He ended up here anyway. What’s your problem?
Paul Mulcahy #99 on ESPN's final 2019 rankings
- Thread starter kcg88
- Start date
I understand where you are going with this but I think what your are discounting is that other schools fail at the same rate that we do with four star kids. The difference is they recruit a lot more of them so the ones that don’t pan out don’t stick out as much. We needed to follow up the Jack Mack class with another group of highly rated guys so that they could replace the recruits from that class that didn’t pan out. That didn’t happen as we were close with Jenkins and the other guy who went to Nova. Those guys got derailed by the tapes that were leaked. Duke and Kentucky have 5 star guys that don’t get drafted all the time but nobody cares because they recruit so many that get drafted. We won’t win until we are consistently landing four star guys.
And Geo was our second best, he was not a 4* either.
This.
Four star players have a hit/miss rate - they don't all live up to their billing. Three star players also have a hit/miss rate, as do guys with five and two stars. As you climb up the "star system", the hit rate tends to get better - but it never reaches 100%.
Rivals has 130+ guys each year rated 4-star or better.... and only 60 guys get drafted each year (and they're certainly not all 4-star-or-better college players). So, more than 50% of guys rated 4-stars or higher end up not playing in the NBA.
Only getting a small handful of four-star players, and having a low hit rate on those players, is too small a sample size. There will always be four-star misses around the country (most aren't NBA bound) - the trick is to reach a critical mass of four-star players so that the misses get absorbed.
Just going by Rivals star-ratings back to 2002, we've had 14 guys in 18 seasons rated 4-star (0.78 per season):
Harper (2018)
Mathis (2018)
Doucoure (2017)
Sanders (2015)
Freeman (2015)
Jack (2011)
Seagears (2011)
Miller (2009)
Rosario (2008)
Echenique (2008)
Chandler (2007)
N'diaye (2006)
Inman (2005)
Douby (2003)
We had a few misses in there, but most of those guys were contributors (either for RU or somewhere else after transferring) and most ended up playing professionally somewhere (though only N'diaye and Douby spent any time in the NBA).
Compare that to the hit rate on our lower rated players. While it's great to have gems like Baker, Omoruyi, Mack, etc.... we have far more 3-star guys who end up not being contributors.
No doubt the hit rate for 4 stars is high for every school. It is going to be lower for the less attractive schools.
Thanks. There is no debating the talent for most guys on this list. For most that wasn't the problem. Also I have highlighted those who had a good senior season.
This is how Schiano did it and how Pike will do it.
I have said the build is in phases.
Not far away from the phase where Pikiell can get Anthony Davis and Kenny Britt. Program could use some luck with Syracuse coach getting fired and 3 guys falling in our lap.
Need Hopkins to stay at Washington (where he's pulling in five stars) when Boeheim goes.
Yeah, talent wasn't usually the problem.... lost a lot of guys before that senior season.
Of the 11 players who are old enough to have had a senior season, only 5 were at Rutgers for theirs (N'Diaye, Freeman, Jack, Miller, Inman)... and I'd say that N'Diaye, Freeman, and Jack all had solid senior campaigns, while Miller/Inman suffered from coaching changes.
Two guys left early to go pro (Douby, Sanders) after team-leading junior seasons, 3 transferred (Echenique/Rosario/Seagears), and 1 was dismissed (Chandler)
Interesting that we haven't had a single 4-star guard make it to their senior season in that time.
Hamady N'diaye was our only guy since 2006 to play four years here under the same coach.
Fixing that is issue #1 (Eugene will accomplish that this season... Issa would have as well, but, y'know). Then the next year Baker and potentially Kiss if you count his redshirt year.
We had a lost decade between Waters and Pikiell where there was a complete inability to instill a culture and generate momentum. Hopefully that is turning.
Fixing that is issue #1 (Eugene will accomplish that this season... Issa would have as well, but, y'know). Then the next year Baker and potentially Kiss if you count his redshirt year.
We had a lost decade between Waters and Pikiell where there was a complete inability to instill a culture and generate momentum. Hopefully that is turning.
Bingo!! (IMO) the issue hasn't been our hit/miss rate with highly regarded kids, but rather our inability to get those highly regarded kids to play here for four years. There was a stretch in the (end of)Waters/Hill/Rice/Jordan years where something like 3 of the players we had recruited as freshman made it to Senior Day over a 10 year span (something like 30 recruits). More than any other factor (imo) our inability to have kids play here for four years has been our biggest issue.
There are 4 or 5 on that list that had character flaws that transcended who the coach was. And those character flaws were probably the reason they ended up at Rutgers. This is what needs to be avoided going forward.
Exactly.
I'd like to see us follow the Michigan State model. Izzo never gets the flashy recruits that Duke, UNC or KY get, but he gets guys to stay 3 or 4 years and develop.
Izzo pretty consistently gets Top 100 guys (20 in the last 10 classes, 10 in the last 4 classes), and fairly regularly pulls in Top 30 guys (8 in the last 10 classes, 5 in the last 4 classes).
Rivals Top 100 guys:
2018: #61 Bingham, #65 Loyer
2017 - #6 Jackson, #86 Tillman
2016: #10 Bridges, #20 Langford, #29 Winston, #41 Ward
2015: #26 Davis, #84 McQuaid
2014: #62 Nairn
2012: #25 Harris, #81 Valentine, #83 Costello
2011: #20 Dawson, #95 Anderson
2010: #20 Payne, #38 Appling
2009: #69 Nix, #75 Sherman
Had some free time, so here it is. (I only included players who (i think) made it to campus)**:
'07: Sofman/Coburn/Pettis/Chandler- 4 recruits/1 Senior day
'08: Patrick Jackson/Christian Morris/Rosario/Echenique: 4 recruits/0 Senior Day
'09: Beatty/Austin Johnson/Miller/Brian Okam: 4 recruits/3 Senior day
'10: Poole/Carroll/Biruta: 3 recruits/0 Senior Day
'11: Mack/Jack/Carter/Lewis/Seagears/Randall/Kone: 7 recruits/2 Senior day
'12: No recruits (Did Vince Garrett ever make it to campus?)
'13: Campbell/Brown/Etou: 3 recruits/0 Senior day
'14: Mi. Williams/Diallo/Bishop Daniels/Foreman: 4 recruits/2 Senior Day
'15: Freeman/Sanders/Laurent/Goode: 4 recruits/1 Senior day
That totals to 33 recruits and 9 kids who made it Senior day over 9 classes. Ugh.
** I used Rivals commitment list
'07: Sofman/Coburn/Pettis/Chandler- 4 recruits/1 Senior day
'08: Patrick Jackson/Christian Morris/Rosario/Echenique: 4 recruits/0 Senior Day
'09: Beatty/Austin Johnson/Miller/Brian Okam: 4 recruits/3 Senior day
'10: Poole/Carroll/Biruta: 3 recruits/0 Senior Day
'11: Mack/Jack/Carter/Lewis/Seagears/Randall/Kone: 7 recruits/2 Senior day
'12: No recruits (Did Vince Garrett ever make it to campus?)
'13: Campbell/Brown/Etou: 3 recruits/0 Senior day
'14: Mi. Williams/Diallo/Bishop Daniels/Foreman: 4 recruits/2 Senior Day
'15: Freeman/Sanders/Laurent/Goode: 4 recruits/1 Senior day
That totals to 33 recruits and 9 kids who made it Senior day over 9 classes. Ugh.
** I used Rivals commitment list
He does consistently get top 100 guys, as you state.
But, he does not get the clear one and dones that Duke, UNC and KY go for and get. He does not have to rebuild every year and is able to rely on upperclassmen, which is more to my point and what we have been lacking.
3 of those 9 werent 4 year guys.
Grand total of 6 (actually 7) HS played all 4 years here.
Coburn
Miller
Austin Johnson
Mack
Jack
Lewis (I think you missed him BTW)
Mike Williams
You just keep repeating your opinion over and over again without any evidence that other schools have a higher hit rate on 4 star guys. There's also no evidence that this staff's evaluation or development of players tracks with our past coaches.
Sure, but only a small handful of teams actually rely on one and dones.
One-and-dones drafted from 2006-2018:
27 - Kentucky
16 - Duke
11 - UCLA
9 - Kansas
8 - Texas
7 - Arizona
6 - Ohio St, Washington
4 - Cuse
3 - UNLV, Memphis, GTech, LSU, FSU, NCState, UNC
2 - KState, USC, Indiana, MSU, Creighton, Gonzaga
So, since 2006, only 22 schools had more than one freshman drafted (6.2% of 353 schools). Only Duke and Kentucky averaged at least 1 per season, and only 6 schools averaged at least 1 every 2 seasons.
I don't think anyone's realistically expecting us to be in this crowd. Getting one or two 4-star players per class (consistently having 6-8 on the roster) would go a long way toward making us a perennial tournament team.
I will attempt to get the thread back on topic or ask Greene 2 specific questions, as opposed to the generic comments that are usually historically based vs real time or current???
A) Take Paul Mulcahy and ask what do you consider a successful freshman or sophomore season.
B) what aspect regarding the Pike era have you doubting that we have selected or recruited "the wrong or left overs", from the 4 star pool of players??
Keep in mind, we have seen 5 specific coaches in the last 15 years or so...the posts above that have isolated the lack of consistency in recruiting over 3 to 5 year cycles, has more to do with anything, other than the talent.
I had a post regardinf what's gone wrong in football and we lack star power in some spots in football and there has always (in my opinion) been elite star players BUT the bottom half of the football roster lacked similar talent that the top half presented.
Pike's first item isn't how high the recruiting ranking is for his best players....it's really trying to make sure that players 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and any walkons, are as close to the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th players.
That may mean to some fans, landing 10 to 12 4 star players over a 4 to 5 year span. But if you look RutgHoops list going back to 2007, a lot of those kids were not at McConnell, Mulcahy, Baker, Harper's, Myles Johnson level. The difference or why Greene may view the prior 4 stars differently was lack of support off the bench.
When Mathis played well in January and slowed down in February, Harper stepped up....when Harper didn't have a good game, McConnell stepped up. When Eugene played but didn't get a double/double, Myles came through once in a while.
The improvement for RU comes not with how good Mulcahy actually is...it's whether his worse game or day impacts the roster.
Mulcahy plays well, RU is better...if he doesn't, RU has other options at guard. People were upset with Baker vs PSU or down the stretch, but others kept RU alive.
For the 1st time in over a decade, a 4 star player comes to RU and isn't expected to start immediately. In most cases in the last decade, every recruit was plugged into the starting lineup by default or by media hype. In this case, Mulcahy has the opportunity to earn his minutes without an expectation that his play will be absolutely essential.
A) Take Paul Mulcahy and ask what do you consider a successful freshman or sophomore season.
B) what aspect regarding the Pike era have you doubting that we have selected or recruited "the wrong or left overs", from the 4 star pool of players??
Keep in mind, we have seen 5 specific coaches in the last 15 years or so...the posts above that have isolated the lack of consistency in recruiting over 3 to 5 year cycles, has more to do with anything, other than the talent.
I had a post regardinf what's gone wrong in football and we lack star power in some spots in football and there has always (in my opinion) been elite star players BUT the bottom half of the football roster lacked similar talent that the top half presented.
Pike's first item isn't how high the recruiting ranking is for his best players....it's really trying to make sure that players 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and any walkons, are as close to the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th players.
That may mean to some fans, landing 10 to 12 4 star players over a 4 to 5 year span. But if you look RutgHoops list going back to 2007, a lot of those kids were not at McConnell, Mulcahy, Baker, Harper's, Myles Johnson level. The difference or why Greene may view the prior 4 stars differently was lack of support off the bench.
When Mathis played well in January and slowed down in February, Harper stepped up....when Harper didn't have a good game, McConnell stepped up. When Eugene played but didn't get a double/double, Myles came through once in a while.
The improvement for RU comes not with how good Mulcahy actually is...it's whether his worse game or day impacts the roster.
Mulcahy plays well, RU is better...if he doesn't, RU has other options at guard. People were upset with Baker vs PSU or down the stretch, but others kept RU alive.
For the 1st time in over a decade, a 4 star player comes to RU and isn't expected to start immediately. In most cases in the last decade, every recruit was plugged into the starting lineup by default or by media hype. In this case, Mulcahy has the opportunity to earn his minutes without an expectation that his play will be absolutely essential.
A. 12-20 MPG legitimately earning time on the court being a capable point guard. Doesn't ever have to be a starter to be a success. Don't want to post stats. needs to not be a huge negative defensively and is capable of taking and making a perimeter shot. I am very happy he is here. We need what I think he will offer.
B. I won't do that.
You follow recruiting more than i do. Weren't Harper and Mulcahy 3 star guys when signed. Signing a 3 star guy that ends his HS career as a 4 is a GREAT sign.
Very good point - having four star guys come in and be able to get up to speed without immediately having to be "the guy" is a great step forward.
Looking at all our 4-star guys back to 2002, the only ones I can see that didn't start the majority of games their first year were Jack, N'diaye, and Douby.
And we finished at the bottom of the league and one and done in the tournament. Maybe some 4 stars will help change that!
Maybe, but put yourself in a 4 star recruit's shoes. You have 7-8 major conferences after you. Most you can reasonably expect to play in the NCAA tournament. Most you expect to be in the rotation on Day 1. In 2018 why would you pick Rutgers?
Now if that same team is together in 2 more years with a few added pieces maybe they go 11-9 and win a few games in B1G T, play in front of filled RAC all 18 games, make it to the NCAAs. Then we are a reasonable destination for the Legit 4 star guy.
I don't think we are far away. The practice facility will help. I reject the notion that Pikiell or anyone else can get someone by selling a vision. I am sure it is possible and doesn't hurt to have team with great chemistry that is noticeable on court and during an official visit. What most people don't realize is how important interactions with future teammates on official visits can impact final decisions.
You can get them now. Just not as many or as often. It's a slow build.
It's not as if your suggested route is simple. It's not easy to get what some folks call under-the-radar guys who can actually compete in a top conference. Recruiting is crazy competitive. Coaches recruit to win just as hard as their teams play to win. Good players don't often get overlooked. And when they are there isn't an "under-recruited-but-really-good bin" that a coach can simply dip into and get one, or two, or five. You have to identify them--and more important you have to be right. And in that pursuit, it's easier to be wrong. We've seen it for years, and seen it even under Pike.
That said, recruiting those types of players is certainly a big part of a rebuild. But so is going after the top players with the goal of getting more and more of them as you establish success. There are so many points at which this process can fail, which is one of the reasons why RU hasn't gotten much of anywhere in almost 30 years. But a big part of it, particularly if you are trying to compete in the B1G, is going after and eventually getting top recruits.
The hope is that the practice facility actually puts us in a better position to compete.
One thing to have 27 year NCAA drought and a half full small arena, but when you add sharing a practice court with the women and men's baseball team .....
One thing to have 27 year NCAA drought and a half full small arena, but when you add sharing a practice court with the women and men's baseball team .....
Just some more perspective on the 'hit rate' for four star players, and the likelihood of finding top performing "under the radar" 3-star players that can perform at a high level:
https://basketballrecruiting.rivals...numbers-recruiting-rankings-and-the-nba-draft
"127 of 867 four-star prospects from 2003-14 have been drafted.".... so just about 15% of four-star prospects end up drafted, or a little less than 1 in every 6. We had 14 four-star recruits since 2002, and 2 were drafted into the NBA.... which is very close to the national average.
"100 of 3,870 three-star prospects from 2003-14 have been drafted. Another interesting detail is that three-stars inside the Rivals150 are much more likely to be drafted (7.5 percent) than three-stars outside the Rivals150 (1.66 percent)."
So, a 4-star prospect is about 2x as likely to be drafted as a 3-star Top 150 prospect, and about 10x more likely to be drafted than a 3-star prospect that falls outside the Top 150.
https://basketballrecruiting.rivals...numbers-recruiting-rankings-and-the-nba-draft
"127 of 867 four-star prospects from 2003-14 have been drafted.".... so just about 15% of four-star prospects end up drafted, or a little less than 1 in every 6. We had 14 four-star recruits since 2002, and 2 were drafted into the NBA.... which is very close to the national average.
"100 of 3,870 three-star prospects from 2003-14 have been drafted. Another interesting detail is that three-stars inside the Rivals150 are much more likely to be drafted (7.5 percent) than three-stars outside the Rivals150 (1.66 percent)."
So, a 4-star prospect is about 2x as likely to be drafted as a 3-star Top 150 prospect, and about 10x more likely to be drafted than a 3-star prospect that falls outside the Top 150.
Which has nothing to do with my post, but I am glad the you got the opportunity to whine.
Kone, Jack, Lewis and Mack all made it to a Senior Day on campus, but this is a damn good and eye opening list.
(Vince Garrett semi played in Rice's last year and then transferred out.)
That commit vs Senior Day list is why I get so annoyed when people here seem to champion kids transferring out. Continuity and experience are huge for a program. The flip side of the programs led to the tourney by a big name freshman is the huge number of teams that get there with teams stacked with upperclassmen.
It's a fine line between that and necessarily upgrading talent. Last year's two out-transfers were a net positive for the on court product. Conversely, Thiam doing what he did sucks for a million reasons, the smallest among them what it means for the basketball team. But if a world existed where he was an upstanding, non-abusive human the team would be better with him on it because it does mean something to have guys who know the culture and have been through the years with the same coach.
Sure, and when we get to the point where we never seem to have open schollie for the potential talent upgrades then maybe I'll be more sympathetic to that position. We have several years of culture building left and personally I'd like to see every kid currently on the roster graduate from RU and have a nice Senior Day celebration, likely or not. That would signal the biggest change in culture yet from the prior instability.
Earlier in the thread you said Pike needs to get his A Davis & Kenny Britt. I have not met any of these people so I don’t like to talk in terms of “character flaws” but I’m curious to know what fits into your criteria given who you are citing since it’s no secret they were both a handful to manage. Most elite players these days come in with egos and since we’re mixing sports here, this looks like you are being Monday morning QB.
