Early Entry Sophomore bench player? Topic

isack24
Posts: 1566 (0)
Hall of Famer
81 19
Prospect
"Saying that the elite programs average five openings a year is an overstatement. But even if it's four and that's reduced, the small handful of top players that would've gone to one of them would now mostly go to B/B+/A- BCS programs that generally have large monetary advantages."

And this.  I don't think the lack of EEs matter because it just means that talent would be dispersed among different BCS schools, not mids.
5/8/2012 3:43 PM
jskenner
Posts: 246 (0)
Hall of Famer
249
Prospect
I think I'm coming around to your thinking, girt and isack. I do think elite BCS teams average pretty much 5 spots, but I think you may be right that dropping that to 3 would be mitigated significantly.

But this quote from girt really got me thinking:
"Ask any good BCS coach if he'd rather be guaranteed no EE's, or lose EE's but have some more recruiting cash. Anyone worth their salt would opt for no EE's -- and that right there tells you that overall it's advantageous for the BCS conferences."

It hit me that I'm actually a BCS coach worth my salt (at least I THINK I am), but I'm FOR no EEs. So does that make we not worth my BCS salt? ;)
5/8/2012 4:08 PM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
js, we go back way too far for me to ever make a statement like that....

But as the coach at a good BCS school, wouldn't you rather not have to ever worry about EE's and then have a little less cash (and fewer schollies to fill) in recruiting? Gosh, I think that is a complete and total no-brainer ... I'd pay extra every sesaon to have that guarantee at UNC.
5/8/2012 4:43 PM
isack24
Posts: 1566 (0)
Hall of Famer
81 19
Prospect
" I'd pay extra every sesaon to have that guarantee at UNC."

Sounds like a new booster idea...
5/8/2012 5:23 PM
grantduck
Posts: 290 (0)
Hall of Famer
73
Prospect
Still pretty ****** about this.  It basically makes it so you have no ability to plan/shape your roster/schedule for future seasons. 

I don't mind EE's at all, even 1 and dones would be fine, but there's needs to be some consistent logic behind when guys go and when they don't.
5/14/2012 6:04 PM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
Grant, the guy you lost was a stud. How can you be surprised that he left?
5/14/2012 9:08 PM
tianyi7886
Posts: 4243 (0)
Hall of Famer
51 33 282 40
Prospect
Am I looking at an EE candidate here when he's a JR? He still has avg growth in ath/spd/def/sb, high in reb/bh, reb is low and will max at 87-88.

Edward Stewart
C | Sophomore | 6'9" | 230 lbs. | 2.8 gpa
Refugio HS Refugio, TX | Recruited By: tianyi7886 C 741
RatingsStatisticsGame LogAwards
Athleticism 84 3  
Speed 30 5  
Rebounding 83 3  
Defense 93 3  
Shot Blocking 82 7  
Low-post 67 15  
Perimeter 10  
Ball Handling 32 6  
Passing 44
Work Ethic 78 1  
Stamina 78 2  
Durability 60  
FT Shooting C+  
Health 100
5/14/2012 10:03 PM
grantduck
Posts: 290 (0)
Hall of Famer
73
Prospect
Posted by girt25 on 5/14/2012 9:08:00 PM (view original):
Grant, the guy you lost was a stud. How can you be surprised that he left?

Because he wasn't a starter and averaged 6 ppg at 44% shooting; also was a sophomore EE.  Wasn't in the 90's in RBD or LP.  All of those things seems pretty inconsistent with what an EE should be.  Maybe I'm wrong, but someone that unproductive as a sophomore just was a big surprise.

5/15/2012 12:35 AM
dacj501
Posts: 4779 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 305
Pro
stats play very little role in determining EE (so I'm told)
5/15/2012 4:48 AM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
grant, ppg is really just a function of how much distro you elect to give a player. It used to be a significant factor in the EE process. People simply gamed the system, held back on distro and didn't lose the player. It w as ridiculous. So now, a lack of scoring will not stop a guy from leaving early.

You can try to spin it, but I looked at that guy when you posted, and he was a stud. Let's not pretend that he wasn't.
5/15/2012 9:32 AM
jskenner
Posts: 246 (0)
Hall of Famer
249
Prospect
If they're studs, play 'em while you got 'em. Woe to the coach who doesn't. :)
5/15/2012 9:34 AM
jpmills3
Posts: 337 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 174 1 1
Prospect
Posted by tianyi7886 on 5/14/2012 10:03:00 PM (view original):
Am I looking at an EE candidate here when he's a JR? He still has avg growth in ath/spd/def/sb, high in reb/bh, reb is low and will max at 87-88.

Edward Stewart
C | Sophomore | 6'9" | 230 lbs. | 2.8 gpa
Refugio HS Refugio, TX | Recruited By: tianyi7886 C 741
RatingsStatisticsGame LogAwards
Athleticism 84 3  
Speed 30 5  
Rebounding 83 3  
Defense 93 3  
Shot Blocking 82 7  
Low-post 67 15  
Perimeter 10  
Ball Handling 32 6  
Passing 44
Work Ethic 78 1  
Stamina 78 2  
Durability 60  
FT Shooting C+  
Health 100
Not likely. Though if you had a really good run, it wouldn't be impossible. Still unlikely in my opinion.
5/15/2012 12:20 PM
mykids_31206
Posts: 219 (0)
Hall of Famer
95 60
Prospect
Posted by jskenner on 5/15/2012 9:34:00 AM (view original):
If they're studs, play 'em while you got 'em. Woe to the coach who doesn't. :)
I have had players who were studs on paper, but over the season I had to reduce their distribution because they were just not performing. That is one reason why stats should carry more weight, because some players just seem to have a year that they dont perform well. If stats are not going to have any more effect than they have, then the players that dont have stats need to be kicked out if they average over 20 minutes per game.

We have more players now who end up being EE's that shouldnt have been, than we had players in the past they who should have been EE's but werent.
5/15/2012 12:49 PM
◂ Prev 123
Early Entry Sophomore bench player? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.