times.  Let's say Nico was 'self centered' on a team like that.  Personally I don't see Wojo or his teammates tolerating it for a moment.  Plus if he thinks the world will revolve around him the next year in the NBA he'll wash out pretty quickly.  Working hard and being a team player actually enhances his stock in the eyes of the league.  Henry's situation was different because of the lack of talent.

I really think we've got a great shot at Nico.  So much will depend on the experience the Bailey family is having over these next months.  Thurl and Brendan will be a huge influence.  Again, just like was the case with Joey, Nico isn't going to rely on 'coach speak' in making his decision about MU.

[mu03eng]

I'll admit being extra tired this morning so I might not be thinking clearly but are:

"Would he be at best the third-best player on the court and, if so, would that sit well with him?"

and:

"I have no idea how the idea of a super talented one and done joining a stacked roster hurts MU in any way."

talking about the same player?

It is in theory, but definitely don't agree that we could classify Nico as 3rd best player on the roster from a talent standpoint

[tower912]

Take him. 

[Archies Bat]

Unless a kid is a potential cancer on the team, take him.  Always take him.

If we want the program to get better over time, we've got to get better players, even if they are here for less than 4 years.

If a one and done drives a current player to transfer because of playing time, it means we have a better player getting playing time.  I want them all to succeed at Marquette.  Some won't, and I'll wish them luck.

[Its DJOver]

Why would Nico be different from Henry? Maybe because we'd have a better team around him, one with veteran leaders truly capable of a FF run?

Would there be any concerns that, like Henry, Nico would be mostly about showcasing Nico?

I understand the fear that featuring one player so much can hurt a team, but I think that these are vastly different scenarios.

Showcasing a self described "pure point guard" is significantly different than showcasing a power forward that launched over 3 3s a game at a 28% clip.  Nico's potential draft stock will be effected by his assist numbers and his ability to make his teammates better.  Can anyone really say that Hanks 1.8 apg had much of an impact on his stock. 

I'm not a NBA scout, but I would imagine that looking at a Pgs line, 10ppg, 7apg, and 1spg would be more favorable than 17ppg, 2apg. For the other 4 positions in the NBA you're mostly judged on how much you can score and who you can defend.  With PGs, you also have to throw in ability to make teammates better.  I think one of the potential boosts that we might get in trying to attract Nico, that is being overlooked, is if Joe comes in for one year, and dishes dimes left and right, Nico could see himself doing the exact same thing one year later with the same core. 

[wadesworld]

I’m not quite sure where the narrative that Hank “set us back many years” comes from. Would we have been better without Hank the year Hank was here had we been able to fill his spot with another Matt Heldt? Heldt no.

Did we not make our only NCAA Tournament of the Wojo era the year after Hank left?

Also, according to Evan Daniels’s podcast, I’m not sure Nico “is about as interested in playing defense as Rowsey was.” Daniels reports he’s a 2 way player that is about as well rounded as they come in high school. So I don’t know how you get from “I don’t know a lick about the guy” to “he has no interest in defense” but Daniels seems to think he’s a pretty good defender.

If players transfer because coach hurt their feelings by bringing in more talent instead of just bringing in guys they don’t have to compete with then buh bye. I hope the team is sick of 5th-8th place BE, non NCAA Tournament seasons. Only one way to fix that...

[muwarrior69]

Duh! He is a 5 star recruit. He will have an impact and it can only be good. Brunson and Whitehead were both 5 star guards and they both were not one and done(s). Maybe Nico will be and if he is I'll be glad that he chose MU regardless, but don't be so sure.

[muwarrior69]

I'm with Eng on this.  It's a different story for different times.  Let's say Nico was 'self centered' on a team like that.  Personally I don't see Wojo or his teammates tolerating it for a moment.  Plus if he thinks the world will revolve around him the next year in the NBA he'll wash out pretty quickly.  Working hard and being a team player actually enhances his stock in the eyes of the league.  Henry's situation was different because of the lack of talent.

I really think we've got a great shot at Nico.  So much will depend on the experience the Bailey family is having over these next months.  Thurl and Brendan will be a huge influence.  Again, just like was the case with Joey, Nico isn't going to rely on 'coach speak' in making his decision about MU.

Oh no! Not another 2 year mission.

[GGGG]

I’m not quite sure where the narrative that Hank “set us back many years” comes from. Would we have been better without Hank the year Hank was here had we been able to fill his spot with another Matt Heldt? Heldt no.

Did we not make our only NCAA Tournament of the Wojo era the year after Hank left?

Also, according to Evan Daniels’s podcast, I’m not sure Nico “is about as interested in playing defense as Rowsey was.” Daniels reports he’s a 2 way player that is about as well rounded as they come in high school. So I don’t know how you get from “I don’t know a lick about the guy” to “he has no interest in defense” but Daniels seems to think he’s a pretty good defender.

If players transfer because coach hurt their feelings by bringing in more talent instead of just bringing in guys they don’t have to compete with then buh bye. I hope the team is sick of 5th-8th place BE, non NCAA Tournament seasons. Only one way to fix that...

Yep.  As long as the player gets along with the coaches and other players, and fits into the philosophy of what you are trying to accomplish, then you bring in as much talent as you can and sort it out.  And Henry didn't delay the rebuilding process. 

[onepost]

I'm sorry 82, but OF COURSE you take Nico Mannion.  If Nova, Duke, Zona are willing to take on the burden of a 5-star recruit like Mannion, I think Marquette should be too.  How is this even a debate??

[bilsu]

Look at it this way.
Nico really performs well and we could be a final four team.
Nico underperforms he probably is not a one and done.

As far as team chemistry he wants to be the star and Wojo has promise him the ball. That could be a problem, but I never heard that the Oklahoma player that led the country and scoring and assists had a problem with his teammates. The key may be the assist numbers. If Nico really distributes the ball well, I do not think there will be a problem with his teammates. In the end everyone wants to win the game.

[Silkk the Shaka]

I understand the fear that featuring one player so much can hurt a team, but I think that these are vastly different scenarios.

Showcasing a self described "pure point guard" is significantly different than showcasing a power forward that launched over 3 3s a game at a 28% clip.  Nico's potential draft stock will be effected by his assist numbers and his ability to make his teammates better.  Can anyone really say that Hanks 1.8 apg had much of an impact on his stock. 

I'm not a NBA scout, but I would imagine that looking at a Pgs line, 10ppg, 7apg, and 1spg would be more favorable than 17ppg, 2apg. For the other 4 positions in the NBA you're mostly judged on how much you can score and who you can defend.  With PGs, you also have to throw in ability to make teammates better.  I think one of the potential boosts that we might get in trying to attract Nico, that is being overlooked, is if Joe comes in for one year, and dishes dimes left and right, Nico could see himself doing the exact same thing one year later with the same core.

Totally agree. It would be a pretty huge selling point. 6'3" PG playing big minutes from day 1, surrounded by lethal scoring outlets making him look good. Copy/paste.

[Marcus92]

Omari Spellman was essentially a one and done for Nova last season (after being ruled ineligible to play his freshman season). He played a key role in a national championship team. If Nico or any other recruit can do the same, bring them in.

[MU82]

I'm sorry 82, but OF COURSE you take Nico Mannion.  If Nova, Duke, Zona are willing to take on the burden of a 5-star recruit like Mannion, I think Marquette should be too.  How is this even a debate??

Why are you apologizing to me, onepost?

Maybe the language in my OP made it seem I didn't want Wojo, Stan & Co. to go full-bore after Nico, but that wasn't my intent at all. Indeed, my concluding paragraph stated:

In general, I'm all about bringing in the most talented players possible and trusting the head coach, the coaching staff and the leaders among the players to sort out any concerns.

I mostly was trying to play devil's advocate and to stoke conversation. I then sat out for awhile so others could chime in.

I think the Nico thing and Henry thing are very different. Henry came in at a time when the talent cubbard was bare and I think it did delay the rebuilding process in combination raise expectations way too high. Bringing Nico into an established roster with staff continuity in place, recruits on deck on the outlying years is a non-factor from a concern standpoint plus if you can get talent that will lead you to a FF/NC with the roster we have in place you absolutely do it.

I have no idea how the idea of a super talented one and done joining a stacked roster hurts MU in any way.

I tend to agree with this. You have a chance to bring in a stud, a chance to get a young man who can help us get to the FF, you do it.

I’m not quite sure where the narrative that Hank “set us back many years” comes from. Would we have been better without Hank the year Hank was here had we been able to fill his spot with another Matt Heldt? Heldt no.

Did we not make our only NCAA Tournament of the Wojo era the year after Hank left?

Also, according to Evan Daniels’s podcast, I’m not sure Nico “is about as interested in playing defense as Rowsey was.” Daniels reports he’s a 2 way player that is about as well rounded as they come in high school. So I don’t know how you get from “I don’t know a lick about the guy” to “he has no interest in defense” but Daniels seems to think he’s a pretty good defender.

If players transfer because coach hurt their feelings by bringing in more talent instead of just bringing in guys they don’t have to compete with then buh bye. I hope the team is sick of 5th-8th place BE, non NCAA Tournament seasons. Only one way to fix that...

For some reason, I thought I had read here or elsewhere that Nico didn't play much defense. That seems to not be the case, at least per Daniels, so I happily sit corrected.

And I agree with the rest of your well-articulated take, wades. I said as much when Carter transferred -- you don't want to compete for playing time in an effort to make MU a better team, see ya!

Over the years here on Scoop, I've consistently said some version of: "Bring in the best players. Everything else will sort itself out."

And that's how I feel about bringing in Nico, too.

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

I thought we were debating whether the coaches told him he would start or only had the chance to earn the starting spot. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I’m not quite sure where the narrative that Hank “set us back many years” comes from. Would we have been better without Hank the year Hank was here had we been able to fill his spot with another Matt Heldt? Heldt no.

Did we not make our only NCAA Tournament of the Wojo era the year after Hank left?

Also, according to Evan Daniels’s podcast, I’m not sure Nico “is about as interested in playing defense as Rowsey was.” Daniels reports he’s a 2 way player that is about as well rounded as they come in high school. So I don’t know how you get from “I don’t know a lick about the guy” to “he has no interest in defense” but Daniels seems to think he’s a pretty good defender.

If players transfer because coach hurt their feelings by bringing in more talent instead of just bringing in guys they don’t have to compete with then buh bye. I hope the team is sick of 5th-8th place BE, non NCAA Tournament seasons. Only one way to fix that...

The idea behind the "Hank set the rebuild back a year" is centered around the idea that he cost us other players who would have stayed longer. It is a fact that Steve Taylor and Gabe Levin transferred mainly because of Henry's commitment. It has been speculated that Henry's presence scared off other potential additions such as Kyle Washington. Personally, if I had a choice between 1 year of Henry or 1 year of Teve/2 years of Levin/2 years of Washington, I would take the latter all day every day. But it's all speculation. There is no way to know that we would have picked up Washington or a comparable player. There is also no reason why you can't land Henry and also convince players like Teve, Levin, and Washingon to sign up, Wojo just couldn't get it done.

There's also no way to quantify the other benefits of landing a 5-star recruit and getting him into the NBA. Without that, maybe the Hausers or Markus don't come here. Maybe we're not even on Mannion's radar because Wojo hadn't put anyone from Marquette into the NBA. Who knows? It's all message board fodder. Personally, I'd rather have the coach who goes for the 5 star recruit then the one who doesn't because he might scare off other players.

[WarriorDad]

The most pressing concern with one and dones is not their talent, but who are they playing for?  Are they playing for themselves only to improve draft position or playing for the school on the front of the jersey?

Henry was a mix of good and bad because guys stood and watched him at times, but that was also partially because he was clearly the best player.  In this situation, Mannion he would not be head and shoulders above.  How would the seniors and other accept him?  Doesn’t Wojo let the players vote on team chemistry possibilities?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The most pressing concern with one and dones is not their talent, but who are they playing for?  Are they playing for themselves only to improve draft position or playing for the school on the front of the jersey?

Henry was a mix of good and bad because guys stood and watched him at times, but that was also partially because he was clearly the best player.  In this situation, Mannion he would not be head and shoulders above.  How would the seniors and other accept him?  Doesn’t Wojo let the players vote on team chemistry possibilities?

I agree with you in theory but I do think its a bit different for one and done PGs. They improve their draft stock by being exceptional and by making the players around them better.

[Tha Hound]

This seems ridiculous to me. We have a chance to add a top 3 PG in the country to a team that includes senior Howard and Hauser. You're telling me you would consider, even for a second, passing on him? And because you're worried someone like Koby McEwan would transfer?

[WarriorDad]

I agree with you in theory but I do think its a bit different for one and done PGs. They improve their draft stock by being exceptional and by making the players around them better.

Excellent point

[Galway Eagle]

This seems ridiculous to me. We have a chance to add a top 3 PG in the country to a team that includes senior Howard and Hauser. You're telling me you would consider, even for a second, passing on him? And because you're worried someone like Koby McEwan would transfer?

You say that now but if Koby did transfer and we found ourselves without a top tier PG the year after Mannion left I have a suspicion your narrative would place the blame on wojo for not being prepared for the long term.