Recruiting

[Murph85]

Out of boredom and interest I subscribed to a recruiting website. This time of the year makes me desperate for sports information and since X is the top choice and the Reds are all but eliminated less than halfway through June, well at least it is something to read.

My initial reaction to the recent commitment was disappointment. I feel that being in the BE and playing the likes of Villenova requires across the board 4 stars and hopefully a 5 or two. We have arrived as a major destination and do not have to settle for the sake of filling spots.

One of the articles, or audio as the case may be, pointed out that this kid is a "safe" recruit for several reasons. We will need shooting the year after this and he fits that bill very well. The safe part is the fact that since we will attempt to fill 5 or 6 spots he does not scare off other recruits. He was specific with a wing we are making our highest priority stating he is a driver and not a shooter so they can coexist very well. That does sound logical and Mack is very smart in these situations as far as I can tell. This being said I like the recent recruit and he may be one of those guys that end up being highly under rated.

Another mention was the Kentucky transfer. He has a tremendous upside according to the narrators and is a good fit. I was of the opinion that he is possibly one of those top 50 wash outs but apparently he is solid and would be a great get.

The other thing I found interesting is that we are involved with a high number of top 50 kids and our name is not being dismissed as pie in the sky recruiting which has been the case sometimes in the past. I think the season we just had moved us up significantly as a destination with the BE being the league with the national champs and X being the last team to beat them. It did not hurt that it was a nationally televised game.

I am looking for a really big June-July recruiting period for X.

[paulxu]

and the Reds are eliminated less than halfway through June,

Not to derail your thread, but I wanted to fix that for you.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Don't look too much at *'s. This kid looks like a good get, he was rated at 6'5 and seems to have grown a bit, and is listed as a top 3 shooter in the class. Trust in Mack on this one.

Matthews is tall and long and is great defensively, but he is worse offensively than Abell and may not be as good defensively. Matthews can't shoot a lick. There is a reason he is transferring. Markell Johnson is a better get here. He is shorter, but he is an elite athlete.

Edit: I am shocked Michigan is on him at all considering Bielein's propensity for shooters.

[XUFan09]

Don't look too much at *'s. This kid looks like a good get, he was rated at 6'5 and seems to have grown a bit, and is listed as a top 3 shooter in the class. Trust in Mack on this one.

Matthews is tall and long and is great defensively, but he is worse offensively than Abell and may not be as good defensively. Matthews can't shoot a lick. There is a reason he is transferring. Markell Johnson is a better get here. He is shorter, but he is an elite athlete.

Edit: I am shocked Michigan is on him at all considering Bielein's propensity for shooters.

These two players are not mutually exclusive.

[XMuskieFTW]

I am shocked Michigan is on him at all considering Bielein's propensity for shooters.

I've really been wondering this. He doesn't fit with the way Michigan plays at all. It makes zero sense.

[Murph85]

These two players are not mutually exclusive.

Funny, ESPN had Matthews as a shooting guard as did 247 sports. Scout is quoted as "his game starts with his jump shot" !!

So what the hell happened at Kentucky?

[MuskieCinci]

Out of boredom and interest I subscribed to a recruiting website. This time of the year makes me desperate for sports information and since X is the top choice and the Reds are all but eliminated less than halfway through June, well at least it is something to read.

My initial reaction to the recent commitment was disappointment. I feel that being in the BE and playing the likes of Villenova requires across the board 4 stars and hopefully a 5 or two. We have arrived as a major destination and do not have to settle for the sake of filling spots.

One of the articles, or audio as the case may be, pointed out that this kid is a "safe" recruit for several reasons. We will need shooting the year after this and he fits that bill very well. The safe part is the fact that since we will attempt to fill 5 or 6 spots he does not scare off other recruits. He was specific with a wing we are making our highest priority stating he is a driver and not a shooter so they can coexist very well. That does sound logical and Mack is very smart in these situations as far as I can tell. This being said I like the recent recruit and he may be one of those guys that end up being highly under rated.

Another mention was the Kentucky transfer. He has a tremendous upside according to the narrators and is a good fit. I was of the opinion that he is possibly one of those top 50 wash outs but apparently he is solid and would be a great get.

The other thing I found interesting is that we are involved with a high number of top 50 kids and our name is not being dismissed as pie in the sky recruiting which has been the case sometimes in the past. I think the season we just had moved us up significantly as a destination with the BE being the league with the national champs and X being the last team to beat them. It did not hurt that it was a nationally televised game.

I am looking for a really big June-July recruiting period for X.
I guess I'm unclear what point you are trying to make. One paragraph you mention that we should have all 4 stars and a couple 5 stars, but then later in your post you admit you are surprised we aren't being automatically dismissed by top 50 rated kids.

I understand that you want to recruit the absolute best players possible, but I think it is at least as important to find the kids that fit what you want to do and mesh with your other players. Would you rather recruit like St. John's where all that matters is the stars next to the kid's name or Villanova where you ignore the scouts and just go get the guys you want?

[Murph85]

I understand that you want to recruit the absolute best players possible, but I think it is at least as important to find the kids that fit what you want to do and mesh with your other players. Would you rather recruit like St. John's where all that matters is the stars next to the kid's name or Villanova where you ignore the scouts and just go get the guys you want?

Agreed , I never want our recruiting to resemble St. Johns. More like Villanova.

[XUGRAD80]

How accurate are the STAR ratings?.........24/7 had the kid as a 4 star earlier this year, but now he's a 3 star on the same site a couple of months later. These ratings are so inaccurate as to be laughable. It seems that there are times that how a kid is rated delemds more on who is recruiting him, than it does on actual talent or skill of the kid involved.

[Chalmers0]

Don't look too much at *'s. This kid looks like a good get, he was rated at 6'5 and seems to have grown a bit, and is listed as a top 3 shooter in the class. Trust in Mack on this one.

Matthews is tall and long and is great defensively, but he is worse offensively than Abell and may not be as good defensively. Matthews can't shoot a lick. There is a reason he is transferring. Markell Johnson is a better get here. He is shorter, but he is an elite athlete.

Edit: I am shocked Michigan is on him at all considering Bielein's propensity for shooters.

Shooting certainly isn't Matthews strength but I'm willing to bet he ends up being at least an average shooter over the course of his career. I'm also willing to bet he would be significantly better than Remy offensively as a whole. Remy could do 2 positive things on offense. Catch and shoot at a respectable clip and if he got out ahead in transition he could put his head down and drive straight at the rim. Also Remy was non-existent rebounding the ball where that is actually a huge strength of Matthews.

I think absolute worst case scenario, Matthews would give you the same level of all-around production as Remy.

[Xville]

Plus, Matthews would actually be coached at Xavier, something that I don't think happens very much at UK. Players don't get better there...actually a lot of times they regress. Cal can recruit his tail off, i'm still not convinced he can actually coach a lick.

[XUFan09]

How accurate are the STAR ratings?.........24/7 had the kid as a 4 star earlier this year, but now he's a 3 star on the same site a couple of months later. These ratings are so inaccurate as to be laughable. It seems that there are times that how a kid is rated delemds more on who is recruiting him, than it does on actual talent or skill of the kid involved.
Who are you talking about now? Ridder? Matthews? Johnson?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[XUFan09]

Funny, ESPN had Matthews as a shooting guard as did 247 sports. Scout is quoted as "his game starts with his jump shot" !!

So what the hell happened at Kentucky?
Matthews is a wing, while Johnson is a combo guard. His playing time at UK was limited (just look who he was behind in the depth chart), so who's to say how he'll actually be as a shooter when he gets some run.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[X Factor]

Don't look too much at *'s. This kid looks like a good get, he was rated at 6'5 and seems to have grown a bit, and is listed as a top 3 shooter in the class. Trust in Mack on this one.

Matthews is tall and long and is great defensively, but he is worse offensively than Abell and may not be as good defensively. Matthews can't shoot a lick. There is a reason he is transferring. Markell Johnson is a better get here. He is shorter, but he is an elite athlete.

Edit: I am shocked Michigan is on him at all considering Bielein's propensity for shooters.

Where did you hear he can't shoot a lick? Is worse offensively than Remy?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41MLcBrH49s

Looks like he can shoot better than a lick, unless he completely forgot how to in his one year at UK. You wouldn't want this kid at X? I sure would.

[X Factor]

I've seen him do things in these two videos that Remy couldn't dream of doing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GphcUgKz_rc

[GIMMFD]

If Matthews is able to produce at a Remy rate defensively, and has an offensive game that's better, I don't see why we wouldn't welcome him in with open arms. I try not to pay too much attention to the stars and what scouts think, because there's busts and gems in every single class. I mean hell, wasn't Kwame Brown a 5star recruit in high school??? I trust Mack knows what he's doing, and will fit our program with kids that will contribute and be good players for X, he's had helluva success in nabbing pretty good talent between Blueitt, Macura, Sumner, etc. We'll be fine, even if it doesn't mean grabbing 5*s on a regular basis.

[xudash]

Let's see:

1. I've now watched both videos.

2. The kid found a way onto the University of Kentucky's roster.

3. He now wants something else.

4. We're in the running for him, and we appear to be up against the University of Michigan for his services.

I would love to have him join our team! What is not to like about this young man?

[Murph85]

That's the first time I've seen video of the kid. I'll take him all day long.

[XUGRAD80]

Who are you talking about now? Ridder? Matthews? Johnson?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Ridder

[Muncie]

How accurate are the STAR ratings?.........24/7 had the kid as a 4 star earlier this year, but now he's a 3 star on the same site a couple of months later. These ratings are so inaccurate as to be laughable. It seems that there are times that how a kid is rated delemds more on who is recruiting him, than it does on actual talent or skill of the kid involved.

I think the difference between a 3 star and a 4 is not of much value , but big difference in most cases between a 3 and a 5. Role players are so important in today's game .

[XUFan09]

I think the difference between a 3 star and a 4 is not of much value , but big difference in most cases between a 3 and a 5. Role players are so important in today's game .

As long as one understands the stars as broad terms, it's a suitable metric. Now, I don't recall Ridder ever being a 4 star, but if he once was, he probably dropped out of that category because he didn't improve as much as was expected. It's also very likely that he was on the border between 4 and 3 stars, where it's very easy to slide back and forth.

[nuts4xu]

How accurate are the STAR ratings?.........24/7 had the kid as a 4 star earlier this year, but now he's a 3 star on the same site a couple of months later. These ratings are so inaccurate as to be laughable. It seems that there are times that how a kid is rated delemds more on who is recruiting him, than it does on actual talent or skill of the kid involved.

The ratings are pretty fluid with some of these kids. The final star ranking could still change between now and the time they finish their HS career.

It is definitely an inexact science, and I take these with a grain of salt. The recruiting gurus rank these guys based on what they see, and sometimes kids blossom once they reach college. BJ Raymond was a 4 star recruit, but didn't reach that level in college until his junior/senior season. It is great fodder for message boards, and it puts these kids in a talent tier (for lack of a better term).

It is odd how often a kid will jump up in the rankings once he commits to a big 6 school. I have heard the Scout guys report this isn't the case, but it happens to often to dismiss.

[Musketeer]

I thought ive heard somewhere that 5 star players are players that will have an immediate big impact as one of the top players on the team. a 4 star is a player who will have an impact and contribute right away, and has the potential to be a star 2-3 years down the road. and a 3 star is a player who likely wont contribute too much right away, but should become a rotation player/starter by the time he is a junior/senior.

Cant remember where i saw that, so its obviously not the exact definition, but its the gist of what i remembered.

[Muncie]

I thought ive heard somewhere that 5 star players are players that will have an immediate big impact as one of the top players on the team. a 4 star is a player who will have an impact and contribute right away, and has the potential to be a star 2-3 years down the road. and a 3 star is a player who likely wont contribute too much right away, but should become a rotation player/starter by the time he is a junior/senior.

Cant remember where i saw that, so its obviously not the exact definition, but its the gist of what i remembered.
That doesn't work for me because a kid could take a year or 2 to see much court time with a high major but start right away with a mid-major.

[ammtd34]

Sure it's inexact, but the guys rating these kids are pretty good at it, especially near the top.

http://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/233037/Do-High-School-Stars-Lead-To-NBA-Success

[XUFan09]

I thought ive heard somewhere that 5 star players are players that will have an immediate big impact as one of the top players on the team. a 4 star is a player who will have an impact and contribute right away, and has the potential to be a star 2-3 years down the road. and a 3 star is a player who likely wont contribute too much right away, but should become a rotation player/starter by the time he is a junior/senior.

Cant remember where i saw that, so its obviously not the exact definition, but its the gist of what i remembered.
Yeah, that sounds about right. And on the borders, you see some combination of descriptions. For example, Trevon was a high 4-star, and so far his game has followed that projection.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[XU 87]

Does a kid being a 5 star mean he's going to be in the NBA? No.

Does a kid being a 3 star mean that he has no chance of making the NBA? No.

But I would bet that there are a lot more 5 stars in the NBA than three stars.

[XUFan09]

That doesn't work for me because a kid could take a year or 2 to see much court time with a high major but start right away with a mid-major.
Well, it's not too difficult to adjust expectations based on the level, so I don't understand why it's not working for you. If you hear that a high 3-star player (i.e. ranked but outside the top 100) is going to play for a mid-major, you could expect that he'll have a disproportionate impact relative to his rating. The official descriptions I've seen do also take the different levels into account. This was just his recollection off the top of his head.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[paulxu]

-Some surprising 3 Stars included Stephen Curry

OK then.

[Muncie]

Other 3 stars.... Russell Westbrook, Paul George, and Roy Hibbert.

[GIMMFD]

Other 3 stars.... Russell Westbrook, Paul George, and Roy Hibbert.

But I mean Westbrook played at UCLA, and Hibbert at Georgetown, so it's not like they didn't get to play for big time programs. Paul George I can definitely see considering he was at Cal State Fresno.

[XUFan09]

But I mean Westbrook played at UCLA, and Hibbert at Georgetown, so it's not like they didn't get to play for big time programs. Paul George I can definitely see considering he was at Cal State Fresno.

Paul George was a guy that everyone missed on. I can't remember his story completely, but I think it involved a growth spurt and busting his ass in empty gyms. It's just crazy to think of a lottery pick out of Cal State Fresno.

[XUGRAD80]

No more crazy than to think of a lottery pick out of little old Xavier University......see Brian Grant/David West

:)


Lots of examples where the scouts missed on HS recruits and they later became NBA draft picks

[XUFan09]

No more crazy than to think of a lottery pick out of little old Xavier University......see Brian Grant/David West

:)


Lots of examples where the scouts missed on HS recruits and they later became NBA draft picks

Nope, more crazy, unless you think Xavier was on the level with Cal State Fresno. Yeah, there are a lot of examples where scouts missed, but there are so many more where they did not.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[X-man]

Does a kid being a 5 star mean he's going to be in the NBA? No.

Does a kid being a 3 star mean that he has no chance of making the NBA? No.

But I would bet that there are a lot more 5 stars in the NBA than three stars.

A 5-star recruit is one that is virtually NBA ready out of HS, and hence a good bet to be a one-and-done. Recruits with 3 or 4 stars need development in college and hence will stay for more than 1 year. In my view, a 4-star recruit is one who can play at a high major collegiate level straight out of HS and has a good chance for becoming a solid NBA prospect. But 3-star recruits have further to go and while good prospects to develop into high major performing collegiate players, are far less likely to get to "the league" after 4 years in college. That said, I trust the Xavier coaching staff to know their program needs to be able to identify kids with high major (potential) talent.

[XUFan09]

A 5-star recruit is one that is virtually NBA ready out of HS, and hence a good bet to be a one-and-done. Recruits with 3 or 4 stars need development in college and hence will stay for more than 1 year. In my view, a 4-star recruit is one who can play at a high major collegiate level straight out of HS and has a good chance for becoming a solid NBA prospect. But 3-star recruits have further to go and while good prospects to develop into high major performing collegiate players, are far less likely to get to "the league" after 4 years in college. That said, I trust the Xavier coaching staff to know their program needs to be able to identify kids with high major (potential) talent.

Your description for 5-stars is better at describing the top 10. The rest of the 5-stars have legit NBA chances but are less likely to be one-and-dones.

I agree with the rest of it. Really, every time Xavier gets a 3-star, this topic comes up. "Yeah, he's a three-star, but scouts get a lot of guys wrong!" Meanwhile, their knowledge of the player is a paragraph description (from a scout, no less) and a couple highlight reels. It's very convenient reasoning.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Blue Blooded-05]

June and July are my slowest months at the office, so I hope to use my free time to enhance this conversation with the following:

Rivals.com star rankings of notable Xavier players:

Finn 3
Doellman 3
Cage 3
Coly 3
Duncan 3
Burrell 2
Odia 3
Lavender 4
CJ Anderson 0
Wolf 3
D. Brown 3
Raymond 3
Graves 3
Love 3
Bronson 3
Crawford 3
D. Jackson 4
McLean 3
A. Taylor 0
Holloway 4
A. Walker 3
Walsh 3
Frease 4
Redford 3
Lyons 3
Robinson 3
McKenzie 3
J. Martin 4
Canty 3
Latham 3
Reynolds 3 then 4 after prep year
Wells 4
Philmore 3
D. Davis 3
Christon 4
M. Stainbrook 0
Abell 3
M. Davis 3
Farr 3
Randolph 3
Richards 3
Austin 3
Bluiett 4
O'Mara 3
London 4
Macura 4
Sumner 3
Gates 3

[XUFan09]

I think it's safe to say that over the years, Xavier found a disproportionate number of the under-the-radar guys. I mean, that's how Xavier got most of the way to the point it has reached.

Maybe that is influencing people's opinions of rankings. The underplaying of when they're right and exaggerating of when they're wrong could be a natural reaction to being a fan of a program that was unusually good at finding the "diamonds in the rough." The point is, Xavier was not the normal case, and how many 4 stars they have grabbed recently is pretty indicative of their intentions to no longer employ that (tougher) mid-major strategy.

[waggy]

Or maybe the fat white internet jockey "scouts" are just plain full of shit.

[Cheesehead]

Or maybe the fat white internet jockey "scouts" are just plain full of shit.

Body shaming Racist.

[DWXU23]

Great coaching has played a big factor in this. It took a lot of these guys multiple years to develop to be the player they finished up as. The scouts can't really factor that into their rankings. There's a reason why Xavier has so many guys outperform their rankings and it's not all just because the scouts don't know what they're doing.

[birdman71]

June and July are my slowest months at the office, so I hope to use my free time to enhance this conversation with the following:

Rivals.com star rankings of notable Xavier players:

Finn 3
Doellman 3
Cage 3
Coly 3
Duncan 3
Burrell 2
Odia 3
Lavender 4
CJ Anderson 0
Wolf 3
D. Brown 3
Raymond 3
Graves 3
Love 3
Bronson 3
Crawford 3
D. Jackson 4
McLean 3
A. Taylor 0
Holloway 4
A. Walker 3
Walsh 3
Frease 4
Redford 3
Lyons 3
Robinson 3
McKenzie 3
J. Martin 4
Canty 3
Latham 3
Reynolds 3 then 4 after prep year
Wells 4
Philmore 3
D. Davis 3
Christon 4
M. Stainbrook 0
Abell 3
M. Davis 3
Farr 3
Randolph 3
Richards 3
Austin 3
Bluiett 4
O'Mara 3
London 4
Macura 4
Sumner 3
Gates 3

Thanks for that. Shows we are very good at recognizing/developing talent.....and character. I hope recruiting never becomes an exact science.
Makes me feel good that CJ, Taylor, Stain and I shared the same ranking.

[Musketeer]

Your description for 5-stars is better at describing the top 10. The rest of the 5-stars have legit NBA chances but are less likely to be one-and-dones.

I agree with the rest of it. Really, every time Xavier gets a 3-star, this topic comes up. "Yeah, he's a three-star, but scouts get a lot of guys wrong!" Meanwhile, their knowledge of the player is a paragraph description (from a scout, no less) and a couple highlight reels. It's very convenient reasoning.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

yeah the stars/rankings are based on their collegiate outlook, not what their NBA potential is. it just happens to be a correlation with 5 stars more likely to make the NBA (since they are the best prospects).

[X-man]

June and July are my slowest months at the office, so I hope to use my free time to enhance this conversation with the following:

Rivals.com star rankings of notable Xavier players:

Finn 3
Doellman 3
Cage 3
Coly 3
Duncan 3
Burrell 2
Odia 3
Lavender 4
CJ Anderson 0
Wolf 3
D. Brown 3
Raymond 3
Graves 3
Love 3
Bronson 3
Crawford 3
D. Jackson 4
McLean 3
A. Taylor 0
Holloway 4
A. Walker 3
Walsh 3
Frease 4
Redford 3
Lyons 3
Robinson 3
McKenzie 3
J. Martin 4
Canty 3
Latham 3
Reynolds 3 then 4 after prep year
Wells 4
Philmore 3
D. Davis 3
Christon 4
M. Stainbrook 0
Abell 3
M. Davis 3
Farr 3
Randolph 3
Richards 3
Austin 3
Bluiett 4
O'Mara 3
London 4
Macura 4
Sumner 3
Gates 3

I believe that David West was a 3-star recruit coming out of HS in 1999. I also remember a post to the XU message board from someone in North Carolina (where West played in HS) saying that he will quite possibly be the best player to go through Xavier's system. Never forgot that post....so very true.

[XUMIOH12]

figure i'd throw some current recruiting news I've come across the last few days;

Xavier offered 2018 PF Trevion Williams, who was at the team camp and apparently performed very well.
was one of the schools that called 2018 SF/PF Brandon Johns today, first day they were able to do so.

hopefully things heat up with some class of 2017 players, if only for the sake of some news to follow ha.