ADVERTISEMENT

2018 4 Star Center Mamadou Doucoure

With the Uconn offer I will take a guess that this is someone Karl Hobbs has been on since he was at Uconn the last few years.
 
The kid is raw, but very athletic. He has a great deal of upside. He would be an excellent addition if we landed him.
 
St. John's has been the presumed leader for some time. There is a fair amount of instability at St. John's at the moment. If they can get past that and get their season turned around they will be tough on the recruiting trail. That said, the fan base is upset, and more importantly, some major boosters are upset. It is more than wins and losses - which has been troubling. There are larger questions about the entire program that are unexpected. If it enables us to obtain a commitment from this kid, that will be a very nice development for us.
 
Bdodger2 said:
St. John's has been the presumed leader for some time. There is a fair amount of instability at St. John's at the moment. If they can get past that and get their season turned around they will be tough on the recruiting trail. That said, the fan base is upset, and more importantly, some major boosters are upset. It is more than wins and losses - which has been troubling. There are larger questions about the entire program that are unexpected. If it enables us to obtain a commitment from this kid, that will be a very nice development for us.
Click to expand...

As if I needed a reason to enjoy their losses
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUKeystone, Scarlet83, MikeR0102 and 4 others
I would favor trying to get players who aren't projects .Rutgers needs higher level recruits to successfully compete in the B1G.
 
RU-Choppin-Ohio said:
Offers from Uconn, Pitt, Seton Hall and St. Johns are not good enough for you ? o_O
Click to expand...
The schools cited in your message already have better talent than Rutgers which gives them the luxury to take a recruit that needs time to develop.Rutgers will be losing at least 4 players to graduation in 2018 and will need immediate help.
 
I think having a W/L above 10 is higher than what a lot of pundits thought this team would do at the start of the season. We started this season ranked rather poorly by everyone.
 
RUJMM78 said:
The schools cited in your message already have better talent than Rutgers which gives them the luxury to take a recruit that needs time to develop.Rutgers will be losing at least 4 players to graduation in 2018 and will need immediate help.
Click to expand...

No offers? Clearly, a lower caliber player.
Good offers? Clearly, those schools can afford to take a risk on a lower caliber player.

Can't win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DanceAppreciationTA, ScarletDave, KevH and 11 others
Bdodger2 said:
St. John's has been the presumed leader for some time. There is a fair amount of instability at St. John's at the moment. If they can get past that and get their season turned around they will be tough on the recruiting trail. That said, the fan base is upset, and more importantly, some major boosters are upset. It is more than wins and losses - which has been troubling. There are larger questions about the entire program that are unexpected. If it enables us to obtain a commitment from this kid, that will be a very nice development for us.
Click to expand...
Dodger always appreciate your honest input. I asked on the round table for a recruiting update but didnt get too much of a response. Is there any news out there
 
RUJMM78 said:
I would favor trying to get players who aren't projects .Rutgers needs higher level recruits to successfully compete in the B1G.
Click to expand...
How many freshmen centers actually make an impact as freshmen? Most of the time, they pick up garbage time minutes or play infrequently due to foul trouble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg
Rhuarc said:
How many freshmen centers actually make an impact as freshmen? Most of the time, they pick up garbage time minutes or play infrequently due to foul trouble.
Click to expand...
This.... Big men that can make big impacts as freshman are usually one and done types. We have a shot at Reid but outside of that we are not ready to be recruiting that level of player. Top 100 big is exactly what we need. Shaq and Diallo will have to develop and lead as seniors up front.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rhuarc
RUJMM78 said:
The schools cited in your message already have better talent than Rutgers which gives them the luxury to take a recruit that needs time to develop.Rutgers will be losing at least 4 players to graduation in 2018 and will need immediate help.
Click to expand...
We haven't been to NCAA in 25 years, recent history of losing, abuse and neglect. Only this year has been positive. If you were 4* player that doesn't need development would u choose RU over existing powerhouse/perennial Tourney attender? This is a 5 year rebuild to get us to that level. We have to prove our coach can turn around a bottom barrel team, start to Win, make post season, make NCAAs. It's a long process and won't happen overnight. We all need more patience.
 
It certainly feels like St Johns will have a different coach within two seasons, the way things are going there now. I would imagine that would be a factor for anyone that didn't grow up dreaming up playing for the Johnnies.
 
djrc - thanks for the props. I know there are other posters on the board who have advised we are involved with a high level player in the Class of 2017. I concede that I have no idea who that player is. If it happens that will be a good development, and depending upon how he is viewed by 2018 recruits could have an impact upon them as well.

In terms of 2018 I agree that we have made a positive impression upon Naz Reid. That said, absent a very strong second half to this season, it is unlikely we can land him. Although we as RU fans acknowledge this is the first season for this staff, and will be happy with a 16 win season and no blowouts, that is not how elite recruits evaluate things. Reid, and others, will need to see more in order to consider us seriously. It may be unfair in our view as fans, but it is not unfair for recruits whose lives are actually impacted by these developments. At this point I would guess Reid winds up at Villanova.

That said, there are recruits in the top 75-top 150 range who could be open to RU. It is just too early to tell. Let's see what the next ten games show. That will have an impact as much as anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: higgins3 and djrc89
Rufaninga said:
We haven't been to NCAA in 25 years, recent history of losing, abuse and neglect. Only this year has been positive. If you were 4* player that doesn't need development would u choose RU over existing powerhouse/perennial Tourney attender? This is a 5 year rebuild to get us to that level. We have to prove our coach can turn around a bottom barrel team, start to Win, make post season, make NCAAs. It's a long process and won't happen overnight. We all need more patience.
Click to expand...
Yes if we're trending in opposite directions in a top league and the kids have half a brain...in a few yrs those schools won't even be in our league..just regional players to us as national...
 
The basketball trend is one that is moving away from "Power 5" dominance.

You can see the same trends in recruiting. A significant amount of the players in the Rivals Top 150 are committed to schools that aren't members of the "Power 5." At least 32 out of the 136 committed prospects in the Top 150 are committed to schools that aren't in a Power 5 conference. You had 32 last year commit to schools that aren't in a Power 5 conference.

Schools like VCU, George Mason & Butler making the Final Four blew the doors wide open. The Big East breaking off from the football only schools cemented that trend. Villanova winning last year really firmed it up.Thus, it's not like the old days where every team in a Power Conference was expected to get at least 1 Top 150 recruit a year. Nor is it likely anymore that will happen. It's a lot harder to split 118 players among 65 or so schools, than 150 players among around 75 schools. However, it's not a death knell at all.

That's because there is more talent than ever before in the sport. You have a larger proliferation of talent available for the sport as a result of people moving away from football (See: concussions), and the overseas/Canadian talent becoming a bigger deal in the sport. This is great. It means the guy you picked up just outside the Top 150 might not be the giant step down he would have been, in the old days.

Honestly, your league only starts to mean something when competing with a school in the lower end of the A10. If we were recruiting against an upper end A-10 team like let's say VCU for a prospect, they would have the edge on us.
 
It's interesting how statistics can be misused. I strongly disagree with your assertion that the power 5 is trending down. Just take a look at the the final 4 teams over the past 10 years. 80% come from power 5 conf. and that does not include UCONN who was in the Big East when it was a power conf. In fact over the past 5 years, the power 5 has trended up in that 85% has been power 5 teams. The facts just don't back up your claim.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ruready07
Over the last 10 years, 13 of 80 (16.3%) Elite Eight teams were from mid/low-major conferences (including UConn's 2014 appearance as part of the AAC).
2016 - 1 (Nova)
2015 - 1 (Gonzaga)
2014 - 2 (Dayton, UConn - AAC)
2013 - 1 (Wichita State)
2012 - 1 (Butler)
2011 - 2 (Butler, VCU)
2010 - 1 (Butler)
2009 - 0
2008 - 3 (Memphis, Xavier, Davidson)
2007 - 1 (Memphis)

Over the previous 10 years, 11 of 80 (13.8%) Elite Eight teams were from mid/low-major conferences
2006 - 2 (Memphis, George Mason)
2005 - 0
2004 - 2 (St. Joe's, Xavier)
2003 - 1 (Marquette)
2002 - 1 (Kent State)
2001 - 1 (Temple)
2000 - 1 (Tulsa)
1999 - 2 (Temple, Gonzaga)
1998 - 1 (Rhode Island)
1997 - 0

Over the previous 10 years, 7 of 80 (8.8%) were from mid/low-major conferences (take out Temple, and it was just 3 of 80)..
1996 - 1 (UMass)
1995 - 0
1994 - 0
1993 - 1 (Temple)
1992 - 2 (Cincy, Memphis St)
1991 - 1 (Temple)
1990 - 1 (Loyola Marymount)
1989 - 0
1988 - 1 (Temple)
1987 - 0

So the period from 2007-16 saw almost 2x as many mid/low-major teams reaching the Elite Eight as the period from 1987-96

Edit: I'm wondering if the exposure gained by expanded TV coverage over the last 20 years has helped some of the mid/low-major programs pull in recruits. In 1985, you'd be much much less likely to ever get on TV in a mid/low major conference than you are in 2017.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vascosg
Again the trend in the final 4 is up for power 5 over past 5 years. Hard to deny facts.

BTW your data is way off, Memphis was not in the final 4 in 2007 and 2008 was Kansas, Memphis, UCLA & North Carolina. There are more errors but I'll let you verify them yourself. If I include Big East teams in 20 year statistics (2007 - Georgetown, 2009 - UCONN & Villanova, 2010 - WVU, 2011 UCONN, 2012 - Louisville & 2013 - Louisville & Syracuse) the stats go to 83% power 5. Still lower than the 5 year trend of 85%.
 
Last edited:
LOU-RU85 said:
It's interesting how statistics can be misused. I strongly disagree with your assertion that the power 5 is trending down. Just take a look at the the final 4 teams over the past 10 years. 80% come from power 5 conf. and that does not include UCONN who was in the Big East when it was a power conf. In fact over the past 5 years, the power 5 has trended up in that 85% has been power 5 teams. The facts just don't back up your claim.
Click to expand...
Not to mention the tons of extra P5 money available for the coaches and perks like newer and grander facilitie....exposure guarantees etc etc...even UCONN is sliding fast outsideWBB and I credit that to Geno...or the Auriemma effect !!
 
RUChoppin said:
No offers? Clearly, a lower caliber player.
Good offers? Clearly, those schools can afford to take a risk on a lower caliber player.

Can't win.
Click to expand...
If he was a battle ready stud, he would be bad because he's one and done. No, you can't win.
 
LOU-RU85 said:
Again the trend in the final 4 is up for power 5 over past 5 years. Hard to deny facts.

BTW your data is way off, Memphis was not in the final 4 in 2007 and 2008 was Kansas, Memphis, UCLA & North Carolina. There are more errors but I'll let you verify them yourself. If I include Big East teams in 20 year statistics (2007 - Georgetown, 2009 - UCONN & Villanova, 2010 - WVU, 2011 UCONN, 2012 - Louisville & 2013 - Louisville & Syracuse) the stats go to 83% power 5. Still lower than the 5 year trend of 85%.
Click to expand...
Not sure if you were referencing me. I listed teams in the Elite Eight, not the Final Four.
 
LOU-RU85 said:
It's interesting how statistics can be misused. I strongly disagree with your assertion that the power 5 is trending down. Just take a look at the the final 4 teams over the past 10 years. 80% come from power 5 conf. and that does not include UCONN who was in the Big East when it was a power conf. In fact over the past 5 years, the power 5 has trended up in that 85% has been power 5 teams. The facts just don't back up your claim.
Click to expand...

I could say this is a case of statistics being misused to present a point that wouldn't probably be backed up by any other metric. You can extend it out to the past 15 years and your data would show you something completely different.
 
You have made my point. Statistics can be used to make a case. There are always more ways to minipulate the data to make a point. However, if you are looking at recent trends, 10 years is a reasonable window.
 
So what you are saying is using stats to judge anything is meaningless.

Yeah, tell that to Theo Epstein.

More like, we have two separate sets of data points that point to Power Five power decreasing. You just have your one.
 
That's what you are saying. I feel the stats I am pointing out are relevant to your argument - your the one saying the trend is down for power 5 but you have to pull in 15 years of data to make your point. Resent trends are more relevant IMHO. If the lower teams were recruiting better more would show up in the top spots. That's simply not happening.
 
Recent trends tend to support my point.

We can talk about championships. We can talk about the finals. We can talk teams in the tournament. We can talk the NIT.

You have the Final Four. Cool.
 
RUJMM78 said:
I would favor trying to get players who aren't projects .Rutgers needs higher level recruits to successfully compete in the B1G.
Click to expand...
What...Is this stupid comment. Are you out of your frigging mind?
 
Sure if you go on the general bball board & post how we are a better program than VCU, Gonzaga, SD State & New Mexico in b-ball by virtue of conference.

That is my basic point after all. Your point is to disagree with that premise.
 
Last edited:
RUChoppin said:
Over the last 10 years, 13 of 80 (16.3%) Elite Eight teams were from mid/low-major conferences (including UConn's 2014 appearance as part of the AAC).
2016 - 1 (Nova)
2015 - 1 (Gonzaga)
2014 - 2 (Dayton, UConn - AAC)
2013 - 1 (Wichita State)
2012 - 1 (Butler)
2011 - 2 (Butler, VCU)
2010 - 1 (Butler)
2009 - 0
2008 - 3 (Memphis, Xavier, Davidson)
2007 - 1 (Memphis)

Over the previous 10 years, 11 of 80 (13.8%) Elite Eight teams were from mid/low-major conferences
2006 - 2 (Memphis, George Mason)
2005 - 0
2004 - 2 (St. Joe's, Xavier)
2003 - 1 (Marquette)
2002 - 1 (Kent State)
2001 - 1 (Temple)
2000 - 1 (Tulsa)
1999 - 2 (Temple, Gonzaga)
1998 - 1 (Rhode Island)
1997 - 0

Over the previous 10 years, 7 of 80 (8.8%) were from mid/low-major conferences (take out Temple, and it was just 3 of 80)..
1996 - 1 (UMass)
1995 - 0
1994 - 0
1993 - 1 (Temple)
1992 - 2 (Cincy, Memphis St)
1991 - 1 (Temple)
1990 - 1 (Loyola Marymount)
1989 - 0
1988 - 1 (Temple)
1987 - 0

So the period from 2007-16 saw almost 2x as many mid/low-major teams reaching the Elite Eight as the period from 1987-96

Edit: I'm wondering if the exposure gained by expanded TV coverage over the last 20 years has helped some of the mid/low-major programs pull in recruits. In 1985, you'd be much much less likely to ever get on TV in a mid/low major conference than you are in 2017.
Click to expand...

I can't buy into the argument that the Big East is a mid major conference. It is a non-football conference but an excellent basketball conference and is not a mid major. They have 4 top 20 teams currently while Big 10 has 3.
 
It is not a Power 5 conference.

The general theme with b-ball is that high major/mid-major distinctions are very blurry now.
 
High major / mid major / low major has always been fairly blurry. Easiest shorthand is the BCS/P5 schools, then everyone else... though at times other conferences have warranted inclusion.

Could definitely see an argument being made that the Big East is still a "high major" conference given their current performance this season. Still, over its first three seasons it only managed to get a single team as far as the Elite Eight (Nova in 2016), and just two as far as the Sweet Sixteen (Nova in 2016; Xavier in 2015).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bac2therac

GAME 6 NOTRE DAME: Thanks for Harper.

Replies
8
Views
1K
Men's Basketball
charliem24
C
A

Blacksburg in a "NUT"Shell!!!

Replies
30
Views
2K
The Round Table
RU848789
RU848789
bac2therac

GAME 8 WAKE FOREST: About lipsticks and pigs

Replies
46
Views
1K
Men's Basketball
fatsam98
fatsam98
Richie O

Basketball Rutgers Hoops Offseason Notebook: Recruit Scoop + Asst. Coach rumors

Replies
42
Views
3K
The Round Table
RU82
R
kcg88

2022-23 Transfer Watch

Replies
848
Views
78K
Men's Basketball
NewJerseyHawk
NewJerseyHawk
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back