'18 MD F LaQuill Hardnett (Commit)

[cincyguy13]

Your take is lazy and thoughtless.

Not much of a “take”. Just called you out for Taking everything as an attack. Just apologize and we can move on

 

[cincycpaw]

Your take is lazy and thoughtless.

I too expect to see a slight bump in recruiting. NOt sure how that's lazy and thoughtless...or who pissed in your cornflakes. I think we've seen it year on year for the most part...and perhaps this years class keeps that moving.

I'm not evaluating these kids, so if the coach likes a kid a picks him...great. Where I will hold that coach accountable is when that kid has to play. And the reality is after a slow start and some big swings and misses, cronin's recruiting has been pretty solid.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

You took me saying, “ I think the recruiting is fine but would like a slight bump”, and somehow turned it in to an attack on the program. Nice work

I clearly said the "pathetic" comment is what felt like the attack. I'm responding to you this way bc I stated my opinion and you went nuts and said I was acting like people were attacking the program.

You say slight bump bc we need Clark, Evans, Cumberland, whoever types. I'm saying we may still have Evans, we will have Cumberland, we will have Williams, we will have Broome, Diarra, Logan Johnson, and still potentially 2 more scholarships.. Those are the type of players, based on ratings, that are in the "slight bump" class, no? And that's not even mentioning the other more lowly rated guys that we have been bringing along...like Moore, Nsoseme, Scott, Brooks, Jenifer. So I honestly don't know what you mean. Our program is pretty loaded right now. And I don't see how Hardnett would factor into the slight bump category anyway, since in the past the alternative was to have an empty roster spot. So I personally put him in a category where if he turns into a rotation guy, we win with house money. Bc even top of the top power programs aren't going to have the easiest time selling borderline Top 100 players on being the last guy on the team at the beginning of their career. We get guys who are hungry enough to take on that challenge, and even redshirt a year. It's not a bad thing to have a guy like this around if he is a good culture guy. I'm assuming he is based on some of the interviews he has on YouTube from as early as his SO year.

So I'll take this guy sight unseen if our coaches like him. And I don't think he's a recruit who inhibits us from taking advantage of any "bump" that success may provide.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Not much of a “take”. Just called you out for Taking everything as an attack. Just apologize and we can move on

I told you I was confused by slight bump and asked what you meant and instead of explaining anything you went nuts and said I take everything as an attack. That's why it's lazy and thoughtless. You've done nothing to make any kind of a point. You'd rather worry about me. I won't apologize. I have done nothing worth apologizing over.

 

[cincyguy13]

I clearly said the "pathetic" comment is what felt like the attack. I'm responding to you this way bc I stated my opinion and you went nuts and said I was acting like people were attacking the program.

You say slight bump bc we need Clark, Evans, Cumberland, whoever types. I'm saying we may still have Evans, we will have Cumberland, we will have Williams, we will have Broome, Diarra, Logan Johnson, and still potentially 2 more scholarships.. Those are the type of players, based on ratings, that are in the "slight bump" class, no? And that's not even mentioning the other more lowly rated guys that we have been bringing along...like Moore, Nsoseme, Scott, Brooks, Jenifer. So I honestly don't know what you mean. Our program is pretty loaded right now. And I don't see how Hardnett would factor into the slight bump category anyway, since in the past the alternative was to have an empty roster spot. So I personally put him in a category where if he turns into a rotation guy, we win with house money. Bc even top of the top power programs aren't going to have the easiest time selling borderline Top 100 players on being the last guy on the team at the beginning of their career. We get guys who are hungry enough to take on that challenge, and even redshirt a year. It's not a bad thing to have a guy like this around if he is a good culture guy. I'm assuming he is based on some of the interviews he has on YouTube from as early as his SO year.

So I'll take this guy sight unseen if our coaches like him. And I don't think he's a recruit who inhibits us from taking advantage of any "bump" that success may provide.

I’ll take this as your apology. Thank you

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I too expect to see a slight bump in recruiting. NOt sure how that's lazy and thoughtless...or who pissed in your cornflakes. I think we've seen it year on year for the most part...and perhaps this years class keeps that moving.

I'm not evaluating these kids, so if the coach likes a kid a picks him...great. Where I will hold that coach accountable is when that kid has to play. And the reality is after a slow start and some big swings and misses, cronin's recruiting has been pretty solid.

The dude who said we are pathetic for recruiting this kid is the one who pissed in my cornflakes. And cincyguy refuses to explain himself bc he's more concerned about me than his point.

It's lazy and thoughtless only when someone asks you what you mean and you launch into a whole thing about how everything is viewed as an attack by that person, instead of answering a simple question or addressing anything from the post. It doesn't seem well thought out when it happens that way. Doesn't mean the point is automatically illegitimate, but I was offered no further explanation. Just someone telling me how they think I should act to make things better for them.

My point remains unanswered. What do people mean by slight bump? If what we're doing now and what we have been doing for the past few years is the slight bump, then we don't need a slight bump. We need what we're doing to continue. And that's where i live. So I'm actually trying to find out what that means. And it seems like sometimes fans worry more about how you get there, than getting there. Like somehow winning would feel different if we had a different approach to recruiting. And I am not saying a 180 degree different approach, but even a subtle difference. Just seems to me like it's for optics though. I don't care who they are, where they come from, or how we get them, I think we have a solid plan in place to dominate this league for a long time. So I'll leave the coaches to it. If someone else doesn't see it that way, I'd actually like to know why. Like an actual response. Not just one sentence about being pathetic or simply using the "recruiting bump" buzzword.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I’ll take this as your apology. Thank you

Whatever works.

 

[cincycpaw]

The dude who said we are pathetic for recruiting this kid is the one who pissed in my cornflakes. And cincyguy refuses to explain himself bc he's more concerned about me than his point.

It's lazy and thoughtless only when someone asks you what you mean and you launch into a whole thing about how everything is viewed as an attack by that person, instead of answering a simple question or addressing anything from the post. It doesn't seem well thought out when it happens that way. Doesn't mean the point is automatically illegitimate, but I was offered no further explanation. Just someone telling me how they think I should act to make things better for them.

My point remains unanswered. What do people mean by slight bump? If what we're doing now and what we have been doing for the past few years is the slight bump, then we don't need a slight bump. We need what we're doing to continue. And that's where i live. So I'm actually trying to find out what that means. And it seems like sometimes fans worry more about how you get there, than getting there. Like somehow winning would feel different if we had a different approach to recruiting. And I am not saying a 180 degree different approach, but even a subtle difference. Just seems to me like it's for optics though. I don't care who they are, where they come from, or how we get them, I think we have a solid plan in place to dominate this league for a long time. So I'll leave the coaches to it. If someone else doesn't see it that way, I'd actually like to know why. Like an actual response. Not just one sentence about being pathetic or simply using the "recruiting bump" buzzword.

So - I answered your question for me. I said the bump in recruiting needs to show up on the floor. I don't care about ratings if they don't translate. And I think Mick has been stepping it up. I've seen the bump on the floor.

That said I'm betting you hit more success on the floor with 5's and 4's. And I'm hoping a deep run this year will help Cronin land 4's and maybe even a 5 with more regularity...as long as he keeps winning. So I'm hoping that another bump is on it's way! Did I use "bump" too much?

 

[Patrick Bateman]

here is a thought on Tevian Jones. He is a wing. He will be competing for playing time with Cumberland, Williams and Moore. That list could also include Evans if he does not declare for the draft. He may be looking for a better opportunity that involves a easier path to see the court his freshman year.

Enjoy this year. It is shaping up to be a very good one . Lets not drag this season into the mud by speculating on how bad our recruiting is at this point. Mick's results deserve the benefit of the doubt. Just My humble opinion.

Or, he does not want to play in the AAC

 

[cincyguy13]

The dude who said we are pathetic for recruiting this kid is the one who pissed in my cornflakes. And cincyguy refuses to explain himself bc he's more concerned about me than his point.

It's lazy and thoughtless only when someone asks you what you mean and you launch into a whole thing about how everything is viewed as an attack by that person, instead of answering a simple question or addressing anything from the post. It doesn't seem well thought out when it happens that way. Doesn't mean the point is automatically illegitimate, but I was offered no further explanation. Just someone telling me how they think I should act to make things better for them.

My point remains unanswered. What do people mean by slight bump? If what we're doing now and what we have been doing for the past few years is the slight bump, then we don't need a slight bump. We need what we're doing to continue. And that's where i live. So I'm actually trying to find out what that means. And it seems like sometimes fans worry more about how you get there, than getting there. Like somehow winning would feel different if we had a different approach to recruiting. And I am not saying a 180 degree different approach, but even a subtle difference. Just seems to me like it's for optics though. I don't care who they are, where they come from, or how we get them, I think we have a solid plan in place to dominate this league for a long time. So I'll leave the coaches to it. If someone else doesn't see it that way, I'd actually like to know why. Like an actual response. Not just one sentence about being pathetic or simply using the "recruiting bump" buzzword.

I will have a real discussion. You are saying keep doing exactly what they are doing? don't attempt to improve, just do the same thing because it is working? Is this your argument? no sarcasm, this is what your saying?

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Jakob, you keep saying UC is so loaded. If true, why do they sit the best PG so the 2nd team has scoring punch?

It is pretty obvious that there is a severe drop from first team to second. Eli, Brooks, Moore and scott were unranked recruits, Diarra 196 and Keith 127. Those comprise of the most recent recruiting classes, huge drop from Clark/Evans - both ranked 99, Washington -93, Cumberland 61.

 

[cincyguy13]

Maybe it's a difference in expectations. I want more than 1 sweet 16 in 15 years. I want to win the conference tournament every couple years. Bottom line is it's hard to win in these things with lower ranked players. Are the ranking everything, no, but the players ranked higher tend to have higher ceilings and are more of a sure thing. I do not expect us to be UK or DUKE, but I would like, maybe 2 Jarron Cumberland's in a class every other year instead of one. Maybe 2, jacob evans level players in a class. Imagine what Mick could do with that. That's what I mean by slight bump. That's it. I am not saying the program is in trouble, or anyone is doing a bad job.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I will have a real discussion. You are saying keep doing exactly what they are doing? don't attempt to improve, just do the same thing because it is working? Is this your argument? no sarcasm, this is what your saying?

Yeah. I'm saying fill out 12/13 scholarships, be open to landing transfers, try to get a HS headliner in each class who you can develop as "the man" as they get older, but are good enough to at least help early on.

You do that and you see the depth we can build in this league. Filling in with the 3/4/5 year guys like Brooks, Scott, Nsoseme, Moore, Jenifer, Hardnett types has its value. Especially bc like I've mentioned, we used to have those as empty spots. Playing the pressing style we do forces you to play a lot of players. It's nice to not just play a lot of guys, but actually choose who those guys are. And realistically, you don't get those guys on the back end of your roster from the Top 100 group. But they have value for our philosophy. We mold guys into high floor players bc we teach defense and rebounding. So you find a guy with length or athleticism, we can at minimum churn out Top 15 defenses year in and year out. So that's where these guys come into play. And as it turns out, our depth and conference allow these guys to develop at a faster rate. It kind of feeds into itself.

The transfer thing is obvious. Washington and Broome had a clear path to playing time. We've been going out of our way to keep our options open in the spring. That should continue as well. And I think Washington and Broome were listed as Top 10 transfers.

The HS headliner. I guess it depends what you think of Williams and Logan Johnson. Williams still has a high ceiling and luckily we don't need him to be what Cumberland, Evans, and Clark were as FR bc we've been so good the past few years at hitting on these guys. It also looks like at least 1 or 2 of the diamonds in the rough from his class are looking pretty shiny. Another built in safety net with the full roster approach.

This has led to what we are now. Which I wholeheartedly believe is a Top 10 team at worst. I think building things this way is more sustainable than putting chips in on higher rated guys that we have less of a chance to get. Chad just said the other day that 80% of those guys rule us out before we even get in the door. Take that fwiw, but it speaks to how much more difficult it would be to pull off that kind of approach in practice. We've been creative with how we've built this thing. And I'd like to continue down that path. It has led to some pretty damn good basketball.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Led to pretty Dam good basketball? This year yes but for the 11 years before this one, how many posts about walking the ball up, Rock fight, eyes bleed first weekend style of play. You yourself said if you were JC you would not have chosen Cronin because of style of play.

Getting role players is nice when you have a slew of top 100 guys and guys that can score in the paint.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Maybe it's a difference in expectations. I want more than 1 sweet 16 in 15 years. I want to win the conference tournament every couple years. Bottom line is it's hard to win in these things with lower ranked players. Are the ranking everything, no, but the players ranked higher tend to have higher ceilings and are more of a sure thing. I do not expect us to be UK or DUKE, but I would like, maybe 2 Jarron Cumberland's in a class every other year instead of one. Maybe 2, jacob evans level players in a class. Imagine what Mick could do with that. That's what I mean by slight bump. That's it. I am not saying the program is in trouble, or anyone is doing a bad job.

We will have 3 spots open this spring if Evans goes. Keep that in mind. Policelli could be in the mix. Him, Logan Johnson, Mahan, and Hardnett wouldn't be a bad class at all. Or maybe we get a legit transfer like Washington was. Still much to be determined there.

I really think the thing people are overlooking is that the T Moore, Nsoseme, Hardnett types were empty chairs on the bench in the past. And that's the case for a lot of programs in different years. The book is still out on Williams, but at this point, who cares what Moore was ranked? He might be a starter on a ranked team next year. In a non-traditional way I suppose, he has gotten himself on the path that any of the best players we have now were on.

 

[M64W]

In a Nutshell

In a nutshell, UC recruits 3 star players, coaches them up to 4 star players, plays a 3 star schedule, has a 5 star ranking, and cries of "over rated" will reign down on them.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Led to pretty Dam good basketball? This year yes but for the 11 years before this one, how many posts about walking the ball up, Rock fight, eyes bleed first weekend style of play. You yourself said if you were JC you would not have chosen Cronin because of style of play

We have changed our approach and adapted to our situation. The PGs we have turned to tell you all you need to know about that. We apply pressure and use a lot of people. Our 10, who can stay fresh, are going to swarm the hell out of most teams. And pretty much all teams in the AAC. We play 22 teams each year that we know for sure about. We are built to completely dismantle most of those teams. And a few we may be underdogs or they may be coin tosses. I'll take that. But it sounds like I put more stock in the past 2 years than you. I'm looking at our current situation completely detached from whatever was happening however many years before we got into the AAC and started bringing in and developing guys like Clark and Evans. That's just me though. So that's where we may differ.

 

[cincyguy13]

Yeah. I'm saying fill out 12/13 scholarships, be open to landing transfers, try to get a HS headliner in each class who you can develop as "the man" as they get older, but are good enough to at least help early on.

You do that and you see the depth we can build in this league. Filling in with the 3/4/5 year guys like Brooks, Scott, Nsoseme, Moore, Jenifer, Hardnett types has its value. Especially bc like I've mentioned, we used to have those as empty spots. Playing the pressing style we do forces you to play a lot of players. It's nice to not just play a lot of guys, but actually choose who those guys are. And realistically, you don't get those guys on the back end of your roster from the Top 100 group. But they have value for our philosophy. We mold guys into high floor players bc we teach defense and rebounding. So you find a guy with length or athleticism, we can at minimum churn out Top 15 defenses year in and year out. So that's where these guys come into play. And as it turns out, our depth and conference allow these guys to develop at a faster rate. It kind of feeds into itself.

The transfer thing is obvious. Washington and Broome had a clear path to playing time. We've been going out of our way to keep our options open in the spring. That should continue as well. And I think Washington and Broome were listed as Top 10 transfers.

The HS headliner. I guess it depends what you think of Williams and Logan Johnson. Williams still has a high ceiling and luckily we don't need him to be what Cumberland, Evans, and Clark were as FR bc we've been so good the past few years at hitting on these guys. It also looks like at least 1 or 2 of the diamonds in the rough from his class are looking pretty shiny. Another built in safety net with the full roster approach.

This has led to what we are now. Which I wholeheartedly believe is a Top 10 team at worst. I think building things this way is more sustainable than putting chips in on higher rated guys that we have less of a chance to get. Chad just said the other day that 80% of those guys rule us out before we even get in the door. Take that fwiw, but it speaks to how much more difficult it would be to pull off that kind of approach in practice. We've been creative with how we've built this thing. And I'd like to continue down that path. It has led to some pretty damn good basketball.

I completely agree with this plan. I love transfers. I think we should continue getting a transfer every year. There are good players out that can help and at our level, it's a good way to get highly rated players. Only thing I would say is it's hard to sustain a top level program with the majority of your roster being lower ranked guys.

 

[cincyguy13]

We will have 3 spots open this spring if Evans goes. Keep that in mind. Policelli could be in the mix. Him, Logan Johnson, Mahan, and Hardnett wouldn't be a bad class at all. Or maybe we get a legit transfer like Washington was. Still much to be determined there.

I really think the thing people are overlooking is that the T Moore, Nsoseme, Hardnett types were empty chairs on the bench in the past. And that's the case for a lot of programs in different years. The book is still out on Williams, but at this point, who cares what Moore was ranked? He might be a starter on a ranked team next year. In a non-traditional way I suppose, he has gotten himself on the path that any of the best players we have now were on.

No one cares what Moore was ranked now. I don't care what anyone is ranked but the fact is there is usually a reason the guys are ranked in the top 100. They usually turn out to be pretty good players.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I completely agree with this plan. I love transfers. I think we should continue getting a transfer every year. There are good players out that can help and at our level, it's a good way to get highly rated players. Only thing I would say is it's hard to sustain a top level program with the majority of your roster being lower ranked guys.

Yeah and we found that out the hard way when the 2011 and 2012 classes should've been/were seniors. Between those 2 classes being duds and 3/5 of the 2013 class leaving 1 year in, we saw a dip. Quadri Moore as a FR was the #8 scholarship guy. I really think our staff is determined to make sure that doesn't happen again. Worst case we have to turn to the Scott, Brooks, possibly Hardnett types. But at least we have them in for a few years learning before we have to just throw them in bc we have no other choice.