Bitter Fan Base

Of the NBA level recruits I only count 2 that left too early (Avery Bradley and PJ Tucker). Avery Bradley is the only one I'd trade for a less talented player who stayed longer. If you ignore the Findlay Prep kids, how many of our NBA-level recruits would you trade in for a solid 4 year college player (i.e. Gary Johnson or AJ)?

Damion James - surprisingly stayed 4 years. He sure looked like a one and done when he switched to Texas. Barnes privately told people that he thought DJ would be drafted above KD before their freshman years. He probably would have been a first rounder after any of his 4 seasons. Great recruit.

Dexter Pittman - stayed 4 years, probably a good decision. He could have have left based on his tourney play his Junior year. I think he helped his stock to stick around.

*Avery Bradley - left after 1 mediocre year. He could have stayed and improved his stock; he clearly wanted no part of college. Hindsight is 20/20, but I think Texas would pass if they could do that one over.

DJ Augustin - stayed 2 years. Was a lottery pick. He didn't have the look of one and done as a recruit and he didn't leave too early. I'll take two years of DJ Augustin on my team any day.

Kevin Durant - No brainer. I wouldn't change anything. We got to watch one of the best ever for a year.

Lamarcus Aldridge - Eh, I'll give that a non-ringing endorsement. Great player, made the right decision, represents UT well.... I'm not sure that I'd take his two years over Gary Johnson's 4 years. Its close. Injuries make that unfair though.

Boobie Gibson - It seemed like he left early at the time, but a good choice in hind sight. He had a team committed to him and he was put in a position to succeed in the NBA. I loved him at UT and am glad he came. I'll take 2 years of Boobie Gibson at Texas over 4 years of AJ or Jai Lucas.

PJ Tucker - left too early. I still can't figure out why he did that. I'd recruit him again though. He was my favorite player for 3 years.

TJ Ford - Left after 2 years, made the right choice to leave, my favorite UT player of all time.... No way anyone is arguing that we shouldn't be recruiting the TJ Fords of the world.

Royal Ivey - maybe makes a good case for recruiting more "non-NBA" level recruits. But for every Royal, I point to Shawn Williams, Dion Dowell, or Harrison Barnes. Role player recruits that didn't pan out.
 
Great analysis Nic. Thumbs up.

As for PJ, I'm sure an extra year (whether at the 3 or 4) might have helped him get into the 1st round. I don't think anyone had him as a 1st round lock when he declared.
 
After reading Nic's post, I am even less excited about the future. His laundry list is fairly spot on, which means we can probably expect a continuation of the recent experience with UT basketball~~sigh~~
 
I admit...I am bitter. I believe that Gary Johnson did more for our team in his 4 years that Hamliton, Thompson and Joseph did in their 4 years combined.

Give me more Gary Johnson's and James and leave those one and doners for someone else.

Hell, even Perry Jones came back for one more year. He sure as hell would have been drafted ahead of Joseph.

I wonder what would have happened to Miles' NBA career if he had come here for two years before joing the Jazz. Bet he would have had a role on the Jazz a lot quicker than he did.
 
Nic you list all those players but the fact remains that we have a habit as of late of being a one n done in the tourney or even a first round exit.

I don't care about watching a future NBA first round player for one year at TX. I care about The Horns winning a national title.

The NCAA & NBA needs to institue a rule that says you have to stay 3 years in college if you go the college route. It will improve the college game and probably the NBA game as well.
 
"I wonder what would have happened to Miles' NBA career if he had come here for two years before joing the Jazz. Bet he would have had a role on the Jazz a lot quicker than he did."

Doubtful. Unless you're subtracting the time he would have spent in college.
 
don't believe that I used the words "hate the players who leave after 1 year. I believe the point was recruit players that will be around 2 or 3 years.

The program would have been better of.

On C J Miles, He basically rode the bench for the first three or four years. Just wondered if his skill level, and hense his draft postion might have been a lot higher with a couple of years in college ball.. If that's the case, he would have made more money quicker and played a lot more.

I don't know the answer, it was just a question. I would rather he went right out of high school than to be a one and done here.
 
Name the teams who win the tournament with one and done players. Kentucky can't seem to accomplish this. Who has?
Is the last team to win it all with a one-year superstar Syracuse with Carmello Anthony? Or have there been any others?
This year was the perfect illustration, as one team after another fell to the "mid-majors" who were not able to get the one and doners, but had rosters of good players, many of whom stayed until their seniors seasons.
 
UConn had three freshman starters. The only seniors on the team were role players who maybe picked up 5 minutes like Wangmene.

The whole one-and-done thing is still pretty new. Unless the NBA changes the rule some time soon, I have a feeling we'll see a lot more champions with young teams like UConn.
 
old65horn,

Not sure what you're trying to say. CJ Miles did go straight to Utah from high school He wasn't a one and done, he never showed up....
 
2222horn

, I knew Miles went straight to the Jazz out of high school. I thought I said he only saw limited minutes in his first 4 or 5 years as a pro. Very limited minutes and scoring.

I was wondering if he could have made a much bigger, quicker, impact in the NBA if he had two years of college to develope his skills. I don't know the answer to that.

A couple of poster here could do a better job of addressing that issue, but I cannot.

It was a question. Would he have been better to have spent at least a couple of years in college.
 
So basically, CJ got pretty slim minutes his first three years in the league while he developed. He was kind of forced into action because of the depth Utah had at swingman. Now he's a pretty decent role player.

The question is whether coming to UT for 2-3 years would have had the same effect on his career. I've said in other posts that basketball is more about how an individual plays his role as part of the group, and not how a "unit" determines success like football. I honestly think he'd be in the same spot right now had he come to Texas... maybe even not as good because the NBA doesn't limit the amount of coaching you can receive in the offseason. Plus, there's no way he gets a $3.7 million salary right out of Texas like he got from his 2nd contract on Utah. So he's tons richer without having attended college.

I have no doubt that he could have helped our team right when Durant was getting here. But winning in college is a lot different than being a professional.
 
Thanks Bob, looks like he made the right decision.

My gripe is not with the kids whether they go after one year or not. Thry have to do what's best for them.

I want us to start recruiting players who will be around for three or four years

I would rather have three or four Gary Johnsons that three or four Thompsons and Bradleys. I do not "hate" the players who leave, just the decision to bring them in in the first place.

There are rare exceptions to this in my opinion. Durant, Anthony, Rose and the big guy from Ohio State are rare talents and are worth it for one year. You knew that going in. It was not worth it for Joseph and Thompson in my opinion, which granted, is not worth much..

I will save my "dislike" for the NBA, not the players.
 
old65, I hear you. I've gone around with busterbrown a couple of times on this. You agree with him. I'd rather not get into the details again, but I disagree with both of you.

If you want three- or four-year players, you're saying that some attrition is OK. But when you're recruiting, you can only guess in a general way which players are likely to leave early and which will stay.

You can't raise your expectations and lower your targets at the same time. If you're willing to accept a chance at a S16 or EE every few years, then your approach is probably OK. Some people posting here are saying that Barnes isn't producing in line with the program's capabilities. That opinion definitely will not change if Texas becomes more like a regular bubble candidate.

It's been shown that championship teams have top-level players -- not all of them, but some. I don't know how you plan to recruit to snag a certain player for a championship mix if you're not trying regularly for as many as you can get.

As to Joseph and Thompson, I expect (but don't know) that Joseph will be back. Thompson almost certainly will not. If they go, in an inverse sort of way, it benefits the program. Top players know that if they are ready, they will be able to leave. If both leave, it's going to be a hard road next year. But UConn had a hard road last year (18-16) and found the right mix (with mostly young players) to win this year. Texas could have won, which is frustrating, but at least the UConn mix was shown to work.

People want to compete every year. You need for players for that. If they don't have them this year, they'll have them next year or the year after. That's the theory, anyway. But only this year are people in full complain mode when looking ahead to a season which does not look all that bright. It's possible to take that step forward after a step back. I don't want to take that step back either, but the answer is not to stop recruiting the best players they can find.
 
I won't rehash this conversation either Bob, as we have gone round and round. I have refrained from getting into the debates lately because it just gets me more frustrated about Rick Barnes and what our basketball program has become and where it is going. But, actually, the only reason I am posting right now is to sort of agree with you.

I think it is easier said than done to say "we are going to only recruit 3 or 4 year guys."

How do you know who is going to be a one and done player? This is certainly not a scientific study, but you can assume that anyone ranked in the top 15-20 of rivals rankings has a chance to go pro after one year. This is certainly not the standard or the rule, but it is a pretty safe bet. More stay than go, for sure, but you know that when you are recruiting at this level then you have a real possibility of only watching a player for a year and then seeing him go to the NBA.

So, how do you know who is going to be a 3 or 4 year guy? Well, I guess you look to the 50-100 ranked players as far as rivals rankings go.

But then, how do you know who is going to be worth a ****. Well, you don't. And that is where the problem is and the dilemma Barnes faces.

Barnes could focus on the 2nd tier recruits, but then you run into the problem that Bob brings up. Let's say you recruit 4 players in the 50-100 range. And for argument's sake, let's say they are the nucleus of your team. If you miss on a couple of those guys and one turns out to be serviceable and one turns out to be really good. In that case, you are depending on a couple mid-level recruits to carry your team. In that scenario you have a real chance of missing the tournament, which would not fly with a lot of Longhorn faithful.

But, let's say you recruit four guys in the 50-100 range and, by their junior year, one becomes serviceable and one becomes a really dependable defender and shooter and two become top 20 type NBA prospects. Well, then your looking at a team that has been playing together for 3 years and they are prepared to make a deep run in the tournament.

This takes out the intangible of coaching, which is an area I think Barnes lacks a little bit in (not as bad as I sometimes make him out to be, but I do think there are some deficiencies).

But I do not think Barnes (or the powers that be in Belmont) want to roll the dice with either of the scenarios above. When you recruit top 15-20 players, you are assured of being competitive immediately every year and you do not need to have years where you rebuild or years where you go to the NIT because you missed out on more recruits in a year than you hit on. They will take competing for Big 12 regular season titles and NCAA tournament appearances (albeit short appearances) over the unknown.

I hope I am making sense. I don't have any names or numbers of recruits to back any of this up (so don't jump all over me). Just giving my opinion on where the dilemma comes in.
 
My two cents: I can not stand the rule allowing the players to leave after 1 (or even 2) years. It it bad for college and for the NBA (although I really dont give a **** about the NBA). I don't blame the kids-- how can you? I understand not wanting to recruit these "1 and dones," but like it has been said numerous times, who thought any of these (save Durant) would be 1 and done? One thing I keep coming back to is how much of a difference 1 special player can have in basketball-- huge! I think you have to take these risks hoping you can strike gold with a great player or 2.

I hope to god they change the rule so this doesn't keep happening. It has ruined the game. And it's turning fans away, when we don't have that many to begin with But, I don't know what Barnes can really do other than recruit better or develop better the non-starters.

Barnes would get crucified if he steered away from top talent or if he wouldn't take a great player that wanted to come here.

All I know is I hate the way it is. And UT bball is a passion for me.
 
Buster, I think you summed it up pretty well.

Here is the other major problem with that approach, which Barnes pretty much lives by: If he doesn't get the top players, he will play against someone that did. When you pass on the potential one-and-dones (assuming you have an opportunity to get one), your chances of going to the FF go way down, and your chances of winning the championship become basically zero. That's doesn't mean it can be a lock if you recruit great players, but if you don't, it's a lock the other way.

When you go into the tournament, the further you go, the more you need great players. We need not get past Butler this year, which had an outstanding team of mid-level guys (and that is stretching it), but was absolutely impotent against UConn's high-level defenders, especially in the paint.

Now, nobody this side of Duke (and sometimes UNC, and lately, Kentucky -- thanks, Cal) gets to pick and choose among the very best. So your class is not going to be made up of these kinds of players (although Barnes has come pretty close a couple of times). But you have a much better chance when you pick up one every year, as Barnes has been doing lately (Bradley, Thompson, Kabongo, Ridley commitment for 2012).
 
I will give you that LaMarcus and Hamilton wouldn't have suprised anyone if they left after 1 year, because they had NBA measureables. But there is no way can you convince me that Augustin, Bradley, Thompson, or Joseph were projected to leave after 1 year. Leave early? Maybe. But not after 1 year.
 
At least possible, based on what? Being highly recruited?

And I know that Augustin didn't leave after 1 year. I wasn't the one that brought him up, though. So, what you and buster are saying is that Barnes knew or suspected that he would lose Bradley, Joseph (if it happens) and Thompson after 1 year? That he knew he was recruiting potential or likely 1 and dones? If that is the case, then I am ADAMANTLY opposed to recruiting such players. Now, players like Carmelo, Durant, Sullinger (who I know isn't leaving), Oden,etc are worth that risk. But not these guys.
 
I think elface is right regarding the expectation on these guys, as I had heard basically the same thing -- they thought Augustin and Thompson would fall the other way than they have (more likely 3 and 2, respectively, than 2 and 1 -- bad break for the program but good for the players).

Joseph as a (projected) one-year guy... I don't recall that. But he was rated high enough (13th by RSCI) that it was possible.

Bradley was a top-five guy, and seven of the top 10 went.

Hey, the last two years they had pieces that should have gotten them S16s/EEs. That they didn't, IMO, is on the staff. It's not on the players for leaving.
 
Bradley was absolutely recruited as a "one and done" candidate. He was a top 5 recruit on most recruiting sites and was even ranked as #1 or #2 by some services.

You guys are probably right on Augustine. I am not as familiar with his recruiting rankings. I do know that it was very clear early on that he would not be on campus very long. I actually thought he was impressive as a freshman and could have left after one year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top