Potential recruiting of posts?

[sybarite]

Let's separate this discussion from what should be a thread of celebration. If you want to discuss recruitment, let's try to approach it with some form of logic and introspection.

1. Let's look at the list of uncommitted posts in Prospect Nation's Top 150

----2. Forward A'Ja Wilson
----14. Jatarie White
----27. Alyssa Rice
----28. Khaalia Hillsman
----32. Kristen Simon
----56. Kristina King
----63. Vionise Pierre-Louis
----78. Erykah Davenport
----89. Tyesha Taylor
---100. Alexis Jennings
---134. Ayanna Edwards

It is interesting that 8 of the top 32 are uncommitted. Of these, four are posts. That's half. It is also interesting that most of the prospects have committed somewhere. But, then of the posts remain uncommitted. Why?

2. Let's assume that you are looking at a prospect that is maybe #100. But, your evaluation suggests that that is based primarily on the fact that the prospect is a post. You may not think she will be that valuable for your team. Do you take her because she is a post? Is a post who will likely never contribute all that much or won't get you to the next level all that useful to your program? It is interesting that so many post prospects are still out there.

3. Let's assume that Sherri thinks that there are only about five prospects this year that could be valuable enough to raise the program. Does she give a scholarship to another prospect in whom she has less faith? Does she simply bring in any of those five that will visit and hope to get one of them? What is accomplished by bringing in someone who does not raise the bar?

4. We have no idea who Sherri has invited. Robeson did visit. We've heard that there is some interest in Hillsman. Is there someone else? Generally, we have little information. Did we have a clue that we were interested in Gileysa Penzo? This isn't like men's basketball. The women don't go bragging to the press that much.

5. If you can get the interior player you want, so be it. If not, do you just get the biggest player you can get? Would it be a good idea to find every potential scorer that you can get to come to OU? Not everyone you sign will be as good as you had hoped. But, teams that win have scorers. Stanford has set the bar on height. But, it's teams like Notre Dame, Louisville, etc. who keep getting into the Final Four because they have several who can score. Wouldn't it be good to have about five Aaryn's, some of whom might be a bit taller? Most of the players that Sherri seems to be recruiting or getting appear to be scorers---not necessarily shooters. If you have a bunch that can handle the ball and score, a little size goes a long way.

 

[sybarite]

It is also interesting who has a post committed:

15, Illinois Chatrice White
21. Ohio State Alexis Hart
37. Georgia Nasheema Oliver
68. Georgia Tech Erin Garner
69. Auburn Asia Robeson
90. Maryland Aja Ellison
97. Duke Erin Mathias
104 Baylor Micayla Buchner
115 Clemson Makayla Johnson
119 Virginia Commonwealth Yazmine Belk
121 NC State Akela Maize
143 Utah Joesetta Fatuesi

No North Carolina, Notre Dame, UConn, Louisville, Rutgers, Tennessee, Kentucky, LSU, Florida State, A&M, Stanford, UCLA, Texas, or Cal. But, VC and Utah get one?

 

[atlantasooner]

syb,
have you reviewed the last 3 classes of the schools you have mentioned not signing a post.
what does their PF/C depth look like??

 

[sybarite]

syb,
have you reviewed the last 3 classes of the schools you have mentioned not signing a post.
what does their PF/C depth look like??

If you mean did I research each one just prior to this post, no. Did you?

But, it may surprise you, although it shouldn't given the fact that I'm always looking things up, that I do study the rosters of teams in the top twenty several times a year. I'm usually familiar with their benches, their statistics within the team, etc.

Strangely enough, what they have on the bench doesn't translate directly to what they recruit.

 

[atlantasooner]

You are trying to make some point about the correlation between posts recruits not being valued by top programs.
I'm not.

And their roster of graduating players, upperclassman v underclassman mix, posts v guards, skills - strengths always translates into what they are recruiting in all sports.
To suggest otherwise, is pure folly.

 

[euphguy]

You are trying to make some point about the correlation between posts recruits not being valued by top programs.
I'm not.

And their roster of graduating players, upperclassman v underclassman mix, posts v guards, skills - strengths always translates into what they are recruiting in all sports.
To suggest otherwise, is pure folly.

True. Good point.

 

[sybarite]

You are trying to make some point about the correlation between posts recruits not being valued by top programs.
I'm not.

And their roster of graduating players, upperclassman v underclassman mix, posts v guards, skills - strengths always translates into what they are recruiting in all sports.
To suggest otherwise, is pure folly.

You have completely ignored the FACT that coaches make decisions of whom to recruit based on what is available. You don't recruit a quarterback if no good prospects are out there. You are limited by what you think is available.

I asked the question what of what was available, and did that have any influence on who was being recruited. You ignored that and assumed, erroneously, that they would recruit a post if they didn't have one. Whereas I raised the question of who you would recruit in a down year for posts, you just raced past that to insist that you recruit what you don't have. Do you really?

I am trying to inject some sense of reality into the board's discussion. What is a coach facing? How does that affect decisions. Don't race past that. That is what is folly.

 

[SoonerNorm]

If you look at the available post players last year and this year there were certainly some really good ones out theft. I don't think numbers were the problem.

 

[keysersose]

Might all of this not relate to how she wants to play? They went back to the 4-1 motion offense last year which requires a single post. Also, the ten-second clock will kick in. And, we've been too often beat up by deep athletic teams that press a lot (A&M, Lville, Mississippi, etc.) Even UCLA in the first game last year. So, maybe she's got a different theory about how to play going forward and thinks that depth on the perimeter is more important than size in the post. Especially if you might lose four players in one year to injury.

 

[atlantasooner]

keyser,
It's possible Sherri wants to counter punch by using a 4 guard lineup with 2 big wings and 1 athletic post player.
Will it work?

 

[keysersose]

If the wings can hit the corner 3 and if someone can defend the post. Corner 3's come naturally in the 4-1 motion and we have a long list of good ones. Hill, Rush, Welch, Stevenson, and McFarland come to mind. That will spread the floor. Looks as if Manning, Campbell, Kornet, and Little can all do it. As to who guards the post, looks as if we'd have three athletic players at 6'2" or above. Whether anybody likes it or not, that's what we've got.

 

[sybarite]

Might all of this not relate to how she wants to play? They went back to the 4-1 motion offense last year which requires a single post. Also, the ten-second clock will kick in. And, we've been too often beat up by deep athletic teams that press a lot (A&M, Lville, Mississippi, etc.) Even UCLA in the first game last year. So, maybe she's got a different theory about how to play going forward and thinks that depth on the perimeter is more important than size in the post. Especially if you might lose four players in one year to injury.

This is the reason for this thread. This is the type of discussion that needs to occur. What is Sherri thinking?

There is the possibility that Sherri is simply having difficulty recruiting a post. That doesn't appear to have been a problem in the past. Why now?

A team like Notre Dame has been interesting. They had so many scorers that you didn't know who to try to shut down. As a result, they overcame the lack of a true center. Since not every team has a great center, it becomes interesting to see how they did when they didn't have a great center.

This is a curious topic that could generate a lot of discussion of a type that we haven't had, an introspective look at what Sherri is facing and what she might be thinking. We don't really know. She may have a post coming in. She may not. But, it does appear that Sherri has decided to load up on potential scorers, not all of whom are shooters.

 

[atlantasooner]

syb,
You are right the talent out there does impact what you pursue to a degree. But you make a great point, perhaps one year you don't recruit a QB because of the talent available. But, no football program goes 3 years without recruiting a QB at some point you offer the best available and get depth into your program because not having QB depth will cripple your program. The same thing applies to DT recruiting. All the elite kids are in the SEC area but you have to find some impact kids.

None of the programs you listed as "sitting' out this year's post players (and we're still 2 months from signing day so that list may change) have sat out signing PF/C kids for 3 years in a row like OU is potentially doing.

 

[sybarite]

If the wings can hit the corner 3 and if someone can defend the post. Corner 3's come naturally in the 4-1 motion and we have a long list of good ones. Hill, Rush, Welch, Stevenson, and McFarland come to mind. That will spread the floor. Looks as if Manning, Campbell, Kornet, and Little can all do it. As to who guards the post, looks as if we'd have three athletic players at 6'2" or above. Whether anybody likes it or not, that's what we've got.

Let's not walk past this post either. It is quite possible that Sherri may be more concerned right now about scorers. We know that she did try to recruit Roberson, and I think she may have been surprised that Asia went to Auburn. That move astounds me. Why would you go from Kalamazoo to Bama?

But, we did lose to some teams that simply could score from different places on the floor while we were not quite so versatile. We were, in a sense, easier to defend. Just looking back to last year, when we had Jasmine at the point, there was a five on four defense on the other four players. They left her completely alone outside. If you put people on the floor who have difficulty putting the ball in the basket, other teams find you easy to defend. They can follow Aaryn everywhere she goes.

I don't really know which of the "scorers' that OU has recruited will work out. Derica's competition hasn't been the best. I haven't seen Gioya or T'Ona. I have not a clue what to expect from Penzo. She impressed someone to be on the All-FIBA team. I don't even know what to expect from Peyton. She played a lot, but she didn't shoot well as a freshman. We also have Williams, Ortiz, and Chelsea coming in. From this group, can we find three or four people who can score? Not all of them will make it. If three were to make it, we would have the foundation to challenge anyone.

Although Sherri did recruit Robeson, she may not have the emphasis on post that the board might have. Teams do play without posts. N. Carolina plays with a bunch of forwards a lot of the time, none of whom play back to the basket. They score.

If you think back through the history of basketball over the past fifty years, a lot of winners didn't have a post. Wooden won two national titles with nobody over 6-5, beating taller teams at a time when the tradition defined that you had to have 1,2,3,4,5. He didn't like coaching Alcindor's team. Bored him. Crum often coached without a true post. The Bullets won a pro title with a 6-6 center, who just happened to be almost that wide. UConn has won without a post.

I suspect that Sherri would feel better if she had one more interior player, whether a power forward type or post. But, do you recruit someone just for that reason?

Incidentally, Leach once used a linebacker as his quarterback, and he led the nation in passing.

 

[Soonerbay]

Basketball is a game of match-ups. The more diverse your team, the better the opportunity to prepare for any other team. Flexibility to run any offense and defend any offense is key.

 

[SoonerNorm]

If Sherri is planning to go with all scorers in the future, here are some questions I have:

1. Why would she stop contacting Danni Williams who made an unofficial to Norman and loved OU? This girl can score and she has 35 offers. She also happens to be a great student.

2. Is Sherri showing any interest in Brooke Alexander? We haven't received any reports that she is and we know Brooke really wants an OU offer. From what I've read and what has been reported on this board, Brooke's ability speaks for itself. When you consider that Cox is one of Brooke's very best friends, I would think showing some love to Brooke might at least get a visit from Cox.

3. Is Sherri recruiting Lauren Cox? I have not seen any reports that indicate she is on our radar. Even if she is, I don't think Sherri or anyone else is going to convince Cox (who has been compared to Delle Donne) to become a post player or play the majority of her time in the paint. Cox, like Danni Williams, will have offers from the best teams in the country. Seems like it's never too early to build a relationship with her.

4. Hearns (a 6'3" forward) is also a top player in the country from Texas whom OU has an interest in. Does OU have enough scorers to leave her out? Would Sherri try to convince her to play the post? If I'm a 4 who has WNBA ability, I think I would prefer to play the same position in college that I feel is going to be my position in the pros.

5. The other thing we have talked a little about is, which girls will leave when they see they have been recruited over. IF, between 1-3 girls decide to leave, that would open up more ships at some point in the future. It seems highly unlikely all of those girls will hang around if they are only playing mop-up minutes.

6. I think it is most likely Sherri will not sign anyone else for 2014 although, we do still have 2 ships available if she chooses to use them.

7. If Sherri signs no one else this year, and if no one leaves, we will have 3 ships to give in 2015 (Sharane will be the only senior) even though Sherri hasn't been known for using all 15 ships on a frequent basis. It will be very interesting to see who Sherri signs in that class.

8. Now, if Sherri does go with 4 guards, where does that leave Kaylon, Portia, Gibbs, and Shaya? Will Sherri still try to use them or will she go with players like Sharane or Kornet to play the 4 knowing both can shoot from outside?

 

[sybarite]

There is information on Brooke Alexander and Lauren Cox, but it is on the OUInsider pay board.

 

[keysersose]

Big data shows that the traditional classification of 5-4-3-2-1 does not correspond to how teams actually play. So, you start with what you have and figure out how that group of players can most effectively distribute the ball and score. I noticed that L'ville has signed to 6' wings, and assume that this fits into the way they want to play. Since none on this board can have any influence on (and apparently usually not much knowledge of) who is recruited, it seems to me more interesting to think about how the players we do have might play together. So I share the curiosity about what she'll do with this depth on the perimeter. The best I can come up with now is that she wants to run.

 

[sybarite]

Big data shows that the traditional classification of 5-4-3-2-1 does not correspond to how teams actually play. So, you start with what you have and figure out how that group of players can most effectively distribute the ball and score. I noticed that L'ville has signed to 6' wings, and assume that this fits into the way they want to play. Since none on this board can have any influence on (and apparently usually not much knowledge of) who is recruited, it seems to me more interesting to think about how the players we do have might play together. So I share the curiosity about what she'll do with this depth on the perimeter. The best I can come up with now is that she wants to run.

At some point in the past, I got the idea that Sherri's favorite was John Wooden, who probably should be the favorite of about anyone who likes basketball. Although Wooden had the All-Everything team of Alcindor, Lowe, Allen, Warren, and Wickes, among others, he was best known for simply having teams that played a ball-hawking defense and ran. I will never forget the sight of Hazzard or Goodrich making a steal, only to shoot a layup from eight-foot to the side when the defense got back. They never misses one of those layups (eight-foot jump shots). It was a fast game, and the forwards were also active in hawking the ball. The center was there for rebounds and defense.

I have always had the feeling that Sherri would rather push the ball. She talks of speed every year, especially since the Paris years. Something happens to keep us from running, like we lose our guards to ACLs. I think Sherri would love to have ten players who ran at the basket all night long, got twenty steals per game, and didn't know that there was a shot clock. I think it hurt her when we had people who couldn't score, although they played good defense. I may be wrong, but I think she is recruiting that player who can find a way to score, is willing to play defense, and doesn't have to be told to go into motion in a motion offense. In recent years, sometimes that motion offense seems very immobile. That just isn't Sherri.

I don't think you can be sure of who can play at this level. I think she has high hopes for some players who will find this a different game than they have seen. Some will work out. Some won't. I think that if we do recruit a back to the basket player like Asia Robeson or Hillsman, it is because they can move. I think Sherri has always been wanting to play a faster game, but didn't have the personnel. Now, she is recruiting enough of those types of players to give some who can do it. Now, if we can keep ACL's from killing us....

 

[sybarite]

I would like to thank everyone for some thoughts.