• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

OSU Men's Basketball Recruiting/Projections/General Discussions

LitlBuck;1212684; said:
You cannot fill your roster with all one and done or two and done players. You have to bring in some players who have not been MacDonald's All-Americans. It just won't happen. The players you mentioned filled in some holes for the Buckeyes even though they might not have played in crucial minutes.

Also, I do not know what 09 insiders TM has really missed on this year because there were really no big guys in the state of Ohio which makes things a little difficult when it comes to recruiting. I guess I would like to know who you realistically thought we had a chance at. I know that you want the guys to do well but please wait to they step on the floor as a Buckeye before you start to judge them especially "Z". He is very young and sitting out one year will help him tremendously IMO

Litl,
No one is saying you can recruit ONLY 1&d's, but there is a big chasm between 1&d's and Emonte Jernigan's. My take is that you need some "transition" players like Lighty, Lauderdale, Diebler, Offutt, Crater, Wright that have plenty of talent and potential but are pretty likely to stay all 4 years as well. Those are who you fill out your roster - and bench - with, IMO, you shouldn't have to scrap around for summertime desparation slim pickings. Some of the problem has been taking too few quality players in past classes, and not anticipating as well as possible other defections. Frease was mentioned as probably not being pursued as much as he should have been, for example, I for one agree with that sentiment.

I'm not judging Z yet, just presenting the counterpoint argument that his only results in the US game, to date, are unimpressive and valid reason for skepticism and question marks to be raised.

It is hard to say what players TM should have a legit shot at. I certainly was not happy that he struck out with Roe, Gates and Frease - for whatever reasons - and then finds himself scrambling to the JUCO and xfer ranks for any inside help ( Kecman and Z being the results ). I hope we get lucky WITH BOTH, but I'd rather sign OH h.s. T50-nationally talent than JUCOs and xfers, TYPICALLY.

As for the 09 class, TM was linked to or said to be after: Sidney, Painter, Plumlee, Judge, Armwood and Wilson among others up front, and hopefully is still after Orton. I applaud the staff for going after some of the best - but they struck out and thus why it may have led to more desparation than there should be! Signing big classes in 08 and 10 ( 6 hopefully ) will go a long way to helping smooth things out over time. I advocated using all 7 in the 06 class when momentum was there, but 4 of those 5 are now gone which creates too big a hole ( and the prior year has zero remaining recruits - thus no SRs on the roster at all ).

:osu:
 
Upvote 0
optimist-you are not living up to your name. I strongly disagree with the implication that you think Matta is reaching on some of his recruits. Some other guys are you managing for 09 might be one and done or, if not, two and dones. Also, he really never had a shot at Roe (because of the Snow factor). K F was not going to come here because of BJ. I do not know about Gates but I did hear that he was a little lazy. The problem with second-guessing Thad's recruiting is that you really don't know what is going on behind the scenes. I know that I have no idea. He evaluates talent like every other coach and I have no reason to second-guess him.
 
Upvote 0
LitlBuck;1217676; said:
optimist-you are not living up to your name. I strongly disagree with the implication that you think Matta is reaching on some of his recruits. Some other guys are you managing for 09 might be one and done or, if not, two and dones. Also, he really never had a shot at Roe (because of the Snow factor). K F was not going to come here because of BJ. I do not know about Gates but I did hear that he was a little lazy. The problem with second-guessing Thad's recruiting is that you really don't know what is going on behind the scenes. I know that I have no idea. He evaluates talent like every other coach and I have no reason to second-guess him.

On the other hand, you, like buckeydoptimist, have expressed concern over the number of 1-and-done's that Coach Matta has brought in and have also mentioned a desire to see more 3-4 year players in the program for the continuity they provide. I think you guys are on the same page in that the sheer quantity of players leaving early the last two seasons has left the roster somewhat inexperienced and/or unbalanced for last season and this season.

The difference seems to be in how you prefer to see the situation handled, be it through filling the roster as you can with as many quality players as you can get (although that may cause a logjam and hurt future recruiting) or to play it a bit more loosely, saving the occasional scholarship and using it when it is time to find a necessary part to fill holes as they appear.

That being said, if you ask me to pick one of those options, I'm probably just going to shrug and tell you to trust the coaches. :p
 
Upvote 0
Bucky Katt;1217684; said:
On the other hand, you, like buckeydoptimist, have expressed concern over the number of 1-and-done's that Coach Matta has brought in and have also mentioned a desire to see more 3-4 year players in the program for the continuity they provide. I think you guys are on the same page in that the sheer quantity of players leaving early the last two seasons has left the roster somewhat inexperienced and/or unbalanced for last season and this season.

The difference seems to be in how you prefer to see the situation handled, be it through filling the roster as you can with as many quality players as you can get (although that may cause a logjam and hurt future recruiting) or to play it a bit more loosely, saving the occasional scholarship and using it when it is time to find a necessary part to fill holes as they appear.

That being said, if you ask me to pick one of those options, I'm probably just going to shrug and tell you to trust the coaches. :p
Let me try and defend myself. I think the problem began when Thad brought in three guys who all became one and dones. I think that really put him behind the eight ball in terms of recruiting. I don't mind him bringing in a one and done every season as long as there is some continuity in the program with some quality backup players. One and done player a season will not bother me when you get past that number tis when you run into problems IMO.

I will agree with you in trusting the coaches and hopefully maybe some of those one and done will stay for more than one and then everything will be wonderful:cool:
 
Upvote 0
Well Katt, there is no fun in a "trust the staff" post! LOL The off season is for "trust no one" thinking! I guess it's the X-files lover in me!

I don't presume to know that Roe was ungettable or that Frease would not have ever considered coming to the same school BJM signed with. Most feel Frease will develop a bit slower and be more of a "transitional" player wherever he signed. BJM is highly speculated to be a 1&d. I see no reason they couldn't have fit into the same class! I could see Frease being a TUFFER SELL, obviously, but that is what TM gets the BIG BUCKS for! To make the tuff sells WORK not just the easy ones with gobs of PT to tempt them with!

I'm just a big advocate of signing h.s. talent and then using the slower developers or those who were perhaps a bit overrated as your bench. Not in signing low ceiling kids HOPING they develop into 5 min/game players someday ( a la Hill and Madsen ). I also think there is more room for mistakes in a 4-year player ( time to develop or time to xfer out ) than in JUCOs or xfers who when they don't pan out you are STUCK WITH as xferring again is most unlikely - and I hate having them drop out completely as I want all to get their degrees.

:osu:
 
Upvote 0
buckeydoptimist;1217734; said:
Well Katt, there is no fun in a "trust the staff" post! LOL The off season is for "trust no one" thinking! I guess it's the X-files lover in me!

I'm the king of fence-straddling. :pimp:

buckeydoptimist said:
I don't presume to know that Roe was ungettable or that Frease would not have ever considered coming to the same school BJM signed with. Most feel Frease will develop a bit slower and be more of a "transitional" player wherever he signed. BJM is highly speculated to be a 1&d. I see no reason they couldn't have fit into the same class! I could see Frease being a TUFFER SELL, obviously, but that is what TM gets the BIG BUCKS for! To make the tuff sells WORK not just the easy ones with gobs of PT to tempt them with!

I'm just a big advocate of signing h.s. talent and then using the slower developers or those who were perhaps a bit overrated as your bench. Not in signing low ceiling kids HOPING they develop into 5 min/game players someday ( a la Hill and Madsen ). I also think there is more room for mistakes in a 4-year player ( time to develop or time to xfer out ) than in JUCOs or xfers who when they don't pan out you are STUCK WITH as xferring again is most unlikely - and I hate having them drop out completely as I want all to get their degrees.

:osu:

Since I've now been put on the spot to not be so wishy-washy, I tend to agree with this. It seems like targeting mostly high school recruits gives you quite a bit more time and flexibility in figuring out what you want, who you want, and how to get them rather than JUCO approach where it does feel a bit more helter-skelter. Time is running out and the talent pool is so much smaller. All personal preference, I suppose.

I guess I can't complain too much about the on-court results of Matta's method thus far. :p
 
Upvote 0
Roe verballed to MSU very early. I don't think there was any way he was coming to Columbus. Regarding KF don't you think he can see what is in front of him and he saw BJ. There was no way that Thad could have talked him into coming to Ohio State when he could see what was in front of him. You can't "sell" a kid when he can see what the depth chart is going to look like.

I also think that you might be a little bit surprised with the play of Hill this coming season. That's not right these days off too fast. I was down on him last year because I did not think he knew the system but I am willing to give him a chance on what others have told me.
 
Upvote 0
If Conley doesn't leave early, we are not really talking abou this IMO...Big men if you want legit ones, are guys that are going to be looked at to leave early...Unless you get a guy like Hansbrough who can play at a high level, but his game is not suited to be a lottery pick...

If Conley stays we don't have a bad season last year and there is not much talk about this...

That is where you walk the fine line...Sometimes the players blow up and leave early and sometimes they decide to come back...Much like Ellington for UNC, but he was not a lottery pick...IMO it comes to picking up guys like Buford hopefully and COnley in retrospect out of high school...Big time guys that can play at the NBA level, but you figure they at least give you 2 if not 3...Turner could fit into this category and he is probably the best example in terms of one that will stay longer than the other 2, but he is also going to be drafted lower than the other 2 as well...

Really there is no way to really know...You can not pass on kids like Buford, Cook, Conley, Mullens and try and have a successful team...We could of taken Armond Bassett, Kenny Frease, Lighty, and someone else as guys that probably would of came here if we passed on the guys we did...Not a bad team...A team that would have 4 year guys, but does that team have the talent to go up against teams of the caliber of UNC, UCLA, etc...You are looking at guys that maybe lucky to be drafted in the second round of the NBA...You will also have more guys that struggle in their freshmen seasons like Diebler did this past year...You will also look at smaller classes of probably no more than 3 guys/year...So in 2010 we take a kid like Wright, no Sullinger, Thomas, and go after Johnson, Sibert, and Payne...Not bad, but you are missing out on two superstars that could possibly stay more than 1 year and really do big things, and if they do leave you bring in a class of 6 like is the plan to still have the class of 3/4 guys you would of had without the one and dones...
 
Upvote 0
I do not know if that is his entire philosophy or not. I do not mind him bringing in one one and done player a year if he can do that but I think we got severely set back when the three guys left us two years ago. I would like to see some continuity and not a big fluctuation which happens when you bring in more than one one and done player. That is my opinion and I'm sticking with it.:)
 
Upvote 0
LitlBuck;1219443; said:
I do not know if that is his entire philosophy or not. I do not mind him bringing in one one and done player a year if he can do that but I think we got severely set back when the three guys left us two years ago. I would like to see some continuity and not a big fluctuation which happens when you bring in more than one one and done player. That is my opinion and I'm sticking with it.:)

The only problem I see with this is sticking to a set number like 1...Think this this past year, we could miss out on Buford or Mullens, if the staff deemed them as 1 and dones...two years ago who do you take Cook, Conley, or Oden?...2010 SUllinger or Thomas...

See what I mean...First let me say that us having all these one and dones is not going to continue at a pace of 3 a year, or probably not 2 a year, but if you do see guys as being one and dones and you have room in that class, just take another player that you view as a 3-4 year guys and have him as a backup player his first year...Then you don't have a new guy the next season, but a guy that was in the system, and will be able to take over the next year...

Kinda like we are looking to do in 2010 with Sullinger/Payne and some extent this year with Buford/Offut...And we could of done with Conley/Basset or maybe even Mullens/Frease in some peoples eyes this year...The thing is you don't reach to take a guy just because you think he is a 4 year guy...That is worse than a 1 and done because he takes up a spot for 4 years...

Lighty/Cook would be a very godo example of it working for us...
 
Upvote 0
crazybuckfan40;1219462; said:
The only problem I see with this is sticking to a set number like 1...Think this this past year, we could miss out on Buford or Mullens, if the staff deemed them as 1 and dones...two years ago who do you take Cook, Conley, or Oden?...2010 SUllinger or Thomas...

See what I mean...First let me say that us having all these one and dones is not going to continue at a pace of 3 a year, or probably not 2 a year, but if you do see guys as being one and dones and you have room in that class, just take another player that you view as a 3-4 year guys and have him as a backup player his first year...Then you don't have a new guy the next season, but a guy that was in the system, and will be able to take over the next year......
I see what you are saying and I guess I will have to agree with it as long as Thad can bring in "quality" players to back up the one and done players. I knew as soon as I posted my last message that 2010 popped into my mind and I knew that Thomas and Sullinger will probably be gone after one year, but I guess I can live with that as long as we don't have yo-yo tapes of years like the one when three guys left us. I realize that Thad probably did not think Conley would go after one year but I guess that is the nature of the beast.
 
Upvote 0
LitlBuck;1219483; said:
I see what you are saying and I guess I will have to agree with it as long as Thad can bring in "quality" players to back up the one and done players. I knew as soon as I posted my last message that 2010 popped into my mind and I knew that Thomas and Sullinger will probably be gone after one year, but I guess I can live with that as long as we don't have yo-yo tapes of years like the one when three guys left us. I realize that Thad probably did not think Conley would go after one year but I guess that is the nature of the beast.

The thing is even with that year, if we bring in Armond Bassett and have a 6th guy, and even better bring in a freshmen PF instead of Hunter(not knocking Hunter, just the nature of the beast 4 years better than 2)...We are still looking at 3 guys from that class on the roster...Bassett and Butler take the PG role last year and we are that much of a better team...

Then this year we are looking at 4 guys with junior eligibility, still no seniors due to the class of 05, but still an older team, and a better team last year, and we aren't talking about 3 guys leaving and hurting the program...

Just think of one and dones as guys that are seniors in a regular scenario...You just know you are going to have to replace them...so recruit as they will be gone...
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top