Mike Anderson - Recruiting, Coaching, Etc.

[quote="Anthony Mattia" post=401556]This is all really simple. There are some here who want 4 and 5 star recruits now and nothing anyone says will change their minds because this is CMAs 3rd recruiting class so he should do better.

There are others who view this as his 2nd recruiting class and see that he put a winner on the floor last year in a flash and look at his career and have some faith that he will continue to win and then get higher ranked kids, and nothing you say will change their minds either.

Bottom line is we do need better recruits, but, CMA has only coached here for 1 season. After the last 3 decades of mediocrity I am of the mindset to give a career coach with a proven track record a little more time. I know it's hard to be patient, but I am trying to be and will be rooting like crazy for coach and the kids we do get, regardless of their star rankings.[/quote]

Then there are those of us of fall somewhere in the middle. We preach patience, we trust CMA, we don't expect 4 and 5 star recruits now. etc. Yet we question closing out next year's class(barring a roster change) this early with a top 300 kid, on top of 2 top 200 kids. And we question why, on paper, next year's class doesn't seem any better then CMA's first 2 recruiting classes. Of course, the game is not played on paper, so we'll see how the kids do on the court. I remain extremely optimist.
 
Last edited:
[quote="lawmanfan" post=401559]As I've posted before, Coach Anderson's requirements do tend the limit the recruiting pool. He wants players who have good character traits, are unselfish, are willing to work hard, and will commit to playing defense. That is going to take you out of the running for some highly-ranked kids who have had smoke blown up their ass since they were 10.

However, if he is able to establish a program that wins regularly that's in New York City and plays in the Garden - and there is zero reason to believe he won't do exactly that - then that will lead to interest from more highly ranked players. Not all of them, but you don't need all of them. You just need the right ones.[/quote]

I hear what you're saying, but a quick count tells me that CMA got about 15 top 100 kids at his last 2 stops. And he did that right from the get-go at both schools. So, unless he's abandoned that strategy, it's reasonable to expect that he'll do somewhat the same here. After all, we are touting his track record as a reason for optimism. And rightfully so.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Monte" post=401560][quote="Anthony Mattia" post=401556]This is all really simple. There are some here who want 4 and 5 star recruits now and nothing anyone says will change their minds because this is CMAs 3rd recruiting class so he should do better.

There are others who view this as his 2nd recruiting class and see that he put a winner on the floor last year in a flash and look at his career and have some faith that he will continue to win and then get higher ranked kids, and nothing you say will change their minds either.

Bottom line is we do need better recruits, but, CMA has only coached here for 1 season. After the last 3 decades of mediocrity I am of the mindset to give a career coach with a proven track record a little more time. I know it's hard to be patient, but I am trying to be and will be rooting like crazy for coach and the kids we do get, regardless of their star rankings.[/quote]

Then there are those of us of fall somewhere in the middle. We preach patience, we trust CMA, we don't expect 4 and 5 star recruits now. etc. Yet we question closing out next year's class(barring a roster change) this early with a top 300 kid, on top of 2 top 200 kids. And we question why, on paper, next year's class doesn't seem any better then CMA's first 2 recruiting classes. Of course, the game is not played on paper, so we'll see how the kids do on the court. I remain extremely optimist.[/quote]

I felt that way (optimistic) on election night too at about 11 pm. We know how that turned out. lol
 
[quote="Beast of the East" post=401562][quote="Monte" post=401560][quote="Anthony Mattia" post=401556]This is all really simple. There are some here who want 4 and 5 star recruits now and nothing anyone says will change their minds because this is CMAs 3rd recruiting class so he should do better.

There are others who view this as his 2nd recruiting class and see that he put a winner on the floor last year in a flash and look at his career and have some faith that he will continue to win and then get higher ranked kids, and nothing you say will change their minds either.

Bottom line is we do need better recruits, but, CMA has only coached here for 1 season. After the last 3 decades of mediocrity I am of the mindset to give a career coach with a proven track record a little more time. I know it's hard to be patient, but I am trying to be and will be rooting like crazy for coach and the kids we do get, regardless of their star rankings.[/quote]

Then there are those of us of fall somewhere in the middle. We preach patience, we trust CMA, we don't expect 4 and 5 star recruits now. etc. Yet we question closing out next year's class(barring a roster change) this early with a top 300 kid, on top of 2 top 200 kids. And we question why, on paper, next year's class doesn't seem any better then CMA's first 2 recruiting classes. Of course, the game is not played on paper, so we'll see how the kids do on the court. I remain extremely optimist.[/quote]

I felt that way (optimistic) on election night too at about 11 pm. We know how that turned out. lol[/quote]

lol
 
[quote="Monte" post=401561][quote="lawmanfan" post=401559]As I've posted before, Coach Anderson's requirements do tend the limit the recruiting pool. He wants players who have good character traits, are unselfish, are willing to work hard, and will commit to playing defense. That is going to take you out of the running for some highly-ranked kids who have had smoke blown up their ass since they were 10.

However, if he is able to establish a program that wins regularly that's in New York City and plays in the Garden - and there is zero reason to believe he won't do exactly that - then that will lead to interest from more highly ranked players. Not all of them, but you don't need all of them. You just need the right ones.[/quote]

I hear what you're saying, but a quick count tells me that CMA got about 15 top 100 kids at his last 2 stops. And he did that right from the get-go at both schools. So, unless he's abandoned that strategy, it's reasonable to expect that he'll do somewhat the same here. After all, we are touting his track record as a reason for optimism. And rightfully so.[/quote]

I almost wonder if CMA is finding it a lot harder to recruit here than expected. Remember, his last two stops were large public state schools, so that certainly played an advantage in terms of resources and maybe easier sells.

I feel like I need to include this disclaimer on every post in this thread lol, but this is not me making excuses. Just an interesting discussion about what we're watching play out and potential reasons.
 
[quote="lawmanfan" post=401548]Looking forward to when there are actual games played and actual results to evaluate as opposed to ... the rest of this thread.[/quote]

You and me both!

Some of the guys on this thread could give an aspirin a headache with this incessant regurgitation of their thoughts on our "poor" recruiting...
 
[quote="Anthony Mattia" post=401556]This is all really simple. There are some here who want 4 and 5 star recruits now and nothing anyone says will change their minds because this is CMAs 3rd recruiting class so he should do better.

There are others who view this as his 2nd recruiting class and see that he put a winner on the floor last year in a flash and look at his career and have some faith that he will continue to win and then get higher ranked kids, and nothing you say will change their minds either.

Bottom line is we do need better recruits, but, CMA has only coached here for 1 season. After the last 3 decades of mediocrity I am of the mindset to give a career coach with a proven track record a little more time. I know it's hard to be patient, but I am trying to be and will be rooting like crazy for coach and the kids we do get, regardless of their star rankings.[/quote]

I agree. And I'd further point out that he hasn't even been here for one FULL season. That 1st season, and the 6 months of recruiting since it, have all been in a covid environment. That hasn't impacted the programs at the top of the food chain. But it certainly hasn't helped a program trying to rebuild itself.

When you don't pay prospects big $, and you don't have a sneaker company paying them big $ while steering them your way, and you have been a doormat nationally for the entire life of the kids you are recruiting, and your campus facilities are the worst in the league, and your HC plays a system that coddled HS stars aren't lining up to play in... maybe its not the coach that's the problem, perhaps...just perhaps...its the absurd expectations of our fanbase that are the issue?

Just sayin...
 
[quote="Monte" post=401558][quote="Room112" post=401557][quote="Monte" post=401544][quote="Mike Zaun" post=401539]Also, yes I totally agree the system hurts recruiting. It's fun for us to watch, but not fun for top kids looking to commit somewhere. If you want to land the Ponds type kids you have to be able to guarantee tons of PT bottom line. Our recruiting strategy at the moment seems to be going to yard sales hoping we find a Mickey Mantle rookie card some old lady is selling for $5.[/quote]

If CMA can land a Ponds type of kid, he's got be able to guarantee him PT. Provided it's a kid who buys in to CMA's system, of course.[/quote]

I'm not even sure Ponds would have come here if CMA were the coach. I absolutely loved Ponds and watching him play. But let's be honest. He wasn't always interested on the defense end nor was he always willing to put in the conditioning work. Both of these are things CMA demands. Now who knows, maybe CMA would have been a great influence on him, we will never know.[/quote]

Agree completely. Just to clarify, when i said a "Ponds type of kid", I meant talent level.[/quote]

All good/fair points, but someone remind me...how many post season games did Ponds help us win in his career?
 
Last edited:
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=401569][quote="lawmanfan" post=401548]Looking forward to when there are actual games played and actual results to evaluate as opposed to ... the rest of this thread.[/quote]

You and me both!

Some of the guys on this thread could give an aspirin a headache with this incessant regurgitation of their thoughts on our "poor" recruiting...[/quote]

Why not just skip posts you don't like? Or the whole thread? It's in the title...recruiting. Kinda like walking into Macy's and declaring how annoying Macy's is but still staying in the store. I regularly skip threads I'm not into. Like it or not, a Big East team's fanbase has every right to question recruiting 2 star kids. It's completely fair. And yes I do think CMA didn't realize how hard it is to recruit here. It's almost like it takes some Lavin suave to sell it. His pitch is straightforward and no bells and whistles. Lavin could probably sell salt to a slug. We should've hired Hsu which I said a long time ago.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Monte" post=401561][quote="lawmanfan" post=401559]As I've posted before, Coach Anderson's requirements do tend the limit the recruiting pool. He wants players who have good character traits, are unselfish, are willing to work hard, and will commit to playing defense. That is going to take you out of the running for some highly-ranked kids who have had smoke blown up their ass since they were 10.

However, if he is able to establish a program that wins regularly that's in New York City and plays in the Garden - and there is zero reason to believe he won't do exactly that - then that will lead to interest from more highly ranked players. Not all of them, but you don't need all of them. You just need the right ones.[/quote]

I hear what you're saying, but a quick count tells me that CMA got about 15 top 100 kids at his last 2 stops. And he did that right from the get-go at both schools. So, unless he's abandoned that strategy, it's reasonable to expect that he'll do somewhat the same here. After all, we are touting his track record as a reason for optimism. And rightfully so.[/quote]

Just curious but do people think he forgot how to recruit after leaving Arkansas? Or is it possible its just a little bit easier to recruit at a middle of the pack $EC program than it is at a mom & pop, perennial BE bottom tier school?
 
[quote="Mike Zaun" post=401573][quote="SJUFAN2" post=401569][quote="lawmanfan" post=401548]Looking forward to when there are actual games played and actual results to evaluate as opposed to ... the rest of this thread.[/quote]

You and me both!

Some of the guys on this thread could give an aspirin a headache with this incessant regurgitation of their thoughts on our "poor" recruiting...[/quote]

Why not just skip posts you don't like? Or the whole thread? It's in the title...recruiting. Kinda like walking into Macy's and declaring how annoying Macy's is but still staying in the store. I regularly skip threads I'm not into. Like it or not, a Big East team's fanbase has every right to question recruiting 2 star kids. It's completely fair. And yes I do think CMA didn't realize how hard it is to recruit here. It's almost like it takes some Lavin suave to sell it. His pitch is straightforward and no bells and whistles. Lavin could probably sell salt to a slug. We should've hired Hsu which I said a long time ago.[/quote]

Silly me. I saw the thread title and assumed there might be something worth chatting about.
How was I to know it was going to end up being the same 5 people making the same comments they made during the same discussion in August, in May, in March...
If you guys are going to keep throwing up the same argument you are going to keep getting the same responses. That just makes no sense to me. Kinda like if you walk in to Macy's and get lunch at the food court then get violently ill and hospitalized, only to go get lunch at their food court again the day after being discharged from the hospital. I mean, what's the point?

Candidly, I'd love to be able to skip 90% of what is posted here, but as a moderator that really isn't an option. Thanks for the suggestion though.
 
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=401574][quote="Monte" post=401561][quote="lawmanfan" post=401559]As I've posted before, Coach Anderson's requirements do tend the limit the recruiting pool. He wants players who have good character traits, are unselfish, are willing to work hard, and will commit to playing defense. That is going to take you out of the running for some highly-ranked kids who have had smoke blown up their ass since they were 10.

However, if he is able to establish a program that wins regularly that's in New York City and plays in the Garden - and there is zero reason to believe he won't do exactly that - then that will lead to interest from more highly ranked players. Not all of them, but you don't need all of them. You just need the right ones.[/quote]

I hear what you're saying, but a quick count tells me that CMA got about 15 top 100 kids at his last 2 stops. And he did that right from the get-go at both schools. So, unless he's abandoned that strategy, it's reasonable to expect that he'll do somewhat the same here. After all, we are touting his track record as a reason for optimism. And rightfully so.[/quote]

Just curious but do people think he forgot how to recruit after leaving Arkansas? Or is it possible its just a little bit easier to recruit at a middle of the pack $EC program than it is at a mom & pop, perennial BE bottom tier school?[/quote]

That's fair, but then let's stop using his track record with recruits and wins as a basis for what to expect moving forward. You can't have it both ways. And once again, all the prior coaches had no problem recruiting here, even after stretches near or at the bottom of the BE. . Maybe not always the right kinds of kids, and I don't expect CMA to compromise his standards, but I also expect to to achieve the same or similar results as he's done over the course of his career. If he can't do that as a bare minimum, then we have problems that no coach will ever solve.
 
Last edited:
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=401572][quote="Monte" post=401558][quote="Room112" post=401557][quote="Monte" post=401544][quote="Mike Zaun" post=401539]Also, yes I totally agree the system hurts recruiting. It's fun for us to watch, but not fun for top kids looking to commit somewhere. If you want to land the Ponds type kids you have to be able to guarantee tons of PT bottom line. Our recruiting strategy at the moment seems to be going to yard sales hoping we find a Mickey Mantle rookie card some old lady is selling for $5.[/quote]

If CMA can land a Ponds type of kid, he's got be able to guarantee him PT. Provided it's a kid who buys in to CMA's system, of course.[/quote]

I'm not even sure Ponds would have come here if CMA were the coach. I absolutely loved Ponds and watching him play. But let's be honest. He wasn't always interested on the defense end nor was he always willing to put in the conditioning work. Both of these are things CMA demands. Now who knows, maybe CMA would have been a great influence on him, we will never know.[/quote]

Agree completely. Just to clarify, when i said a "Ponds type of kid", I meant talent level.[/quote]

All good/fair points, but someone remind me...how many post season games did Ponds help us win in his career?[/quote]

I believe that to be more a result of the coaching, or lack of, then anything else. Mullin's freestyle offense pretty much made it "every man for himself". Not absolving Ponds or blame, mind you.
 
Last edited:
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=401569][quote="lawmanfan" post=401548]Looking forward to when there are actual games played and actual results to evaluate as opposed to ... the rest of this thread.[/quote]

You and me both!

Some of the guys on this thread could give an aspirin a headache with this incessant regurgitation of their thoughts on our "poor" recruiting...[/quote]

I didn't see many people say that our recruiting has been "poor". Discussing and analyzing aspects of our recruiting strategy, especially during a dead period and when we just finished off next year's class, is fair game IMO. And it's not an attack on CMA. For two guys who hate the subject matter, you sure do engage a lot.
 
The difference is that only homers agree with the "they may be 2 stars but they will be a great fit and turn into beasts" sentiment all the time. Those who agree with me that recruiting is at best a concern so far (though early) are more objective and fans of other programs would more often agree with that. Believe me, if this was happening to other Big East teams, their fans would be having the same questions at a minimum and rightfully so. CMA's future here will be based in large part to his recruiting ability like it or not. If this is the best we can do, we are in big trouble and more 7-11 type finishes. If someone had a correlation graph showing the relationship between recruiting success and success as a program, you would see a clear and obvious relationship. Rankings are there for a reason...they shouldn't be taken as gospel but they are a pretty good guide. Generally, if you're top 10 you are NBA lottery pick material, if you're top 50 you have a chance at the NBA and chance to be a great college player, etc. So while the difference between 55th and 76th may not be that great, the difference between 250 and 55th is big. So there's something to it although it isn't perfect. As much as people want to say these types of posts are "repetitive", so too are the responses to them. Do you want to live in an echochamber, or really discuss things with diff views amongst your fellow fans?
 
[quote="Mike Zaun" post=401589]The difference is that only homers agree with the "they may be 2 stars but they will be a great fit and turn into beasts" sentiment all the time. Those who agree with me that recruiting is at best a concern so far (though early) are more objective and fans of other programs would more often agree with that. Believe me, if this was happening to other Big East teams, their fans would be having the same questions at a minimum and rightfully so. CMA's future here will be based in large part to his recruiting ability like it or not. If this is the best we can do, we are in big trouble and more 7-11 type finishes. If someone had a correlation graph showing the relationship between recruiting success and success as a program, you would see a clear and obvious relationship. Rankings are there for a reason...they shouldn't be taken as gospel but they are a pretty good guide. Generally, if you're top 10 you are NBA lottery pick material, if you're top 50 you have a chance at the NBA and chance to be a great college player, etc. So while the difference between 55th and 76th may not be that great, the difference between 250 and 55th is big. So there's something to it although it isn't perfect. As much as people want to say these types of posts are "repetitive", so too are the responses to them. Do you want to live in an echochamber, or really discuss things with diff views amongst your fellow fans?[/quote]

I don't claim to know more then anyone else. I almost always voice what is my opinion. It may be right, it may be wrong, it may be too soon to know. There are posters on this board who love to speak as though they are the voice of authority or have some sort of superior intellect. I gotta learn to ignore them. Anyhow, if you read that article that i posted the link to, it supports your argument. There is a huge difference in college success and a potential NBA career between the kids ranked in the top 100, the top 200 and the top 300. Again, rankings are not the end all be all, but they are something. And not something insignificant.
 
Truth is if we can land one kid like Cuffe, we are looking at a dominant Big East backcourt for the foreseeable future, with a talented 4*wing coming in like Pinzon. All it takes is one or two guys like that to get this moving the needle. We have a lot of depth, size and the like.
 
SJU has a coach who has shown over the years that he can compete at a decent level playing his threes vs your fours but if the intent is to challenge the top teams in the big east and get NCAA bids on a regular basis and win a couple of games every so often he is going to need a sprinkling of fours.
A few years of competing at the top level in the big east will provide a shot in the arm to recruiting but that will be difficult in the competitive big east. Cragg appears to be the best AD SJU has had in years and from his experience at Duke he is well aware of what interest those Duke - SJU games at MSG generated.
National TV, enormous media coverage, and just a major increase in fan interest. Just yesterday I read where a recruit in Arizona stated how nice it would be to play at MSG. SJU has played very few games at MSG lately vs top ten teams.
Cragg should schedule that type of game for next season and every season after that. MSG is one advantage we have in the recruiting wars but we don’t seem to use it.
 
[quote="Monte" post=401579][quote="SJUFAN2" post=401574][quote="Monte" post=401561][quote="lawmanfan" post=401559]As I've posted before, Coach Anderson's requirements do tend the limit the recruiting pool. He wants players who have good character traits, are unselfish, are willing to work hard, and will commit to playing defense. That is going to take you out of the running for some highly-ranked kids who have had smoke blown up their ass since they were 10.

However, if he is able to establish a program that wins regularly that's in New York City and plays in the Garden - and there is zero reason to believe he won't do exactly that - then that will lead to interest from more highly ranked players. Not all of them, but you don't need all of them. You just need the right ones.[/quote]

I hear what you're saying, but a quick count tells me that CMA got about 15 top 100 kids at his last 2 stops. And he did that right from the get-go at both schools. So, unless he's abandoned that strategy, it's reasonable to expect that he'll do somewhat the same here. After all, we are touting his track record as a reason for optimism. And rightfully so.[/quote]

Just curious but do people think he forgot how to recruit after leaving Arkansas? Or is it possible its just a little bit easier to recruit at a middle of the pack $EC program than it is at a mom & pop, perennial BE bottom tier school?[/quote]

That's fair, but then let's stop using his track record with recruits and wins as a basis for what to expect moving forward. You can't have it both ways. And once again, all the prior coaches had no problem recruiting here, even after stretches near or at the bottom of the BE. . Maybe not always the right kinds of kids, and I don't expect CMA to compromise his standards, but I also expect to to achieve the same or similar results as he's done over the course of his career. If he can't do that as a bare minimum, then we have problems that no coach will ever solve.[/quote]
True enough. Ultimately, I think that's the case. We just have issues that prevent a quick fix, as proven by the Jarvis, Lavin, Mullin failures.
The only way to do it is start over from scratch with a blue collar approach and build on one success after another until the perception of the program is changed on a local and national level.

I think CMA is exactly the right guy for that job.

Here's a thought experiment/research project for people (not you) who seem to lack the patience or impulse control to give him more than 32 games before complaining about the lack of 4&5 star recruits...

Can anyone provide a list of all the 4 and 5 star players that have represented this program in the NCAA Final Four, Elite Eight and Sweet Sixteen?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top