PDA

View Full Version : Is Filling All Scholarships Hurting Our Team?



pbriz
05-02-2011, 05:16 AM
Interesting thought I had but with all the recent transfers it seems as though having 13 guys that are fairly even in terms of talent may actually be hurting our team chemistry as 4-5 of those guys feel as though they aren't getting the time they deserve that they could get at another school.

I understand that it is nice to have backups as injuries are a common theme in Zag basketball, but would last years team have been better if 10 guys were on the roster and each knew his role throughout the year?

gu03alum
05-02-2011, 05:22 AM
13 scholarships is a good thing. It forces guys to work hard to keep their spot in the rotation which makes everyone better. It also gives you options if the guy that looked good as a 17 year old doesn't improve.

jazzdelmar
05-02-2011, 05:55 AM
Numbers mean nada in college bb. GU like all top programs needs three studs and up to five high quality role players. Right now, those slots are only partly filled. I agree, loading up on scholarship players of about equal talent is disastrous on many levels. Uncertain roles, exacerbated by Fews historic inability to develop a rotation til very late in the season, are problematic.

MickMick
05-02-2011, 06:33 AM
Time answers all.

If Zags go far, then a transformation took place. If Zags fall on their face, then recruiting mistakes are the culprit.

Either way, a lot of "I told ya so" comments will be made. If now is the time to choose sides, put me in the group that believes that Zag recruiting is evolving and access to higher level talent is the cause.

zag67
05-02-2011, 07:10 AM
Jazz, I think that you are missing part of the problem. You say that Few cannot pick a 8-9 man rotation early and stick with it. I think that the problem is more that with as many young people as we have had this last few years, the coaches need to try the ones they think will be there and some of those players have played themselves out of the picture.

So if you take last year, according to you, then Carter would never have made the rotation. Manny would have still been there, even though he was not performing. Stockton and Hart would have never got off the bench and you would not have allowed MK and MM to try and earn their minutes. The coaches have learned a lot about what MK and MM need to play at this level and Stockton has shown that he can play.

I do think with the injuries that we had early (Harris and Gray), Few did a fine job in letting the other players play themselves into or out of the lineup.

Now, if you feel the way you do, maybe you should take a year off, because the coaching staff is going to go through some of the same "opportunities" this year. We are going to have six new players, who will be trying to find themselves and the place they have on this team. The coaches need to play them early to find out how they will fit (even if it is later in their lives).

Hopefully starting in 2 years we will have a core in place that will allow most of your major minutes defined. But even then you use the "pre season" to work your new players into the system and at the same time recognize what you have. The problem with the GU schedule is our early schedule is as hard (and even harder) than our conference schedule.

IMO we need to create a base where we only have 3 or 4 new players coming each year and at the same time 3 or 4 graduating. This allows you to bring the new players in and not expect them to be super stars on day one. Look at Thomas and Gaddy for UW and also Silva for Louisville. It takes time to play at this level.

krozman
05-02-2011, 07:34 AM
Just take the example to a larger scale: the NFL draft. Some players are drafted to be superstars, some are taken to only motivate the veterans to work harder and to out perform their contract, and some are drafted to be practice squad, hoping maybe they'll get lucky enough to earn a spot on the roster.

Just because a player is given a scholarship doesn't mean Few expects them to all be superstars. HOWEVER, I think Few gives everyone a shot if they show it on the practice court, then in games.

zag67
05-02-2011, 08:35 AM
Kroz well stated. IF you perform in practice, you get the chance in games. If you perform in games, you get more minutes. An perform is not always scoring.

LongIslandZagFan
05-02-2011, 09:09 AM
Can someone point out to me a major program that leaves schollies open? This seems to be a really silly argument. Get used to the fact that guysvare going to go elsewhere. It isn't the coaching staff failing to see talent. The list of transfers out of GU is long. There are always going to be... Face it... It is reality.

krozman
05-02-2011, 09:16 AM
Can someone point out to me a major program that leaves schollies open? .

I guess theoretically some "one and done" amazing talent could de-commit somewhere and look here if a spot was open, but the assume that (1) that happens and (2) Gonzaga would be a front runner for that person, is such a fantastic scenario that I agree with you. Very silly argument.

Schmitty
05-02-2011, 09:32 AM
Can someone point out to me a major program that leaves schollies open? This seems to be a really silly argument. Get used to the fact that guysvare going to go elsewhere. It isn't the coaching staff failing to see talent. The list of transfers out of GU is long. There are always going to be... Face it... It is reality.

Exactly, and when schollies open up due to transfers the coaching staff tries to fill them, why wouldnt they? This further explains some of the "swing and misses" were seeing with the roster... If a scholly opens us late in the game, thus catching the staff off guard (not always the case, but it is sometimes), the staff has the luxury of taking a risk on a kid.. Not a lot left to choose from when a sudden departure happens.

MDABE80
05-02-2011, 12:59 PM
If a kid doesn't perform, is lazy or just doesn't fit in with his team members, that kid should be told. If no improvement...he should look elsewhere.
I'd say we have two or three of those yearly. One, maybe two, goes.
Sadly to me it looks more and more like an industry.
With the Calipari's of the world in full bloom (there are several who block the more traditional programs like GU from being successful), we need to not lower to their level but we do need to get some new stratgics in place. Not the tactics but the plan to succeed.

1998 is a looooong time ago. What worked then in recruiting may not work now. I don't know. The whole college basketball world is very different now.

We don't like the one and done group. It's rare we even pursue that bunch. BUt there are lots of kids who have tremendous talent and will stay for 2 or 3 years. We still like the same type of kid (under the radar) but we might need to get 2 or 3 special kids lik Jazz points out. Build the very good players around them. The problem is finding and signing those special kids. With the sharks running around with their minions in full force, it's a tough business.
We got the best recuirts this year. JC guys might help for a bit, but the type of kid we go after needs a full 4 years to develope. We don't get the playground stars. We pretty much get the normal kids with lots of talent and even MORE desire. I like those kids.

lawzag
05-02-2011, 04:52 PM
let me play devil's advocate here - I think the problem is recruiting & agreeing to sign 6 players when only ONE current player is graduating & 1 or 2 may transfer due to lack of playing time. If there aren't 6 spots, 6 players shouldn't be signed. By taking that action, the coaching staff is basically pushing out over 1/3 of the existing roster....because NCAA only allows 15 players on the team, so where do they plan to put these 6 new players? In the spots of existing players who may not have transfered, in not pushed out/replaced.

This is the third year (or is it fourth) that these conversations have occurred on this board, perhaps its a function of success ~ the team's success leads them to recruit higher profile players (not necessarily BETTER players than previously, just higher profile recruits) than in years past & these higher profile players expect to be starters immediately, so the recruiters promise that, and when it doesn't happen the players want to leave...

I'm just not sure that I personally classify that type of revolving door as "success". Without player's sticking around you don't give them the opportunity to develop & become that senior star...

just another point of view.

NorthoftheBorder
05-02-2011, 05:54 PM
Can someone point out to me a major program that leaves schollies open? This seems to be a really silly argument. Get used to the fact that guysvare going to go elsewhere. It isn't the coaching staff failing to see talent. The list of transfers out of GU is long. There are always going to be... Face it... It is reality.

Duke never uses up all 13 scholarships. Calipari hasn't used all 13 scholarships since he arrived at Kentucky (there was only 10 players on the roster this year and I'm not sure if they were all on scholarship).

I'm sure there's lot of schools that don't use all 13 scholarships because they know they can't keep 13 players happy (plus they want a few spots available for transfers).

DixieZag
05-02-2011, 07:03 PM
Time answers all.

If Zags go far, then a transformation took place. If Zags fall on their face, then recruiting mistakes are the culprit.

Either way, a lot of "I told ya so" comments will be made. If now is the time to choose sides, put me in the group that believes that Zag recruiting is evolving and access to higher level talent is the cause.


This is it. I am sure that somewhere in the bowels of the McCarthey center, 5 or 6 guys in kahkis and shortsleeve shirts have a pretty good idea of who is thinking what. They hold meetings to try to address the situation. Is Guy Flanders good enough? Is Bryce Jones just misunderstood or gas looking for a fire? Are we fairly sure that Pangos/Bell can start this year and be good D-1 players? So many questions.

NOT ONE of them has all the right answers. They simply go with what they feel is best at that point in time. Also - the Zags seldom use ALL their scholies, that is why they offer walk-ons one for the second semester - they left one or two open. Anyway, if the Zags win some good OOC games, win the WCC and win 3 or more in the tournament - they are geniuses. If they do not, they are being reckless.

Sometimes thats all it comes down to. If Jimmer wasn't hitting from 23 ft (bricking them like the next game) does GU go to the sweet sixteen in one of the wildest, weirdest, seasons ever??? I choose to remember our little team that couldn't beat LC High halfway through the year, dismantle ST. JOHN"S - do you KNOW what conference they are in????

Keeps me coming back, year after year.

MickMick
05-02-2011, 08:08 PM
You got it Dixie.

Personally, I'm growing weary of all this "sky is falling" stuff and am eagerly awaiting the upcoming season. If we can endure a summer of GU boards "doom and gloom", I expect we are going to like what we see with the new bunch coming in. All it takes is one good season of hoops to dispel all of this nonsense.