If I'm recruiting I'd consider the following requirements in this order. Obviously being able to qualify academically and having a good attitude would be important, but from there 1. Being able to shoot the ball from out on the floor. 2. Being at least a 70% free throw shooter. 3. Rebounding and Defensive ability.

That would be my philosophy. According to an article, Billy Tubbs was listening to an assistant about a prospective recruit. The coach raved about how the player was strong, could run and jump, had the necessary height they were looking for, and Tubbs interrupted him. "Can he shoot"? The assistant sort of hesitated and said something like "well he's not a really good shooter", and Tubbs told him to forget it. You had to be able to shoot to play for him. That should hold true for any D1 team at any level.

(01-10-2011 12:58 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  That would be my philosophy. According to an article, Billy Tubbs was listening to an assistant about a prospective recruit. The coach raved about how the player was strong, could run and jump, had the necessary height they were looking for, and Tubbs interrupted him. "Can he shoot"? The assistant sort of hesitated and said something like "well he's not a really good shooter", and Tubbs told him to forget it. You had to be able to shoot to play for him. That should hold true for any D1 team at any level.

Oklahoma did put some points on the board back in those days. i don't recall any national championships, but they damn sure were what one would call a sucessful basketball program under Tubbs. They won lots of games, and went to post season.

And who learned some of his basketball philosophy from Tubbs? Our own Mike Newell.

(01-10-2011 04:45 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  And who learned some of his basketball philosophy from Tubbs? Our own Mike Newell.

Surely he picked up a thing or two from Tubbs. But, I think Newell liked the offensive game. I remember hearing one night when we played at Purdue, that Newell had set the building scoring record in Purdue's arena at 60 something points as a high schooler, in a tournament played at Purdue.

(01-10-2011 05:39 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(01-10-2011 04:45 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  And who learned some of his basketball philosophy from Tubbs? Our own Mike Newell.

Surely he picked up a thing or two from Tubbs. But, I think Newell liked the offensive game. I remember hearing one night when we played at Purdue, that Newell had set the building scoring record in Purdue's arena at 60 something points as a high schooler, in a tournament played at Purdue.

Newell was one of Indiana high school basketball's all time leading scorers. I think he played for a small school, but he could fill it up. He does like scorers.

I agree. on a 13 man roster, you could have 1 defensive stopper on the perimeter, one defense first post and the rest better be able to shoot it.

Basketball is like baseball. At some positions you can afford to give up one thing to get another. Your shortshop and catcher MUST be able to play defense. Offense is optional. Your first baseman and right fielder MUST be able to hit. Defense is optional. Your point guard MUST be able to distribute. Your power forward MUST be able to rebound.

(01-10-2011 08:24 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  Basketball is like baseball. At some positions you can afford to give up one thing to get another. Your shortshop and catcher MUST be able to play defense. Offense is optional. Your first baseman and right fielder MUST be able to hit. Defense is optional. Your point guard MUST be able to distribute. Your power forward MUST be able to rebound.

Baseball has nine eight positions where you might get some offense. You can afford one or two that aren't very good offensively. Basketball only has five, so you don't have much room for slack. If I have a choice, at least four of them better be able to score some, and the fifth one better be able to when needed. I can understand in pee wee ball, junior high, or high school, where you have to play what shows up for tryouts. In college you get to pick your players. How in the hell are we able to recruit so many guys in here who can't play with their ******* ?

(01-10-2011 08:40 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  If I have a choice, at least four of them better be able to score some, and the fifth one better be able to when needed.

I think all of them had better be able to score when needed. But all of them will not be equal in scoring, and you want your best scorers (who are not always your best shooters) taking most of the shots. But if a player is superlative at one aspect of the game, I want him on my team, even if he isn't overly good at all of them.

I guess Graber was the best example of what I mean. (Or, as has already been mentioned, JJ.) He was a superlative point guard, even if not a good scorer. So I want him on my team. He could score when he needed to, but he wasn't going to make his living scoring. But on the other hand, the scorers weren't going to make as good a living without someone like him distributing.