Unless they bring in a sharp shooter who can contribute NOW, might as well save those 2 spots for incoming freshmen and round out the # per class. Sad to see these two guys leaving, but wish them all the best wherever they go.
Mainly agree. I think Fore is going to be a good player, Friendshuh who knows, the guy had like 16 scholarship offers, so we can't consider him a reach. But that is 2 out 4 for that class. If we want to be a team that competes consistently for NCAA you need to bat a higher percentage that in my opinion. This is one of the reasons we have a 7 man rotation that past couple of years.Originally posted by SpiderFan:
I think both guys were reaches for our recruiting needs in the first place. Let's hope CM and staff doesn't waste this second opportunity with these 2 spots. Overall I think the recruiting the last couple of cycles has been poor other than the 2 transfers.
+1. Both might have contributed but I suspect both saw 2-3 players in front of them and were looking at bench time for the most part. A lot of folks thought these guys were unheralded when we signed them, so complaining a second time now that they're leaving seems silly.Originally posted by 97spiderfan:
When we are a players by far best offer, you know it is a recruiting reach. That was the case for both Smithen and Diekvoss. No offense to either of them, but neither was going to be a huge impact player for the program. Smithen had a nice game, but you could tell it was more suited to a lower major type of program. And if Diekvoss was such a great shooter, he wouldn't have redshirted when we had a guy playing his position shooting less than 10% from 3 this year.
So in my mind, this is freeing up two slots to go after guys that could be big impact players. I don't know who said what and how it went down but this is how major programs get out of recruiting mistakes. I'm glad we are acting like a major program.
I like trolling the transfer waters for at least one of these slots. This should keep the message board interesting during the offseason.
This post was edited on 3/30 9:09 PM by 97spiderfan
Maybe JK is a candidate to be put on scholarship. Would be kind of a weird move if he's already here and committed without it...but it's not cheap for him to pay his own way.Originally posted by spider23:
Ideally, if we are strictly looking at this for next year in a basketball sense, a strong shooter/scorer at the 2 or 3 that can step in right away would be ideal - so that would be a grad transfer. The problem is that type of transfer is in high demand, and many of these guys will look to a bigger name school to try to raise their profile. I do think the guard from VaTech is intriguing, though I don't know much about him. I really like what I saw from Josh Jones this year, but as noted I don't see Mooney cutting Trey's minutes, so I think it is important to have a shooter at the 2 or 3 next to him. I am a big fan of defense, but agree with the sentiment that we cannot have 2-3 guys on the floor that are not scorers. Julius coming in as a freshman, would not be impacted too greatly by a post grad transfer - unless of course he is good enough to start immediately - and that would be a good problem to have. Interesting thought about Joe Kirby from some posters. Maybe not your typical walk on?
I think there must be some middle ground. The only way I see the freshmen as freshmen being better than the seniorsOriginally posted by WebSpinner:
i want the freshmen coming in better than our upper class men and yes you will have some players who they won't be but don't just want our frosh coming in being better than the frosh we brought in last year, want them being ready to play, take time away from the current roster. maybe am being unrealistic but feel that should always be the goal with new players. recruiting is the lifeblood, the foundation of the program along with the development of the players over their 4 years.