PDA

View Full Version : WSU's recruiting class for 2008



tyra
11-15-2007, 05:38 PM
If this has been posted I apologize. I couldn't find it.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/cougars/2004014808_hooprecruits15.html

Looks like WSU is building on its successes. That's good. Perhaps the Bennett era is really here.

cbbfanatic
11-15-2007, 07:23 PM
youd hope they could get at least one top 100 kid if they really want to capitalize on their success.

sure, kids overachieve all the time, but you dont want to have to rely on that to compete, you want some kids that are more along the lines of sure fire college contributors.

i dont see bringing in 5 3star kids as "building" on success...

building on success is getting bouldin, heytvelt, daye, etc to sign at gonzaga.

TM27
11-15-2007, 08:37 PM
youd hope they could get at least one top 100 kid if they really want to capitalize on their success.

sure, kids overachieve all the time, but you dont want to have to rely on that to compete, you want some kids that are more along the lines of sure fire college contributors.

i dont see bringing in 5 3star kids as "building" on success...

building on success is getting bouldin, heytvelt, daye, etc to sign at gonzaga.

hmm...I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this. As college basketball players prove everyday high school rankings dont mean a damn thing! BTW Heytvelt a 3/4 (depending where you look) star recruit, Adam Morrison a 3 star recruit, Pargo a 3 star recruit.... If it was based strictly on "stars" handed out by old men and women then why play the game?

This is a very good class for the team from Pullman! You build a TEAM by bringing in players that fit your system. This group seems to be a great fit for Tony Bennett and for Bennett ball. If they follow this class up by grabbing a couple of other 3 star/4 star players , that fill their needs (a bruiser) they will be in great shape. Not to mention the following years class, and the next, and the next...that is how you build a program. This is a great foundation for Bennett and I tip my cap to the Palouse on job well done.

SteeleMan
11-15-2007, 09:38 PM
nicely said, TM27

Birddog
11-16-2007, 05:22 AM
I don't see the words "Gonzaga", "Bulldog", or "Zag" anywhere in this thread. Ooops, now I see them, damn! It just goes to show you.

Birddog

thickman1
11-16-2007, 06:26 AM
I agree with TM27's thoughts on this and just wanted to ask cbbfanatic which top 100 recruit joined GU after their elite 8 run? It's only been in the last few years that GU has really jumped up in their recruitment of what are considered to be "top 100" type players.

cbbfanatic
11-16-2007, 11:12 PM
I agree with TM27's thoughts on this and just wanted to ask cbbfanatic which top 100 recruit joined GU after their elite 8 run? It's only been in the last few years that GU has really jumped up in their recruitment of what are considered to be "top 100" type players.

to answer your question, i dont think one magical year is going to (nor should it) impress recruits and bring them to a smaller conference... thats why gonzaga had to maintain their success for years while gaining more exposure to get the kids they currently have.

how is george mason doing on the recruiting trail after their final four? not pullin in any top 100s. would probably take some consistent success and domination of their conference to get to the GU level.

and by the way, someone above pointed out that morrison and pargo and heytvelt were all 3 stars or below in an attempt to say that the rankings dont mean anything. ok, try this, go back over the last few years and peruse the top 25-50 of each class and then tell me that rankings mean nothing... i know its fun to point out the kids here and there that prove the scouts wrong, but they certainly arent the majority, and can be tough to spot, and it would be borderline irresponsible to bank entirely on these types of player if you want to compete at the highest level on a yearly basis

relatively unheralded kids CAN develop late and become stars, but its a much longer shot than with your 5 star and high 4 star kids, thats reality.

i stand by my statement that for pac 10 standards this is not an impressive class and i wouldnt really call it "building on success" -- the capitalizing off of a big year in recruiting typically occurs 2-3 years after anyway, due to how early you gotta get in on big kids these days and how early many of them give verbal committment.s

zagman21
11-17-2007, 01:32 AM
Considering who WSU was recruiting before their run last year, I'm not sure how this isn't building on success. Lets take a quick look at their classes from 2004-2007 from scout.com

In '04, they had one 1 star recruit, three 2 star, and two 3 star recruits. All were high school players.

In '05 they had one 1 star, two 2 star, and three 3 star recruits. All three 3 star recruits were JC players.

In '06 there was one 3 star and one 1 star. The 3 star recruit was a JC player.

In '07 there was two 1 star and two 2 star recruits. All were high school players.

To recap:

1 Star: 5 players, none JC
2 Star: 7 players, none JC
3 Star:6 players, 4 were JC

Now lets look at the 2008 class. two 2 stars, two 3 stars, and one 4 star. two ranked by position nationally. All high school players.

I see that as an improvement on its own. Building on success requires a team to take what they have and make it better. They have a great set of players now but if your gonna base your opinion on star rankings, they still improved from what they had. With two players ranked by position nationally I would see that as being better than having 12 combined one and two star recruits. It probably doesn't help that the campus is in Pullman either. I love it there, but I don't think it fits a lot of people's style.

TM27
11-17-2007, 08:15 AM
youd hope they could get at least one top 100 kid if they really want to capitalize on their success.

i dont see bringing in 5 3star kids as "building" on success...

building on success is getting bouldin, heytvelt, daye, etc to sign at gonzaga.




i stand by my statement that for pac 10 standards this is not an impressive class and i wouldnt really call it "building on success" -- the capitalizing off of a big year in recruiting typically occurs 2-3 years after anyway, due to how early you gotta get in on big kids these days and how early many of them give verbal committment.s

:confused: :confused: :confused: By your definition they cant "build" on their success until two or three years later? What???

If you dont see this as an improvement or building or capitalizing on last years success....then really there is no reason to keep debating / wasting energy on another teams recruiting class. It is obvious that there is a definite gap between the way you view, and the way I view, the development of programs and teams.....now that we got that out of the way we can move onto things that matter, like....GU plays at 5pm.