I think a C+ is more than fair. Walton most likely would still be a top 75 player if they did the rankings over again. Irvin??? Not so sure he would be top 100 the season is still not over and if he continued his poor shooting??? Donnal top 250??? Maybe not even that since he finally started making a contribution last year and those minutes from last year have been peeled back more.
1 Like
Iāll refer you to the discussion of Zak in the other thread, in which I was happy to have a reasoned, extended back and forth with Hail about how we should be seeing Zak. Itās really not that hard if you try. Iāll suggest that when youāre aligning yourself with Guestavo on constructive, respectful dialog, youāre not doing yourself any favors.
As for grading a class of 3 that had;
(1) Walton - PG who was a freshman starter on a B1G champ/E8 team, who played through injuries years 2 and 3 and is going to be All-B1G 1st or second team senior year (and letās see what they do yet in the tourneys),
(2) wing - Zak, see description above, and
(3) big - tough sophomore year, moderately successful junior starter who went for 11 and 5 in B1G play, but inconsistent, and solid back up senior year but lost minutes to better younger player ā
āall who graduated and never got in a speck of trouble ā
Iād say B+. Go look at all the classes in the B1G that year and see what the success rate is for recruits and recruiting classes. People act like every player in every class should be a future pro.
Gotta go, though, have a good day.
1 Like
Wow, itās crazy how much more pleasant conversations can be when you simply give a counter opinion rather than rant about any criticism of players!
Iām back quicker than I thought. Anyway, when grading the use of a scholarship, giving a guy with Zakās college career a āD+ā isnāt a serious opinion, itās an insult. Itās not a means to beginning cordial, if contested, conversations.
Yup, any opinion you disagree with is just completely invalid. Good logic, buddy.
Iām not gonna argue against your post because itās your opinion that Zak has played up to his 29th composite ranking, and if those are your standards then whatever. The fact that I hold players more accountable than you doesnāt make my viewpoint an insult and not an opinion.
Not any opinion, but some are.
Youāre a riot. As much as it deeply, deeply pains me to not have your esteemed seal of approval on my opinionās validity, I think we both know your deep homerisms prevent you from looking at any Michigan player objectively. Even with that being said, I will never tell you that your opinion is invalid, just that you have far different standards than most. Have a great day, and just keep on downing those blue pills.
1 Like
You would honestly give Irvinās career a D+ grade? Maybe the month of February, but his whole career?
Ugh, relative to rankings (he was 29th in the composite), yes. Overall grade as a player Iād go C or C+. Yes, we put him in a position where he had to be the number one scorer and he had obvious limitations, but a 4.5 star wing ideally would be able to handle that by his senior year. Iām really not sure how that take is being declared a trolling insult with no validity. Seems rather tame compared to the majority of people on twitter, MGoBlog, etc.
A Mr. Basketball in the state of Indiana here are some of the most recent winners
Guy
Swanigan
Lyles
Harris
Zeller
DeShaun Thomas
Hulls
Zeller
Gordon
Oden
Zeller
Ratliff
Cage
Where would he rank among those guys? Out of guys in 2013 who had better college career between Irvin/Demetrious Jackson/VJ Beachem??
Iām thinking your beef is more with the ranking (which the player canāt control), and maybe our coaching staffās buy-in to that ranking? When you just take Zak as a basketball player, and as a leader on/off the court through the injury/attrition years, heās really had a positive impact on the program and led directly to many big wins. I donāt know how to put a grade on that exactly, but I surely think if āCā is average, heās been above average.
1 Like
Yeah, I think looking at all 4 years heās been average at best, so there.
For class rating purposes do you consider Duncan Robinson as part of that class? Same situation as Donnal (4th yr with 1 more year of eligibility) ---- although it appears UM will be bringing Robinson back and not Donnal.
Donnal yes (he bogs down the rating as a whole), but not Duncan. Weāll have to see how Duncanās senior year goes but Iām really happy with how heās developing.
In that case, the 3-man class, Iād probably grade a B- w/possibility to grow into a B with a strong next month.
Graded against their HS recruiting rankings, probably a C or C-
A lot of college production from Walton & Irvin, but at best they matched HS rankings. But Walton was a 4yr starter on a team that made the NCAAs in 2 of his first 3 years ā and probably 3 of 4 after this season. And Irvin was 3yr starter & 2x team MVP, including on last yearās NCAA Tournament team.
And Donnal produced at a career back-up level, which isnāt bad, but doesnāt match a borderline Top100 recruiting profile.
1 Like
Grading āagainst HS rankingsā when judging whether someone was a good use of a scholarship is weird. If Zak had finished second in Mr. Basketball voting, would he have been a better use of a scholarship? An A is an A, a B is a B, as so on.
Would a Michigan professor say, well, this is a B paper but Iām giving you a C because I expected an A? No. He or she might say Iām giving you a B but thatās disappointing because youāre capable of an A.
Same here. We can say with some reasonableness Zak was a B+ or B or, maybe, if youāre really down on him, a C+, but thatās disappointing because we were hoping for an A- or better. Think about it reverse, is MAAR an A+ player because he was unranked? A better use of a scholarship because he was a late pick up? No. We can say it was good to get a B+ player (or whatever you want to grade him) late in the cycle, but that doesnāt mean heās an A+ college player.
2 Likes