BGleas

If you're Crean though, and you feel you have a real shot at some players you've prioritized above him, and those players are visiting soon, then there's no way you can accept that commitment before those kids visit. It's just not smart. I'd hope some of the offers he throws out are conditional and they're not all first come first serve.

No, you're good! I just completely missed it :).

"A focal point" and "the focal point" aren't the same. Coaches say a lot of things in recruiting. This is Yogi's team. Yogi is the engine, and guys like Blackmon and Troy are as well. Bryant will be our best/featured big and a big piece of our success. But, he's the missing piece, not the savior. He's a cog in the wheel, albeit an important one.

You're confusing "savior" with "missing piece". I frequent multiple boards and I don't think I've seen anyone saying Bryant is going to carry the team or being the focal point. He's talented 5 on a team that has most other aspects covered, except inside play.

I don't mean to direct this specifically at you, but I hate when people say this. Defense is just as much knowledge and defensive principles, if not more, as it is hustle. JBJ and most our team had horrible defensive principles and understanding last year. They were constantly out of position, constantly not on the same page and constantly playing with their hands down and not keeping their eyes on ball and man. Constantly turning their backs to either their man or the ball. Their defensive fundamentals were horrible.

It's all going to come down to how hard he's willing to work. He has all the athleticism and size you can ask for, as well as what seems to be a nice base of skill. Work like VO and the sky is the limit for this kid. Work like Hollowell and Perea and he could be playing at Georgia St in two years.

I hear where you're coming from too, a few guys would definitely do this, I just think it would be a mistake for anyone not locked into a high lottery pick. For example, I think it would be a collassal mistake for someone like Caleb Swanigan. Just raises more questions though. Is the 700k for multiple years? If a McDonald's AA comes in highly touted, but then ends up not being NBA material after 1 year, does he just get 700k for each year he's still there? I've worked with NBA players making over 800k a year that were basically broke. After taxes 700k is what? Maybe 400k? Rent a house in Vegas and buy one for Mom back home, and we're probably down to 250k- 200k. Pay your AAU coach to come live with you in Vegas and you're down to 150k-100k (this happens a lot). Buy a car for you and mom and after the down payment were at somewhere between 80-50k, and we haven't eaten, paid for the internet, paid for cell phones for the "crew" and family. I'm telling you, it goes quick. On the Euro thing, there's multiple levels of European basketball. I played with/against kids at the D2 level that are still playing in Europe and I played college ball from 97-2001. I played with a kid in high school who was a D2 level player, but never made it to college and played in Europe. The point is, the talent level can be good, and it can be highly questionable.

Agree with everything you said. Most don't realize, but kids can go straight to the NBDL from high school. Nobody has done it because the pay isn't great, but they can do it.

Like I said, I think the idea has merit. But, some unsanctioned, glorified AAU coach in Vegas implementing it would be a disaster. Work this concept into the NBDL, where you can trust the coaching/organization, etc., and I think it could be a great idea. Maybe with the NBA, through their scouting, releasing a list of "eligible" players.

But the alternative isn't welfare, the alternative could be going to a school that has a policy like IU's, where they'll honor your scholarship even if you leave early. You might not have interest in college at 18, but you might at 28, and it would sure be nice if it was free. 700k isn't that much in the grand scheme for an 18year old that has no clue how to manage that money, especially in Vegas. Look at how many pro athletes that have made millions upon million of dollars are broke within 5 years. You know how many late first/second round pick current NBA players are broke? You'd be surprised. But this outfit is going to suddenly figure out the secret sauce to get young, impressionable and uneducated athletes to wisely manage their money? What's the coaching like in this thing? Is it glorified AAU or is it actually preparing kids for the NBA? Whats the medical staff like? S&C staff? What's the competition like? Can this guy actually bankroll the payroll? Will the games be on TV? Because while the NCAA doesn't pay players, it provides them free marketing, which does result in endorsement money should they make it in the NBA.

There's a concept here that makes a little sense, but this idea as laid out would be a colossal failure IMO. You'd have to be a moron to let your kid do this, and yes I realize there are a lot of morons out there.

On the UK thing, I loved the part of the game where Isiah Briscoe went on a personal 6 minute game of 1-on-1, during which the announcers were going on and on about how he's the rare kind of guard that cares so much more about getting his teammates involved as opposed to his own scoring. He literally took every shot for 4-6 minutes without ever passing and waving off anyone that even tried to set a screen for him.

Regardless of whether it's Holt or Hanner, and they could/should both get time there, the point is we're both hoping we actually play big with a more natural 4 and Williams at the 3.

I'd argue that Holt plays bigger than Hanner.

That's exactly what he should be doing this summer, even if we hadn't gotten Bryant.

I just hope they actually play together in the same lineup at time, meaning I hope we go big a good amount next year.

I know Crean will never do it, but I think the teams best chance is to play big. Use Davis/Holt at their natural 4 position and bring RoJo off the bench in a platoon with Yogi and JBJ. It will never happen though.

I live here, and one of my good friends is a die-hard Terp fan. He's been telling me for a couple months they were going to get him.

They also have a 6'8" transfer, I think from Georgia Tech, that averaged about 11 and 8 before transferring to Maryland.

Sorry, didn't mean to take this off track. Back to Bryant. Is he still supposed to make a decision this month?

Agree on screening off the ball. While JBJ had a good freshmen season, he could be a monster if we actually did things to get him open looks, same with Hulls before him.

I think we did run some new offensive sets this season, so I'm sure some of that was watching UConn tape and I think he mentioned Villanova too. We also went to that man/switch to zone defense. So there were some, I guess I'd call them tweaks to his system. My post was more in reference to larger philosophical changes. For example, not trying to force the 2013-14 team to run, which only magnified the turnover issues. Bo Ryan allowing his last two teams to be more offensive minded and run more, etc. Maybe IU pressing with this years team.

There's lots of things to gripe about in terms of X's and O's, etc., but this is my high level, overarching gripe of Crean. I prefer coaches that alter their system to the talent on their roster, not force their talent to conform to their system. Like you, my opinion is Crean is that latter. Look at WVU this year. Huggins said after a couple of workouts last summer he decided he needed to full-court press with this group. While it took him deep into his career, Bo Ryan has changed his style the last two seasons and it's paid off big time. Coach K has won national titles playing several different ways. The 2010 team was not a typical Duke team. It won't be popular in these parts, but I've seen Bill Belicek change his teams style from game-to-game and even half-to-half based on what is best for his talent to attack the opponents weaknesses. I just prefer a coach that's willing and able to adjust his style/system.

Just watching Remy yesterday, I think we can safely say a senior Remy would have been a fairly big upgrade over Stan Robinson. Equal, if not better on defense, and a much better offensive player. He's not a guy you go to on offense, but he doesn't turn it over as much, is a better ball handler and can knock down the open 3.

That Orlando job is open again.