Looking at our class ranking currently at #66 with schools like Temple, St. Louis, VCU, and all P5 schools ahead of us. I'm wondering what happened to Mick's recruiting mojo. Did he burn some bridges? Did something happen after the Calipari confrontation ? When Mick was here as an assistant , at UL, and at Murray I always thought the big take on Mick was that he was a lights out recruiter. When he first got here we were mixing with all kinds of top 40 players (Walker, Thabeet, Harvey, Teague). All I here anymore is us going up against DePaul and Charlotte for receuits, or maybe getting on an early top 20 with some guy we have no shot with.

"Don't recruit, get"

I think this staff stopped going after guys they knew they had no chance of landing.

It's probably not just one thing, it's a lot of things.
1. Recruiting for yourself isn't the same as recruiting for Pitino and Huggins.
2. Tougher to recruit to AAC than to BE.
3. Let's face it, a lot of hanky-panky goes on in top-level recruiting. I suspect Mick has been told "no" by Nancy and her successors, and that he's willing to live within the rules.
4. Top recruits who aren't thinking about payoffs and hookers are at least thinking about which coach will help them get to the NBA. Mick= 2 players in 11 years, with one of those needing additional work in summer league and D-league before he was ready to play.

From the time Mick arrived to now UC has been seriously downgraded conference wise from arguably the best bball conf in the country the Big East to at best the 6th or 7th best bball cod in the country.

Doors that might've been open 8 years ago are closed now.

He is not at liberty to recruit questionable character guys.

(03-21-2017 11:56 AM)Former Lurker Wrote:  It's probably not just one thing, it's a lot of things.
1. Recruiting for yourself isn't the same as recruiting for Pitino and Huggins.
2. Tougher to recruit to AAC than to BE.
3. Let's face it, a lot of hanky-panky goes on in top-level recruiting. I suspect Mick has been told "no" by Nancy and her successors, and that he's willing to live within the rules.
4. Top recruits who aren't thinking about payoffs and hookers are at least thinking about which coach will help them get to the NBA. Mick= 2 players in 11 years, with one of those needing additional work in summer league and D-league before he was ready to play.

#1 & #4.

Cronin has stated on multiple occasions that recruiting is a game. He got Satterfield pushed to a 5* by just promoting him to Scout and Rivals, not because of his play. He said from the day he came back to UC that he didn't care about rankings because he didn't believe in them.

(03-21-2017 11:57 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  From the time Mick arrived to now UC has been seriously downgraded conference wise from arguably the best bball conf in the country the Big East to at best the 6th or 7th best bball cod in the country.

Doors that might've been open 8 years ago are closed now.

He is not at liberty to recruit questionable character guys.

I think that's a fair assessment.

But questions continue to puzzle me in this regard. First, why didn't we see better recruits while he coached under the Big East brand? I don't see a big difference in the players on the floor before or after the Big East. In fact players such as Clark, Evans and Cumberland may be better than any he recruited before.

Second, how does a Butler rise from the obscurity of the Horizon League to have back-to-back Final Fours,coming within a play or two of a national championship? I don't have the answer. But they had to have quality talent along with excellent coaching. One appearance the final weekend could be a fluke; two years in a row I call remarkable.

Third, watching Wichita, Gonzaga, VCU--what are they doing better than UC to recruit players who help their teams advance in the tournament more consistently from even weaker conferences than the AAC?

If we're not getting at least one player of Cumberland's quality each year I think we're falling behind. I know little about the incoming players for next year but I'm wondering if any rise to his level and readiness to contribute immediately.

I think Mick has started to focus on guys with a developed offensive skill set that can function as go-to guys that will have the ball in-hand when we need a score the most. Our last few classes have netted Jacob Evans III, Jarron Cumberland, and this year, Keith Williams. All demonstrated a knack to score often in high school and have the mentality required to drive on offense. Also, Mick has brought in Cane Broome, another offensive-minded player to drive the offense. I can't remember anyone in the previous classes that demonstrated this ability.

I think the lull of the past several years is due to a line of several recruiting classes not panning out. Had Jermaine Lawrence stayed and played close to his potential, we might not be having this conversation.

Our talent in recent years is much better than it was during Mick's early days.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

(03-21-2017 12:55 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  But questions continue to puzzle me in this regard. First, why didn't we see better recruits while he coached under the Big East brand? I don't see a big difference in the players on the floor before or after the Big East. In fact players such as Clark, Evans and Cumberland may be better than any he recruited before.

Because we were rebuilding and playing in the BE in those early years was an invitation and get your ass kicked for a rebuilding program. We only established ourselves as a tournament team in the last 3 years of the conference when it was starting to fall apart so we couldn't take advantage of being a tournament quality team.

(03-21-2017 01:01 PM)crex043 Wrote:  I think Mick has started to focus on guys with a developed offensive skill set that can function as go-to guys that will have the ball in-hand when we need a score the most. Our last few classes have netted Jacob Evans III, Jarron Cumberland, and this year, Keith Williams. All demonstrated a knack to score often in high school and have the mentality required to drive on offense. Also, Mick has brought in Cane Broome, another offensive-minded player to drive the offense. I can't remember anyone in the previous classes that demonstrated this ability.

I think the lull of the past several years is due to a line of several recruiting classes not panning out. Had Jermaine Lawrence stayed and played close to his potential, we might not be having this conversation.

in one of the tournament interviews, Mick noted that the player with NBA measurables and athleticism, the type that play good defense and rebound aggressively, but aren't able to shoot, or at least shoot at a high percentage, are becoming extinct at the next level. He understands the shifting dynamic at the next level. i imagine we will see him try and recruit more offensively skilled players going forward.

(03-21-2017 01:01 PM)crex043 Wrote:  I think Mick has started to focus on guys with a developed offensive skill set that can function as go-to guys that will have the ball in-hand when we need a score the most. Our last few classes have netted Jacob Evans III, Jarron Cumberland, and this year, Keith Williams. All demonstrated a knack to score often in high school and have the mentality required to drive on offense. Also, Mick has brought in Cane Broome, another offensive-minded player to drive the offense. I can't remember anyone in the previous classes that demonstrated this ability.

I think the lull of the past several years is due to a line of several recruiting classes not panning out. Had Jermaine Lawrence stayed and played close to his potential, we might not be having this conversation.

Absolutely this! I have no concerns about the direction of our recruiting, especially given the four players you cite. Our depth and talent level next year will be higher than it has been in years.

The rankings depends on many things. If you have a larger class like 5 guys then you could have a high overall rated class. Mick had a top 25 class, in the AAC, few years ago. How do these people who do the rankings even scout watch a Canadian,

2017 6-10 Eliel Nsoseme (Congo/Clarkson, ON)

Congolese import that arrived at Clarkson last season. Born in June of 1997. Entered July as a unknown, ended it unforgettably. Nsoseme a genuine shot blocker with a developing offensive game picked up offers from New Mexico, Portland, Evansville among others. Tons of speculation on where he plays high school ball next season. Henry Carr has been linked as a possible destination online.

(03-21-2017 01:32 PM)eroc Wrote:  

(03-21-2017 01:01 PM)crex043 Wrote:  I think Mick has started to focus on guys with a developed offensive skill set that can function as go-to guys that will have the ball in-hand when we need a score the most. Our last few classes have netted Jacob Evans III, Jarron Cumberland, and this year, Keith Williams. All demonstrated a knack to score often in high school and have the mentality required to drive on offense. Also, Mick has brought in Cane Broome, another offensive-minded player to drive the offense. I can't remember anyone in the previous classes that demonstrated this ability.

I think the lull of the past several years is due to a line of several recruiting classes not panning out. Had Jermaine Lawrence stayed and played close to his potential, we might not be having this conversation.

in one of the tournament interviews, Mick noted that the player with NBA measurables and athleticism, the type that play good defense and rebound aggressively, but aren't able to shoot, or at least shoot at a high percentage, are becoming extinct at the next level. He understands the shifting dynamic at the next level. i imagine we will see him try and recruit more offensively skilled players going forward.

Yup. And to be fair, Mick should know better than anyone. He's had a front row seat to see his own teams comprised mostly of this type of player compete but never be able to get over the hump. Hopefully this trend continues and enhances the type of player that will take a Cincinnati offer seriously.

Would Lawrence have been a senior on this team? Imagine if he lived up to his potential.

(03-21-2017 03:11 PM)Banter Wrote:  Would Lawrence have been a senior on this team? Imagine if he lived up to his potential.

Wasn't the supposed reason that Lawrence left because the staff wanted him to be a legit 5? Now Mick is cool with Kyle Washington launching threes from all over the place.

Its all about the three ball in the NBA and now college. You got to make shots. If not for the short run of threes by UCLA and our in ability to answer the other night we are in it until the end.

(03-21-2017 03:13 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  

(03-21-2017 03:11 PM)Banter Wrote:  Would Lawrence have been a senior on this team? Imagine if he lived up to his potential.

Wasn't the supposed reason that Lawrence left because the staff wanted him to be a legit 5? Now Mick is cool with Kyle Washington launching threes from all over the place.

Oh perception is such a funny thing...
No, they wanted him to be a 4, not a 5. Nobody on earth thought Jermaine Lawrence could be a center. The problem is Jermaine Lawrence or his entourage possibly, thought he could be a 3. He can't. He can't dribble well enough, he can't shoot well enough. Kyle Washington shot 35% from 3 this year, Jermaine Lawrence went for not quite 13% from 3 at Manhattan http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...washington
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...e-lawrence

Washington's ability to hit from the outside and the inside, was of tremendous import to us. He went through a bit of a slump toward the end of the year but even when he wasn't on from 3, he could still hit jump shots from midrange. Lawrence could not. Perhaps he's since developed the ability to do so, but his college career, was a disaster. Jermaine Lawrence would not have helped us this year, he couldn't even help the Jaspers. Anybody contending he could have, is an imbecile.

(03-21-2017 03:47 PM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-21-2017 03:13 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  

(03-21-2017 03:11 PM)Banter Wrote:  Would Lawrence have been a senior on this team? Imagine if he lived up to his potential.

Wasn't the supposed reason that Lawrence left because the staff wanted him to be a legit 5? Now Mick is cool with Kyle Washington launching threes from all over the place.

Oh perception is such a funny thing...
No, they wanted him to be a 4, not a 5. Nobody on earth thought Jermaine Lawrence could be a center. The problem is Jermaine Lawrence or his entourage possibly, thought he could be a 3. He can't. He can't dribble well enough, he can't shoot well enough. Kyle Washington shot 35% from 3 this year, Jermaine Lawrence went for not quite 13% from 3 at Manhattan http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...washington
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...e-lawrence

Washington's ability to hit from the outside and the inside, was of tremendous import to us. He went through a bit of a slump toward the end of the year but even when he wasn't on from 3, he could still hit jump shots from midrange. Lawrence could not. Perhaps he's since developed the ability to do so, but his college career, was a disaster. Jermaine Lawrence would not have helped us this year, he couldn't even help the Jaspers. Anybody contending he could have, is an imbecile.

A shame how "the entourage " ruins some kids.

Literally the only impressive play Lawrence had his entire freshman year was the pump fake, drive and dunk against New Mexico. Nothing else he did suggested he would develop into anything more than a Darnell Wilks type. He was vastly overrated...