Bear Down Wildcats

I never fully understood why McCoy would come here if Ayton does too. Right now, we'd be looking at Ayton and Ristic as true C's and Comanche as another option at C, and McCoy is a C all the way.

On the wing, I would assume most prospects want to know if Alkins, Simmons and even Trier will be back. I include Zo based on the idea that the absence is limiting his marketabilty to the pros. If we return two of those three, we have those two plus Randolph and Smith on the wing. That's deep. Toss in Lee if he can play the 3 too and it gets even deeper.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:I never fully understood why McCoy would come here if Ayton does too. Right now, we'd be looking at Ayton and Ristic as true C's and Comanche as another option at C, and McCoy is a C all the way.

On the wing, I would assume most prospects want to know if Alkins, Simmons and even Trier will be back. I include Zo based on the idea that the absence is limiting his marketabilty to the pros. If we return two of those three, we have those two plus Randolph and Smith on the wing. That's deep. Toss in Lee if he can play the 3 too and it gets even deeper.

Which is why we are really set where we are, filling an immediate impact with Ayton at C and Randolph at the wing to mix with Alkins and Simmons and possibly Barcello, if ready to contribute as a Freshman, with PJC back, and depth in the post with Lee. We don't really need anything else, but another either PG or wing would be a nice cherry on top of this class.

But if we didn't get another player here, it wouldn't be disappointing or really an issue at all. With Trier and Markkanen leaving, and no other signings, we have this, without even considering the possibility Dylan Smith turns out to be a useable sniper/awesome transfer even half as important as TJ:

C - Ayton / Ristic / Comanche
PF - Comanche / Pinder / Ayton / Lee
SF - Alkins / Randolph / Pinder
SG - Simmons / Randolph / Barcello / (Smith as filler?)
PG - PJC / Simmons / Barcello

Yes, a freshman PG with super TJ skills would be nice, but that isn't coming. If we add Bowen to that mix? It gets ridiculous, because the only place you can say there might be some depth issue with an injury or issue is the SG/SF area, with only Alkins and Simmons proven and Randolph expected to have impact. You'd like Simmons to hang out at point as much as possible and win that spot, and then we'd be Simmons/Alkins/Randolph with possible Barcello impact. Pinder is effort, but you don't want him on the wing at all. So Bowen would be nice.

But, yeah...we could stop right here and be OK

We need Bowen. Difference between top 15 and top 5.

Beachcat97 wrote:We need Bowen. Difference between top 15 and top 5.

Wrong. A returning Kobi/Rawle is a better situation than Bowen. Prior to knowing who stays and who goes, saying Bowen makes a difference has zero actual relevance.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:We need Bowen. Difference between top 15 and top 5.

Wrong. A returning Kobi/Rawle is a better situation than Bowen. Prior to knowing who stays and who goes, saying Bowen makes a difference has zero actual relevance.

The point is that we need all three.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:We need Bowen. Difference between top 15 and top 5.

Wrong. A returning Kobi/Rawle is a better situation than Bowen. Prior to knowing who stays and who goes, saying Bowen makes a difference has zero actual relevance.

The point is that we need all three.

No we don't. Want, maybe. Need, no. You can still only put 5 guys on the court.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:We need Bowen. Difference between top 15 and top 5.

Wrong. A returning Kobi/Rawle is a better situation than Bowen. Prior to knowing who stays and who goes, saying Bowen makes a difference has zero actual relevance.

The point is that we need all three.

No we don't. Want, maybe. Need, no. You can still only put 5 guys on the court.

Our lack of depth this year is a critical weakness. If you can't see that, you haven't been paying attention.

we "need" the #1 through 15 players in the country, then.

Because, you know...we'd be better if we had the 15 best players in the country. Then we'd be...better, I guess, than everyone.

But with a top 3 class with 4 top 80 signings, and 2 of 3 super freshmen returning, and upper classmen at 3 other positions returning, there is no "need". Not in any definition of the word.

We are looking at a top 5 team right now, stop the presses. Of course, they actually have to play. But the lineup options I just discussed are with Randolph as support at the 2/3. You don't need that many wings. Add Barcello at the 2 for 10 minutes. Where are more players supposed to play? Bowen isn't more ready than Alkins or Simmons. Randolph and Bowen are similar. We have Randolph.

you can say everyone is a "need", I guess. But we have a top 3 national class filled with the #1 player in the nation and two posts/2 backcourt players with a strong returning roster. In no reasonable definition do we "need" Bowen. We'd love to have him and if he is as good as his high school rating (unproven, but highly rated), we would have time for him. Nothing more.

Using this year as an excuse....a year where we lost 4 players to odd circumstances....is disingenuous. No team can prepare for losing a McDs AA to academics/Australia, a high level 3 to a 3rd knee injury, a top returning SG to whateverthefuck and PJC to the ankle.

No one can recruit for 4 losses. No one does. No top player comes to a school saying "well...I am the #2 SG in the class, but I am going to come be the 5th wing in case they have that once in a program loss of four players in one season." It's a ridiculous attempt at a reason to "need" Bowen. We HAVE depth. That's why we are still competitive despite all 4 losses.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
Wrong. A returning Kobi/Rawle is a better situation than Bowen. Prior to knowing who stays and who goes, saying Bowen makes a difference has zero actual relevance.

The point is that we need all three.

No we don't. Want, maybe. Need, no. You can still only put 5 guys on the court.

Our lack of depth this year is a critical weakness. If you can't see that, you haven't been paying attention.

We have a lack of depth because we are down 3 perimeter players, one to an ACL, one to a high ankle sprain and one for an undisclosed reason.

As I take your proposal, you believe we can recruit 5 star wings based upon the potential for that situation to recreate itself. You also believe that scenario is so likely to repeat itself that Bowen's level of protection against it means the difference between top 15 and top 5. By that logic, I don't see why we simply don't fill every scholarship spot with a 5 star, just in case.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
Wrong. A returning Kobi/Rawle is a better situation than Bowen. Prior to knowing who stays and who goes, saying Bowen makes a difference has zero actual relevance.

The point is that we need all three.

No we don't. Want, maybe. Need, no. You can still only put 5 guys on the court.

Our lack of depth this year is a critical weakness. If you can't see that, you haven't been paying attention.

We have a lack of depth because we are down 3 perimeter players, one to an ACL, one to a high ankle sprain and one for an undisclosed reason.

As I take your proposal, you believe we can recruit 5 star wings based upon the potential for that situation to recreate itself. You also believe that scenario is so likely to repeat itself that Bowen's level of protection against it means the difference between top 15 and top 5. By that logic, I don't see why we simply don't fill every scholarship spot with a 5 star, just in case.

Obviously, the Trier and Smith situations are unusual and highly unlikely to recur. But you have to recruit and manage the roster in anticipation of these situations. They happen every year, in one form or another. Guys leave early, guys transfer, guys get injured. And you have to be careful with guys with eligibility questions. We got burned with Ferguson, and who knows what'll happen with Ayton?

So yes, Bowen is potentially a critical piece of the '17 class.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:We need Bowen. Difference between top 15 and top 5.

Wrong. A returning Kobi/Rawle is a better situation than Bowen. Prior to knowing who stays and who goes, saying Bowen makes a difference has zero actual relevance.

If Bowen does choose AZ, you have to think at least one of Kobi/Rawle has already made up his mind to leave.

I think we need McCoy more than another wing. Unless of course, we lose both Kobi/Rawle.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote: The point is that we need all three.

No we don't. Want, maybe. Need, no. You can still only put 5 guys on the court.

Our lack of depth this year is a critical weakness. If you can't see that, you haven't been paying attention.

We have a lack of depth because we are down 3 perimeter players, one to an ACL, one to a high ankle sprain and one for an undisclosed reason.

As I take your proposal, you believe we can recruit 5 star wings based upon the potential for that situation to recreate itself. You also believe that scenario is so likely to repeat itself that Bowen's level of protection against it means the difference between top 15 and top 5. By that logic, I don't see why we simply don't fill every scholarship spot with a 5 star, just in case.

Obviously, the Trier and Smith situations are unusual and highly unlikely to recur. But you have to recruit and manage the roster in anticipation of these situations. They happen every year, in one form or another. Guys leave early, guys transfer, guys get injured. And you have to be careful with guys with eligibility questions. We got burned with Ferguson, and who knows what'll happen with Ayton?

So yes, Bowen is potentially a critical piece of the '17 class.

Have you considered that it may be difficult to sell a top 10 player with the idea it is highly unlikely he will start and is mainly there to protect against unexpected roster turnover? Perhaps you bring in a more lightly regarded guy (Randolph) or a midmajor transfer (Smith) as your insurance for that?

If 2 of 3 of AT/RA/KS return, we are 4 deep at the 2/3 with two very, very good players who are virtual locks for starting. Is it honestly a mystery why Bowen isn't jumping at the chance to get a piece of that?

No, you don't get to do that.

You don't get to say "well, this might happen again, so a FIFTH top recruit in a top 3 class is critical."

It isn't true. These things "happen" with one or two players every year. We had the depth to handle four. We have the depth right now to handle a lot of loss. But we also likely won't have any loss, and you cannot manage to get kids to come in to maybe play if there are injuries or suspensions. If you have more than 8 top players, you have issues with chemistry.

So, no, Bowen is not a critical piece of the '17 class. It is a top 3 class without him. It is a successful and large (four) class without him, supplementing a solid returning base (5 regular players returning). He would be really nice, though. An absolute steal.

But you cannot claim we are in a need position with Ristic, Pinder, Alkins, Simmons, and PJC returning and Ayton, Lee, Randolph, and Barcello joining Dylan and the rest of the scout guys. It is not a requirement to go 10 deep with top 100 recruits and proven players. It is a luxury. Signing Bowen would be a luxury.

Not going to continue with this, because it is silly. Saying a top 3 class of 4 players across the positions with 5 major playing time returners is inadequate is absurd. Any more and it would just be more trolling.

EVCat wrote:It is not a requirement to go 10 deep with top 100 recruits and proven players. It is a luxury. Signing Bowen would be a luxury.

Not sure Duke and UK agree.

Beachcat97 wrote:

EVCat wrote:It is not a requirement to go 10 deep with top 100 recruits and proven players. It is a luxury. Signing Bowen would be a luxury.

Not sure Duke and UK agree.

So you just named less than 1% of D1 college basketball teams....sounds pretty much like a luxury

Beachcat97 wrote:
Our lack of depth this year is a critical weakness. If you can't see that, you haven't been paying attention.

We have a lack of available players. A return of PJC and Trier instantly makes us one of the deepest teams in the country. Add even one of those guys and depth (outside of pure point guards) is a non issue.

IndianaZonaFan wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

EVCat wrote:It is not a requirement to go 10 deep with top 100 recruits and proven players. It is a luxury. Signing Bowen would be a luxury.

Not sure Duke and UK agree.

So you just named less than 1% of D1 college basketball teams....sounds pretty much like a luxury

I'm married and 100% committed to my wife. There is a highly unlikely chance that she would be struck by lightning.

I feel as if I should recruit Eva Green as a backup option because I thought Casino Royale was a really good movie. I feel that would really go a long way in terms of making sure all potential negative circumstances are accounted for.

What are the potential reasons this does not work out for me?

Laugh it up, guys. We'll see how our roster depth shapes up for next season.

I am not trying to encourage BC97, but CSM seems to be recruiting Bowen pretty hard. There must be a good reason? ie it is unlikely at least 2 of AT/KS/RA will not be on the roster next year. Maybe all 3.

baycat93 wrote:I am not trying to encourage BC97, but CSM seems to be recruiting Bowen pretty hard. There must be a good reason? ie it is unlikely at least 2 of AT/KS/RA will not be on the roster next year. Maybe all 3.

In my first post before things got off track, the idea I was trying to advance is that our need level for Bowen is completely dependent on the plans of AT/RA/KS. They stay, we really don't have room for a 3rd or 4th guy as good as Bowen is. To add Bowen, it's reasonable to assume at least 2 of the 3 would be gone.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

baycat93 wrote:I am not trying to encourage BC97, but CSM seems to be recruiting Bowen pretty hard. There must be a good reason? ie it is unlikely at least 2 of AT/KS/RA will not be on the roster next year. Maybe all 3.

In my first post before things got off track, the idea I was trying to advance is that our need level for Bowen is completely dependent on the plans of AT/RA/KS. They stay, we really don't have room for a 3rd or 4th guy as good as Bowen is. To add Bowen, it's reasonable to assume at least 2 of the 3 would be gone.

And the plans of AT/RA/KS won't be known until well after BB's recruitment process has concluded. So do you wait until April to sign another player, or do you go all in on BB? I think it's almost certain that AT, RA, or KS will leave after this season.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

baycat93 wrote:I am not trying to encourage BC97, but CSM seems to be recruiting Bowen pretty hard. There must be a good reason? ie it is unlikely at least 2 of AT/KS/RA will not be on the roster next year. Maybe all 3.

In my first post before things got off track, the idea I was trying to advance is that our need level for Bowen is completely dependent on the plans of AT/RA/KS. They stay, we really don't have room for a 3rd or 4th guy as good as Bowen is. To add Bowen, it's reasonable to assume at least 2 of the 3 would be gone.

And the plans of AT/RA/KS won't be known until well after BB's recruitment process has concluded. So do you wait until April to sign another player, or do you go all in on BB? I think it's almost certain that AT, RA, or KS will leave after this season.

See my above post about Eva Green. It's a metaphor.

It isn't just about whether we want Bowen. Does Bowen want us? Does Bowen affect the go/stay calculus for a potential returner? Can we sell Bowen like we need to given our current roster situation?

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Can we sell Bowen like we need to given our current roster situation?

Probably not, given that he's a strong MSU lean.

Where is AT going? He is completely off the draft charts last I checked. Of course, after this year he may want to get as far away from the NCAA as possible.

Cant keep him on the list when he hasnt played a game I guess. If or when he plays a couple games he'll be a first rounder again

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Can we sell Bowen like we need to given our current roster situation?

Probably not, given that he's a strong MSU lean.

He's not a strong MSU lean. In fact if I had to bet on one today it'd be Arizona or Texas.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

baycat93 wrote:I am not trying to encourage BC97, but CSM seems to be recruiting Bowen pretty hard. There must be a good reason? ie it is unlikely at least 2 of AT/KS/RA will not be on the roster next year. Maybe all 3.

In my first post before things got off track, the idea I was trying to advance is that our need level for Bowen is completely dependent on the plans of AT/RA/KS. They stay, we really don't have room for a 3rd or 4th guy as good as Bowen is. To add Bowen, it's reasonable to assume at least 2 of the 3 would be gone.

Totally agree SS. I am implying CSM has a pretty good idea already. I have no inside knowledge. Just looking at it rationally. If both CSM and Bowen agree they are a good fit to the roster next year...

Jefe wrote:Cant keep him on the list when he hasnt played a game I guess. If or when he plays a couple games he'll be a first rounder again

We'll see. It's a deep draft.

I feel really bad for Trier. He does the sort of thing that the NCAA should want to prioritize up and he's been hurt by it. If the suspension is as rumored, it's another reason why NCAA enforcement prizes the letter of the law above the reason for the law.

Think it'd be very surprising to see AT in Tucson next fall.

Beachcat97 wrote:

EVCat wrote:It is not a requirement to go 10 deep with top 100 recruits and proven players. It is a luxury. Signing Bowen would be a luxury.

Not sure Duke and UK agree.

Like I said...A luxury.

And they have gone into seasons with a 4 player class over and over.

baycat93 wrote:I am not trying to encourage BC97, but CSM seems to be recruiting Bowen pretty hard. There must be a good reason? ie it is unlikely at least 2 of AT/KS/RA will not be on the roster next year. Maybe all 3.

Cause he would be awesome to get.

He is not, however, critical to our being a success next year. We aren't on the edge of disaster without him. He is not a must if we want this class to be a success. It is a top 3 class. We are in the top 3 programs in D1 with our class as currently constructed.

But, yeah...fuck yeah, we'd love to have him. I'd like to have every scholarship go to the very 5 best players of every class. But not doing so is not considered a critical miss if you get a top 3 class.

Beachcat97 wrote:Think it'd be very surprising to see AT in Tucson next fall.

Aren't you being doom and gloom about whether his suspension ends, then simultaneously this drops?

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Think it'd be very surprising to see AT in Tucson next fall.

Aren't you being doom and gloom about whether his suspension ends, then simultaneously this drops?

If his suspension ends, it won't take long for AT to re-assert himself as a legit pro prospect. He probably could've been drafted this past June.

If the suspension is season-long, he might be so fed up with the NCAA that he decides to focus entirely on prepping for the '17 draft.

What does he stand to gain by returning for another year, especially with our backcourt so crowded?

Beachcat97 wrote:
What does he stand to gain by returning for another year, especially with our backcourt so crowded?

I thought we were thin and it was essential...CRITICAL...to have another wing?

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Think it'd be very surprising to see AT in Tucson next fall.

Aren't you being doom and gloom about whether his suspension ends, then simultaneously this drops?

If his suspension ends, it won't take long for AT to re-assert himself as a legit pro prospect. He probably could've been drafted this past June.

If the suspension is season-long, he might be so fed up with the NCAA that he decides to focus entirely on prepping for the '17 draft.

What does he stand to gain by returning for another year, especially with our backcourt so crowded?

If his suspension is season long and he wanted to prep for the draft, he would have begun.

If our backcourt is so crowded, why do we need Bowen so bad? Oops, EvCat beat me to this.

If he'll be back and reassert himself shortly, how do you square that with the down year and bubble talk you peddle elsewhere.

Bowens good he's not 10 spots in the rankings good

EVCat wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:
What does he stand to gain by returning for another year, especially with our backcourt so crowded?

I thought we were thin and it was essential...CRITICAL...to have another wing?

Oh snap!

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Think it'd be very surprising to see AT in Tucson next fall.

Aren't you being doom and gloom about whether his suspension ends, then simultaneously this drops?

If his suspension ends, it won't take long for AT to re-assert himself as a legit pro prospect. He probably could've been drafted this past June.

If the suspension is season-long, he might be so fed up with the NCAA that he decides to focus entirely on prepping for the '17 draft.

What does he stand to gain by returning for another year, especially with our backcourt so crowded?

Crowded? I thought you said we need Bowen just to fill out the backcourt.

ProfessorFate wrote:

EVCat wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:
What does he stand to gain by returning for another year, especially with our backcourt so crowded?

I thought we were thin and it was essential...CRITICAL...to have another wing?

Oh snap!

Whoops!

Pay attention, guys. The roster "thinness" comment had to do with anticipated misfortunes, as are very common not just at AZ but everywhere. In a perfect world, we've got no suspensions, no injuries, no transfers, and no other roster issues next season. But when was the last time we had a season like that? Bowen gives us terrific depth, and not just walk-on caliber depth but high-level depth, which is what national contenders require.

Look, getting a guy like Bowen next year is similar to if we'd had Ferguson this year. If Ferguson were at UofA, the PJC/AT/RS situations would not have been as impactful. In fairness, the full impact is not yet known, as we're not even a third of the way through the season. But Ferguson would've given us much better depth. Miller knew this, of course, which is why he really wanted him this year.

Bowen would have to commit to AZ knowing that our roster is pretty full for next year. He'd be choosing to play for an elite team/program, and would be willing to compete for playing time. I hope we get him. He's a heck of a player and would make us the favorite in the Pac next season.

Moral of the story, Miller is still recruiting Bowen...and Diallo and Duval and to a lesser extent McCoy. Fall signing period is over so none of these guys will be signing anytime soon and Miller can wait till the spring when he has a better feel what to expect next season and recruit accordingly. He has a pretty good track record filling in the holes in the spring (though they don't always translate in the fall). As it stands now depth doesn't appear to be any concern at all and we have a little bit of cushion in both the front and backcourt.

PJC, Simmons, Alkins, Ayton, Ristic. Barcello, Smith, Randolph, Pinder, Chance, Lee. That is a solid 11 players (6 back court, 5 front court) that would constitute a top 10 team. If one or two of those guys were to leave then it is time for Miller to put on the full court press, but as it stands adding any of the guys mentioned above will not make or break our season though they could give us the needed push for a legit finals run.

so...Bowen would be a great get, but is not critical to making this a successful recruiting class.

Exactly...

Forgot about Dylan Smith. Nice to have him in the hip pocket.

So ...... no chance at Duvall right fellas?? An elite pg could really put us over the top and PJC as depth sounds like a championship roster.

PennZona20 wrote:So ...... no chance at Duvall right fellas?? An elite pg could really put us over the top and PJC as depth sounds like a championship roster.

I wouldn't say "no chance". From what I've read I'd categorize it as a very slim chance.

But we had very slim chances of landing any number of kids over the past however many years. Miller is a witch.

PennZona20 wrote:So ...... no chance at Duvall right fellas?? An elite pg could really put us over the top and PJC as depth sounds like a championship roster.

Duval is really, really good. No one really thinks we have much chance. Nothing's impossible.

I would worry about the API issue after Ferguson, but that's me.

gumby wrote:Forgot about Dylan Smith. Nice to have him in the hip pocket.

Thought he was bigger than PJC

Miller knows what he is doing

I don't think Arizona is even involved with Duval for numerous reasons at this point, but things can always change.

As far as Bowen goes, he's a true SF, something we wouldn't have on next year's roster even if both Rawle and Kobi return. I'm not fully confident both do return, especially Kobi, who is probably a 1st rounder based on huge upside and solid performances so far. It's definitely better to prepare for the worse than not. Either way if Arizona doesn't land Bowen and needs a wing due to one of our freshman taking off for the pros Miller will certainly be proactive on the transfer market.