• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

First commit of 2023

Many reasons to like this commitment:
--Size: We've been too small for too long.
--Brains: Zack was also recruited by Brown so that tells you he's no dummy. Another quality recruit.
--Mater Dei: One of the storied high school basketball programs in all of California. Coach Gary McKnight has built a powerhouse there. Last year they ranked eighth in the state.

https://twitter.com/wcebball/status/1387573235756138499?lang=en
 
fanofzoo said:
mtgrizrule said:
Sweet, some length.

AND at a buck twenty !

I'm guessing he's near 210 lbs now. Looks like he has a good frame to add another 20 lbs. No need to add more. He's certainly bulkier than Selvig and Mack Anderson. I'll take his skill set over too much bulk any day.

It would be nice to add a natural big, like Qvale again.
 
citay said:
Many reasons to like this commitment:
--Size: We've been too small for too long.
--Brains: Zack was also recruited by Brown so that tells you he's no dummy. Another quality recruit.
--Mater Dei: One of the storied high school basketball programs in all of California. Coach Gary McKnight has built a powerhouse there. Last year they ranked eighth in the state.

https://twitter.com/wcebball/status/1387573235756138499?lang=en
I see a bigger combination of Strait and Ward there.
 
Poor man's Drew Timme. Could end up being like one of the Groves brothers that were such studs at EWU, Looks highly skilled for a high schooler. 6' 8" but could end up at 6' 10" and 225 lbs. as an upperclassmen and then would be a tough match.
 
CopperGold14 said:
Poor man's Drew Timme. Could end up being like one of the Groves brothers that were such studs at EWU, Looks highly skilled for a high schooler. 6' 8" but could end up at 6' 10" and 225 lbs. as an upperclassmen and then would be a tough match.
He sounds like a good gamble, but a gamble none the less. It's easy to get wrapped up in the potential of these kids, but the truth is that there are still a lot of ifs involved. You never really know. I know, at WSU, we have had some highly touted kids who had then turned out to be a waste of time and money. It's always a gamble.
 
oldrunner said:
CopperGold14 said:
Poor man's Drew Timme. Could end up being like one of the Groves brothers that were such studs at EWU, Looks highly skilled for a high schooler. 6' 8" but could end up at 6' 10" and 225 lbs. as an upperclassmen and then would be a tough match.
He sounds like a good gamble, but a gamble none the less. It's easy to get wrapped up in the potential of these kids, but the truth is that there are still a lot of ifs involved. You never really know. I know, at WSU, we have had some highly touted kids who had then turned out to be a waste of time and money. It's always a gamble.

Hit it right and two years later their gone.
 
citay said:
Many reasons to like this commitment:
--Size: We've been too small for too long.
--Brains: Zack was also recruited by Brown so that tells you he's no dummy. Another quality recruit.
--Mater Dei: One of the storied high school basketball programs in all of California. Coach Gary McKnight has built a powerhouse there. Last year they ranked eighth in the state.

https://twitter.com/wcebball/status/1387573235756138499?lang=en

I’ve heard Brown described as the Eastern Washington of the Ivies. Of course it was on the football message board so that should take away all credibility.
 
oldrunner said:
CopperGold14 said:
Poor man's Drew Timme. Could end up being like one of the Groves brothers that were such studs at EWU, Looks highly skilled for a high schooler. 6' 8" but could end up at 6' 10" and 225 lbs. as an upperclassmen and then would be a tough match.
He sounds like a good gamble, but a gamble none the less. It's easy to get wrapped up in the potential of these kids, but the truth is that there are still a lot of ifs involved. You never really know. I know, at WSU, we have had some highly touted kids who had then turned out to be a waste of time and money. It's always a gamble.

So oldrunner, two things can be true at the same time.

First, that all recruits are a gamble, some turn out to be a waste of time and money so why spend your time speculating because we've all had touted recruits that didn't pan out, not only your guys but us as well and every other team, pro and collegiate, throughout the entire history of any sport.

But second, c'mon! Don't take the fun out of it! Both the NBA and NFL have come to realize how eager fans are to watch the draft! Nothing perks up my interest on this board like a post that reads, "First Commit of 2023." Don't put "Jaded Cynical" in front of your title. Tout your recruits! Tell us how great the Cats are going to be next year! Bring it on! That's half the fun of Fandom. Of the fun rivalry we've developed in basketball with Weber State.

On a more serious note, I'd like to get your take on the Pac-12, and what the ramifications are for the Big Sky Conference. I don't know why this has to be the exclusive preserve of the Football Board.
 
citay said:
oldrunner said:
He sounds like a good gamble, but a gamble none the less. It's easy to get wrapped up in the potential of these kids, but the truth is that there are still a lot of ifs involved. You never really know. I know, at WSU, we have had some highly touted kids who had then turned out to be a waste of time and money. It's always a gamble.

So oldrunner, two things can be true at the same time.

First, that all recruits are a gamble, some turn out to be a waste of time and money so why spend your time speculating because we've all had touted recruits that didn't pan out, not only your guys but us as well and every other team, pro and collegiate, throughout the entire history of any sport.

But second, c'mon! Don't take the fun out of it! Both the NBA and NFL have come to realize how eager fans are to watch the draft! Nothing perks up my interest on this board like a post that reads, "First Commit of 2023." Don't put "Jaded Cynical" in front of your title. Tout your recruits! Tell us how great the Cats are going to be next year! Bring it on! That's half the fun of Fandom. Of the fun rivalry we've developed in basketball with Weber State.

On a more serious note, I'd like to get your take on the Pac-12, and what the ramifications are for the Big Sky Conference. I don't know why this has to be the exclusive preserve of the Football Board.

Citay, any chance you get to see this kid play down there?
 
mtgrizrule said:
citay said:
So oldrunner, two things can be true at the same time.

First, that all recruits are a gamble, some turn out to be a waste of time and money so why spend your time speculating because we've all had touted recruits that didn't pan out, not only your guys but us as well and every other team, pro and collegiate, throughout the entire history of any sport.

But second, c'mon! Don't take the fun out of it! Both the NBA and NFL have come to realize how eager fans are to watch the draft! Nothing perks up my interest on this board like a post that reads, "First Commit of 2023." Don't put "Jaded Cynical" in front of your title. Tout your recruits! Tell us how great the Cats are going to be next year! Bring it on! That's half the fun of Fandom. Of the fun rivalry we've developed in basketball with Weber State.

On a more serious note, I'd like to get your take on the Pac-12, and what the ramifications are for the Big Sky Conference. I don't know why this has to be the exclusive preserve of the Football Board.

Citay, any chance you get to see this kid play down there?
[/quote

Sorry, no. Wish I could.
 
citay said:
oldrunner said:
He sounds like a good gamble, but a gamble none the less. It's easy to get wrapped up in the potential of these kids, but the truth is that there are still a lot of ifs involved. You never really know. I know, at WSU, we have had some highly touted kids who had then turned out to be a waste of time and money. It's always a gamble.

So oldrunner, two things can be true at the same time.

First, that all recruits are a gamble, some turn out to be a waste of time and money so why spend your time speculating because we've all had touted recruits that didn't pan out, not only your guys but us as well and every other team, pro and collegiate, throughout the entire history of any sport.

But second, c'mon! Don't take the fun out of it! Both the NBA and NFL have come to realize how eager fans are to watch the draft! Nothing perks up my interest on this board like a post that reads, "First Commit of 2023." Don't put "Jaded Cynical" in front of your title. Tout your recruits! Tell us how great the Cats are going to be next year! Bring it on! That's half the fun of Fandom. Of the fun rivalry we've developed in basketball with Weber State.

On a more serious note, I'd like to get your take on the Pac-12, and what the ramifications are for the Big Sky Conference. I don't know why this has to be the exclusive preserve of the Football Board.
You are right, I like to speculate on a kid's potential as well. When I do it on our board I get shot down quick. We do have some interesting guys coming in and returning guys who are just pups and getting better everyday. We have a 7' center coming in who was a three star guy coming out of HS, Tamba, who reminds me a great deal of Joel Bolomboy as a freshman. He has a realy high ceiling and 4 years to play. We have a 6'6'' freshman guard out of Las Vegas, Dockery, who is rated 3* by some services. He is one of the most athletic and talented guys we have brought in for quite some time. We have a 6'5'' freshman PG who had some P5 offers, Louden, and has a big up side as well. We have a 6'9'' wing freshman who is a lights out shooter from 3, Jordan, who has played at the highest levels of club ball in the UK. those are the freshmen. We have a sophomore transfer guard out of SDSU, Dinwiddie, who was a 3* guy coming out of HS. He is a scorer, but may play PG a bit. We also have a 6'4'' wing in a junior, Verplanken, who may have to sit out a year if his appeal with the NCAA is rejected. We still have two spots left to fill and are said to be on a couple of grad transfers, Probably a guard and a forward. I am somewhat optimistic, but a lot of questions have to be answered.

This kid you have committed looks great on his highlight video, but don't they all. :lol:

Here is what I look for. I look for their relative speed, thier foot work, their positioning, their vision, their hands and the rest is fluff. Of course, every shot they take goes in and that gets us excited, but can they do it against D1 competition on a regular basis? To me, this kid looks like he has good potential, but I wouldn't expect him to be an all conf. player right out of the gate. He needs some polish. If he has it in him, your coaches will bring it out. :thumb:
 
citay said:
oldrunner said:
He sounds like a good gamble, but a gamble none the less. It's easy to get wrapped up in the potential of these kids, but the truth is that there are still a lot of ifs involved. You never really know. I know, at WSU, we have had some highly touted kids who had then turned out to be a waste of time and money. It's always a gamble.
On a more serious note, I'd like to get your take on the Pac-12, and what the ramifications are for the Big Sky Conference. I don't know why this has to be the exclusive preserve of the Football Board.
I'm not sure that the PAC12 will look to expand back to 12 right away. Their options are not good. The two best options that I see are SDSU and BSU. After that it is slim pickings. If they do pull the trigger on one or both of those schools, that would leave the MWC a bit thin. The MWC could look at some BSC schools, but they could look elswhere as well. These days it is all about TV contracts and those contracts are based on populations who would be watching those games. The MWC already has too many small market programs and would be very careful not to add any more. I'm sure that UI would love to jump back into the FBS pool, but that aint happening. Bigger markets with smaller fan bases are not real attractive either. These things are based on the all mighty $$$ and not on strength of programs. Out of the BSC scools, I would say that MSU, UM, and WSU, in that order, would be the most likely targets. :geek:
 
oldrunner said:
citay said:
On a more serious note, I'd like to get your take on the Pac-12, and what the ramifications are for the Big Sky Conference. I don't know why this has to be the exclusive preserve of the Football Board.
I'm not sure that the PAC12 will look to expand back to 12 right away. Their options are not good. The two best options that I see are SDSU and BSU. After that it is slim pickings. If they do pull the trigger on one or both of those schools, that would leave the MWC a bit thin. The MWC could look at some BSC schools, but they could look elswhere as well. These days it is all about TV contracts and those contracts are based on populations who would be watching those games. The MWC already has too many small market programs and would be very careful not to add any more. I'm sure that UI would love to jump back into the FBS pool, but that aint happening. Bigger markets with smaller fan bases are not real attractive either. These things are based on the all mighty $$$ and not on strength of programs. Out of the BSC scools, I would say that MSU, UM, and WSU, in that order, would be the most likely targets. :geek:

Funny thing is, the most powerful conference, the S.E.C., has some of the smallest markets: College Station, Fayetteville, Lexington, Athens, Starkville, Oxford, Gainesville, Columbia (Missouri and South Carolina), Tuscaloosa, Auburn, Nashville, Knoxville, Baton Rouge. Not only are these tiny markets, they're really not even close to major markets except Atlanta.

No, it has to do with this: Football is the major American sport; it's the South where the collegiate football rivalries have become the most intense and where member schools have not only built the best regional TV network, the S.E.C. network, but have the most appealing games for national TV. I believe the Bay Area is the fifth largest market in the country, yet the Stanford-Cal rivalry, which used to be known in these parts as "The Big Game," is not really that big a deal any more. You can walk up late to any "Big Game" these days and get a ticket at the gate, partly because people are at home watching Alabama play Florida in a game with consequences for a national championship. (When I used to go to a sports bar here to watch the Griz play football, the place was packed with Florida fans, Tennessee fans, Alabama fans.)

So I question whether it's about markets or simply about rivalries in the most prominent American sport, football.

Maybe this is the route for the Big Sky, to gradually build such intense rivalries that the games make it on to ESPN. I dunno.

I do know this: The Pac12 is a dead conference walking. Oregon and Washington must follow the money trail or become second-rate athletic powers, something neither wants to do. The two Arizona schools will follow suit, probably to the Big 12, which will welcome back Colorado and probably add Utah too. I think Oregon State and Washington State are toast. The smaller remaining schools will have to develop regional conferences if they are to maintain their women's sports programs, which by law they must.

I think this all bodes well for Weber and the Montana schools to join a stronger regional conference--which, by the way, would be a wonderful thing for both men's and women's basketball.
 
oldrunner said:
citay said:
So oldrunner, two things can be true at the same time.

First, that all recruits are a gamble, some turn out to be a waste of time and money so why spend your time speculating because we've all had touted recruits that didn't pan out, not only your guys but us as well and every other team, pro and collegiate, throughout the entire history of any sport.

But second, c'mon! Don't take the fun out of it! Both the NBA and NFL have come to realize how eager fans are to watch the draft! Nothing perks up my interest on this board like a post that reads, "First Commit of 2023." Don't put "Jaded Cynical" in front of your title. Tout your recruits! Tell us how great the Cats are going to be next year! Bring it on! That's half the fun of Fandom. Of the fun rivalry we've developed in basketball with Weber State.

On a more serious note, I'd like to get your take on the Pac-12, and what the ramifications are for the Big Sky Conference. I don't know why this has to be the exclusive preserve of the Football Board.
You are right, I like to speculate on a kid's potential as well. When I do it on our board I get shot down quick. We do have some interesting guys coming in and returning guys who are just pups and getting better everyday. We have a 7' center coming in who was a three star guy coming out of HS, Tamba, who reminds me a great deal of Joel Bolomboy as a freshman. He has a realy high ceiling and 4 years to play. We have a 6'6'' freshman guard out of Las Vegas, Dockery, who is rated 3* by some services. He is one of the most athletic and talented guys we have brought in for quite some time. We have a 6'5'' freshman PG who had some P5 offers, Louden, and has a big up side as well. We have a 6'9'' wing freshman who is a lights out shooter from 3, Jordan, who has played at the highest levels of club ball in the UK. those are the freshmen. We have a sophomore transfer guard out of SDSU, Dinwiddie, who was a 3* guy coming out of HS. He is a scorer, but may play PG a bit. We also have a 6'4'' wing in a junior, Verplanken, who may have to sit out a year if his appeal with the NCAA is rejected. We still have two spots left to fill and are said to be on a couple of grad transfers, Probably a guard and a forward. I am somewhat optimistic, but a lot of questions have to be answered.

This kid you have committed looks great on his highlight video, but don't they all. :lol:

Here is what I look for. I look for their relative speed, thier foot work, their positioning, their vision, their hands and the rest is fluff. Of course, every shot they take goes in and that gets us excited, but can they do it against D1 competition on a regular basis? To me, this kid looks like he has good potential, but I wouldn't expect him to be an all conf. player right out of the gate. He needs some polish. If he has it in him, your coaches will bring it out. :thumb:
All of this means almost nothing, sorry but these kids you are high on will be gone in two years, if they are that good. The portal means you play for now not development years down the road, gone is the romantic idea of going somewhere and playin your whole career there.
And I hate it.
 
fanofzoo said:
oldrunner said:
You are right, I like to speculate on a kid's potential as well. When I do it on our board I get shot down quick. We do have some interesting guys coming in and returning guys who are just pups and getting better everyday. We have a 7' center coming in who was a three star guy coming out of HS, Tamba, who reminds me a great deal of Joel Bolomboy as a freshman. He has a realy high ceiling and 4 years to play. We have a 6'6'' freshman guard out of Las Vegas, Dockery, who is rated 3* by some services. He is one of the most athletic and talented guys we have brought in for quite some time. We have a 6'5'' freshman PG who had some P5 offers, Louden, and has a big up side as well. We have a 6'9'' wing freshman who is a lights out shooter from 3, Jordan, who has played at the highest levels of club ball in the UK. those are the freshmen. We have a sophomore transfer guard out of SDSU, Dinwiddie, who was a 3* guy coming out of HS. He is a scorer, but may play PG a bit. We also have a 6'4'' wing in a junior, Verplanken, who may have to sit out a year if his appeal with the NCAA is rejected. We still have two spots left to fill and are said to be on a couple of grad transfers, Probably a guard and a forward. I am somewhat optimistic, but a lot of questions have to be answered.

This kid you have committed looks great on his highlight video, but don't they all. :lol:

Here is what I look for. I look for their relative speed, thier foot work, their positioning, their vision, their hands and the rest is fluff. Of course, every shot they take goes in and that gets us excited, but can they do it against D1 competition on a regular basis? To me, this kid looks like he has good potential, but I wouldn't expect him to be an all conf. player right out of the gate. He needs some polish. If he has it in him, your coaches will bring it out. :thumb:
All of this means almost nothing, sorry but these kids you are high on will be gone in two years, if they are that good. The portal means you play for now not development years down the road, gone is the romantic idea of going somewhere and playin your whole career there.
And I hate it.

I'm hoping they pan out for Weber. On the theory that a rising tide lifts all boats, I would like to see one Big Sky team make it past the first round of the playoffs. If not Weber, us. If not us, Sac Sate. If none of the above, the Cats.

We need money and we need TV exposure, and we're only going to get it if one teams steps up big-time.
 
Back
Top