Bigs

[TPFKAPFS]

well this got better quickly, lol!

But nobody is talking about Manley. Are there no whispers out there about his leaning and why we are recruiting him?

I feel just the opposite of Arch for some reason. I have a positive vibe about Mr. PJ lately, but it could be my Blue glasses.

 

[Archer2]

I've been accused of that many times.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

My Blu Blockers only block certain darkish shades!

 

[DSouthr]

Plenty of recruits have cancelled before even taking the trip in the past, so it's nice we can at least get a visit nowadays.

He's far from a lock to any school, regardless of what the likes of Evan Daniels would want you to "smell". Personally, I think Texas is leading for him, but hopefully our visit throws a wrench at that.

This is the 1st year we don't have a hardwired reason not to get commitments like sanctions or playing time, so I'm a bit more optimistic about landing an Elite recruit like Knox or PJ.

Rose, I spoke to this point a few months ago, we do still have some lingering effects of the NCAA stuff, it has effected this class hard. Reason is when you formulate relationships with these players is in freshman and soph seasons, you see how often kids refer and remain fond of those programs that have been on them the longest. Roy already has a couple 2019 offers out, he is getting in early and forming those relationships that really help when the kid is a senior and ready to announce. When the 2017 class was in the relationship forming stage we were under NCAA cloud, so the damage was already done when the updated NOA removed the cloud from our basketball program. To a lesser extent the 2018 class will as well be effected but not nearly to the level of damage as was able to be done to us earlier. It will help even more when the NCAA has finally finished its ruling and this whole thing becomes part of the past.

AND, as I have also spoken about, the NCAA stuff is not the whole story, we do have a perception problem that was solidified by the NCAA stuff and that is just going to take a while to over come. We need to bring in some players that over achieve perception earlier in their careers. Been a while since we had guys over achieve expectations, Marcus maybe, Joel maybe but we also have a list of guys that came in with huge expectations, top 20 guys that didn't blow folks away as expected.

 

[gary-7]

Yep, we shared some things back channel, some we agreed on and some we didn't. Been a wile since we discussed it but I think I agreed with you that Carter had eliminated Ky near early summer because something soured him on Ky, maybe it was a visit that didn't answer what he was interested in. Early early on I agree, Carter liked us but Capel starting his deal in the kid's Jr season and killed us prior to the up dated NOA. When that updated NOA came, think I said it here and referred to it when we talked privately, a window of opportunity for us did re-open.

Where we didn't agree was my understanding was that window closed very quickly, to much damage had been done to us, you believed that window was stil cracked and I appreciate that belief but disagreed. I think we agreed to disagree on that one and moved on, we sure as heck didn't snipe back & forth on it! LOL

If Carter ends up at Harvard, not only would I be tickled to death but there would be zero way I could be anything but shocked! You know darn well you would be to! LOL

I was hoping the package deal with Carter and Trent would weaken the dukies position because it seems cater if much more wanting duke than Trent seems to, Trent seemed more open to Ky in my opinion. But Trent ain't going to Harvard and you & I both know Carter ain't either. Will be interesting to see if that rock solid package deal stays together, feels like some crumble to it to me.

That Trent deal may still happen, but if so it will be dook by process of elimination. And as I said, WC's very serious flirtation with Hahvahd seems to have ebbed as the reality of his decision closes in... and that sadly means dook.
So yeah, the chances he throws a curve and goes Ivy League have waned, but no, I wouldn't be shocked, I'd just LMFAO if he goes further nawth

 

[DSouthr]

well this got better quickly, lol!

But nobody is talking about Manley. Are there no whispers out there about his leaning and why we are recruiting him?

I feel just the opposite of Arch for some reason. I have a positive vibe about Mr. PJ lately, but it could be my Blue glasses.

IDK if recruiting Manley is the term I would use, I would call it watching him, having him on the radar in case we need to get more involved.

 

[RoseHeel]

IDK if recruiting Manley is the term I would use, I would call it watching him, having him on the radar in case we need to get more involved.

I'd be more worried if he got an offer than I would that we're just watching him.

 

[mikeirbyusa]

Another possible Big in the game now.

 

[Sk1310]

PJs father on the unofficial they took a couple months ago

"It was waking up at Christmas and seeing the Christmas tree but not unwrapping the gifts."

He said this, because they could only stay for 4 hours, and didnt get to enjoy it all. He says they looking forward to the full experience on the OV this weekend. Good vibes with PJ folks

 

[gary-7]

PJs father on the unofficial they took a couple months ago

"It was waking up at Christmas and seeing the Christmas tree but not unwrapping the gifts."

He said this, because they could only stay for 4 hours, and didnt get to enjoy it all. He says they looking forward to the full experience on the OV this weekend. Good vibes with PJ folks

Shhh... Evan Daniels might hear ya

 

[alabamaheel]

How do yall think Roy would use PJ if we were to get him? He wants to be a 3 or 4. Would Roy play him out on the perimeter?

 

[gary-7]

How do yall think Roy would use PJ if we were to get him? He wants to be a 3 or 4. Would Roy play him out on the perimeter?

He is capable of being a swing-3 in "big" lineups and a stretch-4 in normal lineups, OR banging inside as a traditional Big. I believe we would see him mostly as a versatile 4. I know some here won't appreciate it, but a much more talented version of how we'll see Luke play this season, i.e., a 4 who can bang, face up or even step outside the arc. I think he would be a great complement to Tony in the starting frontcourt.

 

[alabamaheel]

He is capable of being a swing-3 in "big" lineups and a stretch-4 in normal lineups, OR banging inside as a traditional Big. I believe we would see him mostly as a versatile 4. I know some here won't appreciate it, but a much more talented version of how we'll see Luke play this season, i.e., a 4 who can bang, face up or even step outside the arc. I think he would be a great complement to Tony in the starting frontcourt.

Sounds about right to me Gary. Just been reading on his dads wants and what thy are looking for. He has said that he wants his college game transfer him into his pro game. He would be a three in the NBA. Just an observation.

 

[Archer2]

PJs father on the unofficial they took a couple months ago

"It was waking up at Christmas and seeing the Christmas tree but not unwrapping the gifts."

He said this, because they could only stay for 4 hours, and didnt get to enjoy it all. He says they looking forward to the full experience on the OV this weekend. Good vibes with PJ folks

I like the sound of that.

 

[DSouthr]

How do yall think Roy would use PJ if we were to get him? He wants to be a 3 or 4. Would Roy play him out on the perimeter?

He would be our starting 4 IMO, more of a George Lynch or Theo type 4 with better ability to face up than those 2 fellas. He and Theo IMO would be a great tandem on the floor together with the ability to seamlessly switch 3s and 4s and make us very quick to rebounds.

 

[RoseHeel]

Another possible Big in the game now.

Manley???

 

[mikeirbyusa]

Manley???

No

 

[RoseHeel]

No

You're killing me man! lol

 

[HeelFan58]

Consensus among recruiting guys is we will take 1 of Manley , Brooks and Stokes , most seem to think they are all 5's as is Huffman.

 

[DSouthr]

IDK if recruiting Manley is the term I would use, I would call it watching him, having him on the radar in case we need to get more involved.

I would now officially call it recruiting him ! I guess Roy really liked what he saw!

 

[TPFKAPFS]

Yup. Now can we get some opinions of where he stands in the Stokes, Brooks, Huffman continuum?

I put him behind Stokes, even with Brooks and ahead of Huffman (not talking potential, but readiness)

 

[DSouthr]

Yup. Now can we get some opinions of where he stands in the Stokes, Brooks, Huffman continuum?

I put him behind Stokes, even with Brooks and ahead of Huffman (not talking potential, but readiness)

I see that list in a different order so will disagree without being disagreeable, let me explain why.

I look first at what is transferable from high school to college, 6'9" & 235lbs is size that you can play with at either level. If you can easliy flush it in high school you can in college as well because the rims are the same height from the floor. Jump shooting is not always transferable and it is very rare that a kid jump shoots as well in college as he does in high school, not as easy shooting against long matured and well schooled college athletes as it was in high school. So how much of that jump shooting from Stokes and Brooks will transfer to the college game? IDK but it is safe to say that it will not likely be the same as it is in high school now.

So I look at what a kid can do right now that is valuable in a college game today. Huffman, I see a kid that can rebound and will defend, a kid that can easy flush a stick back, a kid that is already at a solid college playing weight, and a kid that will not try to be something he ain't. Stokes I like a lot but it does concern me that he is a Deon or Meeks like below the rim front court power forward when we really do need some rim protecting big men. Brooks to me needs to work hard in the weight room, I see him as a bit of a poor man's Jawad (jawad had jump shooting range out past the trey that I do not see in Brooks). I see Brooks and Manley somewhat similar but I like 6'11" & 235lbs more than 6'9" 205.

So my order would be more like Huffman, Stokes, Manley, and then Brooks, just my opinion.

 

[Archer2]

Manley sure looks like a player. He's supposedly broken both legs and that scares me but I've heard bones heal better than joints, especially larger bones.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

So have we determined that Brooks is actually 6'9" or 6'10 and 205 or 230ish. that makes a world of difference to me, but the sites are inconsistent. Also I have only seen 1 video of Manley so I have no real basis for comparison.

I love me some Huffman and my list should not suggest otherwise. I saw more advanced skills in the other 3 bigs, but Huffman has a man's body and a killer attitude. I differ the most with Stokes. He seems to have that something that Peppers had that will translate well to bball. He is not the leaper of Pep, but he has that will to go through you if necessary. I think Stokes will be one heck of a college player. I will take the size of course, but I want skill, motor, and attitude just as much and I am not suggesting we trade anyone for Huffman! Wanting to be a Tar Heel is a deciding factor to me!.

 

[DSouthr]

So have we determined that Brooks is actually 6'9" or 6'10 and 205 or 230ish. that makes a world of difference to me, but the sites are inconsistent. Also I have only seen 1 video of Manley so I have no real basis for comparison.

I love me some Huffman and my list should not suggest otherwise. I saw more advanced skills in the other 3 bigs, but Huffman has a man's body and a killer attitude. I differ the most with Stokes. He seems to have that something that Peppers had that will translate well to bball. He is not the leaper of Pep, but he has that will to go through you if necessary. I think Stokes will be one heck of a college player. I will take the size of course, but I want skill, motor, and attitude just as much and I am not suggesting we trade anyone for Huffman! Wanting to be a Tar Heel is a deciding factor to me!.

I think on Brooks he is 6'9" and in that 205lb area and that makes a ton of difference to me as well.

On Stokes, not trying to down grade the kid at all, just saying I have not seen the pep in him but his brother was really good for Tenn. I see him more in the Deon-Meeks range and no offense to thiose guys either, I just would prefer a kid that elevates better that can flush it inside thru contact.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

If the measurables are correct then I prefer Manley to Brooks right now. The thing with Stokes is intangible and hard to define, but I like him. Huffman and Manley in the fold would mean we are in great shape for a good bit for Bigs. Adding PJ or Knox changes the game to immediate favorite or at least top contender for FF status! The Pep I see in Stokes is in attitude not athleticism, but I think the skills are there too. (Pep is a freak of nature) I would have no problem with another Deon or a healthy, motivated Meeks but I feel Stokes is meaner than both. Vertical and explosion can be improved significantly, but mean streaks have to be born into the recruit!

Might be a moot discussion because I see either Brooks or Manley being the second recruit; then we wait for Knox or PJ and,if neither, hold the scholly for '18 I bet.