6’1 Brunson
6’3 Coleman
6’5 Kennard
None jumped on offer, but still have hopes for each. Albeit I’m starting to doubt Kennard with Kentucky involvement.
I would think this will be a 3 man class…Pg, 2g, Big.
I am not sure if any big has visited yet…therefore no offers yet.
I do know that Eric Davis has visited…He is a Baller. Coaches…OFFER HIM. He is a BALLER.
Need to have more than just three offers out there…and Eric Davis is gooooood.
More offers need to be out there. You don’t get first choice always…need to have multiple first choices.
OFFER ERIC DAVIS.
I really think we shouldn’t take a PG. We have a backlog with Spike and Derrick plus Caris is better with the ball in his hands.
Coleman would be ideal and two bigs.
Need bigs (legit bigs I might add) in the worst way.
If Brunson will come, I think you snatch him up even if the PG need isn’t the greatest.
If you can get Coleman and Brunson doesn’t want to come…I wouldn’t mind letting the PG recruiting slide to 2016. There are some good PG prospects in 2016.
Then hopefully two “bigs”
Spike would have to transfer if we took another PG.
Posted this deep in a discussion on the blog, but a 2015 big man who might be a good option is Henry Ellenson. Has McGary’s size and I think he could very possibly play the 4 in our offense. He can’t jump at all and as usual, you don’t really know how he plays defense based on highlight videos, but he’s big and his offense looks good. I think there’s probably already mutual interest.
Obviously the coaches would accept a commitment from any of the guys they’ve offered, but we’ll see how they continue to pursue them. I’m guessing they’ll try to get recruits on campus for some of the bigger home games. Do they invest a lot of time in Kennard like they did with Booker? I think they need to prepare for at least the possibility that Stauskas goes pro THIS year. Kennard would be a good replacement. Plus, IMO, I think they’d ideally not have to start a freshman PG, so I still think they’ll try to get one in 2015.
Finally, I like P.J. Dozier better than Eric Davis, assuming he heals from his injury.
Spike would not have to transfer.
Adding another would give us:
Spike - senior
Walton - Junior
New- Fresh
As bad as you want Levert to be a pg - hes not.
He is a wing that can handle the ball.
Spike would not have to transfer. Adding another would give us: Spike - senior Walton - Junior New- Fresh As bad as you want Levert to be a pg - hes not. He is a wing that can handle the ball.
The ball is going to be in Levert and Walton’s hands regardless of whatever you want to call Caris. We take another PG like Brunson and Spike is sitting on the bench, get real. We are already having trouble with just Walton, Caris and Spike…
I don’t think you can wait another year…then have…
Senior - Walton (if he;s around and not pro)
Freshman - backup
That is too little of depth.
I don't think you can wait another year....then have.. Senior - Walton (if he;s around and not pro) Freshman - backup That is too little of depth.
Coleman is a combo, Chatman can play lead like Levert…
I’d rather we take a person who can play either guard spot than someone who is strictly a lead guard.
So you only want to recruit a true point guard once every three years.
We can disagree. Pretty important position to put so little resource to.
13 scholarships…can at least have 3 dedicated to the position.
I have always thought 3 points, 5 swings, 5 posts.
However- staff disagrees in that we are only using 11 this year.
They have failed to utilize the most obvious resource…scholarships.
No not every three years, just this one time because our roster would be lopsided with 3 true PG and multiple wings who need the ball in their hands to flourish.
How is Walton/Spike/Coleman/Chatman bad depth at the lead guard position?
Either we recruit wings who can flourish off the ball or we minimize the amount of true lead guards we have.
Not enough lead guards. How they going to play over Stauskes, Levert, Irvin, Chatman and you are adding even Coleman? They wont play…period …over those guys.
I think the wings is our strength. Id rather play behind Walton/Spike before that group of players.
2015-2016
Post
Sr. 6’7 Bielfeldt
So. 6’10 Doyle
So. 6’9 Donnal
Fr - 6’9 Wilson
Fr - Open
Wings
Sr. 6’6 Stauskas
Sr 6’6 Levert
Jr. 6’6 Irvin
So - 6’7 Chatman
Fr - Open
Point
Sr. 5’11 Albrecht
Jr. 6’1 Walton
Fr - Open
Coleman can play the 1 and 2, Ben. I’d rather have a player we can plug into multiple spots rather than a player who only has utility with the ball in his hands.
Coleman isn’t a wing in the same sense as Stauskas or Irvin. He can play the 1.
You have guys who excel with the ball in their hands and those who can flourish off the ball. A combo can theoretically do both.
Not enough lead guards. How they going to play over Stauskes, Levert, Irvin, Chatman and you are adding even Coleman? They wont play...period ..over those guys. I think the wings is our strength. Id rather play behind Walton/Spike before that group of players. 2015-2016 Post Sr. 6'7 Bielfeldt So. 6'10 Doyle So. 6'9 Donnal Fr - 6'9 Wilson Fr - Open Wings Sr. 6'6 Stauskas Sr 6'6 Levert Jr. 6'6 Irvin So - 6'7 Chatman Fr - Open Point Sr. 5'11 Albrecht Jr. 6'1 Walton Fr - Open
A few things: (1) we play 4-out and 1-in, so we don’t need five scholarship “post” players. (2) With that said, I think you can classify Wilson as a wing (despite his current lack of ball skills). (3) I think we should plan as if Stauskas will be gone by ‘15. (4) Rotation will probably be 9 players - 10 max - 3-4 at the “1” and "2’, 3-4 at the “3” and “4”, and 2-3 at the “5”. Here’s how I would break it down:
Post “5”
Sr. 6’7 Bielfeldt - rugged experience with best potential as solid positional defender
So. 6’10 Doyle - would probably be our best offensive player in the post
So. 6’9 Donnal - probably our best shooting big man and underrated passer
Fr - Open
Wings “3” and “4”
Jr. 6’6 Irvin - Hopefully our starting “3” by his junior year…tons of potential
So - 6’7 Chatman - Could be our starting “4” again (assuming he is as a freshman)
Fr - 6’9 Wilson - Best length UM’s had at the “4” - potential shot-blocker and steals-getter
Fr - Open
Fr - Open
Guards “1” and “2”
Sr 6’6 LeVert - Probably a 3-year starter at the “2”
Sr. 5’11 Albrecht - With Walton will form a formidable PG duo
Jr. 6’1 Walton - With Albrecht will form a formidable PG duo
Fr - Open
Our “5” position lacks an explosive player, a good rebounder, and shot-blocker. The guys we’ll have should be decent offensively, but probably lacking on the other end and with offensive rebounds. Potential for a '15 recruit to get good playing time or even start.
We’ll be thin, though very skilled, at the “3” and “4”. Need a couple bodies here and preferably one who can step in to the rotation immediately.
“1” and “2” - we could be fine with what we have and could recruit for depth and future PT, but if we can get a scorer (hello Mr. Coleman or P.J. Dozier), then we could slide LeVert to the “3” to fill that gap.
In general, we’ll need a couple rotational players and probably one guy who can put the ball in the hoop.
Hopefully Caris adds 15-20 lbs and get significantly better off the ball before we theoretically play him at the 3
Good point…so based on that I think our two biggest needs are impact players at the 3/4 and 5. Anything else is gravy.
Hopefully Caris adds 15-20 lbs and get significantly better off the ball before we theoretically play him at the 3
What is up with people rather going with a combo guard than a true PG? The PG is like the quarterback of the offense and if Beilein has the chance to land an elite PG (Brunson) he will. As good as our “2s, 3s, and 4s” were last year, that team is a bubble team without Burke. The team 3 years ago doesn’t make the tournament with a “combo” guard in place of Darius Morris.
Also, Beilein has already stated that the 2 and 3 are the same thing in his offense. To categorize the positions as “1s and 2s”, “3s and 4s”, “5s” is ridiculous.
Also, Beilein has already stated that the 2 and 3 are the same thing in his offense. To categorize the positions as "1s and 2s", "3s and 4s", "5s" is ridiculous.
First of all, Beilein didn’t say that. Secondly, I don’t think it’s ridiculous or I wouldn’t have put it in writing. But I will concede that often times, based on players skillsets, what you label them is arbitrary. For example, Stauskas this year and Manny Harris his junior year play a lot more like 2s than 3s. But then again, does LeVert this year play more like a 3 or a 1? And what was Stu Douglass as a sophomore when Manny was a junior?
But to your point about needing/wanting an elite PG, I agree with you. But I’m not so sure you can put Brunson in the same category as Burke. I also wouldn’t assume a freshman Brunson would earn a lot of PT over a junior Walton or senior Albrecht. With all that said, I would be very happy if we were to get a player of Brunson’s caliber…and if he could steal a few minutes from some upperclassmen, it’d probably mean he is very, very good. I just don’t think it’s as much as a need as two impact players - one at the 3/4 and one at the 5 - in the 2015 class.