NCAAbbs

A poster below copied his bio from the ESPN recruiting site. I went back and checked what the 84 rating means:

Scouts Inc. High School Grading System

80-89: High Major ProspectPlayer has the potential to start or significantly contribute as a freshman for most top national Division I programs.

Just for the sake of comparison, Courtney Fortson was given this rating last year. No doubt he is a major talent, although he still plays out of control.

Clearly the highest rated player we have signed since I became aware of recruit ratings. Carlos Rogers may have been rated this high, if the rating existed back then. However, he was an academic risk from day one. This kid is a coach's son who is described as having a "high basketball IQ". My guess is that he is an excellent student. Ynocpirt worries he may not return from Serbia. I have been assured that he's excited about returning to the States. I guess we'll see. We've all been craving a "shooter". A 6-6 shooter with a high basketball IQ and a rating of 84 from ESPN is more than I ever dreamed of. Let's keep our fingers crossed that he makes it to campus and is as good as advertised. Again I don't think grades, attitude, or effort will be an issue with this kid.

I always like Serbian players they can shoot the lights out...but the only knock against alot of them is they can't play a lick of D against more athletic players.

(02-08-2009 02:59 AM)LR Alum Wrote: [ -> ]I always like Serbian players they can shoot the lights out...but the only knock against alot of them is they can't play a lick of D against more athletic players.

Well, I guess thank goodness we have such a great defensive coach in Sheilds to assist in that area! :)

I am really excited about Cicic. He may be the first great, great shooter we've had since Barksdale, but possibly smarter due to high "Basketball IQ" given that his dad was a coach. We've really positioned ourselves to be great on the perimeter for years to come. Now if we can just do the same inside! Time will tell in that.

(02-08-2009 02:59 AM)LR Alum Wrote: [ -> ]I always like Serbian players they can shoot the lights out...but the only knock against alot of them is they can't play a lick of D against more athletic players.

We know he won't play for Steve if he can't play defense. Maybe, since his father is a coach he is more schooled in defense than the average Serbian player. With Bozeman at the point, and Stevie at the 2, you know Steve is going to want a "long armed" defender out there. Hopefully, Cicic can fit the bill. While he will be a freshman, the ESPN rating describes him as a player who could come in and play as a freshman on the major college level. Again, I don't think we've ever signed a freshman with those kind of accolades.

(02-08-2009 01:17 AM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]A poster below copied his bio from the ESPN recruiting site. I went back and checked what the 84 rating means:

Scouts Inc. High School Grading System

80-89: High Major ProspectPlayer has the potential to start or significantly contribute as a freshman for most top national Division I programs.

Just for the sake of comparison, Courtney Fortson was given this rating last year. No doubt he is a major talent, although he still plays out of control.

Clearly the highest rated player we have signed since I became aware of recruit ratings. Carlos Rogers may have been rated this high, if the rating existed back then. However, he was an academic risk from day one. This kid is a coach's son who is described as having a "high basketball IQ". My guess is that he is an excellent student. Ynocpirt worries he may not return from Serbia. I have been assured that he's excited about returning to the States. I guess we'll see. We've all been craving a "shooter". A 6-6 shooter with a high basketball IQ and a rating of 84 from ESPN is more than I ever dreamed of. Let's keep our fingers crossed that he makes it to campus and is as good as advertised. Again I don't think grades, attitude, or effort will be an issue with this kid.

I don't know how Will Coleman was rated as a high school player, but he's rated the number two Juco player in the country. That would have been a big boost to our program if we could have gotten him into school and kept him there.

That doesn't stop us from playing Matt.

There are a lot of players who don't have to play D in high school who have to when they get to college, and who do.

We keep hoping for the one player that helps us make the step forward. Maybe this is it.

[quote='Ynocpirt' pid='3969024' dateline='1234116294']
That doesn't stop us from playing Matt.
[/quote

Matt will likely continue to be a nice role player for us off the bench. Maybe be a little tougher for him to get minutes if these recruits are as advertised. But I agree with LRTrojan that we need to see them first, and with Ynocpirt that we need to see them make it to campus.

A good shooter will always have a place.

http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/recruitin...son%3d2009

hope the link works. most everyone in the belt signed players in the 80's. so, either the league is about to be a 3 bid league or espn has designed everyone can "play."

(02-08-2009 03:30 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/recruitin...son%3d2009

hope the link works. most everyone in the belt signed players in the 80's. so, either the league is about to be a 3 bid league or espn has designed everyone can "play."

Right now I'd love to be an annual two bid league. Don't think three is going to happen for awhile, unless a couple of new teams like Memphis or Gonzaga join the Sun Belt.

ESPN says there are 20+ players signed by belt teams with an 80 or better. With that much talent entering the league we would be a 3 bid league. I think espn is ranking everyone too high.

Last years belt class had 2 players ranked 80 or better. That is right 2. Now we have 20+. That means we have 20 SEC calibur players entering the belt. Anyone believe that?

(02-08-2009 03:41 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN says there are 20+ players signed by belt teams with an 80 or better. With that much talent entering the league we would be a 3 bid league. I think espn is ranking everyone too high.

Last years belt class had 2 players ranked 80 or better. That is right 2. Now we have 20+. That means we have 20 SEC calibur players entering the belt. Anyone believe that?

That is bizarre. Is it possible that getting two teams in the NCAA and WKU to the Sweet 16 opened up kids eyes to the Sun Belt? Is it possible that Jarvis used his Big East ties to sign 5 BCS type players? I doubt either it true. Brings me back to reality on this Cicic kid. I guess I need to see him before I relegate III to the bench.

And, he will be only a freshman.

(02-08-2009 04:26 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 03:41 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN says there are 20+ players signed by belt teams with an 80 or better. With that much talent entering the league we would be a 3 bid league. I think espn is ranking everyone too high.

Last years belt class had 2 players ranked 80 or better. That is right 2. Now we have 20+. That means we have 20 SEC calibur players entering the belt. Anyone believe that?

That is bizarre. Is it possible that getting two teams in the NCAA and WKU to the Sweet 16 opened up kids eyes to the Sun Belt? Is it possible that Jarvis used his Big East ties to sign 5 BCS type players? I doubt either it true. Brings me back to reality on this Cicic kid. I guess I need to see him before I relegate III to the bench.

Yes, how do you think the MVC did it? Missouri St. had that breakthrough year and then the floodgates opened.

Look it, FIU/FAU have been sitting on a goldmine of talent, it was a matter of time before they broke through. MTSU has been recruiting well for several years now but have pissed it away. Ditto USA. From what I have read / heard WKU's class is very legit, several players ranked at thier position. Laury has had THREE QUADRUPLE DOUBLES his senior season.

Last year was a breakthrough year for the SBC. I really believe that. As someone wisely observed these classes will not fully pay off for another couple of years. But things are looking UP.

(02-08-2009 05:43 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 04:26 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 03:41 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN says there are 20+ players signed by belt teams with an 80 or better. With that much talent entering the league we would be a 3 bid league. I think espn is ranking everyone too high.

Last years belt class had 2 players ranked 80 or better. That is right 2. Now we have 20+. That means we have 20 SEC calibur players entering the belt. Anyone believe that?

That is bizarre. Is it possible that getting two teams in the NCAA and WKU to the Sweet 16 opened up kids eyes to the Sun Belt? Is it possible that Jarvis used his Big East ties to sign 5 BCS type players? I doubt either it true. Brings me back to reality on this Cicic kid. I guess I need to see him before I relegate III to the bench.

Yes, how do you think the MVC did it? Missouri St. had that breakthrough year and then the floodgates opened.

Look it, FIU/FAU have been sitting on a goldmine of talent, it was a matter of time before they broke through. MTSU has been recruiting well for several years now but have pissed it away. Ditto USA. From what I have read / heard WKU's class is very legit, several players ranked at thier position. Laury has had THREE QUADRUPLE DOUBLES his senior season.

Last year was a breakthrough year for the SBC. I really believe that. As someone wisely observed these classes will not fully pay off for another couple of years. But things are looking UP.

The MVC's breakout year ~10 years involved only 1 2nd round draft pick, Buford of CU. That year Mo. St. (SMS), CU and Evensville (of all things) had good ball players but no supermen in the league. The SMS team had two good guards and a 6'11" skilled big that got a cup of tea in the NBA.

For the most part the MVC's turning point was scheduling and getting together a plan, as a league, to get their basketball moving forward. About 5 years later they had a deal with CBS for their tournament finals that got them away from the evil ESPN that holds us down as a league.

I hope that the league is bringing in 20 BCS players. Having been a season ticket holder for the Billikens when CUSA was still CUSA (Marquette, Depaul, Memphis, Louisville, UNCC, Cini) there was drop off in over all talent and coaching moving to SBC country.

With 20 BCS players and a couple ex-BCS coaches hopefully the league can keep building on the respect WKU got for us last year.

(02-08-2009 06:48 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 05:43 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 04:26 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 03:41 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN says there are 20+ players signed by belt teams with an 80 or better. With that much talent entering the league we would be a 3 bid league. I think espn is ranking everyone too high.

Last years belt class had 2 players ranked 80 or better. That is right 2. Now we have 20+. That means we have 20 SEC calibur players entering the belt. Anyone believe that?

That is bizarre. Is it possible that getting two teams in the NCAA and WKU to the Sweet 16 opened up kids eyes to the Sun Belt? Is it possible that Jarvis used his Big East ties to sign 5 BCS type players? I doubt either it true. Brings me back to reality on this Cicic kid. I guess I need to see him before I relegate III to the bench.

Yes, how do you think the MVC did it? Missouri St. had that breakthrough year and then the floodgates opened.

Look it, FIU/FAU have been sitting on a goldmine of talent, it was a matter of time before they broke through. MTSU has been recruiting well for several years now but have pissed it away. Ditto USA. From what I have read / heard WKU's class is very legit, several players ranked at thier position. Laury has had THREE QUADRUPLE DOUBLES his senior season.

Last year was a breakthrough year for the SBC. I really believe that. As someone wisely observed these classes will not fully pay off for another couple of years. But things are looking UP.

The MVC's breakout year ~10 years involved only 1 2nd round draft pick, Buford of CU. That year Mo. St. (SMS), CU and Evensville (of all things) had good ball players but no supermen in the league. The SMS team had two good guards and a 6'11" skilled big that got a cup of tea in the NBA.

For the most part the MVC's turning point was scheduling and getting together a plan, as a league, to get their basketball moving forward. About 5 years later they had a deal with CBS for their tournament finals that got them away from the evil ESPN that holds us down as a league.

I hope that the league is bringing in 20 BCS players. Having been a season ticket holder for the Billikens when CUSA was still CUSA (Marquette, Depaul, Memphis, Louisville, UNCC, Cini) there was drop off in over all talent and coaching moving to SBC country.

With 20 BCS players and a couple ex-BCS coaches hopefully the league can keep building on the respect WKU got for us last year.

Just because a player gets a score of 80+ doesn't mean they are a an automatic NBA 1rst rounder or something. It just means that before the college career is over they should be a pretty good college player.

(02-08-2009 08:26 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 06:48 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 05:43 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 04:26 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 03:41 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN says there are 20+ players signed by belt teams with an 80 or better. With that much talent entering the league we would be a 3 bid league. I think espn is ranking everyone too high.

Last years belt class had 2 players ranked 80 or better. That is right 2. Now we have 20+. That means we have 20 SEC calibur players entering the belt. Anyone believe that?

That is bizarre. Is it possible that getting two teams in the NCAA and WKU to the Sweet 16 opened up kids eyes to the Sun Belt? Is it possible that Jarvis used his Big East ties to sign 5 BCS type players? I doubt either it true. Brings me back to reality on this Cicic kid. I guess I need to see him before I relegate III to the bench.

Yes, how do you think the MVC did it? Missouri St. had that breakthrough year and then the floodgates opened.

Look it, FIU/FAU have been sitting on a goldmine of talent, it was a matter of time before they broke through. MTSU has been recruiting well for several years now but have pissed it away. Ditto USA. From what I have read / heard WKU's class is very legit, several players ranked at thier position. Laury has had THREE QUADRUPLE DOUBLES his senior season.

Last year was a breakthrough year for the SBC. I really believe that. As someone wisely observed these classes will not fully pay off for another couple of years. But things are looking UP.

The MVC's breakout year ~10 years involved only 1 2nd round draft pick, Buford of CU. That year Mo. St. (SMS), CU and Evensville (of all things) had good ball players but no supermen in the league. The SMS team had two good guards and a 6'11" skilled big that got a cup of tea in the NBA.

For the most part the MVC's turning point was scheduling and getting together a plan, as a league, to get their basketball moving forward. About 5 years later they had a deal with CBS for their tournament finals that got them away from the evil ESPN that holds us down as a league.

I hope that the league is bringing in 20 BCS players. Having been a season ticket holder for the Billikens when CUSA was still CUSA (Marquette, Depaul, Memphis, Louisville, UNCC, Cini) there was drop off in over all talent and coaching moving to SBC country.

With 20 BCS players and a couple ex-BCS coaches hopefully the league can keep building on the respect WKU got for us last year.

Just because a player gets a score of 80+ doesn't mean they are a an automatic NBA 1rst rounder or something. It just means that before the college career is over they should be a pretty good college player.

Looks like they may have changed the grading system. Compare the following with what I posted above. The current rating system basically says a player in the 80's should end up being a decent midmajor player:

Scouts Inc. High School Basketball Grading System

98-100: High-major plus prospect
Player demonstrates rare abilities. He should have an immediate impact at a national program with the potential for early entry into the NBA.
94-97: High-major prospect
Player has the potential to significantly contribute as a freshman for most national programs. He could be a three- or four-year starter and have an opportunity for all-league honors.

90-93: High-major minus prospect
Player has the potential to significantly contribute to a national program as a freshman. He could be a four-year contributor with an opportunity to start over the course of his career.

87-89: Mid-major plus prospect
Player could contribute for three or four years at a high-major program or have a significant impact as a freshman at a mid-major program.

83-86: Mid-major prospect
Player should be a solid contributor and two- or three-year starter at a mid-major program.

80-82: Mid-major minus prospect
Player could be a three- or four-year contributor with an opportunity to eventually start at a mid-major program.


77-79: Low-major plus prospect
Player could contribute at a mid-major school but should be a significant contributor as a freshman at a low-major program.


73-76: Low-major prospect
Player should be a solid contributor and two- or three-year starter at a low-major program.


70-72: Low-major minus prospect
Player could be a three- or four-year contributor with an opportunity to eventually start at a low-major program.



40: Pending Prospect
Player evaluation is pending film.

(02-08-2009 09:45 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 08:26 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 06:48 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 05:43 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 04:26 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 03:41 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN says there are 20+ players signed by belt teams with an 80 or better. With that much talent entering the league we would be a 3 bid league. I think espn is ranking everyone too high.

Last years belt class had 2 players ranked 80 or better. That is right 2. Now we have 20+. That means we have 20 SEC calibur players entering the belt. Anyone believe that?

That is bizarre. Is it possible that getting two teams in the NCAA and WKU to the Sweet 16 opened up kids eyes to the Sun Belt? Is it possible that Jarvis used his Big East ties to sign 5 BCS type players? I doubt either it true. Brings me back to reality on this Cicic kid. I guess I need to see him before I relegate III to the bench.

Yes, how do you think the MVC did it? Missouri St. had that breakthrough year and then the floodgates opened.

Look it, FIU/FAU have been sitting on a goldmine of talent, it was a matter of time before they broke through. MTSU has been recruiting well for several years now but have pissed it away. Ditto USA. From what I have read / heard WKU's class is very legit, several players ranked at thier position. Laury has had THREE QUADRUPLE DOUBLES his senior season.

Last year was a breakthrough year for the SBC. I really believe that. As someone wisely observed these classes will not fully pay off for another couple of years. But things are looking UP.

The MVC's breakout year ~10 years involved only 1 2nd round draft pick, Buford of CU. That year Mo. St. (SMS), CU and Evensville (of all things) had good ball players but no supermen in the league. The SMS team had two good guards and a 6'11" skilled big that got a cup of tea in the NBA.

For the most part the MVC's turning point was scheduling and getting together a plan, as a league, to get their basketball moving forward. About 5 years later they had a deal with CBS for their tournament finals that got them away from the evil ESPN that holds us down as a league.

I hope that the league is bringing in 20 BCS players. Having been a season ticket holder for the Billikens when CUSA was still CUSA (Marquette, Depaul, Memphis, Louisville, UNCC, Cini) there was drop off in over all talent and coaching moving to SBC country.

With 20 BCS players and a couple ex-BCS coaches hopefully the league can keep building on the respect WKU got for us last year.

Just because a player gets a score of 80+ doesn't mean they are a an automatic NBA 1rst rounder or something. It just means that before the college career is over they should be a pretty good college player.

Looks like they may have changed the grading system. Compare the following with what I posted above. The current rating system basically says a player in the 80's should end up being a decent midmajor player:

Scouts Inc. High School Basketball Grading System

98-100: High-major plus prospect
Player demonstrates rare abilities. He should have an immediate impact at a national program with the potential for early entry into the NBA.
94-97: High-major prospect
Player has the potential to significantly contribute as a freshman for most national programs. He could be a three- or four-year starter and have an opportunity for all-league honors.

90-93: High-major minus prospect
Player has the potential to significantly contribute to a national program as a freshman. He could be a four-year contributor with an opportunity to start over the course of his career.

87-89: Mid-major plus prospect
Player could contribute for three or four years at a high-major program or have a significant impact as a freshman at a mid-major program.

83-86: Mid-major prospect
Player should be a solid contributor and two- or three-year starter at a mid-major program.

80-82: Mid-major minus prospect
Player could be a three- or four-year contributor with an opportunity to eventually start at a mid-major program.


77-79: Low-major plus prospect
Player could contribute at a mid-major school but should be a significant contributor as a freshman at a low-major program.


73-76: Low-major prospect
Player should be a solid contributor and two- or three-year starter at a low-major program.


70-72: Low-major minus prospect
Player could be a three- or four-year contributor with an opportunity to eventually start at a low-major program.



40: Pending Prospect
Player evaluation is pending film.

One more thing on Cicic. ESPN/Scout rates him as the #109 shooting guard in the country. Since there are likely less "true" centers on their list, it is probably safe to say Cicic is considered a Top 500 player. That's probably pretty good for us. I remember Mike Hamrick showing me that Muntrelle Dobbins was in the 190's on Gibbons recruit listing when we signed him. I'm pretty sure Malik Dixon was likely in the Top 500. I remember watching him on TV in an All-star game that pitted Chicago's top players agains some other all-star team. I think Joe Stephens was pretty highly rated when he originally went to Colorado from Houston, but we got him as a transfer.
I can't think of a top rated high school player coming here since Jim Platt left. That's been awhile.

(02-08-2009 09:57 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 09:45 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 08:26 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 06:48 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 05:43 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 04:26 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 03:41 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN says there are 20+ players signed by belt teams with an 80 or better. With that much talent entering the league we would be a 3 bid league. I think espn is ranking everyone too high.

Last years belt class had 2 players ranked 80 or better. That is right 2. Now we have 20+. That means we have 20 SEC calibur players entering the belt. Anyone believe that?

That is bizarre. Is it possible that getting two teams in the NCAA and WKU to the Sweet 16 opened up kids eyes to the Sun Belt? Is it possible that Jarvis used his Big East ties to sign 5 BCS type players? I doubt either it true. Brings me back to reality on this Cicic kid. I guess I need to see him before I relegate III to the bench.

Yes, how do you think the MVC did it? Missouri St. had that breakthrough year and then the floodgates opened.

Look it, FIU/FAU have been sitting on a goldmine of talent, it was a matter of time before they broke through. MTSU has been recruiting well for several years now but have pissed it away. Ditto USA. From what I have read / heard WKU's class is very legit, several players ranked at thier position. Laury has had THREE QUADRUPLE DOUBLES his senior season.

Last year was a breakthrough year for the SBC. I really believe that. As someone wisely observed these classes will not fully pay off for another couple of years. But things are looking UP.

The MVC's breakout year ~10 years involved only 1 2nd round draft pick, Buford of CU. That year Mo. St. (SMS), CU and Evensville (of all things) had good ball players but no supermen in the league. The SMS team had two good guards and a 6'11" skilled big that got a cup of tea in the NBA.

For the most part the MVC's turning point was scheduling and getting together a plan, as a league, to get their basketball moving forward. About 5 years later they had a deal with CBS for their tournament finals that got them away from the evil ESPN that holds us down as a league.

I hope that the league is bringing in 20 BCS players. Having been a season ticket holder for the Billikens when CUSA was still CUSA (Marquette, Depaul, Memphis, Louisville, UNCC, Cini) there was drop off in over all talent and coaching moving to SBC country.

With 20 BCS players and a couple ex-BCS coaches hopefully the league can keep building on the respect WKU got for us last year.

Just because a player gets a score of 80+ doesn't mean they are a an automatic NBA 1rst rounder or something. It just means that before the college career is over they should be a pretty good college player.

Looks like they may have changed the grading system. Compare the following with what I posted above. The current rating system basically says a player in the 80's should end up being a decent midmajor player:

Scouts Inc. High School Basketball Grading System

98-100: High-major plus prospect
Player demonstrates rare abilities. He should have an immediate impact at a national program with the potential for early entry into the NBA.
94-97: High-major prospect
Player has the potential to significantly contribute as a freshman for most national programs. He could be a three- or four-year starter and have an opportunity for all-league honors.

90-93: High-major minus prospect
Player has the potential to significantly contribute to a national program as a freshman. He could be a four-year contributor with an opportunity to start over the course of his career.

87-89: Mid-major plus prospect
Player could contribute for three or four years at a high-major program or have a significant impact as a freshman at a mid-major program.

83-86: Mid-major prospect
Player should be a solid contributor and two- or three-year starter at a mid-major program.

80-82: Mid-major minus prospect
Player could be a three- or four-year contributor with an opportunity to eventually start at a mid-major program.


77-79: Low-major plus prospect
Player could contribute at a mid-major school but should be a significant contributor as a freshman at a low-major program.


73-76: Low-major prospect
Player should be a solid contributor and two- or three-year starter at a low-major program.


70-72: Low-major minus prospect
Player could be a three- or four-year contributor with an opportunity to eventually start at a low-major program.



40: Pending Prospect
Player evaluation is pending film.

One more thing on Cicic. ESPN/Scout rates him as the #109 shooting guard in the country. Since there are likely less "true" centers on their list, it is probably safe to say Cicic is considered a Top 500 player. That's probably pretty good for us. I remember Mike Hamrick showing me that Muntrelle Dobbins was in the 190's on Gibbons recruit listing when we signed him. I'm pretty sure Malik Dixon was likely in the Top 500. I remember watching him on TV in an All-star game that pitted Chicago's top players agains some other all-star team. I think Joe Stephens was pretty highly rated when he originally went to Colorado from Houston, but we got him as a transfer.
I can't think of a top rated high school player coming here since Jim Platt left. That's been awhile.

You've definitely been getting a lot of research in. Thank you for sharing with us! I still feel pretty good about Cicic, because of those intangibles (coaches son, etc.), but ultimately only time will tell.

And you're right, it seems we've not had a big name recruit here since Platt. Dang. The one thing I'll give the man is he could recruit like crazy. Of course they all walked out him but oh well...

(02-08-2009 11:44 PM)eh9198 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 09:57 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 09:45 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 08:26 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 06:48 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 05:43 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 04:26 PM)mjs Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2009 03:41 PM)insideualr Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN says there are 20+ players signed by belt teams with an 80 or better. With that much talent entering the league we would be a 3 bid league. I think espn is ranking everyone too high.

Last years belt class had 2 players ranked 80 or better. That is right 2. Now we have 20+. That means we have 20 SEC calibur players entering the belt. Anyone believe that?

That is bizarre. Is it possible that getting two teams in the NCAA and WKU to the Sweet 16 opened up kids eyes to the Sun Belt? Is it possible that Jarvis used his Big East ties to sign 5 BCS type players? I doubt either it true. Brings me back to reality on this Cicic kid. I guess I need to see him before I relegate III to the bench.

Yes, how do you think the MVC did it? Missouri St. had that breakthrough year and then the floodgates opened.

Look it, FIU/FAU have been sitting on a goldmine of talent, it was a matter of time before they broke through. MTSU has been recruiting well for several years now but have pissed it away. Ditto USA. From what I have read / heard WKU's class is very legit, several players ranked at thier position. Laury has had THREE QUADRUPLE DOUBLES his senior season.

Last year was a breakthrough year for the SBC. I really believe that. As someone wisely observed these classes will not fully pay off for another couple of years. But things are looking UP.

The MVC's breakout year ~10 years involved only 1 2nd round draft pick, Buford of CU. That year Mo. St. (SMS), CU and Evensville (of all things) had good ball players but no supermen in the league. The SMS team had two good guards and a 6'11" skilled big that got a cup of tea in the NBA.

For the most part the MVC's turning point was scheduling and getting together a plan, as a league, to get their basketball moving forward. About 5 years later they had a deal with CBS for their tournament finals that got them away from the evil ESPN that holds us down as a league.

I hope that the league is bringing in 20 BCS players. Having been a season ticket holder for the Billikens when CUSA was still CUSA (Marquette, Depaul, Memphis, Louisville, UNCC, Cini) there was drop off in over all talent and coaching moving to SBC country.

With 20 BCS players and a couple ex-BCS coaches hopefully the league can keep building on the respect WKU got for us last year.

Just because a player gets a score of 80+ doesn't mean they are a an automatic NBA 1rst rounder or something. It just means that before the college career is over they should be a pretty good college player.

Looks like they may have changed the grading system. Compare the following with what I posted above. The current rating system basically says a player in the 80's should end up being a decent midmajor player:

Scouts Inc. High School Basketball Grading System

98-100: High-major plus prospect
Player demonstrates rare abilities. He should have an immediate impact at a national program with the potential for early entry into the NBA.
94-97: High-major prospect
Player has the potential to significantly contribute as a freshman for most national programs. He could be a three- or four-year starter and have an opportunity for all-league honors.

90-93: High-major minus prospect
Player has the potential to significantly contribute to a national program as a freshman. He could be a four-year contributor with an opportunity to start over the course of his career.

87-89: Mid-major plus prospect
Player could contribute for three or four years at a high-major program or have a significant impact as a freshman at a mid-major program.

83-86: Mid-major prospect
Player should be a solid contributor and two- or three-year starter at a mid-major program.

80-82: Mid-major minus prospect
Player could be a three- or four-year contributor with an opportunity to eventually start at a mid-major program.


77-79: Low-major plus prospect
Player could contribute at a mid-major school but should be a significant contributor as a freshman at a low-major program.


73-76: Low-major prospect
Player should be a solid contributor and two- or three-year starter at a low-major program.


70-72: Low-major minus prospect
Player could be a three- or four-year contributor with an opportunity to eventually start at a low-major program.



40: Pending Prospect
Player evaluation is pending film.

One more thing on Cicic. ESPN/Scout rates him as the #109 shooting guard in the country. Since there are likely less "true" centers on their list, it is probably safe to say Cicic is considered a Top 500 player. That's probably pretty good for us. I remember Mike Hamrick showing me that Muntrelle Dobbins was in the 190's on Gibbons recruit listing when we signed him. I'm pretty sure Malik Dixon was likely in the Top 500. I remember watching him on TV in an All-star game that pitted Chicago's top players agains some other all-star team. I think Joe Stephens was pretty highly rated when he originally went to Colorado from Houston, but we got him as a transfer.
I can't think of a top rated high school player coming here since Jim Platt left. That's been awhile.

You've definitely been getting a lot of research in. Thank you for sharing with us! I still feel pretty good about Cicic, because of those intangibles (coaches son, etc.), but ultimately only time will tell.

And you're right, it seems we've not had a big name recruit here since Platt. Dang. The one thing I'll give the man is he could recruit like crazy. Of course they all walked out him but oh well...

Ya, I really don't know what makes someone a good/great recruiter. Jim was truly a nice guy and maybe kids and parents could see that he wasn't the type to just sell them a bill of goods. On the other hand, he really couldn't relate to or deal appropriately with the player's once they got here. He had standards which may have worked ten years earlier but not when he took over. For example, I think he wouldn't allow the players to walk around listening to CD players (that was before ipods) when they went on road trips. Eventually the players just rebelled. Of course that led to a terrible situation for Mike Hamrick- you can't let the inmates run the institution, but if all your players leave...