Next letter in "B" for Bekelja.  Mike Bekelja has signed.

https://twitter.com/kmbball11/status/1250938648775864322

WashPaRick wrote:

the alphabet is A. Sorry, I was bored.

Booooooooo!

Last edited by coffee (4/17/2020 2:27 pm)

Acuff- Signed
Baker- Signed
Bakelja- Signed
Okani- Signed
Roesing- Signed
Harris- Waiting

https://pittsburghsportsnow.com/2020/04/18/source-duquesne-signs-three-still-waiting-on-andre-harris/

Star...

duq81 wrote:

1111 Vickroy wrote:

Dukes all the way but do you notice that every single story about Pitt involves four or five- recruits.

Well, you aren't going to compete in the ACC if you don't land some 4 star talent. I'd love to have some 4 star guys here, but in the A10, 3 star guys will do the trick.
 

Even more to the point, in reality Pitt is going to get 3 and 4 star guys, and we will get 2 and 3 stars. The reality is Pitt will not beat out ACC and other power 5 programs for 5 star guys.

5 star guys are the closest to a sure thing in recruiting and unless they are local to a mid level p5 program, 90% of these guys go to about 20-25 programs we all know, and Pitt ain’t one of them. There were exceptions like Khem Birch and Steven Adams (don’t know if either were true 5 stars), but that was 2 in the last few decades.

Pitt is going to have a tough time ever getting out of the lower-middle part of the ACC. They will never win recruiting battles with the likes of Duke, Carolina, Louisville, FSU, Syracuse, and even NC State. This is especially true if the player is anywhere outside of the old big east footprint.

These kids don’t remember Jamie, the old big east, and Pitt of the early 2000s, that is long in the past and not winning any recruits. They are a very small fish in a big pond in the ACC and I think you could make the argument that DU is better set up for long term success than Pitt because of this. Believe it or not these recruits were yet to be born or infants last time Pitt was having success.

Back to us. 5 stars closest to a sure thing, 2 stars are a legit raw project. 3 and 4 stars are much less differentiated, and guys in this category can either be a success or failure. A roster of 3 star guys will get you to the tournament.

When I look at our roster ceiling in terms of an A10 team, I tend to look at the premier members of our conference and what they get. That could be Dayton, VCU, URI, and Richmond, but I really look at Dayton and VCU because we want to be the best, not among the best.

Dayton and VCU get mostly 3 stars, maybe one or two 2 stars, and one or two 4 stars on their roster. 3 star is the standard. They may reach on a couples 2 stars they like. And they can get a couple 4 stars by selling them on being the centerpiece of a nationally recognized and competitive program rather than a role player on a P5 team. We need to get here, and with the coach, Nike connection, new arena, and success on the court, I do believe we can get here.

Right now to apply the same model to us I would say:

2 star is the standard. They may reach on a unranked player they like. And they can get a couple 3 stars by selling them on being the centerpiece of a competitive program rather than a role player on a P5 team.

I think it only seems like Pitt's success was that long ago because of the Stallings debacle. From 2008-2016 they averaged 24.5 wins a season, won the CBI, had one NIT season, & made 6 NCAA appearances. They won 6 NCAA games while once making it to the Elite 8. 

I think that for recruits born from 2002-2004, their families, & handlers, Those years can still be relevant. 

Dixon was a really strong coach but a B+ recruiter at best. Capel promises to be a much better recruiter but the jury is still out his quality rating as a coach. The next 2 seasons at Pitt will probably set the stage for that program for a decade or so.

 

Duques102 wrote:

duq81 wrote:

1111 Vickroy wrote:

Dukes all the way but do you notice that every single story about Pitt involves four or five- recruits.

Well, you aren't going to compete in the ACC if you don't land some 4 star talent. I'd love to have some 4 star guys here, but in the A10, 3 star guys will do the trick.
 

Even more to the point, in reality Pitt is going to get 3 and 4 star guys, and we will get 2 and 3 stars. The reality is Pitt will not beat out ACC and other power 5 programs for 5 star guys.

5 star guys are the closest to a sure thing in recruiting and unless they are local to a mid level p5 program, 90% of these guys go to about 20-25 programs we all know, and Pitt ain’t one of them. There were exceptions like Khem Birch and Steven Adams (don’t know if either were true 5 stars), but that was 2 in the last few decades.

Pitt is going to have a tough time ever getting out of the lower-middle part of the ACC. They will never win recruiting battles with the likes of Duke, Carolina, Louisville, FSU, Syracuse, and even NC State. This is especially true if the player is anywhere outside of the old big east footprint.

These kids don’t remember Jamie, the old big east, and Pitt of the early 2000s, that is long in the past and not winning any recruits. They are a very small fish in a big pond in the ACC and I think you could make the argument that DU is better set up for long term success than Pitt because of this. Believe it or not these recruits were yet to be born or infants last time Pitt was having success.

Back to us. 5 stars closest to a sure thing, 2 stars are a legit raw project. 3 and 4 stars are much less differentiated, and guys in this category can either be a success or failure. A roster of 3 star guys will get you to the tournament.

When I look at our roster ceiling in terms of an A10 team, I tend to look at the premier members of our conference and what they get. That could be Dayton, VCU, URI, and Richmond, but I really look at Dayton and VCU because we want to be the best, not among the best.

Dayton and VCU get mostly 3 stars, maybe one or two 2 stars, and one or two 4 stars on their roster. 3 star is the standard. They may reach on a couples 2 stars they like. And they can get a couple 4 stars by selling them on being the centerpiece of a nationally recognized and competitive program rather than a role player on a P5 team. We need to get here, and with the coach, Nike connection, new arena, and success on the court, I do believe we can get here.

Right now to apply the same model to us I would say:

2 star is the standard. They may reach on a unranked player they like. And they can get a couple 3 stars by selling them on being the centerpiece of a competitive program rather than a role player on a P5 team.

What I look at is who else was in on a player. I'm not encouraged if we beat out MAAC, and AE teams for a player. There are indeed always some late bloomers who get overlooked, but the truth is, highly ranked players succeed at a higher rate than low ranked ones, just as first round draft picks are more likely to become stars in the pros than guys drafted lower. Can a coach with a sharp eye, and the ability to develop players win in the A10 with mostly 2 star guys, sure, but his program won't be dominant, it will be something like Bona, which is basically the level we've just reached. If you want to be Dayton, or VCU, you have to get 3 star guys. These need to be guys who have offers from A10, AAC, and even some lesser P5 schools. If you look at Pitt under Dixon, he had a particular system, and he landed mostly 3 star guys to run it. They won a lot of games, but when march came, they usually went home early. The one year they didn't (2009), they had a 4 star stud in Blair. It makes a difference. Looking at us now, we have a 2 star that was probably underrated in Marcus, another 2 star that has developed into what you expect a veteran 2 star to become in Mike. Sincere is a guy who likely would have been a 3 star had he not fallen off the radar after being injured. Maceo is a 3 star, that we desperately need to take a step forward.

By the way, Syracuse is done. Boeheim is pulling a Paterno, and dragging his program down by staying too long. This was the worst Cuse team I can remember. He's an old man, and he needs to retire.