WayneFleekHoosier

Not sure I agree. It’s a huge jump for freshman in general. Relying on players ranked outside the top 25-50 is a wildcard. Getting them on campus and slowly adjusted the game is what id expect as Normal at a program trying to compete and win at the top. Where I do agree, is there are Fragers, and Waglers out there that can be good as a freshman and not highly ranked. Indiana has historically been awful at identifying these types of players. Really, really hoping for this to change.

I have No idea at all. Just seems like LSU and UK will throw major offers to him.

AH1971 and I see roster building much the same. Winning at the top level and expecting mid level recruits being ready to contribute as freshman aren’t things that generally fit well together. Although Moody being ready won’t surprise me. 1 more semi star and 1 solid bench piece and you’ve got yourself a team that can win a championship.

As cool as this is, it won’t be over until it’s over. Makes getting excited for football recruits a challenge. (For me)

Baylor’s Yessoufou likely portaling. He’ll garner significant money somewhere. LSU and UK the big spenders left? UNC? Someone will pay him well.

The best teams for next season like Duke, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc are filling spots 9-13 with freshman of different degrees of ranking. this is the track we’d be on if we signed Clemens then 2 playable guys. Manhertz, Clemens, Karvala, Moody could have been 10-13. What isn’t known is just because a player is slotted there doesn’t mean that’s how they will perform. Wagler is the ultimate example of this. I’d rather be developing FR at the end of the bench. The best ones will play and stay. The other ones might leave. No harm, no foul.

I’ll come back to this in a few weeks when rosters are finished with specific examples. Michigan state for example have a bunch of 4 star freshman taking up roster spots 9-12. Louisville who is like us, just added a top 60 rated 2026 kid as their 11th or 12th.

I think it’s intentional. I think it’s somewhat about money being low. Maybe even mostly this. However I think they like a short rotation and they want the freshman to be involved. Also an argument can be team chemistry with players getting what they are promised. Im not saying there isn’t benefits, but this strategy relies on freshmen being ready to contribute and the hope we don’t have 1-3 impact injuries. The drop off is huge for us from starter to bench to practice guy. Not my preference, but this was clearly the plan.

Strongly disagree. You get guys that can play, that have assets and upside. The best players win the spots. Maybe that’s the freshman this year. If so, great. If not, we are a better team. If the freshman can’t earn their spot and EARN PT and are unwilling to work and wait then bye bye. Purdue have talented players and freshman redshirting often or not playing at all, that turn out to be good players. That’s college sports. It’s not a charity. You aren’t (shouldn’t be) given things. The whole point is you build the best roster you can for the cash you have. The guys that end up 11-13 are the guys that aren’t as good or as ready. You shouldn’t know until court time together. Anything predetermined is a mistake. Another reason it took DeVries so long to figure out Reed Bailey was getting outplayed last year. making 3 roster spots clear practice guys is just bad news. Simple as that. Getting guys that end up being 11-13 practice guys is a different matter.

Without a doubt. Cutting the margins as thin as possible and pushing the freshman into spots of need. Those spots are to be earned. I get it. Building rosters is expensive, especially when you turn over damn near every spot. But we are literally aiming for practice players. The number of guys out there that might push our freshman are innumerable. It’s not the money. It’s the staff choosing this path. They basically want a roster of 10. That’s fine if those 10 don’t have question marks or injury concerns. It’s insane otherwise. Handcuffing ourselves.

It’s better than ours. Ours is almost like we are tying to build spots 11-13 with non D1 talent. Michigan State has 4 star freshman filling those spots. As rosters fill out, we will have more comparisons.

In advanced analytics our new addition ranked in the worst 50 D1 players last season. Out of approximately 2900 rated players.

Filling those spots with a freshmen is the way. Manhertz and Karvala would be great at 11-13. Even though the ranking like Moody least, I like him most. Those 3 being 10-12 instead of 8-10 was the answer.

Just an odd addition. I’m fine with carrying a roster of 10 or 11. But, for me, when 2 of them likely aren’t ready for B1G play that really hinders the team. Karvala and Manhertz should be ecstatic we are penalizing ourselves in terms of roster build. Literally no competition for playing time. My mind is blown. And now we have full staff and a GM concluding this is the way to backfill a roster.

We better hope our 6 are good and healthy. And we hope 2 or 3 of Sisley and freshmen pop. Insane roster building on the backend. lol

Maryland is likely going to be sneaky good this year. Especially if Payne comes back healthy. Purdue should be down, but that is top 5 hard places to win right now. Hopefully we double up on NW. for 4-2 here. We need to make home court advantage a bigger advantage. We weren’t good enough this year at home compared to what is needed.

Seems like we got a very nice draw this year. As far as stacking wins at least

Agreed. Was it the Ewing draft that started the BS?

Arizona added a 6’11” Pro league B big man today too. 11/9 on the same minutes. And being touted as a long range prospect. So that is another clear cut example of where this one stacks up.

He really should have. And I think he realized too late but we had no BIG depth which handcuffed him. Hence the different strategy this time around. Not adding an extra capable big last season was a Crime against Humanity.

Ohio State added a Foriegn big guy the same time we did. Who got the better player?

That’s kinda my point. Hope so. Carr getting his name attached to what appears to be a practice player strikes me. But, I guess that’s what the GM does. Find best value for the price you are willing to spend.

This could be close. My problem with the roster is I don’t LOVE Mustaf. So 28 minutes there is big. Nothing is changing that. I also wonder strongly about Harris. Major wildcard. 22 minutes there. I think Moody can push these 2. But I don’t think Karvala or Manhertz can. This the the crux of where my concerns lie. If Mustaf and Harris both end up being good/great everything settles in. Then if we run the 2 big lineup, which seems like our best lineup shooting becomes a weakness. I guess it is regardless. So, here’s where you trust to coach to have it all figured out but DeVries doesn’t give me those vibes.

Good take. I don’t think we are aiming higher, though. Hope so. German B league pro translates to about D2 hoops in the states. Just an FYI. A 7 foot guy is nice to have on the bench so I don’t hate it. Weird one for Ryan Carr to get attached to. The only direct one I know of.

It’s funny because the argument last summer was it’s so cheap to keep guys on the roster. Now they are getting massive retention bumps. I do admit it’s generally cheaper to keep a player, but if that player and their camp is about money it’s going to end being a number in the similar ballpark. And that was my stance last year. And that assumes the player is happy with things. The real advantage is the advanced scout. You know exactly what your getting from said player when they’ve been on your team. No question marks. But financially it’s not the savings many project. I don’t know what Sisley. My guess is he got 300 or so last year. My guess is a million would be an appropriately huge bump. He’s a borderline starter but not a guaranteed starter. Shows potential but didn’t get the chances to demonstrate. He’s the perfect keep candidate player because the staff knows all.