|
|
Post by beaverwbb fan on May 31, 2019 9:18:44 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by wbosh15 on May 31, 2019 9:38:20 GMT -8
If Clark commits to the Ducks I'm going to throw up. 2020 recruiting not going well for the Beavs so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaverwbb fan on May 31, 2019 10:14:05 GMT -8
While it hasn’t gone well, no one I really have predicted coming have committed yet. Bueckers was always thought to be a UConn lean, and Brink was always Stanford bound. Clark, Van Lith, and Goforth are the ones I have been most hopeful for, and if they all go elsewhere, then...that would be bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by fridaynightlights on May 31, 2019 11:32:28 GMT -8
It is still early in the process with about 60% of the top players still uncommitted. If we don't have any commits by the time the Fall roles around then it may be time for concern. I have heard for some time that ND and Oregon are the leaders for Clark
|
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,837 
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on May 31, 2019 11:32:42 GMT -8
I have realized a couple things of late around recruiting....
uo has a "cast the net wide" and offer tons of players (very talented players, mind you), and they also have a lot to offer - a good coach, facilities, all sorts of association with Nike, and perhaps most importantly - fawning media attention (over SI) AND many other Nike contract holder Pro players (great NCAA loophole, BTW) providing visibility.
These players are now very much more empowered by transfer rules, and whether their calculus is "uo is a good fit! I will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy" (Mos Eisley spaceport reference) OR "at least my name and brand will be out there when I realize I have made a mistake and need to leave skid marks and transfer", it might be a good move for a player depending on their value system.
We have a coach who is *truly* creating a family, not only for the scholarship period of the players, but for life. Perhaps uo does the same, don't know, don't care. What I do know is we have also taken a much, much more targeted recruiting approach, investing a lot of time and energy attempting to recruit a few players who truly fit that approach. (Aside - I really admire how SR is doing things the right way - his coaching is obviously more than a job to him, and kudos to him for creating the environment *he* wants to work in). We are incrementally increasing our talent level with the targetted approach, but I don't know if we will ever get the splashy recruiting classes.
I also think we have a 2 year window in which to land the backcourt players of the future - especially if we get Kat back for another year and Aleah continues on the trajectory she is on. Now I really want to see Goforth here (and I think we will), and Clark, and really think HVL might see more playing time here than elsewhere (and get to the Final Four) - hopefully she visits Corvallis while her brother is playing for the Knights and falls in love with OSU/Corvallis......but she won't get Nike contract holders to come visit the locker room, sign their shoes (ambiguity on "their" intentional), tweet about the signed shoes, or have Mark Campbell take all the credit for every good thing that ever happened, or have gold plated PS4s in her locker room.
Will be interesting to see how this pans out......I think we will still do OK, but regardless, I like the way we are doing things.
Go Beavers!
|
|
|
|
Post by fridaynightlights on May 31, 2019 11:42:48 GMT -8
I don't buy that OSU has a more targeted approach then uo. From what I have read uo has been recruiting most or all of their 5 current commits since the 8th or 9th grade. That sounds pretty targeted. You can't sign top players unless you put in the time and effort. They have probably offered more players this cycle because they needed to sign a big class.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparty on May 31, 2019 11:57:28 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by shelby on May 31, 2019 12:10:15 GMT -8
Anxious to see how this plays out...
I respect Rueck and his staff and they obviously have some different issues when talking to recruits. We don’t have the bright shiny object ( which - personally I think is a good thing),Second - we have a coach that creates a team approach to the game( UO likes to focus on one individual at the expense of others contributions. How in the hell are the ducks going to manage 6-7 ego’s and I wannabe’s - especially with one more year of ‘hey, look at me- I really think I am special , you should too’
SI showed some VERY POOR actions towards the end of last year, that a ‘normal’ Coach should have given her some serious bench time. Rueck is on top of this with every athlete , treated equally... as it should be.
Ultimately,we have to sell what we have to sell and do that with athletes that blend in with a team ethic - where they may not get the ball 75% of the time, and where there will be a different ‘ player’, almost every game. That is the MVP.
Scott is doing it his way.. and we all have to understand and respect that. We will get the players that are great now, and that want to improve over time. Many duck players have learned ( and left ) that program because it’s only about winning the recruiting battles - not, in any way about the girls development on and off the court.
Scott is also flexible and learns and game plans - I see the duck game as totally one dimensional park ball, with Graves waving his arms around like he is signaling a guy that is going to third base, that he should keep going to home.
|
|
|
|
Post by sewingbeaver on May 31, 2019 12:46:42 GMT -8
Integrity. That's what we have, it's what we respect and it's what we'll get. Sometimes the shiny stars related to a player's ranking aren't really worth it. Go Beavs!!
|
|
|
|
Post by beavsteve on May 31, 2019 13:18:16 GMT -8
I hate to see the tsdtr recruiting so well, but then I guess the bright side is that it creates an good opportunity... to have a spotlight rivalry against what is perceived to be a final four team and a chance to beat them twice despite each year despite their interesting ability to suddenly attract star players. Last year we had a glaring weakness on our team on the front line. This year, it looks like we have the potential to eliminate that weakness. Rueck has a great opportunity to demonstrate his coaching ability and team-building approach is superior to tsdtr. I think he can do it. Of course, Stanford will be no slouch this next year and for years to come and gives us the same opportunity. Their ability to attract stars is well understood and respected. When looking at tsdtr's recruiting, it is pretty clear that their only significant advantages over the Beavers are glitzy facilities and Nike assistance (and I'll always be suspicious of their recruiting tactics)... all attributable to a certain billionaire. I think if we pull it off we'll see our recruiting ramp up again. It would be SO sweet!
|
|
|
|
Post by green85 on May 31, 2019 13:25:09 GMT -8
Anxious to see how this plays out... I respect Rueck and his staff and they obviously have some different issues when talking to recruits. We don’t have the bright shiny object ( which - personally I think is a good thing),Second - we have a coach that creates a team approach to the game( UO likes to focus on one individual at the expense of others contributions. How in the hell are the ducks going to manage 6-7 ego’s and I wannabe’s - especially with one more year of ‘hey, look at me- I really think I am special , you should too’ SI showed some VERY POOR actions towards the end of last year, that a ‘normal’ Coach should have given her some serious bench time. Rueck is on top of this with every athlete , treated equally... as it should be. Ultimately,we have to sell what we have to sell and do that with athletes that blend in with a team ethic - where they may not get the ball 75% of the time, and where there will be a different ‘ player’, almost every game. That is the MVP. Scott is doing it his way.. and we all have to understand and respect that. We will get the players that are great now, and that want to improve over time. Many duck players have learned ( and left ) that program because it’s only about winning the recruiting battles - not, in any way about the girls development on and off the court. Scott is also flexible and learns and game plans - I see the duck game as totally one dimensional park ball, with Graves waving his arms around like he is signaling a guy that is going to third base, that he should keep going to home. Oregon had 4 different players lead in scoring in games. One reason that Sabrina gets lots of assists ... is because she knows how to run the pick-and-roll effectively with Ruthy Hebard. You won't find two players more connected on and off the court than Ruthy and Sabrina. Sabrina is about winning ... and sometimes she has to dominate the ball to score when the team needs a score. Sometimes she fails to score in those key situations. But to imply that Oregon is simply a "one player, rat-ball team" is to ignore what other players on the team have contributed and how they play. Oregon loses a big time play-maker in Corzola. She could break down a defender with her driving ability, setup teammates with how she ran the offense, and shoot the 3 at a high percentage. In 70% of the time the offense was initiated by Corzola with Sabrina playing off the ball. Yes, Oregon has lost players to transfer ... some very good players that left the team. But having Erin Boley (transfer from Notre Dame) join the team was a big boost. Now adding the transfer Moore from USC is great. So the transfer door has swung both ways for the Ducks. It is rare that a collegiate woman basketball player leaves school before completing their degree. For that reason, a very high percentage of women's basketball programs are driven to help those student-athletes get their degree. To assume that Oregon is not motivated to help the student-athletes achieve academic success (or that they fall short in the endeavor because of some systematic effort to ignore the needs of the student-athlete) is certainly not supported by any information I am aware of from the athletes or the staff. |
|
|
|
Post by beaverwbb fan on May 31, 2019 13:36:27 GMT -8
Quite honestly, I think we are the UVA of WBB. UVA obviously has great success, but they don’t always attract the top recruits due to the team-first approach. Oregon’s style of play is not very team-oriented, and if a recruit sees themself as the “me me me” player on the team, then it is an extremely attractive style of play.
Now of course, we do have the highly ranked players in Aquino, Pivec, Corosdale, and Brown coming in (and Slocum), but it will be interesting to see if the star players choose us because of the team-first style of play. I think it is something Destiny has had to adjust to.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparty on May 31, 2019 16:26:26 GMT -8
Anxious to see how this plays out... I respect Rueck and his staff and they obviously have some different issues when talking to recruits. We don’t have the bright shiny object ( which - personally I think is a good thing),Second - we have a coach that creates a team approach to the game( UO likes to focus on one individual at the expense of others contributions. How in the hell are the ducks going to manage 6-7 ego’s and I wannabe’s - especially with one more year of ‘hey, look at me- I really think I am special , you should too’ SI showed some VERY POOR actions towards the end of last year, that a ‘normal’ Coach should have given her some serious bench time. Rueck is on top of this with every athlete , treated equally... as it should be. Ultimately,we have to sell what we have to sell and do that with athletes that blend in with a team ethic - where they may not get the ball 75% of the time, and where there will be a different ‘ player’, almost every game. That is the MVP. Scott is doing it his way.. and we all have to understand and respect that. We will get the players that are great now, and that want to improve over time. Many duck players have learned ( and left ) that program because it’s only about winning the recruiting battles - not, in any way about the girls development on and off the court. Scott is also flexible and learns and game plans - I see the duck game as totally one dimensional park ball, with Graves waving his arms around like he is signaling a guy that is going to third base, that he should keep going to home. Oregon had 4 different players lead in scoring in games. One reason that Sabrina gets lots of assists ... is because she knows how to run the pick-and-roll effectively with Ruthy Hebard. You won't find two players more connected on and off the court than Ruthy and Sabrina. Sabrina is about winning ... and sometimes she has to dominate the ball to score when the team needs a score. Sometimes she fails to score in those key situations. But to imply that Oregon is simply a "one player, rat-ball team" is to ignore what other players on the team have contributed and how they play. Oregon loses a big time play-maker in Corzola. She could break down a defender with her driving ability, setup teammates with how she ran the offense, and shoot the 3 at a high percentage. In 70% of the time the offense was initiated by Corzola with Sabrina playing off the ball. Yes, Oregon has lost players to transfer ... some very good players that left the team. But having Erin Boley (transfer from Notre Dame) join the team was a big boost. Now adding the transfer Moore from USC is great. So the transfer door has swung both ways for the Ducks. It is rare that a collegiate woman basketball player leaves school before completing their degree. For that reason, a very high percentage of women's basketball programs are driven to help those student-athletes get their degree. To assume that Oregon is not motivated to help the student-athletes achieve academic success (or that they fall short in the endeavor because of some systematic effort to ignore the needs of the student-athlete) is certainly not supported by any information I am aware of from the athletes or the staff. Your beating a dead horse. You should have better things to do like mowing the lawn. |
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Jun 1, 2019 19:54:36 GMT -8
With respect to the Ducks' big recruiting class, let's not lose sight of the fact that they won't be playing until 2020 - and then they'll be freshmen! Talented they undoubtedly are, but they'll still be freshmen. At that point, Ionescu, Hebard, and Moore will be gone. When they're sophomores, Boley and Sabally will be gone as well, and not all 5 (or 6) will have gotten enough playing time when it counts as freshmen to easily transition into big time contributors.
I consider it much more preferable to have classes of 3 or 4, at the most. I still think we get Van Lith, and I still think we get Goforth, and we're going to be fine for 2020.
Also, I would remind you once again that the Ducks don't have a single domestic top 100 player in their 2019 class, and had but 1 in 2018.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackbuttebeaver80 on Jun 1, 2019 20:34:07 GMT -8
With respect to the Ducks' big recruiting class, let's not lose sight of the fact that they won't be playing until 2020 - and then they'll be freshmen! Talented they undoubtedly are, but they'll still be freshmen. At that point, Ionescu, Hebard, and Moore will be gone. When they're sophomores, Boley and Sabally will be gone as well, and not all 5 (or 6) will have gotten enough playing time when it counts as freshmen to easily transition into big time contributors. I consider it much more preferable to have classes of 3 or 4, at the most. I still think we get Van Lith, and I still think we get Goforth, and we're going to be fine for 2020. Also, I would remind you once again that the Ducks don't have a single domestic top 100 player in their 2019 class, and had but 1 in 2018. To your last comment, I won’t take any comfort if they continue to recruit international players like the Sabally sisters. And, with the 2020 class Graves has clearly answered the question of whether he can recruit top US players. |
|
