Did anyone visit?

[Big B]

Does anyone know if we had any top recruits in yet?

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070624/SPT01/706240351/1088/CINCI

[Oldtimer_UC_fan]

Things seem to be really quiet on the recruiting front. But, there could be all sorts of things happening behind the scenes.

[Inchickinkick]

As of August 12, 2007

Are there any updates?

[IKnowMoreThanYou]

As of August 12, 2007

Are there any updates?

Cashmere Wright is on campus right now taking an unofficial visit and will be on campus until tomorrow and he is expected to choose between Cincy and Tennessee early next week.

[Inchickinkick]

We are going too get him.

[CroninCrazy]

Cashmere Wright is on campus right now taking an unofficial visit and will be on campus until tomorrow and he is expected to choose between Cincy and Tennessee early next week.

Thanks a lot IKNOW!

[IKnowMoreThanYou]

You're welcome. Hope he enjoys his visit enough to commit to the 'Cats!

[Kindog202]

To the people who have seen both Holloway and Wright play, how would you rank them in terms of fitting in here. I understand that we will be happy to get either one and either one will be great additions, but we can only choose one, so who would it be?

[Mick's Da Man]

We'll more than likely end up with Holloway.

[Inchickinkick]

Witch one is the better of the two Wright or holloway?

[IKnowMoreThanYou]

Witch one is the better of the two Wright or holloway?

The two bring different things to the table at the PG position. Wright can put up points in a hurry by getting to the rim with a quick first step while also being able to light it up from 3. Holloway is lightning quick and is more adept at getting his teammates involved. He also can use both hands around the basket. Cincy would be in good shape with either one.

[Inchickinkick]

What are our chances of landing both?

[IKnowMoreThanYou]

If the 'Cats get a commitment from either Wright or Holloway I would expect the other to choose the school the other one passed over. I can't see Cincy taking 2 PG's for 2008 because playing time is a selling point and they still have needs on the wing and up front.

[Inchickinkick]

If we land both then we could play Vaughn at the shooting guard,
plus we could have both of them on the floor at the same time with mitchell on wing.

[SLMadiCat]

If we land both then we could play Vaughn at the shooting guard,
plus we could have both of them on the floor at the same time with mitchell on wing.

Vaughn is a pg from now until he graduates. He has all the skills to play the position, and at 5'10", that is where he is best suited.

[Mick's Da Man]

Witch one is the better of the two Wright or holloway?

Is it Halloween yet?

It remains to be seen witch one is better. Wright is probably more highly rated, but Holloway made his mark this Summer. And Holloway isn't just a creator, he knows how to get to the basket and has a penchant for nailing big shots. He's best when the pressure is on.

I wouldn't consider Holloway a consolation prize at all if Wright decides to go to Tennessee. In fact, part of me prefers Holloway over Wright.

[Mick's Da Man]

Vaughn is a pg from now until he graduates. He has all the skills to play the position, and at 5'10", that is where he is best suited.

Remember Logan and Satterfield. That is what Mick is trying to achieve.

[Bearcat_DF]

Remember Logan and Satterfield. That is what Mick is trying to achieve.

Remember NVE - that's what I would prefer.

Go Cats!
DF

[james jr]

I will always revere Satterfield as my PG because as a freshman he was the point guard on what would have been a national championship team. He knew that the point guard's main function is to facilitate and defend against penetration. Everything else above that from a PG is gravy. Nick was the best athlete and scorer but Satt was the best point!

[Inchickinkick]

Vaughn is a pg from now until he graduates. He has all the skills to play the position, and at 5'10", that is where he is best suited.

Deonta Vaughn is a 6-1- 200 pound combo guard.

[mike pinzki]

^
Vaughn is certainly not 6' 1". 5' 10" is about right.

[UCEE73]

^
Vaughn is certainly not 6' 1". 5' 10" is about right.


Did you ever stand next to him?

I did and I'm 6'4". He looked taller than 5'10" to me.

[mike pinzki]

no, i have never stood directly next to him. i guess i could see someone calling him 5' 11". i still think he's about 5' 10".

[ctipton]

Deonta Vaughn is a 6-1- 200 pound combo guard.


You have no idea what you are talking about. You do not speak understandable English, and Vaughn ain't close to 6'1". Have you graduated an accredited high school?

[jkwuc89]

Let's all try to cool down a bit please? We are all for the same team here.

[Flanntastic]

Donte Vaughns dad could beat up your dad

[Inchickinkick]

^
Vaughn is certainly not 6' 1". 5' 10" is about right.

Mike:

Tell us how tall Deonta Vaughn is?

[Oldtimer_UC_fan]

You have no idea what you are talking about. You do not speak understandable English, and Vaughn ain't close to 6'1". Have you graduated an accredited high school?

He ain't? What high school did you go to?

[Oldtimer_UC_fan]

Mike:

Tell us how tall Deonta Vaughn is?

Why don't some of you just grow up and quit arguing about stupid stuff? Vaughn is already a Bearcat, and, as long as he can play (which he obviously can), what difference does it make?

[Nerf]

Ok, ok. He's 6'1", but only when he's wearing his 3" stiletto heels.:eek:

[MikeInClifton]

Mike:

Tell us how tall Deonta Vaughn is?

5'10 or 5'11 . . .

[waterhead]

Why don't some of you just grow up and quit arguing about stupid stuff? Vaughn is already a Bearcat, and, as long as he can play (which he obviously can), what difference does it make?

I have to agree with Oldtimer here. We should stop arguing about grammatical error. Vaughn can play the PG however I do see the point that a 5'10"-6'0 guard is not your typical shooting guard size for a reason. Most of that has to do with getting a shot off over a defender as well as defending a shooter. 5'10" people "generally" have a tough time blocking/altering shots of people who are 6'3". As well they generally have a tougher time getting shots off over good defenders who are taller.

This is not to say they can't just that it's a lot tougher. I guess you can imagine why Mitchell (6'4-6'5) has great size and skill for the position so long as he can shoot the ball with some consistency. Vaugh can play the position but when he is up against a good on the ball defender he will have trouble getting shots off because of his size or lack thereof. He is a true point guard with shooting ability and that can be a lethal combo.

[Kindog202]

Vaughn is also much stronger than a typical point guard and matches up overall better against point guards than 2-guards.

You could probably get away with using Vaughn at the 2 against weaker competition, but he is not a legitimate Big East 2-guard due to his lack of size.

[Inchickinkick]

WLW radio, Dan Hoard and Chuck Machach have it wrong, If you remember bearcatradio games last year said Deonta Vaughn 6-1 guard.

[MikeInClifton]

Here . . .this will help (aka: "hurt") the argument

From Vaughn's Recruiting page on BearcatNews


04/19/06: "(Rodney) Crawford said Vaughn was 6-foot-1, even though many services have called him 5-11 -- and in the basketball world, the truth may lie somewhere in between. Crawford said Vaughn averaged 17.4 ppg, 6.6 apg and 4.3 rpg and can play either guard position." - Trents blog
http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/cincybearcats/
(changed height to 5-11, from 5-10)

[ctipton]

He ain't? What high school did you go to?

I graduated from Hamilton Garfield High School in 1964. How about you old timer?

Sometimes when speaking to people, you have to use words they understand.

[lt7784]

I've stood next to Vaughn while walking to class. I'm 5'11'' and he was definitely taller than me. I'd say 6'-6'1'' is about right.

[Oldtimer_UC_fan]

I graduated from Hamilton Garfield High School in 1964. How about you old timer?

Sometimes when speaking to people, you have to use words they understand.


I graduated from Purcell High School, class of 1967. Did you know Don Gillespie? I think he used to coach basketball at Garfield.

[Inchickinkick]

If Vaughn is 5-11 then it must be the shoes he wears. this post reminds me
of that 80's t.v commersal -- yes the man is 6-5 with his affro>i just got a chuck of out that, you guys remember that one?

[waterhead]

Vaughn is also much stronger than a typical point guard and matches up overall better against point guards than 2-guards.

You could probably get away with using Vaughn at the 2 against weaker competition, but he is not a legitimate Big East 2-guard due to his lack of size.

I think this sums it up pretty well! Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and call him 6'0 even. Still too short for the prototypical SG in the Beast although just right for the PG.

We don't need Vaughn at SG anyhow. Mitchell, Gentry, Davis, Miller...can all shoot the rock. Vaughn is a team leader type that I would much rather have at PG anyway!

[waterhead]

If Vaughn is 5-11 then it must be the shoes he wears. this post reminds me
of that 80's t.v commersal -- yes the man is 6-5 with his affro>i just got a chuck of out that, you guys remember that one?

I think Fletch was 6'4" and 6'9" with the afro!

[Mick's Da Man]

There have been plenty of undersized PG's that have outplayed taller ones. I see no difference that his height makes.

[waterhead]

There have been plenty of undersized PG's that have outplayed taller ones. I see no difference that his height makes.

I agree with you that his height is not a disadvantage at PG.

Most of the comments about Vaughn on this thread were concerning his height if he had to play SG.

[Inchickinkick]

Until freshman prove they can step up and play major roles as freshman,
All we really have is Warren, Vaughn and Gentry in the backcoart.
With Williamson, Sikes, MWilliams and Hrycaniuk.
That a great core returning, All they need is freshman Help>


1Vaughn 6-1/Davis 6-3
2Gentry 6-3/Mitchell 6-4
3Williamson 6-6/Wilks 6-8
4Williams 6-7/Belton 6-7
5Hrycaniuk 6-10/McClain 6-11
6Sikes 6-8/Bishop 6-6
7Warren 6-2/
8Miller 6-4/

[JerseySean]

Steve Logan. Under 6'0. Enough said...

[SLMadiCat]

Steve Logan. Under 6'0. Enough said...

Lo was one of my all time favorite players, but I'm not sure what your point is. My point was that the typical SG is taller now adays. 6'1" is considered a small SG. Deonta, until I hear fact that he is above 6'0", is better suited to play PG. That is where Mick wants him to play and that is where I think he is best suited to play. I thought he did a pretty good job handling the point last year, especially for a freshman who was required to do all the scoring.

And just to add to your comment, Logan was shut down against UCLA because, imo, they put a taller guard on him and he could not get any good looks. But don't get me wrong, I loved the guy, but I still think Logan was best when running the point.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

Lo was one of my all time favorite players, but I'm not sure what your point is. My point was that the typical SG is taller now adays. 6'1" is considered a small SG. Deonta, until I hear fact that he is above 6'0", is better suited to play PG. That is where Mick wants him to play and that is where I think he is best suited to play. I thought he did a pretty good job handling the point last year, especially for a freshman who was required to do all the scoring.

And just to add to your comment, Logan was shut down against UCLA because, imo, they put a taller guard on him and he could not get any good looks. But don't get me wrong, I loved the guy, but I still think Logan was best when running the point.

http://www.bearcatnews.com/bearcats/basketball/archives/boxscore.php?ID=2260 Logan had 18 points and 7 assists versus UCLA.

[SLMadiCat]

http://www.bearcatnews.com/bearcats/basketball/archives/boxscore.php?ID=2260 Logan had 18 points and 7 assists versus UCLA.

Thanks for the stats. Did you actually watch the game, or do you just follow stat lines? Logan had a VERY difficult time against the taller UCLA players guarding him.

BTW, since you threw out the stats, Logan shot 33% from the floor, 2-7 from the 3pt line, and 4 turnovers. He also had two extra periods to get those points. That is not a very good game for the Logan that UC fans grew accustomed to.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

Thanks for the stats. Did you actually watch the game, or do you just follow stat lines? Logan had a VERY difficult time against the taller UCLA players guarding him.

BTW, since you threw out the stats, Logan shot 33% from the floor, 2-7 from the 3pt line, and 4 turnovers. He also had two extra periods to get those points. That is not a very good game for the Logan that UC fans grew accustomed to.

Yes, I did (of course). I'll repeat, Logan had 18 points and 7 assists. Unbiased observers would consider that a good, not great, game.

You may not view it that way.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

I went back to see Logan's numbers in 2001 and 2002 seasons.

2001 - 21 ppg, 2 assists per game, 1.5-1 ATO ratio.

2002 - 22 ppg, 5 assists per game, 2-1 ATO ratio.

UCLA game - 18 points, 7 assists, 1.8-1 ATO ratio.

Reasonably close to his 2 best years as a Bearcat.

Good, not great, game for Logan vs UCLA.

[JerseySean]

And just to add to your comment, Logan was shut down against UCLA because, imo, they put a taller guard on him and he could not get any good looks. But don't get me wrong, I loved the guy, but I still think Logan was best when running the point.

So, you're going to blame Steve Logan for our early exit that year? The problem wasn't our offense, it was our defense and missed free throws (if I remember correctly from throwing my couch pillows at the TV in utter disgust). We had a significant lead in that game and broke down defensively and failed to put it away at the line. Additionally, we had chances to win it in overtime. Hardly a Steve Logan height issue...

To be fair to you, I recognize that you're talking about SG. But to clear, the conversation did change to the size of a point guard. So, I stand by my earlier comments. I'd trade size if I could have someone like Steve Logan. If I could get the 1979 version of Magic Johnson to play point for us, even better. But Steve Logan being guarded by a taller player is not why we lost to UCLA.

[jeffto]

So, you're going to blame Steve Logan for our early exit that year? The problem wasn't our offense, it was our defense and missed free throws

It was typical tournament choke coaching.

Logan was a stud, one of UC's greatest. What I've never understood is why, as good as he was for us, he couldn't make the NBA. There have been plenty of successful short guards in the NBA (Tiny A., Mugsy, etc.). What was it about Logan that kept him out?

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

It was typical tournament choke coaching.

Logan was a stud, one of UC's greatest. What I've never understood is why, as good as he was for us, he couldn't make the NBA. There have been plenty of successful short guards in the NBA (Tiny A., Mugsy, etc.). What was it about Logan that kept him out?

Listened to his first agent. NBA contract was offered. Agent told him to hold out for guarantee (as 2nd rounder). Oops.

[Bearcat_DF]

Additionally, he got an injury and put on a some weight. By the time he healed, he wasn't in NBA shape any longer.

[Inchickinkick]

Additionally, he got an injury and put on a some weight. By the time he healed, he wasn't in NBA shape any longer.

Thats no excuse, If he wanted it, He could have done it, If you were in great
shape, Then you get hurt (slack) gain ten pounds now your in decent shape,
In Logans case, You lose your quick first step, Then you start too dream orange roundballs telling you three months of hard work, Will bring you back.
Did Steve Logan want that? I guess we know what logans answer is>
Is the dream still alive? What do you think....

--------------------------------------------

I speak only english

[SLMadiCat]

So, you're going to blame Steve Logan for our early exit that year? The problem wasn't our offense, it was our defense and missed free throws (if I remember correctly from throwing my couch pillows at the TV in utter disgust). We had a significant lead in that game and broke down defensively and failed to put it away at the line. Additionally, we had chances to win it in overtime. Hardly a Steve Logan height issue...

To be fair to you, I recognize that you're talking about SG. But to clear, the conversation did change to the size of a point guard. So, I stand by my earlier comments. I'd trade size if I could have someone like Steve Logan. If I could get the 1979 version of Magic Johnson to play point for us, even better. But Steve Logan being guarded by a taller player is not why we lost to UCLA.

It's like arguing with little kids. Find where I blamed the game on him? I said Logan struggled in that game when he was guarded by taller players. The problem with that years team was there was too much dependence on Steve. Sure, Stokes had a good game against UCLA, but they just didn't have enough firepower besides Steve. I could blame the game on one player, but if you watched the game you could easily figure out who it was.

Would I trade a tall Taron Barker for a Steve Logan? Yea, sure, every time. Size isn't everything, but it sure is nice.

[waterhead]

Steve Logan. Under 6'0. Enough said...

There are exceptions to any rule. Why stop at Steve Logan? The point is SG's need more height (generally speaking) than do PG's on up the line to SF, PF, and C. The "typical" PG is someone who drives and dishes...while the "typical" SG needs to be able to shoot over defenders. Logan was great at fading away while shooting the three (when he had to) just like Darnell Burton. They both also had a lightning fast release and didn't need to be set to be accurate. Not all shooters have that capability. If you do you can play the SG at 6'0". If not you better be at least 6'3" or preferrably even taller.

Nobody is saying you can't play the SG at 6'0"...just that you will have to be exceptional (like Logan) to do it in the Beast with consistency. It doesn't matter...Vaughn is a PG (which is where we want him) and we have plenty of SG's on this team. Vaughn is a team leader type and perfect for the PG. We don't have much of an option to use him at SG even if we wanted to...there is not much depth at PG. Having height at PG is more of a non issue than having height at other positions although it always comes in handy given similar skill sets and athletic ability.

[Kindog202]

I agree, I think Deonta is quick enough and we already know he is strong enough to play point in the Big East. I just don't think he is crafty enough now to play shooting guard on a night-in, night-out basis. To waterhead's point, guys like Logan and Burton could get off off-balance shots and make them at a nice percentage, so they could shoot against guys who were a little taller. From what I have seen with Vaughn, especially when shooting 3's is he needs to have a good look to get them off and having someone 3-4 inches taller than you in your face does not lead to too many open looks. I will say that his running teardrop floater in the lane is nearly unguardable and he does have a great knack for getting it over the bigs and in the basket.

The bottom line is: This team is a better team with Vaughn at the point as opposed to Vaughn at the 2 for all the reasons mentioned on this thread.

[Inchickinkick]

I agree, I think Deonta is quick enough and we already know he is strong enough to play point in the Big East. I just don't think he is crafty enough now to play shooting guard on a night-in, night-out basis. To waterhead's point, guys like Logan and Burton could get off off-balance shots and make them at a nice percentage, so they could shoot against guys who were a little taller. From what I have seen with Vaughn, especially when shooting 3's is he needs to have a good look to get them off and having someone 3-4 inches taller than you in your face does not lead to too many open looks. I will say that his running teardrop floater in the lane is nearly unguardable and he does have a great knack for getting it over the bigs and in the basket.

The bottom line is: This team is a better team with Vaughn at the point as opposed to Vaughn at the 2 for all the reasons mentioned on this thread.
Wright with Vaughn and Mitchell, You run those three on the coart at the same time. Deonta Vaughn at SG, I quess what we are trying too understand here is, Vaughn can backup at SG. He did play there last season>

[JerseySean]

It's like arguing with little kids. Find where I blamed the game on him?

I think you're capable of having a better debate than resorting to this...

The fact is, you specifically mentioned the UCLA game and talked about Steve Logan struggling due to his height. I would suggest that was a poor example because it was not his height (nor his "struggling") why we lost.

Now, may I please have a cookie for being such a good little boy?

[Kindog202]

Wright with Vaughn and Mitchell, You run those three on the coart at the same time. Deonta Vaughn at SG, I quess what we are trying too understand here is, Vaughn can backup at SG. He did play there last season>

Yes, I think he can backup at SG at the Big East level and I think he will do that to some extent this year, I just don't think he should have to play a majority of his minutes at the SG.

Also it would not surprise me to see Mick go with a smaller lineup at times in the coming years. I could see Gates or McClain along with Wright, Vaughn, Mitchell and Wilks on the court at the same time to give a different look.

On a side note, I know it is still 2 full years away and there are many different factors still left to evolve, but imagine this starting lineup in '09:
Vaughn (Sr.), Mitchell (Jr.), Wilks (Jr.), Gates (Soph.), McClain (Jr.) - This lineup would appear to have legitimate NBA talent at all 5 spots. Throw in a bench of Davis, Bishop, Belton (all Jr's.), Wright (Soph.), McElroy (Fr.), plus 3 more schollys (Soph.'s or above) and you have a team that is a solid Final Four/National Title contender

[SLMadiCat]

I think you're capable of having a better debate than resorting to this...

The fact is, you specifically mentioned the UCLA game and talked about Steve Logan struggling due to his height. I would suggest that was a poor example because it was not his height (nor his "struggling") why we lost.

Now, may I please have a cookie for being such a good little boy?

Right, I did mention the UCLA game, because that is a game where he was guarded by a much taller player. And for those who watched the game would know that he did not have his typical all-american game. I remember that game well, and he had difficult times getting his shots off b/c of the taller player guarding him. If you find anywhere in my posts that I said that this was the reason they lost, please point it out.

[Bearcat Cafe]

UCLA threw Jason Kapono and Dijon Thompson at Lo. Both 6'7". At times Lo got stuck on switches trying to cover Kapono. Ugly.

[JerseySean]

cookie, please.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

UCLA threw Jason Kapono and Dijon Thompson at Lo. Both 6'7". At times Lo got stuck on switches trying to cover Kapono. Ugly.

Yet, 18 points and 7 rebounds. Comparable (but a little less) to his averages in his junior and senior years at UC.

Good, not great, game for Logan.

[Inchickinkick]

As of August 21, 2007

Are any recrutes visiting?

[Inchickinkick]

I see Mike has got:

sg- Warren a4
sg- McDonald a4
sf- Jones a3
sf- Jared Swopshire a3
c- Morgan awash
Who are the centers?

Does anybody have a outside scoop?

[MikeInClifton]

As of August 21, 2007

Are any recruits visiting?

Not to my knowledge. But it will pick up a bit when football season starts.
I happened to hear that Warren is visiting a Big 12 school on Sept 8th.

[SLMadiCat]

Not to my knowledge. But it will pick up a bit when football season starts.
I happened to hear that Warren is visiting a Big 12 school on Sept 8th.

I'm guessing Kansas or OSU? If Mick could somehow pull a rabbit out of his hat with this one, it would be unbelievable. I doubt UC will get him but I won't rule it out. Another big time scorer and a big man would be great for '08 but the building blocks are already in place.

[james jr]

http://www.bearcatnews.com/bearcats/basketball/archives/boxscore.php?ID=2260 Logan had 18 points and 7 assists versus UCLA.

The biggest detriment that Logan caused in the 2002 UCLA was on DEFENSE where Cedric Bozeman got in the lane on him at will and wrecked us inside and with dishes. That was the single most contributing factor to the loss.

[Inchickinkick]

U.C.L.A's height advantage had alot too do with that lose, A gaint with six
6-7 guys>

[JerseySean]

Missed free throws had a lot to do with that loss...

[Oldtimer_UC_fan]

Missed free throws had a lot to do with that loss...

Just like last season. Free throw shooting killed us in several games during the closing minutes of games.

[Inchickinkick]

Just like last season. Free throw shooting killed us in several games during the closing minutes of games.

As of September 9th 2007 Are there any new visits?

sg Phillip MCdonald4
sg Willie Warren4
sgTeondre Williams5
sf Jared Swopshire3

Are there any centers?

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

I'm guessing Kansas or OSU? If Mick could somehow pull a rabbit out of his hat with this one, it would be unbelievable. I doubt UC will get him but I won't rule it out. Another big time scorer and a big man would be great for '08 but the building blocks are already in place.

I'll rule it out. UC has no chance at Willie Warren. He did like UC best as a HS freshman.

[Bearcat Cafe]

He listed UC as the leader in 8th grade, not as a freshman. Something happened in Fairfax that changed his mind the summer before his freshman year.