Four Recruting Classes: A Summary

R

Ray Morgan

Well-known member
With time on my hands, here is a summary of the 4 recruiting classes for Coach Mullin, listing high school recruits only.
Initial Class: Mussini, Ellison, Yakwe. Lovett, Sima
Class 2: Ponds, Freudenberg, Diakite
Class 3: Trimble, Sid Wilson,
Class 4: Earlington,Roberts, Williams
13 recruits, 10 from U.S. schools
Back to Europe: Freud, Mussini
Went pro: Lovett
Transferred: Ellison, Sima, Wilson, Yakwe, Diakite
On team: Ponds, Trimble, Earl, Williams, Roberts
Major contributor: Ponds
Major upside: ? Maybe Williams
Ellison not doing much at Pitt. Wilson has awful numbers at UConn. Not much out of Yakwe either. Sima better stats here. Diakite sitting out. If you count 15 minute commit JRan Brooks, he isn;t doing much at USC.
Conclusions? Draw your own. Obviously high school recruiting something an A.D. should be questioning.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Ray Morgan" post=316729]With time on my hands, here is a summary of the 4 recruiting classes for Coach Mullin, listing high school recruits only.
Initial Class: Mussini, Ellison, Yakwe. Lovett, Sima
Class 2: Ponds, Freudenberg, Diakite
Class 3: Trimble, Sid Wilson,
Class 4: Earlington,Roberts, Williams
13 recruits, 10 from U.S. schools
Back to Europe: Freud, Mussini
Went pro: Lovett
Transferred: Ellison, Sima, Wilson, Yakwe, Diakite
On team: Ponds, Trimble, Earl, Williams, Roberts
Major contributor: Ponds
Major upside: ? Maybe Williams
Ellison not doing much at Pitt. Wilson has awful numbers at UConn. Not much out of Yakwe either. Sima better stats here. Diakite sitting out. If you count 15 minute commit JRan Brooks, he isn;t doing much at USC.
Conclusions? Draw your own. Obviously high school recruiting something an A.D. should be questioning.[/quote]

Are transfers and JUCOs not recruits? Leaving them off definitely spins the story you want to tell.
 
Last edited:
[quote="gman" post=316731][quote="Ray Morgan" post=316729]With time on my hands, here is a summary of the 4 recruiting classes for Coach Mullin, listing high school recruits only.
Initial Class: Mussini, Ellison, Yakwe. Lovett, Sima
Class 2: Ponds, Freudenberg, Diakite
Class 3: Trimble, Sid Wilson,
Class 4: Earlington,Roberts, Williams
13 recruits, 10 from U.S. schools
Back to Europe: Freud, Mussini
Went pro: Lovett
Transferred: Ellison, Sima, Wilson, Yakwe, Diakite
On team: Ponds, Trimble, Earl, Williams, Roberts
Major contributor: Ponds
Major upside: ? Maybe Williams
Ellison not doing much at Pitt. Wilson has awful numbers at UConn. Not much out of Yakwe either. Sima better stats here. Diakite sitting out. If you count 15 minute commit JRan Brooks, he isn;t doing much at USC.
Conclusions? Draw your own. Obviously high school recruiting something an A.D. should be questioning.[/quote]

Are transfers and JUCOs not recruits? Leaving them off definitely spins the story you want to tell.[/quote]

I'm not spinning anything. I clearly stated it's a review of high school recruits. JUCO and transfer recruiting has been excellent. Probably should have put it in the title. I, unlike many, am not anti Mullin or anti staff. I think it;s important to see that H.S. recruiting has been a difficult process. Don't kill the messenger.
 
Last edited:
If there is a message, it's to rebut those claiming roster imbalance and bench weakness the fault of staff losing many to transfers. That's why I included summary of how transfers have done.
P.S. I tried editing title to say "Four High School Recruiting Classes", but it didn't work.
 
Last edited:
Here's a summary of JUCO and transfers:

2016:
JUCO: Ahmed
Transfers: Clark, Simon, Owens

2017:
Transfers: Keita, Dixon

2018:
JUCO: Figueroa
Transfers: Caraher, Wright, Heron

Transferred out: Owens, Dixon
Owens starting and contributing at Texas Tech.
Major contributors: Heron, Figueroa, Simon, Clark. Ahmed for the time he was here. Owens, too.

Great job by Coach Mullin and Matt on this front. Let's make that clear.
 
Last edited:
I am not suggesting that some of these transfers are not good (they are) and I am not opposed to tapping the transfer market especially when they are immediately eligible.

But can someone define the word success when they say SJU has had a lot of success in the transfer market? I guess that means they "landed players."

To me a successful strategy is putting together good, solid deep teams with interchangeable parts that win significantly on the court.

I will repeat what I wrote a few days ago, SJU has been above .500 in BE play over the last almost 4 years for a grand total of 12 days. That's it. We can use injuries and other excuses and there maybe some creedence to them. But here is the ultimate point. How do we actually define success?
 
I will judge success based on end of year results. For me anything less than NCAA bid this year is a fail. A bid with less than an 8 seed and no tourney wins is marginal success. Any result beyond that for me is good success in year 4. I am not talking long term success that would take more time to judge.
 
[quote="Ray Morgan" post=316734]If there is a message, it's to rebut those claiming roster imbalance and bench weakness the fault of staff losing many to transfers. That's why I included summary of how transfers have done.
P.S. I tried editing title to say "Four High School Recruiting Classes", but it didn't work.[/quote]

Ray, you did a good job the first time listing the below average high school recruiting classes. The only true "recruit" remaining on the roster is Shamorie Ponds. Period.
The roster imbalance and bench weakness is partially the fault of losing many players. It's hard to pin blame when players leave. It could be personal, handlers, inflated egos, or the staff.
Except for the three current freshmen and Ponds not one player remaining were committed to playing for St. John's and Mullin out of high school. No matter how we spin it 9 players have left the program in 3 1/2 years.
While junior college basketball players can nominally be considered recruits the definition the NCAA uses is
"Recruiting happens when a college employee or representative invites a high school student-athlete to play sports for their college."
Players never part of the original recruiting plan who chose other schools or junior colleges are notb considered recruits in the purest sense of the term.
Here's an example of what I mean by the original plan: a staff of coaches target specific players who can fill key roles on the team both in the short and long term to insure balance. In the first recruiting class we signed 5 prep players all of whom were good prospects. Three of those players were originally recruited by Lavin (Yakwe, Mussini and LoVett).
Except for Ponds none of the original classes that committed are enrolled. That includes the few local recruits like Yakwe and Ellison.
Last recruiting class we struck out with every local recruit. This year we may sign one or two. The fact remains that local area recruiting has been below expectations given that Mullin himself promised to change our approach to local recruiting. National recruiting has been a total bust.
The transfers brought in by Matt have kept Mullin's ship afloat. That was never the plan.
Some should be reminded of Mullin's promise when he replaced Lavin.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Class of 72" post=316766][quote="Ray Morgan" post=316734]If there is a message, it's to rebut those claiming roster imbalance and bench weakness the fault of staff losing many to transfers. That's why I included summary of how transfers have done.
P.S. I tried editing title to say "Four High School Recruiting Classes", but it didn't work.[/quote]

Ray, you did a good job the first time listing the below average high school recruiting classes. The only true "recruit" remaining on the roster is Shamorie Ponds. Period.
The roster imbalance and bench weakness is partially the fault of losing many players. It's hard to pin blame when players leave. It could be personal, handlers, inflated egos, or the staff.
Except for the three current freshmen and Ponds not one player remaining were committed to playing for St. John's and Mullin out of high school. No matter how we spin it 9 players have left the program in 3 1/2 years.
While junior college basketball players can nominally could as recruits the definition the NCAA uses is
"Recruiting happens when a college employee or representative invites a high school student-athlete to play sports for their college."
Players never part of the original recruiting plan who chose other schools or junior colleges are considered recruits in the purest sense of the term.
Here's an example of what I mean by the original plan: a staff of coaches target specific players who can fill key roles on the team both in the short and long term to insure balance. In the first recruiting class we signed 5 prep players all of whom were good prospects. Three of those players were originally recruited by Lavin (Yakwe, Mussini and LoVett).
Except for Ponds none of the original classes that committed are enrolled. That includes the few local recruits like Yakwe and Ellison.
Last recruiting class we struck out with every local recruit. This year we may sign one or two. The fact remains that local area recruiting has been below expectations given that Mullin himself promised to change our approach to local recruiting. National recruiting has been a total bust.
The transfers brought in by Matt have kept Mullin's ship afloat. That was never the plan.
Some should be reminded of Mullin's promise when he replaced Lavin.[/quote]

More importantly, why is it that we’re not succeeding with local kids and what can be done to change that? I mean, Matt and Chris are local guys with lots of connections. So it’s not that.
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=316766][quote="Ray Morgan" post=316734]If there is a message, it's to rebut those claiming roster imbalance and bench weakness the fault of staff losing many to transfers. That's why I included summary of how transfers have done.
P.S. I tried editing title to say "Four High School Recruiting Classes", but it didn't work.[/quote]

Ray, you did a good job the first time listing the below average high school recruiting classes. The only true "recruit" remaining on the roster is Shamorie Ponds. Period.
The roster imbalance and bench weakness is partially the fault of losing many players. It's hard to pin blame when players leave. It could be personal, handlers, inflated egos, or the staff.
Except for the three current freshmen and Ponds not one player remaining were committed to playing for St. John's and Mullin out of high school. No matter how we spin it 9 players have left the program in 3 1/2 years.
While junior college basketball players can nominally could as recruits the definition the NCAA uses is
"Recruiting happens when a college employee or representative invites a high school student-athlete to play sports for their college."
Players never part of the original recruiting plan who chose other schools or junior colleges are considered recruits in the purest sense of the term.
Here's an example of what I mean by the original plan: a staff of coaches target specific players who can fill key roles on the team both in the short and long term to insure balance. In the first recruiting class we signed 5 prep players all of whom were good prospects. Three of those players were originally recruited by Lavin (Yakwe, Mussini and LoVett).
Except for Ponds none of the original classes that committed are enrolled. That includes the few local recruits like Yakwe and Ellison.
Last recruiting class we struck out with every local recruit. This year we may sign one or two. The fact remains that local area recruiting has been below expectations given that Mullin himself promised to change our approach to local recruiting. National recruiting has been a total bust.
The transfers brought in by Matt have kept Mullin's ship afloat. That was never the plan.
Some should be reminded of Mullin's promise when he replaced Lavin.[/quote]

I hoped to spark some discussion on this staff's high school recruiting challenges, looking for feedback. I still hope that happens. I have my own opinions, which I have posted. But I might as well repeat it since some posters think I have an agenda or a spin. Some, perhaps more than some, of the top recruits are for sale. If not them, then their handlers. If not from illegal sources, then legal perks that big programs can offer. I mentioned a few in personal chefs and Nike gear. The unwillingness of Coach Mullin to go in that direction is understandable. The inability to offer perks that some schools offer is a financial matter, and a reflection of being a commuter, non football school. Then there is a few decades of disorder, with only a few tourney appearances in 20 years.

St. John's has the aforementioned disadvantages to deal with. Being Chris Mullin dream teamer and Hall of Famer is obviously no where near enough to overcome those disadvantages. We have some advantages. The Big East, MSG, a big media marker, a great but fading tradition. If I know this, the staff knows it a whole lot better than I do. Thus the emphasis on transfers and JUCOs. i hope that's enough. I'm not sure it is. Does anyone have any thoughts on what can be done to improve the recruiting of high school players that can make a difference? Does anyone agree that recruiting here is particularly challenging?
 
[quote="NCJohnnie" post=316754]I will judge success based on end of year results. For me anything less than NCAA bid this year is a fail. A bid with less than an 8 seed and no tourney wins is marginal success. Any result beyond that for me is good success in year 4. I am not talking long term success that would take more time to judge.[/quote]

And that is part of my point. People keep saying this strategy has been successful, really? Exactly what success have they had with it. Shouldn't we wait not just this year although it is important but a few years of success before we declare this a winning strategy?
 
[quote="Ray Morgan" post=316768][quote="Class of 72" post=316766][quote="Ray Morgan" post=316734]If there is a message, it's to rebut those claiming roster imbalance and bench weakness the fault of staff losing many to transfers. That's why I included summary of how transfers have done.
P.S. I tried editing title to say "Four High School Recruiting Classes", but it didn't work.[/quote]

Ray, you did a good job the first time listing the below average high school recruiting classes. The only true "recruit" remaining on the roster is Shamorie Ponds. Period.
The roster imbalance and bench weakness is partially the fault of losing many players. It's hard to pin blame when players leave. It could be personal, handlers, inflated egos, or the staff.
Except for the three current freshmen and Ponds not one player remaining were committed to playing for St. John's and Mullin out of high school. No matter how we spin it 9 players have left the program in 3 1/2 years.
While junior college basketball players can nominally could as recruits the definition the NCAA uses is
"Recruiting happens when a college employee or representative invites a high school student-athlete to play sports for their college."
Players never part of the original recruiting plan who chose other schools or junior colleges are considered recruits in the purest sense of the term.
Here's an example of what I mean by the original plan: a staff of coaches target specific players who can fill key roles on the team both in the short and long term to insure balance. In the first recruiting class we signed 5 prep players all of whom were good prospects. Three of those players were originally recruited by Lavin (Yakwe, Mussini and LoVett).
Except for Ponds none of the original classes that committed are enrolled. That includes the few local recruits like Yakwe and Ellison.
Last recruiting class we struck out with every local recruit. This year we may sign one or two. The fact remains that local area recruiting has been below expectations given that Mullin himself promised to change our approach to local recruiting. National recruiting has been a total bust.
The transfers brought in by Matt have kept Mullin's ship afloat. That was never the plan.
Some should be reminded of Mullin's promise when he replaced Lavin.[/quote]

I hoped to spark some discussion on this staff's high school recruiting challenges, looking for feedback. I still hope that happens. I have my own opinions, which I have posted. But I might as well repeat it since some posters think I have an agenda or a spin. Some, perhaps more than some, of the top recruits are for sale. If not them, then their handlers. If not from illegal sources, then legal perks that big programs can offer. I mentioned a few in personal chefs and Nike gear. The unwillingness of Coach Mullin to go in that direction is understandable. The inability to offer perks that some schools offer is a financial matter, and a reflection of being a commuter, non football school. Then there is a few decades of disorder, with only a few tourney appearances in 20 years.

St. John's has the aforementioned disadvantages to deal with. Being Chris Mullin dream teamer and Hall of Famer is obviously no where near enough to overcome those disadvantages. We have some advantages. The Big East, MSG, a big media marker, a great but fading tradition. If I know this, the staff knows it a whole lot better than I do. Thus the emphasis on transfers and JUCOs. i hope that's enough. I'm not sure it is. Does anyone have any thoughts on what can be done to improve the recruiting of high school players that can make a difference? Does anyone agree that recruiting here is particularly challenging?[/quote]

We can try winning. Just an idea.
 
Here is our four year everything summary:

We get better each year.

Stop the insanity people. Every time we lose people want to hoist every fear they have on Mullin and the staff. Is it really so hard to wait to the end of the season before judging? What good does it do to assume the worst and then impute that onto the staff?
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=316766]Some should be reminded of Mullin's promise when he replaced Lavin.[/quote]

Saw this tweeted out.... This 40 second video clip had given me such high hopes, but reminded me of presidential elect campaign promises... If we can land Curbelo, along with the already committed Tabor, we may be on the right track... just a few years later than expected.

https://twitter.com/tominsalem/status/1087715918451564545
 
Last edited:
[quote="RedStormNC" post=316810][quote="Class of 72" post=316766]Some should be reminded of Mullin's promise when he replaced Lavin.[/quote]

Saw this tweeted out.... This 40 second video clip had given me such high hopes, but reminded me of presidential elect campaign promises...

https://twitter.com/tominsalem/status/1087715918451564545[/quote]

That's the promise that I was referring to and we got two significant recruits in 4 years. Seton Hall has done better in the NY metro area.
Marrilac talks of incremental improvement. When you consider we fired a guy who won 20 and 21 games in his last two seasons with post season appearances this regime had to at least match the last regime in years 3 and 4. The recruiting season isn't over but I'm still waiting for that impact player to replace Shamorie Ponds.
The last coach was supposedly fired for losing recruits like Anderson and Briscoe.
 
[quote="Marillac" post=316780]Here is our four year everything summary:

We get better each year.

[/quote]

Couple of problems with this:
1)The goal was not to "get better every year." Norm Roberts first 3 years under self-imposed sanctions conference record: 2-14, 5-11, 7-9. He improved and yet no one took that seriously. The goal is to compete with Nova and compete nationally. If that is not the goal then I will admit I root for the wrong program.

2)Last time I checked going from 7th place at 7-11 to last place at 4-14 is not an improvement. Perhaps someone can check my math and

3)Are you seriously telling me that on 4/1/15 when Mullin was hired coming off back to back 10-8/20+ win seasons the board would have definitely been satisfied with a 3 1/2 year run of 1-17, 7-11, 4-14 and 3-4 because it showed "improvement." I honestly cannot believe the stuff you are posting. You were one of the harshest critics of previous staffs and yet you not only make excuses for mediocrity you make it sound like we should be "happy" about it.
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=316815][quote="RedStormNC" post=316810][quote="Class of 72" post=316766]Some should be reminded of Mullin's promise when he replaced Lavin.[/quote]

Saw this tweeted out.... This 40 second video clip had given me such high hopes, but reminded me of presidential elect campaign promises...

https://twitter.com/tominsalem/status/1087715918451564545[/quote]

That's the promise that I was referring to and we got two significant recruits in 4 years. Seton Hall has done better in the NY metro area.
Marrilac talks of incremental improvement. When you consider we fired a guy who won 20 and 21 games in his last two seasons with post season appearances this regime had to at least match the last regime in years 3 and 4. The recruiting season isn't over but I'm still waiting for that impact player to replace Shamorie Ponds.
The last coach was supposedly fired for losing recruits like Anderson and Briscoe.[/quote]

I didn't want Lavin fired. I haven't wanted any coach besides Norm Roberts fired in my 2 decades + as a fan. Firing a coach has to be an absolute necessity. This topic should be tabled until the end of the season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top