2023 prospects and offers

mict085 said:
Why are we not recruiting Garrison?
Click to expand...

I'll give you two likely reasons:

1 - He isn't a great fit with what Moser wants out of his bigs. The guy, right now, is a defensive minded, thin (light, skinny, etc) 5 without much of an offensive game, especially away from the basket. Moser's system really needs a guy, even at the 5, that can be a threat from outside.

2 - If you are going to recruit a guy that isn't a great fit, you probably don't want to be competing with schools like KU, and even Arkansas. Garrison fits better on those two teams/styles, so why waste precious time recruiting a kid that isn't a great fit, and is being recruited by two semi-local schools that have been out-recruiting us anyways?
 
mict085 said:
Why are we not recruiting Garrison?
Click to expand...

as a former college coach I can say that it doesn't just come down to "hey this is good and we should recruit him"

There are a LOT of really talented players that coaches do not recruit for various reasons.....a lot has to do with the style of play you run, culture fit, academic fit, etc.

For me, I did not really look for PG's that were scoring PG's....I wanted guys who could play defense, distribute and limit TO's. Not every kid was a good fit.

For PF's I really looked for longer guys who were more of a G than a F.....someone with length who could shoot the 3 and put the ball on the floor and get to the rack. For me, it was the easiest spot on the floor to create matchup problems.

If a kid doesn't fit your scheme he isn't worth the time and resources to spend recruiting him.

You or I may like a kid that Moser simply doesn't see as a good fit in his system.
 
NorthCarolinaSooner said:
as a former college coach I can say that it doesn't just come down to "hey this is good and we should recruit him"

There are a LOT of really talented players that coaches do not recruit for various reasons.....a lot has to do with the style of play you run, culture fit, academic fit, etc.

For me, I did not really look for PG's that were scoring PG's....I wanted guys who could play defense, distribute and limit TO's. Not every kid was a good fit.

For PF's I really looked for longer guys who were more of a G than a F.....someone with length who could shoot the 3 and put the ball on the floor and get to the rack. For me, it was the easiest spot on the floor to create matchup problems.

If a kid doesn't fit your scheme he isn't worth the time and resources to spend recruiting him.

You or I may like a kid that Moser simply doesn't see as a good fit in his system.
Click to expand...

I've always enjoyed reading your perspectives from a coach's point of view. Thank you for sharing.
 
[TWEET]https://twitter.com/Cassidy_Rob/status/1530213164121456640[/TWEET]
 
NorthCarolinaSooner said:
as a former college coach I can say that it doesn't just come down to "hey this is good and we should recruit him"

There are a LOT of really talented players that coaches do not recruit for various reasons.....a lot has to do with the style of play you run, culture fit, academic fit, etc.

For me, I did not really look for PG's that were scoring PG's....I wanted guys who could play defense, distribute and limit TO's. Not every kid was a good fit.

For PF's I really looked for longer guys who were more of a G than a F.....someone with length who could shoot the 3 and put the ball on the floor and get to the rack. For me, it was the easiest spot on the floor to create matchup problems.

If a kid doesn't fit your scheme he isn't worth the time and resources to spend recruiting him.

You or I may like a kid that Moser simply doesn't see as a good fit in his system.
Click to expand...

Agreed! Good stuff!
 
NorthCarolinaSooner said:
as a former college coach I can say that it doesn't just come down to "hey this is good and we should recruit him"

There are a LOT of really talented players that coaches do not recruit for various reasons.....a lot has to do with the style of play you run, culture fit, academic fit, etc.

For me, I did not really look for PG's that were scoring PG's....I wanted guys who could play defense, distribute and limit TO's. Not every kid was a good fit.

For PF's I really looked for longer guys who were more of a G than a F.....someone with length who could shoot the 3 and put the ball on the floor and get to the rack. For me, it was the easiest spot on the floor to create matchup problems.

If a kid doesn't fit your scheme he isn't worth the time and resources to spend recruiting him.

You or I may like a kid that Moser simply doesn't see as a good fit in his system.
Click to expand...

I don't think a coach's system should be so rigid. Should be plenty of different plays out of different sets to accommodate different styles of players. Not enough talent on OU's roster to afford being picky. I do agree with not wasting recruiting resources on a player that is not likely to choose your school.
 
Last edited:
[TWEET]https://twitter.com/247HSHoops/status/1532419831781371905[/TWEET]
 
Dr Sleep said:
I don't think a coach's system should be so rigid. Should be plenty of different plays out of different sets to accommodate different styles of players. Not enough talent on OU's roster to afford being picky. I do agree with not wasting recruiting resources on a player that is not likely to choose your school.
Click to expand...


This is true at the HS level, where you coach what you have. At the college level you re ruin to your needs. Totally different mind set. With limited scholarships why would I ever recruit multiple guys who don't fit my scheme?
You can't be successful changing your entire dynamic to try to fit some kid in your team if his skill set doesn't fit. For example, my teams were never designed for the PG to be a scorer...what good would it do me to spend a lot of time looking for a scoring pg and trying to make him fit into the system when it would break everything else down?
It isn't about a rigid system as much as it is finding the RIGHT fit.
 
NorthCarolinaSooner said:
This is true at the HS level, where you coach what you have. At the college level you re ruin to your needs. Totally different mind set. With limited scholarships why would I ever recruit multiple guys who don't fit my scheme?
You can't be successful changing your entire dynamic to try to fit some kid in your team if his skill set doesn't fit. For example, my teams were never designed for the PG to be a scorer...what good would it do me to spend a lot of time looking for a scoring pg and trying to make him fit into the system when it would break everything else down?
It isn't about a rigid system as much as it is finding the RIGHT fit.
Click to expand...

I feel like at the high D-1 level, coaches need to be able to adapt. Sure, there are some examples of guys who stubbornly stuck to one system and managed to be successful over the long haul, but most guys who thrive for decades evolve. Self is a great example. For years, his staple was having two bigs and the high/low. The past few years, he has played a ton of small ball. To use your example, if the best high school PG in America is a great scorer and is seriously interested in coming to your school, if you coach at a blue blood, you probably recruit him even if you usually prefer a pass-first guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
ESPN Article: "Are Teams Passing on Trae Young Missing a Future Superstar?"
Replies
1
Views
2K
sperry
S
M
The Loyalty Game: How sneaker dollars transformed youth hoops
Replies
0
Views
2K
MsProudSooner
M
G
Texas AAU Team breakdown
Replies
7
Views
5K
SoonerDAZE
S
Big Old Booger
Guerrero injured in Friday night game
Replies
0
Views
2K
Big Old Booger
Big Old Booger
seniorsooner
Rotnei Clarke may leave Arkansas; interesting tidbit about his recruitment
7 8 9
Replies
164
Views
85K
boksooner
boksooner
Back
Top