'16 MS PF/C Darius Hicks

BearcatTalk

Help Support BearcatTalk:

mdchick said:
Absolutely terrible comparisons Cobb was a starter for his two years here and cane Broome wil start both years he is here
Click to expand...

Yeah, both as JRs. No chance Hicks would start as a JR when Clark and Washington (and Moore) are gone?
 
jds513 said:
Of course. Everyone knows that. Including him. Same is true for those other schools and it may be easier for him to get on the court. Every recruit wants something different in a school. You can't just deny that there could possibly be more playing time available at one of those schools. He's a 3 star player, not 5.
Click to expand...

The guys we have here that he'd be competing with for PT aren't 5* either. I'm sure it'd be easier for him to get on the floor at Tulane...but again, that's the case for lots of players who don't choose crappy programs. If he can come to UC, I'm betting he does.
 
mdchick said:
Absolutely terrible comparisons Cobb was a starter for his two years here and cane Broome wil start both years he is here
Click to expand...

And also, those comparisons were more about guys not wanting to play for bad teams. It really is funny how hard you try to troll me. You don't ever have an original post of your own. What you "contribute" on this site is so easy.
 
jacobkdoyle said:
And also, those comparisons were more about guys not wanting to play for bad teams. It really is funny how hard you try to troll me. You don't ever have an original post of your own. What you "contribute" on this site is so easy.
Click to expand...

Don't flatter yourself I just try to show the avg poster or are players that everyone on this site isn't an idiot.
 
mdchick said:
Don't flatter yourself I just try to show the avg poster or are players that everyone on this site isn't an idiot.
Click to expand...

Can we get MadMan on a spell check for this guy? I'd give you the benefit of the doubt and call it a typo, but that's twice now. And I'm the idiot. Good grief. Come up with an original thought of your own on UC or basketball in general sometime, and I'll show you how easy it is to respond the way you do to me. Pathetic.
 
he's not doing a good job showing anyone that all posters aren't idiots, that's for sure.
 
Realistically I think he gives us some needed size coming off the bench and some explosiveness that Moore doesn't offer. And that is all we need. Washington and Clark are going to get the majority of the minutes the next 2 seasons. If we can convince a kid to come here to be a part of a really good team, and embrace the role player off the bench their first couple years then great! Let's just hope we pitch him the benefit of making the NCAA and having guys like Gary and Washington ahead of him to help his development.
 
BearcatSpaniard513 said:
Realistically I think he gives us some needed size coming off the bench and some explosiveness that Moore doesn't offer. And that is all we need. Washington and Clark are going to get the majority of the minutes the next 2 seasons. If we can convince a kid to come here to be a part of a really good team, and embrace the role player off the bench their first couple years then great! Let's just hope we pitch him the benefit of making the NCAA and having guys like Gary and Washington ahead of him to help his development.
Click to expand...

I totally forgot about Brooks when I typed this...
 
I guess I'm confused why some think saying Playing Time is a factor in recruiting is an excuse. An excuse for what???? We are a good program that competes well in our league and makes the dance. The problem with this board is almost every thread turns into a debate about the effectiveness of our Coach. Playing Style, recruiting, personality and many others. If we don't land Hicks because he would rather play in a situation that affords him with a better opportunity to see the floor or any number of reasons that is up to him. I could list many factors that go into landing players. Here is a news flash for everyone we are not the 1960 bearcats and haven't been for awhile. We are not Huggins bearcats and haven't been for awhile. We are a good program that competes very hard who's players graduate and who generally stay out of trouble. We also are a program that has room for improvement. This is not a excuse, it is reality. In my opinion we do very well with what we have to offer in todays college athletics. I won't list what obstacles make up todays college game because its been done to death by many almost daily on here.

I mean really didn't this conversation start on the general recruiting thread.
 
WAITE HOYT 2 said:
I guess I'm confused why some think saying Playing Time is a factor in recruiting is an excuse. An excuse for what???? We are a good program that competes well in our league and makes the dance. The problem with this board is almost every thread turns into a debate about the effectiveness of our Coach. Playing Style, recruiting, personality and many others. If we don't land Hicks because he would rather play in a situation that affords him with a better opportunity to see the floor or any number of reasons that is up to him. I could list many factors that go into landing players. Here is a news flash for everyone we are not the 1960 bearcats and haven't been for awhile. We are not Huggins bearcats and haven't been for awhile. We are a good program that competes very hard who's players graduate and who generally stay out of trouble. We also are a program that has room for improvement. This is not a excuse, it is reality. In my opinion we do very well with what we have to offer in todays college athletics. I won't list what obstacles make up todays college game because its been done to death by many almost daily on here.

I mean really didn't this conversation start on the general recruiting thread.
Click to expand...

BC WE ALSO HAVE PLAYING TIME TO OFFER. If a grad transfer PG turned us down for playing time reasons, yeah that makes sense. But for this specific case, it is not an issue. He will have every opportunity to get on the floor here. Why else would we be recruiting him this spring? Obviously the staff sees our frontcourt and realizes that minutes behind Clark and Washington are wide open. Hicks has just as good of a chance as anyone else to get them.
 
I love when I come to this forum in hopes of finding recruiting updates only to see people screaming at each other. Good times.
 
jacobkdoyle said:
Can we get MadMan on a spell check for this guy? I'd give you the benefit of the doubt and call it a typo, but that's twice now. And I'm the idiot. Good grief. Come up with an original thought of your own on UC or basketball in general sometime, and I'll show you how easy it is to respond the way you do to me. Pathetic.
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't think anyone on here cares 1 poop about your opinion, I just want to see facts on this site. The only person on here that should have an opinion is Chad because he sees what happens everyday. You obviously have no clue what's going on. Just like the rest of us and I really hate all the speculation you start by all of your opionated posts.
 
mdchick said:
Honestly I don't think anyone on here cares 1 poop about your opinion, I just want to see facts on this site. The only person on here that should have an opinion is Chad because he sees what happens everyday. You obviously have no clue what's going on. Just like the rest of us and I really hate all the speculation you start by all of your opionated posts.
Click to expand...

Go sign up for BCJ then bro. I'm not apologizing for having an opinion on UC basketball, that I share on a UC basketball board.

*Also, you don't speak for everyone on this board. You always try to do this...but to date, no one has joined your uprising. That should tell you something.
 
So back on topic... If we do land Hicks we would be pretty set with our 4/5 depth. The PG spot is covered with Jenifer and Broome next year. Tre Scott should backup Evans for the next couple years. I think we definitely need to land a shooting guard next. Does anyone know if they have anyone they're targeting this off season as far as a transfer or late 2016 signee? If not, who in the 2017 class would be our top priority?
 
BearcatSpaniard513 said:
So back on topic... If we do land Hicks we would be pretty set with our 4/5 depth. The PG spot is covered with Jenifer and Broome next year. Tre Scott should backup Evans for the next couple years. I think we definitely need to land a shooting guard next. Does anyone know if they have anyone they're targeting this off season as far as a transfer or late 2016 signee? If not, who in the 2017 class would be our top priority?
Click to expand...

I think Scott will mostly back up Clark, but regardless, a shooting guard/wing will be vital. With KJ gone after this year, we will have basically no depth at the 2 or 3.
 
#BearcatNation said:
I think Scott will mostly back up Clark, but regardless, a shooting guard/wing will be vital. With KJ gone after this year, we will have basically no depth at the 2 or 3.
Click to expand...

I was saying if we land Hicks. No way he would come here if it were Clark, Moore, Scott, and him all at the 4. I think Scott was originally listed as a 3 on some recruiting sites. Yes, he'll play both because of his size and versatility, but I see him as a backup to Evans as of right now. I'll admit I could be totally wrong on that though. Just my opinion.
 
BearcatSpaniard513 said:
I was saying if we land Hicks. No way he would come here if it were Clark, Moore, Scott, and him all at the 4. I think Scott was originally listed as a 3 on some recruiting sites. Yes, he'll play both because of his size and versatility, but I see him as a backup to Evans as of right now. I'll admit I could be totally wrong on that though. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I dont think we will see scott at the 3 ever.
 
coachpipe said:
I dont think we will see scott at the 3 ever.
Click to expand...

"He'll use me as a combo forward. He said he likes how I get up and down the floor and I can give them more athleticism and versatility," Scott said. "I think I can be a mismatch here or there and beat people off the dribble at the three. If there is a smaller guy at the four, I can use my quickness to defend him. I feel like I can help them in different places."
 
BearcatSpaniard513 said:
"He'll use me as a combo forward. He said he likes how I get up and down the floor and I can give them more athleticism and versatility," Scott said. "I think I can be a mismatch here or there and beat people off the dribble at the three. If there is a smaller guy at the four, I can use my quickness to defend him. I feel like I can help them in different places."
Click to expand...

I guess it will all depend on if he can develop a jump shot outside 10 feet. If he can, sure it might be worth a try. I still dont think he will be playing much if any 3 though
 
BearcatSpaniard513 said:
"He'll use me as a combo forward. He said he likes how I get up and down the floor and I can give them more athleticism and versatility," Scott said. "I think I can be a mismatch here or there and beat people off the dribble at the three. If there is a smaller guy at the four, I can use my quickness to defend him. I feel like I can help them in different places."
Click to expand...

If kids got to play the positions they think they should be playing there would be no one left to play the post.

Ever since Durant burst on the scene every post player to enter college basketball has thought they belong on the wing.

The reality is "combo forward" is a nice way of saying you don't have the skill to be a 3 and don't have the back to the basket moves to be a traditional big.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

C
'16 NC PG Kyran Bowman
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
41K
UCalum08
U
Back
Top