To my mind, a guy who fits the mold of a “project” on which to take a chance is DJ Wilson. He to me fits the definition of a kid who’s available because he’s raw, in need of developing basketball skills, but with athleticism. He could develop into a player with a penchant for rebounding and may protect the rim while maybe not scoring much. To me, there’s a place on the roster for him If he doesn’t develop much…scout team. To me, athletic and rough around the edges is better than slow and developing. But I’ll add the standard disclaimer: hope to be wrong, I’m sure Davis will be great, yadda yadda.
I don’t think that’s really fair at all… There’s definitely plenty of long-term/project developing big guys that aren’t the best athletes. The kid is also still a (young) junior in high school so it’s not even that he’s slow developing or anything like that.
Slow as in lack of speed, Dylan. The phrase was “slow AND developing.”
Yes I understand that he’s not a great athlete and that’s what you were saying… What I’m saying is there’s no reason big wide bodied guys can’t develop just like raw athletic types. Obviously will be different sorts of players, but still potential there.
Michigan also has one of those raw and athletic ‘project bigs’ on the roster already in DJ Wilson.
Yep, see Bryant “Big Country” Reeves, Derrick Nix, and Matt Stainbrook, to name a few.
I wouldn’t mention Derrick Nix as a comp. Don’t think fans would be happy with him taking until his senior year to become an okay player.
People complain we don’t have enough size. People complain when we start recruiting a bunch of big men. There is no winning
People complain we don't have enough size. People complain when we start recruiting a bunch of big men. There is no winning
Not true, at least not for me. Not necessarily about size, but just how much value I think a given player has given the team’s needs. On the other side, people will rubber stamp anything UM related, for no apparent rhyme or reason at times, just in the name of being positive I guess. There is a middle ground
There is a middle ground
Can we keep this comment for posterity? 
The “rhyme or reason” is simply that Beilein has already achieved success beyond our reasonable expectations, so he’s bought himself buckets of benefit of the doubt (which is a completely different thing than “just to be positive”). As it evolves, it seems like Davis is becoming another example of him being “right”.
The "rhyme or reason" is simply that Beilein has already achieved success beyond our reasonable expectations, so he's bought himself buckets of benefit of the doubt (which is a completely different thing than "just to be positive"). As it evolves, it seems like Davis is becoming another example of him being "right".
No such thing as benefit of the doubt in my view. Sports is all about what have you done for me lately/now. So, while you may believe in the benefit of the doubt theory, I do not. I believe in evaluating each situation for what it is, independent of past success or failure. This is especially true in college, as turnover rate is very high.
I can understand you personally have a different opinion, but I’m telling you why I (and perhaps others) are positive on the things Beilein does. I’m not asking you to agree, but I am suggesting there exists a reason, where you said there was none apparent. Make sense?
I can understand you personally have a different opinion, but I'm telling you why I (and perhaps others) are positive on the things Beilein does. I'm not asking you to agree, but I am suggesting there exists a reason, where you said there was none apparent. Make sense?
It makes sense if you look at it through your logic, yes. However, if one is not a ‘benefit of the doubt’ subscriber, then necessarily there is no logic in that approach, hence there is no rhyme or reason in my view.
In other words, if you believe that past success or failure indicates future results, then it makes perfect sense. However, if you don’t, then it makes little sense at all.
All that to say, we just agree to disagree in that regard.
Voltron, you simply cannot ever dissuade MattD from his appointed position. He will not change his mind and if your opinion differs from his he will simply say, “we just agree to disagree.” I, personally, have decided to just “agree to disagree” with Matt on much of what he says. It enables me to keep my sanity, and it keeps my anger in check. Yet, having said that, I do appreciate his knowledge of recruiting, his ability to evaluate talent, and the insight he provides to the board. He certainly causes me to think, although sometimes the thoughts I’m thinking after reading one of his more negative posts aren’t real nice! LOL
I’m totally on the same page, except that even “agree to disagree” is an acknowledgement of the dissenting argument. Above, he’s basically saying that if he doesn’t agree, it literally doesn’t exist. Which I know he doesn’t actually believe, he just got himself twisted up. It’s all good.
Sports is all about what have you done for me lately/now.
Then, fortunately, what Beilein has done for you lately is sign another top 100 4* player 
I'm totally on the same page, except that even "agree to disagree" is an acknowledgement of the dissenting argument. Above, he's basically saying that if he doesn't agree, it literally doesn't exist. Which I know he doesn't actually believe, he just got himself twisted up. It's all good.
Nothing twisted, just tried to convey in a PC manner that I think your ‘benefit of the doubt’ theory is nothing more than BS. I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, just saying that it isn’t logical to me, therefore it is without reason.
I can understand you personally have a different opinion, but I'm telling you why I (and perhaps others) are positive on the things Beilein does. I'm not asking you to agree, but I am suggesting there exists a reason, where you said there was none apparent. Make sense?It makes sense if you look at it through your logic, yes. However, if one is not a ‘benefit of the doubt’ subscriber, then necessarily there is no logic in that approach, hence there is no rhyme or reason in my view.
In other words, if you believe that past success or failure indicates future results, then it makes perfect sense. However, if you don’t, then it makes little sense at all.
All that to say, we just agree to disagree in that regard.
We’re not talking mutual funds here, we’re talking coaching. A coach who has had success has demonstrated his ability to evaluate talent, recruit talent, develop talent, game plan - whatever facet of coaching that you are looking at. Success doesn’t guarantee further success in a given facet of coaching, but it makes it much more likely. I would sure put my money on Duke having a top 5 recruiting class in 2017. It’s not guaranteed, but it’s very likely. I would bet that any Bo Ryan team will have few turnovers. Not guaranteed. But very likely. No guarantee that Davis is the next Luke Harangody, but the potential is there. Beilein locked him in before other schools made a move. That fact alone adds, IMO, to the likelihood that Davis will prove the doubters wrong.
So MattD, and I really don’t want to get involved here, are you saying that if any of us find your arguments to be illogical to us that, therefore, they are without reason? Seriously, do you really mean that last phrase in your comment or are you just…playing?
OK, this is why I like Sane so much and have for the last several years on this and other forums. I know, I know, this is probably a wasted post that’s just taking up space but I ALWAYS appreciate the sanity and reasonableness of Sane1’s comments. Thanks.