Hoops Recruitin' Lives And Learns
Lesson Learned
After Tyus Battle took the last available scholarship in the 2016 class only to decommit and cause Michigan to lose out on fellow five-star wing Josh Langford, it looked like John Beilein's strict adherence to not oversigning—even in the attrition-heavy environment of major conference college hoops—cost Michigan their shot at an elite wing, especially after they accepted the commitment of three-star Ibi Watson last week.
Sam Webb hinted in the wake of Watson commitment that was not, in fact, the case. When Webb broke the news that five-star wing Miles Bridges, a Flint native who plays for Huntington (WV) Prep, would visit on Monday, the picture became clear: Michigan is changing their recruiting tack and they're not done recruiting wings.
Michigan had been the only school in Bridges' top five not to offer him, since he hadn't taken a visit to Ann Arbor yet. That changed following Monday's visit, according to Webb. While Kentucky and Michigan State are the favorites to land Bridges, there's reason for optimism. Bridges is AAU teammates with top point guard target Cassius Winston, and they've mentioned a desire to play together in college. [Insert caveat about package deals here.]
This is a significant shift for Michigan, as it'd mark a change in Beilein's willingness to project attrition when recruiting. The Wolverines need a point guard in this class; it's expected commit Austin Davis will take a prep year and reclassify to 2017 to make room for one. There isn't an obvious way to make room for one more, but Beilein isn't exactly at risk of going Full Crean (never go Full Crean); with the logjam at the three and the four, plus the potential for a Zak Irvin breakout year, it'd be a surprise if every eligible member of this year's team was back in 2016-17.
It's a lesson learned the hard way, but it looks like Beilein took note of what happened with Battle and is making the requisite adjustments to his recruiting strategy.
[Hit THE JUMP for the rest of the roundup.]
Winston Sets Officials
@cassiuswinston official visit schedule: Stanford (8-7) Pittsburgh (8-30) Harvard (9-4 - tentative), Michigan St. (9-12) Michigan (9-19).
— Jeff Goodman (@GoodmanESPN) July 28, 2015
As you can see above, Michigan will get the final official visit for the aforementioned top-30 U-D Jesuit point guard Cassius Winston. While he's planning to take all five officials, this has long looked to be a Michigan-MSU battle, and he's been the primary focus of M's 2016 recruiting efforts for a while now.
The other point guard Michigan has offered this cycle, four-star KY PG Quentin Goodin, committed to Xavier last weekend. That doesn't mean Beilein lacks a backup plan. Four-star NJ PG Bryce Aiken recently named Michigan to his top six, though he's yet to set a visit. In a recent rundown of the July evaluation period, Dylan from UMHoops also mentioned three-star WI PG Te'Jon Lucas and top-50 OR PG Payton Pritchard, who decommitted from Oklahoma last month, as potential options.
There's also the chance that four-star SG Kevin Huerter, a 2016 recruit who could wind up reclassifying to 2017, has enough combo guard skills that Beilein would take him instead of a point guard. It seems more likely Michigan would push for him to reclassify, as Syracuse is doing with him.
More Ibi Watson
There wasn't a ton of scouting out there on Ibi Watson when he committed, so I figured I'd add some more here. Scout's Brian Snow posted a lengthy evaluation following his commitment ($):
As Watson gets more reps and more confidence in that jumper he could be someone who really takes off as a shooter going forward.
Also Watson brings solid size, he is a legit 6-foot-4 and maybe slightly taller, and versatility to the court. With that in mind he can play the shooting guard or small forward position on the offensive end, and also is a capable defender who should in time be more than adequate in that area, potentially even developing into someone who can be looked to lockdown an opponent’s top scorer.
As for areas for improvement, Snow mentioned a need to add toughness and aggressiveness. While he sees Watson as a redshirt candidate in need of significant development, he also notes the potential for him to turn into a go-to player down the road.
The Wolverine's Chris Balas caught up with Watson to get a self-evaluation ($):
"They like my versatility, my ability to shoot the ball," he said of college coaches. "The fact that when I'm aggressive, nobody can stop me … my ability to do everything.
"A lot of colleges say they think I can play the one through three offensively and defensively. I can shoot, drive, pass and do everything."
Beilein, though, wanted to see more aggressiveness before he offered, and Watson obliged. He was in attack mode most of the summer.
Considering Watson's breakout summer, the light may have come on in regards to his aggressiveness as a scorer.
He shoots with his left hand, and does pretty much EVERYTHING else - blocks, dunks, layups - with his right. I've never seen anything like that before in basketball.
That is odd... Even shoots some layups right handed that he could probably do much easier with his left. it's like he finishes right and shoots left. But I like what I see there.
Aaron Harrison with more hops.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
The Pistons' second round draft pick Darrun Hilliard is right handed but shoots with his left.
"As for his basketball skills, find someone else with this trait: Hilliard is right-handed in everything he does – eating, writing, throwing a football, even much of his skill set on the court including finishing at the rim. But he shoots left-handed.
Why? His father Darrun Sr. taught him to shoot that way as a boy, ostensibly to make him more confusing to defend:
“It all started with my dad, honestly," said Darrun II. "He put the ball in my hands at 5 years old. It was something I slowly fell in love with.”"
http://www.pennlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/02/darrun_hilliard_is_villanovas.html
I dropped into the comments to post that exact same thing. After a minute or so of watching I was confused as hell as to what his dominant hand was.
I think I saw someplace that Huerter isn't going for Syracuse's 2017 reclassify offer, so not sure he would do it for UM. Sounds like he wants to come in with the 2016 class.
Why did they tell Langford there was no room?
Is it really a 'change in tactic'? This implies that the staff saw the Langford/Battle situation as a lesson learned. If so, that seems exceedingly naive.
Honestly, I hope not. Perhaps that situation was misreported or misinterpreted. Maybe Langford was going elsewhere anyway. It is foolhardy to turn away a 5-star guy for the HOPE that you might get another 5-star guy, even considering positional need. It's not like Langford and Battle couldn't play together.
I feel like the mods on all the major sites have a really difficult time getting good intel on what's going on in the basketball program, especially with regard to recruiting.
There's a tendency to take the things these guys say as fact. Sometimes, probably most of the time, they are valid (especially Webb, who has a solid track record). But sometimes the coaches or program insiders may be spinning them, sometimes staff may not be telling them the whole story, and sometimes they just heard something from a guy who is tangentially involved with a recruit and wants to feel important so he tells a lie and the never-quenched thirst for more info and need to market their services overrides the insider's better judgement.
I have a hard time thinking this veteran intelligent coaching staff would be so naive as to change tactics based on one decommitment. I have a much easier time thinking a recruiting insider got a story wrong.
It may also be that - after Michigan told Langford they didn't have room for him - a current player gave the coaching staff reason to believe he won't be back next year.
But we've also read that they expect everyone else to be here in the upcoming season. It's hard to imagine what could have changed in the last few weeks that would make a guy who plans to be here next year NOT plan to be here the following year (Irvin's draft stock shooting up? Wagner planning to head back to Europe after 1 year? etc.) But you are right -- that's possible too.
Again, THAT seemes more likely than the coaches saying "so guys guess what I learned - it turns out a recruit might change his mind, so lets oversign OK?"
Perhaps Michigan saw 1 spot for PG, 1 spot for SG, and 1 spot for a wing forward all along. Couldn't they have planned to offer Bridges all along?
Bridges seems like a very different player than Watson/Battle/Langford.
Obviously, the ideal is to have Winston and Walton. But if Winston goes elsewhere what are you going to do - look for another sleeper PG or grab a versatile 4-star SG?
I think they could easily elect to wait for '17 on the PG and instead take Heurter (or another skilled guard) in 2016 if things fall through with Winston and backup plans like Pritchard/Lucas who will likely be gone by the time Winston decides.
If Walton is back in 2016-17, Michigan could get by with MAAR as the backup PG. We've seen the offense initiated through the SG spot before. MAAR has the defensive chops to guard opposing 1s. etc. Watson and another versatile guard could provide adequate support to offer enough playmaking and ball-handling to be an excellent team.
You can live without a point guard, true, but I don't think Michigan is really hurting for wings. Having a guy who can play with and deputize Walton for a year is more important than getting another combo type guard/wing. MAAR's a great secondary option, but I'd rather get the next guy to get the keys to the offense on campus sooner rather than later.
More than a PG they need some elite talent to go around the more complementary pieces - Robinsons, Dawkins, Rhakmans, and Doyles.
They'll have Walton back in 2016. After that things get very speculative as the only truely elite recruit Michigan has landed in recent years is Chatman.
Obviously you want both - an elite PG is the ideal fit, but the reality is that you might not land one. A lot of them don't want to spend a year being an apprentice to a senior starter. If the elite PGs (Winston, Pritchard, etc.) are off the board, for whatever reason, and elite wings remain on it (Heurter, Bridges, etc.) you go with talent over position.Then you try to find your next great PG in '17... It's a viable strategy for Michigan.
note: I don't think that Walton will be an obstacle to the '16 PG because he can clearly be an off-the-ball player too. Showed that when he played besides Nik and IMO he'll show it again when MIchigan plays him beside spike this coming season.
Yes, Michigan has had some recruiting misses, but I think the Beilein system requires intelligent ball handlers who can run the team. In a perfect world I want both elite talent and a point, but if I have to choose one for the remaining spot in this years class, I take a point guard now and forever. You need a straw that stirs the drink and point guards don't exactly grow on trees, whereas I think you can always find a wing who can play at the collegiate level.
Michigan/Beilein ran its offense primarily through Manny Harris and Nik Stauskas in years past, and had great success in doing so. We've seen Michigan do well with walk-ons and freshman at PG in the past. In other words, if my options for PG/SG are MAAR/another Stauskas vs another Spike/MAAR, I'll take the Stauskas (elite talent).
And to reiterate -- Michigan will still have Walton in '16. I'm not suggesting they go without a pure PG on the roster. I'm suggesting they can get by without a backup pure PG. If you miss for your cornerstone PG in '16 you can wait till the job is open in '17. Remember that Morris, Burke, and Walton all started as freshman. It's not ideal but that's how things go down sometimes.
either, neither was Morris, neither was Burke, and neither was Caris, yet Beilein still saw that ability within all of them, so I'm just gonna go ahead and trust that he knows what he's doing at this point.
For instance, you may not think Te'Jon Lucas is an elite talent, but people who've seen him play say that he is an elite passer, and has better quickness and athletic ability than Winston, despite being ranked lower. Who's to say he doesn't come to UM should Winston go elsewhere and prove to be Beilein's next great PG?
This isn't really about starz or not trusting Beilein. Quite the opposite. I'm saying the guys Beilein prioritized (like Langford, Battle, Heurter) should be taken instead of late-in-class additions. I'm not saying you have to recruit name guys and I'm not saying that Lucas isn't an elite player. I'm saying Beilein should trust his eye and not worry too much about positions.
If the Winston recruitment drags out far enough and guys like Lucas and Pritchard commit elsewhere but Heurter is still around Michigan should take Heurter.
We all love Spike (2 star) but there is a reason he sits behind Walton (4 star) and there's a reason the team struggled when Walton was hurt.
BTW Stauskas was a 4-star and a top 100 player. He was no sleeper. 'Elite' is semantics, but Stauskas was very well-regarded and (like Heurter) a priority early in the recruiting cycle (unlike LeVert, Burke, Dawkins, etc.)
I get what you're saying but given the pieces on the board and available right now, I think a point guard needs to be emphasized over a wing who is slightly higher rated, and I'd really rather not go into 2017 absolutely HAVING to nail down a point guard as that almost never works out in the good guys favor. It's a lot easier to find A capable wing later on than a capable point. I'd say the other point you're missing with Stauskas comparison and even with Harris is that it took both of them time to learn their handling and distribution responsibilities and you're not likely to see the same learning curve with a point.
Boiled down given the current recruiting board, I think the priority needs to be with the points, later on if the choice is between a relatively unknown project guy and a highly rated wing, then yeah, you go with the wing, but thats not really the choice on offer right now.
with Morris, with Burke, with Walton. While it's true that Beilein recruited Burke and Walton BEFORE he new the incumbant was gone, it could be argued that the knowing would be beneficial to recruiting. Given how Beilein's PGs have succeeded so far, I thinking handing over the keys to a recruit from day 1 would be a HUGE selling point...
I feeling like you're arguing both a sides a bit when you are talking about the short learning curve for PGs and then claiming it won't work well if we wait for Walton to graduate before getting a new PG. I think it can work. MAAR will be a junior next year, so he can have enough experience to play backup to Walton. Stauskas was a sophomore.
Below is a hypothetical list of top ball-handlers if you don't take a PG in '16 and instead take Heurter:
'16-17: Walton (SR), MAAR (JR), Heurter (FR), Watson (FR)
'17-18: '17 PG (FR), MAAR (SR), Heurter (SO), Watson (SO)
Both look a lot better with Winston of course, but neither is catastrophic.
I agree that PG is the target positon. I'm just saying that if Winston/Pritchard/Lucas don't work out the next step doesn't have to necessirly be to move on down to the 4th/5th/6th option at PG (or whatever is leftover at that time.) You can go with Heurter instead, if he's still on the board (and it doesn't sound like he is close to deciding anytime soon.)
I think the difference between the PG and SG could be more than a slight difference in talent. You could be talking about a 5-star kid (Jaylon Brown/Josh Langford) elite programs are fighting over vs a 2-star kid (Albrecht/MAAR/Dawkins) we steel from a mid-major.
The point is that Michigan already HAS 'capable'. What it needs is 'exceptional'. Being too tied to positional purity shouldn't come at the expense of talent.
This whole conversation is hopefully moot when Winston commits. If he doesn't it becomes more relevant.
I don't think it's arguing out of both sides at all to talk about a faster learning curve for a PG as to why I would prefer one. Look at it this way, under my preferred scenario, we have a second year PG running the O in 2017. Under your preferred scenario, we have a first year PG or what would in essence be an equivalent to a first year point guard running the offense. I think the offense runs better in the first scenario and gets you a more sustainable advantage than what you may or may not get from a one and done.
In any case we're starting to talk past each other and I'm out, but wanted to wrap up my point.
At least having a good one. Usually, not having a bona-fide PG on the floor results in more turnovers. Big guards just don't protect the ball as well. Also, the penetrating ability of a good PG result in more points typically.
"Michigan needs more talent more than another PG. More than a PG they need some elite talent to go around the more complementary pieces - Robinsons, Dawkins, Rhakmans, and Doyles.They'll have Walton back in 2016. After that things get very speculative as the only truely elite recruit Michigan has landed in recent years is Chatman.
I don't think that Walton will be an obstacle to the '16 PG because he can clearly be an off-the-ball player too. Showed that when he played besides Nik and IMO he'll show it again when MIchigan plays him beside spike this coming season."
Among the complementary players you mentioned Robinson might not have elite overall athletic talent, but he has an elite talent or skill at something specific to and pretty important in basketball called shooting. Allegedly better shooting than Stauskas, and according to a team manager who watched Nik for 2 years & Duncan for one, the best shooter he's ever seen. Combine that with his height, & if he can do it in games, and you have an unstoppable scoring machine.
Dawkins and Rhak have already shown elite talent right in front of your eyes, regardless of how they were ranked coming in. If you can't see it I'm not sure what the point of the discussion is for you. You form an opinion according to the rankings, but say that you don't, but yet you can't see the distinctions you're trying to talking about once you see them play.
How many guys have you seen with more athletic ability than Dawk? Who jumps better? Have you seen his dunks? How many better shooting strokes than his? He also showed quickness, a great drive or two when he finally tried and some good passes. He just needs playing time and to be more aggressive and work on his handle and he'll be unstoppable.
Rhak is amazing around the basket going to the hole, he's quick, can handle and can jitterbug his way to wherever he wants, he can pass and he can shoot and defend. He just didn't get enough time but he produces. He can be a force.
Doyle has all sorts of skills and moves around the basket, good rebounding & a good mid range shot, but wasn't strong enough, didn't jump high enough or quickly enough, and was inconsistent. However after just a month or so after the season he transformed his body, baby fat gone, tons of muscle added, lifting as much as J-Mo did as a senior he told me!
I'm sure he's done even more hard work since then. So the strength thing has been taken care of, which hopefully also improves his jumping and quickness and allows him to player longer and more consistently. If he works as hard on his moves and his whole game as he was in the weight room he'll be a hell of a player and a hell of a grinder/workhorse, even if he's not athletically an elite talent. He also has an enthusiastic and infectious personality, a great smile and super nice, so that's got to make him a great teammate.
You singled out Chatman as the one recent elite talent but each of the 4 "complimentary" players had far better years with much more production and by and large showed more skills and abilities than he did up until the final 3 or 4 games of the regular season when he finally started to show some of what he can do. That only came after infinitely more minutes and chances than the frosh guards had (& actually after finally sitting and watching for a while!)
You also mentioned in another post something to the effect of "that's why we see Walton playing over Spike, a 2 star" regarding his allegedly greater talent, yet you admit that Spike will play point over him when they're both on the court. So if your definition of greater talent is more important in running the team than pure point guard skill then why is he moving off the ball when Spike is in? Why would Spike ever come in other than to spell him since Spike isn't going to play shooting guard?
As for areas for improvement, Snow mentioned a need to add toughness and aggressiveness. While he sees Watson as a redshirt candidate in need of significant development, he also notes the potential for him to turn into a go-to player down the road.
Reminds me of Caris, although Watson seems to have a more developed game in high school. Either way, I'm really excited to see him in year 2 under Beilein.
August 5th, 2015 at 10:05 PM ^
do want
August 6th, 2015 at 12:19 PM ^
Comments