5 Under the Radar D1 Prospects
- Thread starter jerseyshorejohnny
- Start date
Thanks Kevin. Nice to see a Hayesman on this list!
[quote="jerseyshorejohnny" post=290722]https://realscoutbasketball.com[/quote]
Thanks for posting this. I was actually thinking about something similar the other day, but felt it would have made for too dumb of a post. But what if we shifted gears and really zeroed in on and focused in on the lower end 4 stars, 3 stars and upper echelon 2 stars to create a well rounded team. I get this wouldn't result in wins in 1 year, but if we can put together some real good 3 star guys, without having to scramble at the end when we lose out on a 5 star guy we've been drooling over.
Similar to the model some of the teams in mid-majors use. Like the A-10. Come the junior/senior year of the core guys, the teams are really good. I think we'd have a better chance beating Nova in the BE with a real good team, opposed to squad focused on one big time guy.
Just a thought. Obviously, at the moment, we should be aiming high and chasing the big boys. But was just curious what others thought about something like this.
Thanks for posting this. I was actually thinking about something similar the other day, but felt it would have made for too dumb of a post. But what if we shifted gears and really zeroed in on and focused in on the lower end 4 stars, 3 stars and upper echelon 2 stars to create a well rounded team. I get this wouldn't result in wins in 1 year, but if we can put together some real good 3 star guys, without having to scramble at the end when we lose out on a 5 star guy we've been drooling over.
Similar to the model some of the teams in mid-majors use. Like the A-10. Come the junior/senior year of the core guys, the teams are really good. I think we'd have a better chance beating Nova in the BE with a real good team, opposed to squad focused on one big time guy.
Just a thought. Obviously, at the moment, we should be aiming high and chasing the big boys. But was just curious what others thought about something like this.
I've argued that instead of going after the 5 stars, I would like us to go after the top 50 to 100 range. Much higher percentage. We could include some high 3 stars, but should not be going after 2 stars. As you said, don't have to worry about them being 1 and done and they could be around for 3 or 4 years.
JohnnyFever
Active member
The more recruiting cycles come and go, the stronger I feel we should be going hardest after the 3-4 star players at this juncture. Aiming high is nice but not realistic at this point. I would think you could tell right away if there's a 5 star who is adamant about staying close to home. So don't totally leave the 5 stars alone but put feelers out and if they don't seem to want to stay home or close to home then ditch them. No sense in wasting time on so many. The only way we could realistically convince a 5 star to come here at this point is if we have a top 25 type season. I'd rather focus on top 150 guys we have a much better shot at. I feel like we recruit the 5 stars, then we get excited, then we believe, then we are all disappointed. At least with the 3-4 star guys you know you have as much a chance as anyone else. We're going to the Gucci store looking around with a $45k job. If we can finally start winning again then we can up the ante a bit.
By the way apologies to Beast, I re-read your post and I saw it wasn't a personal attack I read it incorrectly.
By the way apologies to Beast, I re-read your post and I saw it wasn't a personal attack I read it incorrectly.