Recruit Lists v2.0

[Rhoadhoused]

I'm really talking track records here. Zero history of Doc being able to recruit HS players, albeit at Nebraska.

Zero record of Matt A landing good HS players. Granted this year he spent most of his time with one recruit and missed. I don't blame that on him. We swung for the fences and missed. That's ok. My point again is that his success has been with transfers and juco's, which are on a much shorter recruiting cycle.

Custer and Thomas were TJ recruits.

Matt had a bigger part in recruiting a lot of our players than you are letting on. For example, Niang had Hoiberg as his main recruiter, but do you really think that they were recruiting a player out east like that and Matt A didn't have a hand in it?

Fred Hoiberg himself said he has an ability to create relationships better than anyone he has ever met. If he was told to recruit more high school players, he would and he would be successful. Fred told him to recruit the biggest fish since Harrison Barnes and gave him that job.

And just because Tavon Sledge and Kerwin Okoro had to transfer out of the program doesn't make him a bad recruiter, it makes the staff as a whole look a little worse on evaluation (at worst),and is probably just a coincidence caused by recruiting over those players with transfers in more likelihood. He had to get those players to turn down some very good schools that were close to home for them and come to ISU before we had had any success.

That sounds a bit jumbled, but whatever.

 

[acgclone]

Why do you care? Would you rather we go sign crappy players for the sake of it?

Recruiting is totally secondary to winning, so at the end of the day, I just want good players. I couldn't care less if we recruit 100% 1-year transfers, as long as we win.

I was just pointing out that for those that are fixated on recruiting 4-yr players are going to be disappointed more times than not with Fred, because his strategy seems to be based on 40% transfers, 30% Jucos and 30% HS players.

Given who is on our staff, we're not going to win any HS recruiting beauty pageants.

Totally fine with me. I appreciate that taking the creative approach is pretty much your only option in Ames. I can't think of many examples in football or basketball of coaches who were able to land top talent consistently out of HS here.

You do need some HS recruiting, and we've done that with Ejim, Niang, Morris and Thomas. Hopefully Custer will be among that group too. Another thing that seems to help is that Hoiberg has no problem with helping recruiting misses, move on to a better situation, so they aren't trying up a scholarship for 4 years with no production.

 

[CloneinWDSM]

I think Hoiberg focuses in on 5-7 high school kids and recruits them as hard as possible. If they don't work out, he knows he can fall back on transfers and JUCO. He's not going to reach and offer High School kids that he doesn't think can be impact players.

 

[Cydkar]

Why do you care? Would you rather we go sign crappy players for the sake of it?

You don't care?

 

[The_Architect]

Amazing how the most recent few years of much success plus PR about our team and especially our coach, and these high school guys seem to just get tougher to get.

We're being negative recruited against very hard and effectively.

 

[Rhoadhoused]

You don't care?

Of course not. Why the hell would I care if our talent comes from one arbitrary pool of players as long as we are succeeding?

 

[Dingus]

We're being negative recruited against very hard and effectively.

If that's true it can be combated if they choose to.

 

[brokenloginagain]

We're being negative recruited against very hard and effectively.

...since the beginning of time.

 

[The_Architect]

...since the beginning of time.

It's even worse now.

1. Fred isn't going to be your coach for your 4 years
2. You will be recruited over by transfers

 

[Cyclones01]

It's even worse now.

1. Fred isn't going to be your coach for your 4 years
2. You will be recruited over by transfers

I'm not sure that's worse than what it used to be when we sucked for the better part of the last decade.

1. Fred stays long enough and eventually this pitch will be harder to sell

2. I don't think kids with the level of talent Fred has been targeting lately will be too worried by this.

I also think Fred can easily refute both of those points.

 

[Jsievers24]

It's even worse now.

1. Fred isn't going to be your coach for your 4 years
2. You will be recruited over by transfers

Wake up bro. If you're good enough you will play, HS recruit or transfer. This is like any other program in the nation that is making the tournament consistently - if you aren't good enough someone else will take your spot.

 

[Rhoadhoused]

Our last 4 high school recruits were 4 star players.


We're doing ok. FH is just being selective. That is it.

 

[acgclone]

It's even worse now.

1. Fred isn't going to be your coach for your 4 years
2. You will be recruited over by transfers

Negative recruiting has ALWAYS happened and will ALWAYS continue to happen. I'd rather schools tell recruits that we've over-recruit them and our coach will probably land in the NBA compared with the type of stuff that they told recruits when Gmac was our coach.

 

[Cydkar]

Of course not. Why the hell would I care if our talent comes from one arbitrary pool of players as long as we are succeeding?

Your fine with a large percentage of our options being "eliminated"?

 

[Cydkar]

Wake up bro. If you're good enough you will play, HS recruit or transfer. This is like any other program in the nation that is making the tournament consistently - if you aren't good enough someone else will take your spot.

You are ignoring the fact that the negativity is working. Argue all you want but it is working.

 

[The_Architect]

You are ignoring the fact that the negativity is working. Argue all you want but it is working.

This.

 

[bawbie]

We're being negative recruited against very hard and effectively.

What is your evidence of this?

 

[Rhoadhoused]

Your fine with a large percentage of our options being "eliminated"?

I'm fine with us choosing to eliminate inferior options. Like 3 star recruits we don't think can play. No signing high school kids who can't contribute just because that is the norm for schools when they miss on their top targets, or can't do any better. I'm excited our staff is progressive and has a plan that takes advantage of what other schools ignore.

And it has been extremely successful.

And like I have said, our last 3 recruits from high school were 4 stars. The year before that we signed Naz Long, George Niang (another 4 star), and Okoro.

That's a pretty damn solid percentage there. And there is a very slight chance that Okoro could've contributed if he stayed past his freshman year. But even if you count him as a complete bust that is a phenomenal percentage.

 

[State43]

I wish people who are negative recruiting would get called out on it. It would pretty much eliminate most of that crap.

 

[acgclone]

Assuming that negative recruiting is working against us in the HS market, it is up to our coaching staff to "out-sell" the opposing recruiters.

I would hope like hell we're saying... "Do you really want to go to KU (or fill in the blank school) and compete against a bunch of 5-stars that have likely been promised playing time?"

The schools that we're recruiting against are bringing in boatloads of talent too, so it's not as if competing against a transfer or two is any more challenging than competing against the players that KU, Wiscy, Marquette, Xavier, NC State, etc are bringing in.