It doesn't matter how many recruits you miss...

[DCWildcat]

...it matters how many you sign.

I believe this to be correct, but I seem to be in the minority of it. Here's my reason:

1) Recruiting a player and not getting him generally doesn't hurt the program
2) Not recruiting a player that you may have gotten generally does hurt a program
3) So don't be scared of missing out on recruits.

I say "generally" in 1) because I supposed you could end up wasting valuable scouting/recruiting time that's better spent on other recruits. But it seems most coaches are able to recruit as many players as they wish in the long run, so I don't think this is too much of a bother. In fact, it may be good to recruit players and miss on them, as it provides exposure and communication to AAU and high school coaches who may, in turn, have more positive things to say about us.

Or to put all of this another way: All else being equal, would you rather a coach recruit 4 All-Americans a year and get all 4 (and no one else), or recruit 20 All-Americans a year and get 5 (and no one else). I think the answer is clearly the latter.

[DCWildcat]

Part of the reason I bring this up is because I've seen Gillispie being faulted with missing out on a lot of prospects. In fact (most folks don't realize this), Gillispie probably missed more prospects in 2008 than Tubby would've ever targeted, if Tubby's prior years offer a good predictor of what he would've done in 08.*

But it doesn't matter how many he misses.

I suppose this is a "reach for the stars, so if you miss you land in the clouds" kind of argument. And I think it holds true.

I should also point out that this argument only holds true on the whole. Missing certain individual prospects certainly hurts--wish we would've landed Zeller and Brandon Jennings, for example. But our program isn't in any worse shape now that we've missed on them, compared to the shape we would've been in if we hadn't recruited them at all.

It's who you sign that counts.


*This isn't a knock on Tubby, just an observation of different recruiting styles.

[Wildcat_Fan98]

well I think ppl can see that he know how the Recruiting world works...we have one possibly 2 scholerships unless Coach G knows of more...and he is always recruiting more players than what he has ....there is a reason for that and ppl do get mad about a recruit well that is just part of it really...there are 340 division 1 schools and all 340 miss out on players.....I'm sure ppl got mad when Patterson chose KY instead of Duke or FL

[jtukfan]

I agree. No matter how delusional we get, when we think we should just be able to pick n choose. We never know what goes through a recruits mind. Better to cast a large net and catch some fish than to cast a small net and catch none.

[Ukosumu]

I agree. No matter how delusional we get, when we think we should just be able to pick n choose. We never know what goes through a recruits mind. Better to cast a large net and catch some fish than to cast a small net and catch none.
:thumbup::thumbup: My thoughts exactly...well not exactly but the point was the same.

[JWORLD]

...it matters how many you sign.

I believe this to be correct, but I seem to be in the minority of it. Here's my reason:

1) Recruiting a player and not getting him generally doesn't hurt the program
2) Not recruiting a player that you may have gotten generally does hurt a program
3) So don't be scared of missing out on recruits.

I say "generally" in 1) because I supposed you could end up wasting valuable scouting/recruiting time that's better spent on other recruits. But it seems most coaches are able to recruit as many players as they wish in the long run, so I don't think this is too much of a bother. In fact, it may be good to recruit players and miss on them, as it provides exposure and communication to AAU and high school coaches who may, in turn, have more positive things to say about us.

Or to put all of this another way: All else being equal, would you rather a coach recruit 4 All-Americans a year and get all 4 (and no one else), or recruit 20 All-Americans a year and get 5 (and no one else). I think the answer is clearly the latter.


Great thead. great point.........:thumbup::thumbup:

At least we have a coach who never sleeps and is always looking for that right recruit. It feels good to know that all of the good players are on the radar and being looked at by Gillispie and his staff........

[dwarfdorin]

I agree completely.

:widcat::widcat: Go CATS!!!

[billoliver40]

Agreed. It also matters how the players you get develop. (or not)

Recruiting is a crap shoot at best. How many years has Memphis lay pretty dormant until recently? How many 'can't miss' kids went to
Kentucky and Duke but just didn't click?

[BigblueDrew]

Agreed. It also matters how the players you get develop. (or not)

Recruiting is a crap shoot at best. How many years has Memphis lay pretty dormant until recently? How many 'can't miss' kids went to
Kentucky and Duke but just didn't click?

I could Name a dozen or so here at UK alone that fit that category. Remember, Richard Madison, or Rob Locke or of a more recent vintage Rashard Carruth