05-14-2021, 11:10 AM
Nice signing. Plenty of room in the starting lineup for 2021 if he is ready.
Men's Hoops Recruiting Class of 2021
05-14-2021, 02:25 PM
(05-14-2021, 10:58 AM)BobK Wrote: This is outstanding. Is he one abd done.
Just kidding. I hope
He'll have to stay in college for more than one year if he wants to be an astrophysicist ;-)
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
(05-14-2021, 10:58 AM)BobK Wrote: This is outstanding. Is he one abd done.
Just kidding. I hope
He'll have to stay in college for more than one year if he wants to be an astrophysicist ;-)
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
05-14-2021, 03:19 PM
Nice looking shot and good handle. Moves well, and of course, you can't teach 7 ft (or 2.13 m, him being from France and all). But I would like to see him be more physical, and I didn't see a single blocked shot in that entire highlight reel. Looks like he will be a bit of a project.
BC
BC
Nice looking shot and good handle. Moves well, and of course, you can't teach 7 ft (or 2.13 m, him being from France and all). But I would like to see him be more physical, and I didn't see a single blocked shot in that entire highlight reel. Looks like he will be a bit of a project.
BC
BC
05-14-2021, 06:03 PM
Kind of disappointing to see a highlight reel of a 7-footer without a single rejection. But always want to see a big guy move well and have some sort of a shooting touch like is on display in that video.
Kind of disappointing to see a highlight reel of a 7-footer without a single rejection. But always want to see a big guy move well and have some sort of a shooting touch like is on display in that video.
05-14-2021, 10:19 PM
I like what I see... An anti-stiff 7-footer. I'll take it and be real happy if he can be as good as senior year Nasty (Stefan N) by his sophomore year.
(05-14-2021, 10:19 PM)PVTree Wrote: I like what I see... An anti-stiff 7-footer. I'll take it and be real happy if he can be as good as senior year Nasty (Stefan N) by his sophomore year.
This kid definitely seems to move better than Nastic did and has more range on his shot. But, yes, Nastic was solid his senior season so if this kid is that productive his sophomore year...and improves from there, that wouldn't be a bad deal.
(This post was last modified: 05-14-2021, 10:40 PM by Brickcity.)
(05-14-2021, 10:19 PM)PVTree Wrote: I like what I see... An anti-stiff 7-footer. I'll take it and be real happy if he can be as good as senior year Nasty (Stefan N) by his sophomore year.
This kid definitely seems to move better than Nastic did and has more range on his shot. But, yes, Nastic was solid his senior season so if this kid is that productive his sophomore year...and improves from there, that wouldn't be a bad deal.
05-15-2021, 01:39 PM
He moves well,actually has a handle, and can shoot the three. Question. Can he jump?
PS: I think I remember Fitzmorris hitting some threes in HS.
PS: I think I remember Fitzmorris hitting some threes in HS.
He moves well,actually has a handle, and can shoot the three. Question. Can he jump?
PS: I think I remember Fitzmorris hitting some threes in HS.
PS: I think I remember Fitzmorris hitting some threes in HS.
05-15-2021, 08:07 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-15-2021, 08:08 PM by BostonCard.)
More…
[tweet]https://twitter.com/cbb_europe/status/1393502704220188674?s=21[/tweet]
Again, no blocks though.
BC
[tweet]https://twitter.com/cbb_europe/status/1393502704220188674?s=21[/tweet]
Again, no blocks though.
BC
(This post was last modified: 05-15-2021, 08:08 PM by BostonCard.)
More…
[tweet]https://twitter.com/cbb_europe/status/1393502704220188674?s=21[/tweet]
Again, no blocks though.
BC
[tweet]https://twitter.com/cbb_europe/status/1393502704220188674?s=21[/tweet]
Again, no blocks though.
BC
05-15-2021, 08:08 PM
OK, a 46% 3-pt FG% is completely not possible unless the sample size is small, but still, anybody who ever shoots enough 3s to have a 46% make percentage at any time, has to be considered a credible outside shooter.
OK, a 46% 3-pt FG% is completely not possible unless the sample size is small, but still, anybody who ever shoots enough 3s to have a 46% make percentage at any time, has to be considered a credible outside shooter.
05-15-2021, 11:43 PM
He averaged 1.5 blocks in the 2020 Valencia ANGT tourney, so he obviously can block shots. But who even needs blocked shots when Raynaud's phenomenon is clearly caused when his presence on the court leads to the cold, numb shooting hands of our opponents?
05-16-2021, 08:03 AM
(05-15-2021, 11:43 PM)scorecard Wrote: He averaged 1.5 blocks in the 2020 Valencia ANGT tourney, so he obviously can block shots. But who even needs blocked shots when Raynaud's phenomenon is clearly caused when his presence on the court leads to the cold, numb shooting hands of our opponents?
The clips do not focus on his defense where one would expect to see blocks. They are all about his offensive and passing skills. One thing I really like is that he never brings the ball down where the little guys can get at it. Every rebound he touches goes right back up from where he caught it. He shows great timing on some alley oops plays and clearly has a nice outside shot. Only 18, a year in a college weight room will help him. In some clips he shows a willingness to set screens. Looks pretty well coached. Doesn't appear to have the build to support Brook Lopez size
(05-15-2021, 11:43 PM)scorecard Wrote: He averaged 1.5 blocks in the 2020 Valencia ANGT tourney, so he obviously can block shots. But who even needs blocked shots when Raynaud's phenomenon is clearly caused when his presence on the court leads to the cold, numb shooting hands of our opponents?
The clips do not focus on his defense where one would expect to see blocks. They are all about his offensive and passing skills. One thing I really like is that he never brings the ball down where the little guys can get at it. Every rebound he touches goes right back up from where he caught it. He shows great timing on some alley oops plays and clearly has a nice outside shot. Only 18, a year in a college weight room will help him. In some clips he shows a willingness to set screens. Looks pretty well coached. Doesn't appear to have the build to support Brook Lopez size
(05-15-2021, 08:08 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: OK, a 46% 3-pt FG% is completely not possible unless the sample size is small, but still, anybody who ever shoots enough 3s to have a 46% make percentage at any time, has to be considered a credible outside shooter.
I took a look at Raynaud's league game log and here are the numbers. In 10 games:
3pt: 6/13 (46%)
FTs: 18/23 (78%)
So yes, small sample size, but he was consistently shooting 1-2 long balls per game according to the game log. Pretty much exactly backs up your point.
The free throws, while also a somewhat small sample size, are encouraging because:
1. FT% is known to generally coincide with overall shooting ability.
2. Our current bigs are just awful at them.
(FWIW I count Murrell as a stretch 4 a la Delaire, not a pure big. Murrell was 16-16 on FTs, which led the nation in most FTs without a miss.)
(This post was last modified: 05-17-2021, 11:35 AM by SamuelMcF.)
(05-15-2021, 08:08 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: OK, a 46% 3-pt FG% is completely not possible unless the sample size is small, but still, anybody who ever shoots enough 3s to have a 46% make percentage at any time, has to be considered a credible outside shooter.
I took a look at Raynaud's league game log and here are the numbers. In 10 games:
3pt: 6/13 (46%)
FTs: 18/23 (78%)
So yes, small sample size, but he was consistently shooting 1-2 long balls per game according to the game log. Pretty much exactly backs up your point.
The free throws, while also a somewhat small sample size, are encouraging because:
1. FT% is known to generally coincide with overall shooting ability.
2. Our current bigs are just awful at them.
(FWIW I count Murrell as a stretch 4 a la Delaire, not a pure big. Murrell was 16-16 on FTs, which led the nation in most FTs without a miss.)
05-17-2021, 11:38 AM
With 13 shots, the 95% confidence interval for his three point shooting is 20.4 - 73.9%.
A 30% three point shooter would make at least 6/13 shots about 22% of the time.
BC
A 30% three point shooter would make at least 6/13 shots about 22% of the time.
BC
With 13 shots, the 95% confidence interval for his three point shooting is 20.4 - 73.9%.
A 30% three point shooter would make at least 6/13 shots about 22% of the time.
BC
A 30% three point shooter would make at least 6/13 shots about 22% of the time.
BC
05-17-2021, 11:57 AM
(05-17-2021, 11:28 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote: (FWIW I count Murrell as a stretch 4 a la Delaire, not a pure big. Murrell was 16-16 on FTs, which led the nation in most FTs without a miss.)
Murrell was only 3-12 on 3's this year, but he was 5-8 on mid-range shots, which is another positive indicator. Small sample size, but no one else on the team was over 50% from mid-range.
Murrell's shot looks very smooth, and I think he will eventually be an excellent shooter from the field.
(05-17-2021, 11:28 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote: (FWIW I count Murrell as a stretch 4 a la Delaire, not a pure big. Murrell was 16-16 on FTs, which led the nation in most FTs without a miss.)
Murrell was only 3-12 on 3's this year, but he was 5-8 on mid-range shots, which is another positive indicator. Small sample size, but no one else on the team was over 50% from mid-range.
Murrell's shot looks very smooth, and I think he will eventually be an excellent shooter from the field.
05-22-2021, 11:13 AM
I have questions for those who follow college hoops recruiting closely.
How are the G League's inroads into the top echelon of basketball prospect talent changing the landscape of college basketball recruiting, college basketball in general, and Stanford in specific?
My perception as a casual observer is the best players are increasingly opting for professional development as opposed to amateur in college. If this is the case, it seems more players who choose college will be doing so because they want the education/college experience. This doesn't mean the "blue bloods" won't land good players, it just means they won't be landing the players - at least not as many of them - who are far superior than the majority population of college players. This will create more parity in the sport.
Is this a reasonable picture of reality, or is it more like a relative few will opt for pros instead of college, but not enough to make any real material difference for college basketball, and Stanford specifically?
How are the G League's inroads into the top echelon of basketball prospect talent changing the landscape of college basketball recruiting, college basketball in general, and Stanford in specific?
My perception as a casual observer is the best players are increasingly opting for professional development as opposed to amateur in college. If this is the case, it seems more players who choose college will be doing so because they want the education/college experience. This doesn't mean the "blue bloods" won't land good players, it just means they won't be landing the players - at least not as many of them - who are far superior than the majority population of college players. This will create more parity in the sport.
Is this a reasonable picture of reality, or is it more like a relative few will opt for pros instead of college, but not enough to make any real material difference for college basketball, and Stanford specifically?
I have questions for those who follow college hoops recruiting closely.
How are the G League's inroads into the top echelon of basketball prospect talent changing the landscape of college basketball recruiting, college basketball in general, and Stanford in specific?
My perception as a casual observer is the best players are increasingly opting for professional development as opposed to amateur in college. If this is the case, it seems more players who choose college will be doing so because they want the education/college experience. This doesn't mean the "blue bloods" won't land good players, it just means they won't be landing the players - at least not as many of them - who are far superior than the majority population of college players. This will create more parity in the sport.
Is this a reasonable picture of reality, or is it more like a relative few will opt for pros instead of college, but not enough to make any real material difference for college basketball, and Stanford specifically?
How are the G League's inroads into the top echelon of basketball prospect talent changing the landscape of college basketball recruiting, college basketball in general, and Stanford in specific?
My perception as a casual observer is the best players are increasingly opting for professional development as opposed to amateur in college. If this is the case, it seems more players who choose college will be doing so because they want the education/college experience. This doesn't mean the "blue bloods" won't land good players, it just means they won't be landing the players - at least not as many of them - who are far superior than the majority population of college players. This will create more parity in the sport.
Is this a reasonable picture of reality, or is it more like a relative few will opt for pros instead of college, but not enough to make any real material difference for college basketball, and Stanford specifically?
05-22-2021, 11:49 AM
OF, you should factor in the impact of foreign players. If college coaches cannot get the elite US players, they go after top foreign talent. This is what has happened in sports like tennis. We see it in college hoops now with teams like Gonzaga, but it may become more prevalent.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
OF, you should factor in the impact of foreign players. If college coaches cannot get the elite US players, they go after top foreign talent. This is what has happened in sports like tennis. We see it in college hoops now with teams like Gonzaga, but it may become more prevalent.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
05-22-2021, 12:22 PM
(05-22-2021, 11:49 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: OF, you should factor in the impact of foreign players. If college coaches cannot get the elite US players, they go after top foreign talent. This is what has happened in sports like tennis. We see it in college hoops now with teams like Gonzaga, but it may become more prevalent.
Watching College Cup soccer it is very clearly obvious all the top programs are getting international players.
(05-22-2021, 11:49 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: OF, you should factor in the impact of foreign players. If college coaches cannot get the elite US players, they go after top foreign talent. This is what has happened in sports like tennis. We see it in college hoops now with teams like Gonzaga, but it may become more prevalent.
Watching College Cup soccer it is very clearly obvious all the top programs are getting international players.
05-22-2021, 03:06 PM
(05-22-2021, 12:22 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Watching College Cup soccer it is very clearly obvious all the top programs are getting international players.True, but mostly for different reasons IMHO. There is lots more overseas talent in soccer than there is USA native talent. In basketball, it is still the other way around. However, there are enough elite basketball players in the rest of the world to make recruiting them attractive. For the players, coming to the USA to get an education and play basketball is a reasonable path to the NBA. I doubt you can get an H-1 to play in the G league.
(05-22-2021, 12:22 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Watching College Cup soccer it is very clearly obvious all the top programs are getting international players.True, but mostly for different reasons IMHO. There is lots more overseas talent in soccer than there is USA native talent. In basketball, it is still the other way around. However, there are enough elite basketball players in the rest of the world to make recruiting them attractive. For the players, coming to the USA to get an education and play basketball is a reasonable path to the NBA. I doubt you can get an H-1 to play in the G league.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »