They haven’t updated their rankings since the summer and haven’t evaluated him since his junior year, are you really serious? Both of the major services are saying he’s a 4 star once they update. And the Morris anecdote, you should know better than to bring such a weak comparison up…
I really don't care much about rankings, just the fact that Scout is seemingly enamored with his "upside" while simultaneously saying he's not very good. Point is, I don't care what scout says because of the obvious hypocrisy.As it relates to Grantham, I could really care less about where he ranks relative to Wilson, the fact is I believe Grantham would’ve been a much better fit for what we need next year in light of the potential attrition.
The ranking is off on Wilson because he missed last season with back issues and just started to emerge over the summer. Scouts who see him now are seeing a healthy and improving player.
They haven't updated their rankings since the summer and haven't evaluated him since his junior year, are you really serious? Both of the major services are saying he's a 4 star once they update. And the Morris anecdote, you should know better than to bring such a weak comparison up..
Quite frankly, I don’t put any stock into rivals or scout rankings(especially rivals), because they’re substandard in terms of basketball recruiting. Scout is OK I guess, but ESPN is by far the best basketball recruiting service. But ultimately I’m going going to make my assessment based on footage I’ve seen rather than a few random tweets and reports.
The Morris analogy is dead on - basically dont talk me to death, show me.
They haven't updated their rankings since the summer and haven't evaluated him since his junior year, are you really serious? Both of the major services are saying he's a 4 star once they update. And the Morris anecdote, you should know better than to bring such a weak comparison up..Quite frankly, I don’t put any stock into rivals or scout rankings(especially rivals), because they’re substandard in terms of basketball recruiting. Scout is OK I guess, but ESPN is by far the best basketball recruiting service. But ultimately I’m going going to make my assessment based on footage I’ve seen rather than a few random tweets and reports.
The Morris analogy is dead on - basically dont talk me to death, show me.
You may not put much stock in the rankings, but those scouts have actually seen these kids play full games in person. They are not relying on a couple of minutes of film here and there - and old film at that. Earlier, you questioned why their rankings don’t match the nice comments that have been made about Wilson recently. You’ve been given the explanation. So now your position is that they don’t know what they are talking about.
No, I’ve been given YOUR explanation, which is no better or worse than my own since you haven’t seen full games as you say. Furthermore the recent film I’ve seen of Wilson hasn’t been impressive in my view. I didn’t question why the rankings don’t match a few select comments, I know the reason why. It’s rare that a recruiting service flat out says “this kid is not that good” - they’re going to extract any positives they can. Lip service is meaningless, give me something tangible. Let’s wait to see the updated rankings before we make assumptions.
I really don't care much about rankings, just the fact that Scout is seemingly enamored with his "upside" while simultaneously saying he's not very good. Point is, I don't care what scout says because of the obvious hypocrisy.As it relates to Grantham, I could really care less about where he ranks relative to Wilson, the fact is I believe Grantham would’ve been a much better fit for what we need next year in light of the potential attrition.
The ranking is off on Wilson because he missed last season with back issues and just started to emerge over the summer. Scouts who see him now are seeing a healthy and improving player.
It’s just not plausible that analysts seen Wilson play and simply don’t think he’s an elite talent, that can’t be an option huh?
MattD are you also Mattski?
I really don't care much about rankings, just the fact that Scout is seemingly enamored with his "upside" while simultaneously saying he's not very good. Point is, I don't care what scout says because of the obvious hypocrisy.As it relates to Grantham, I could really care less about where he ranks relative to Wilson, the fact is I believe Grantham would’ve been a much better fit for what we need next year in light of the potential attrition.
The ranking is off on Wilson because he missed last season with back issues and just started to emerge over the summer. Scouts who see him now are seeing a healthy and improving player.
It’s just not plausible that analysts seen Wilson play and simply don’t think he’s an elite talent, that can’t be an option huh?
The rankings will be updated based on recent play, so we will see what the analysts think.
MattD are you also Mattski?
No sir, that is a game I don’t play.
No, I've been given YOUR explanation, which is no better or worse than my own since you haven't seen full games as you say. Furthermore the recent film I've seen of Wilson hasn't been impressive in my view. I didn't question why the rankings don't match a few select comments, I know the reason why. It's rare that a recruiting service flat out says "this kid is not that good" - they're going to extract any positives they can. Lip service is meaningless, give me something tangible. Let's wait to see the updated rankings before we make assumptions.
Recruiting services don’t come out and say “this kid is not that good”, but if they thought a kid “was not that good” they would not feature him in articles. There were hundreds and hundreds of players at that event, and if Wilson wasn’t impressive, Rivlas could have easily omitted him from the article. It isn’t like the article was dedicated to breaking down Wilson’s pros/cons, it was an article about the top performers at an event, and one of them happened to be Wilson.
“Let’s wait to see the updated rankings before we make assumptions.”
…In other words, let’s wait to see if they agree with you or not? If they do, Bingo. If they don’t, then Scout/Rivals suck, right?
So just for clarity - if Wilson has been “featured” in an article as a “top perfomer” regarding ONE event, that means he’s great?
Second - I’ve stated literally dozens of times that I don’t care about the rankings, so if Scout, Rivals, ESPN, 247, Future 150, Joe Blow, Tom, Dick, Harry, and whoever else you’d like to name state that DJ Wilson is a world beater on the basketball court, I simply don’t put any stock into it. I’m going to assess a recruit on what I see with my OWN 2 eyes independent of what any analyst has to say about it. If he shows improvement on the court in footage that I see, then I will be the first to admit that, but I haven’t seen that to date, and the same concerns still exist.
My only point was this - everybody says that Wilson was underrated due to a back injury or whatever justification you’d like to use, and that he will be bumped up to 4 star status - how does anybody know either of these to be factual? In other words, is it not plausible that analysts simply don’t think Wilson is that good to garner 4 star status? Essentially, if a few random tweets reinforce certain opinions on the board that Wilson is indeed a great player, why are these comments/tweets no reinforced by the rankings - I guess the only way to find out if these comments/tweets by select analysts are their true opinions, is to wait until the next round of updates.
However, MY opinion hasn’t changed, regardless of any analyst. Rankings don’t impact my opinion, as reinforced by my opinions of Booker being overrated, Grantham being underrated, etc.
So just for clarity - if Wilson has been "featured" in an article as a "top perfomer" regarding ONE event, that means he's great?Second - I’ve stated literally dozens of times that I don’t care about the rankings, so if Scout, Rivals, ESPN, 247, Future 150, Joe Blow, Tom, Dick, Harry, and whoever else you’d like to name state that DJ Wilson is a world beater on the basketball court, I simply don’t put any stock into it. I’m going to assess a recruit on what I see with my OWN 2 eyes independent of what any analyst has to say about it. If he shows improvement on the court in footage that I see, then I will be the first to admit that, but I haven’t seen that to date, and the same concerns still exist.
My only point was this - everybody says that Wilson was underrated due to a back injury or whatever justification you’d like to use, and that he will be bumped up to 4 star status - how does anybody know either of these to be factual? In other words, is it not plausible that analysts simply don’t think Wilson is that good to garner 4 star status? Essentially, if a few random tweets reinforce certain opinions on the board that Wilson is indeed a great player, why are these comments/tweets no reinforced by the rankings - I guess the only way to find out if these comments/tweets by select analysts are their true opinions, is to wait until the next round of updates.
However, MY opinion hasn’t changed, regardless of any analyst. Rankings don’t impact my opinion, as reinforced by my opinions of Booker being overrated, Grantham being underrated, etc.
So where would you rank him? Top 150?, unranked? One way you know he could be underrated by the recruiting sites and might be bumped up to 4 star is when one of their analysts sees him play at length in person and says so. You’re free to disagree - and apparently you do.
Sane - no sense beating a dead horse, I just don’t like the fit between Wilson and Michigan. When we initially got wind of our interest in Wilson, I went on record in saying that he was underrated (despite what most people may think), I actually think he is a #85 - 100 or high 3/low 4 star type of recruit.
I think Wilson has a fine offensive skill set for a team that is already solid defensively (think OSU/MSU). When you add a kid that is defensively challenged to a roster that is average at best on the defensive end of the court, the problem is exacerbated. The best analogy I can think of from the top of my head would be the Lakers - you add Steve Nash to a frontline anchored by Pau Gasol - just makes a suspect defense even worse, to the extent that it doesn’t matter how good those 2 individuals are on offense because their defense is so bad that the offense simply can’t compensate for it.
When I look at Wilson I see a kid that can shoot and handle the ball well for his size, but the true question is will shooting improve this team going forward. I say it doesnt, we already have enough perimeter shooting now and for the future. Our halfcourt offense, although it has shown signs of life the past few games, is in desperate need of a playmaker/creator for others that can draw a double team, whether that be in the post (preferred in my opinion) or at the PG spot. On defense, Wilson is severely undersized in terms of weight and strength, I think most would concede this. Furthermore, Wilson lacks lateral movement in my opinion, and looks stiff when moving laterally. He looks to be an above average jumper, but that is only 1 component of athelticism. He is a tweener, a guy not strong enough to defend a 4, and not quick enough to guard a 3 - essentially you can’t hide him on defense.
In a nuthshell, I think Wilson is a nice player, just don’t like the fit for Michigan. He is defensively challenged in my opinion, and his skill set on offense is just redudant. I’d like to be in a position where we can wait 3 years for a guy to develop, but unfortunately, if Mitch/GR3 leaves, we won’t have that luxury.
We won’t have that luxury because Chatman/Donnal/Irvin don’t exist LOL
So just for clarity - if Wilson has been "featured" in an article as a "top perfomer" regarding ONE event, that means he's great?Second - I’ve stated literally dozens of times that I don’t care about the rankings, so if Scout, Rivals, ESPN, 247, Future 150, Joe Blow, Tom, Dick, Harry, and whoever else you’d like to name state that DJ Wilson is a world beater on the basketball court, I simply don’t put any stock into it. I’m going to assess a recruit on what I see with my OWN 2 eyes independent of what any analyst has to say about it. If he shows improvement on the court in footage that I see, then I will be the first to admit that, but I haven’t seen that to date, and the same concerns still exist.
My only point was this - everybody says that Wilson was underrated due to a back injury or whatever justification you’d like to use, and that he will be bumped up to 4 star status - how does anybody know either of these to be factual? In other words, is it not plausible that analysts simply don’t think Wilson is that good to garner 4 star status? Essentially, if a few random tweets reinforce certain opinions on the board that Wilson is indeed a great player, why are these comments/tweets no reinforced by the rankings - I guess the only way to find out if these comments/tweets by select analysts are their true opinions, is to wait until the next round of updates.
However, MY opinion hasn’t changed, regardless of any analyst. Rankings don’t impact my opinion, as reinforced by my opinions of Booker being overrated, Grantham being underrated, etc.
Bingo. “They’re wrong, I’m right, because I watch 4 minute cut-ups while they watch dozens of full games.”
Also, as it has been stated, RECRUITING RANKINGS ARE NOT UPDATED EVERYDAY. Is this your first year following recruiting? GRIII was ranked 118th by Rivals when he committed. Several re-rankings later (as this article mentions) http://nychoops.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1333392… and GRIII ended up #11.
In between those re-rankings, scouts were saying things like they are about Wilson, but you don’t see it until they UPDATE the rankings. Were the scouts lying about moving GRIII up in the rankings? No, but you can’t move someone up in rankings until you actually UPDATE the rankings. The rankings are updated on a set schedule, not when MattD is asking for proof.
How does that concept drift so far over your head?
Also, what is this garbage of spouting “waiting 3 years to develop” as some kind of certainty? Jon Horford put on 30 pounds between his freshman and his sophomore year. LeVert and Stauskas both added a lot of muscle/weight to their frames in one off-season. Our Strength and Condition coaches can transform Horford, LeVert, and Stauskas but not Wilson?
Someone has an agenda here…
Jon Horford came to Michigan at 210. By Sophomore season he was 250.
Tim Hardaway Jr. came to Michigan at 185. By Sophomore season he was 205.
Trey Burke came to Michigan at 170. By Sophomore season he was 190.
Max Bielfeldt came to Michigan at 220. By Sophomore season he was 245.
Glenn Robinsin III came to Michigan at 200. By Sophomore season he was 220.
Nik Stauskas came to Michigan at 190. By Sophomore season he was 205.
Caris LeVert came to Michigan at 170. By Sophomore season he was 185.
D.J. Wilson is currently listed at 6’8 215 by ESPN. What makes you think by Sophomore season he won’t be up around 6’8 235?
A 6’8 235 pound PF with a nice stroke? Yeah, totally worthless to Michigan and Beilein’s system…
We haven’t had a “defender” at the 4 spot in a long time and it’s worked.
Novak - 6’3" SF undersized by strong
Smotrycz - 6’9" SF and not strong or athletic
GR3 - 6’6" SF undersized by strong and athletic
I think Wilson will be fine. I actually like his shot blocking/altering potential with those long arms. Put on a few pounds (which is expected) and I think he’ll make a nice player.
We won't have that luxury because Chatman/Donnal/Irvin don't exist LOL
In what world is Irvin a 4?
Chatman/Donnal may exist, but existence isn’t enough. Whether it’s Chatman or Donnal there will be a severe dropoff from the 4 spot next year (assuming GR3 leaves), especially if McGary leaves.
Bottom line - yea those guys exist, but so what, is there a net gain or net loss if GR3 & Mitch leave and are replaced by the above mentioned players? We don’t have that type of program, at least at this point, to sustain a “bad” year or two. We are a borderline tournament team THIS year, if GR3 & Mitch leave, and are replaced by those guys, our team will be significantly worse.
In essence, because there are players available that can theoretically play a position doesn’t really mean a whole lot, the true question is whether the player(s) in question can sustain or improve the level at which the position was at previously. If not, the position production declines, and ultimately, the team.
Are you really depending on a RS freshman, that hasn’t played a meaningful minute of college basketball (and can’t get on the court despite the fact that Michigan doesn’t really have a backup PF), and a true freshman that is really a point forward, to replace GR3, and not experience a significant dropoff? You have to be kidding me.
I recall a certain someone stating “I loathe the prospects of Donnal/Wilson playing the 4 spot next year” - sound familiar? What a joke
Bingo. “They’re wrong, I’m right, because I watch 4 minute cut-ups while they watch dozens of full games.”
Also, as it has been stated, RECRUITING RANKINGS ARE NOT UPDATED EVERYDAY. Is this your first year following recruiting? GRIII was ranked 118th by Rivals when he committed. Several re-rankings later (as this article mentions) http://nychoops.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1333392… and GRIII ended up #11.
In between those re-rankings, scouts were saying things like they are about Wilson, but you don’t see it until they UPDATE the rankings. Were the scouts lying about moving GRIII up in the rankings? No, but you can’t move someone up in rankings until you actually UPDATE the rankings. The rankings are updated on a set schedule, not when MattD is asking for proof.
How does that concept drift so far over your head?
Let me ask you - have you seen DJ Wilson play a full game, or have you simply been exposed to the same “4 minute clips” as I? If not, you are not qualified to claim DJ Wilson is a good basketball player based on your own logic. If you are qualified, you’re a hypocrite - your choice.
Is this my first year following recruiting - you’ve got to be kidding me right? I understand recruiting rankings aren’t updated on a daily basis. Perhaps you don’t understand, you’re talking about the same analysts that were on record as saying things such as “Burke is underrated” or “Burke is going to rise” or “Burke has tremendous skill” and then subsequently dropped him from #135 to #142. Or perhaps you don’t understand when these same analysts were on record as saying “Chatman could have the most upside” and then subsequently drop him from #42 to #49. So, let me ask you, were the scouts “lying” as you say?
How does the simple concept that words don’t really mean much float over your head? I’m from Missouri, if you truly believe in a player, be about it, don’t talk about it.
Furthermore, I don’t care about rankings, I make my own evaluations. I’d prefer if you just flat out said, “Beilien and the analysts like Wilson and therefore I do” and be done with it.