Sean Miller

[Bruins01]

Wilner:

Pac-12 basketball: Arizona’s plan isn’t working, so something needs to change
The Wildcats are in a roster rut under coach Sean Miller

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/09/ ... opL9dcCfus" target="_blank

Hard to argue with any of this but... I'm not really convined that Miller is good at developing players, either.

[CalStateTempe]

I agree Bruins.

I don’t see the longevity in the league of alumni in the nba to the same level of lutes nba alumni.

Gotta be flexible to teach and coach up others. Miller ain’t that.

[ByJoveByJingle]

A lot of people have a lot of opinions about that with respect to Miller but also many other coaches. I’m just curious what the metric would be to prove that this isn’t just a Rorschach test or confirmation bias. Also, how can you compare a coach who gets players for 1 or 2 years to a coach who gets 4 or 5 years to “develop” a player?

Is Miller just as responsible for Solomon Hill as he is for Kobi Simmons? Did he just luck into Derrick Williams, or was he at all responsible for his development? Is Kaleb Tarczewski’s inability to live up to his 5* status a function of limited upside, or did Miller fail to capitalize on his transcendent potential? I certainly don’t claim to know. But I see a lot of conflicting evidence and I suspect that if you a do a deep dive into most coaches’ history you’ll find the same thing.

[TheCat]

Any writer who says "have steady seniors Stone Getting or Dylan Smith" does not know what he is talking about. Dylan Smith is about as far away from steady as I have ever seen. I do agree balancing the roster and players needs to happen. I think that was Zeke's role on this team as a four star but he turned out to be the best player of the 3.

[Beachcat97]

Wilner's the one who routinely writes negative articles about AZ, right?

[Bruins01]

Wilner's the one who routinely writes negative articles about AZ, right?

Has Arizona done anything recently to deserve positive articles?

[SCCats]

Wilner's the one who routinely writes negative articles about AZ, right?

Has Arizona done anything recently to deserve positive articles?

No.

[Merkin]

Wilner's the one who routinely writes negative articles about AZ, right?

Has Arizona done anything recently to deserve positive articles?

UA is a great pit stop for One and Dones?

[ChooChooCat]

Wilner's last article about how Miller has to be fired after the Scheme debuted fell flat on its face, so he had to follow it up with an article on a premise that has been discussed as nauseam on every Arizona message board for the past 3 or so years.

[Beachcat97]

Wilner's the one who routinely writes negative articles about AZ, right?

Has Arizona done anything recently to deserve positive articles?

That's true. Kick em while they're down. Nice.

[Chicat]

Wilner's the one who routinely writes negative articles about AZ, right?

Has Arizona done anything recently to deserve positive articles?

That's true. Kick em while they're down. Nice.

Exactly why Bruins01 suddenly finds himself on the upper boards.

[Beachcat97]

Wilner's the one who routinely writes negative articles about AZ, right?

Has Arizona done anything recently to deserve positive articles?

That's true. Kick em while they're down. Nice.

Exactly why Bruins01 suddenly finds himself on the upper boards.

Yeah. I haven't seen Bruin fans on here for a long time, but they've been coming out from under their slimy, ancient rocks recently. As soon as UCLA starts losing again, they'll go away.

[97cats]

im trying to be the shepherd, but its hard

[Chicat]

im trying to be the shepherd, but its hard

My man from Inglewood....

[baycat93]

embrace your inner tyranny '97. We will be better for it.

[Bruins01]

Ha, I don't want anyone here* to be miserable. If I did, I would want you guys to keep Sean Miller forever. Things are absolutely depressing in our conference and it needs to turn around. That means UCLA AND Arizona not being worthless disappointments.

I'm sure you guys agree that basketball was a hell of a lot more fun when both our programs were great.

*Machina excepted of course. And a few of the other racists.

[zonagrad]

A lot of people have a lot of opinions about that with respect to Miller but also many other coaches. I’m just curious what the metric would be to prove that this isn’t just a Rorschach test or confirmation bias. Also, how can you compare a coach who gets players for 1 or 2 years to a coach who gets 4 or 5 years to “develop” a player?

Is Miller just as responsible for Solomon Hill as he is for Kobi Simmons? Did he just luck into Derrick Williams, or was he at all responsible for his development? Is Kaleb Tarczewski’s inability to live up to his 5* status a function of limited upside, or did Miller fail to capitalize on his transcendent potential? I certainly don’t claim to know. But I see a lot of conflicting evidence and I suspect that if you a do a deep dive into most coaches’ history you’ll find the same thing.

^^^^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^^^^

I’d like to know if Miller knows if guys like Simmons, Alkins, Jerrett, etc... have no intention of stay and developing or if they’re non-committal about their future. None of the guys who’ve left early have amounted to anything on the professional level. They had not business leaving early and could’ve developed more had they stayed 4 years. Their early departure prevented Arizona from deviant kind of continuity in the program. And it’s partly why fans have lost interest.

Fans fully understand when a guy like Ayton or Markannen leave early. But it’s frustrating when others do it because the program is short changed. Even more frustrating is when guys like Doutrive bail instead of being patient. It leads back to AAU and how it’s wrecked college basketball.

[EVCat]

^^^^^^^^^^This^^^^^^^^^^

I’d like to know if Miller knows if guys like Simmons, Alkins, Jerrett, etc... have no intention of stay and developing or if they’re non-committal about their future. None of the guys who’ve left early have amounted to anything on the professional level. They had not business leaving early and could’ve developed more had they stayed 4 years. Their early departure prevented Arizona from deviant kind of continuity in the program. And it’s partly why fans have lost interest.

Fans fully understand when a guy like Ayton or Markannen leave early. But it’s frustrating when others do it because the program is short changed. Even more frustrating is when guys like Doutrive bail instead of being patient. It leads back to AAU and how it’s wrecked college basketball.

I'll argue Grant Jerrett's message from God cost us the national championship in 2014.

And that's always been my thing...does Miller get credit for Solo and TJ and Dusan and even Gabe York (he was much better by the end...less of his 3's were in blowouts)? And if he did 'develop' those players better, did he forget how to with others? Or, at this level, is it up to the player to listen to the coach and follow those instructions that have worked well for others? Even Ayton seemed to be a much better post player with improved footwork just from 9 months before he left. Did Miller just forget how to do this job in the summer of 2015?

Maybe we just had two bad decisions, one Miller's fault and one not, back into each other and create chaos...bad PG projection/recruiting/wrangling of dads and the FBI/ESPN mess. Certainly 2018 was somewhat impacted. 2019 was a crater because of it. 2020 was "take everyone we can no matter how much time they will be here (OADs, Sr transfers)", and the continued loss of BWill and disappearance of guards through the year impacted the final record some. Didn't expect Zeke to play to a OAD, so 2020 was a quick fix rebuild because the alternative was to tell the fans they had to wait 2 to 3 years for some super 3* and low 4* projects to grow into an elite role...and Miller would never have seen the end of that. We were ready for that in 2009, but he surprised us in year 2 with a shot for the Final Four. We aren't as prepared, as a fanbase, for a long rebuild. So we reloaded. And, yeah...it does make you chase a bit to fill vacancies with transfers and elite players who like how we prepare for the NBA. But I am not sure what the choice was...tell Nico and Josh no? You can't come here. Sometimes I think people overestimate the amount you can finesse recruiting and win.

[Beachcat97]

But I am not sure what the choice was...tell Nico and Josh no? You can't come here. Sometimes I think people overestimate the amount you can finesse recruiting and win.

Now that their AZ careers are over, and produced a fifth place Pac finish and a pretty disappointing OOC run, I'm not sure how you can make the case that taking Nico and Josh was good for the program. Here's the alternative: recruit guys ranked more in the 40 to 80 range, accept that these guys won't lead you to the promised land in one year, and be appreciative that you'll have them for at least 2-3 seasons. If we'd gone that route, maybe Doutrive stays. Maybe Hazzard gets more minutes. If a team with three 5-stars can only get you a 5th place finish, how much worse could a team be with three or four 4- and 3-stars? Probably not much. In fact, these lower rated players are probably less focused on being OAD and more focused on being at AZ for a while, which is what we want.

So as has been discussed at great lengths in other threads, I'm so ready to be done with Caliparian recruiting. Getting multiple 5-stars doesn't equate to deep tourney runs. If you want a good foundation for your program, you need a roster comprised mainly of multiple-year players. The roster turnover is killing us, and yes, that's on Miller.

[97cats]

My man from Inglewood....

brotha!! my fav part of that monologue...

The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men.

[zonagrad]

But I am not sure what the choice was...tell Nico and Josh no? You can't come here. Sometimes I think people overestimate the amount you can finesse recruiting and win.

Now that their AZ careers are over, and produced a fifth place Pac finish and a pretty disappointing OOC run, I'm not sure how you can make the case that taking Nico and Josh was good for the program. Here's the alternative: recruit guys ranked more in the 40 to 80 range, accept that these guys won't lead you to the promised land in one year, and be appreciative that you'll have them for at least 2-3 seasons. If we'd gone that route, maybe Doutrive stays. Maybe Hazzard gets more minutes. If a team with three 5-stars can only get you a 5th place finish, how much worse could a team be with three or four 4- and 3-stars? Probably not much. In fact, these lower rated players are probably less focused on being OAD and more focused on being at AZ for a while, which is what we want.

So as has been discussed at great lengths in other threads, I'm so ready to be done with Caliparian recruiting. Getting multiple 5-stars doesn't equate to deep tourney runs. If you want a good foundation for your program, you need a roster comprised mainly of multiple-year players. The roster turnover is killing us, and yes, that's on Miller.

If Miller doesn’t take the 3 freshmen and instead opts for 3-4 year players instead, what do you think 2020 looks like? I’ll tell you: a damn near last place finish. The problem wasn’t the freshmen. They carried us. The problem was everyone else. No BWill. An overvalued Jeter and Dylan Smith. Stone Gettings would’ve been our leading scorer. We desperately needed the freshmen just to finish 5th. Without them I shudder at the possibility.

Simmons and Alkins would’ve been seniors. And leaders. Akot and Doutrive would’ve been key contributors. That’s how crazy our roster has been.

[Beachcat97]

If Miller doesn’t take the 3 freshmen and instead opts for 3-4 year players instead, what do you think 2020 looks like? I’ll tell you: a damn near last place finish. The problem wasn’t the freshmen. They carried us. The problem was everyone else. No BWill. An overvalued Jeter and Dylan Smith. Stone Gettings would’ve been our leading scorer. We desperately needed the freshmen just to finish 5th. Without them I shudder at the possibility.

Simmons and Alkins would’ve been seniors. And leaders. Akot and Doutrive would’ve been key contributors. That’s how crazy our roster has been.

I disagree, zg. Maybe those lower rated guys are more coachable, more responsive to hard practices. We really don't know. I'm leaving Zeke out of this because I think he absolutely lived up to (if not exceeded) his billing. Josh had a decent (not great) season. Nico was pretty disappointing, imo. I just think you really roll the dice when you pin your hopes almost entirely on OAD players. This past season probably gave us the greatest contrast between freshman class ranking and eventual season outcome.

Look around the Pac. Other teams are competing just fine without OAD players. If Miller is half as good a coach as many here think he is, he should be able to develop a group of players between November and March. When was the last time that happened? Is he not as good a coach as we thought, or is the recruiting strategy wrong? Maybe a bit of both.

[EVCat]

5 star freshmen struggle.

3 star freshmen are not ready to be, what, 80% of our scoring like our three freshmen starters were.

Other teams compete just fine with 3 star seniors and juniors. And sometimes they do...sometimes they are Oregon State. I don't want to be Oregon State. We have always had upperclassmen play a huge role until this year. This was a direct result of having no one left after 2019 and needing to lean on the freshmen, but that has not been the standard lineup makeup under Sean Miller.

If we had 4 three-star freshmen this year, including at PG, we would have been sunk.

[Beachcat97]

Oregon, Ohio State and Florida State all had multiple 3/4 star freshmen this year. They also had better upperclassmen than we did, but that could be looked at as the long term outcome of having too many OADs and two and dones. Would you rather have Peyton Pritchard or Kobe Simmons? They were both class of ‘16.

[Dave]

I would like to know how many players we have lost directly related to playing time concerns after the OAD guys commit.

[Chicat]

My man from Inglewood....

brotha!! my fav part of that monologue...

The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men.

Sean Miller needs a guy like The Wolf to come in and get all this shit cleaned up.

“You feel better motherfucker?”

[ChooChooCat]

I would like to know how many players we have lost directly related to playing time concerns after the OAD guys commit.

Plenty.

[Dave]

That's what you call a double whammy. We need to follow Gonzaga's roster management model to a T or at least try.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.spokes ... ontent=amp" target="_blank

[CalStateTempe]

I would like to know how many players we have lost directly related to playing time concerns after the OAD guys commit.

Plenty.

Infuriating

[EVCat]

Oregon, Ohio State and Florida State all had multiple 3/4 star freshmen this year. They also had better upperclassmen than we did, but that could be looked at as the long term outcome of having too many OADs and two and dones. Would you rather have Peyton Pritchard or Kobe Simmons? They were both class of ‘16.

would you rather have Aaron Gordon or some non starter senior for Oregon? Would you rather have Derrick Williams or Sabatino Chen?

I mean, we can cherry pick players all day. But if you really think the path to national elite play is taking a series of 3 and 4 star players, I would highly disagree. I think our recruiting classes before this year, with a single OAD brought in with multiple year players and playing with numerous upperclassmen, is what you want. That flow was disrupted in 2018. We didn't lose in 2016 and 2018 because of too many OADs. We lost because of PG play and, with Wichita St, a ridiculously underseeded team. Until this year, we simply have not had that many OADs, and every program loses players to transfer (more than we do).

This idea that we should want less talent is amazing to me. If we can get all the lottery picks, we are going to win. But the reality is we don't typically get 3 or 4 OADs a class, and the recruiting process itself creates blended classes of early entrant players and long term players. But what if your designated 4 year recruits transfer because they weren't good enough to play early? Transfers hurt more than OADs. OADs typically tear shit up while they are on campus. Zeke, Deandre, Lauri, AG...even Stanley...they were big impact players.

Teams that count on 3 star players don't make the tournament as consistently as we do. For every single success story you name, I can fill an NIT and CIT bracket with the teams that didn't blow up with less talent. You need to blend your roster as best you can, using all avenues (senior and multi-year transfers, role player recruits, elite players) and, until this year, we have generally had older rosters than you probably think

[EVCat]

I just see a lot of throwing the baby out with the bathwater regarding OADs. OAD's, if properly blended with aged rosters, are not some evil that destroys your program. Our 4 best years of the Sean Miller era, 3 of them had a OAD, and two had 2 year players that were stars. Our worst teams had no OAD.

It's not a single OAD that is causing problems. This year was an anomaly. Recency bias...

[Beachcat97]

Among the last 4 NCAA champions, there have been two OAD players (Spellman from Nova and Bradley from UNC).

You don’t need OADs to win big in March. You need roster continuity and good coaching. It’s questionable whether the impact of a OAD like Aaron Gordon outweighs the roster discontinuity it entails. His team didn’t reach the FF.

[UAEebs86]

Among the last 4 NCAA champions, there have been two OAD players (Spellman from Nova and Bradley from UNC).

You don’t need OADs to win big in March. You need roster continuity and good coaching. It’s questionable whether the impact of a OAD like Aaron Gordon outweighs the roster discontinuity it entails. His team got screwed by a horrible call and didn’t reach the FF.

Fixed your post.

[gronk4heisman]

Among the last 4 NCAA champions, there have been two OAD players (Spellman from Nova and Bradley from UNC).

You don’t need OADs to win big in March. You need roster continuity and good coaching. It’s questionable whether the impact of a OAD like Aaron Gordon outweighs the roster discontinuity it entails. His team didn’t reach the FF.

And among the last 5 NCAA Champions, there have been 5 OAD players, it works both ways. Top tier recruits is not the issue, the mis-evaluation, non development and early departure of the next tier of recruits is the main reason we are were we are.

2015:
Trier - Top tier, lived up to the billing for the most part.
Smith - Never played due to injury, sad.
Comanche - Left after two years to take a picture with a Lambo and sit at home, would have been a solid rotation and a huge help in 2018 and 2019 when Keanu Pinder was our first big off the bench one year and Chase Jeter was our best player the next.
Simon - Left part way into his freshman year, Became a solid rotation player for St Johns

2016:
Lauri - Top tier, exceeded expectations and was our best player by far.
Kobi - Had no business leaving after one year, if he told us beforehand that he was going to that is one big mistake in recruiting there. Would have been a Jr last year and probably get us into the tournament had he stayed.
Rawle - He was decent during his time, but again left after two years.
Pinder - I guess you get what you can, if I recall we struck out on a lot of guys this year which lead to us reaching for a few undesirables like Kobi and Pinder was to cover the unexpected loss of Smith and Victor the year before.

2017:
Ayton - Top tier, all universe type player. Had we not had him we probably win less then 10 games this year.
Brandon Randolph - This is the type of player you build around, unfortunately he saw the league in his future and left without developing or adding really anything.
Akot - Left after 1.5 years, no development but another guy who should have been part of our core this year.
Barcello - See above.
Ira - Has stuck around and is the glue holding this team together going into next year.

After that, the FBI happened and threw everything off leading to a weak 2018 class and the over compensation of needing to take multiple OAD talents in 2019. As you can see the issue has not been the top 15 OAD guys, the issue has been the second tier guys. I would say taking one top 15 guys each year along with doing a much better job vetting the others would make a world of difference. Losing the guys expected to be your core for multiple years has killed us (Victor, Simon, Ray, Chance, Akot, Randolph, Kobi, Bancello, Devonaire, BWill) and is hard to overcome.

[Beachcat97]

I would say taking one top 15 guys each year along with doing a much better job vetting the others would make a world of difference. Losing the guys expected to be your core for multiple years has killed us (Victor, Simon, Ray, Chance, Akot, Randolph, Kobi, Bancello, Devonaire, BWill) and is hard to overcome.

That sounds good to me. I really didn't mean to imply that we should turn our back on top 15 guys who want to come here. Some of these elite players dream of playing at AZ. What I'm against is roster instability, the kind that numerous OADs (or even grad transfers) bring.

You're right: if we'd been able to keep some of those anticipated "core" players, we'd have been in different shape the last two seasons. I think Simon, Chance and DD, in particular, could've done big things for us.

[Dave]

I think we are focusing too much on the level of the player we should or shouldn't be recruiting. The bigger problem lies in the culture of the program. The culture starts with the coaching staff. I would love to hear our sales pitch to recruits.

[azcat49]

Maybe the pitch is, “we get kids to the league”. Kids want to go to a place where they can visualize then realize their dreams. They all want to play in the league and spending a year st AZ with our track record can’t be to bad of a choice.

[Beachcat97]

Maybe the pitch is, “we get kids to the league”. Kids want to go to a place where they can visualize then realize their dreams. They all want to play in the league and spending a year st AZ with our track record can’t be to bad of a choice.

If the pitch is "we get kids to the league," we can never be upset or disappointed when not one, not two, but three freshmen are one and done.

[Dave]

If that is our pitch, it would explain everything. We will get you to the league before your even ready. DWWD

[Postmaster]

I feel Randolph was run off. He also wasn’t ready to be in the role he had.
I believe Simmons felt he was OAD but also thought he should have played more PG.
Didn’t help that he got move to end of bench when Trier came back.

The grad transfers generally don’t have the skills to dominate and aren’t around long enough to learn the defense.

I understand going after top tier guys but there is a trade off (especially in Miller’s system) when you push other guys out the door.

[gronk4heisman]

I would be interested to hear what the pitch is to current players, those are the ones we struggle to recruit/retain.

[luteformayor2]

I have been sitting on this thought a for a second, trying to really digest whether it makes any sense whatsoever. I am not sure it does, but hear me out. This is the way that Miller can be saved (can save himself).

Next year won't be great but it shouldn't be horrible. Miller is going to have Koloko, Brown, Baker, Mathurin, Terry, Akinjo, maybe Bwill, Lee, possibly Haarms, and possibly 2 decent euros. That is a deep, top tier front court, a proven point guard (akinjo), and at minimum 2 athletic wing players (mathurin, terry) who will get a full year to develop on the wing together.

We should make the tournament with this crew next year but mainly, the whole core of the group will be returning in 2021.

That gives Miller a year to develop these guys and for all of them to grow and gel together. The prospect of a seasoned Koloko and Brown in 2021 dominating the paint, 2 tall, lanky, athletic defensive wing players in their second year together (mathurin/terry) especially under miller's defensive training, and then Akinjo and whoever else at the point is definitely a really intriguing potential team.

Now if Miller can grab 2 top tier 2021 high school guys, and they get to come in with a super defensive minded veteran starting 5 who is 6'0, 6'6", 6'6", 6'11", and 7'1" - we are POISED for a serious title contender team. That would make a team of 7-8 guys who all are contributors. A solid fucking team.

This scenario would be very similar to TJ McConnell teams where we kept the core and cycled in top fresham over 2 years and both teams were championship level. I am not saying Akinjo is like McConnell. But the situation is similar and Miller has shown he can make it work in this way.

Now, the only way any of this works is if Miller does 3 things.

1) Gets to the tourney next year
2) Signs two 5* 2021 recruits
3) Doesn't lose any of these guys to the NBA or transfer

It is probably a tall task for Miller but the blue print is there. It makes sense and if Miller can pull it off we will have a title contender in 2021.

It gives me some level of optimism.

[PHXCATS]

I have been sitting on this thought a for a second, trying to really digest whether it makes any sense whatsoever. I am not sure it does, but hear me out. This is the way that Miller can be saved (can save himself).

Next year won't be great but it shouldn't be horrible. Miller is going to have Koloko, Brown, Baker, Mathurin, Terry, Akinjo, maybe Bwill, Lee, possibly Haarms, and possibly 2 decent euros. That is a deep, top tier front court, a proven point guard (akinjo), and at minimum 2 athletic wing players (mathurin, terry) who will get a full year to develop on the wing together.

We should make the tournament with this crew next year but mainly, the whole core of the group will be returning in 2021.

That gives Miller a year to develop these guys and for all of them to grow and gel together. The prospect of a seasoned Koloko and Brown in 2021 dominating the paint, 2 tall, lanky, athletic defensive wing players in their second year together (mathurin/terry) especially under miller's defensive training, and then Akinjo and whoever else at the point is definitely a really intriguing potential team.

Now if Miller can grab 2 top tier 2021 high school guys, and they get to come in with a super defensive minded veteran starting 5 who is 6'0, 6'6", 6'6", 6'11", and 7'1" - we are POISED for a serious title contender team. That would make a team of 7-8 guys who all are contributors. A solid fucking team.

This scenario would be very similar to TJ McConnell teams where we kept the core and cycled in top fresham over 2 years and both teams were championship level. I am not saying Akinjo is like McConnell. But the situation is similar and Miller has shown he can make it work in this way.

Now, the only way any of this works is if Miller does 3 things.

1) Gets to the tourney next year
2) Signs two 5* 2021 recruits
3) Doesn't lose any of these guys to the NBA or transfer

It is probably a tall task for Miller but the blue print is there. It makes sense and if Miller can pull it off we will have a title contender in 2021.

It gives me some level of optimism.

The money many not be there to fire him but we will see. I think 1 is important but not 2 and 3.

If Miller gets a tournament bid plus is competitive in the conference next year I think he gets a few year extension. The 2020-2021 team will be far more like the early years with Miller minus D Williams at Arizona and his Xavier teams. More heart and more coachable. If they gel and do well in conference he will be extended in my opinion.

[ChooChooCat]

More heart and more coachable.

That's the hope and all, but who knows truly if that's true. Just because they're all lower rated guys does not mean they have more heart or are more coachable.

[legallykenny]

Maybe the pitch is, “we get kids to the league”. Kids want to go to a place where they can visualize then realize their dreams. They all want to play in the league and spending a year st AZ with our track record can’t be to bad of a choice.

If the pitch is "we get kids to the league," we can never be upset or disappointed when not one, not two, but three freshmen are one and done.

It's abundantly clear that that is exactly what our messaging is and that we take guys that other elite programs are a little less warm on because they suspect they'll be leaving before they've really contributed.

[PHXCATS]

More heart and more coachable.

That's the hope and all, but who knows truly if that's true. Just because they're all lower rated guys does not mean they have more heart or are more coachable.

You are right, we won't know for certain. I am by no means an insider nor do I have sources like you do, but I do hear things from some people from time to time. Those things are the vast majority of the time correct. I am hearing this team will have those things. But like you said you truly never know until the games get going.

[PHXCATS]

I will say this. Coachable maynot have been the best word. "Buy in" might be better.

[Chicat]

Maybe the pitch is, “we get kids to the league”. Kids want to go to a place where they can visualize then realize their dreams. They all want to play in the league and spending a year st AZ with our track record can’t be to bad of a choice.

If the pitch is "we get kids to the league," we can never be upset or disappointed when not one, not two, but three freshmen are one and done.

It's abundantly clear that that is exactly what our messaging is and that we take guys that other elite programs are a little less warm on because they suspect they'll be leaving before they've really contributed.

Can’t be A Player’s Program if we aren’t focused on the needs and wants of the players.

[CalStateTempe]

Maybe the pitch is, “we get kids to the league”. Kids want to go to a place where they can visualize then realize their dreams. They all want to play in the league and spending a year st AZ with our track record can’t be to bad of a choice.

If the pitch is "we get kids to the league," we can never be upset or disappointed when not one, not two, but three freshmen are one and done.

It's abundantly clear that that is exactly what our messaging is and that we take guys that other elite programs are a little less warm on because they suspect they'll be leaving before they've really contributed.

I’ve been saying this for a while: our top players are different then the top players taken by other teams.

[DrWildcat]

Maybe the pitch is, “we get kids to the league”. Kids want to go to a place where they can visualize then realize their dreams. They all want to play in the league and spending a year st AZ with our track record can’t be to bad of a choice.

If the pitch is "we get kids to the league," we can never be upset or disappointed when not one, not two, but three freshmen are one and done.

It's abundantly clear that that is exactly what our messaging is and that we take guys that other elite programs are a little less warm on because they suspect they'll be leaving before they've really contributed.

I’ve been saying this for a while: our top players are different then the top players taken by other teams.

So generally, good enough (or enough pro potential) to leave after 1 year but not good enough to dominate during their 1 year of college?