Class of 2024

[LJay]

Top 50 Glover planning visit to Creighton

[LJay]

[LJay]

A recent visitor.

[LJay]

“Creighton’s heavily involved but I ain’t visiting” (Okay, he didn’t say that)

[Ethanfor3]

I thing I've generally thought about with regards to say "Top 50," certainly Top 25 recruits is whether the better strategy would be to target the Top 100 guys.

I'm not saying I don't want a top 25 recruit, but you have a better chance to build a program with a bunch of top 100 / 150 guys that are likely to be here at least 2 years if not more. In the end, you get an older, talented team that is capable of deep tournament runs as opposed to the boom or bust Kentucky model.

I would be curious to hear Mac's take on his strategy for building a team and whether his energy is more focused on the good 4 star players he can build a team around, or does he go all in for a Top 25 guy.

The last quote by LJay, while somewhat tongue in cheek, reminded me of this question on strategy.

Either way...Mac has proven to be a top notch recruiter / coach. I'm just along for the ride.

[LJay]

Creighton getting officials from highly rated kids.

[Chicagojayfan]

I thing I've generally thought about with regards to say "Top 50," certainly Top 25 recruits is whether the better strategy would be to target the Top 100 guys.

I'm not saying I don't want a top 25 recruit, but you have a better chance to build a program with a bunch of top 100 / 150 guys that are likely to be here at least 2 years if not more. In the end, you get an older, talented team that is capable of deep tournament runs as opposed to the boom or bust Kentucky model.

I would be curious to hear Mac's take on his strategy for building a team and whether his energy is more focused on the good 4 star players he can build a team around, or does he go all in for a Top 25 guy.

The last quote by LJay, while somewhat tongue in cheek, reminded me of this question on strategy.

Either way...Mac has proven to be a top notch recruiter / coach. I'm just along for the ride.

It's a good question - I think Mac looks for guys who fit the system and for the top kids seems to offer quickly hoping to see if they can build a relationship

While there still are one and dones, there aren't as many as there used to be and in the NIL era there seems to be more experience at the end of the tourney, so if someone is likely to jump soon that has to be a consideration

Top 100 does seem to be our target in general, though, but Mac seems to rely heavily on his own staff's scouting more than any rankings there. That's why you see someone like Vice or Knox or Dotzler or Green a few years ago. Creighton also seems to be a staff where if they heavily recruit someone the rankings and other programs take note.

The other issue coming into play is how the HS scholarship recruiting fits with NIL recruiting. Some highly rated kids are going to constantly keep their options open, but in order to be considered in the transfer you want to have built a relationship in HS as well -- and the transfer is probably more solid after the first transfer anyway

Didn't Altman used to say something like (paraphrasing), 'everyone knows the top 15 or 25, and after that the top 150 is wide open and nobody really knows'. I think that's generally true in that those top 25 or so usually have amazing physical skills that just can't be replicated, and after that it starts to be more about fit with the system and having the right team attributes. I will say that I think that the top 100-150 means that you're likely getting the kind of athletes who can compete physically. If you don't have a lot of those guys in the BE you are going to consistently lose (unless you have a roster full of amazing skill players like Doug and Wragge )

But even that is open to debate - Green's a really good athlete with a lot of the right skills, Knox is a guy from this year who seems to have really good physical skills to fit in the BE as well and neither was a top 150 guy

NIL has made it more complicated, but Mac and the staff (and the NIL people) have done a great job -- and it helps that they have the support of selling out 17K+ every home game

[LJay]

Quotes on CU visit here.

[gtmoBlue]

Hmmm
I tracked down an old article on the subject (2013). Hanner says that star ratings are quite accurate, in the main.
He used his data, verbal commits data, and other data to compile a 19-year database on Hs recruits. It's a good quick read.

https://basketball.realgm.com/article/2 ... s-In-Depth

Generally, his premise is that ratings - due to their comprehensive and talent assessment/upside evaluations, are quite accurate in the main.
Yes, there are always outliers and exceptions. In fact kids like the 4 named (Vice, Knox, Dotzler, and Green), the Omaha kids tend towards outperforming
their ratings due to the greater number of & higher level offers, than say Vice & Knox, who both had fewer & lesser offers. It should be noted that both Vice & Knox were
gradual improvers over the course of their HS Careers, played in high-level conferences, & won championships - Knox also being a McDonald's candidate,
all of which point towards these guys probably exceeding expectations.

Note: Several Jays teams over the years built 'better teams over time with lesser players: 2002-03, 2006-07, 2009-10, and all the DMD teams, and the Mo Watson 2016-17 team. None made deep tourney runs. The 2016-17 Jays squad is the closest talent-wise to this year's Elite Eight squad.

Ethanfor3 - I'm not saying I don't want a top 25 recruit, but you have a better chance to build a program with a bunch of top 100 / 150 guys that are likely to be here at least 2 years if not more. In the end, you get an older, talented team that is capable of deep tournament runs as opposed to the boom-or-bust Kentucky model.

Players tend to play to their level (of competence). Yes, some overachieve & some are even poorly evaluated, but by and large ratings are accurate.

Recruiting strategies, coaches' methodologies & preferences, kids seeking 'bluebloods' over the rest of the field, legacy factors, & NIL, among other factors, all play roles, but the bottom line is talent rules.

As an aside here is a great article on Levels of Competence.
https://www.footy4kids.co.uk/how-to-coa ... ompetence/

[gtmoBlue]

This 2024 Millard North kid, Neal Mosser... I know Jays are not on him, BUT!

Is this kid related to the Great Neal Mosser, Omaha Tech HS? Would be a great-grandson or great, great grandson?

https://nebhalloffame.org/neal-mosser-omaha-tech/

Coach—This champion basketball coach was at the helm of Omaha Technical High School during some glory years for the school. In his 20 years coaching at Tech, Neal Mosser helped develop what many consider the greatest high school boys basketball team of all time, the Class A State Championship Tech team of 1963. Few if any high school coaches in Nebraska in history developed more top flight athletes during his tenure, including Bob Gibson of baseball fame, ‘53; legendary basketball great Bob Boozer, ‘55; and Fred Hare, ‘63. Came to Nebraska after an outstanding basketball career in the Midwest while in the military, played for the Cornhuskers and made his life in Omaha. His coaching philosophy added a very fast pace to high school basketball in Nebraska. Career coaching record 237-122. His sons played for him and became outstanding basketball coaches in their own right.

It is noted that the great Ron Boone also played for Coach Mosser at Omaha Tech. Boone went on to a sterling professional career in both the ABA and the NBA, playing for the Dallas Chaparelles, Utah Stars, ABA / LA Lakers, Utah Jazz, NBA. Boone's 13 year career spanned from 1968-1981. Guard Ron Boone is Professional Basketball's All-time Ironman (consecutive games played in ABA & NBA).

https://www.factsnippet.com/site/facts- ... boone.html

Note: Lakers AJ Green is supposed the NBA Ironman, but was liberally subbed into games repeatedly, just to click the tally that he 'played'.