2019-2020 Open Thread

[cincyguy13]

There are very few players in the transfer portal who fit that mold and the few who are definitely good enough to help us like Seth Towns, Landers Nolley, and Jordan Bruner aren't giving us a sniff.

We are recruiting Isaiah White from Utah Valley who is a 6'7 wing that can reliably score and rebound, but I'm not sure how attractive of an option we are for an LA kid who's also getting looks from USC and Arizona.

This. People act like we can just go out and get a skilled big like there are a bunch to pick from. Love to know who these people want us to get.

 

[kskenyon4]

Here is how I see our front court minutes at the moment:

Vogt: 25-30 min/game (starts)
Diarra: 20-25 min/game (starts)
Eason: 15-20 min/game (starts the year on the bench, could become a starter if he proves he can play at a "Gary Clark" freshman level)
Graduate Transfer: 15 min/game (2nd big off the bench, sees extended time in blow-outs and foul trouble situations)

Vogt is a pretty safe bet based on what we saw this year. I'd imagine the grad transfer is going to be a no-frills, what-you-see-is-what-you-get type player as well.

Diarra and Eason are the two biggest wild cards.

I agree in theory, I think the issue here is getting a grad transfer who is willing to be the 4th big. They often want assurance they are going to be a key player, albeit not always starting.

If you're in on a guy like Marfo, Tape, Cole, etc, I think they're only coming to get 18 minutes or more.

 

[skyblade]

Here is how I see our front court minutes at the moment:

Vogt: 25-30 min/game (starts)
Diarra: 20-25 min/game (starts)
Eason: 15-20 min/game (starts the year on the bench, could become a starter if he proves he can play at a "Gary Clark" freshman level)
Graduate Transfer: 15 min/game (2nd big off the bench, sees extended time in blow-outs and foul trouble situations)

Vogt is a pretty safe bet based on what we saw this year. I'd imagine the grad transfer is going to be a no-frills, what-you-see-is-what-you-get type player as well.

Diarra and Eason are the two biggest wild cards.

What did Vogt prove this year? That he's a poor defender, poor rebounder and can't deal with a double team? He needs to show significant improvement or he should be a bench guy. Scott was able to mostly cover up for us having a center who can't rebound, but next season we need a center who can rebound.

Diarra already started taking Vogt's minutes late in the year and assuming he continues to progress, I could see him starting at center over Vogt. Then play smaller and use Vogt as a 10-15 minute change of pace guy.

A grad transfer SF/PF/C could earn starting minutes at PF or C over Vogt, with Diarra starting at the other position.

My predictions.
Diarra 25-30 minutes (starts).
Vogt 15-20 minutes.
Eason 10-15 minutes.
Grad Transfer or Small ball PF 20-25 minutes.

 

[Queens_NYC]

I agree in theory, I think the issue here is getting a grad transfer who is willing to be the 4th big. They often want assurance they are going to be a key player, albeit not always starting.

If you're in on a guy like Marfo, Tape, Cole, etc, I think they're only coming to get 18 minutes or more.

I agree as well that we're not going to get a decent grad transfer by pitching a role as a 4th big.

I'm assuming the coaching staff is telling players that we have an opening at our starting 4 position (and a need at back-up 5) and they would have to compete with Diarra and Eason for minutes.

 

[Queens_NYC]

On another note, NKU's Jalen Tate has officially entered the transfer portal.

 

[cincyguy13]

What did Vogt prove this year? That he's a poor defender, poor rebounder and can't deal with a double team? He needs to show significant improvement or he should be a bench guy. Scott was able to mostly cover up for us having a center who can't rebound, but next season we need a center who can rebound.

Diarra already started taking Vogt's minutes late in the year and assuming he continues to progress, I could see him starting at center over Vogt. Then play smaller and use Vogt as a 10-15 minute change of pace guy.

A grad transfer SF/PF/C could earn starting minutes at PF or C over Vogt, with Diarra starting at the other position.

My predictions.
Diarra 25-30 minutes (starts).
Vogt 15-20 minutes.
Eason 10-15 minutes.
Grad Transfer or Small ball PF 20-25 minutes.

Are we still bashing Vogt? Give it a rest man. I agree, we hope we can get better than Vogt and someone can take his minutes but the dude has a solid year. Give it a rest.

 

[skyblade]

I agree as well that we're not going to get a decent grad transfer by pitching a role as a 4th big.

I'm assuming the coaching staff is telling players that we have an opening at our starting 4 position (and a need at back-up 5) and they would have to compete with Diarra and Eason for minutes.

I think coaching staff is telling guys that pretty much every position is open. The only guy on the roster who is a proven starter is Keith. I'd say Diarra is the 2nd most likely starter on the roster.

Diarra starting at the 5 and playing a lot of small ball is quite possible if we don't add a big. Another big could come in and start at the 4 or 5.

Pretty much every position is open. Sure Vogt started last year, but he was at best an average center (and I'd argue below average). Diarra was coming on at the end of the year and quite possibly would have taken Vogt's starting role (or at least played more minutes) if we'd had tournies, but he lacked consistency. MAW was solid, but not spectacular and also not very consistent. Davenport was injured, Harvey was coming on at the end of the year but hadn't proven anything, Prince is an unknown and may not even be able to play.

There are potential starting roles all over the court for us.

 

[skyblade]

Are we still bashing Vogt? Give it a rest man. I agree, we hope we can get better than Vogt and someone can take his minutes but the dude has a solid year. Give it a rest.

He had a solid first half of the season. In conference play he generally wasn't a major offensive threat and teams regularly attacked his poor defense. He was also very bad at rebounding.

We are talking about next years team, Vogt did not show he should be playing 25-30 minutes next year. Nobody else did either (besides Keith and possibly Diarra - if you judge only by the last few games), but nobody is predicting the other guys will be getting 25-30 minutes and be a starter.

I'm okay with Vogt being a 15-20 minute change of pace bench guy. But if he is starting and averaging 25-30 minutes he needs to make big off-season improvements at defense and rebounding and I doubt he can.

 

[cincyguy13]

He had a solid first half of the season. In conference play he generally wasn't a major offensive threat and teams regularly attacked his poor defense. He was also very bad at rebounding.

We are talking about next years team, Vogt did not show he should be playing 25-30 minutes next year. Nobody else did either (besides Keith and possibly Diarra - if you judge only by the last few games), but nobody is predicting the other guys will be getting 25-30 minutes and be a starter.

I'm okay with Vogt being a 15-20 minute change of pace bench guy. But if he is starting and averaging 25-30 minutes he needs to make big off-season improvements at defense and rebounding and I doubt he can.

I know we have went over this a 100 times but what did diarra prove? I hope he is great but he was bad more than he was good. There is no debate there. None. He finished the year strong and I hope it continues, but let’s not act like he was good all year. He was unplayable for 2/3 of the season. Vogt was unplayable the last month. They both have issues. Diarra has a much higher ceiling but let’s not act like one is great and the other is terrible: they both have issues. Hopefully they can fix them in the future. I think they can

 

[justinhub2003]

I know we have went over this a 100 times but what did diarra prove? I hope he is great but he was bad more than he was good. There is no debate there. None. He finished the year strong and I hope it continues, but let’s not act like he was good all year. He was unplayable for 2/3 of the season. Vogt was unplayable the last month. They both have issues. Diarra has a much higher ceiling but let’s not act like one is great and the other is terrible: they both have issues. Hopefully they can fix them in the future. I think they can

Clearly they both have issues.

But PERSONALLY believe vogt’s issues are much tougher for him to change. He isn’t suddenly going to be quick footed and athletic. Can he improve marginally? Absolutely

To me Diarra biggest obstacle has always been his lack of experience and hasn’t developed a foundation of good basketball IQ. I think he played basketball with out shoes most of his life.

Usually Mick redshirted players because he saw some long term potential in them and knew they needed more time to develop. Diarra just finished his redshirt Soph year. This past season alone Vogt played nearly double the total minutes than Diarra played in 2 combined seasons.

Diarra’s has length, athleticism, a developing jumper, a developing defensive IQ and so on.


All that said, likely we will see Diarra play the 4 and Vogt the 5. We don’t really have a lot of choices. I doubt Eason is going to be gary Clark level good his first year, so the dou vs Vogt debate will be put to bed considering they both will play a lot together.

 

[skyblade]

Diarra improved throughout the year. Vogt regressed.

Diarra's issues are correctable, Vogt is stuck being slow and unathletic.

Diarra played the important minutes over Vogt in the last two games of the season, had tournament been played this trend would likely have continued.

Diarra was the better player at the end of the year, given that he also has a much higher ceiling, there is no reason to assume he won't be the better player next year as well.

As Justin says, they may well start together. But if we go small, then Diarra should be the starter at the 5 over Vogt.

But on the original subject. Vogt has not proven he deserves to be the starter next year. There's no reason to think that Brannen would be telling a grad transfer big they'd only be getting bench minutes. Vogt had the opportunity and didn't do enough to prove he should start. Diarra showed potential and started to show results, but hasn't proven himself as a starter. Eason is a freshman and may not be worthy of more than 5-10 minutes per game in his first year.

There is a lot of room for a big to come in and get 20+ minutes per game. The question is does Brannen want to go that route? Based on his recruiting I suspect he is looking at playing Diarra at the 5 and playing a small ball 4.

 

[justinhub2003]

Diarra improved throughout the year. Vogt regressed.

Diarra's issues are correctable, Vogt is stuck being slow and unathletic.

Diarra played the important minutes over Vogt in the last two games of the season, had tournament been played this trend would likely have continued.

Diarra was the better player at the end of the year, given that he also has a much higher ceiling, there is no reason to assume he won't be the better player next year as well.

As Justin says, they may well start together. But if we go small, then Diarra should be the starter at the 5 over Vogt.

But on the original subject. Vogt has not proven he deserves to be the starter next year. There's no reason to think that Brannen would be telling a grad transfer big they'd only be getting bench minutes. Vogt had the opportunity and didn't do enough to prove he should start. Diarra showed potential and started to show results, but hasn't proven himself as a starter. Eason is a freshman and may not be worthy of more than 5-10 minutes per game in his first year.

There is a lot of room for a big to come in and get 20+ minutes per game. The question is does Brannen want to go that route? Based on his recruiting I suspect he is looking at playing Diarra at the 5 and playing a small ball 4.

I Think saying Vogt flat out regressed is pretty short sighted. The dude had never logged those kind of minutes before.


I’m certain that we would see that kinda late season funk from just about any one Who went from playing 492 combined minutes in 2 previous seasons to now playing 30 min per game and also logging 856 total minutes

 

[cincyguy13]

Diarra improved throughout the year. Vogt regressed.

Diarra's issues are correctable, Vogt is stuck being slow and unathletic.

Diarra played the important minutes over Vogt in the last two games of the season, had tournament been played this trend would likely have continued.

Diarra was the better player at the end of the year, given that he also has a much higher ceiling, there is no reason to assume he won't be the better player next year as well.

As Justin says, they may well start together. But if we go small, then Diarra should be the starter at the 5 over Vogt.

But on the original subject. Vogt has not proven he deserves to be the starter next year. There's no reason to think that Brannen would be telling a grad transfer big they'd only be getting bench minutes. Vogt had the opportunity and didn't do enough to prove he should start. Diarra showed potential and started to show results, but hasn't proven himself as a starter. Eason is a freshman and may not be worthy of more than 5-10 minutes per game in his first year.

There is a lot of room for a big to come in and get 20+ minutes per game. The question is does Brannen want to go that route? Based on his recruiting I suspect he is looking at playing Diarra at the 5 and playing a small ball 4.

Let’s be honest. Diarra had 3-4 good games. Maybe not even that. Vogt played well for 3 times that. His ceiling is definitely higher than vogts but I’m not ready to say he turned a corner and is going to be some kind of all league player. There is no evidence of that. Hopefully he can but I like to see it for at least a month straight first

 

[waterhead]

Diarra improved throughout the year. Vogt regressed.

Diarra's issues are correctable, Vogt is stuck being slow and unathletic.

Diarra played the important minutes over Vogt in the last two games of the season, had tournament been played this trend would likely have continued.

Diarra was the better player at the end of the year, given that he also has a much higher ceiling, there is no reason to assume he won't be the better player next year as well.

As Justin says, they may well start together. But if we go small, then Diarra should be the starter at the 5 over Vogt.

But on the original subject. Vogt has not proven he deserves to be the starter next year. There's no reason to think that Brannen would be telling a grad transfer big they'd only be getting bench minutes. Vogt had the opportunity and didn't do enough to prove he should start. Diarra showed potential and started to show results, but hasn't proven himself as a starter. Eason is a freshman and may not be worthy of more than 5-10 minutes per game in his first year.

There is a lot of room for a big to come in and get 20+ minutes per game. The question is does Brannen want to go that route? Based on his recruiting I suspect he is looking at playing Diarra at the 5 and playing a small ball 4.

I am not sure I would call Vogt's play a regression rather than other teams figured out he was killing it and started making a plan to deal with him. He would see doubles that he was not seeing early on. Commanding a double team is still valuable for the team. Dou never had to deal with that and if he did...would likely be a mess

Dou has ALWAYS had potential. The problem is he hasn't seemed mentally ready to fulfill it. Some coaches will value consistency over potential as you never know what you are going to get with the latter. I would LOVE nothing more than for Dou to realize his potential because the ceiling is very high especially if he can add another 10-20 lbs.

But let's not pretend a 3 game stretch at the end of the season is enough to show he will be anything close to consistent. But I sure hope he can put it together!

 

[Queens_NYC]

We (along with Xavier) didn't make the final 8 for Carlik Jones.

Louisville, West Virginia, Gonzaga, Maryland, Texas Tech, Michigan State, Marquette and Radford are the schools he's considering.

Hope we put the full court press on Tate now.

 

[kskenyon4]

Jadun Michael decommitted from Wichita State. We were on him before, and he said we have reached out. 4 star wing.

 

[sirthought]

I also think Vogt was just playing more minutes than he was in shape for. Losing that backup was tough. He was double teamed and tired.

I don't know if he'll become all conference ever, but I see him doing a lot to prepare for the next opportunity to move up in reliability.

 

[waterhead]

We (along with Xavier) didn't make the final 8 for Carlik Jones.

Louisville, West Virginia, Gonzaga, Maryland, Texas Tech, Michigan State, Marquette and Radford are the schools he's considering.

Hope we put the full court press on Tate now.

I wonder just how much effort we put in. Tate seems like a perfect fit so maybe we backed off a little or didn't show the level of interest other programs did.

There are a few players that are probably more talented than Tate out there but once you consider the familiarity with the coach and system...I am not sure that doesn't even it up a little compared to guys like Jones and Turner etc.

I would like to see a shooter on the wing but maybe CJB can fix Tate's woes from last year. I think the Madsens can give us some shooting if we are struggling

 

[cincyguy13]

I wonder just how much effort we put in. Tate seems like a perfect fit so maybe we backed off a little or didn't show the level of interest other programs did.

There are a few players that are probably more talented than Tate out there but once you consider the familiarity with the coach and system...I am not sure that doesn't even it up a little compared to guys like Jones and Turner etc.

I would like to see a shooter on the wing but maybe CJB can fix Tate's woes from last year. I think the Madsens can give us some shooting if we are struggling

Looks like jones wanted a big school based on his list. Can’t blame him. Probably the last time he will have every school in America wanting him to play.

As far as Tate, I don’t love his game but I think we are good on guards and wings. If he can help bridge the gap for a year, I’m all for it. I would like a scorer but with all the young guys we have, we could have multiple Guys be that. Never really know until they come in and play. We also have a top 50ish guy in Harvey that is healthy and a year in to the system. Could see a big jump from him.

 

[justinhub2003]

Looks like jones wanted a big school based on his list. Can’t blame him. Probably the last time he will have every school in America wanting him to play.

As far as Tate, I don’t love his game but I think we are good on guards and wings. If he can help bridge the gap for a year, I’m all for it. I would like a scorer but with all the young guys we have, we could have multiple Guys be that. Never really know until they come in and play. We also have a top 50ish guy in Harvey that is healthy and a year in to the system. Could see a big jump from him.

Tate to me is an ideal mick Cronin guard.

Just wish he shot better.


But this late, I’ll take him because he knows the system.