Four Recruting Classes: A Summary

[quote="Marillac" post=316821][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.[/quote]

I didn't blame you for firing Lavin. This topic is about 4 years of recruiting to date. Except for Shamorie Ponds no one recruit has been an impact recruit. I think many fans thought that would change considering the last staff was described as lazy. The irony is that Mullin went after the same players offered by Lavin in Mussini, LoVett, Yakwe and Sampson in his first class. The transfers Matt brought in the first year were a bust. I'll wait until the end of the season to evaluate the 2018 recruits and the 2019 intended recruits. Let's also remember that Mullin ostracized his hand picked associate head coach and 2nd recruiter after 10 months on the job. If we're behind in recruiting Mullin shares much of the blame.
 
As usual, another thread turns into a battle between posters, with the dividing line being lauding the staff or attacking them. How about we just discuss high school recruiting. Some posters here must have some insight or thoughts on the subject. How can we recruit the high schools a little better? Is playing the transfer game, with the NCAA showing more compassion to players, a viable substitute for building a program and maintaining continuity and roster balance? Should the staff focus more on 3 star recruits than the 4 and 5 star players that, as Paultzman has frequently said, blow up as juniors and take us out of the running?
 
[quote="Ray Morgan" post=316827]Should the staff focus more on 3 star recruits than the 4 and 5 star players that, as Paultzman has frequently said, blow up as juniors and take us out of the running?[/quote]

The answer to that depends on whether you believe the staff as currently composed is good enough to coach a collection of three-star players to the tournament.
 
Rather than being pulled into Hatfields v McCoy nuttiness, all I will note is what I said before, the “one person controls all” recruiting model is highly unorthodox. Recruiting is not rocket science, but the selling component is a vital part of process. A guy like Greg benefits program by devoting his time to practices, game planning and in game adjustments. Just my sense, but I don’t see Greg having that “selling ability”.

This is no knock at Matt who has kept boat afloat with transfers like Simon, Figgy, Clark, Heron etc. However, most successful coaches rarely if ever put all eggs in one basket & imo a little competition between recruiters is fine if managed well by the HC. (no Slice diatribes please). Mullin should be the planner & closer in the process, like most HCs.

So, my strong suggestion post season would be to broaden the base with second AC who recruits & performs other functions. How you get there would obviously be up to CM with Cragg’s input I assume. Back to the season.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think Ray raises a few great questions (and orients the discussion productively).

I would say that its fine to look to see if we can get the 5 stars if that is feasible, but I think we should spend the vast amount of our resources on more realistic targets. We should look to focus our major efforts strategically on targeted 3s and 4s, especially ones who are local with a knowledge and maybe an affinity for our school.

And, I think there is a difference between strategically recruiting 3 and 4 stars versus "settling" (I don't mean to be disrespectful to the guys we've recruited) for 3s and 4s who may still be on the table. The former approach maybe lends itself to being able to craft a class and continuity in a more consistent and thought-out fashion. The latter makes that harder to do, I believe, and could lead to mismatches in terms of position depth and class balance. (I.e., if you whiff on your prime targets, you may have to fall back to a "best available" approach that makes it harder to round out a roster and get the balance that is needed (ie, positional and class rotation)).

I don't have any problem with using transfers to fill in gaps. And, I do not blame the staff for relying on transfers to get the program righted when they were basically left with nothing.

But, my basic (maybe outdated) opinion is that a healthy program relies more heavily on high school recruiting. I would like to see transfers in the future used mostly opportunistically and strategically to supplement a normalized high school recruiting effort.

I guess in the end, it does not really matter how you get talent in here, as long as it is balanced and fills the needs. I think an overreliance on transfers makes that harder to do and probably is not the most efficient use of scholarships (ie, sit outs etc) and makes having the requisite balance and depth harder to achieve.
 
I think transfers are fine, granted they aren't the entire model for recruiting. You need the solid HS kids coming in who can play right away instead of waiting a year as transfers sit. A blend IMO would be more conducive. Teams like Butler and Creighton take 2 and 3 star kids and make them into top notch Big East players. Xavier went to D2 to get a big who is having a fantastic year for them. I think we should be more creative in our approach like Xavier. I often hear how the difference between D1 and D2 is not as much as one would think. Well, if that's the case why not use D2 to go find some big bodies who can bang down low? They don't need to be very athletic. The thing is, if you're going to go after 3 star kids, they need legitimate development. I can't say I've noticed anyone seriously developed from night to day under either recent administration. Paschall was shooting 27% from 3 his first year at Nova. He's now right around 40% as a senior. I want to see that. Went from raw to a finished product.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Paultzman" post=316843]Rather than being pulled into Hatfields v McCoy nuttiness, all I will repeat is what I said before, the “one person controls all” recruiting model is highly unorthodox. Recruiting is not rocket science, but the selling component is a vital part of process. A guy like Greg benefits program by devoting his time to practices, game planning and in game adjustments. Just my sense, but I don’t see Greg having that “selling ability”.

This is no knock at Matt who has kept boat afloat with transfers like Simon, Figgy, Clark, Heron etc. However, most successful coaches rarely if ever put all eggs in one basket & imo a little competition between recruiters is fine if managed well by the HC. (no Slice diatribes please). Mullin should be the planner & closer in the process, like most HCs.

So, my strong suggestion post season would be to broaden the base with second AC who recruits & performs other functions. How you get there would obviously be up to CM with Cragg’s input I assume. Back to the season.[/quote]


This is it in a nutshell. The idea of having one guy being responsible for 99% of the recruiting is absurd. It seems like each assistant coach has a different and unique function. Matt is the recruiter, Greg is the game manager and Mitch is involved in player development. You never hear about Mitch being on the recruiting trail and Greg very rarely. Similarly, you rarely see Matt involved in game management while on the bench.

We may be the only high major program that has an organizational chart like ours. While I can see tweaking it to some extent to take advantage of the special talents that each assistant brings to the table, I still maintain that all three coaches should be actively involved in every phase of the operation and not have different "job descriptions". It should be the goal of every assistant to eventually become a head coach. Exposing them to every function is the proper way to prepare them for that possibility. No different than in the business world or in any other profession.
 
Last edited:
MZ, Paschall has become a very good shooter from outside . It enhances his post game . He also moves well , with and without the Ball. And , he is a big body . I know he played a year or 2 at Fordham after HS in Dobbs Ferry and then transferred to Nova . A question to ask is, Fordham is good for Academics but, has fallen into second tier level as a BB program . Was Paschall ever recruited by Mullin or Lavin as a High schooler ? Seems like somebody should have been on him then ? Mullin and Richmond were 2 of the best pure shooters when they played in the NBA.. Simon , with 3 years being Coached by these HOFamers , is not a good shooter from any distance . Shooting is like having a special talent , you have it or don’t . Like playing the Violin . Simon gets high marks in every aspect of the game , except shooting . It’s a natural weakness he has as a player . It will not get appreciably better for him , despite any Coaching . It likely led to his transferring here from Arizona . He was not getting or would get PT there because of his shooting . He came here and has been a solid contributor to our Program . But, shooting doesn’t get him playing , it’s the other stuff he does .
 
Last edited:
[quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=316854]MZ, Paschall has become a very good shooter from outside . It enhances his post game . He also moves well , with and without the Ball. And , he is a big body . I know he played a year or 2 at Fordham after HS in Dobbs Ferry and then transferred to Nova . A question to ask is, Fordham is good for Academics but, has fallen into second tier level as a BB program . Was Paschall ever recruited by Mullin or Lavin as a High schooler ? Seems like somebody should have been on him then ?[/quote]
After Paschall left Fordham, Matt had just arrived & tried to get involved to no avail as Nova was positioned well via Tom Pecora. Initially, after playing at Dobbs Ferry HS, many teams missed out on him. That happens.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=316854]MZ, Paschall has become a very good shooter from outside . It enhances his post game . He also moves well , with and without the Ball. And , he is a big body . I know he played a year or 2 at Fordham after HS in Dobbs Ferry and then transferred to Nova . A question to ask is, Fordham is good for Academics but, has fallen into second tier level as a BB program . Was Paschall ever recruited by Mullin or Lavin as a High schooler ? Seems like somebody should have been on him then ?[/quote]

He was legit coming out of High School and was a HUGE get at the time for Fordham. Pecora recruited him hard.

Good article from last year. Pecora was fired in 2015 from Fordham and basically tried to steer Paschall to Villanova.

http://www.philly.com/philly/column...inal-four-jay-wright-recruiting-20180402.html
 
[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]

Slice... is that you?
 
Starting to think that if there is no invite to the dance, then there is an amicable parting of the ways with CM and staff. Back to square one, but this time with an AD leading.
 
[quote="Knight" post=316863]Starting to think that if there is no invite to the dance, then there is an amicable parting of the ways with CM and staff. Back to square one, but this time with an AD leading.[/quote]

Why even bring this up now?
 
One thing we all have learned is that the difference between getting a HS commit and a JUCO or transfer commit is night and day. Matt has brought in 4 and 5 star players from the latter, and 2 out of high school. So why the big difference? Paultzman talks about the coveted recruits waiting to see if Mullin can build a winning program. If that's a factor, which makes sense, why is it not inhibiting Matt's ability to get coveted JUCOs and transfers? My take goes back to Fran Fraschilla's comments on a broadcast, which he repeated the next day for emphasis. In addition, the blue bloods, and almost everyone for that matter, covets the 18 and 19 year old HS star more than the transfer.

So several questions have to be answered:
1. Can you build a program this way? That will take more than this year to determine. It is a relatively new concept.

2. Can SJU do better by tweaking the staff? That's the job of the AD. Ask questions, demand answers, and evaluate the model the staff has chosen. If money needs to be spent on facilities or an assistant that is an active recruiter, or requiring an existing assistant to get out there, that should be considered and implemented if at all possible.

If all that fails, knock down the dorms and bring back the stipend.
 
[quote="Marillac" post=316871][quote="Knight" post=316863]Starting to think that if there is no invite to the dance, then there is an amicable parting of the ways with CM and staff. Back to square one, but this time with an AD leading.[/quote]

Why even bring this up now?[/quote]

I was responding to those implying or expressing CM's staff not building a team that can recruit and retain players that can get us invited to the dance.
 
[quote="Ray Morgan" post=316872]One thing we all have learned is that the difference between getting a HS commit and a JUCO or transfer commit is night and day. Matt has brought in 4 and 5 star players from the latter, and 2 out of high school. So why the big difference? Paultzman talks about the coveted recruits waiting to see if Mullin can build a winning program. If that's a factor, which makes sense, why is it not inhibiting Matt's ability to get coveted JUCOs and transfers? My take goes back to Fran Fraschilla's comments on a broadcast, which he repeated the next day for emphasis. In addition, the blue bloods, and almost everyone for that matter, covets the 18 and 19 year old HS star more than the transfer.

So several questions have to be answered:
1. Can you build a program this way? That will take more than this year to determine. It is a relatively new concept.

2. Can SJU do better by tweaking the staff? That's the job of the AD. Ask questions, demand answers, and evaluate the model the staff has chosen. If money needs to be spent on facilities or an assistant that is an active recruiter, or requiring an existing assistant to get out there, that should be considered and implemented if at all possible.

If all that fails, knock down the dorms and bring back the stipend.[/quote]

My understanding is that the stipend is still possible as current dorm space is insufficient. One possibility:

1. Freshmen in dorms
2. sophs room with upperclassman
3. upperclassmen in university approved stipend housing
 
Last edited:
Not sure why people don't seem to understand that ST John's University is not a desirable spot for big time HS recruits? Outside of getting someone shady like Cal or Sean Miller, which will never happen not going to get talented HS recruits w/o baggage except for the random kid that truly wants to stay hope. And the problem with that is NY is no longer the talent base it was when Louie was coaching. To get talent whoever the coach is, he or she (When Mullin leaves who knows where next coach comes from so not ruling anything out) will have to be creative.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Marillac" post=316871][quote="Knight" post=316863]Starting to think that if there is no invite to the dance, then there is an amicable parting of the ways with CM and staff. Back to square one, but this time with an AD leading.[/quote]

Why even bring this up now?[/quote]

Why not? It's fair game IMO...of course we should all wait until the end of the year to judge and hopefully things get back on track, but fanbases of teams are constantly discussing this stuff. Were us Jets fans not allowed to discuss the possibility of a Bowles replacement while he was still coach? That happened for years even before he was on the hottest of seats and it was warm. If it can't be discussed here then where can it be discussed? It's a SJ basketball forum after all. Just how I see it. People need outlets to discuss these things, it's healthy after a buildup of frustration. You give him the rest of the year and see what happens, but it's not outrageous to discuss the possibility IMO simultaneously. No one is speaking in definite terms. Just my take, feel free to disagree.

Also we are sju, the tri state is chock full of talent. That's not the issue. The issue is we don't have a winning culture and our staff may need tweaking. I think both are related. If it's not allowed here, anyone can feel free to discuss it on the Mullin's Maniacs forum ;)
 
Last edited:
[quote="we are sju" post=316901]Not sure why people don't seem to understand that ST John's University is not a desirable spot for big time HS recruits? Outside of getting someone shady like Cal or Sean Miller, which will never happen not going to get talented HS recruits w/o baggage accept for the random kid that truly wants to stay hope. And the problem with that is NY is no longer the talent base it was when Louie was coaching. To get talent whoever the coach is, he or she (When Mullin leaves who knows where next coach comes from so not ruling anything out) will have to be creative.[/quote]

Can you define creative?
 
[quote="MarkRedman" post=316848][quote="Paultzman" post=316843]Rather than being pulled into Hatfields v McCoy nuttiness, all I will repeat is what I said before, the “one person controls all” recruiting model is highly unorthodox. Recruiting is not rocket science, but the selling component is a vital part of process. A guy like Greg benefits program by devoting his time to practices, game planning and in game adjustments. Just my sense, but I don’t see Greg having that “selling ability”.

This is no knock at Matt who has kept boat afloat with transfers like Simon, Figgy, Clark, Heron etc. However, most successful coaches rarely if ever put all eggs in one basket & imo a little competition between recruiters is fine if managed well by the HC. (no Slice diatribes please). Mullin should be the planner & closer in the process, like most HCs.

So, my strong suggestion post season would be to broaden the base with second AC who recruits & performs other functions. How you get there would obviously be up to CM with Cragg’s input I assume. Back to the season.[/quote]


This is it in a nutshell. The idea of having one guy being responsible for 99% of the recruiting is absurd. It seems like each assistant coach has a different and unique function. Matt is the recruiter, Greg is the game manager and Mitch is involved in player development. You never hear about Mitch being on the recruiting trail and Greg very rarely. Similarly, you rarely see Matt involved in game management while on the bench.

We may be the only high major program that has an organizational chart like ours. While I can see tweaking it to some extent to take advantage of the special talents that each assistant brings to the table, I still maintain that all three coaches should be actively involved in every phase of the operation and not have different "job descriptions". It should be the goal of every assistant to eventually become a head coach. Exposing them to every function is the proper way to prepare them for that possibility. No different than in the business world or in any other profession.[/quote]

Mark wrote:
"I still maintain that all three coaches should be actively involved in every phase of the operation and not have different "job descriptions". It should be the goal of every assistant to eventually become a head coach."

Unless Mullin has an epiphany that coaching structure will not change. The only assistant who has a chance to move on to coaching is Greg St. Jean but his resume will forever be tainted by our poor record and the fact that he is not viewed as a recruiter. He certainly is not a D1 coaching prospect. Mitch? He's cashing his NBA deferred payments and St. John's checks and just along for the ride. Like Lavin Chris Mullin was totally immersed into the program in his first months and by year two shit happened like the Slice debacle and his wife and daughter moving back to California forcing him to sell a million dollar home he had just bought. That kind of distraction may not equate to prostate cancer but it was a kick in the balls nonetheless. I think this president has put the squeeze on Mullin's budget and hiring a competent assistant may not be the fault of Mullin. Let's see if AD Cragg will outline a logical plan for both the President and Mullin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top