Finley Bizjack - 2023 Offer

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
This is unbelievable. We can disagree, and we obviously do, but to think that with a straight face you can say you would rather have an extra big type for depth who may never even see the floor over a 4 star top 100ish recruit like Bizjack is one of the craziest things I have ever heard on here.

no, I hope we get a terrific big guy. you think we're still recruiting Bizjack for this one spot??? we just got a verbal from top 150 Trevor Smith. we told Trevor he's our guy. according to all the articles, we even told him he wasn't in direct competition with Nelson. you could play some point but we have a plan to play you together.

and you want to turn around and recruit over him in the same class for the same spot the next day?

we'll keep talking to him in case something happens and a guard spot opens up. but no, this last current spot isn't for Bizjack. we had one guard spot to fill. it's gone.
 

MrTbone

Head Coach
Apr 27, 2005
7,818
5,630
113
I think it’s tough to say no to a borderline top100 guy so I don’t have much of an issue if that’s where we end up.

but the notion that we don’t need to prioritize having more depth at our F/C spots seems faulty. I think there’s are plenty of teams out there who are throwing not just height but weight at us and we’re definitely undersized if our third and fourth biggest guys are 6’7”/200–ish.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
Fair point T, but let's not get a big guy just to get a big guy. Would be good if he could shoot the 3 a little. Cayo did well without a 3 because he improved dramatically going to the hoop. Not a lot of bigs who can't shoot turn into Cayo, so I would be careful just filling this spot with just size. And, I doubt a 6'7 Cayo type is who are talking about anyway? All I'm saying is if we get size, I hope there's some solid talent there and not just a size guy. Prioritizing this is fine. But, we can't just focus on this spot and this spot only. I hope our coaching staff is not following Sman's talk and saying "we are 100% replacing Grace with a big". I just can't imagine a staff saying that at a non PG or "5" position. Maybe I will let Allen Iverson say it for me: Power Forward??? We're talking about power forward, man. Power forward? Power forward?
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
no, I hope we get a terrific big guy. you think we're still recruiting Bizjack for this one spot??? we just got a verbal from top 150 Trevor Smith. we told Trevor he's our guy. according to all the articles, we even told him he wasn't in direct competition with Nelson. you could play some point but we have a plan to play you together.

and you want to turn around and recruit over him in the same class for the same spot the next day?

we'll keep talking to him in case something happens and a guard spot opens up. but no, this last current spot isn't for Bizjack. we had one guard spot to fill. it's gone.
Why would this be recruiting over him? He and Smith couldn't play together?? You don't think top 150 and top 100ish combo guards can play together? Shoot, the advantage here would be they could play together with a PG like Nelson or Dji, or play without them. Same spot? What spot is that? Are you still in this 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 world? Do you not think a ton of teams are going with 3 guard lineups now?
 

MrTbone

Head Coach
Apr 27, 2005
7,818
5,630
113
Fair point T, but let's not get a big guy just to get a big guy. Would be good if he could shoot the 3 a little. Cayo did well without a 3 because he improved dramatically going to the hoop. Not a lot of bigs who can't shoot turn into Cayo, so I would be careful just filling this spot with just size. And, I doubt a 6'7 Cayo type is who are talking about anyway? All I'm saying is if we get size, I hope there's some solid talent there and not just a size guy. Prioritizing this is fine. But, we can't just focus on this spot and this spot only. I hope our coaching staff is not following Sman's talk and saying "we are 100% replacing Grace with a big". I just can't imagine a staff saying that at a non PG or "5" position. Maybe I will let Allen Iverson say it for me: Power Forward??? We're talking about power forward, man. Power forward? Power forward?
I’m not advocating we get a stiff just to fill a spot with a big dude. But there are some skilled forwards out there who have some size that we actually need to win a recruiting battle for. They don’t need to be center types but they could definitely be bigger than our current SF types.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiderman

urmite

Spider's Club
Gold Member
Dec 2, 2004
10,206
3,281
113
Without suggesting what we should do…
If we had only two choices for our next 2023 recruit, would you take Terry Allen or Darien Brothers?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderDogg

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
I’m not advocating we get a stiff just to fill a spot with a big dude. But there are some skilled forwards out there who have some size that we actually need to win a recruiting battle for. They don’t need to be center types but they could definitely be bigger than our current SF types.
Understood, and sounds good to me. And, I am not saying don't get a guy like that. Prioritize it, go hard after them, fine by me. All I have been saying is don't 100% say you have to have that type of guy for the last spot regardless. You still can and should recruit the other spots hard as well, especially with, like I think you said earlier, all the transfer activity out there. Also, we have a lot of unproven guys at the guard/wing position. We certainly don't want to assume they all pan out, and not even try for other guys there.
 

PhillySpider

Team Manager
Gold Member
May 14, 2003
1,976
1,234
113
I am going to be with VT here. If we can sign a Top 100 guy, we should. Period. We don't sign enough of them that we can ever pass on one for a hypothetical other (big) guy. Sure, if we had two guys, both Top 100 ready to sign and had to pick one in our current situation, I'd pick the big, but that's not the choice. Its do we keep recruiting this Top 100 guy and sign him if wants to sign or do we back off in favor of a hypothetical. I am taking the real thing every time. Especially given our history with recruiting bigs!
 

spider23

Spider's Club
May 31, 2002
14,101
7,685
113
Dedmon Center USA
ruhoops.proboards.com
Also with 4700 and Philly on this one, you can bring in a top 100 guy, do it. He is ranked 104 in his class by rivals. I know rankings don't always translate, but I think there is so much exposure and interest in recruiting these days these are pretty darn accurate now. Great to see he was on a visit, it would appear. Keep striking while the iron is hot!
 

Ferrum Spider

Team Manager
Feb 17, 2010
2,495
2,239
113
I think its insane that we wouldn't take this kid because "we need a big" or whatever. There is no way we wont have turnover next season which we can look at adding a transfer that is already college ready instead of rolling the dice (If we have another big as good as this kid obviously its worth debating). And even if we don't, that likely means were getting contributions where needed. Cross that bridge when we get to it. If this kid was ready to commit today wed have the LOI out the printer before the ink would dry.

IMO we are in a unique position right now. Part of it is timing, but the transfer portal is going to help us out from an academics standpoint in a way a lot of people aren't taking into account. We are attracting players from smaller really good academic institutions and not have to deal with admissions in the same way getting them in I feel. Add that (And I mean this as no offense to SPCS) SPCS grad programs aren't as rigorous as our day programs we can be a more attractive option to grad transfers (Since we are now winning) since that seems to be where some of our upperclassmen wind up. I like going after high rated recruits that will probably be recruited over because of the transfer market and filling the rest out with PL/SOCON/IVY all conference players. Cautiously optimistic we wont have a repeat of the last 10 years with the way this rebuild is going vs 2011.
 

Section9.RowD

Starter
Gold Member
Nov 19, 2021
941
1,346
93
I think its insane that we wouldn't take this kid because "we need a big" or whatever. There is no way we wont have turnover next season which we can look at adding a transfer that is already college ready instead of rolling the dice (If we have another big as good as this kid obviously its worth debating). And even if we don't, that likely means were getting contributions where needed. Cross that bridge when we get to it. If this kid was ready to commit today wed have the LOI out the printer before the ink would dry.

IMO we are in a unique position right now. Part of it is timing, but the transfer portal is going to help us out from an academics standpoint in a way a lot of people aren't taking into account. We are attracting players from smaller really good academic institutions and not have to deal with admissions in the same way getting them in I feel. Add that (And I mean this as no offense to SPCS) SPCS grad programs aren't as rigorous as our day programs we can be a more attractive option to grad transfers (Since we are now winning) since that seems to be where some of our upperclassmen wind up. I like going after high rated recruits that will probably be recruited over because of the transfer market and filling the rest out with PL/SOCON/IVY all conference players. Cautiously optimistic we wont have a repeat of the last 10 years with the way this rebuild is going vs 2011.
Completely agree and since Finley's profile reads as the below, he clearly seems to value academics too.

6’4” Guard / 2023 / Byron Nelson HS / 4.0 GPA / Southern Assault AAU Team
 

SFspidur

Spider's Club
Gold Member
May 5, 2003
15,814
10,306
113
Not going to lie...it does still make me nervous about our big depth and development, but yes, I'd take Bizjack in a heartbeat. I don't expect Burton to stay for a fifth year in 2023, and there's a very good chance we lose at least one other guy, so there should be a couple of slots we can hit the portal with next year to get a big or two.
 

urmite

Spider's Club
Gold Member
Dec 2, 2004
10,206
3,281
113
I agree about Bizjack, I don't see us close right now to landing anyone close to his caliber so there really isn't a debate.

So I will make an arbitrary generic one.
If the roster calls for a front court player and you have two options a 6'8" 250 LB ranked 275 and a 6'4" shooter ranked 175, which do you choose?
 

SFspidur

Spider's Club
Gold Member
May 5, 2003
15,814
10,306
113
That's pretty much the situation we're in...Bizjack is #104 at Rivals and #147 at 24/7, while Reed is #179 at 24/7. There's also Lang as a big option...#96 at Rivals and #113 at 24/7.

Getting Bizjack in for a visit is obviously a great sign of strong interest on his part, so you have to run with it. Not sure about Reed, but we're taking trips to Texas to recruit him. Lang is more local, so hard to tell, but competition for his services seems stiffer.
 

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
we're clearly still recruiting Bizjack so we probably have a strong feeling that we'll have another opening besides Goose and Grace next year ... most likely Burton going pro at that point. maybe Crabtree who could have a masters by then. or maybe a someone who doesn't earn time this year. I guess it takes care of itself.

but I'm very confident we're adding a guy with size in 2023.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
we're clearly still recruiting Bizjack so we probably have a strong feeling that we'll have another opening besides Goose and Grace next year ... most likely Burton going pro at that point. maybe Crabtree who could have a masters by then. or maybe a someone who doesn't earn time this year. I guess it takes care of itself.

but I'm very confident we're adding a guy with size in 2023.
Come on, Sman. We are not still recruiting him because we have a feeling a spot will open next year. We are recruiting him because he is a top 100ish player who could clearly help us. You went from saying we are not recruiting him for our last current spot, and getting on me for saying we are still recruiting him, to now, when proven wrong, saying we are only still recruiting him because we think we will have a spot for next year? Nothing has changed about Burton or Crabtree or anyone else from a few weeks ago when you said we would not be recruiting him. Take the L here, man.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: gcarter52

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
Come on, Sman. We are not still recruiting him because we have a feeling a spot will open next year. We are recruiting him because he is a top 100ish player who could clearly help us. You went from saying we are not recruiting him for our last current spot, and getting on me for saying we are still recruiting him, to now, when proven wrong, saying we are only still recruiting him because we think we will have a spot for next year? Nothing has changed about Burton or Crabtree or anyone else from a few weeks ago when you said we would not be recruiting him. Take the L here, man.
if we don't bring in a 4/5, I'll take the L from the mountain top.
I'm confident we won't go into next year with our 3rd biggest guy being Burton.
 

97spiderfan

Spider's Club
Feb 2, 2005
13,244
9,020
113
Top 100 player for his position, really nice offer list including Stanford, TCU, SMU, and SLU. And yeah, if you have a player with his pedigree, you take that offer. We can clear someone out in the portal next year if we have to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gospidersgo

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
if we don't bring in a 4/5, I'll take the L from the mountain top.
I'm confident we won't go into next year with our 3rd biggest guy being Burton.
That's not what you said a few weeks ago. You said, to me: " you think we are still recruiting Bizjack for this one spot"? And, you also said, "and you want to recruit over him (Smith) in the same class for this one spot"? And, finally, this: "This last current spot isn't for Bizjack. We had one guard spot to fill. It's gone." All 3 of those comments were directed at me. All 3 were proven wrong, and you can't get on here and admit that?

So, yes, take the L here. You said current spot a few weeks ago. You said this final spot. You never said anything about what happens next year.
 

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
yes you're right, VT.

but if Bizjack takes this spot, then it won't be the final spot. we're not filling the last spot with a 6'4" guard. we're not going into next year with just 2 guys who can defend the post. you always carry 3.
 

VT4700

Graduate Assistant
Dec 16, 2016
4,727
2,127
113
yes you're right, VT.

but if Bizjack takes this spot, then it won't be the final spot. we're not filling the last spot with a 6'4" guard. we're not going into next year with just 2 guys who can defend the post. you always carry 3.
Who was our 3rd this past year? And, did we even need a 3rd this past year? But, now you are confusing me. You just finished saying that Bigelow could start as a big forward over Grace. So, if you think that, wouldn't Quinn, Walz, and Bigelow be your 3 guys anyway? But, I would say there is a 0.000001% chance Burton is here in 2 years, so, sure, go get a guy with size in the transfer portal to take his spot next year.
 
Last edited:

spiderman

Spider's Club
Jun 7, 2001
16,927
6,214
113
Who was our 3rd this past year? And, did we even need a 3rd this past year? But, now you are confusing me. You just finished saying that Bigelow could start as a big forward over Grace. So, if you think that, wouldn't Quinn, Walz, and Bigelow be your 3 guys anyway?
gone through this already. no, I don't see any way Bigelow or Burton can defend the post. Sal might be light in the cakes, but he was long enough to be the 3rd big that could defend the post last year.
 

UR Fan 2

Team Manager
May 5, 2005
2,970
550
113
These days, you need to recruit the parents just as much as the player, and in this particular case, I would be happy to assist in recruiting Ms. Bizjack.

One way to not land a top 100 kid is to have anonymous alumni creeping on his Mom....on some message board. Just sayin....
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFspidur

SFspidur

Spider's Club
Gold Member
May 5, 2003
15,814
10,306
113

Latest posts