BGleas

Who knows, not sure what school Zimmerman's mom was referring to (I think it's Arizona), but IU could be getting an official from Zimmerman if that coach was involved in USAB.

It's not just Duke though, it's all the schools who's coaches are involved at the different levels of USAB. Not sure of all of them, but I know Boeheim and Sean Miller are both highly involved.

Didn't Zimmerman's mom directly prove that it's an advantage?

I don't see how anyone could possibly argue it's not an advantage. Recruiting is all about relationships, so how would a coach getting to spend time working directly with a kid not be an advantage? It's clearly an advantage.

The most interesting part is Stephen Zimmerman's mom participating in the debate. She came right out and said they were about to cut a school and then Zimmerman spent two weeks with the coach in a USAB Camp and it totally repaired the relationship and the school is back in play now. Assuming he's talking about Arizona?

Didn't want to start an entire new thread, and sorry to take this off topic a bit, but for some reason the other night I decided to look at Arizona's recent recruiting and it's off the charts. According to Rivals, between 2011-2015's recruiting classes, they've had ONE 3* recruit. Every other recruit has been a 5* or a 4*.   During that time, they've had 11 5* recruits and have had multiple 5* recruits in 4 of the 5 recruiting classes. They've had 3 5* recruits in 2 of the 5 classes.    That's crazy. 

I don't think Crean has stated that, more a fan impression from seeing his video. Although we can probably assume Crean is making that comparison, given the athletic similarities. Coaches aren't allowed to comment on recruits until they've signed an LOI.

Obviously every program will make room for a 5* and prioritize that guy, but Syracuse does already have four commits in the class, including a 4* C and a 4* PF. Hopefully Crean can pitch the "be the man" inn the paint angle.

Who knows, there could be numerous reasons to keep an eye on Kasongo. Maybe the staff told him to get his grades up, lose the handler and then we'd keep an eye on him for 2015. It makes sense to keep an eye on him.

Watford and Hulls weren't highly recruited? I think you're misremembering. Watford was a higher rated recruit than both Morgan and Shake. Hulls was a 4* by some services and that class also had Creek. I think even Elston was a 4* on some services.    2011 is the questionable one. Zeller was the only real good recruit in that class, but he was a program changer. I'd agree with you on that one in terms of 2015 (if it panned out this way) being better on paper.    2012 is a better class IMO in terms of how they were thought of in-coming. I'm not sure it's fair to judge 2015 strictly on rankings and put it higher than 2012 because they didn't pan out. 2015 might not pan out either.    Assuming we landed Bryant, Morgan and Shake for 2015, I'd personally rank them (using their rankings, not their production once on campus): 2013 2012 2009 2014 (You could flip-flop '14 and '15 very easily assuming the class we're assuming for '15) 2015 2011 (This is really a tough one, Zeller is by far the most important recruit to date in this era, but as a class Ethrington and Abel really bring it down) 2010 (On paper the worst class, but in terms of production it's arguable #1)   It's just difficult to compare. Some classes people want to point to rankings, and others they want to point to actual production. I think if we're going to compare classes in a list, we can't bounce around between criteria, and since 2015 hasn't happened yet, I'm going with rankings instead of production.  

Yes, because IMO when comparing classes we have to decide if we're judging thoughts on the class incoming, or their actual production once they arrived. Obviously, we can't judge 2015 on actual production since they won't take the court for another year.   To your point, you can make an argument that 2012 was Crean's best class on paper, but his worst (not counting 2008) in terms of production. 

It's semantics, but I wouldn't call it "great". Really good? Absolutely. But, tt wouldn't be a great class for the Duke's, Kansas', UK's, UCLA's, Arizona's, etc. of the world. I don't know if that would be in Crean's top 4-5 classes while at IU.    Like I said, it's probably semantics though. It would certainly be a good class. 

That would be a good class under normal circumstances, but given the last 4-6 months in terms of recruiting, that would be a great 2015 class. 

Not saying two games is long enough, but I'm also pretty sure that wasn't his only punishment. I'm sure Crean had him doing stuff behind the scenes we'll never know about.

I was more referring to a 3rd spot. I doubt we lose three guys and it's not at least one of those guys.

I hope we don't have room. Not that I don't like these guys as players, but I'd rather have a senior Yogi, junior Stan and Troy and sophomore JBJ and RoJo than having three recruits in 2015.

Agree. I live in Maryland and have been to a few games. It can be hit or miss, depending on how good UMD is and who they're playing, but when they're competitive that place can be one of the toughest places to play. I was at the 2010 game (Vasquez's last game) when Maryland beat Duke and it was absolutely insane. That place was rocking from start to finish and their fans can be nasty too. As your video showed, they're loud and they're organized.

I think you guys are taking the crystal ball thing way too seriously, but to each his own.   The most positive news I've heard on this was also posted on 24/7. A posted said they helped Juwon's parent at TIS purchase a bunch of IU gear over the weekend. I can see buying a t-shirt or something on every visit you go on, but the poster was saying t-shirts, a polo and other stuff.  

That might be the best way I've seen the argument against Crean put. If his resume were at a rival, we'd be fine if that rival kept him.

I have no idea what Vandy has. But, Juwan Morgan is not a sure thing to be impactful as a freshmen. This isn't a 5* recruit. If this was Zimmerman or Maker I'd agree that PT isn't a factor, those guys start from day 1. But Morgan, if he comes to IU, will be battling Troy Williams, Devin Davis, Emmitt Holt, and to a lesser extent Hoetzel for minutes at the 4. What if Vandy has a open spot at the 4 in their lineup? The allure to start as a freshmen could be a big factor for him. I don't know, I don't know what his priorities are. But he isn't the type of recruit that can come in and expect time ahead of most of the aforementioned guys. Again, I'm by no means saying it's the only factor, but to dismiss it is not being realistic. Playing time matters to any player.

First, show me where I said it's the "end all be all"? It is a factor whether you like it or not. As someone else said, every kid is different and has different factors. But to dismiss playing time as one factor is simply naive by you. I'll take it from personal experience. I was recruited by low level D1 schools and D2 schools and chose a D2 school. One, not the only, but one factor was I knew I could go D2 and compete to start as a freshmen (I ended up being a 4-year starter), but at the D1 level I'd probably have to fight for regular minutes by my junior year.

I would assume playing time would be a factor. While we definitely need help on the interior, at the same time we have Hanner with 1 more year, Devin with 2 more, Troy Williams with potentially 2 more and Holt with 3 more, once Howard would get on campus. There's also Max who could project as a stretch 4 at times. Plus, you know we'll land at least one highly recruited forward in 2016. I'm assuming at Vandy lots of early playing time is more likely.

They also landed the #10 football recruit in the country today.

I agree. Crean is great at getting 1 featured player in each class, then after that it tends to fall off. At some of the schools you mentioned JBJ would be their 3rd recruit, not their headliner. I don't mean that as an indictment on JBJ, just saying to consistently compete with the Dukes, UK's, Louisville's, Kansas', etc., we need to be bringing classes primarily consisting of 5* and high ranked 4* kids, with a 3* thrown in for depth. We tend to go the reverse way lately.    Before someone says "it's not all about star ratings", I get that, but it's the easiest way to summarize the thought, since I'm not on the scouting trail. 

Are the swings really right on? Wasn't Robert Johnson swinging UNC right up until his commitment? There are other examples, just can't recall them at the moment.   My view of the crystal ball is that a lot of swings happen when a player is on a visit or shortly there after, which I don't think is really based on inside info, more just "hey he visited school X and said good things, they must be making a move".