Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
Some 23-24 Basketball stats
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="lv20gt" data-source="post: 996102" data-attributes="member: 2299"><p>So you didn't really answer the question of whether it was too optimistic to expect improvement over where we ended last year. I guess I should clarify I don't necessarily mean record wise as winning 60% of our games doesn't reflect where the team was at the end of last year when you extrapolate it out to a full schedule. This comment seems to be the closest you got but still doesn't really answer the question. </p><p></p><p>Anyways, I ask to get some sort of actual baseline over what you think was reasonable to expect because otherwise posters here have a tendency to be fluid with their expectations to set the bar at just the right spot to allow them to right off criticism. </p><p></p><p>To I guess I'll give my take, and let you point out wherever you disagree. </p><p></p><p>At the end of last year we had a roster where we were set to lose one player to loss of eligibility, Franklin. Everyone else could have returned. Now obviously it was likely some would leave in the portal because that's the norm. Maxwell and Meka being the two most obvious candidates. Regardless, we were very reasonably expecting to return 7 of our top 8 players. So at the end of last year, meaning on march 9th, it was reasonable to expect improvement from where we ended the year based on returning most the roster. And just to be clear, I'm not saying to expect to win the ACC, but to be improved from where we were. And we can get into the whole coaching change, roster turnover that did happen, as well as what exactly that level we were at to end the year, but just to set a baseline do you agree that it was reasonable to expect us to improve from where we ended last year based on being scheduled to return 7 of our top 8 players?</p><p></p><p>And since I'm asking you to address a specific point, I'll respond to one you made. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Recruiting has looked real good. I'm not sure I would agree that George has more upside than several players we've brought in since Jose but that's tangential to the main point. Recruiting has looked better with three top 150 recruits, as someone described to me elsewhere. I usually use 247 composite that has Kirouac at 182 but I'll give it to them. That's great and if it is proven to be consistent then our roster will have increased talent in t he long run which has been needed. So yeah, recruiting has been very good. So I doubt there will be a whole lot of discussion because there isn't a whole lot of disagreement. But I don't think the recruiting is to the level to allow us to just out talent teams to get to where we want to be, so then the obvious follow up question is what do we expect to get out of the better recruiting? Are we expecting our current staff to get the most out of it? Any answer at this point is speculative and I doubt there will even be agreement on what to even look at for support of trying to answer that question. To me I'd look at how much is the current staff getting out of what we have currently.</p><p></p><p>So to that end here are some player now that I would put in a similar boat based on their 247 composite rankings coming out of HS.</p><p></p><p>Coleman - 67th </p><p>Kelly - 125th</p><p>Abram - 109th</p><p>Sturidvant - 140th</p><p>Ndongo - 126th </p><p>Reeves - 42nd</p><p>Gapare - 123rd</p><p></p><p>To me the recruiting has obviously been better, but we will also need the staff to do a better job of utilizing the talent than what we are seeing this year for the improved talent to have the impact we want. Others will probably point to more nebulous concepts like being a better fit, better mentality, being tougher, buying in more, as reasons why the new recruits will have a better impact than the old top 150 recruits. I'll be skeptical of the basis for such beliefs but it's also possible that they will turn out better because recruiting isn't an exact science. Time will provide the definitive answer.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="lv20gt, post: 996102, member: 2299"] So you didn't really answer the question of whether it was too optimistic to expect improvement over where we ended last year. I guess I should clarify I don't necessarily mean record wise as winning 60% of our games doesn't reflect where the team was at the end of last year when you extrapolate it out to a full schedule. This comment seems to be the closest you got but still doesn't really answer the question. Anyways, I ask to get some sort of actual baseline over what you think was reasonable to expect because otherwise posters here have a tendency to be fluid with their expectations to set the bar at just the right spot to allow them to right off criticism. To I guess I'll give my take, and let you point out wherever you disagree. At the end of last year we had a roster where we were set to lose one player to loss of eligibility, Franklin. Everyone else could have returned. Now obviously it was likely some would leave in the portal because that's the norm. Maxwell and Meka being the two most obvious candidates. Regardless, we were very reasonably expecting to return 7 of our top 8 players. So at the end of last year, meaning on march 9th, it was reasonable to expect improvement from where we ended the year based on returning most the roster. And just to be clear, I'm not saying to expect to win the ACC, but to be improved from where we were. And we can get into the whole coaching change, roster turnover that did happen, as well as what exactly that level we were at to end the year, but just to set a baseline do you agree that it was reasonable to expect us to improve from where we ended last year based on being scheduled to return 7 of our top 8 players? And since I'm asking you to address a specific point, I'll respond to one you made. Recruiting has looked real good. I'm not sure I would agree that George has more upside than several players we've brought in since Jose but that's tangential to the main point. Recruiting has looked better with three top 150 recruits, as someone described to me elsewhere. I usually use 247 composite that has Kirouac at 182 but I'll give it to them. That's great and if it is proven to be consistent then our roster will have increased talent in t he long run which has been needed. So yeah, recruiting has been very good. So I doubt there will be a whole lot of discussion because there isn't a whole lot of disagreement. But I don't think the recruiting is to the level to allow us to just out talent teams to get to where we want to be, so then the obvious follow up question is what do we expect to get out of the better recruiting? Are we expecting our current staff to get the most out of it? Any answer at this point is speculative and I doubt there will even be agreement on what to even look at for support of trying to answer that question. To me I'd look at how much is the current staff getting out of what we have currently. So to that end here are some player now that I would put in a similar boat based on their 247 composite rankings coming out of HS. Coleman - 67th Kelly - 125th Abram - 109th Sturidvant - 140th Ndongo - 126th Reeves - 42nd Gapare - 123rd To me the recruiting has obviously been better, but we will also need the staff to do a better job of utilizing the talent than what we are seeing this year for the improved talent to have the impact we want. Others will probably point to more nebulous concepts like being a better fit, better mentality, being tougher, buying in more, as reasons why the new recruits will have a better impact than the old top 150 recruits. I'll be skeptical of the basis for such beliefs but it's also possible that they will turn out better because recruiting isn't an exact science. Time will provide the definitive answer. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What is the last name of the current Head Football Coach?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
Some 23-24 Basketball stats
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top