Next years Mens Basketball squad

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:09 pm

*************** Opinion Alert ***************

OK first of all this is not a dump/keep Durham thread. There are plenty of other threads
around hear that can carry that banner. This thread assume Durham will back. He has a
two year plan.

The Cats surprised a lot of teams this year, but I think the surprise was gone by the end of
the season. The Cats also got lucky, in that I think this was one of the weakest years
EVER in the Conference history. I know with everyone back next year, that everyone in
the Bobcatnation will be expecting big things next year, but one thing I would like to
point out is that the league will be much improved next year. MSU has all of their top
8-9 players back and the Griz only lose Kamar Davis (granted an all league player) so
they have to be considered two of the top teams next year. The thing is, though EWU,
Sac St., ISU, also return the majority of the top players back also. You also know that
Weber always manages to load up on talented JC's and Portland State is also not going to
drop off the planet either so the league title is not a given. I know the Griz are looking to
sign a JC big man and have a line on a Kamar type player from Miami who they feel real
good about. If they were to land a high quality JC forward I think they could easily
jump past the Cats next year.

I recently talked with some folks and this is what I hear is the recruiting priorities for this
Spring.

A JC big man: As has been the case all year, this is their #1 priority from what I hear.
The one and only guy I have heard about is Peace who I mentioned before. He is a
solidly built 6-8 player on a team of scorers known more for rebounding , and defense
than offense. In JC. scoring around 9-10 points a game but double digit rebounder.

A JC Wing (2g-sf) probably a shooter. This one surprised me I thought we had enough
wing players for the short term. Have not a clue who they may be recruiting.

Highschool "Big" meaning either a pf or center. 6-8 Tommy Craddock most likely is at
the top of there list here. I have heard that they have been in close contact with him
almost all winter. If the Griz can not find their JC forward look for them also to
challenge us for Craddock. Craddock is a highly ranked Washington player who a
couple people have said would be a steal for a big sky program. He is a post. He will
not take a three and will rarely shoot further than 12-15 feet. He has soft hands and very
good rebounder. Has been playing against some of the best big men in the country.
Averaged about 16 points and 11 rbs. a game.

High School guard. I had heard they were looking for a pure point but now I hear that
may not be the case. David Cernin 6-3 guard from Century high school in Oregon is
someone to keep an eye on. He was second the Oregon Metro league in scoring at 23
points a game. He is not a true point nor a true off guard. He is ranked as the #14 player
in Oregon pre-season. He has some of the same knocks that Jason Erickson had in that
he is a little too short to be an off guard in the pac-10 and too, slow to be a point guard.

Couple these recruiting targets with 6-10 Ted Morris and we definitely will be better next
year, but to be honest I really don’t know why we would go after a JC wing with
everyone we have coming back. The other thing someone mentioned last week was we
needed to get some depth. I am not a big believer in having a 9 man rotation. it is just
too many people to have to worry about getting minutes for. Yea, it may work for Duke,
and UCLA but at our level I really prefer a smaller rotation for our level. Have a
eightman rotation who can put in major minutes and then pull role players (ie this year
Pratt and Durr) into the mix for injuries and/or foul trouble.

Helcat72 · Post by **Helcat72** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:41 pm

I think I mentioned depth because I was talking about big men in general...4 's and 5's that can bang. I still think we need someone that can be a physical presence in the 4 position to match the friz. Yousaid yourself that they will be the team to beat! Look what the friz did to Moss after Davis came back. They had Seifert, Davis and Dlouhy with Strait and Easley coming off the bench. If they add another big man, that makes up for the loss of Davis...That is depth! At the end of March they just wear down the smaller teams with less depth.

Cat Pride · Post by **Cat Pride** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:58 pm

I hope Durham scratches the JC sf and goes with McGillis instead. This is a no brainer to me. McGillis is definitely athletic enough to play the 3, and big enough to play the 4. Good enough shot to play the 3, and has the post moves to play the 4. Seriously doubt USU or Sienna or Santa Clara are looking at Jack to be their future PF - he is a perfect SF in the making.

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:57 pm

*************** Opinion Alert ( part 2 ) ***************
This falls under the "Oh god he has more to say" category

I had to bale and go pick up the kids, but I thought I might mention a few more things. It has been said that you really don't get everything out of a JC transfer until the second ear. I think Durham proved that wrong this year, but the one exception to that rule might be Miller. I really think that next ear we will see a much-improved Miller, with this year under his belt. I also think Marvin Moss will be much more solid from beginning of the season to the end. The other player that I think ended the season very well is Carson Durr if he can come into next season with an offensive game he really could make some waves. If not and Durham does indeed recruit the two JC's as mentioned above it could be a long season for Carson. Additionally if these recruiting priorities are correct minutes could get short for Holmes, Pratt and/or Durr. Meaning one or two could be redshirted.

Nine man Rotation:
At Guard/wings
Miller
Jefferson
Durham
Dissley
JC wing

Forward/Centers
Moss
JC Big
Beye
Morris

Bench role players
Pratt
Durr
Holmes

Possible Redshirt
Pratt
Holmes
High school guard
High school Big

With Durham as a walk-on we are blesses with essentially 14 Scholarship so that gives us some flexibility. I still think I might rather sign a high school small forward for the future but it seems to me that Durham feels he needs to win next year. In order to do so feels he need to add three transfers to supplement this year’s team.

BelgradeBobcat · Post by **BelgradeBobcat** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 7:32 pm

Miller, Dissly, and Durr need to lock themselves in separate gyms all summer and fine tune their games. Rat ball is fun, but I'm of the opinion it teaches you nothing and actually creates bad habits-like running down and launching the first three that's available.

Durham mystifies me-I've got to think the heat would be turned down exponetially if he tried a little harder in state (this is assuming Mslacat is correct and he's going after a JC wing player).

How many in state players were better than Dennis Woodall when we recruited him? A dozen? Who's the next Frontier player to drop 30 on us like the kid from Havre did? I don't get it.

I like the idea of redshirting Holmes-if he'd go for it.

BozoneCat · Post by **BozoneCat** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 9:26 pm

Is Durham ever going to get this program out of the JC mode? I would like to see us sign one JC max every year to supplement and add depth, but that is it. You just can't build a program for long-term, consistent success by relying on numerous JCs every year. We had some success with it this year, but look at the track record and realize that this habit fails more often than it succeeds.

This year, I'll take a JC true power forward - but I would really like to see us fill the rest of our schollies with high school players. If Mick feels the need to sign another JC, I would like it to go to a true point guard who is more interested in assists than points. I can't for the life of myself fathom why he would sign another JC swing man? Get some good high school kids and work on building some consistency and continuity into this revolving door of a basketball program we've got going. *Sigh...*

wbtfg · Post by **wbtfg** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:04 pm

BozoneCat wrote:Is Durham ever going to get this program out of the JC mode? I would like to see us sign one JC max every year to supplement and add depth, but that is it. You just can't build a program for long-term, consistent success by relying on numerous JCs every year. We had some success with it this year, but look at the track record and realize that this habit fails more often than it succeeds.

This year, I'll take a JC true power forward - but I would really like to see us fill the rest of our schollies with high school players. If Mick feels the need to sign another JC, I would like it to go to a true point guard who is more interested in assists than points. I can't for the life of myself fathom why he would sign another JC swing man? Get some good high school kids and work on building some consistency and continuity into this revolving door of a basketball program we've got going. *Sigh...*

I would really like to see us sign all HS kids this year. I really think that we are very strong with the guys coming back, add Ted Morris, and a year of playing together, I really think that this team has a lot of potential next year, and I don't see glaring holes in our lineup....other than a true point guard.

How many schollies will we have next year? Towsley's, Woodall's, Brown's...is that all? Is Martrell Johnson coming back? Is Casey Durham going to be on scholarship next year?

grizwhiz · Post by **grizwhiz** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 12:55 pm

Hey Mslacat- I guess I'll have to ask you this question over here since you frequent this board more often that egriz or grizzlyboards. Is the Miami player the GRIZ are looking at from Miami Dade CC. Who is it (if you know)? Thanks!

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:19 pm

My two cents worth real quick. Somewhere in the huge book of NCAA rules one can find the tiny aspect relative fee waivers. If memory serves correctly, all Montana University employees and their immediate family are entitled to reductions and virtually total free tuition. Coaches kids count as family members, so in essense we could have a free scholarship. Same applies for academic scholarships not counting against the total athletic allotment; Spurrier challenged and demanded clarification from the NCAA relative Georgia's HOPE scholarship. NCAA ruled the HOPE kids don't have to be counted against their athletic numbers. So it should be a no-brainer: recruit and get kids who qualify for academic scholarships.

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:24 pm

I think mslacat pegged it when he said that the Cats caught everyone by surprise in the first half of conference. After tape and practice, they were pretty much shut down [as usual] in the second half of conference.

I think the Cats are very talented, talented enough to play with anyone next year. Next year, I believe the cream of the coaching crop in the BSC will be easily identified.

As for recruiting - my only comment is that mslacat's "rumor" was noticeably devoid of any in-state kids who, clearly, have all the necessary skills to play in the BSC (Although, mslacat could have thought that this was like an adendum to the other recruiting threads). Whatever - I just shake my head about how Mick recruits. I'm trying to understand - but I just don't get it!!!

wbtfg · Post by **wbtfg** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:43 pm

Bleedinbluengold wrote:I think mslacat pegged it when he said that the Cats caught everyone by surprise in the first half of conference. After tape and practice, they were pretty much shut down [as usual] in the second half of conference.

I think the Cats are very talented, talented enough to play with anyone next year. Next year, I believe the cream of the coaching crop in the BSC will be easily identified.

As for recruiting - my only comment is that mslacat's "rumor" was noticeably devoid of any in-state kids who, clearly, have all the necessary skills to play in the BSC (Although, mslacat could have thought that this was like an adendum to the other recruiting threads). Whatever - I just shake my head about how Mick recruits. I'm trying to understand - but I just don't get it!!!

So in one sentence you say that the Cats are very talented, can play with anyone next year, and then in the next paragraph you question Mick's recruiting abilities. It seems a bit contradictory to me.

jagur1 · Post by **jagur1** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:51 pm

I think the cat fans should be very excited about next year. A new coach might take a step back for the cats.

CLUB 126 · Post by **CLUB 126** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 2:55 pm

come on people, can we not just be happy? we were in the NCAA tounament just 9 years ago, It"s fun to think about!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AZCAT21 · Post by **AZCAT21** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:00 pm

seriously...9 years isn't that long. And 1 time in 15-16 years isn't that bad. but at least we have good kids playing for MSU.

CARDIAC_CATS · Post by **CARDIAC_CATS** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:24 pm

Until we can add some beef to the lineup, our teams will always be competitive but slide towards the end of the season. We need a balanced attack. The team was doing well when we shared the ball inside/outside in the middle part of the year, but when it came down to crunch time the guards just let the ball fly/got totally away from what we were doing in the middle of the year. LIVE by the 3, DIE by the 3.

I agree that a number of our players need to hit the weight room/practice circuit this year in the off season. This team has major room for improvment in free throws, rebounding, passing, fundamentals of full court breaking (by this I do not mean having a 3 on 1 break and stopping up at the 3 point line and launching the ball). They all need to be worked on. We do that as well as add a little beef/fire inside and I think this team has a very good shot next year of winning the conference/conference tourney. I am happy for what our team achieved this year, but I still have very high expectations.

The Grizzlies earned their trip to the tourney as they made good coaching changes the last 3-4 weeks as well as the players improved a lot on their ability to play together. Krysko is a class act and I knew he would bring the fire/coaching expertise to the Griz. I just thought it might take another year or so. I like his style and his fire. I thought he made a great coaching job by putting Dlouhy on Jefferson and make him earn his looks. I was wondering a few days before the game if he would do that as our guards the previous game were shooting uncontested 3 point shots.

I think Durhams best strengths are getting his teams to play very good team defense. I just wish he would have more fire/passion to him as well to get our team fired up. Thats why I think our team does so well at home so often is that the crowd gets them pumped up. We need this every game and it can be done with the coaches and othe players. It seems we usually go 'flat' at tourney time when its on a neutral court. This is where I think Krysko is going to be a huge asset to the Griz come tourney time. He knows how to motivate (I'm sure he learned a lot being a player in the NBA) and he know's how to work the refs.

Next year should be very interesting as there could be 4-5 teams for sure that could all win the title if they play well.

Hell's Bells · Post by **Hell's Bells** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 4:23 pm

it seems to me that the cats are recruiting their posts to be able to run the floor, we have only one person taller then 6'6 on the roster that got playing time and he could run (al beye). Id like to see durham recruit some thugs that can get down and dirty in the paint, rebound, play defence, and get a occasional hoop or 2

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 4:48 pm

wbtfg wrote:So in one sentence you say that the Cats are very talented, can play with anyone next year, and then in the next paragraph you question Mick's recruiting abilities. It seems a bit contradictory to me.

I thought the same thing while I was writing it. I think the contradiction is Durham. As I said, I try to understand his strategery, but I get totally perplexed. I simply don't understand his reluctance toward McGillis, but was 100% on board with Dissly.

I guess what I'm saying in regards to team talent is that if they actually played as a team, then they could compete with anyone in the league. As we discovered this year, the team concept was lost to everyone launching 3's from Hylite Canyon. Everyone has awesome athletes these days. It takes good coaching to make them play as a team...especially if there are a significant number of JC's.

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 4:51 pm

Hell's Bells wrote:...Id like to see durham recruit some thugs...

OK - are you Kramer?

mquast53000 · Post by **mquast53000** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 4:56 pm

Bleedinbluengold wrote:
Hell's Bells wrote:...Id like to see durham recruit some thugs...
OK - are you Kramer?

LOL

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:02 pm

Krysko has brought the old Big Sky basketball back. If we're going to be competitive, five or six of the athletes Mick has on this team had better at least go through spring ball and maybe not get back until after the playoffs in the fall. Next year, the Fizzlies are going to look like a Pat Dye Boise State defense and they're going to have some meat on them bones.