ADVERTISEMENT

Kwe Parker junior year highlights

higgins3

All American
Dec 15, 2012
7,168
2,309
113



Parkers athleticism is really something I don't know if I've ever seen before. Three point shot developing-more of a set shot but I have no doubt he will develop the capability to make a shot off the dribble. Seems like a decent kid. Ally oop show really.

These kids all need a good diet. Before Sanders came here, he mentioned on twitter he was eating mcdonalds a couple times a week. They could all use weight and some extra support.
 



Parkers athleticism is really something I don't know if I've ever seen before. Three point shot developing-more of a set shot but I have no doubt he will develop the capability to make a shot off the dribble. Seems like a decent kid. Ally oop show really.

These kids all need a good diet. Before Sanders came here, he mentioned on twitter he was eating mcdonalds a couple times a week. They could all use weight and some extra support.
Really hoping Parker ends up with us.
 
Great player. As I have posted before if we land him to go with Sanders we will go to the tournament.
 
Great player. As I have posted before if we land him to go with Sanders we will go to the tournament.

You are underestimating how good the B1G and how difficult it is to move up the ladder. It will take a lot more than 2 highly skilled players to get us over the top. It all starts with the program infrastructure and that starts with Eddie Jordan.

Let's not forget we had a player here last year that actually made mock NBA draft lists. With him he were still arguably the worst P5 team.
 
I hope that guy "program infrastructure" can develop his shot and play good transition defense....lol

I heard he may start at PF and can be a 10 and 7 type player because he works hard in the lane getting to the rim......something "mock draft" Jack did not do on a consistent basis last year.
 
Last edited:
Green,

I do understand. I am that high on these two. I like our bus with doors on and foreman. Haven't seen Diallo yet but have heard good things. Mike Williams as a glue guy and Johnson as a backup would have us set up in the back court. That gets you to the tournament.
 
I hope that guy "program infrastructure" can develop his shot and play good transition defense....lol

I heard he may start at PF and can be a 10 and 7 type player because he works hard in the lane getting to the rim......something "mock draft" Jack did not do on a consistent basis last year.


Is there is a correlation with strength and conditioning and shooting? Playing good transition defense is about attitude and conditioning.

It is very convenient to think we solely have had a talent program. Also very convenient to use the Rice scandal as an excuse. There is no doubt that Jordan has to step it up and has to make changes and adjustments in year 3. it is not about results in 2015-16, but it will be in 2016-17 and beyond.
 
Sure.....the Rice scandal helped the program....:rolleyes:. Every program in the country wanted one...lol. B1G AD's were saying, " We need that type of positive media attention for all our programs".

SERIOUSLY.......

Jordan has already stated that uptempo may be in the cards. You can do that with a full roster and more athletic players. You can also spread the half court offense with improved shooters (not playing PG). Talent wins, basketball is the only team sport where 2 or 3 players can dramatically improve a team. Add in a full roster and you have something to work with.
 
Last edited:
Any update on his recruitment? Still RU or WAKE? I know we've heard we were favored if he committed soon, but now it's been a few weeks
 
It would still be a challenge to get to the tournament with Parker. He would help our chances though. To get to the tournament we need 8+ players that are of decent skill level and a head coach that puts them in the best position to succeed. I have faith In EJ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bac2therac
It would still be a challenge to get to the tournament with Parker. He would help our chances though. To get to the tournament we need 8+ players that are of decent skill level and a head coach that puts them in the best position to succeed. I have faith In EJ.
If we get Parker we have more than 8 players with a decent Skill Level;

Sanders - Soph
Parker - Frosh
Williams - As a junior he should be a Big 10 player
Johnson - Redshirt Senior Proven to be a P5 player

Freeman - Senior
Foreman - Junior
Doorson- Junior
Diallo - Redshirt Soph
Laurent- Soph

That is talent mixed with experience. Maybe Goode brings a shooter as well. Also, Eddie still has ships to land another piece.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vascosg
No doubt,Brad. I think this team in the next couple years could make it's way to the top eight in the big. I think they will have a good level of skill mixed with fundamentals/smarts.
 
He stated a week or so ago that he is going to push his decision a little longer, he plans to take a few more visits, and he plans to have WF be his last visit before he decides.

The falling out that WF and Parker had was about Parker missing a planned meeting with Coach Manning. Manning was very disappointed and started pursuing other SGs pretty heavily after that point over continuing to pursue Parker primarily. But now there's some reports that Parker did extensive damage control with Manning so it's anyone's guess at this point. Which is a huge surprise for me as everything that I had heard up until a week ago pointed very heavily to Rutgers. I'd put it 50/50 now.
 
Thanks Deac! Good update. My sister attended Wake Forest for a year, still root for them, great little campus.
 
He stated a week or so ago that he is going to push his decision a little longer, he plans to take a few more visits, and he plans to have WF be his last visit before he decides.

The falling out that WF and Parker had was about Parker missing a planned meeting with Coach Manning. Manning was very disappointed and started pursuing other SGs pretty heavily after that point over continuing to pursue Parker primarily. But now there's some reports that Parker did extensive damage control with Manning so it's anyone's guess at this point. Which is a huge surprise for me as everything that I had heard up until a week ago pointed very heavily to Rutgers. I'd put it 50/50 now.
sigh. :(
 
He stated a week or so ago that he is going to push his decision a little longer, he plans to take a few more visits, and he plans to have WF be his last visit before he decides.

The falling out that WF and Parker had was about Parker missing a planned meeting with Coach Manning. Manning was very disappointed and started pursuing other SGs pretty heavily after that point over continuing to pursue Parker primarily. But now there's some reports that Parker did extensive damage control with Manning so it's anyone's guess at this point. Which is a huge surprise for me as everything that I had heard up until a week ago pointed very heavily to Rutgers. I'd put it 50/50 now.

Wasn't Parker originally supposed to decide before July?

If it was down to WF and RU and the story above is accurate, the delay in decision would seem to swing momentum back to WF IMO. Then again, I realize speculating about this stuff is silly. Just my (way) outside observation. Would love to be wrong.
 
There was no due/expiration date for a decision and Wake is not favored anymore than anyone else is here or certainly not RU....Parker outlined after his RU visit that he would take or plan to take some visits in July before a decision would be made this summer. What makes sense is that a Top 75 player would take all 5 potential visits and still has a likely idea on who the two or three primary contenders are, but reserves the right to take all his visits before making a decision, so this fits the profile. I would be shocked that a kid of this caliber didn't take visits or was pursued by the caliber of programs he has after him.

The questions are always the same or similar to what we saw and heard with Deshawn Freeman....kid is a priority recruit by RU staff, they recruit him consistently and there is an big opportunity to play in a great conference without a crowded lineup. The same "woe is RU" stuff kinda resurfaces as soon as a kid mentions other visits or schools being interested....but as we saw with Freeman, RU was always the strongest suitor that covered all the bases in his recruitment. A need at the position was clear when Etou rumblings of a departure started during the season and immediate minutes and exposure in at worst, the 2nd best conference in America.

Same concept applies here...Wake has a crowded backcourt or 2015 and 2016 kids and although Parker can ultimately decide that Wake is the best fit, RU actually stands in a very good position here. Sanders looms as a big chip and Parker can likely certain land immediate minutes with Sanders for the forseeable future, in a conference that can showcase his skill set.

In RU's case, he is interchangeable to me and can thrive here in transition and play through the ultimately growing pains that underclassmen like Sanders and Parker will go through. Can that happen elsewhere is the question or will other coaching staffs allow that to happen?? How can a kid like Parker develop if a program only wants him to play a few minutes a half, with a crowded backcourt??

After reviewing the enormous NBA free agent signings from yesterday and seeing kids from Eastern Washington get drafted before some kids from Kentucky/Kansas or North Carolina did, leads me to believe that ultimately, you need playing time in college to max out your potential. Some families and AAU coaches still struggle with understanding this concept, but how much you play or don't get to play as an underclassman really determines how strong a look you can have at the next level. I have conversations with parents changing their kids out of AAU programs, because one program wins more than another.....what happens then when you give up starters minutes to be a role player on a better AAU program???

NBA GM's/scouts have been burned badly by watching NCAA tourney games (former Lottery pick Nik Stauskas is the latest example of a player that doesn't do anything else that a team needs to win, but had a handful of great shooting games before leaving Michigan). Stauskas adds zero value on defense, doesn't help with rebounding and requires a Trey Burke type player to thrive on offense. He was essentially traded after one non-descript season by Sacramento because a coach like George Karl has no need for a one dimensional shooter.

On the other hand, if Draymond Green is a 3 to 4 year player/starter, grinder/rebounder/hustler on defense plays multiple positions for 3-4 years at Michigan State and gets drafted in the late 30s or the 2nd round and lands a 5 year/85M contract 3 years out of school, that has to be a signal for kids to understand what GM's are going to look for in college players. At some point, it's no longer going to be the reputation of your college program or career, which isn't guaranteed to translate to the next level. A college star that cannot showcase his skills isn't going to get the proper looks going forward.

Parker and Sanders next level position is to be able to show they can play either guard position, defend, rebound, score in transition and make plays. That may not necessarily translate to RU immediately launching itself to an NCAA team, but you have to have athletic kids capable of playing to do so and start somewhere. And the programs that are clogged with too many recruits ultimately have to sort our minutes to do so.

With the amount of money (over 2.0 Billion likely to be spent over the first 4 to 5 days of Free agency) being tossed around like Halloween candy, I'd be extremely leery of not making sure I had playing time as "highly likely" in Year 1 or Year 2 of my college career, if I possessed NBA caliber athleticism. And the more chances I had to challenge myself against a high caliber schedule, the better.

Having the next level as a selling chip doesn't always equate as the fastest or best way to try and build a program, but RU has to sell this aspect as most programs do in the same situation. Klay Thompson and Steph Curry had NBA caliber potential and pedigree in their parents that played many years in the NBA as well. I've been told by someone in the NBA circles that their success had more to do with their workload they were asked to carry at Washington State and Davidson respectively, than anything else in college.

Kids like Whitehead at Seton Hall, Sanders at RU and potentially Parker at RU, have a unique opportunity to mature in an area/location that can boost the local programs reputations, if they are coachable, can mature and thrive while playing through their mistakes. It's the ultimately goal and I think RU still lands Parker because these factors ultimately are starting to sink in.

The amount of anxiety I'm hearing about from some circles of highly touted Top 25-50 kids in the last 4 to 5 years that barely got drafted OR weren't drafted at all, but landed at some NCAA powers was that scouts "didn't see enough of them" OR "they didn't do enough to convince current coaches that they could do more than one thing on the court". It's an even bigger decision for kids now, the amount of real money now available in the NBA has changed things.

If Iman Shumpert has 2 knee surgeries and isn't a great ball handler, but was asked to guard three different positions at Georgia Tech and has a OK or decent jump shot and gets 4 years & 40M, what can an athletic player like Sanders or Parker get down the road, if they develop their games here??? They certainly project to be as good as a Patrick Beverly, who is athletic and annoying as hell on defense, but has to be likely to land at 4 Years 20-25M.....and he's not a starter.

This free agency period has exploded in a big way....it used to be, just pick a college and you can make probably make as much overseas as you can as a 9th player in a rotation of an NBA team.

In this "new NBA market", you absolutely are making a 40M to 50M decision over the next 8 to 10 years....and you have to actually play lots of minutes in college to have a shot at it. If you pick the school based just on winning tradition, well, good luck to you.
 
Myles Mack is making the NBA if he was 6 2.

TDirish, how would you explain Aaron Harrison?Not a #1 draft pick of course, but from Kentucky and did well there for a sophmore. Maybe he should of stayed and improved his game, played more minutes.
 
The way Cal recruits he may have gotten beaten out so he moved on.

A real good college player but the truth was the Frosh Euliss is better than him.

Not alot of similarities between the college game and the NBA. The Pro game is a mans game and 18-19 and 20 year olds for the most part aren't men.

You know in February 70 % of last years # 1 picks were playing in the D-League ? Now they're still getting well paid but there just aren't the minutes for them and once the season starts in the NBA there isn't a ton of practice time for guys to develop. That has to be done in the offseason.

Thought the George Karl reference was funny------George Karl wanted to trade DeMarcus Cousins last week and the owner told him he'd be fired before that happened.

Stauskas didn't get traded-----he escaped------even going to Philly . You'll get looks with a center who can pass like Okafor.

Karl will be gone by Easter----make book on it.
 
There was no due/expiration date for a decision and Wake is not favored anymore than anyone else is here or certainly not RU....Parker outlined after his RU visit that he would take or plan to take some visits in July before a decision would be made this summer. What makes sense is that a Top 75 player would take all 5 potential visits and still has a likely idea on who the two or three primary contenders are, but reserves the right to take all his visits before making a decision, so this fits the profile. I would be shocked that a kid of this caliber didn't take visits or was pursued by the caliber of programs he has after him.

The questions are always the same or similar to what we saw and heard with Deshawn Freeman....kid is a priority recruit by RU staff, they recruit him consistently and there is an big opportunity to play in a great conference without a crowded lineup. The same "woe is RU" stuff kinda resurfaces as soon as a kid mentions other visits or schools being interested....but as we saw with Freeman, RU was always the strongest suitor that covered all the bases in his recruitment. A need at the position was clear when Etou rumblings of a departure started during the season and immediate minutes and exposure in at worst, the 2nd best conference in America.

Same concept applies here...Wake has a crowded backcourt or 2015 and 2016 kids and although Parker can ultimately decide that Wake is the best fit, RU actually stands in a very good position here. Sanders looms as a big chip and Parker can likely certain land immediate minutes with Sanders for the forseeable future, in a conference that can showcase his skill set.

In RU's case, he is interchangeable to me and can thrive here in transition and play through the ultimately growing pains that underclassmen like Sanders and Parker will go through. Can that happen elsewhere is the question or will other coaching staffs allow that to happen?? How can a kid like Parker develop if a program only wants him to play a few minutes a half, with a crowded backcourt??

After reviewing the enormous NBA free agent signings from yesterday and seeing kids from Eastern Washington get drafted before some kids from Kentucky/Kansas or North Carolina did, leads me to believe that ultimately, you need playing time in college to max out your potential. Some families and AAU coaches still struggle with understanding this concept, but how much you play or don't get to play as an underclassman really determines how strong a look you can have at the next level. I have conversations with parents changing their kids out of AAU programs, because one program wins more than another.....what happens then when you give up starters minutes to be a role player on a better AAU program???

NBA GM's/scouts have been burned badly by watching NCAA tourney games (former Lottery pick Nik Stauskas is the latest example of a player that doesn't do anything else that a team needs to win, but had a handful of great shooting games before leaving Michigan). Stauskas adds zero value on defense, doesn't help with rebounding and requires a Trey Burke type player to thrive on offense. He was essentially traded after one non-descript season by Sacramento because a coach like George Karl has no need for a one dimensional shooter.

On the other hand, if Draymond Green is a 3 to 4 year player/starter, grinder/rebounder/hustler on defense plays multiple positions for 3-4 years at Michigan State and gets drafted in the late 30s or the 2nd round and lands a 5 year/85M contract 3 years out of school, that has to be a signal for kids to understand what GM's are going to look for in college players. At some point, it's no longer going to be the reputation of your college program or career, which isn't guaranteed to translate to the next level. A college star that cannot showcase his skills isn't going to get the proper looks going forward.

Parker and Sanders next level position is to be able to show they can play either guard position, defend, rebound, score in transition and make plays. That may not necessarily translate to RU immediately launching itself to an NCAA team, but you have to have athletic kids capable of playing to do so and start somewhere. And the programs that are clogged with too many recruits ultimately have to sort our minutes to do so.

With the amount of money (over 2.0 Billion likely to be spent over the first 4 to 5 days of Free agency) being tossed around like Halloween candy, I'd be extremely leery of not making sure I had playing time as "highly likely" in Year 1 or Year 2 of my college career, if I possessed NBA caliber athleticism. And the more chances I had to challenge myself against a high caliber schedule, the better.

Having the next level as a selling chip doesn't always equate as the fastest or best way to try and build a program, but RU has to sell this aspect as most programs do in the same situation. Klay Thompson and Steph Curry had NBA caliber potential and pedigree in their parents that played many years in the NBA as well. I've been told by someone in the NBA circles that their success had more to do with their workload they were asked to carry at Washington State and Davidson respectively, than anything else in college.

Kids like Whitehead at Seton Hall, Sanders at RU and potentially Parker at RU, have a unique opportunity to mature in an area/location that can boost the local programs reputations, if they are coachable, can mature and thrive while playing through their mistakes. It's the ultimately goal and I think RU still lands Parker because these factors ultimately are starting to sink in.

The amount of anxiety I'm hearing about from some circles of highly touted Top 25-50 kids in the last 4 to 5 years that barely got drafted OR weren't drafted at all, but landed at some NCAA powers was that scouts "didn't see enough of them" OR "they didn't do enough to convince current coaches that they could do more than one thing on the court". It's an even bigger decision for kids now, the amount of real money now available in the NBA has changed things.

If Iman Shumpert has 2 knee surgeries and isn't a great ball handler, but was asked to guard three different positions at Georgia Tech and has a OK or decent jump shot and gets 4 years & 40M, what can an athletic player like Sanders or Parker get down the road, if they develop their games here??? They certainly project to be as good as a Patrick Beverly, who is athletic and annoying as hell on defense, but has to be likely to land at 4 Years 20-25M.....and he's not a starter.

This free agency period has exploded in a big way....it used to be, just pick a college and you can make probably make as much overseas as you can as a 9th player in a rotation of an NBA team.

In this "new NBA market", you absolutely are making a 40M to 50M decision over the next 8 to 10 years....and you have to actually play lots of minutes in college to have a shot at it. If you pick the school based just on winning tradition, well, good luck to you.
There was no due/expiration date for a decision and Wake is not favored anymore than anyone else is here or certainly not RU....Parker outlined after his RU visit that he would take or plan to take some visits in July before a decision would be made this summer. What makes sense is that a Top 75 player would take all 5 potential visits and still has a likely idea on who the two or three primary contenders are, but reserves the right to take all his visits before making a decision, so this fits the profile. I would be shocked that a kid of this caliber didn't take visits or was pursued by the caliber of programs he has after him.

The questions are always the same or similar to what we saw and heard with Deshawn Freeman....kid is a priority recruit by RU staff, they recruit him consistently and there is an big opportunity to play in a great conference without a crowded lineup. The same "woe is RU" stuff kinda resurfaces as soon as a kid mentions other visits or schools being interested....but as we saw with Freeman, RU was always the strongest suitor that covered all the bases in his recruitment. A need at the position was clear when Etou rumblings of a departure started during the season and immediate minutes and exposure in at worst, the 2nd best conference in America.

Same concept applies here...Wake has a crowded backcourt or 2015 and 2016 kids and although Parker can ultimately decide that Wake is the best fit, RU actually stands in a very good position here. Sanders looms as a big chip and Parker can likely certain land immediate minutes with Sanders for the forseeable future, in a conference that can showcase his skill set.

In RU's case, he is interchangeable to me and can thrive here in transition and play through the ultimately growing pains that underclassmen like Sanders and Parker will go through. Can that happen elsewhere is the question or will other coaching staffs allow that to happen?? How can a kid like Parker develop if a program only wants him to play a few minutes a half, with a crowded backcourt??

After reviewing the enormous NBA free agent signings from yesterday and seeing kids from Eastern Washington get drafted before some kids from Kentucky/Kansas or North Carolina did, leads me to believe that ultimately, you need playing time in college to max out your potential. Some families and AAU coaches still struggle with understanding this concept, but how much you play or don't get to play as an underclassman really determines how strong a look you can have at the next level. I have conversations with parents changing their kids out of AAU programs, because one program wins more than another.....what happens then when you give up starters minutes to be a role player on a better AAU program???

NBA GM's/scouts have been burned badly by watching NCAA tourney games (former Lottery pick Nik Stauskas is the latest example of a player that doesn't do anything else that a team needs to win, but had a handful of great shooting games before leaving Michigan). Stauskas adds zero value on defense, doesn't help with rebounding and requires a Trey Burke type player to thrive on offense. He was essentially traded after one non-descript season by Sacramento because a coach like George Karl has no need for a one dimensional shooter.

On the other hand, if Draymond Green is a 3 to 4 year player/starter, grinder/rebounder/hustler on defense plays multiple positions for 3-4 years at Michigan State and gets drafted in the late 30s or the 2nd round and lands a 5 year/85M contract 3 years out of school, that has to be a signal for kids to understand what GM's are going to look for in college players. At some point, it's no longer going to be the reputation of your college program or career, which isn't guaranteed to translate to the next level. A college star that cannot showcase his skills isn't going to get the proper looks going forward.

Parker and Sanders next level position is to be able to show they can play either guard position, defend, rebound, score in transition and make plays. That may not necessarily translate to RU immediately launching itself to an NCAA team, but you have to have athletic kids capable of playing to do so and start somewhere. And the programs that are clogged with too many recruits ultimately have to sort our minutes to do so.

With the amount of money (over 2.0 Billion likely to be spent over the first 4 to 5 days of Free agency) being tossed around like Halloween candy, I'd be extremely leery of not making sure I had playing time as "highly likely" in Year 1 or Year 2 of my college career, if I possessed NBA caliber athleticism. And the more chances I had to challenge myself against a high caliber schedule, the better.

Having the next level as a selling chip doesn't always equate as the fastest or best way to try and build a program, but RU has to sell this aspect as most programs do in the same situation. Klay Thompson and Steph Curry had NBA caliber potential and pedigree in their parents that played many years in the NBA as well. I've been told by someone in the NBA circles that their success had more to do with their workload they were asked to carry at Washington State and Davidson respectively, than anything else in college.

Kids like Whitehead at Seton Hall, Sanders at RU and potentially Parker at RU, have a unique opportunity to mature in an area/location that can boost the local programs reputations, if they are coachable, can mature and thrive while playing through their mistakes. It's the ultimately goal and I think RU still lands Parker because these factors ultimately are starting to sink in.

The amount of anxiety I'm hearing about from some circles of highly touted Top 25-50 kids in the last 4 to 5 years that barely got drafted OR weren't drafted at all, but landed at some NCAA powers was that scouts "didn't see enough of them" OR "they didn't do enough to convince current coaches that they could do more than one thing on the court". It's an even bigger decision for kids now, the amount of real money now available in the NBA has changed things.

If Iman Shumpert has 2 knee surgeries and isn't a great ball handler, but was asked to guard three different positions at Georgia Tech and has a OK or decent jump shot and gets 4 years & 40M, what can an athletic player like Sanders or Parker get down the road, if they develop their games here??? They certainly project to be as good as a Patrick Beverly, who is athletic and annoying as hell on defense, but has to be likely to land at 4 Years 20-25M.....and he's not a starter.

This free agency period has exploded in a big way....it used to be, just pick a college and you can make probably make as much overseas as you can as a 9th player in a rotation of an NBA team.

In this "new NBA market", you absolutely are making a 40M to 50M decision over the next 8 to 10 years....and you have to actually play lots of minutes in college to have a shot at it. If you pick the school based just on winning tradition, well, good luck to you.
Njhawk I like the thinking here. To piggy back one step further and to the right of your point here is the " Can EJ developed players with real talent ? ".
I believe the answer is yes. I believe EJ knows real talent, real mental competitive toughness. And I think he has that to work with with these two young men.
The unknown to my eye is how coachable are these two guys. I'm hoping and expecting the answer to be very coachable. If so not only will that impact current players on this team, but also throw color at other athletes looking on for the next couple of years. Eddie Jordan is a real asset a real talent and I believe he will prove that to the naysayers who doubt his ability to function at this level (which is rediculous to me) but time will tell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vascosg
Njhawk I like the thinking here. To piggy back one step further and to the right of your point here is the " Can EJ developed players with real talent ? ".
I believe the answer is yes. I believe EJ knows real talent, real mental competitive toughness. And I think he has that to work with with these two young men.
The unknown to my eye is how coachable are these two guys. I'm hoping and expecting the answer to be very coachable. If so not only will that impact current players on this team, but also throw color at other athletes looking on for the next couple of years. Eddie Jordan is a real asset a real talent and I believe he will prove that to the naysayers who doubt his ability to function at this level (which is rediculous to me) but time will tell.

Treau, I think Sanders is pretty coachable. Also, I think the length at which a coach can "develop" a player is overrated. A player has to want to develop himself. No one can force him in the gym during off hours, make him eat right, make him study-that must come from within.

Can we develop players?More like are we picking the right kind of kid with the right attitude that wants to get better himself.
 
Cousins is as good a big man and passer as any in the NBA...Stauskas escaping to Philly, doesn't change much, he's still one dimensional and doesn't add any other value to the NBA game. Okafor isn't as good as Cousins and will never be as good as Cousins is today....if Okafor has Cousins stats, he'd be halfway to the Hall of Fame.....the problem is Cousins just is a malcontent/troublemaker, but there is little doubt about his skill set, ability etc. Okafor has miles to go to approach Cousins right now on either end of the floor.

In any event, regarding EJ or staff "developing" players....I tend to place that emphasis on the player's work ethic and desire to improve, more than the staff molding or shaping a player. I would like to think freedom in an offense to create your own offense is one of the strengths of a guard heavy system like UConn had with Calhoun and now Kevin Ollie....it doesn't necessarily mean the player has the athleticism to succeed at an NBA level (Shabazz Napier, Shane Larkin were both elite college lead guards and both struggled out of the gate to capture minutes BUT both got drafted or looks because they were able to dominate their respective teams offense and carried a lot more weight for their programs on both ends of the floor.

I think it comes down to a player being highly recruited or ranked and how much of a "reputation" can that player develop by being seen consistently on the floor during his college career. Parker and Sanders have a unique chance because RU isn't a winning program, but they can be "credited" with turning a program from the basement to something over .500 or significantly better, if other pieces fall into place. I think Sanders and Parker are unique athletes and probably don't have the savvy of a Larkin, Napier or even a Ryan Boatright or a Yogi Ferrell, now at Indiana. But they have more explosion to their games in transition, so it depends on whether these players develop other aspects of their games when they don't get a chance to only play in transition/up tempo settings.

At least Larkin got a 1st round selection and is now approaching his 3rd season in the league after being traded from the Mavs to the Knicks last season.....he just signed with Brooklyn for a couple of years at 3M, which is kinda high, considering he has not played more than 1.5 seasons of total NBA action.....but he carries a 1st round grade and reputation and gets the benefit of the doubt probably for another 2 years. If he finds a niche as a defensive point guard that can spot minutes at point for 15 to 16 minutes a night somewhere, he might add another 4 to 5 years to his career.....at these revised salary amounts, that money tends to add up quickly.

The mention of the Harrison twins by Higgins was interesting...some scouts thought they were "too bulked up as freshman" and they both struggled with footspeed against quicker guards.....they both dropped weight and bulk to try and get quicker, but they are more along the lines of smarter, traditional guards....they are not going to beat anyone with footspeed. Someone like Russ Smith out of Louisville is a more explosive athlete and undersized, that just lacks the height of a Harrison twins who are 6'5 or 6'6"....
 
Treau, I think Sanders is pretty coachable. Also, I think the length at which a coach can "develop" a player is overrated. A player has to want to develop himself. No one can force him in the gym during off hours, make him eat right, make him study-that must come from within.

Can we develop players?More like are we picking the right kind of kid with the right attitude that wants to get better himself.
Higgs, NJhawk. In terms of player development. Guards in particular. Your not gonna be teaching them how to play the game. Cory, Kwe and the like know how to play the game. They will work because they love to play. You can see that in certain individuals. As guards, lead or off guard there will come a point in competition where you have to be taught tempo. How and when to identify your teammates need direction on the floor and or a lift, ie when is a good time for me to " take over " when is the 3 from me acceptable and or needed. How do I help my big man defend his area. Is this a good time to play to the crowd. What can I do to limit the oppositions momemtom without my coach having to call time out. I have a mismatch to what degree do I try to exploit that. Can I recognize what the defense is trying to do to me.
These are coaching points, developmental skills that need to be addressed in all players.
To me as long as Cory and Kwe and really any of our guys are really open and able to digest what EJ will try to share with them and I believe both kids are eager to improve because they have the dream. I think we are in for a treat.
To the guys who want to say we don't really know how good they are. Again. Time will tell. But my eyes tell me that we have not seen this type of athleticism since Steve Worthy and that's being generous to Steve.
Without knowing what the player on the floor will be until tipoff in November.
I love the talent package of both guys. I love to hear the two guys talk about playing. I love the way there former teammates react to their presence. If Kwe comes its Showtime.
If he does not then search continues for a Sanders running mate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vascosg
Good points trutu. The learning process of the game never stops. Thats what ej is here for.
 
Stauskas had 15 minutes per game in 73 appearances----you would be hard pressed to find many # 1's from last years draft who can say that.

Too early IMO to quit on a young player. Especially in the West which is a very hard conference on young guards.

Always a place for guys who can shoot-------reminds me of Kyle Korver.

We'll see.
 
Just read that WF is now going after a 2016 SG from Lakeland, FL actually. If this is indeed true is that huge news for RU possibly?
 
This might be an extreme example but do you think Towns would have been the #1 pick in the draft had he went to RU instead of Kentucky? Would he have lifted RU's program in one year with that supporting cast to demonstrate the same skills or might have some of his weaknesses been exposed by more minutes with a less talented cast. I am sure he would have been a very high pick just wondering if a kid that talented can take a risk of going to a lesser school and still rise to the top that quickly.
 
Well, I would have to say that this looks good for us if the above is true. This is always the start of disappointment in recruiting when I see RU start recruiting a future, or lesser player. In this case, it seems like the shoe might be on the other foot. If WF and RU are indeed the 2 top choices for Kwe, then I think we're in good shape. I haven't heard anything thus far about him visiting or scheduling visits to other schools, and I know that early to mid-July was supposed to be when he decides.
 
This might be an extreme example but do you think Towns would have been the #1 pick in the draft had he went to RU instead of Kentucky? Would he have lifted RU's program in one year with that supporting cast to demonstrate the same skills or might have some of his weaknesses been exposed by more minutes with a less talented cast. I am sure he would have been a very high pick just wondering if a kid that talented can take a risk of going to a lesser school and still rise to the top that quickly.
Maybe if he played the whole game (as opposed to the platoon at Ky) and had to carry the team (rather than have 7 other McD AAs to play with), he would have been seen as even better.
 
A kid like that becomes a better player at a UK.

Forget the minutes in the games and think about the fact that everything basketball related is better at a place like UK. The Strength and Conditioning is better , the Nutrition is better , you're better coached.

Then you factor in that your practicing against NBA guys every day .

Towns was banging heads every day with Caulley-Stein , Lyles and Johnson--------you get better doing that.
 
ADVERTISEMENT