Ohio State is definitely one IMO.
Not that I disagree with everything you say, but it seems you are bending over backwards to create a certain narrative about why Michigan is an exceptional case and thus canât realistically expect to compete.
I didnât say that Xavier has landed a bunch of high level commits, just that they now pursue and offer aggressively. If Mack sticks around, it may start paying dividends. They are already better than us and loaded with athletes.
California is recruiting at a very high level under Martin. One can say bad things about Martin, but nobody can claim that Berkeley doesnât have demanding academic standards.
I agree that Indiana is also a peer â didnât include it because some people might protest that UM has none of their basketball culture, which is selling Michigan a bit short (look at the popularity of UMHoops, after all). They also offer tons of elite talent, in-state and nationally. We also have to play them every year, and it sucks getting blown off the court evert time Michigan plays in Assembly Hall.
As for Maryland, itâs a pretty good school and without getting into rumours about specific recruitments, they seem to strike a good balance in terms of targeting elite talent, talented UM-type guys (Huerter, Jackson), and top-tier transfers. I donât know much about their UA relationship but I would imagine that Michigan becoming a Jordan Brand school should help them in that department. Just my two cents.
1 Like
Anyway, to steer back on topic, while I think U-M may struggle in 2016-17, I am optimistic that the team in 2017-18 will strike the right balance between shooting and athleticism IF they land at least two of Matthews/Cain/Wilkes/Jackson/Tillman/Young with no major attrition. The question is, is that a big âifâ?
1 Like
I would also add that itâs imperative a guy like Wagner steps up this year especially with Donnalâs 17/18 season up in the air. I like the guys they are recruiting but if Wagner doesnât take the next step and guys like Davis/Teske are question marks then you have a team with a hole in the middle.
2 Likes
I think that is a bit of a short list and the list of targets will continue to grow this summer with some of the names that have been in the 2017 thread. Itâs very rare that the target list in June matches the target list in August.
The names that have been casually thrown around like Justin Smith, Anthony Gaines, Zach Dawson, Brad Davison, etc. could end up being much more serious targets in a couple months and several others might not be so serious targets.
Iâd be surprised to add a five in this class. If Wagner doesnât step up or Teske/Davis struggle mightily then maybe you bring Donnal back for a fifth year, but that gives you enough insurance to focus on other positions.
As long as weâre not trading down in terms of quality and balance from the short list above, no problem, but otherwise it would be a bit of deja vu of the swing-miss cycles of recent years. I also didnât list a PG as I expect that anybody added would likely be a backup, so not so critical that they be elite.
Re Wagner, I am hoping that he is given every opportunity to be the first option at the five this year (including a longer leash). I agree that we donât really need a five but in all honesty I would trade ANY three of our 4 fives for Malik Williams.
1 Like
Cal is a bad example. Notorious cheaters. Do an internet search on Todd Bozeman and Jelani Gardner. And now Abdur-Rahim (a five star recruit who Cal somehow pulled out of Georgia in 1995) is an assistant there. Thatâs not a clean program.
I hate losing at IU, too - of course, every team gets a complete shaft from the refs in that building. Iâd gladly take our success under JB over whatever Crean has done there, though. Really, itâs not even close.
The UA relationship is that UA founder and CEO Kevin Plank is a Maryland grad and huge Maryland supporter.
Itâs interesting, because on the one hand you fret that UM wonât go after elite players, but on the other hand you concede that itâs okay to recruit a PG who will only be a backup. Iâm more in the middle on both ends.
As to the one hand: I do think JB will and should go after âeliteâ â i.e., top 25-30 players. And I think heâs likely to secure some. But Iâm also not that worried about it because I think heâll go harder, earlier, after some guys a little lower down who he really likes. None of Trey, Caris, THJr, Darius Morris, GRIII (although he blew up in the rankings later) were subjects of nationwide recruiting fights. Neither were Derrick Walton, Demetrius Jackson, or Monte Morris, the three 2013 PGs we went after. Nor was Vince Edwards. Yet all were athletic enough to be good two way players. (And thatâs not even counting Nik, who may not have been great defensively but was a superlative player).
As to the other hand: I donât think JB can or wants to recruit guys just to be backups. Injuries happen, guys donât pan out or transfer or leave early, etc. Look how much MAAR will end up playing, or Spike, etc. Nor do I think thereâs any need to. A '17 guard prospect is looking to join a roster with Simpson, Watson, and Poole (with one year of MAAR), and Watson is big enough to play the 3 and probably isnât scaring away elite guys right now. Poole also is probably big enough to play the 3 in college. With all the potential multi-guard lineups and players with enough size Michigan has, unless youâre a top 25 guy who plans to start from day 1 and leave after a year, Michiganâs depth chart isnât overly threatening at this juncture, especially for a guard with a little size.
1 Like
I thought Spike was recruited to be a back-up, with a four-star PG coming in the following year. I do agree that nothing about the current or future lineup should scare away elite talent per se but I also think that Simpson is a presumptive three-year starter, so any guy who has serious expectations to start before his senior year probably isnât coming. (That said, the more talent, the better, and I would love to have a guy who could actually challenge X for the starting spot ⌠I think Iâm just being realistic here, and saving my idealism for the other roster spots.)
1 Like
Spike was recruited because it looked like Trey was leaving for the NBA and Brundidge was transferring out. We needed him in case Trey left (and as a backup to Trey). I donât think he was recruited specifically to back up Walton in following years.
I do think a guard with a little size, like Dawson or Davison, might be a better fit and more interested than a small PG, given Simpsonâs presence.
And conserving idealism is importantâŚ
I agree I am just responding in regards to 17/18 that for this team to get back to being a threat those type of players need to be recruited but as well as internal improvement. In regards to Donnal being back for a 5th year that should be decided come September. After that I think that ship sails and Donnal should look at other options.
Why would the decision on a fifth year for Donnal be decided in September? He loses nothing by waiting until spring to look for other options â indeed, schools in September wonât be focusing on graduate transfers (or necessarily know their needs/availability) for the following year. And UM loses nothing by waiting until spring to make a final decision, and indeed will have much more knowledge of the development/readiness of Wagner/Teske/Davis. The staff could very well be honest with Donnal that nothing is guaranteed to him. They could sign enough recruits that if everyone stays, there wonât be a spot for Donnal, while recognizing that a spot may come open. But making a final decision in September makes little sense.
2 Likes
I am speaking from his point of view. If they donât tell him in September theyâre pretty much telling him heâs playing for his eligibility at Michigan in his final year. The only reason he was reclassified as a junior this past year was because of a scholarship crunch but it never panned out because 25% of the roster transferred.
Are you saying that if they donât reclassify him in September he should just assume he wonât get a fifth year? Or that he has to earn his fifth year? In either case, what difference would it make? Heâd still want to play his best to have the best possible options for the year after. Heâd still have no idea now what options will be available come next year. Moreover, I just donât think itâs true. Whatever the reasons why it was initially done, it wouldnât make sense to reclassify him in September. The back and forth would look weird. He could always leave anyway even if they reclassified him, so theyâre not gaining much. Theyâll probably tell him either that they hope to have space but canât promise anything or donât have space but something might open up. And given UMâs situation, why would they close the door? It just doesnât make any sense to say it âshould be decided by September.â And it wonât be.
I do agree that itâs the coaching staffâs job to get a player interested in Michigan. Having said that, I also understand that some players wonât be persuaded no matter what a staff may do or say. As to your second statement, one of the ways a staff ensures that a kid is coachable (to them and their style) is to simply not recruit him if he is not a âfitâ, and Iâm not referring just to basketball âfit.â While I think coaches have a responsibility to mentor kids and help them become the kind of citizens that we would like them to be, the bottom line is this is college, not junior high or high school, where a lot of that should have already happened. There are just too many great kids out there with skill and athleticism who will come in and play their hearts out, be decent students and good teammates, and not create unnecessary distractions. Those are the kids JB wants. And those are the kids I want at Michigan, too. My hope is anyone we recruit would not only help us win, but would help us do it the right way. But then, maybe Iâm just old fashioned fuddy duddy who thinks kids ought to appreciate the opportunity to come to a great university and be coached and mentored by outstanding coaches. And I donât mean to start any arguments. This is just how I feel and what I believe.
1 Like
I agree with you for the most part - you donât want to take on kids with potential for criminal behavior and the like. I think there is a very fuzzy line between âswagâ and being a âbad appleâ that most traditional/conservative folks may get confused. A good example would be Russell Westbrook - talks a lot of smack, celebrates often, plays angry BUT is not a bad apple in any way. I think some people here probably think a guy like that wouldnât fit at UM based on âcultureâ. Corey Sanders is another good example
1 Like
I agree, itâs definitely a fine line. Weâve had a few guys who have butted heads with JB from time-to-time - Manny and Darius - and certainly they were still great players worth recruiting.
Some kids, I think, you just donât want to deal with their nonsense, or perhaps their parentsâ nonsense. But thatâs probably a small minority.
Another concern is with one and done kids. I think we certainly should recruit them, but JB has said he wants to be sure they fit into the team concept, and I think thatâs appropriate. Glenn and Mitch (both could easily declared) did. Booker would have.
I mean, how do we even tell who is a fit like that? We know very few of the recruits personally (some none at all, others a bit like MattD), so itâs very difficult for us to make a judgment on that. Most kids in college basketball go through their entire careers without engaging in anything other than marijuana (which I donât condemn at all, but thatâs a conversation for another day). I think JB is less likely to take a risk on a kid with behavior issues than other coaches, but that doesnât lessen the available talent pool all that much.
Stauskas wasnât a prim and proper guy on the court. He had bulldog in the yard in him. Same as Trey. And Mitch. I think Wagner does too. You canât have 13 of those guys, just as you canât have 13 Duncan Robinson personalities either.
1 Like
Youâre right. We donât know, but JB does, or at least he certainly should, and Iâm quite certain he makes every attempt to know. And I think thatâs important. Itâs also why I trust JBâs judgement MUCH more than I do a bunch of message board posters. I did, however, ask Matt if he had posted an interview because I love the questions he asks, and I enjoy reading the answers kids give to those questions. By the way, EVERY player you mentioned in paragraph two is a player for whom I have great respect. I said nothing about âswag.â I was talking solely about players who make it very difficult to coach and who create problems for the entire program. Iâm talking about âbad applesâ not âswag.â JB doesnât want âbad apples,â and while itâs not my decision, I wouldnât want them either. Thankfully there are a lot of players out there with talent and athleticism who are the kind of young men JB would love to coach; players, who in addition to being very good, are also team players, and and who are quite coachable and will allow themselves to be mentored. Thatâs all. And, again, Iâm not trying to argue with anyone about this. Just stating an opinion.