Double Diamond said:

---

All I said is I think Shaka could have more success getting back to his roots. Picking up full court with edgy players.

---

I think it's a little late for a coach to be getting back to his roots, but assuming he does decide to go back to an uptempo scramble game, does he even have the roster to make it work? It's one thing to do it in a midmajor where half the teams suck, much harder to do it in a conference where you're starting in the bottom half regarding team strength

Doubt Shaka has the depth. Still think he would do better with edgy hard workers.

Double Diamond said:

---

Doubt Shaka has the depth. Still think he would do better with edgy hard workers.

---

well hopefully when he gets fired by Texas, he finds a more suitable situation to implement that plan

Texas overpaid big time. I don't think any other school would have offered Shaka close to 3 million/year. After that Final Four run, he strung together a number of "good but not great seasons" at VCU, but nothing that screamed "can't miss" coach. It'd be like paying 5 million to a group-of-5 football coach who had one amazing season, and then went 9-3 the next year while losing to SMU. So basically like Tom Herman.

Shaka could punch his ticket was very much a hot coach. Texas made the mistake of picking personality over coaching ability. Gregg Marshall should've been their guy. I don't think Texas over paid as that was the going rate. I do think Shaka Smart is and was overrated.

He had offers, but he'd definitely lost some of the shine since his Final Four run.

I agree. And said Shaka is pretty overrated.

If shaka can win more games by recruiting less talented players... Well, that's an easy problem to fix.

Makes me wonder why he wasn't recruiting crappier players from the beginning.

Ask rick Barnes.

Method Man said:

---

Ask rick Barnes.

---

Barnes always had star talent

True, but he did better when he wasn't getting the one and dones. They're just not as invested. Especially if they pick UTx over a blue blood. I'm not arguing for crappy recruiting. It's just sometimes better to have fringe 4-5 stars that will stay and develop.

Method Man said:

---

True, but he did better when he wasn't getting the one and dones. They're just not as invested. Especially if they pick UTx over a blue blood. I'm not arguing for crappy recruiting. It's just sometimes better to have fringe 4-5 stars that will stay and develop.

---

It's like every other recruiting strategy. Sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't. There are a bunch of bad teams out there full of fringe guys.

Method Man said:

---

True, but he did better when he wasn't getting the one and dones. They're just not as invested. Especially if they pick UTx over a blue blood. I'm not arguing for crappy recruiting. It's just sometimes better to have fringe 4-5 stars that will stay and develop.

---

It's almost always better to have guys who stay multiple years. Gives you more chances to have success with them.

Ok. Fair enough, but those two did better with very good players that weren't one and done. I'll restate...the kids that don't go to blue bloods to play bball that are one and done aren't looking to win a NC. They're mostly looking to solidify their draft position.

I don't think I've ever heard of 4-5 stars referred to as fringe players before. And I would imagine if a player improves their draft stock then they are playing well, which usually increases your chances at a NC.

Sorry. Fringe NBA players. Tyler Davis, Danuel House, Brad Buckman, PJ Tucker (at the time), Daniel Gibson, LaceDarius Dunn, etc. As opposed to Ben Simmons, Michael Beasley, Deandre,etc. who can mail it in at any point.

Quote:

---

the kids that don't go to blue bloods to play bball that are one and done aren't looking to win a NC. They're mostly looking to solidify their draft position.

---

this is lazy analysis

Not really. Maybe a lazy explanation. Maybe it's anecdotal evidence, but I've been watching it for about 15 years now and I feel pretty good about it. Explain why a kid with offers from teams that consistently compete for championships would pick UTx when they never come close.

Method Man said:

---

Not really. Maybe a lazy explanation. Maybe it's anecdotal evidence, but I've been watching it for about 15 years now and I feel pretty good about it. Explain why a kid with offers from teams that consistently compete for championships would pick UTx when they never come close.

---

it is lazy. You put everyone into some arbitrary box (top NBA prospects must go to a blueblood) and then those who don't do as you prescribe, you assign a character flaw of caring for themselves more than winning something as a team.

Like you really think Kevin Durant cares less about winning than the Brandan Wright? Greg Oden cares less about winning than the Harrison twins?

It's like saying Myles Garrett or Christian Kirk care more about their draft status than team success because they chose A&M over a bunch of teams that compete for titles.

I think Durant cared less about winning a NC in college than a kid that went to UNC. Yes. he stopped taking classes in Spring. If he wanted a NC he would've stayed until his team was older so he could win one.

Also, football players stay three years so it's a little different. I assume if Kirk and Myles had Bama offers and chose us they didn't come to A&M because they wanted to win.

It's also lazy to say I said "everyone".

Method Man said:

---

It's also lazy to say I said "everyone".

---

"everyone" as in all one-and-done types, which I mentioned

Method Man said:

---

I think Durant cared less about winning a NC in college than a kid that went to UNC. Yes. he stopped taking classes in Spring. If he wanted a NC he would've stayed until his team was older so he could win one.

Also, football players stay three years so it's a little different. I assume if Kirk and Myles had Bama offers and chose us they didn't come to A&M because they wanted to win.

---

Like I said earlier, this is lazy analysis from someone who has been watching it for 15 years. Kentucky/Calipari fashions his program as the place to get you pick as high as possible in the NBA draft and you think players signing up for that means they care more about winning than the other guys.

It's sad to see you disparage kids because they don't fit in your box, but I guess that's what the older generation feels entitled to do these days.

Kids go to UK to get drafted after one year. The fact that Cal can manage them into a good team helps. Like I said earlier, I believe it to be true and your "critique" not backed by anything substantial doesn't change that for me. Logic tells anyone UTx isn't winning a title this season.

Why did Bamba pick them knowing he was one and done? Why not pick UNC, Duke or KU or anyone else with a consistent track record of success? That doesn't mean there aren't exceptions.

You could also attribute what team pays you more or what coach you like best. but then again that's not about winning.

Method Man said:

---

Kids go to UK to get drafted after one year. The fact that Cal can manage them into a good team helps. Like I said earlier, I believe it to be true and your "critique" not backed by anything substantial doesn't change that for me. Logic tells anyone UTx isn't winning a title this season.

Why did Bamba pick them knowing he was one and done? Why not pick UNC, Duke or KU or anyone else with a consistent track record of success? That doesn't mean there aren't exceptions.

---

There are a million different reasons to choose one school over another, and those reasons aren't mutually exclusive.

You can care about winning and prefer one coach over another, or one city over another, or one shoe company over another, or one assistant over another, or one place closer to your home, or a school you grew up watching. Or maybe your girlfriend or brother or cousin goes to a particular. Or your best friend is already to committed somewhere.

It's like saying you don't care about your family's safety if you don't choose to live in one of the 5 safest cities in America or drive the safest care on the market. Or you don't care about your health if you don't go to the best doctor in America.

Not really, but ok

When a player like Ben Simmons who was going to be a top pick regardless goes to LSU it's not about winning. Not sure what it is, but winning isn't it.

I personally don't care we're most players go. But I do find it strange that I'd you have the offer you don't pick the very best.

Double Diamond said:

---

When a player like Ben Simmons who was going to be a top pick regardless goes to LSU it's not about winning. Not sure what it is, but winning isn't it.

I personally don't care we're most players go. But I do find it strange that I'd you have the offer you don't pick the very best.

---

a player like Tyler Davis doesn't care about winning because he chose A&M over Kansas. I'm not sure what he cares about, but winning isn't it.

Every athlete wants to win, but I'm not sure winning takes precedent for ANY prospective student-athlete when choosing where to attend school. Antoine Wright wanted to win, but it clearly wasn't very high on his priority list to go to a school where he could win.

He didn't want to win a championship or compete for one. *

Hop said:

---

Recruits pick a school that gives them the most exposure and sets them up for a pro career...and the most money coming out of high school.

---

When you say edgy do you mean emo kids? Because that's what edgy means.

Meant to quote Double Diamond