Does Rick Barnes need to do a better job recruiting

Does Rick Barnes need to do a better job recruiting?

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .
#52
#52
cncchris33 said:
I think schools like Gonzaga and Wichita State, and Butler, and VCU have proven you can do it on a consistent basis, but I haven't seen a P5 team do it on a consistent basis, so I think Ziti has a decent point relative to our level of competition.

P5 teams that succeed like Tennessee has this year either elevate their recruiting profile, and rightfully so with that type of success, or they tend to fade in and out of success and mediocrity.
Click to expand...

And that’s a fair take, but given the youth of this team does anyone really see a fall off in the next 2 years??

So we are then talking about 3 straight “good” years...so how many consecutive years would it take before people say, ok maybe it does work?

I don’t see his recruiting strategy currently changing much...he was on Rothstein’s podcast for 20 minutes yesterday and mentioned the recruiting strategy. Said they’ve tried to get in on some of this higher ranked guys but couldn’t land them, that similar happened at Texas early on...said they expect to land so of those guys but they also won’t get away from the kind of guys he currently has like they did a bit at Texas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#54
#54
BigZiti09 said:
1. So I guess winning is here to stay and we should suspect to see improvement next year no matter what right? We don't really lose anyone and everyone gets a year older.

2. Anyone we missed on that prompted us to land a better yet more lowly ranked and lesser recruited player. Bowden would also be luck. We hired a guy who was recruiting him. Barnes had no idea about him.


Really don't wanna argue about this stuff. It gets twisted the same way every single time. Just like the last post in this thread before it was bumped where you're acting like I'm clamoring for 5 stars even though that's NEVER been my stance.
Click to expand...

1. We’ve all said making the tourney is expectation...if we don’t make the tourney next season than yea it would be a disappointment. Impossible to improve on your record every single year and that’s common sense, even the best most consistent teams in the nation don’t do that.

2. That’s good coaching? He said today it’s a staff award and not just him, he had a spot open in the spring and brought in Bowden, don’t really consider that one luck.
 
#55
#55
BigZiti09 said:
And again.... doing "better" at recruiting doesn't mean top 5 classes or multiple top 50 players in every class and you will almost never hear me talk about landing 5* players. I think our path to success is recruiting guys that are 3 and 4 year contributors. We can do that and recruit inside the top 150 for the most part and a top 50 player every now and then wouldn't hurt.
Click to expand...

That’s my point...far cry you saying give me a 140 ranked 3 Star from where you were a year ago on this topic. You may not have been saying I need all 5* but I assure you that you weren’t saying build the roster with mostly 3* guys either.
 
#58
#58
I trust the SEC coach of the year to know what players that he needs. I am sure he appreciates the thoughts of the experts posting on this board.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#59
#59
bleedingTNorange said:
That’s my point...far cry you saying give me a 140 ranked 3 Star from where you were a year ago on this topic. You may not have been saying I need all 5* but I assure you that you weren’t saying build the roster with mostly 3* guys either.
Click to expand...

No.

I still think we need top 75-100 players on the roster. And I don't mean just 1 guy who has a very unreliable ranking (good or bad) because he wasn't really scouted here.

Have I softened my stance a little based on watching Barnes coach this year? Maybe a little but not a far cry. My stance on his recruiting has always been overblown by this board.

The comparison to Purdue the other day was a good exercise I thought.
 
#60
#60
bleedingTNorange said:
Right? Lol.

I think many on here would take 4 years of Tyler Harris over 1 year of Anfernee Simons...yet who’s the more highly ranked guy?
Click to expand...

Well let's just do that. Why stop there? Why waste our time with the 4* PG out of memphis? Just go find a 3* nobody wants.
 
#63
#63
bleedingTNorange said:
And that’s a fair take, but given the youth of this team does anyone really see a fall off in the next 2 years??

So we are then talking about 3 straight “good” years...so how many consecutive years would it take before people say, ok maybe it does work?

I don’t see his recruiting strategy currently changing much...he was on Rothstein’s podcast for 20 minutes yesterday and mentioned the recruiting strategy. Said they’ve tried to get in on some of this higher ranked guys but couldn’t land them, that similar happened at Texas early on...said they expect to land so of those guys but they also won’t get away from the kind of guys he currently has like they did a bit at Texas.
Click to expand...

True, but I think it is rare to have such a young nucleus already finding their way. I don't see them dropping off next year, but the following year, we lose quite a bit in Schofield and Alexander, plus Darrington, so that remains to be seen, and may result in only two straight years of this type of high-level success instead of three.

Barnes might go out and replicate that under the radar approach in the upcoming classes, but it would be rare for him to do so, if not unprecedented to do it for a prolonged period of time at a P5 program. That isn't to say it's impossible, but it would be surprising to see him string together 6-7-8 consecutive seasons where we make the NCAAT, compete in the top 3 of the SEC, and still maintain the same national recruiting profile that lives outside the top-150ish level of talent.
 
#64
#64
BigZiti09 said:
Well let's just do that. Why stop there? Why waste our time with the 4* PG out of memphis? Just go find a 3* nobody wants.
Click to expand...

Harris is already some national name...in fact he’s only ranked top 100 by Rivals, that’s the kind of prospect that you would’ve criticized in the past (see Pons), yet you claim your stance hasn’t changed?
 
#65
#65
BigZiti09 said:
No.

I still think we need top 75-100 players on the roster. And I don't mean just 1 guy who has a very unreliable ranking (good or bad) because he wasn't really scouted here.

Have I softened my stance a little based on watching Barnes coach this year? Maybe a little but not a far cry. My stance on his recruiting has always been overblown by this board.

The comparison to Purdue the other day was a good exercise I thought.
Click to expand...

When I get bored this week I’ll look...I assure you that you’ve made comments saying the majority of roster needs to be top 100.
 
#66
#66
BigZiti09 said:
Why are we wasting our time on these top 100 guys? Just go get the 200+ ranked guy that is coachable and a bit undersized.
Click to expand...

You’ve claimed recruiting needed to improve and criticized offers sent out to lower guys and were a part of the Barnes doesn’t leave Knoxville crowd...from day 1 we recruited top 100 guys, that hasn’t ever changed, it’s why this take makes zero sense.
 
#67
#67
bleedingTNorange said:
Harris is already some national name...in fact he’s only ranked top 100 by Rivals, that’s the kind of prospect that you would’ve criticized in the past (see Pons), yet you claim your stance hasn’t changed?
Click to expand...

I don't know where to start with this post...

1. I use Rivals. I rarely ever look at 247 and I especially dislike the composite. Do an advanced search for posts by me with the word "composite" in them for proof.

2. Idk what you're talking about with Pons. I've always said he was a good get but we really don't know what we have and the recruiting services don't either. He could be LBJ or he could be a bust. They just slapped a 4* ranking on him and never really tried to evaluate him. Especially Rivals. 247 and Rivals both ranked him as a 4* and I think at one point I used the rivals rating system to figure out where he'd fall numerically and it was top 100.
 
#68
#68
If this year's success isn't enough to attract 4- and 5-star recruits to UT, I don't know what will.
 
#69
#69
bleedingTNorange said:
You’ve claimed recruiting needed to improve and criticized offers sent out to lower guys and were a part of the Barnes doesn’t leave Knoxville crowd...from day 1 we recruited top 100 guys, that hasn’t ever changed, it’s why this take makes zero sense.
Click to expand...

We need to land top 100 guys. And our net seems to be in those waters more consistently now.

Meaning that Barnes agrees with my thinking.
 
#70
#70
cncchris33 said:
True, but I think it is rare to have such a young nucleus already finding their way. I don't see them dropping off next year, but the following year, we lose quite a bit in Schofield and Alexander, plus Darrington, so that remains to be seen, and may result in only two straight years of this type of high-level success instead of three.

Barnes might go out and replicate that under the radar approach in the upcoming classes, but it would be rare for him to do so, if not unprecedented to do it for a prolonged period of time at a P5 program. That isn't to say it's impossible, but it would be surprising to see him string together 6-7-8 consecutive seasons where we make the NCAAT, compete in the top 3 of the SEC, and still maintain the same national recruiting profile that lives outside the top-150ish level of talent.
Click to expand...

I think recruiting will improve some, but not to the level that people were clamoring for. I think you’ll see some guys 100-150 added instead of 151-250 like we’ve currently done...but I don’t think you’re gonna see some monumental shift or us all of a sudden landing guys like he did at Texas.

And my opinion has always been there just isn’t a huge difference between guys ranked 80 and a guy ranked 140, I think the hit/miss ratio is about the same once you get down around that mark.
 
#71
#71
BigZiti09 said:
I don't know where to start with this post...

1. I use Rivals. I rarely ever look at 247 and I especially dislike the composite. Do an advanced search for posts by me with the word "composite" in them for proof.

2. Idk what you're talking about with Pons. I've always said he was a good get but we really don't know what we have and the recruiting services don't either. He could be LBJ or he could be a bust. They just slapped a 4* ranking on him and never really tried to evaluate him. Especially Rivals. 247 and Rivals both ranked him as a 4* and I think at one point I used the rivals rating system to figure out where he'd fall numerically and it was top 100.
Click to expand...

My point is that if a player was ranked only by rivals and unranked by every other service you would’ve claimed how he wasn’t a true 4* etc etc.

Look at Harris’ offer list, another thing you would’ve pointed to in the past...he’s got Colorado State and Memphis in his top group along with Baylor and Iowa State...that’s a pretty similar list to a lot of our roster.

Simple question...what’s your take on Harris if Rivals updates and drops him outside their top 100?
 
#73
#73
bleedingTNorange said:
I think recruiting will improve some, but not to the level that people were clamoring for. I think you’ll see some guys 100-150 added instead of 151-250 like we’ve currently done...but I don’t think you’re gonna see some monumental shift or us all of a sudden landing guys like he did at Texas.

And my opinion has always been there just isn’t a huge difference between guys ranked 80 and a guy ranked 140, I think the hit/miss ratio is about the same once you get down around that mark.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I believe we may sprinkle in a top 75 player every other year too, and that is probably enough if we can continue to land the type of kids we have over the past three years. Coachable, hard-working kids that want to be pushed to excel.
 
#74
#74
bleedingTNorange said:
My point is that if a player was ranked only by rivals and unranked by every other service you would’ve claimed how he wasn’t a true 4* etc etc.

Look at Harris’ offer list, another thing you would’ve pointed to in the past...he’s got Colorado State and Memphis in his top group along with Baylor and Iowa State...that’s a pretty similar list to a lot of our roster.

Simple question...what’s your take on Harris if Rivals updates and drops him outside their top 100?
Click to expand...

The bolded above is BS.

Moving on.....I default to rivals. That's the site I prefer and by a large margin.

I think that eventually we need to get in there and land a guy or two that are consensus top 75 players. What is wrong with that?

I haven't watched a bunch of film on Harris and don't really plan to cause I'm not a scout. I can watch a 5* and know I'm seeing something awesome but I can't tell you the difference in a guy ranked 100th and 150th.

Rivals isn't gonna drop him 40 spots man. Come on.

So Rivals has him 66 and 247 has him 142. To me that's a good get. If rivals drops him to 101 then he's still a good get and I'd still refer to him as a 4*.

You're still over-exaggerating my stance man. I may not have been all in on Barnes but I think I was pretty fair to him in my takes unlike a guy like Basilio who wouldn't give him credit for Pons at all and was calling him Weekend at Barnesy's.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top