Psyched about the future of Marquette hoops

[MU82]

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!

[Vander Blue Man Group]

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. 

[Jay Bee]

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. 

Both receiving $3M in NIL for saying that

[MU82]

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. 

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.

[The Lens]

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. 

[Shooter McGavin]

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!

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. 

[Jay Bee]

With 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.).

[tower912]

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.

[Nukem2]

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.

Agree. And the recruits obviously interact with guys on the team and get the real lowdown on everything (including NIL reality at MU).

[JakeBarnes]

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.

[ATL MU Warrior]

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.

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.

[Markusquette]

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.

[wadesworld]

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.

Shaka got the big names at Texas.  It didn't go well.

[MU82]

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.

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).

[wiscwarrior]

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.

[tower912]

He recruited Kon.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

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.

Are you really sarcastically "yay'ing" two 2-seeds in 4 years?

[The Thing]

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.

[MU82]

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.

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?

[IrwinFletcher]

Even 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.

[tower912]

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.

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?

[The Thing]

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?

Valid point. Short answer is no. I'm thinking more about teams that essentially rebuild their entire roster year to year.

[MuMark]

10 of the top 25 transfer classes(according to On 3) didn't make the NCAA Tournament......including 4 of the top 10.

[Jay Bee]

10 of the top 25 transfer classes(according to On 3) didn't make the NCAA Tournament......including 4 of the top 10.

Portal Potty

[Galway Eagle]

one 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.