Kim English

[Bearcat_DF]

I was just looking at the BCN recruiting page and noticed that Mike added Kim English as a "5". Also, it appears he was scheduled to visit this past weekend.

Sounds like we might get a verbal this week.

seeing as we need two wing players (SG and SF) - would Williams and English fill those needs even though both are listed as SGs?

Go Cats!
DF

[tophat]

I see us needing a SG who can truly shoot, but not a SF. Wilks, Bishop and Mitchell can all play SF -- in fact SF appears to be the only position for Wilks and Bishop. I can't see us taking both a SG and a SF unless we can't get a big man, have a scholarship to give and an exceptional player.

[Bearcat_DF]

Here is my breakdown for 2008:

PG - Vaughn
PG - Wright
SG - Mitchell
SG - Davis
SG - OPEN
SF - Wilks
SF - Bishop
SF - OPEN
PF - Williams
PF - Gates
PF - Belton
C - McClain
C - OPEN

Given that the wing players can often be interchanged, it might be worth considering taking two more centers.

I think the hard thing about recruiting at this point, is not having a real good sense of what the needs are. The assumption is that we will have top-talent at each of the positions, and that it even goes two deep.

The big exception is at Center.

It may be that we take one more wing player and then 2 JUCO bigs. A Kareem Johnson type player might be just what this team needs. A good, solid role player to back up McClain, Williams, Gates, and Belton.

Go Cats!
DF

[SLMadiCat]

It may be that we take one more wing player and then 2 JUCO bigs. A Kareem Johnson type player might be just what this team needs. A good, solid role player to back up McClain, Williams, Gates, and Belton.

Go Cats!
DF

I think Belton is that solid role player.

[Bearcat Cafe]

DF,

Mick is not recruiting anyone from the JUCO ranks. His words not mine.

[waterhead]

BCL seems to be reporting that Williams recruitment may be affected significantly because of a recent commitment to Clemson. Not sure if this is good news or bad news.

Also it seems to report that English did in fact visit and BCL talked to him about it.

What's the report on this kid? Would he be a nice addition? The only thing I have been able to find so far is that he is the 25th ranked 5th year prep recruit. Would we rather have Williams or English or both?

[Bearcat Cafe]

The important question to ask is what would the coaching staff prefer. I think we need a deep threat to compliment the slashers on the 08' roster.

[shaunsimpson]

BCL seems to be reporting that Williams recruitment may be affected significantly because of a recent commitment to Clemson.

Smith seems to be a player who would interfere with Williams' Clemson recruitment.

http://cincinnati.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Sport=2&pr_key=51434

[waterhead]

Thanks Shaun! I was thinking it might have been bad news by the wording of the lead in to the article. If Williams was down to two schools that should pretty much wrap things up with him...No?

[MikeInClifton]

I was just looking at the BCN recruiting page and noticed that Mike added Kim English as a "5". Also, it appears he was scheduled to visit this past weekend.


Yes, he was in town.

[Kindog202]

I think he was at the footbal game with Vaughn. Vaughn was walking in with someone as I was walking into the game.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

I was just looking at the BCN recruiting page and noticed that Mike added Kim English as a "5". Also, it appears he was scheduled to visit this past weekend.

Sounds like we might get a verbal this week.

seeing as we need two wing players (SG and SF) - would Williams and English fill those needs even though both are listed as SGs?

Go Cats!
DF

They both sound like SG but UC has other wings (Mitchell, Bishop, Wilks) who can play the "3" (small forward) spot.

One might guess UC could take both (SG) and be set there with Davis, too.

[Mick's Da Man]

Man, I'm getting excited about basketball, even though football is thrilling me right now.

[Mick's Da Man]

English has 1 Big 12 team after him (Mizzou), 2 ACC teams (Fla. State, Miami), 1 SEC team (UT), 2 Big East teams (Seton Hall, UC), and 2 A-10 teams (Rhode Island, St. Bonnie). Looks like UC, Mizzou, and Florida State are the real players though.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

English has 1 Big 12 team after him (Mizzou), 2 ACC teams (Fla. State, Miami), 1 SEC team (UT), 2 Big East teams (Seton Hall, UC), and 2 A-10 teams (Rhode Island, St. Bonnie). Looks like UC, Mizzou, and Florida State are the real players though.

I never understood the fascination with who else is recruiting a player.

[DimitriusChristedes]

because when you are competing with mizzou and FSU you like your chances better than if you are competing with Duke and Florida.

[shaunsimpson]

I never understood the fascination with who else is recruiting a player.

I understand your point, but I think that is a better indication of a players talent than a arbitrary star that a service gives based on who is looking at the kid and how many subscribers they have.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

because when you are competing with mizzou and FSU you like your chances better than if you are competing with Duke and Florida.

Not necessarily. Depends on the player.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

I understand your point, but I think that is a better indication of a players talent than a arbitrary star that a service gives based on who is looking at the kid and how many subscribers they have.

And I see yours but no one (big) recruited Nick Van Exel. Or guys like that.

[Bearcat Cafe]

Why do we keep referring to guys we signed 5 presidential terms ago?

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

Why do we keep referring to guys we signed 5 presidential terms ago?

There are more recent examples, of course. (Larry Davis comes to mind) But Van Exel makes the point.

[waterhead]

Not necessarily. Depends on the player.

I think it's safe to say these guys are talking about "normal" situations. When you have Duke, NC, Kentucky, Florida, Kansas, etc. all going after the same player I think it would be safe to assume he has some "noticeable" or "potential" talent. When there are no teams in the BCS conferences chasing a player it might be safe to assume he has less "noticeable" or "potential" talent. On average that is...not every time.

You can assess a higher probabitlity to the recruit's potential if he has the top D-1 schools drooling over him. You can assess a lower probability of his potential if they aren't even looking at him. There are of course exceptions to the rule.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

I think it's safe to say these guys are talking about "normal" situations. When you have Duke, NC, Kentucky, Florida, Kansas, etc. all going after the same player I think it would be safe to assume he has some "noticeable" or "potential" talent. When there are no teams in the BCS conferences chasing a player it might be safe to assume he has less "noticeable" or "potential" talent. On average that is...not every time.

You can assess a higher probabitlity to the recruit's potential if he has the top D-1 schools drooling over him. You can assess a lower probability of his potential if they aren't even looking at him. There are of course exceptions to the rule.

There are frequent exceptions. That's how Acie Law made A-A at Texas A&M. Or Adam Morrison at Gonzaga. Or a whole slew of others.

Deonta Vaughn, to name a recent Bearcat example. Lightly recruited (after he dropped IU) but very talented.

[waterhead]

I agree with you 58'. As I stated twice there are exceptions to the rule and they seem to happen quite frequently...probably because we are talking about 1,000's upon 1,000's of players over the years. There are going to be some late bloomers, some hidden talent, some kids who work extra hard, some that get coached up, etc. There are also going to be some highly ranked players who flop.

The point being made is about probabilities...nobody is saying there are not exceptions. If you knew nothing else about them would you, 58', rather have the player ranked 25th nationally (by rsci) or the player ranked 150th?

[Oldtimer_UC_fan]

I agree with you 58'. As I stated twice there are exceptions to the rule and they seem to happen quite frequently...probably because we are talking about 1,000's upon 1,000's of players over the years. There are going to be some late bloomers, some hidden talent, some kids who work extra hard, some that get coached up, etc. There are also going to be some highly ranked players who flop.

The point being made is about probabilities...nobody is saying there are not exceptions. If you knew nothing else about them would you, 58', rather have the player ranked 25th nationally (by rsci) or the player ranked 150th?

It's the same in every sport. Just look at the NFL draft year after year. With all the scouting services, combines, etc., there are misses every year for guys who get drafted high. Ryan Leaf, for example. And, there are free agents who come in and make an immediate impact. Kurt Warner, for example.

[waterhead]

It's the same in every sport. Just look at the NFL draft year after year. With all the scouting services, combines, etc., there are misses every year for guys who get drafted high. Ryan Leaf, for example. And, there are free agents who come in and make an immediate impact. Kurt Warner, for example.

Yep, I agree...the hard part is predicting which low ranked players will be a huge success and which high ranked players will be a big flop. It still doesn't change the fact that the probabilities are that (on average) the higher ranked players will do better than the lower ranked players.

If this weren't the case teams would all just draw names from a hat and hope for the best. LOL!

[richard k.]

You're absolutely right - put the names of high school seniors ranked 1-100 (pick your own recruiting service list) in a hat, and then put the ones listed 101-200 in another. If you were to pick randomly 12 players out of each hat - which team, putting aside for a moment position allocations and height, would you want to coach when they were college freshmen. There are always exceptions, lower ranked players who become AA's and NBA stars, and top ranked players who are busts at the college level. Trying to figure out which is which is one of the reasons why the coaches get paid what they do. However, any college coach who tells you he would rather have all his players ranked 101-250 rather than 1-100 is either smoking funny cigarettes (or consuming other strange things), lying because he can't get the top 100 to come to his school, or someone who will soon be unemployed.

[CincyBearcat95]

Agreed. I think its a matter of data points. Who is recruiting, what they've seen on tape, personality, ranking, stats, etc. There has to be a whole picture view. The NFL analogy comes to mind again. There are teams who have "formulas" that are applied to those in the draft that take a bunch of different things into account, including integrity and come up with who they should draft. I'm sure Bball is no different. They look at all the available data, make a decision and then pursue it. Its not a matter of a silver bullet, its a matter of the reducing the chances of picking up a flop.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

You're absolutely right - put the names of high school seniors ranked 1-100 (pick your own recruiting service list) in a hat, and then put the ones listed 101-200 in another. If you were to pick randomly 12 players out of each hat - which team, putting aside for a moment position allocations and height, would you want to coach when they were college freshmen. There are always exceptions, lower ranked players who become AA's and NBA stars, and top ranked players who are busts at the college level. Trying to figure out which is which is one of the reasons why the coaches get paid what they do. However, any college coach who tells you he would rather have all his players ranked 101-250 rather than 1-100 is either smoking funny cigarettes (or consuming other strange things), lying because he can't get the top 100 to come to his school, or someone who will soon be unemployed.

The better teams always seem to have a mix of those players.

Florida, for example. Just one HS All-American (Brewer) the past 2 seasons. Several Top 100 guys like Noah, Green, etc. Some Top 250 guys like Lee Humphrey.

Add 'em up and you get 2 NCAA titles.

1998 Kentucky is another example. 1 McDonalds A-A. 1 Parade A-A. A mix of all the rest. Result was 35 W and NCAA championship.