Just how loaded are we??!!

[BOBB]

For the record, I don't drink. I was sniffing glue in the parking lot.

[pie n eye]

Regarding embarassing, it is embarassing that we have but one senior or junior that,started their career at WSU. Regarding damaging, maybe "damaging if continued" is a more nuanced way to express it.

I'm not entirely sure what's embarrassing about that fact. I'm more likely to be embarrassed by "WSU has a graduation rate of 40%" or "WSU player X was arrested for shoplifting". Actually the only thing embarrassing about WSU bball is in game production(at times, but it improved). I bet the person in charge attended a Juco at some point.

Has anyone considered that going after these coveted "four year players" is what caused us to recruit more from the Juco ranks? Meaning, we recruited some four year guys who couldn't make it for one reason or another so they left and we had to "fill the holes" with Juco.

So I wonder what's worse, or more embarrassing, recruiting junior college players and transfers who can only play for two years or recruiting a couple of four year guys who will take up a scholarship on the bench for a year or two then transfer out.

Also, the Suellentrop article mentioned Marquette as another school who has experienced success with Jucos. I hate the BigEast bias as much as the next guy but Marquette is one of the more consistent programs in that conference.

In my mind you go with what works and what gets you wins. If that means four year guys, great. If that means Juco guys, great. If its some combo in between well that's great too.

[vancedave56]

Things have changed, and you have to change with the times to stay competitive. There are different avenues to take. Some sign one and dones - they do not stay for four years. Some recruit the best of the rest, but some of them decide to transfer. This creates transfers and "holes" both coming and going. Then, some recruit jucos to fill the "holes" to stay more competitive. Some don't recruit to fill the holes and stay less competitive, but have more four year players. Now, if you can recruit super four year players that are really competitive, and they do not leave - you woiuld have no holes to fill. :)

[SubGod22]

That's more or less what most of us have been saying. If you focus too much on JUCOs you have no choice but to recruit JUCOs as there will continue to be huge holes that have to be filled every year.

Like I've said before, I think we're going to see fewer JUCOs the next few years as our HS kids appear to be just fine and ready to do what they need to do. As long as the staff continues to land quality kids our of HS, there's less need for JUCOs.

It doesn't make sense to recruit another JUCO in next years class. And the class after that should be fine. Baker, FVV and Green look to be givens to be here. Green could RS though. Same with Hawkins IF he shows. I could potentially see a JUCO big in this class if Hawkins and Uwadiae both fail to show up. But I'd be surprised and a little disappointed if we have two or more.

[shock]

Well, successful early teams don't count because of a different environment. Turgeon rebuilt the prgram with Jamar, Randy, Kampman, Miller, PJ, Ogirri and Brauer. Martin, Karon, Fridge and Wilson were great additions to that nucleus of stability. 3G rebuilt the program with Kyles, Murry and Stutz with Durley providing more continuity. Hannah, Smith, Blair, Hall and Ragland were additions to that nucleus.

I'm not saying that the JUCOs are bad kids, or bad players. I am saying that you don't build a successful program on the back of two year players and that I would take a fifteen win season with or young guys getting more minutes over twenty wins with a bunch of two year players.

@SubGod22 is making my argument better than me.

This is a good point.

[Mr. Obvious]

This is a good point.

Meaning... if the juco players don't pan out, you could have a 1 step forward, 2 steps back situation? Agree.

[shock]

Meaning... if the juco players don't pan out, you could have a 1 step forward, 2 steps back situation? Agree.

Meaning... it is better to have a tight nucleus of players that have been together for a few years, then add the juco stars. However, when the you look like a juco all-star team with a few four years like Baker and Green and that is a pretty salty team.

[WuDrWu]

For the record, I don't drink. I was sniffing glue in the parking lot.

I picked a bad week to stop taking amphetamines.

[another shocker]

Meaning... it is better to have a tight nucleus of players that have been together for a few years, then add the juco stars. However, when the you look like a juco all-star team with a few four years like Baker and Green and that is a pretty salty team.

Eddie Sutton did that same thing at Arkansas and Oklahoma State (but not at Kentucky).. mix solid H.S. recuits with solid JuCo recruits. 'Worked like magic for him.. what a successful coach he was.. his teams were always well respected, nothing embarrassing about it (he ran into problems at UK, though- but who wouldn't?) Arkansas/OSU would lose three important seniors one year, for example, and not miss a beat the next year- sometimes they'd be even better.. kinda like Wichita State is doing right now. So I've seen this kind of thing before.. just not at Wichita State. I'm liking it.

[Rlh04d]

I think you're agreeing with BOBB and I but I'm not sure if you know it or not. JUCOs fill a need. Normally where recruiting has failed. The next couple of years will most likely show if we're going to rely too much on JUCOs or not. I'd also say that I believe 3G and company would be landing better than just Top 300 types. FVV is a 100-150 type and I'd guess that Hawkins is closer to 150 than 300. Same for Green.

Do you think we'd be able to recruit those kinds of players out of HS without the level of success that we've attained by using JUCO players?

I would say that recruiting talented JUCO players has thus far been easier to do than HS guys. Now that we're becoming more successful, it's evening out.

Winning cures most ailments in sports. Marshall has had to do whatever it takes to win in the short term to guarantee future success. The more often we're putting up 25 win seasons, the more talented HS guys are willing to come here, and the less holes we'll have to fill with JUCO guys.

I'd rather win 25 with JUCO than 15 with HS guys. As long as they're not trouble makers or failing.

[another shocker]

But really, Marshall signed Jake White (4th team Parade AA), Fred VanVleet (most underrated recruit in the country?), Hawkins (uber talent, they say) Green.. on and on.. and you complain (some of you)? We just graduated three four-year contributors, that played all over the floor (Kyles, Stutz, Murry), and you complain (some of you)? Let's raise this board up to high level, like Marshall is doing with the Wichita State men's basketball team.

[1972Shocker]

The question is, would you take a JUCO kid that might rank out better than that for two years, or a couple of those kids in and around 150 for 4 years? You might take the shot at a JUCO if you're thin in a position, but if not, I'd sure as hell hope you'd pick the HS kid.

That is just one possible question. Would you take a JUCO All-American over a high school project or even a less than sure thing high schooler (i.e. a Joe Ragland vs a Kenny Manigault).

I think most coaches would prefer to build with solid 4-year players. But unfortunately recruiting is not like going to the grocery store and just picking and chosing what you want off of the shelf. You will always have recruiting misses, or injuries, or academic problems, or home sickness and sometimes you find yourself able to get a player that is just to good too pass on.

You deal with these issues as flexibly as you can and you adjust as needed. I think 3G and staff have done a good job of this.

[SubGod22]

I think most coaches would prefer to build with solid 4-year players. But unfortunately recruiting is not like going to the grocery store and just picking and chosing what you want off of the shelf. You will always have recruiting misses, or injuries, or academic problems, or home sickness and sometimes you find yourself able to get a player that is just to good too pass on.

You deal with these issues as flexibly as you can and you adjust as needed. I think 3G and staff have done a good job of this.

Petty sure that's what I've been saying. It's also why I think we'll be seeing fewer JUCOs

[vancedave56]

I think we will see the best players (individuals) available - whomever they may be.

[wufan]

The question is, would you take a JUCO kid that might rank out better than that for two years, or a couple of those kids in and around 150 for 4 years? You might take the shot at a JUCO if you're thin in a position, but if not, I'd sure as hell hope you'd pick the HS kid.

THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION.

The question is, would you rather take a JUCO that ranks out as a top 30 JUCO (roughly equivalent to a top 200 nationally), or a high schooler that ranks around 400. We didn't "pass" on any top 250 high schoolers (VanVleet, Green, Hawkins, Henry), but I think we did pass on a top 20 JUCO in Godfrey, and maybe others. It's not like 15 of the top 200 players in the country were ready to verbal and HCGM said no. He lined up the best 4 he could grab in the fall along with THE best JUCO in Early. In the Spring he'd already been told no or hadn't made enough headway to get in with the top 300ish high schoolers. So, what do you do? Grab the best available JUCO wing and one of the best available JUCO centers. IMO that is an OUTSTANDING way to recruit a winner year in and year out.