General Recruiting Discussion/Comments 2022 and before

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:Dan will go with his favorite four guard lineup.
Unless somebody comes in that can play forward,
there isn't much choice.

So, that means either Thompson or McGlynn starts.

ramfan85 · Unread post by **ramfan85** » 9 years ago

Gil and TJ are definitely big losses. Aside from their on-court performance, there is their leadership that needs to be replaced. I don't know who the leaders will be next year.
Even though Gil's production was erratic, teams still had to prepare for him having a good game. I think his game was really effected this year by him trying to stay out of foul trouble. I'd hate to see Martin have to deal with that next year.
Size is essential, unless the guards are lights-out shooters. They haven't shown this yet.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

Billyboy78 wrote:
rodfromcranston wrote:Dan will go with his favorite four guard lineup.
Unless somebody comes in that can play forward,
there isn't much choice.
So, that means either Thompson or McGlynn starts.

If the roster stays as it is, I'd guess Watson would start until Iverson is eligible.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Rod is right as usual on this.

NO visits by anyone so far.

There is something rather amiss here.

We might get a couple of 4 stars for 2016. Bigs and or PG's. Great. Awesome.

What about NEXT season?

Do we have the Three Stooges for assistants? [sarcasm, folks]

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 9 years ago

Rod and Rambone are saying no one has visited yet, but 6'8 Princeton grad eligible Denton Koon was supposed to visit yesterday. Did he not make that visit?

Da_Process_Survivor · Unread post by **Da_Process_Survivor** » 9 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:Rod is right as usual on this.

NO visits by anyone so far.

There is something rather amiss here.

We might get a couple of 4 stars for 2016. Bigs and or PG's. Great. Awesome.

What about NEXT season?

Do we have the Three Stooges for assistants? [sarcasm, folks]

oh no, we're in day 5 of 36 in the spring signing period and havent HEARD about a visit.

c-h-i-c-k-e-n l-i-t-t-l-e

sf2010 · Unread post by **sf2010** » 9 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:Rod is right as usual on this.

NO visits by anyone so far.

There is something rather amiss here.

We might get a couple of 4 stars for 2016. Bigs and or PG's. Great. Awesome.

What about NEXT season?

Do we have the Three Stooges for assistants? [sarcasm, folks]

Talk to me about panicking when the recruiting season is over. Hurley has earned the benefit of the doubt thus far. I can understand the stress of not knowing, but I'm opting to be a bit more zen about things. I will be living by the words of the immortal Aaron Rodgers: R-E-L-A-X

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Oh, I'm OK for now.

In a couple of weeks, get back to me if nothing happens.....

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 9 years ago

There's seeing the glass half full (me), then there's seeing it half empty (Rod), and then there's Rambone, who thinks the glass is full of rat poison and will kill you and everyone you've ever loved.

sf2010 · Unread post by **sf2010** » 9 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:Oh, I'm OK for now.

In a couple of weeks, get back to me if nothing happens.....

That's a fair take. News would be nice. But in a few weeks, I expect to have more than just reports.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

You guys can take all the little slaps at me that you want.
If we're talking about bringing in guards, Dan gets a lifetime pass.
FACT: ONE good four year front court player in three
recruiting cycles.
The jury is out on staff's ability to attract front court talent.
Now tell me where I'm wrong or being negative, in light of
the facts?

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 9 years ago

But we had Gil!! All team frosh in the Big East!!

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Rod, these guys think they've got all the answers.

They slap at you, and think I'm the Doomsayer of Evil.

They can all shove it somewhere.

Get some big men in here, that can walk and chew gum at the same time.

In the meantime, I'll continue the doom and gloom, until Dan makes good on whatever the "big and beautiful" thing he's promised.

If any of you think we're dancing with the current cast of characters on this roster, think again. The A10 will be better, tougher, deeper, you name it next season.

We will have to be BETTER than last year, to at least repeat last season. A LOT better is needed to Dance, and even think of advancing if we make it.

I'm thinking of changing my name to Mr. Negative. Then everything will be happy, happy, joy, joy!

URI_IEP · Unread post by **URI_IEP** » 9 years ago

To be fair, to the overly pessimistic, I don't think people are taking swipes at you because they don't think URI has a need at the front court. It's more due to the fact that you're making it sound like the ability of the coaches to bring in talented big men to URI is on the same level as doctors finding the cure for cancer.

sf2010 · Unread post by **sf2010** » 9 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:You guys can take all the little slaps at me that you want.
If we're talking about bringing in guards, Dan gets a lifetime pass.
FACT: ONE good four year front court player in three
recruiting cycles.
The jury is out on staff's ability to attract front court talent.
Now tell me where I'm wrong or being negative, in light of
the facts?

I don't think you're "wrong," but by framing the discussion as you have, I certainly think you're being negative. Restricting it to 4-year players you remove Gilvydas and Earl from the discussion. We all know the very unique circumstances of Gil's transfer here so no need to rehash those. I think it is unfair to remove the two of them from that discussion. Hassan is worth at least 6 of any normal humans. Having good guards is more important than having good front court players. We now have good guards. The staff knows that. We will get good frontcourt players. Maybe not any 4-stars this year, but I firmly believe we will get a couple serviceable players before the signing period ends.

josephski · Unread post by **josephski** » 9 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:You guys can take all the little slaps at me that you want.
If we're talking about bringing in guards, Dan gets a lifetime pass.
FACT: ONE good four year front court player in three
recruiting cycles.
The jury is out on staff's ability to attract front court talent.
Now tell me where I'm wrong or being negative, in light of
the facts?

Exactly this. Dan can obviously bring in good guards but if you think about the bigs he has brought in it's kind of scary. Hassan's awesome, Gil was OK, then you've got Reischel, Watson and Iffy. If we do end up getting a big this year it most likely will be someone who's going to need to develop a ton to get the type of minutes we need.

Seems like a lot of people here are confusing realism with pessimism.

sf2010 · Unread post by **sf2010** » 9 years ago

josephski wrote: Seems like a lot of people here are confusing realism with pessimism.

Or a lot of pessimists think they're realists. Nearly everybody thinks they're a realist (though I'm the first to admit I'm a full-fledged optimist).

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Nobody is saying we won't bring in any big men.

No where does it say that I or Rod are saying that.

We are concerned, yet still hopeful something will happen.

Playing the wait and see game is fine, but until something does pop, we are justified in expressing those concerns.

When Rod says Dan has basically recruited one good undersized big man in 3 years [Hassan] he is dead on.

That is not reassuring, at all. He has to change that, or his promises will ring hollow. That's all.

josephski, bingo!

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

It is not wrong to identify frontcourt depth as an area that could be improved, and it is definitely true that adding a competent big or two would further raise the ceiling for next year's team. However, I think the narrative about the need for frontcourt help has taken on a life of its own in that even if we don't add anyone else this is still a team that was a top four team in the conference and the other three teams have all lost AT LEAST their best player.

Meanwhile, we return our best four players from last year who will all presumably be better players next year, add a potential NBA-caliber athletic freak in Iverson and have addressed a couple critical areas of weakness in perimeter and free throw shooting by adding McGlynn. I'm not going to even cite the incoming frosh, since everyone will be adding freshmen to their roster and we don't know what we will get from them, but there is at least the potential that they will be able to contribute and add even further to what is already a good (if incomplete) roster. I also think it is worth mentioning that Earl Watson shouldn't be totally discounted when thinking about the frontcourt, since I believe he was hurt from the @UMass game on, but looked like a player (to me, at least) prior to that.

So I just think that while the need for a big is legit, the consequences of not adding one probably aren't as severe as some are making them out to be.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Um, Gil called Dan. Sorry, dead people could do that kind of recruiting.
Watson? He scored 5 points and had 6 rebounds in the month
of February. Maybe he was injured, but staff wasn't thrilled with
him, as evidenced by his playing time.
Oneykaba? Played 7 games all year. Nuff said.
Hassan was on Staten Island, and his assistant coach was
Tirone's father. A perfect storm in recruiting, and a-typical.

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 9 years ago

sf2010 wrote:
josephski wrote: Seems like a lot of people here are confusing realism with pessimism.
Or a lot of pessimists think they're realists. Nearly everybody thinks they're a realist (though I'm the first to admit I'm a full-fledged optimist).

Yup, saying over and over you're just being a realist doesn't necessarily make it so.

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 9 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:Um, Gil called Dan. Sorry, dead people could do that kind of recruiting.
Watson? He scored 5 points and had 6 rebounds in the month
of February. Maybe he was injured, but staff wasn't thrilled with
him, as evidenced by his playing time.
Oneykaba? Played 7 games all year. Nuff said.
Hassan was on Staten Island, and his assistant coach was
Tirone's father. A perfect storm in recruiting, and a-typical.

Watson's playing time isn't evidence at all of the staff being unhappy with Watson if he was injured. Before the game at UMass Hurley said they needed to give Watson more playing time, then between the radio show and the game Watson hurt his shoulder and wasn't the same player after.

Also, you in particular were very high on Rokas Gustys when we were recruiting him. Well when Hare was coming back we stopped recruiting him. For all the good breaks you cite, if you want to be a realist, cite the unlucky break of Hare recommitting then decommitting again.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

I think the idea that a coach can recruit guards but not big men or vice versa is kind of silly. Like big men are somehow uniquely wired in such a way that they are resistant to a certain coach's charms, whereas guards can't say no? I just don't think that is realistic. I would say that at this point, to the extent that the perceived lack of big man recruiting success is accurate, it is probably more a result of happenstance and circumstance than it is of any fundamental lack of ability on the staff's part.

A big part of the problem is that big guys who are athletically gifted are in much shorter supply (and much higher demand) than small guys who are athletically gifted, so there is just less opportunity overall and URI just hasn't been in a position to beat out other programs for those type of guys over the last few years. Hopefully that is starting to change with the program beginning to find on-court success.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Maybe so, but was Gustys a lock to come here, if Hare didn't get in the way?

A lot of people seem to think so, but was he really?

He at least was close to coming here. Since then, ???????

TP, we are about to see if your theory holds water.

The push is on. The need for good big men here is obvious now. Let's see if Dan and the staff can deliver.

Getting a couple of bigs for 2016 will be great. But we need at least one for next season too.

josephski · Unread post by **josephski** » 9 years ago

RhowdyRam02 wrote:
sf2010 wrote:
josephski wrote: Seems like a lot of people here are confusing realism with pessimism.
Or a lot of pessimists think they're realists. Nearly everybody thinks they're a realist (though I'm the first to admit I'm a full-fledged optimist).
Yup, saying over and over you're just being a realist doesn't necessarily make it so.

Dan has recruited 5 total bigs and the majority of them have sucked but because he's recruited 4 very good players over the past 3 years everyone is supposed to believe we're getting a center who will make an impact this year?

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 9 years ago

Since then we added Jared Terrell and Kuran Iverson, two elite talents according to high school rankings, and Four McGlynn, a player who addresses two of our three biggest weaknesses from this past season with our available scholarships. With where this program was when Dan took over, accumulating talent, no matter the position, was far more important than grabbing players based on position. And now we're in on top talent that will help our third weakness, height. Based on his successes improving other areas of the program I believe Hurley has earned time to get it done before we say he can't. I won't say that Hurley has a problem recruiting bigs until he strikes out bringing in guys for next year and on class of 16 players.

Andrew · Unread post by **Andrew** » 9 years ago

josephski wrote:Dan can obviously bring in good guards but if you think about the bigs he has brought in it's kind of scary. Hassan's awesome, Gil was OK, then you've got Reischel, Watson and Iffy. If we do end up getting a big this year it most likely will be someone who's going to need to develop a ton to get the type of minutes we need.

Seems like a lot of people here are confusing realism with pessimism.

Remember when signing Iffy we (a) knew he was raw and going to be a project, and (b) Dan and staff were simply grabbing players to fill out a roster. Same circumstance for Reischel as it applies to roster filling. Who knows what was behind Gil's inconsistencies, but that wasn't so much of a recruitment compared to what we're doing now. You're also excluding Mike Aaman, who's off-the-court stuff and injury history discounts his career here.

This was Watson's first year at the D1 level plus he was injured, so there's improvement to be expected. We've been involved with some solid names, and it's been much to small of a sample to make a conclusion about recruiting big men. We were -this- close to getting Gustys last year (is he better than Aaman?) and Chris Silva recently (So. Car. commit). We'll get a big man or two before the tip of the game 1 of 2015-2016, and hopefully no one's jumped off a bridge before it happens. And if not, then perhaps staff sees better use of scholarships for standout players in 2016 vs. a big man spring signing who can't play. As it stands now, this roster can win an A10 championship. Comparing our program to big-time programs with Final 4 aspirations year-in and year-out is putting the cart before the horse; gotta walk before you can run. Besides, once you're in the tournament, we've all seen how anything can happen - with or without supreme height.

EDIT: To add, it's realistic to say that the roster has a desperate need for a 5. Guess what? So does every other program in the country. Everyone's got flaws and holes on the roster that they need filled. It's also realistic to say that this team brings back their 4 best players from a team that was about 60 seconds from winning the A10 regular season and getting into the NCAA tournament (VCU/Dav losses).

3wisemen · Unread post by **3wisemen** » 9 years ago

Rewind to about a year ago and most of these recruiting posts were concerning URI's need for a point guard.
'We need a PG....Biggie Minnis isn't the answer.'
'Dan was a PG in college...why can't he recruit one?'
'PG is the most important position on the floor.....we won with Silk and Tyson. Now we have nobody.'
About a week later they signed Jarvis Garrett. It appears to be problem solved.
The lesson here? Some posters frame the discussion in their own ways to cause concern among other posters who are uninformed and reactionary. And it's drives them crazy that the flow of information has ceased to a drip following a couple of staff changes. Don't be suckered into the hysteria.

runninrams5 · Unread post by **runninrams5** » 9 years ago

Lot of buzz going around that Kevin Ollie could be the new Thunder HC, which could possibly lead to Enoch asking out of his NLI if Ollie leaves

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

Hysteria is a good word for it

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

I think it's being incredibly optimistic to say we win a championship with the roster we have right now. We would start the season with 9 scholarship players available. One of those is Iffy. Two are unproven freshmen. Iverson should be a boost once he becomes eligible, but even he hasn't played a lot of meaningful basketball in 3 years. I am confident we will add one or two more pieces who can contribute. But would I feel good going into the season feeling good about the roster as is? Absolutely not. There has to be at least two or three players on the bench that we know we can count on.

Rhody15 · Unread post by **Rhody15** » 9 years ago

I'm still sticking to my belief that Iverson will play in the post this year. He's legitimately our tallest player, and I cannot see Hurley flat out refusing to not have him play down low, regardless of how pissed Iverson gets. There are very few 6'9' guys who are strictly perimeter players in college. He'll play in the post on O and D.

Having said that, I obviously still believe we will bring in one two new big guys before it's all said and done.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Yes, it's written into the University rules, that
after Jack Kraft left, if you're 6'7" or over, you must play center.
Iverson weighs 197 lbs. He NOT a post player.
So, we didn't need a PG this year? What a moron.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

It isn't that we didn't need one, it's that people were prematurely worried that we didn't have one.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

That's what fans do, when we're not pretending we're
Bill Belichick with a blase attitude on everything.

Shaolin Swat · Unread post by **Shaolin Swat** » 9 years ago

Billyboy78 wrote:I think it's being incredibly optimistic to say we win a championship with the roster we have right now. We would start the season with 9 scholarship players available. One of those is Iffy. Two are unproven freshmen. Iverson should be a boost once he becomes eligible, but even he hasn't played a lot of meaningful basketball in 3 years. I am confident we will add one or two more pieces who can contribute. But would I feel good going into the season feeling good about the roster as is? Absolutely not. There has to be at least two or three players on the bench that we know we can count on.

I don't know if it's fair to say that it's incredibly optimistic (which I would also interpret as being unlikely) that this team, as constructed right now, has a very good chance to win an A-10 title. Outside of VCU and maybe Dayton, I don't see a team in the conference that can match our talent level at this time. Obviously, there is still plenty of time for things to change (which hopefully means we bring in a couple of talented bigs). In the A-10, great guard play (which we have) alone makes you one of the top contenders in the conference. It would be great to have a big, but I don't see it as a prerequisite to winning the A-10 (especially since there aren't any dominating bigs in the conference yet that could take over a game). Now winning in the tourney, which is everyone's aspiration, is a different story.

RIFan · Unread post by **RIFan** » 9 years ago

I know talented "Bigs" are harder to come by than talented guards, so having difficulty finding one is not a surprise. But, since Gil's eligibility running out didn't come as a surprise to Dan, I assume he has been working on filling that need for a while, and has so far come up empty. That's a little disconcerting to me. I think this should be a very attractive opportunity for a decent big...a quality roster, that should be in the top 3, in the 5-7th best conference in the country and vying for an NCAA bid, whose only glaring need is your position.

I think that right now, it should be one of the easiest sells we have had to make to a big in a while. We've always had playing time...now we have a good supporting cast too.

RAM67 · Unread post by **RAM67** » 9 years ago

Don't worry we're getting at least one big.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

runninrams5 wrote:Lot of buzz going around that Kevin Ollie could be the new Thunder HC, which could possibly lead to Enoch asking out of his NLI if Ollie leaves

Where were we on Enoch's list? Top two? Top five? Top ten? I know we were on there somewhere, just can't remember how high.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

His visit was cancelled by staff, when i became apparent that
he was UConn bound.
So, if he was visiting, we had to be in his top five.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

I'm remembering now. Isn't he the one who had been dreaming of playing for UConn since he was a little kid? Even if Ollie goes to the NBA, that fact doesn't change.

ace · Unread post by **ace** » 9 years ago

Billyboy78 wrote:I'm remembering now. Isn't he the one who had been dreaming of playing for UConn since he was a little kid?

Yes, that's him. He visited URI unofficially but at the time was pretty set on being a Huskie.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 9 years ago

I am in for hoping Ollie leaving Uconn brings Enoch our way. BUT its not like Ollie is the Huskie brand. It will roll on without him regardless of how highly regarded he is.

All we lost was Gil and TJ. Our invisible power forward and our amazing 6th man in a guard's body that plays better power forward than the power forward.

Rhody15 · Unread post by **Rhody15** » 9 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:Yes, it's written into the University rules, that
after Jack Kraft left, if you're 6'7" or over, you must play center.
Iverson weighs 197 lbs. He NOT a post player.
So, we didn't need a PG this year? What a moron.

You're right, Iverson is not a post player.

But was TJ a 4? Was Hassan Martin a 5? No and no. Guys are forced out of position every single game, and Iverson will eventual be forced to play in the post this year. I don't care if he weighs 197, 6'9 is 6'9. Yes, the majority of his minutes will be on the wing, but he will be forced to play in the post this year, just like TJ and Hassan were forced to play out of position.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

So, you're saying NO help is on the way? OK.
Iverson will not play any post this year, unless
it's the high post against the zone.
He sure as hell won't be playing down low.
It would be a terrible waste of talent.

Rhody15 · Unread post by **Rhody15** » 9 years ago

"Having said that, I obviously still believe we will bring in one or two new big guys before it's all said and done."

I said that in my last post.

So yes, I do believe help is on the way.

Worst comes to worse, I'd be semi comfortable with him playing the post. Much more comfortable than I was with TJ playing against post players.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

How many college offenses even feature two post players?

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

It's called depth.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

Right, but I'm saying...Iverson can play minutes at the "four" without camping out on the block. Most fours don't, anyways. You can move him around. He is a good chess piece because of the contrast of size (length) and skill (guard-ish).

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Of course. He can probably play four positions, but
post/center, isn't one of them.
He'll see lots of time as the de facto 4, much as TJ did,
but physically Iverson is more suited to that position.

Login • Register