Recruiting Thread

[IlliniKrush]

So how about those Salukis? Anyone? Bueller?

No one cares about you and your mid major team

[Buehrle>Wood]

this team is not going to be anywhere near the Final Four unless they start getting the Sherron Collins, Eric Gordon, and Julian Wright's of the world.

We'll agree to disagree. Strongly, strongly disagree.

[whitesoxfan101]

7"0 220 pound 2008 recruit (#9 center)Jeff Withey is on the brink of signing with the jayhawks.

 

Cole Aldrich and him will be a good combo.

 

Jeff Witey?? Awesome name

 

We'll agree to disagree. Strongly, strongly disagree.

 

Fair enough, but let me get off the pure recruiting stars point here. Just looking at the program right now, there isn't a single guy that could be consider a major perimeter scorer other than Jamar Smith right now, and without Gordon, there isn't a lot coming in next year either (although McCamey is solid). The program has and will continue to have a lot of interior depth (Carwell is really, really good, and Semrau might be), but guard play wins in the NCAA, and Illinois is dangerously thin there.

[Rowand44]

No one cares about you and your mid major team

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Rose cuts UCLA; DePaul still in mix

 

By Brian Hamilton

Tribune staff reporter

 

October 14, 2006, 6:40 PM CDT

 

 

And then there were four.

 

Simeon standout Derrick Rose has trimmed UCLA from his list of college finalists, his brother Reggie confirmed Saturday, due to concerns that Los Angeles was too far from home. Rose's final visit is the one he took to Memphis this weekend for the school's Midnight Madness festivities.

 

DePaul, Indiana and Kansas are the guard's other remaining finalists.

 

Brian Hamilton

 

 

 

Copyright © 2006, The Chicago Tribune

 

 

 

Derrick Rose In Memphis

A few more recruiting updates...

 

According to the Memphis Commercial Appeal, Rose stuck around the Memphis campus on Saturday. He watched both Saturday practices, but did not talk with reporters.

 

Sources close to Rose insist that Memphis and Indiana are currently in the lead for the 6-3 guard's services. DePaul is still in the picture, but right now, it's a dead heat between Memphis and Indiana.

 

Posted by Michael O'Brien on October 15, 2006 11:05 AM | Permalink

 

 

[CWSGuy406]

So how about those Salukis? Anyone? Bueller?

 

We are Marquette !

 

These Illini fans are boring, Rowand, seeing that their backcourt can't hold a candle to the group of Dominic James, Jerel McNeal, and Wes Matthews.

 

(okay -- no more prickish comments from me)

[SleepyWhiteSox]

We are Marquette !

 

I guess we're mortal enemies now...

[Rowand44]

These Illini fans are boring, Rowand

I concur.

[CWSGuy406]

I guess we're mortal enemies now...

 

Yeah.... apparently so...

 

Is Marquette generally hated among DePaul fans? I'm just a freshman here, so I haven't quite picked up on who the rivals (other than the obvious Wisconsin Badgers) are and other little intracies like that.

Edited October 16, 2006 by CWSGuy406

[ZoomSlowik]

Illinois' roster:

 

Richard McBride- 4 Star propect, top 100 recruit

Brian Randle- 4 star prospect, top 100 recruit

Warren Carter- 4 star prospect, top 100 recruit

Calvin Brock- 4 star prospect, top 100 rectcruit

Shaun Pruitt- 4 star prospect, top 100 recruit

Brian Carwell- 4 star prospect, top 100 recruit

Richard Semrau(preinjury)- 5 star prospect, top 20 recruit

Of the other 3 players on their roster since day one who are not top 100 recruits, two of them are expected to start this year with one of them being arguably the team's best player. The third was a top 100 football player coming out of high school.

 

The moral here, obviously, is that Illinois has done a horrible job of bringing players into the program, and are deeply screwed.

 

And two of those guys don't see the floor a whole lot, McBride is strictly a jumpshooter (though he does play decent defense), Randle isn't much more than an athlete, and Semrau's contributions are a bit more dubious since the injury. (Rivals has/had Brock as a 3-star by the way) Plus only McBride was a top-50 recruit, with Randle being the only other one higher than 75 (53). There's a big difference between top 50 and top 100, just about any big and/or athletic player can sneak into the last 20 or so of the top 100.

 

Saying they are screwed is a bit of a stretch, but I'll be very surprised if they make the 2nd weekend of the tournament. I like Pruitt and Smith, and Randle is decent, but that's a long way from being a real threat to make some noise.

Edited October 16, 2006 by ZoomSlowik

[IlliniKrush]

We are Marquette !

One of the nation's...best...cheers...

[Rex Hudler]

One of the nation's...best...cheers...

 

Better than "Let's Go Peay!"??

[greasywheels121]

no way... its just gettin started man... IU GOT GORDON, who by the way, i played a pick up game with while he was at Notre Dame.... i think im the reason hes goin to IU ... i was talkin em up big time haha

 

Have you decided if you're going to IU?

[Soxbadger]

I think your right that the Illini do have a lot of talent in their program, enough for Weber to do well with, but this team is not going to be anywhere near the Final Four unless they start getting the Sherron Collins, Eric Gordon, and Julian Wright's of the world.

 

Your right a team like Wisconsin who never gets the big name recruits never has been in the Final Four in the last 10 years.

 

Oh wait...

 

Bruce Weber just needs to look at how Bo Ryan wins at Wisconsin for his blueprint. He may not get the best recruits, but he makes the most out of what he gets. I would rather have a guy who is a general on the floor, than a salesman in the living room.

[ZoomSlowik]

Your right a team like Wisconsin who never gets the big name recruits never has been in the Final Four in the last 10 years.

 

Oh wait...

 

Bruce Weber just needs to look at how Bo Ryan wins at Wisconsin for his blueprint. He may not get the best recruits, but he makes the most out of what he gets. I would rather have a guy who is a general on the floor, than a salesman in the living room.

 

Wisconsin is the one major exception I can think of. Obviously they have had good coaching, and IMO their system helps them a lot because they can get solid production from a lot of "tweener" players offensively like Alando Tucker and Mike Wilkinson. Those guys typically aren't recruited that heavily.

 

However, you also can't quite call Wisconsin a national power. They are a successful program, but they don't go as deep in the tournament quite as frequently as those other programs, and IIRC their two major runs also came as lower seeds (I think a 9 and a 6?). Even they've started recruiting fairly well, Butch was a McD's All-American and Krabbenhoft, Stiemsma, Gavinski and Hughes were all fairly highly rated at one point or another (plus Leuer and Nankivil for next year).

 

A lot of teams can make one good run when they have a veteran team, but the question is whether or not they can consistently make Sweet 16 or better appearances. Coming off their recent stretch Illinois probably should have been better positioned to do that than they currently are. They're going to need underclassmen to start stepping up in the near future, and that's hard to do when you don't recruit as well.

 

I think Illinois can still be a successful program, but they're going to need to recruit better to join the elite. With the way their recent recruiting has gone I'd say they'll have a shot at the Final Four roughly once evey 4 years unless things pick up.

[Soxbadger]

However, you also can't quite call Wisconsin a national power. They are a successful program, but they don't go as deep in the tournament quite as frequently as those other programs, and IIRC their two major runs also came as lower seeds

 

Before I start researching, what would you call a "other programs" that I would need to compare how deep they went with.

 

If you are referring to UNC and Duke, then you are probably correct. But most programs would like the following:

 

Wisconsin has been sweet 16 or higher:

 

2005 (elite 8)

2003 (Sweet 16)

2000 (Final 4)

 

2006 Florida 73-57 UCLA George Mason, LSU

2005 North Carolina 75-70 Illinois Michigan St, Louisville

2004 Connecticut 82-73 Georgia Tech Duke, Oklahoma St

2003 Syracuse 81-78 Kansas Texas, Marquette

2002 Maryland 64-52 Indiana Oklahoma, Kansas

2001 Duke 82-72 Arizona Maryland, Michigan St

2000 Michigan St 89-76 Florida Wisconsin, North Carolina

1999 Connecticut 77-Duke 74 Michigan St., Ohio State

 

To count:

 

MSU 4 appearances

Florida 2 appearances

UNC 2 appearances

Uconn 2 appearances

 

Most teams would take your 1 FF every 4 years.

[ZoomSlowik]

Before I start researching, what would you call a "other programs" that I would need to compare how deep they went with.

 

If you are referring to UNC and Duke, then you are probably correct. But most programs would like the following:

 

Wisconsin has been sweet 16 or higher:

 

2005 (elite 8)

2003 (Sweet 16)

2000 (Final 4)

To count:

 

MSU 4 appearances

Florida 2 appearances

UNC 2 appearances

Uconn 2 appearances

 

Most teams would take your 1 FF every 4 years.

 

I would say those teams (minus Florida, not that consistent), and notice each of those other ones has a national championship during that stretch. That earns them some extra points in my book. Plus UNC's resume would be better if not for Doherty (though he did recruit those stars). I would also include Kentucky, although they are in a bit of a down-slide. However, it wasn't that long ago that they made three consecutive title game appearances and won two titles. Kansas fit in too pre-Self, though they've had some clunkers in the tourney. We'll see what happens this year. Arizona also has had some solid runs with a title, a finals appearance, and another Elite 8 appearance I believe. Yeah, everyone has a few bad years here and there, but I'd say those schools have a better tournament resume in the last 10 years or so than Wisconsin. If you go deep 3 years in a row and then miss it for 5 years, that still averages out to almost a 50% hit rate, they don't necessarily all have to come in a row. Plus I would argue that over the next few years UCLA and OSU have a major chance to join this list. If Florida lives up to expectations this year they could also join that group.

 

I never said Wisconsin was a bad program. They've done pretty well, but they're not quite what I would call an elite program. They're not exactly a perrenial top-3 seed, though they do have a good tournament record. Illinois has been an elite program over the last 5 years or so with a finals appearance, an Elite 8, and a Sweet 16, but I have doubts that they'll keep it up.

 

Also, I said that they'll probably have A CHANCE at the Final Four every 4 years or so on average, not that they would make it.

Edited October 16, 2006 by ZoomSlowik

[Soxbadger]

Zoom I agree that Wisconsin is not a top 5 program, or even a top 10 program yet.

 

What I disagree with is that you have to have the best recruits to make the final four.

 

The person said that without top recruits they would never get anywhere near the final 4.

 

That is far different from saying that without elite recruits you will never have an elite program, which I agree with.

 

I just disagree that you have to have great recruits to make the final 4, and I think the last 8 years of final fours affirms my statement.

[ZoomSlowik]

Zoom I agree that Wisconsin is not a top 5 program, or even a top 10 program yet.

 

What I disagree with is that you have to have the best recruits to make the final four.

 

The person said that without top recruits they would never get anywhere near the final 4.

 

That is far different from saying that without elite recruits you will never have an elite program, which I agree with.

 

I just disagree that you have to have great recruits to make the final 4, and I think the last 8 years of final fours affirms my statement.

 

I don't think you absolutely need top recruits to make the Final Four, but they definitely help a lot, and I think to be a consistent Final Four threat you do need the elite recruits (or at least a good number of good recruits). You can only do so much by finding hidden gems and coaching well. As I said before, I think without those elite recruits you need to have at least a few things go your way to make it that deep. Without looking at all the brackets, I'd say that your average Final Four has at least one recruiting powerhouse, one solid but not stellar program in recruiting (ie Louisville/Illinois), another team from one of those two groups, and another smaller/mediocre recruiting school (Wisconsin, George Mason, Marquette).

 

For a while there it looked like Illinois might be gaining ground toward becoming an elite program, but life should get a little more difficult. The lowest seed they've had the last few years is a 5, and that'll change. I expect them to get a few more 6-9 seeds the next few years, which will make it harder to make a deep run in the tourney. They should still get a few good years when they have veteran teams and/or when they have some success with individual players, but I don't expect them to consistently be 5 seeds or higher anymore.

Edited October 16, 2006 by ZoomSlowik

[Soxbadger]

I put Wisconsin and Illinois at the same level since 1999.

 

And your mistaking my argument. I am not saying that a team that does not have atleast marginal recruits will do well, what I am saying is that if you can get a majority of your team to be 3 star to 4 star recruits you have a chance to succeed.

 

If you have a great coach, it makes those 3-4 stars play like 4-5 stars.

 

I just do not believe that you need McDonalds all-americans constantly to have a quality program. While it makes it easier, it is not the end all of basketball.

[thedoctor]

I put Wisconsin and Illinois at the same level since 1999.

 

And your mistaking my argument. I am not saying that a team that does not have atleast marginal recruits will do well, what I am saying is that if you can get a majority of your team to be 3 star to 4 star recruits you have a chance to succeed.

 

If you have a great coach, it makes those 3-4 stars play like 4-5 stars.

 

I just do not believe that you need McDonalds all-americans constantly to have a quality program. While it makes it easier, it is not the end all of basketball.

 

generally i'd agree with your points. however, if you have a great coach and pair it with those 4-5 stars, i think you end up boosting your program to an even higher level, a level where you are competing for final fours and national titles more years than not. without them, you are still going to be pretty good, but your ability to compete for the big prizes more consistently decreases.

[He_Gawn]

Have you decided if you're going to IU?

 

so far they are only offering a 20% baseball scholarship for me... but with the way their basketball team is starting to shape up that might have an effect? haha

[Soxbadger]

doctor,

 

A lot of times I think 5 star recruits actually set a program back. They come in for 1-2 years and then leave. The coach has no time to adopt to their playing style and really get the team going.

 

That is why many times these "vet" teams take out the diaper dandies.

 

Im not an Illini fan, but honestly I just cant understand why so many people are down on Weber. He may not be the greatest recruiter, but so far his teams have done well.

 

Isnt that all that matters?

 

Self has recruited like a champ but has bombed in the tourney.

 

Which would you prefer?

[ZoomSlowik]

doctor,

 

A lot of times I think 5 star recruits actually set a program back. They come in for 1-2 years and then leave. The coach has no time to adopt to their playing style and really get the team going.

 

That is why many times these "vet" teams take out the diaper dandies.

 

Im not an Illini fan, but honestly I just cant understand why so many people are down on Weber. He may not be the greatest recruiter, but so far his teams have done well.

 

Isnt that all that matters?

 

Self has recruited like a champ but has bombed in the tourney.

 

Which would you prefer?

 

Well, so far Illinois has been winning with Weber's coaching but Self's recruits. His own signees have been much less impressive.

 

On the other hand, Self has had a team that suffered from some lackluster recruiting towards the end of Williams' tenure, and his best players were underclassmen that he recruited. We shall see what he does over the next couple of years with the talent that he has accumulated.

[Soxbadger]

Hopefully well this year.

 

With the Big 12 KU should have a 1 seed locked up.

 

As a 1 seed that is 2 games against teams that are not even top 25.

 

So I would say that they have sweet 16 easy and beyond.