Is Wojo really a good recruiter?

[NolongerWarriors]

It's obvious he's a poor game coach, but I'm not sure his recruiting is that good, either.

How many above average players does MU have?

Carton,Garcia, and maybe Lewis are the only ones, imo.

[4everwarriors]

He's pretty good for the WAC, Big Sky, or Missouri Valley. Not so hot for Big Boy Schools. Solid 5 on a scale of 10, hey?

[We R Final Four]

Wojo has had two Burger boys.
Probably three if MH doesn't come out.
MU hasn't had one prior to that since Kerry Trotter—1984?
His recruiting is solid.
What he's done with those recruits is another story all together.
Do WAC/Big Sky/MVC get burger boys?

[Galway Eagle]

Yes ranking wise he's a good recruiter. Recruiting to his system? No. Developing or maximizing their talent? No. Hanging onto the players? No.

Wojo has had two Burger boys.
Probably three if MH doesn't come out.
MU hasn't had one prior to that since Kerry Trotter—1984?
His recruiting is solid.
What he's done with those recruits is another story all together.
Do WAC/Big Sky/MVC get burger boys?

Potentially four if Hauser doesn't get injured as well.

[BallBoy]

It's obvious he's a poor game coach, but I'm not sure his recruiting is that good, either.

How many above average players does MU have?

Carton,Garcia, and maybe Lewis are the only ones, imo.

Most people complain about Wojo's in game coaching. I don't think that is the problem. In the Creighton game, we were bricking open shots, we missed 3 free throws in the final minutes of the game. Kobe can't seem to execute anything of note. Cain struggles to dribble and isn't consistent.  He switches defenses and approaches but there doesn't seem to be a group which can play both offense and defense. 

I have seen progression with all of the players. They all got better but I don't see the starting point was high enough to make an impact. Our best players have all been in the 3-4 slots or no true position guards. We have lacked a full team.

This leads me to believe the problem is the GM or recruiting side and when I look at the players that is generally what I see. One or two or three good players with some ok players and players who are trying to up level their game.

[hairy worthen]

Yes ranking wise he's a good recruiter. Recruiting to his system? No. Developing or maximizing their talent? No. Hanging onto the players? No.

Potentially four if Hauser doesn't get injured as well.

What system?

[hairy worthen]

Wojo has had two Burger boys.
Probably three if MH doesn't come out.
MU hasn't had one prior to that since Kerry Trotter—1984?
His recruiting is solid.
What he's done with those recruits is another story all together.
Do WAC/Big Sky/MVC get burger boys?

Over rated recruiter. Getting some 5 stars is great, but you need a complete team around them.

[wadesworld]

Solid recruiter.  Bad at keeping the roster together.  Hasn't targeted enough athleticism.

[Silent Verbal]

Wojo's recruiting has been about on par with the previous two coaches.  Lots of top 100 recruits, a few studs, and more than a few duds.  Crean was WAY better at recruiting and evaluating high school talent than the other two, Buzz was a wizard with JUCOs, and Wojo has had the most success with incoming transfers.  Wojo's had a couple McD's AAs, but oddly, his two worst seasons (minus his first one) have come when he's had those players.

Wojo's recruiting isn't necessarily the problem.  The problem is that there's no system in place.  We have a different team and a different look every single year.  With Buzz's teams, you always knew what you were getting:  A hard-nosed, physical team with a bunch of switchables who played great defense and generally shot poorly from distance.  If someone asked me to define a typical Wojo team, I'm not sure what I'd say.  They like to shoot threes and are good at it?  But that hasn't always been the case.  This is why the coaches are the stars in college ball, not the players.  The players always change, but the coach and his system stay the same.

[79Warrior]

Over rated recruiter. Getting some 5 stars is great, but you need a complete team around them.

This

[Viper]

Always an unbalanced roster. Good guards, marginal bigs. Decent front court...so-so guards. Now? Just a bunch of guys.

[MuggsyB]

I think he's a decent recruiter but yes, it's about finding the right players and overall balance.  I've read many posters here state that Wojo develops players well but it's actually about developing roles, not their individual talents.  Imo he does an extremely poor job in this area.  Roles are all over the place, there's no cohesion, and unusually poor fundamentals on our basketball team. 

[The Sultan]

Wojo's recruiting has been about on par with the previous two coaches.  Lots of top 100 recruits, a few studs, and more than a few duds.  Crean was WAY better at recruiting and evaluating high school talent than the other two, Buzz was a wizard with JUCOs, and Wojo has had the most success with incoming transfers.  Wojo's had a couple McD's AAs, but oddly, his two worst seasons (minus his first one) have come when he's had those players.

Wojo's recruiting isn't necessarily the problem.  The problem is that there's no system in place.  We have a different team and a different look every single year.  With Buzz's teams, you always knew what you were getting:  A hard-nosed, physical team with a bunch of switchables who played great defense and generally shot poorly from distance.  If someone asked me to define a typical Wojo team, I'm not sure what I'd say.  They like to shoot threes and are good at it?  But that hasn't always been the case.  This is why the coaches are the stars in college ball, not the players.  The players always change, but the coach and his system stay the same.

Yep yep. Exactly.

[MU82]

Good recruiter, yes.

[MUfan12]

Good recruiter, yes.

Just not for this conference. He gets good players but few strong and athletic enough.

[Silkk the Shaka]

I think he's a decent recruiter but yes, it's about finding the right players and overall balance.  I've read many posters here state that Wojo develops players well but it's actually about developing roles, not their individual talents.  Imo he does an extremely poor job in this area.  Roles are all over the place, there's no cohesion, and unusually poor fundamentals on our basketball team.

Precisely

[MU82]

Just not for this conference. He gets good players but few strong and athletic enough.

He had a good enough roster to win the conference title in 2018-19, good enough to win 20 of 22 games that season; they just were done in by poor team chemistry and coaching. He has had a good enough roster to give a lot of trouble to Nova, Creighton and Madison over the years, and to make the NCAA tournament 3 out of the last 4 years. I happen to think we have enough talent to be a solid NCAA tourney team this season - not a champion or serious BEast contender, but a tourney team. He just is not the kind of coach that maximizes the talent or exceeds expectations.

So I'll say "good recruiter" but not great because he does not stack top-20 classes year after year.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

In general I think his recruiting is overrated and his in game coaching is underrated

[Lennys Tap]

In general I think his recruiting is overrated and his in game coaching is underrated

TAMU

Agree. Most consider him a good to very good recruiter. I think average is more accurate. Most consider him an abysmal game coach. Below average is more like it.

[NolongerWarriors]

In general I think his recruiting is overrated and his in game coaching is underrated

Hmmm, not sure I disagree with that.

[MU82]

In general I think his recruiting is overrated and his in game coaching is underrated

IMHO ... good recruiter ... mediocre to OK game coach. That's why, since the start of his second season, he has been a .500 coach in the BEast. The sum is average, OK.

Scoopers like to toss out words like "horrible" and "embarrassing." He isn't. He's been OK. Just OK. We can do better.

[Shooter McGavin]

TAMU

Agree. Most consider him a good to very good recruiter. I think average is more accurate. Most consider him an abysmal game coach. Below average is more like it.

I don't think average/below average get the average results we've had the last five years.  How about average/average or above average/below average. 

[MuggsyB]

I think this is basically semantics.  Average.  Below Average. Blah.  Mediocre.  Bad.  Horrible.  Choose your adjective.  Average is still average and = mediocre with a grim future for sustainable success.  You're damn right we can do better and should expect much, much, better.

[Shooter McGavin]

My last post should have been in teal.

[shoothoops]

NM