And here's T-Tech's current roster:

Name	Yr.	Pos.	A	SPD	REB	DE	BLK	LP	PE	BH	P	WE	ST	DU	FT	TOT
Jerry Elzey	So.	PG	47	94	1	63	3	1	87	81	68	74	72	58	B-	649
Neal Johnson	Fr.	PG	35	68	1	49	2	29	50	64	48	44	73	49	B+	512
James Garay	Sr.	SG	97	98	14	99	16	10	86	95	97	51	93	69	D+	825
John Hale	So.	SG	43	78	12	58	6	1	78	87	76	51	78	76	C+	644
Richard Henderson	Jr.	SF	93	81	63	64	29	57	74	48	45	74	91	97	C+	816
Thomas Krieger	Fr.	SF	37	39	46	41	34	40	55	38	53	72	64	79	C-	598
Daniel Scott	Fr.	SF	43	56	34	55	22	40	52	46	52	80	75	48	C	603
George Johnson	Jr.	PF	99	62	72	91	84	95	27	25	36	72	95	67	C+	825
Michael Woodall	Jr.	PF	89	70	97	84	50	90	25	27	49	81	83	86	C+	831
Thomas Yorke	So.	PF	68	47	89	67	65	77	43	34	46	59	77	71	C+	743
John Boyle	Fr.	C	62	29	50	72	36	29	20	26	34	75	78	58	C	569
Bryan Gibson	Fr.	C	34	25	83	32	85	79	1	34	27	28	71	34	C	533

Bear in mind that we've run press the past several seasons. I like the situation at SF, PF, and C. Henderson will likely start at SF, and we'll throw Johnson and Woodell in as starters as well. The backcourt situation isn't as rosy. Garay graduating leaves a sizable hole; Elzey is OK and will probably see a decent amount of time. Beyond that, it's up in the air.

Offseason improvements and the recruiting money I end up with could change this, but my first move before recruiting will probably be cutting Neil Johnson. I get we need depth in the backcourt, but he's just not good. I also might cut Boyle; Gibson and Hale's cores are at least passable for the time being, and if I need to keep them around for a season to take up space, I'll do that.

btw - congrats on the big 6 job.

Thanks trobone. Happy to see you're still following.

Anyway, onto my recruits. I cut not only Johnson, but Boyle and Gibson as well, and I'm happy to report I stretched my one-scholarship budget into four players better than the guys I axed. Depth in the backcourt was a big need, and helping to fill the void will be Mario Markovich (#133 overall, #17 PG, **). He was fairly close (within 300 miles), and I love that he's already a very good shooter. Plus, he'll improve passing the ball, as well as in making his free throws. The one negative is that while he's an OK athlete, he's no world-beater. The athleticism and speed won't improve from their just-OK starting points, but they'll still be respectable.

Athleticism	42	(low potential)
Speed	81	(low potential)
Rebounding	3
Defense	33
Shot Blocking	1
Low-post	15	(high potential)
Perimeter	90	(low potential)
Ball Handling	76	(high potential)
Passing	69
Work Ethic	79
Stamina	79
Durability	40	(low potential)

The second top-line recruit for my system was a fast PF. Scott Wilks (#101 overall, #28 PF, ***) is already a good scorer, and it's encouraging to see that his shooting will improve immensely in the next four years. He'll end up with speed in the low-to-mid 60's, and his rebounding will be at a great level by the time he's done. If there's one thing I could change, it's his athleticism, which will be below-average. However, if I don't put him at C (he may also see some time at SF late in his career), he should be a very solid Big 12 player. He could well be a draft prospect, and I'm excited to have him.

Athleticism	44	(low potential)
Speed	49
Rebounding	66	(high potential)
Defense	30	(high potential)
Shot Blocking	70	(high potential)
Low-post	91
Perimeter	10	(high potential)
Ball Handling	48	(low potential)
Passing	29	(high potential)
Work Ethic	82
Stamina	80
Durability	58

I didn't have a need at SF this season. However, I have one senior, and signing someone now will mean I can cut a Sim AI recruit next season, ultimately resulting in a more complete team. John Laboy (#158 overall, #40 SF, *) is just OK in a lot of areas. That includes scoring, and it's unfortunate to report he won't improve much there. There are a few things to like; he's going to be a decent athlete with good defensive skills (good fit for the press), he'll turn into an excellent FT shooter, and he'll be able to move the ball around a bit from the 3, which is a plus. By no means is he a draft prospect, but he beats the alternatives (a walk-on or giving extensive time to two Sim AI recruits).

Athleticism	69
Speed	42
Rebounding	47
Defense	74	(high potential)
Shot Blocking	49
Low-post	32	(low potential)
Perimeter	59	(low potential)
Ball Handling	31	(high potential)
Passing	28	(high potential)
Work Ethic	34
Stamina	81
Durability	49	(high potential)

My fourth recruit is the one I'm least proud of. I had $13k into a JuCo PG that would've been my starter this season. However, Michigan State and it's A+ prestige stomped all over that one, leaving me with $200. Fortunately, I turned that into someone with a pulse instead of a walk-on. Christopher Redrick (#142 PG) isn't good. He'll be fairly slow his entire college career, won't be much of a scorer despite high potential in perimeter, and he's essentially maxed out in ball handling. But he's better than Neil Johnson would've been, and he's CERTAINLY better than a walk-on.

Athleticism	58	(low potential)
Speed	68	(low potential)
Rebounding	6
Defense	52
Shot Blocking	1	(high potential)
Low-post	1
Perimeter	34	(high potential)
Ball Handling	67	(low potential)
Passing	64
Work Ethic	46
Stamina	88	(low potential)
Durability	40	(high potential)

THOUGHTS ON RECRUITING

The goal of any recruiting period is to make your team better, and I'm proud to report that I did that. I was able to trim the fat, cutting three Sim AI players who were terrible fits for this program, and the players I brought in (even Redrick) are much better than they were. In fact, Markovich and Wilks will be very useful, and Laboy could be a solid role player (if someone who's a bit limited on the offensive end). I stretched my $50,000 recruiting budget about as far as it could go, and I'm happy with the results.

Are my guys world-beaters? No. But could some of them form the foundations of a decent Big 6 team down the road? Sure. I'll give this a B, and be very happy for transforming a below-average team into one that could be so-so.

Texas Tech (1-0)

Split the two exhibitions, and we eked out a win in the opener. Markovich did nothing, but we controlled the tempo, got many more shot opportunities, and prevailed as a result.

Arkansas St. (0-2)

An expected (but still dominant) win over a Sim at home. The press worked; we forced turnovers and got big games from our frontcourt (including Yorke off the bench).

Texas Tech (2-1)

I expected to lose this game, but our effort wasn't bad despite what the score indicates. This was tied at 46 with 7 minutes to go, we just ran out of gas against a better team on the road who also ran the press.

Texas Tech (3-1)

Some anxious moments on the road, but we eked out the win, which is all that matters. Us only having four guards will kill us sometimes, due to fatigue and fouls that come with the press.

Mississippi St. (4-1)

Good win at home. Miss. State is a solid team, and we got the better of them in a very evenly-matched game.

Utah (1-5)

Markovich played just 8 minutes. Yay for low press IQ's. Anyway, a lot of turnovers forced here led to the win at our place.