Recruit Feedback & Poll Topic

I'm still new to D2 and trying to get a feel for the quality of recruit I should be bringing in. Any feedback or tips are appreciated.

S75 recruits. Avalos was informed of redshirt.

John Avalos SF 3.44 57.5 71.6 31 46 26 40 10 38 9 21 36 69 52 70 448
Damon Keeling SG 3.57 43.0 76.9 50 37 13 56 12 15 19 30 13 41 63 57 406
Average   3.50 50.2 74.3 40 41 19 48 11 26 14 25 24 55 57 63 427

Green Bold Italics equals high-high potential.
Blue Bold Italics
equals high (unknown) potential.
Blue Bold Underline equals high-low potential.
Black equals average potential.
Red Bold equals low potential.

How did I do in D2, with C prestige? Running a Triangle/Zone.

Votes: 49
(Last vote received: 12/20/2012 8:35 AM)
12/8/2012 12:05 PM (edited)
I think Keeling is quite good with the potential to be great.
12/8/2012 4:29 PM
Keeling could use a redshirt season.  That 41 WE will slow his improvement rate.  And I don't think he'd contribute much his first couple seasons if you play him to improve the WE.
He could be a decent starter at SF his 4th-5th seasons. 
12/8/2012 5:23 PM
Keeling will be a solid SF and Avalos will be a pretty good defender and rebounder but a crappy offensive player. I agree with Iguana that you should RS Keeling instead of Avalos.

As far as in the future I think even with a low prestige you could aim a little higher in starting ratings than what you have.

12/8/2012 11:14 PM
I did aim higher to start, but most of the guys starting at or around 490 just laughed at me. There was a int'l with solid starter ratings who eventually dropped down to me, but I wasn't able to find his important ratings (ath, spd, def) potentials so didn't risk it.

Maybe I will try the redshirt on Keeling, though I thought Avalos would benefit more from it due to his Work Ethic.
12/9/2012 3:33 AM
Posted by zbrent716 on 12/9/2012 3:33:00 AM (view original):
I did aim higher to start, but most of the guys starting at or around 490 just laughed at me. There was a int'l with solid starter ratings who eventually dropped down to me, but I wasn't able to find his important ratings (ath, spd, def) potentials so didn't risk it.

Maybe I will try the redshirt on Keeling, though I thought Avalos would benefit more from it due to his Work Ethic.
Avalos is more likely to max out without it because he has the high WE. Keeling might not max out especially with those high-high ratings.
12/9/2012 1:03 PM
Redshirt Keeling, Avalos, I would not let see a start until Jr year at best.

Get their speed up ASAP. I don't think I'd ever let either of them off of a -2 shot setting. Use the ATH and SPD most effectively by driving the ball and drawing fouls. I think I'd also give them low distribution and only increase it gradually as they show they can score. Be mindful of TO's though, because they both look like TO machines right now. As for Defense, they LOOK like they should be very good defenders, but that will have to be evaluated as they go. watch your PBP's closely. Just my 2 cents.

EDIT: Just wanted to add that although I stand by my comments above, I DO think Keeling has the potential to be a GREAT player, but I think it will be in a NON-traditional roll for a guard. Driving and drawing fouls consistently (killing the 2 guard in the process hopefully), and lots of easy close in chip shots.
12/9/2012 9:36 PM (edited)
Keeling took the redshirt happily, so I am going to give him that extra year to develop and get his IQ up so that he can hopefully log a few extra minutes in his first 2 seasons.
12/10/2012 3:54 AM
Not seeing what a lot of others are. Keeling looks like he'll be decent, could be a solid #2 or 3 option depending on how high high the lp is. If it is one of those 70-80 point varieties he will be very solid, but while it seems that lp and per have more of those, there's no guarantee of that... problem with both guys is even though there are high highs there the starting values are pretty low, so its tough to evaluate. Basically if the HH values turn out to be no better than 28-30 or so neither guy is all that great. The high GPAs and good FT shooting is a nice bonus though. I grade it a B. 
12/10/2012 3:55 AM
zbrent, my biggest question is, what role do you envision them playing? if you dont have a clear purpose in mind, then i dont even need to look at the players - its not a good lot. this game is all about finding the right shape player to fit in the system to create the best possible combination of talents and abilities. 

when i look at these players, what i struggle with is, where are they going to play? sure, they have some decent ratings. and as usual, ill apply my standard, 2 strength measure to each player (every player in a role must have 2 clear strengths, that you are able to leverage. when you are good enough to pick the right 2+ strengths per role, thats when you really start to fire on all cylinders). 

so, starting with keeling. his ath/spd/def combo is good - although 41 work ethic, he will take a while to get there, and hes not going to be playing maxed out in those areas except maybe senior year. thats always a good start. but where is his second strength? rebounding is OK, but that is not an allowable strength for guards (the possible strengths you can have for guards are offense, defense, ball control, for bigs, offense, defense, rebounding. sfs can have any of those). his passing on its own effectively rules him out as a guard, so he really needs to play sf. but in terms of both ball control and rebounding, its not a strength, hes just not totally devoid. on the other hand, he does have a small contribution to make in all the other 3 areas (other than defense, his only clear strength), he can score a bit, has non zero bh/pass/reb. so its not like hes terrible or anything. and if you are going to break the 2 strength rule, teh best place is with a well rounded sf, so you are really doing OK there, but id try to avoid well rounded guys in the future and get some stronger players. i know its tough - you are competing in one of the best d2 confs ever, with a great d2 conf next door. its not an easy place to recruit. but you'll get there all the same. if he does end up being one of those high/high lp guys who gets +70, which is unlikely with his WE and all the other **** you need to practice, even if he had the caps - then he could really be a nice player, because hed have 2 clear strengths for you, with some bonus other stuff. especially with that nice FT%. actually, if you were running FB, id applaud the signing, because really he fits perfectly into that kind of mold. for triangle, hes still pretty solid - definitely not going to be losing you any games - im just concerned hes not going to be winning you any, either.

avalos... now, hopefully you can guess my next comment. its a bad one. with keeling a sf, what is avalos? if the answer is sf, thats a really bad combo - you want maybe 2 sfs (natural, dont care about listed position), on your whole team. the worst possible arrangement is to have them in the same class. anyway, basically, i have all the same comments as the last guy. his ath/spd/def combo is good enough to call defense a strength, and thats very possibly the most important strength to have. but then where is #2? his ath/reb isn't there yet, i dont think, but its not bad. maybe thats close enough. bh/pass, definitely not. offense? very little. so i definitely like him less, he doesn't have the potential to hit the 2 strengths, and with his spd strength, im not liking him swinging to pf  - and his bh/pass preclude him from being a sg.

you are new to the GLV and probably also fairly new to the CBG system, but if you stick around and continue to get advice from me, you will effectively here the same thing a hundred times. its all about roles and team planning. these two guys, on their own, are ok - keeling is decent and maybe pretty good, im not a fan of avalos but hes not terrible by any means. but as a pair, they REALLY, REALLY dont work together. when you have just 2 seniors, you want them to be major building blocks for the rest of your team, your pillars of strength. do you see these two guys ever filling a role like that? i cant even see them both starting, and that is really the first step. make sure you are thinking ahead 2, 3, 4 seasons every time you recruit, its absolutely critical to your continued success as a coach. 

on a final note, i just want to say, i dont mean to sound totally negative, but im trying to give you all the angles and the thinking behind why i wouldnt have signed both of these guys. without question, if i signed keeling, i would hvae taken a walkon before avalos, and its not even close - dont be afraid of walkons, they don't bite, look at them as a second chance. but the reality is, these guys ARE good enough to play on a team that will make the NT, and you are a low end d2 school right now trying to get your prestige up, so by that metric, you succeeded. in d3, especially d3 worlds that aren't that populated (which is most of them, now), its a lot easier to jump into a C range school and in a single cycle (4 seasons), be up to an A, trying to build a championship team. that gets harder as you move up, and when you are in a power d2 conference, its especially the case. so just have a little patience, and try to learn from the lumps you will take! ultimately thats why a promising young coach such as yourself should join a conference like the GLV - to experience that sharp learning curve. 

let me know if you have any questions/comments... if you haven't read the interview i did a while back, you might want to do that, i talk a lot about your vision for your team and that kind of stuff, which is sort of the required framework for us to have intelligent conversations about your strategy and how you are doing implementing it. i didn't do it here because you are new, was going easy on you - but my response to this kind of inquiry is almost always a question, what was YOUR plan and how well do you think you executed it? well, i guess i sort of did open with that, but then i answered anyway. the reality is, you are early enough to get a solid answer without you specifying the system you expect them to fit in, and how they fit in - but when you are trying to go from a 2 time national champion (congrats on achieving that so early by the way, thats really not common at all) to a 10 time national champion, not just trying to learn the ropes of a new division, ill be pressing you a lot harder to give the context - context is everything, once you've mastered the basics. good luck!
12/10/2012 1:49 PM
To answer your question, I expect Avalos to be my starting 4 as an upperclassman. 

I think 50 (minimum), 75 speed, 45 Reb (minimum), 60ish D player can defend most 4s well and (based on his adequate ath and plus speed) get some traditional #4 in foul trouble, even with relatively low distro. 

Keeling, for me, turns on how high the high-high in speed is. If it's 30, he's a SF. If it's 40, he's a SG.

Will these two anchor teams that beat the best of the best (eg: conference play)? No, not on a terribly regular basis.

Will they be competitive enough to let me string together some wins, pull an upset here or there, and build a program up from C prestige? I hope so.
12/10/2012 3:50 PM (edited)
keeling is a sg with +40 speed? its really his bh/pass that worries me. i guess as an upperclassmen, he will have a lot of that growth. but with 41 we, even in 3 seasons, i think his bh/pass is just too low, and probably even at his maximums. triangle has too much of a penalty on low pass guards anyway, i cant see playing a guard with under 40 pass, especially with the speed. AT LEAST i would make one of those 2 guys a sf. avalos can swing to the 4 somewhat but the primary contribution of a 4 is rebounding (outside of defense at least), and so i just don't like him as a 4, although i think hes a decent 3.

i do think they are good enough to overcome C prestige, like i pointed out, i think these guys are fine to make the NT with (i.e. get prestige up to b/a- level, at least). just trying to push you to find players of equal talent who are more suited to a particular role. in a 2 man class you typically want 1 offensive stud, to lead the team as a senior, and thats a total crap shoot with keeling. keeling will honestly be a pretty decent scorer even with +30 lp but its still a bit tough. the more i look at him, the more i like him, but i maintain that hes not a 2, and avalon isn't a 4 - and you just don't want 2 sfs in a class. but it makes sense why you would sign both, if you look at both like you do. also, it will be interesting to see how the foul trouble prediction plays out - i think the reality is, players foul on defense, at least the good majority of the time. hes a good defender, but thats not enough to get a guy in foul trouble, i think you need to be able to score a lot, and i dont think anything about avalos makes me think hes going to draw a lot of fouls. he has a lot of speed - in real life, sure, that might do it - but in HD, i just don't think it works that way. could be wrong though.

anyway, good luck with both of em. i do think you can keep up with guys like this, even in the GLV, but i know you are personally shooting higher than that. at least, im guessing, based on your experience at hamline :) and ESPECIALLY playing a zone formation, i think you have to think about pillars of your team - taking walkons liberally as necessary to get the best players in the right spots. when some of your starters can play 35mpg, without fatigue problems, you just don't need 12 guys - you need a smaller set who is ideally suited, thats really the function of zone, in my opinion at least - it allows you to recruit a smaller set of better players who you can lean on harder. in just about every other way, zone is disadvantaged - although you still managed to build a hell of a program with zone at hamline, which is saying something, maybe i should shut up, because you already have 2 more zone championships than me :)
12/10/2012 9:31 PM
I'll be honest, I'm a bit uncertain about the passing for Keeling in the triangle. I've had somewhat similar players be extremely effective at the top of D3, but it was with motion. I know in theory triangle depends more on the pass and less on the ball handling, but I've always had the impression that there really wasn't a ton of difference between the offensive sets.

As for the speed, more is obviously better, but a 70+ ATH / 77 SPD / 75+Def player should (I think) be fine at the 2, particularly in a zone. Now, if Keeling's unknown high Def ends up being high-high, and gets up to mid-80s or ~90, I'd likely play him at the 3, because that sort of D stopper is really a key (arguably the key) to maximizing the effectiveness and flexibility of the zone D.
12/10/2012 10:04 PM
And I do plan on taking some walkons (or at least being open to it), but that will be once I have ~10 of *my* players on the roster, instead of 10 guys who are a combo of what I inherited and recruited.
12/10/2012 10:05 PM
oh yeah that speed is fine. i dont know why i was thinking 40 speed. +40 is a lot different :) i dont know why it doesnt show edited, but when i was reading my post i was like man 40 speed... thats another reason not to play at sg, so i tossed it in with the bh/pass (especially pass). so scratch that. yeah, its the passing for me that knocks him out. motion is THE offense that is most able to sustain low passing guards, and triangle is THE offense that is least able to. so expect that to hurt somewhat harder than you are used to. especially starting at 13, hes not going to have usable passing for at least 3 full seasons, if ever.

keep in mind that with all his high potential stuff, he just won't be able to grow in all of it fast enough to nearly cap out by junior year - which is where i like to evaluate players to, to decide if i want them or not. i dont want a guy i can only rely on for 1 season. i think if keeling is your sf, hes going to be a good player for you. i really think hes MUCH better there than as a sg, and as a sg, he is kind of crappy, but you know, still not horrible or anything. i think the most important thing on a team is to have the best players in their correct role, so id MUCH rather play keeling as a 3 and avalon as a 4, than keeling at the 2 and avalon at the 3. avalon is the guy i don't like - and the reason i really dont like him is i see him as the second best player at his position on your team, even as a senior. but if in your system, they are able to start together, effectively, it makes your class A LOT better.

i hope i didn't offend you or anything, really not the intention - but from the experience i have in d2, i know a C prestige team can do better. thats a pretty harsh way of looking at things for a new d2 coach, but to be totally honest, i wasn't evaluating your class as a first time d2er, and maybe i should have. i was evaluating your class as a 2 time national champion. so just keep that context in mind when you consider my comments. for your second d2 class, you did well. if you had a normal d3 background, i would have applauded you for signing keeling and suggested avalon was a good enough player but you'd be better with a true big or true guard. but as an already 2 time national champion, i guess i was just holding you to a higher standard. 

one of the toughest challenges in d2, coming from d3, is the change in budget - in d3, you have a smaller pool and have to make it work, with what you can find, because you just dont have the money to usually go further. in d2, i have the experience to know there are better players out there for C schools, you just have to look harder. but i dont expect you to know that yet. you'll get there in time. and we have so much more money - weren't you in a d3 conf by yourself? on a 3 man budget, thats 10k. on a 3 man budget in the GLV, you have about 25K. thats a hell of a lot bigger difference than the standard 3k vs 5k, and you really have to play it a lot different. and remember - our area is HYPER competitive. the MIAA was at one point arguably the 3rd best d2 conf in all of HD (active, not all time or anything), and the GLV is brutal. we just have to look further and be more resourceful, using all options - ineligibles, jucos, internationals - where as normal d2 coaches do not, well, not as much. its an additional challenge, but luckily we have the money to help make it possible - but still, that just makes the learning curve sharper for you. you've commented in conference about how you thought the step up from d3 recruits would be bigger than you saw - and it is - but not by as much as people would normally think. i think the difference, in terms of scope - both in number of recruits you scout, and categories of recruits you consider (d2 recruits, dropdowns, pulldowns, internationals, jucos, transfers, internationals) is a fairly big reason why most d3 coaches come to d2 and take a while to step up the talent level. given your inexperience, you really did a fine job - i just tend to give harsher criticism to those who i think have greater potential for success, so if nothing else, take THAT as a compliment :)
12/10/2012 10:33 PM (edited)
12 Next ▸
Recruit Feedback & Poll Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2018, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of, 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.