2017 Recruiting

[gmujim92]

Everyone says stars don't matter, until we get a 4 star hahha. Hypocrites.

Clearly reading is not your strong suit DJ3. Perhaps a tutor is in order.

 

[Falco]

Clearly reading is not your strong suit DJ3. Perhaps a tutor is in order.

explain?

 

[Falco]

Clearly reading is not your strong suit DJ3. Perhaps a tutor is in order.

This is just one post about fans not caring about stars. Then the second we get a 4 star recruit everyone jumps for joy.

"Stars shmars...i dont pay much attention to them either. Its more about roster building and I think DP is on the right track. However, its obvious, for example, vs Dusquene, they had horses and we had ponies. Im fine with a 2 star kid as long as you know in a year or two he will fill out body wise. And for me, Boyd and Grayer have that."

 

[Herndon]

This is just one post about fans not caring about stars. Then the second we get a 4 star recruit everyone jumps for joy.

"Stars shmars...i dont pay much attention to them either. Its more about roster building and I think DP is on the right track. However, its obvious, for example, vs Dusquene, they had horses and we had ponies. Im fine with a 2 star kid as long as you know in a year or two he will fill out body wise. And for me, Boyd and Grayer have that."

Fair criticism, to my mind. FWIW, I'm not hung up on stars one way or the other. Mar looks like a nice player to me, but not materially nicer than Temara.

 

[gmujim92]

This is just one post about fans not caring about stars. Then the second we get a 4 star recruit everyone jumps for joy.

"Stars shmars...i dont pay much attention to them either. Its more about roster building and I think DP is on the right track. However, its obvious, for example, vs Dusquene, they had horses and we had ponies. Im fine with a 2 star kid as long as you know in a year or two he will fill out body wise. And for me, Boyd and Grayer have that."

Who is this "everyone" you are speaking of?

Personally, I "jump for joy" every time our current staff signs a new player because I know that, regardless of the opinion of some recruiting analyst, the player is more likely than not to become a positive contributor to our program.

I also was happy that DP landed a "four-star" recruit because it silences people like you who were questioning why we hadn't had better than two-star guys in his first two classes.

Beyond that, it's meaningless. Goanar will have to prove himself on and off the court like each of his teammates. Same as it ever was and ever will be at Mason.

 

[G M U]

I look at stars as a nice little bonus when looking at a recruit. Clearly we all want the player with the highest stars but that's not to say we don't want a two star player either. Just gotta trust the coach saw something recruiting websites didn't. Only thing stars really put on a player are expectations not success.

 

[Falco]

Sorry to break it to everyone, but Scouts are pretty good at predicting success.

"It’s safe to say that the recruiting experts usually get it right. Sure, there are some misses, but five star prospects are usually the top NBA talents. There are bound to be some “busts” and underrated prospects who outperform expectations, but the experts are right more often than not. At the same time, it doesn’t mean a 5 Star is guaranteed an NBA deal, or a 0 Star has no shot at earning an NBA contract. "

"What the results showed are that most of the time, the rankings held true. Of the 80 NBA Playoff starters this weekend, 29 were ranked as 5 Stars out of high school. The next highest category was the “N/A (Age)” category, which certainly would have had more 5 Stars if the database had been older. For example, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, David Lee, and Zach Randolph were just some of the McDonald’s All-Americans who likely would have been considered 5 Stars. "

http://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/233037/Do-High-School-Stars-Lead-To-NBA-Success

 

[GreenLantern]

I only want 10 star recruits that have proven ability to bring games to overtime on a consistent basis.

 

[G M U]

Sorry to break it to everyone, but Scouts are pretty good at predicting success.

"It’s safe to say that the recruiting experts usually get it right. Sure, there are some misses, but five star prospects are usually the top NBA talents. There are bound to be some “busts” and underrated prospects who outperform expectations, but the experts are right more often than not. At the same time, it doesn’t mean a 5 Star is guaranteed an NBA deal, or a 0 Star has no shot at earning an NBA contract. "

"What the results showed are that most of the time, the rankings held true. Of the 80 NBA Playoff starters this weekend, 29 were ranked as 5 Stars out of high school. The next highest category was the “N/A (Age)” category, which certainly would have had more 5 Stars if the database had been older. For example, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, David Lee, and Zach Randolph were just some of the McDonald’s All-Americans who likely would have been considered 5 Stars. "

http://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/233037/Do-High-School-Stars-Lead-To-NBA-Success

But what about the players ranging from 2-4 stars? 5 star recruits are clearly something special but the standard mid major 3 star player is harder to evaluate.

 

[Falco]

But what about the players ranging from 2-4 stars? 5 star recruits are clearly something special but the standard mid major 3 star player is harder to evaluate.

Snap shot of the NBA playoffs:

5 Stars: 51 players
4 Stars: 35 players
3 Stars: 28 players
2 Stars: 1 players
0 Stars: 11 players
N/A (Age): 50 players
N/A (Int’l): 29 players

 

[G M U]

Snap shot of the NBA playoffs:

5 Stars: 51 players
4 Stars: 35 players
3 Stars: 28 players
2 Stars: 1 players
0 Stars: 11 players
N/A (Age): 50 players
N/A (Int’l): 29 players

I was in your boat last year. After we signed Otis I said:

"I feel as if I could find praise from local/knowledgeable folks on any recruit. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited for a few our new recruits but I feel as if the "diamond in the rough" argument should be applied to one or two recruits per year but to apply it to all of our recruits is a bit of a stretch. I get that the stars or ranking applied to the recruit is fairly objective but what was concerning for me was the lack of mid-high major interest. Lets hope Paulsen can coach these kids up and they end up playing like 4 star recruits or make other programs regret they overlooked our players."

Otis (as a freshman) was arguably our best player last year on a team that featured a guy that received looks from the NBA. Yeah, the stats may prove otherwise but it really comes down to the coach and system a player is put in.

 

[GMUSig03]

Snap shot of the NBA playoffs:

5 Stars: 51 players
4 Stars: 35 players
3 Stars: 28 players
2 Stars: 1 players
0 Stars: 11 players
N/A (Age): 50 players
N/A (Int’l): 29 players

I wasn't aware George Mason competed in the NBA. All that stat shows is that the higher the star the higher the likelihood the player will go to the NBA (duh) not whether or not that player is a capable DI player.

Obviously players that make it to the NBA are capable DI players, but your stat entirely leaves out all non-NBA players from the analysis which makes up 99.9% of all Mason players and probably a similar percentage of A10 players.

 

[Patriot8]

Geo Baker is off to Rutgers

 

[gmujim92]

I wasn't aware George Mason competed in the NBA. All that stat shows is that the higher the star the higher the likelihood the player will go to the NBA (duh) not whether or not that player is a capable DI player.

Obviously players that make it to the NBA are capable DI players, but your stat entirely leaves out all non-NBA players from the analysis which makes up 99.9% of all Mason players and probably a similar percentage of A10 players.

Beat me to it, Joe. I was getting ready to post the exact same thing.

 

[p8triotfan4life]

we need another big man to add. no more guards!

 

[gmujim92]

we need another big man to add. no more guards!

We could certainly use another PG unless you expect Otis to play 40 minutes every game after Marquise graduates.

Depending on what happens with AJ Wilson, there could be a scholarship available for a big man in the 2017 class, too.

 

[gmujim92]

So since we got the commitment from Goanar, two of our other SF targets for 2017 -- Eddie Scott and Anthony Gaines -- have crossed Mason off their lists.

Scott committed to Penn. Gaines is down to his final 6, which includes Dayton and GW.

Given the youth and composition of our roster, it wouldn't surprise me if we had one scholarship available for a SF and Goanar snagged it.

I really like Scott and Gaines, but it's nice to have a coaching staff that isn't looking to fill all 13 roster spots with wings.

 

[GMUSig03]

So since we got the commitment from Goanar, two of our other SF targets for 2017 -- Eddie Scott and Anthony Gaines -- have crossed Mason off their lists.

Scott committed to Penn. Gaines is down to his final 6, which includes Dayton and GW.

Given the youth and composition of our roster, it wouldn't surprise me if we had one scholarship available for a SF and Goanar snagged it.

I really like Scott and Gaines, but it's nice to have a coaching staff that isn't looking to fill all 13 roster spots with wings.

Doesn't that also imply that we probably got our top choice of the 3?

 

[gmujim92]

Doesn't that also imply that we probably got our top choice of the 3?

I can't say 100 percent, but I am pretty sure Goanar was No. 1 on the list of targeted SFs our staff thought they had a realistic chance of signing. If he wasn't, I doubt they would've accepted his commitment this early.

Gaines has had an unbelievably productive summer and likely will be a very good college player, but he's only 6-4 (more of a SG at our level) and we have three new freshmen at his position.

Goanar has more versatility/upside because he's a true SF at 6-7 with long arms and conceivably could grow into a small-ball PF with hard work in the weight room.

We were very fortunate to land him.

 

[Patriot8]

I can't say 100 percent, but I am pretty sure Goanar was No. 1 on the list of targeted SFs our staff thought they had a realistic chance of signing. If he wasn't, I doubt they would've accepted his commitment this early.

Gaines has had an unbelievably productive summer and likely will be a very good college player, but he's only 6-4 (more of a SG at our level) and we have three new freshmen at his position.

Goanar has more versatility/upside because he's a true SF at 6-7 with long arms and conceivably could grow into a small-ball PF with hard work in the weight room.

We were very fortunate to land him.

Would you say the staff is going to focus the remaining 2017 scholarship almost exclusively on a PG, assuming (and hoping) that Wilson ends up committing in the next few days?