Higgins A Draymont Green clone would be nice except for the anger and now violence he is now displaying off the court as well as on ..
3 new guys after their first full team workout
- Thread starter Tango Two
- Start date
Just for the record, as a freshman in the 1972-73 season Sellers averaged 20.0 ppg and 10.4 rpg. He was a srar even at that time.
If you include in your "everyone who has seen him" list D1 recruiters, you'd be saying something different.
It's a picture. He's barely in the strength and conditioning program yet. Let's see him play some games against B1G teams and in shape before we start declaring him a success and moving him to the 4. Ah, the off season.
And he was Phil Sellers. An off season photo has led to a comparison of a lightly recruited new arrival who hasn't been in a game yet to Phil Sellers. OK.
I just don't understand why some of you are so critical of our guys. I would think you would be supporting them instead of tearing them down. If you can't say something nice about someone than don't say anything at all. I learned that as a child many years ago and still believe in the saying.
Just responding to absurd postings that ridiculously overinflate the abilities and potential of our players as per usual.
Well for one I know you are not on that list. Curious why you need to be a D1 recruiter to see if he busts his ass all game.
Bullock is the type of player that a Cincinnati, West Virginia and Marquette always seemed to have--an undersized bull that could physically dominate the boards and score 15 points and 9 rebounds while no one noticed. He is exactly what we need.....
Overinflate?
Lets look at what our starting lineup will be and tell me if our "fans" are overinflating as usual:
PG Corey Sanders - Rivals top 100 Player
SG Nigel Johnson 3 star on every site
SF Laurent 3 star on every site/ Thiam 3 star on every site (and 247 top 250 composite)
PF Deshawn Freeman Rivals top 100 player (but was rated after the last top 150 list)
C - Shaq Doorson - #16 center and 4 star on ESPN, #34 Center in the nation and 3 star on 247 composite
The only person that we are "overinflating" will be the 4th or 5th person off the bench
Wills, don't worry, no one is getting too positive here. No need to go crazy. We do not want anything positive.
I am not sure anyone is saying he would be a success. I mentioned him having the mentality of being someone that plays down low, and he also adds a shooting presence. For three minutes, maybe they could play some small ball while still having a couple powers under the basket.
Not sure what the intent of this post is, but it seems like many people have certainly set expectations very high for Johnson and Laurent compared to the 3* ratings you site from the rating agencies.
There are alot of people that have said very very very good things about Johnson. People who know alot about basketball like sports writers and even BK.
As far as Laurent, he scored 8 ppg last year as a freshman. Is that not solid? Numbers don't lie.
This is not a top starting lineup
PG Corey Sanders - Rivals top 100 Player - Very good player. Star Potential
SG Nigel Johnson 3 star on every site - Who knows until the games start. Wasn't special at previous school
SF Laurent 3 star on every site/ Thiam 3 star on every site (and 247 top 250 composite) - Laurent was ok. Needs lots of developing to be a difference maker. Thiam needs to develop also.
PF Deshawn Freeman Rivals top 100 player (but was rated after the last top 150 list) Good Player, but small for the B1G. Think he'll be ok for us.
C - Shaq Doorson - #16 center and 4 star on ESPN, #34 Center in the nation and 3 star on 247 composit He wasn't any good his freshman year and is coming off a serious injury. Hopefully he will develop.
You generally need lots of legit 4 stars in basketball to play at a high level. Rutgers biggest problem over the last couple of decades is we recruit 1 or 2 star players and a bunch of spare parts. You can't win this way. And then us fans over inflate our players ability and act like it's a big deal because 1 site has our players as a top 150 or top 250 player.
Then say that, and don't go back to 3* Rivals rankings. Saying Johnson and Laurent are 3* by all rating agencies is meaningless. Stars aren't a great measure to begin with, but after a season (or more) at the college level are little more than a pre-college benchmark to compare actual performance to.
Sanders - Proven player, high level of talent, should grow as a sophomore and under Pikiell's guidance.
Johnson - Saw very little court time at Kansas, reports out of practice are good, hopefully he excels after a year away from live competition and in his first season-long starting role
Laurent - Showed a lot of promise as a true freshman playing largely out of position, hopefully excels in a more natural position for him Pikiell's scheme
Thiam - The only one whose star ratings, offers, and scout comments really apply... and he is a 3* with a short offer sheet, who really needs some time to develop.
Freeman - Showed a lot of promise, but has been injured in two consecutive years. Hopefully stays healthy.
Doorson - Has seen limited court time, really need to control his fouling (41 fouls in 298 min played... and Diallo had 41 fouls in 216 min played). Coming off an injury year.
Can't forget Williams, either, who will definitely be in the guard rotation. Will also see minutes from Sa and Bullock, given the short bench this season.
Our lineup offers a lot of versatility. I have messaged some of the coaches and we all agree that to get better, we need defense, and making sure we do not foul.
Freeman- saw a really short sample of him. In that time, I liked him and Sanders chemistry.
Laurent-like him a lot. Solid slasher.
Thiam-high hopes for thiam because he has high hopes for himself. Worker.
Still need to see the team pass more, become more selfless. We have had a lot of players out for themselves.I will never get why kids would rather get decent stats for themselves, but walk around depressed in the lockerroom after getting blown out by 20 each game. If Pikiell can get players to drive and truly dish, we could be decent and very competitive. If the hands stay straight up in the paint, we will be a lot better off. A lot.
So now he's going for 15 and 9. And no one will notice that. OK.
Curious that you left out Bullock, the focus of the comment.
Noone is saying that we are a final four team. But in order to compete you don't need a lineup of five star players. There are many major conference teams that do well with a lineup of three stars with a sprinkle of top 100 players just like us. Too many people say that this team has zero talent and that is simply a lie. There is plenty of talent to win a bunch of games. In my opinion the only thing that will hold us back from NIT contention is that we have to be real lucky with injuries with only ten scholarship players.
Oh and one more thing how many games have you seen Freeman play? I watched plenty of his games including JUCO. He is GREAT at boxing out and getting in position. And Rivals agreed with me by making him a four star. He will be our best low post player since Kent (who was shorter than him).
Felt from the beginning that Bullock would be way better than the posters allotting minutes thought. A tweener who plays bigger than he is. If he were a couple of inches taller, he wouldn't be here.
TL
TL
Where are the shooters on this team?
Can anyone score on the block(Freeman)? Is Freeman big enough? He's listed as 6'7" so is he really 6'5"?
I really, really hope this team somehow makes the NIT, but I just don't see it happening. Hopefully, the players will get much better coaching and develop.
Excited to see what these guys can do, but I think people are overrating Bullock. I really like that we recruited him and gave him a spot on the team, especially being a local guy. This is a type of player that goes to a different school and puts up decent numbers, and then we all complain about why we didn't recruit him. However to expect much out of him as a freshman is a typical Rutgers fan reaction. Guys like Bullock are players that develop into an important role (either energy guy off the bench, banging down low as a 3, or bringing some physicality and shooting to the 2 position) as upper class men in winning programs. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not expecting much out of him as a freshmen, he was barely recruited by any other power 5 schools. To expect him to really help the team as a freshman in the B1G seems to be setting yourself up for disappointment.
So, it was too much to look across all major conferences, so I just looked at the Big Ten. Specifically, I looked back over the last 6 seasons to find teams that finished .500 or better in conference at least three times... or, more simply, teams that won at least half their games at least half the time (included Maryland in this, too, by looking at both their Big Ten and ACC conference records).
There were 8 teams that fit that description: MSU/Wisconsin/OSU (6 times), Michigan (5 times), Indiana/Purdue/Iowa (4 times), Maryland (3 times)
From there, I looked back in Rivals to see their player star ratings from 2007-2015, which would account for the seniors of 6 years ago through the freshmen of last year. Here's what I found:
# of four and five star players committed over those 9 seasons:
22: OSU
18: MSU
16: Indiana
15: Purdue
13: Michigan, Maryland
6: Wisconsin
2: Iowa
Wisconsin and Iowa are the only two teams that have consistently done well (winning half their conference games at least half the time) without averaging at least 1.4 four or five star player commitments per year.
I'm not sure I gather anything from those numbers because the majority are final four contenders. I'm saying we can compete with what we have.
On a side note since you decided to go back nine years we have a few more four stars during that time as well if you include Rosario, Ech, Miller, Mack(?), etc.
Our guards are decent shooters - Sanders, Williams, and Johnson can all shoot a little bit. Bullock can shoot. I've always said we need to recruit bigger guys that can shoot, but those guys don't grow on trees. Thiam might be that guy down the line, but we need more of them to compete. You watch tournament teams and they've got at a minimum three guys that can shoot the three on the court at a time.
The post was in response to the idea that teams can consistently be good in major conferences with just 3* players and a sprinkle of top 100 players. The teams that have consistently done well in our conference over the past 6 years have largely done it with quite a few players who are 4* are better. Yes, this includes Final Four contenders... we happen to be in a conference that has a lot of top teams, not just a major conference but one of the best conferences in the country.
Iowa and Wisconsin have done a very good job remaining competitive with players less heralded by recruiting sites (Kaminsky was a 3*, for instance), so it's certainly possible to field a team that does better than .500 in conference with few 4 star or better commitments.
If we look at the top 8 players (by minutes played) of the Big Ten last year, we find:
Winning conference teams:
Indiana: 1 five star, 3 four star, 3 three star, 1 NR
MSU: 5 four star, 2 three star, 1 two star
Maryland: 2 five star, 3 four star, 3 three star
Purdue: 1 five star, 3 four star, 3 three star, 1 NR
Iowa: 2 four star, 5 three star, 1 NR
Wisconsin: 1 four star, 5 three star, 2 NR
Ohio State: 1 five star, 6 four star, 1 three star
Michigan: 2 five star, 2 four star, 4 three star
Overall, these teams averaged 50% of their top 8 players (by minutes) being four star or better, 4.8 of their top 8 if you take out Iowa and Wisconsin (who had none). Overall average star rating of these players was 3.36.
Losing conference teams:
Northwestern: 1 four star, 7 three star
PA St: 5 three star, 3 NR
Nebraska: 3 four star, 3 three star, 2 NR
Illinois: 4 four star, 3 three star, 1 NR
Minnesota: 1 four star, 6 three star, 1 NR
Rutgers: 1 four star, 5 three star, 2 NR
Overall, these teams averaged 21% (1.7) of their top 8 players (by minutes) being four star or better. Average star rating of these players was 2.65.
Iowa and Wisconsin are really the model of doing more with less heavily recruited kids, but they seem to be the exception rather than the norm. Will see how Wisconsin fares going forward, too, now that Bo Ryan has retired due to health reasons.
We have two four stars on the team.
Once
Choppin-
In the last 6 seasons:
-Northwestern has gone 101-95 including 2 twenty win seasons
-Minnesota has gone 112-93 including an NCAA birth and an NIT Championship
-Illinois is 114-90, been in the post season four out of those six years, and has twice made it to the second round of the NCAA tournament
So there are a few more models for you.
And we have two 4 stars not one (Sanders and Freeman).
I too don't want to go through the effort of going through every league. Please don't make me do that to make my point that a bunch of three stars with a couple of 4 stars can win.
Once
Choppin-
In the last 6 seasons:
-Northwestern has gone 101-95 including 2 twenty win seasons
-Minnesota has gone 112-93 including an NCAA birth and an NIT Championship
-Illinois is 114-90, been in the post season four out of those six years, and has twice made it to the second round of the NCAA tournament
So there are a few more models for you.
And we have two 4 stars not one (Sanders and Freeman).
I too don't want to go through the effort of going through every league. Please don't make me do that to make my point that a bunch of three stars with a couple of 4 stars can win.
Sanders shot 41.3%, 31.5% from three, 71.3 from the line.
Williams shot 38.0%, 31.6% from three, 79.6 from the line
Johnson shot 36.9%, 27.4% from three, 67.6 from the line at KSU
Bullock has never taken a shot.
And until somebody shows otherwise, those are by far RU's best shooters. Laurent can't shoot a lick from 3.
Not sure why you cherry picked Johnson's freshman stats from KSU - his sophomore year he shot 40% and 34% from 3. I acknowledged that we need to be much better to compete at a high level, but we have three guys who have shown they can shoot a bit, and Bullock and Thiam should hopefully spread the floor as well.
Our Centers can't shoot.
Our PF is a decent shooter
Our Wing is not a good shooter
Our 2's haven't proven they can shoot
Our 1 can shoot decently and create his own shot.
Bullock is supposedly a good shooter. Thiam is a work in progress and Sa can't shoot.
Who's going to score?
JS,
Who the hell is Bingo Long and his All Stars. I know you are a few years older than me, but I've never heard of that.
Sanders showed an ability to shoot at times last year that I didn't expect based on the rep and highlight reels coming in and I'll give him a pass on his percentage since he had no help. Williams has shown over two years that he cannot shoot. I don't care what he did in high school. We all hope he will turn it around but taking shots does not make one a shooter. I'm actually more concerned about our backcourt's ability to guard given the utter lack of size at that position.
If you're talking about Freeman's shooting as the PF, that remains to be seen. He didn't show any ability to hit a jump shot much less an outside shot in the limited time he played. He was nifty around the basket against the undersized teams in the early season but he was injured before he had to match up with the bigger Big Ten interior players.
Not sure why you guys keep asking the same questions - I've acknowledged multiple times that we are not a good shooting team and need to recruit better in that regard. I simply pointed out that we have three decent three-point shooters in Sanders, Williams, and Johnson and potentially two of the newcomers can help as well. Also most college teams don't have centers and power forwards that can shoot all that well, certainly not from three. We need to recruit SF's who can shoot well, though, and if Thiam can spread the floor he will be a big help.
Thanks Colonel.
I saw so little of Freeman last year I forgot his shooting ability. I'm hoping he's big enough to handle the large front lines in the B1G.
I really hope our coaches emphasize Defense because it will be the same old if they can't defend. We really need to recruit players who can shoot from the outside.
You're ignoring the facts and kind of contradicting yourself here. Williams made more three's (50) last year than Sanders and shot a higher percentage from three.
You're right.
We need centers who can score down low. We need Williams and Johnson to shoot much better than they have in their previous seasons. Corey shot better than I thought he would. Laurent is easy to root for but he can't shoot. He's a power forward in a small forwards body. I hope he can improve a whole lot.
