Initial thoughts on Caupain/Johnson verbals

[bearcat jeff]

I was elated to hear of the Troy Caupain commit. He gives UC a pg with toughness, scoring ability and he can kill you at the line. Troy can also move over and be a legitimate threat from the wing by either shooting or driving to the rack. This kid loves contact and knows how to finish.

Caupain has a good handle and above average speed with the ball in his hand. He can be pesty on defense and steal the ball but like most players will have an adjustment to playing team defense at the high D1 level. His size and athleticism should help him in the transition. He is a superb rebounder fron the guard spot and gives you those intangibles you like in a lead guard.

Kevin Johnson will give UC a combo guard with a smooth stroke. He is deadly from mid-range and scores with a nice floater in the lane. He has the skills to make him a very good defender and is coachable. Like Caupain he has excellent ball speed and he is very good at using changes of speed to get in the lane or create a shot.

By signing him Mick has landed who I believe is the premiere player in the city. He has proven again he has an excellent eye for underrated talented. I can see both these guy in the top 100 or at worst the top 150. Kevin Johnson has had a good spring but Troy was slowed with some injuries but still managed to garner the co-MVP at the Big Shots DC event.

These two give Cincinnati a very solid guard combo into the future. Their early verbal also allows UC to concentrate on low post players and a SF. The 2013 class is off to an excellent start.

 

[bearcat18]

Good post, Jeff.

I know Mick's primary defense is man-to-man, but our 2-3 zone was very effective last year. Adding two 6"3' guards could make for a tough zone with our length on the perimeter in the coming years. They both also rebound well, which is huge when you want to play zone since rebounding is toughest when you play zone. Not to mention Ge'lawn and Jeremiah rebound well too.

 

[cincycpaw]

I really like the early commitments. Love the freed up recruiting time with so many more schollys to give. I think that can't be stressed enough as a big win for the coaching staff.

 

[Scheids21]

Feels like forever since we've had commits this early and it feels good. Aside from a couple shockers, not much more you can ask for from these two pickups.

 

[Eternal E]

The future is truly bright. Cincinnati is a probably 1 or 2 elite guys away from being a serious contender (Elite 8 and on).

 

[Thegreatone]

I have always subscribed to the thought that you get solid gaurds and develop them and you try to get your big name recruits to be in the post.

 

[TheLongHaul]

I have always subscribed to the thought that you get solid gaurds and develop them and you try to get your big name recruits to be in the post.

Unfortunately there are only a few elite post players in each class and the top schools get those guys. While there aren't a great deal of top PG's, they are of a greater quantity than big men. And big time SG's and SF's are all over the place. IMO it's better to get big men and develop them since you can't teach size.

 

[Eternal E]

I have always subscribed to the thought that you get solid gaurds and develop them and you try to get your big name recruits to be in the post.

You have it completely backwards. Due to the nature of AAU ball it is very rare that a big man comes in ready to contribute, they usually develop by their latter two years.

 

[Bearcat04]

I really like the approach in recruiting. The comparison has been mentioned before, but Mick is building the program very much like Jamie Dixon at Pitt. Going after 4-year guys that fit the system that will progress to be the next wave in. I like that you always end up with upperclassmen starters that have been in the program for a few years and they already know what it takes to play winning basketball. Caupain and Johnson are welcomed additions for the future of the program.

 

[Nomadic1]

Unfortunately there are only a few elite post players in each class and the top schools get those guys. While there aren't a great deal of top PG's, they are of a greater quantity than big men. And big time SG's and SF's are all over the place. IMO it's better to get big men and develop them since you can't teach size.

I think it's a judgement call.
There's a line, where potential and risk can be justifiably put forth in the recruiting of someone. I think Sometimes though, having a big who acts like he's never played basketball before, just isn't worth it.
Competing above all else.

 

[dp3113]

I really like the approach in recruiting. The comparison has been mentioned before, but Mick is building the program very much like Jamie Dixon at Pitt. Going after 4-year guys that fit the system that will progress to be the next wave in. I like that you always end up with upperclassmen starters that have been in the program for a few years and they already know what it takes to play winning basketball. Caupain and Johnson are welcomed additions for the future of the program.

he is definitely, and pretty openly, modeling the program like howland and dixon did at pitt.

hopefully we have more success in march than pitt has. dixon is not well received anymore by many pitt fans because of this.

 

[TheLongHaul]

I really like the approach in recruiting. The comparison has been mentioned before, but Mick is building the program very much like Jamie Dixon at Pitt. Going after 4-year guys that fit the system that will progress to be the next wave in. I like that you always end up with upperclassmen starters that have been in the program for a few years and they already know what it takes to play winning basketball. Caupain and Johnson are welcomed additions for the future of the program.

No offense but the Jamie Dixon model at Pitt has to be one of the most used lines on this board that just frankly isn't correct. Dixon isn't going after four year guys. He is going after the best players he can get. Same with Mick. Doesn't mean they are following the Calipari model but they aren't recruiting under some system that says if a player has potential to leave early they won't recruit him.

Dante Taylor was a 5* recruit ranked in the top 15 in 2009.
Khem Birch was a 5* recruit ranked in the top 10 in 2011.
Steven Adams is a 5* recruit ranked in the top 5 in 2012.

Pitt obviously recruits elite players and potential one and done players. They of course recruit to their style as does Mick, but they both are trying to get the best players possible.

 

[Bearcat04]

No offense but the Jamie Dixon model at Pitt has to be one of the most used lines on this board that just frankly isn't correct. Dixon isn't going after four year guys. He is going after the best players he can get. Same with Mick. Doesn't mean they are following the Calipari model but they aren't recruiting under some system that says if a player has potential to leave early they won't recruit him.

Dante Taylor was a 5* recruit ranked in the top 15 in 2009.
Khem Birch was a 5* recruit ranked in the top 10 in 2011.
Steven Adams is a 5* recruit ranked in the top 5 in 2012.

Pitt obviously recruits elite players and potential one and done players. They of course recruit to their style as does Mick, but they both are trying to get the best players possible.

That is three guys since 2003.

Taylor has been a bust, Birch transferred, and we have yet to see what Adams has to offer. The success of the Pitt program has been built on 3-star players and guys ranked outside of the top 50.

 

[Eternal E]

No offense but the Jamie Dixon model at Pitt has to be one of the most used lines on this board that just frankly isn't correct. Dixon isn't going after four year guys. He is going after the best players he can get. Same with Mick. Doesn't mean they are following the Calipari model but they aren't recruiting under some system that says if a player has potential to leave early they won't recruit him.

Dante Taylor was a 5* recruit ranked in the top 15 in 2009.
Khem Birch was a 5* recruit ranked in the top 10 in 2011.
Steven Adams is a 5* recruit ranked in the top 5 in 2012.

Pitt obviously recruits elite players and potential one and done players. They of course recruit to their style as does Mick, but they both are trying to get the best players possible.

He only began serious pursuing and getting involved with those top kids very recently (as you mentioned those are in the last 3 years). The model Cronin is following is very similar, Cincinnati had 5* recruit in 2007 and 2009 too, does that mean most of the roster isn't comprised of solid 4 year players?

 

[dp3113]

He only began serious pursuing and getting involved with those top kids very recently (as you mentioned those are in the last 3 years). The model Cronin is following is very similar, Cincinnati had 5* recruit in 2007 and 2009 too, does that mean most of the roster isn't comprised of solid 4 year players?

agreed. both programs are player development programs. they are winning primarily because they are getting capable players in and improving them in the aim to have veteran upperclassmen every year. that doesn't mean there aren't outliers or exceptions- i.e. pitt or uc will never get a top recruit- it just means the primary focus of the program is four year guys.

 

[TheLongHaul]

That is three guys since 2003.

Taylor has been a bust, Birch transferred, and we have yet to see what Adams has to offer. The success of the Pitt program has been built on 3-star players and guys ranked outside of the top 50.

And you think it's coincidence that the better and more established Pitt has become, the more elite players they have gotten.

It doesn't matter how they've done since they've gotten to college, the fact of the matter is Dixon has tried to get the elite players who have had one and done potential. I agree he has built his program on the lower ranked players, but my point is it wasn't necessarily by choice. Same with Mick. He went after Teague as hard as he has ever gone after a recruit and he was a one and done player. You really think that if Mick builds this program into an elite program that he won't go after more one or two and done players? Mick isn't an idiot, he knows that his chances of landing a recruit are much higher if he goes after the kids that are being recruited by similar programs. I guarantee you he'd go after Jbari Parker if he thought he stood a chance.

agreed. both programs are player development programs. they are winning primarily because they are getting capable players in and improving them in the aim to have veteran upperclassmen every year. that doesn't mean there aren't outliers or exceptions- i.e. pitt or uc will never get a top recruit- it just means the primary focus of the program is four year guys.

as opposed to who? West Virginia, Xavier, Michigan, Missouri, and just about every other team that isn't an elite program? Obviously the primary focus of the program isn't going after one and done's. It'd be impossible, they would never get any recruits. But the whole "Mick goes after 3* players" because he'd rather have a lesser talented guy who will stay four years vs a higher talented player who may leave early is ridiculous and I'm shocked that so many people believe this.

 

[Eternal E]

as opposed to who? West Virginia, Xavier, Michigan, Missouri, and just about every other team that isn't an elite program? Obviously the primary focus of the program isn't going after one and done's. It'd be impossible, they would never get any recruits. But the whole "Mick goes after 3* players" because he'd rather have a lesser talented guy who will stay four years vs a higher talented player who may leave early is ridiculous and I'm shocked that so many people believe this.

Who believes that? it is more like Mick realizes he is less likely to land a plethora of 5* guys, not that he won't pursue them.

 

[dp3113]

And you think it's coincidence that the better and more established Pitt has become, the more elite players they have gotten.

It doesn't matter how they've done since they've gotten to college, the fact of the matter is Dixon has tried to get the elite players who have had one and done potential. I agree he has built his program on the lower ranked players, but my point is it wasn't necessarily by choice. Same with Mick. He went after Teague as hard as he has ever gone after a recruit and he was a one and done player. You really think that if Mick builds this program into an elite program that he won't go after more one or two and done players? Mick isn't an idiot, he knows that his chances of landing a recruit are much higher if he goes after the kids that are being recruited by similar programs. I guarantee you he'd go after Jbari Parker if he thought he stood a chance.




as opposed to who? West Virginia, Xavier, Michigan, Missouri, and just about every other team that isn't an elite program? Obviously the primary focus of the program isn't going after one and done's. It'd be impossible, they would never get any recruits. But the whole "Mick goes after 3* players" because he'd rather have a lesser talented guy who will stay four years vs a higher talented player who may leave early is ridiculous and I'm shocked that so many people believe this.

no its more that mick is going to try to become an elite team in the big east by doing what pitt did. pitt rose up from mediocrity to a year in and year out big east power. the other elite teams in the big east- cuse, uconn, louisville, etc. are routinely getting mcdonalds all americans and have more player turnover because often times their best players are leaving the programs quicker as early entrants. pitt however became the "veteran team" that always had upperclassmen, who were tough and played together and beat teams with significantly more talent night in and night out. they do not have a team of lottery picks/first round nba talent, but outside of this last year, they have been a constant amongst the big east elite for the past decade.

so instead of wasting his time trying to recruit 5 star players, which more often than not has not been able to land, he attempts to bring in lower rated players with less fanfare in the attempt to develop them. i am not saying he prefers less talented players. i am saying that instead of recruiting and trying to get a bunch of one or two year guys as their means to get on top of the league and amassing the most talent, they are recruiting players with less fanfare that fit their system and attempting to develop them over. again, not saying they don't want talented players, just saying they know they can't go out and beat all those elite schools right now for recruits, so they have focused their efforts elsewhere. and as for the whole "player development program" line- those are mick's words, which he regularly calls the program on tv spots, his fs-ohio show, radio show, etc.

 

[BearcatAlum1]

I have always subscribed to the thought that you get solid gaurds and develop them and you try to get your big name recruits to be in the post.

100% agree.

 

[Bearcat04]

no its more that mick is going to try to become an elite team in the big east by doing what pitt did. pitt rose up from mediocrity to a year in and year out big east power. the other elite teams in the big east- cuse, uconn, louisville, etc. are routinely getting mcdonalds all americans and have more player turnover because often times their best players are leaving the programs quicker as early entrants. pitt however became the "veteran team" that always had upperclassmen, who were tough and played together and beat teams with significantly more talent night in and night out. they do not have a team of lottery picks/first round nba talent, but outside of this last year, they have been a constant amongst the big east elite for the past decade.

so instead of wasting his time trying to recruit 5 star players, which more often than not has not been able to land, he attempts to bring in lower rated players with less fanfare in the attempt to develop them. i am not saying he prefers less talented players. i am saying that instead of recruiting and trying to get a bunch of one or two year guys as their means to get on top of the league and amassing the most talent, they are recruiting players with less fanfare that fit their system and attempting to develop them over. again, not saying they don't want talented players, just saying they know they can't go out and beat all those elite schools right now for recruits, so they have focused their efforts elsewhere. and as for the whole "player development program" line- those are mick's words, which he regularly calls the program on tv spots, his fs-ohio show, radio show, etc.

Well said!

In no way is Mick seeking out lesser talented players, rather it's that he sees the merit in reeling in the diamond in the roughs as opposed to playing chase with the current powers of college basketball at this point. Not to say that Mick can't eventually get there, because Pitt finally did, but I'd rather realistically build a team with system guys than just sign guys because their rankings make a signing class look better.

TheLongHaul, I respect your opinion on this board, so I'm glad that you initially brought up Taylor, Birch, and Adams. It's because Dixon continued a strong foundation of recruiting system players and developing great teams that his program was finally able to land 5-star players after seven years of success. To say that Mick is following Dixon's model is a complement. Like Dixon, Mick sees this as a sound, stable way to build a winning foundation that'll eventually attract top players. Mick's current philosophy is not set in stone, it is simply a means to an end.